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.

 

FBI launches new Clinton Foundation investigation

page: 5
94
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 08:59 AM
link   
What do you think this thread is about???




posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: introvert

Do you not consider The Hill a reliable source?

 


Reuters seems to think it is legit:


The US Justice Department has begun an investigation into whether the Clinton Foundation conducted "pay-to-play" politics or other illegal activities during Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state.


US Justice Department reportedly launches investigation into the Clinton Foundation
Reuters
Eric Walsh, Reuters



I did not see anywhere in that piece where they think it is legit. They are only reporting what the Hill reported.

Still, no sources.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:01 AM
link   
This is great news for anyone interested in justice. However, I think it's highly unlikely we'll see successful prosecutions of the pay to play schemes. The laws were written by Congress, who probably all do this type of crap, and so the law on this is extremely vague and hard to prosecute with. You pretty much have to have someone on record saying word for word "I will illegally pay you $X as a bribe in exchange for [insert what they want]" and anything short of that doesn't fit the criteria.

The tax angle is probably the best angle to go after the foundation with. And they are also investigating the email server again, which is a slam dunk case. Clinton, Abedin, and Mills have all been shown beyond a reasonable doubt to have violated the laws governing the handling of classified material.

Re: the whining about "Clinton lost the election!!!! Why are you bothering her!!!!" Ok, so can anyone point me to the part of the Constitution that makes you exempt from the law if you lose an election? Would the left have the same reaction come an accuser came forward with evidence Roy Moore raped her last year? I mean, he lost the election. He's not in the Senate, who cares if he broke the law right? When that's the only defense you have, you know you're in the wrong.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: introvert

Do you not consider The Hill a reliable source?

 


Reuters seems to think it is legit:


The US Justice Department has begun an investigation into whether the Clinton Foundation conducted "pay-to-play" politics or other illegal activities during Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state.


US Justice Department reportedly launches investigation into the Clinton Foundation
Reuters
Eric Walsh, Reuters



I did not see anywhere in that piece where they think it is legit. They are only reporting what the Hill reported.

Still, no sources.


It was anonymously sourced. Sucks when that shoe is on the other foot doesn't it?



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: introvert

Do you not consider The Hill a reliable source?

 


Reuters seems to think it is legit:


The US Justice Department has begun an investigation into whether the Clinton Foundation conducted "pay-to-play" politics or other illegal activities during Hillary Clinton's tenure as secretary of state.


US Justice Department reportedly launches investigation into the Clinton Foundation
Reuters
Eric Walsh, Reuters



I did not see anywhere in that piece where they think it is legit. They are only reporting what the Hill reported.

Still, no sources.


It was anonymously sourced. Sucks when that shoe is on the other foot doesn't it?


No. I am very careful not to talk in absolutes or take anything as truth unless we can find solid sources.

Too many people are taking this as gospel without a solid source.

It appears it is not I that has to worry about being a hypocrite in this case.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
This is great news for anyone interested in justice. However, I think it's highly unlikely we'll see successful prosecutions of the pay to play schemes. The laws were written by Congress, who probably all do this type of crap, and so the law on this is extremely vague and hard to prosecute with. You pretty much have to have someone on record saying word for word "I will illegally pay you $X as a bribe in exchange for [insert what they want]" and anything short of that doesn't fit the criteria.

The tax angle is probably the best angle to go after the foundation with. And they are also investigating the email server again, which is a slam dunk case. Clinton, Abedin, and Mills have all been shown beyond a reasonable doubt to have violated the laws governing the handling of classified material.

Re: the whining about "Clinton lost the election!!!! Why are you bothering her!!!!" Ok, so can anyone point me to the part of the Constitution that makes you exempt from the law if you lose an election? Would the left have the same reaction come an accuser came forward with evidence Roy Moore raped her last year? I mean, he lost the election. He's not in the Senate, who cares if he broke the law right? When that's the only defense you have, you know you're in the wrong.




Emails on Huma's laptop show there were favors given, for payment by hillary's SD.

Now that they have some unredacted ones.

So we shall see if that comes up again.

I heard it today on the news, somewhere. lol.

BTW, didn't that Indian guy buy a seat on the atomic committee for like 500K?

Doesn't that count?






posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
A "new" investigation?

How many times has the foundation been investigated and what was the outcome of those investigations I wonder?


Obviously I am only saying this because I expect the out come of this investigation to be the same.


yes but those were conducted by clinton friends and people they have stuff on.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
A "new" investigation?

How many times has the foundation been investigated and what was the outcome of those investigations I wonder?


Obviously I am only saying this because I expect the out come of this investigation to be the same.


Yeah the investigation into Clinton during the Obama years could best be compared to having the SS investigate Auschwitz.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

So, the Trump DoJ will be the one you trust completely, even though Trump's been begging them to investigate her? Even though she's not president, and already been cleared of crimes?

This site is supposed to be about information hidden from the public, and some people are tying themselves into pretzels trying to ignore the fact that we've heard stories about Trump's issues, from a former hero to the Alt-Right, but bc he suddenly verifies what has been verified elsewhere, some people now have to dump dropping their long term support of him, and it can't possibly be that he's the one who's telling the truth.

It just seems like no amount of evidence that is out on the table now will satisfy the Trump supporters, even though everything that has come out supports what's been said all along.

Mitch McConnell had been told about Russian attempts to hack its way into our election. Obama wanted to make a joint state - back when 90% of people expected Hillary to win, including Trump - McConnell wouldn't do it. Why? Does he know it's true? Sure seems like it. Then Obama doesn't say anything out of concern it will sound politically motivated, and that fact gets no respect from the right, that Obama has tried to do the right thing.

Meanwhile, Trump absolutely does pressure Comey to drop the investigation into Flynn, knowing Flynn is dirty, and THAT fact isn't given a moment's notice, that the president wanted to end the Russian investigation before it even came up with anything.

As if that weren't enough, there are now many sources that say the first thing Trump wanted to do is unilaterally lift the sanctions on Russia, which just happens to be what leakers from TRUMP said the Russians asked for.

None of this evidence matters, none. It can't possibly be that Trump is a Russian asset. Some people will deny it with evidence put in front of their faces.

Crazy stuff.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:34 AM
link   
While some try to argue that this isn't actually happening, here is a reminder of who may be getting looked at:



Muckety map

A quick perusal of the above infographic reveals quit a few names that will be familiar to fellow ATS members, among them are:

Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the United States, Director – Clinton Foundation

Hillary Clinton, Former Secretary of State/Former NY Senator/2016 Democratic nominee for president, Director - Clinton Foundation, Member – Clinton Global Initiative

Chelsea Clinton, Vice Chair – Clinton Foundation

Cheryl Mills, Director – Clinton Foundation, BlackIvy Group - Founder and chief executive officer, BlackRock, Inc. - Director


Huma Abedin, Consultant – Clinton Foundation, Consultant – Teneo Holdings, Vice Chair – Hillary for America

Terry McAuliffe, Former chair of the DNC and governor of Virginia

Sidney Blumenthal, Consultant – Clinton Foundation

John Podesta, Chairman – Hillary for America,
Member – Trilateral Commission, former chief of staff – Bill Clinton, Advisor – Obama

Frank Giustra – Director, Clinton Foundation



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I wonder if this is why they are making room at Guantanamo Bay?

It sure will be bad there... hopeless... destitute... a unbearable pain on the soul. With no way out... not even Arkancide... I mean suicide.





posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical
I had no idea that Chelsea was Vice Chair of the corruption foundation.

Thanks for the intel, bookmarking that post.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
I thought the FBI was still in tatters.


If it's tatters now there won't be any pieces left big enough to see after this goose lands:



ALL of Comey's Email were classified before sending.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 10:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
While some try to argue that this isn't actually happening, here is a reminder of who may be getting looked at:



Muckety map

A quick perusal of the above infographic reveals quit a few names that will be familiar to fellow ATS members, among them are:

Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the United States, Director – Clinton Foundation

Hillary Clinton, Former Secretary of State/Former NY Senator/2016 Democratic nominee for president, Director - Clinton Foundation, Member – Clinton Global Initiative

Chelsea Clinton, Vice Chair – Clinton Foundation

Cheryl Mills, Director – Clinton Foundation, BlackIvy Group - Founder and chief executive officer, BlackRock, Inc. - Director


Huma Abedin, Consultant – Clinton Foundation, Consultant – Teneo Holdings, Vice Chair – Hillary for America

Terry McAuliffe, Former chair of the DNC and governor of Virginia

Sidney Blumenthal, Consultant – Clinton Foundation

John Podesta, Chairman – Hillary for America,
Member – Trilateral Commission, former chief of staff – Bill Clinton, Advisor – Obama

Frank Giustra – Director, Clinton Foundation


Still no real sources?

It may very well be happening, but we do not know for sure.

Very dishonest of you to try to deflect from that reality using shiny pictures....trinkets for monkeys, huh?



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Hillary Clinton is being harassed by the United States Government. Clear and simple.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 10:30 AM
link   



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: face23785
This is great news for anyone interested in justice. However, I think it's highly unlikely we'll see successful prosecutions of the pay to play schemes. The laws were written by Congress, who probably all do this type of crap, and so the law on this is extremely vague and hard to prosecute with. You pretty much have to have someone on record saying word for word "I will illegally pay you $X as a bribe in exchange for [insert what they want]" and anything short of that doesn't fit the criteria.

The tax angle is probably the best angle to go after the foundation with. And they are also investigating the email server again, which is a slam dunk case. Clinton, Abedin, and Mills have all been shown beyond a reasonable doubt to have violated the laws governing the handling of classified material.

Re: the whining about "Clinton lost the election!!!! Why are you bothering her!!!!" Ok, so can anyone point me to the part of the Constitution that makes you exempt from the law if you lose an election? Would the left have the same reaction come an accuser came forward with evidence Roy Moore raped her last year? I mean, he lost the election. He's not in the Senate, who cares if he broke the law right? When that's the only defense you have, you know you're in the wrong.




Emails on Huma's laptop show there were favors given, for payment by hillary's SD.

Now that they have some unredacted ones.

So we shall see if that comes up again.

I heard it today on the news, somewhere. lol.

BTW, didn't that Indian guy buy a seat on the atomic committee for like 500K?

Doesn't that count?





They show there were favors given to anyone with an objective eye, but like I said the way the actual law is written you have to have a literal quid pro quo "I will give you $X in exchange for y". None of the emails I've seen lay it out like that. It's done in a more roundabout way like "Hey this is [someone who donated to you, wink wink] and I need [favor]". The way the law is written, that doesn't count as a crime. See the Menendez trial. Anyone with a brain knew he was guilty, but the law is written so they can get away with it unless you have a word for word bribe offer in print or on tape, or a confession.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
Hillary Clinton is being harassed by the United States Government. Clear and simple.

Do you actually believe the BS you type down or are you being paid for this pathetic crap?



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:00 AM
link   
Hillary took money from Russia to approve the Uranium One deal. Fact. Treason.



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 11:16 AM
link   
The Uranium One bribery is just something they cooked up to deflect from Trump's predicaments with Russia, but I do think the Clinton's must have returned favors for wealthy donors. Pretty interesting to see how this goes, if there's new evidence. Not holding my breath though.



new topics

top topics



 
94
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join