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.

 

Federal judge issues BOMBSHELL ruling against Obama

page: 1
65
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+34 more 
posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Not sure about this source, but they claim it is from a Judicial Watch request from what I can find.



A federal judge may have just paved the way for Barack Obama AND Hillary Clinton to be put on trial for TREASON.

U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson has ordered the State Department to turn over previously redacted information regarding what Obama and Clinton knew about and how they responded to the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi.


Link

Like I said, I know nothing about this source, but if true this could be interesting to say the least.....
edit on 5/11/17 by Vasa Croe because: (no reason given)



+8 more 
posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Here is some help:
www.judicialwatch.org...

nypost.com...


Both emails had the subject line “Quick Summary of POTUS Calls to Presidents of Libya and Egypt.” Jackson reviewed the documents and rejected the government’s contention that the records had been properly withheld under the Freedom of Information Act.


ETA: From the JW source.

Both emails had the subject line “Quick Summary of POTUS Calls to Presidents of Libya and Egypt” and were among the emails stored on Clinton’s unofficial email server. Judge Jackson reviewed the documents directly and rejected the government’s contention that the records had been properly withheld under the FOIA B(5) “deliberative process” exemption.


Is this it? I mean, if it's not available to a FOIA request, why was in on her server. If it is subject to FOIA, why wasn't it released?


edit on 11-5-2017 by JinMI because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-5-2017 by JinMI because: (no reason given)


+5 more 
posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Looks like it may be true.

Here is another source with more info...
Link


Judicial Watch today announced that U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson has ordered the U.S. Department of State to turn over to Judicial Watch “eight identical paragraphs” of previously redacted material in two September 13, 2012, Hillary Clinton emails regarding phone calls made by President Barack Obama to Egyptian and Libyan leaders immediately following the terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi. Both emails had the subject line “Quick Summary of POTUS Calls to Presidents of Libya and Egypt” and were among the emails stored on Clinton’s unofficial email server. Judge Jackson reviewed the documents directly and rejected the government’s contention that the records had been properly withheld under the FOIA B(5) “deliberative process” exemption.


+44 more 
posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:42 PM
link   
How casually Ambassador Stevens' death was dismissed by 'them'.

My heart goes out to the other fellas whose lives were lost when the Obama administration wrote them off. Even while our military was poised to intervene. I want to know who issued the stand-down orders.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe
I want to believe this will become something more than words but has Judicial Watch ever been responsible for anything tangible? Not trying to troll, honest question.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Hard core right wing website, also known as fake news in reference to their claims of treason. Did you read the name of the link? Likely, this is conservative backlash because of Trumps recent firing of Comey and hot water over Russia so like any good right winger, deflect immediately to Clinton/Obama.
edit on 11-5-2017 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Is this really a BOMBSHELL? We've been let down so much, and exposed to so much hype from media...

But, as always, FINGERS CROSSED!



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Is this enough to get a a person's hopes up? Man I hope so. I really really hope there is a price to pay for all of the corruption.

Can the small people even win against the swamp anymore?


+15 more 
posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Noncents
a reply to: Vasa Croe
I want to believe this will become something more than words but has Judicial Watch ever been responsible for anything tangible? Not trying to troll, honest question.


Judicial Watch petitioned a judge, who forced Hillary to answer, in writing, 30 questions regarding her email-related crimes. There's a thread about it here on ATS. Unfortunately 27 of the answers were "I can't recall". No kidding.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

If I understand this mess, Ambassador Stevens got-got because he was a whistle blower about weapons being sold to "bad" guys.

Obama has nothing to worry about. People who make $300,000 for a 45 minute speech don't go to prison.


+27 more 
posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Hard core right wing website, also known as fake news in reference to their claims of treason. Did you read the name of the link? Likely, this is conservative backlash because of Trumps recent firing of Comey and hot water over Russia so like any good right winger, deflect immediately to Clinton/Obama.

Kind of like how you deflected immediately to Trump?

Oh, I know dates are hard but this happened a week ago, so there goes your theory.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Caught it on YT awhile back



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Noncents
a reply to: Vasa Croe
I want to believe this will become something more than words but has Judicial Watch ever been responsible for anything tangible? Not trying to troll, honest question.


Tangible? Of course not.

It seems to me many here aren't familiar with Judicial Watch.

I have to admit, it's entertaining how people think this is a "bombshell," of any magnitude.

Clearly, this is the first time they've heard of Judicial Watch lol.

They're your run of the mill "non-partisan," (they're partisan) blogs that operate thru click-bait headlines. Because clicks = revenue and revenue = $$$.

They're not the worst, but they claim to be something that they're most certainly not.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust
Well that's something, I guess. After looking into them a bit it seems most of what they do gets ignored or their cases get thrown out. Oh well, maybe this time things will go differently but I'm not holding my breath.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deplorable
How casually Ambassador Stevens' death was dismissed by 'them'.

My heart goes out to the other fellas whose lives were lost when the Obama administration wrote them off. Even while our military was poised to intervene. I want to know who issued the stand-down orders.


Steven's death has always bothered me. Almost like he was set up. Put in a place where the bad guys knew he would be...



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: Noncents
a reply to: Vasa Croe
I want to believe this will become something more than words but has Judicial Watch ever been responsible for anything tangible? Not trying to troll, honest question.


Tangible? Of course not.

It seems to me many here aren't familiar with Judicial Watch.

I have to admit, it's entertaining how people think this is a "bombshell," of any magnitude.

Clearly, this is the first time they've heard of Judicial Watch lol.

They're your run of the mill "non-partisan," (they're partisan) blogs that operate thru click-bait headlines. Because clicks = revenue and revenue = $$$.

They're not the worst, but they claim to be something that they're most certainly not.


No, not a bombshell. Everyone already knows of the blood on klintons hands, directly related to her involvement with the massacre.

But it would be a ray of hope. Lock her up.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Noncents
a reply to: carewemust
Well that's something, I guess. After looking into them a bit it seems most of what they do gets ignored or their cases get thrown out. Oh well, maybe this time things will go differently but I'm not holding my breath.


Judicial Watch is more like a "Consumer Reports" that keeps an eye on government, instead of goods and products.

For example J.W. recently reported that ObamaCare's Medicaid program literally wastes 30% of its annual budget ($109 Billion) on frivolous "demonstrations and ads". That's an astounding waste of our money, but because people are used to government waste, it doesn't make headlines.

J.W. - Medicaid Blows $109 Billion!: www.judicialwatch.org...



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: SBMcG

originally posted by: Deplorable
How casually Ambassador Stevens' death was dismissed by 'them'.

My heart goes out to the other fellas whose lives were lost when the Obama administration wrote them off. Even while our military was poised to intervene. I want to know who issued the stand-down orders.


Steven's death has always bothered me. Almost like he was set up. Put in a place where the bad guys knew he would be...




What did Hillary tell the parents of the brave soldiers killed at Benghazi? Something insulting and disrespectful, as I recall.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Me and my brother had a similiar conversation earlier today about how laws dont apply to the rich and powerful folk. They can do whatever they want and be perfectly fine.

Bunch of b.s.

If they dont follow laws, neither do we.

Thats not how this shizznit works.



posted on May, 11 2017 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: RomeByFire

originally posted by: Noncents
a reply to: Vasa Croe
I want to believe this will become something more than words but has Judicial Watch ever been responsible for anything tangible? Not trying to troll, honest question.


Tangible? Of course not.

It seems to me many here aren't familiar with Judicial Watch.

I have to admit, it's entertaining how people think this is a "bombshell," of any magnitude.

Clearly, this is the first time they've heard of Judicial Watch lol.

They're your run of the mill "non-partisan," (they're partisan) blogs that operate thru click-bait headlines. Because clicks = revenue and revenue = $$$.

They're not the worst, but they claim to be something that they're most certainly not.


You should have checked the Judicial watch link. They never call it a bombshell. Tell me how the acutal papers of any administration can be biased. Bias is in the mine of the reader.




top topics



 
65
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join