It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Looks like its time for Hillary Clinton to be Charged welcome Jeff Sessions

page: 5
83
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

No proof that she lied? She went on national television and lied about it right to your face! Obama did too! though, I suppose you already know that from reading the report. More importantly, she attempted to fix the questioning for her first Benghazi inquiry, and did so thanks to Menendez (who might take a fall as well), and she destroyed evidence... I mean literally, she took a hammer and destroyed evidence... relevant to said inquiry AND deleted tens of thousands of emails AFTER they'd been subpoenaed. It's not even debatable. It's not my opinion. She did these things. It's all in the FBI report, which I'm sure you've read. So, she lied under oath, impeded an investigation, destroyed evidence, and that's giving her a pass on being a decrepit dimwit who apparently doesn't know what a drone strike is (unless she's wish for one to hit Assange), and doesn't know the abbreviations (though she herself used them).So, that's the case they have, and that's just what WE know of.




posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Comey didn't speak of guilt, just whether he would recommend prosecution. It's not the FBI's job to determine guilt, nor did he ever presume otherwise. He didn't recommend prosecution specifically as it relates to improperly handling classified information, and nothing else. And the only reason she got away with that is because she played dumb and so have people in the past



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 04:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: bender151
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Comey didn't speak of guilt, just whether he would recommend prosecution. It's not the FBI's job to determine guilt, nor did he ever presume otherwise. He didn't recommend prosecution specifically as it relates to improperly handling classified information, and nothing else. And the only reason she got away with that is because she played dumb and so have people in the past



Playing dumb is one thing but another thing when your on Camera.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Stevemagegod

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
TO set and maintain justful precedents, people need to be made example of so that others dont follow in their evil footsteps (not so readily, openly, brazenly anyways).


Precedents have already been made and we have laws/rights in place to protect American citizens from being made examples of without just cause.


Private servers in a basement with classified material on it, and lied about it with the express purpose of circumventing FOIA.

Is JUST CAUSE.



There is no proof she purposely lied and there is no proof of her intent to circumvent FOIA requests.

Without that proof, what case do they have?


Hahah you're in denial. You clearly did not watch the FBI Director's Congressional Hearing.


I did, in fact. They cannot prove intent and specifically said so.


I think you're confused or just in denial as to what "intent" means in this scenario.


According to the law, there are five elements that must be met for a violation of the statute, and they can all be found in section (a) of the statute: “(1) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, (2) by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, (3) knowingly removes such documents or materials (4) without authority and (5) with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location [shall be guilty of this offense].”


Are you saying that she had no INTENT to retain documents or materials at an unauthorized location?

Hope this helps you a little on your obvious misunderstanding...




posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 04:53 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

You keep crying False Equivalence, as if it somehow creates True Irrelevance.

These people are career criminal politician gangsters, and your deflections in the name of Comey are Passive Regressive defenses for their evil.

When it was Al Capone they couldn't bust him for outright gangsterism because he had the city too intimidated, he had the judges and politicians in his pocket, lawyers out the wazoo, and so on. Just like the Bush's, their cronies the Clinton's, and the rest of them. They took down Capone for 'mere' tax evasion, and they threw the book at him there as they knew he was what he was but that's all they could make stick.

Your protection of them here defends others in the future (se Trump).
edit on 9-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard
Here's the thing. To prosecute her for the server or the classified docs would be unprecedented. So sure, go ahead, as long as you call in everyone else that's ever done that and prosecute them too, and spend millions on seeing if Colin Powell, for example, did anything he shouldn't with classified docs, etc.


Um, lets not prosecute criminality & corruption because it will be expensive and ruffle a bunch of feathers?



Don't you think if she should have been indicted, that Comey would have done it??

Meh.





posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: RomeByFire
And this has to do with the topic... how, exactly?

Oh wait - it doesn't. Just more "BUT LEK AT DEZE GUIS," deflections to take the attention away from the topic.


It has to do with shes a ruthless criminal. And the emails is the best entry route into the rabbit hole we've got. And it's time to dig in. Or can you debunk my opening piece, and the other "memes" I pasted in on page 2??????? And that's just scratching the surface of the stuff I know about; have posted at length about.

It's time to clean house.... with torches and pitchforks. Enough was enough many, many years ago.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

And I'm glad you keep reiterating that this spans past one party. It is the loyalist party members who keep this continuing. Plenty of people are willing to defend politicians purely because they represent their party.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:18 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss



You keep crying False Equivalence, as if it somehow creates True Irrelevance.


And you keep crying "criminal", as if it is somehow true.

You don't want to hold politician's feet to the fire for the sake of justice. You want people to rise up with their pitchforks and torches because you believe in some grand conspiratorial nonsense.

That is why we have laws and a system in place. To protect us from those that would take matters in to their own hands, all because of the crap they believe.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Stevemagegod

Looks intresting..

Going to grab a pizza sit down and watch the fireworks...

s/f



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Stevemagegod



Those are chargeable offenses.


He also said that the FBI and the DoJ has maintained the practice and precedent of needing intent to file charges. Did you also miss the part where he said this would have been handled within the SD?


While the 'showing intent' part is complete BS, intent was shown when she used the server and then tried to cover it by deleting emails. Destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice also come to mind.
Intent is needed for espionage but not for carelessness. Letting her Filipino housemaid fax TS documents comes under depraved indifference. If anyone else did what she did, they'd be in the slammer.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: pteridine

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Stevemagegod



Those are chargeable offenses.


He also said that the FBI and the DoJ has maintained the practice and precedent of needing intent to file charges. Did you also miss the part where he said this would have been handled within the SD?


While the 'showing intent' part is complete BS, intent was shown when she used the server and then tried to cover it by deleting emails. Destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice also come to mind.
Intent is needed for espionage but not for carelessness. Letting her Filipino housemaid fax TS documents comes under depraved indifference. If anyone else did what she did, they'd be in the slammer.


That's factually incorrect. In the recent past, 80% of cases are not prosecuted and the ones that are, can prove intent.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

nope you are wrong about intent

and there is a prosecutor in place now who will take the case

no double jeopardy as no one had a trial



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 05:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss



You keep crying False Equivalence, as if it somehow creates True Irrelevance.


And you keep crying "criminal", as if it is somehow true.

You don't want to hold politician's feet to the fire for the sake of justice. You want people to rise up with their pitchforks and torches because you believe in some grand conspiratorial nonsense.

That is why we have laws and a system in place. To protect us from those that would take matters in to their own hands, all because of the crap they believe.


The only people I see rising up with Pitchforks are the Democrats.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Never happen. She will NEVER be prosecuted. This guys an idiot just like his boss. We have a narcissist idiot for a president and an idiot Attorney General, Bannon, some kind of closet Leninist that wants to destroy the government, Kellyanne, hawking Ivanka's products while on the taxpayers dime. What a disgrace. Nixon is rolling over in his grave.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

The entire Two Party duopoly stranglehold of the nation, their deep integration with the MSM, Military Industrial Complex, etc, their goings ons, their agendas, the money, the power, their never ending habitual / pathological LIES, their organizational structures, their campaigning methods, and so forth and so on, its all by its very nature a CONspiracy. And their dark deeds are endless, and verifiable, and that's just with what's public. But if you want to completely self-delude yourself about reality, well, go for it, but to insist people are wrong about such when its all out and open and plain to see, well that doesn't make everyone else the fool as I imagine you must have pictured in your mind.
edit on 9-2-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 07:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: pteridine

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Stevemagegod



Those are chargeable offenses.


He also said that the FBI and the DoJ has maintained the practice and precedent of needing intent to file charges. Did you also miss the part where he said this would have been handled within the SD?


While the 'showing intent' part is complete BS, intent was shown when she used the server and then tried to cover it by deleting emails. Destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice also come to mind.
Intent is needed for espionage but not for carelessness. Letting her Filipino housemaid fax TS documents comes under depraved indifference. If anyone else did what she did, they'd be in the slammer.



My thoughts exactly!







posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 07:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

nope you are wrong about intent

and there is a prosecutor in place now who will take the case

no double jeopardy as no one had a trial


Can you provide a case in which someone was prosecuted and found guilty of a similar crime, without intent or actions that prove intent?



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 07:39 PM
link   
When Hillary is jailed for selling guns/drugs, money laundering, murder and/or TREASON. I would like to see all her wonderful ATS friends rush to her defense and support this poor misunderstood "woman".

Some of you could even be on her legal team as your case is so airtight.



posted on Feb, 9 2017 @ 08:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: introvert
Precedents have already been made and we have laws/rights in place to protect American citizens from being made examples of without just cause.


There is definitely just cause to bring her to trial over her handling of classified documents.


No, there's not. We've seen the info in her case and Comey was correct that what she did would of been handled internally within the SD, not criminally-charged.


Comey made it extremely clear that no prosecutor would be able to prove intent that she did anything deliberately covert when setting up and using her private server for official business - that was Comeys assessment as to why no charges could be laid and that she was just extremely reckless.

Law, as you know, is open to interpretation depending upon the specific law engaged and the effectiveness of lawyers to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that fact-patterns lead to intent - Comeys comments did not account for a Trump Admin and 'new eyes and ears' to reassess the situation, Chaffetz has said, post-election, that Trumps election is irrelevant to ongoing investigations.

We shall see if this horse is indeed flogged dead yet.




top topics



 
83
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join