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.

 

Former Inspector General McCullough III faced reprisals for email investigation

page: 1
23

log in

join
share:
+3 more 
posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 10:37 PM
link   
www.foxnews.com...


A government watchdog who played a central role in the Hillary Clinton email investigation during the Obama administration told Fox News that he, his family and his staffers faced an intense backlash at the time from Clinton allies – and that the campaign even put out word that it planned to fire him if the Democratic presidential nominee won the 2016 election.


Not surprising at all.

Do your job, get threatened to be fired.

Note that he says if the Clinton campaign had turned over the server as requested, there would have been no need to involve the FBI.


Very interesting.
edit on R472017-11-27T22:47:39-06:00k4711Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 10:57 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Simply a matter of "If the campaign had been open and honest".



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a "government watchdog" told a "news outlet" huh....

must be the irrefutable truth.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 11:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a "government watchdog" told a "news outlet" huh....

must be the irrefutable truth.



If you have ever been in the military, or worked for the government as a civilian, then you would know that one of the very last things you want to hear is that the IG is investigating something you were involved in.

They are highly respected, and like a bulldog, they don't let go when they sink their teeth into something.

When I was on active duty, I was referred to the IG for a consistent payroll issue that had been going on for months.

He resolved it in less than a week and cost a government employee their job.


I don't doubt for a second what he says is true. He seems to be well respected in his field.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 11:50 PM
link   
This one, I would guess it was probably true. Just the way it is worded it sounds about right. Especially the part about not needing the FBI involved if they would have just given the e-mails. That actually would have been the easiest way, if they had cooperated with them, maybe Hillary would now be president. People would not look very hard if it appeared nobody was trying to hide things. Everything probably would have been classified as not classified if there would have been cooperation right away.



posted on Nov, 27 2017 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: odzeandennz
Well except for the fact that it's not an 'anonymous source'. Maybe read the article?



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa


When is this criminal scum going to meet her cellmate in Ft. Leavenworth?



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Something similar happened at the UN. They hired a guy to investigate the corruption and misappropriation of funds that runs rampant throughout the UN's activities.

Then they fired his ass when he started looking into the wrong people.



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Something similar happened at the UN. They hired a guy to investigate the corruption and misappropriation of funds that runs rampant throughout the UN's activities.

Then they fired his ass when he started looking into the wrong people.


How hard can it be to post a source? I don't want to have to go hunting to see if what you are saying is true. What if you are wrong?



posted on Nov, 28 2017 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
www.foxnews.com...


A government watchdog who played a central role in the Hillary Clinton email investigation during the Obama administration told Fox News that he, his family and his staffers faced an intense backlash at the time from Clinton allies – and that the campaign even put out word that it planned to fire him if the Democratic presidential nominee won the 2016 election.


Not surprising at all.

Do your job, get threatened to be fired.

Note that he says if the Clinton campaign had turned over the server as requested, there would have been no need to involve the FBI.


Very interesting.


Now firing this guy would in fact be obstruction.



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 10:11 AM
link   
This is something many of us have been trying to explain to the public since the story broke. This was a much bigger deal than the Clinton campaign and most of the media let on. When this guy said he'd be in Leavenworth for doing the same thing, he's not exaggerating. I've said that numerous times on this forum myself, and I believe that wholeheartedly. And I only had a Secret clearance. Being this irresponsible with Top Secret and SCI information and not getting charged set a very, very dangerous precedent. Comey even tried to say essentially "we're not saying this is ok, no one should take this as a precedent". That means she should have been charged.

Also, that is why so many of us are "obsessed" with her even though the election is over. It was never about the election. It's about protecting our national security information. That doesn't just go away because you run for office and lose.
edit on 29 11 17 by face23785 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 29 2017 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
This is something many of us have been trying to explain to the public since the story broke. This was a much bigger deal than the Clinton campaign and most of the media let on. When this guy said he'd be in Leavenworth for doing the same thing, he's not exaggerating. I've said that numerous times on this forum myself, and I believe that wholeheartedly. And I only had a Secret clearance. Being this irresponsible with Top Secret and SCI information and not getting charged set a very, very dangerous precedent. Comey even tried to say essentially "we're not saying this is ok, no one should take this as a precedent". That means she should have been charged.

Also, that is why so many of us are "obsessed" with her even though the election is over. It was never about the election. It's about protecting our national security information. That doesn't just go away because you run for office and lose.


Exactly. Well said.




top topics



 
23

log in

join