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.

 

Whistleblowers accuse Clinton Foundation of criminal activity. Media silent.

page: 8
55
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Propagandalf

Yeah. A SCOTUS confirmation is a big deal.


A former president and presidential nominee accused of enriching themselves through their foundation, being foreign agents, isn’t?

Yes a SCOTUS confirmation is a big deal, especially when it’s enveloped in hot air.




posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Propagandalf

Yeah. A SCOTUS confirmation is a big deal.


A former president and presidential nominee accused of enriching themselves through their foundation, being foreign agents, isn’t?

Yes a SCOTUS confirmation is a big deal, especially when it’s enveloped in hot air.


‘Hot air’ like a more-than-obviously-false sexual assault allegation that was openly supported by every media outlet except for Fox News?

I think the CF fraud is a bigger deal myself.
edit on 14 12 2018 by Breakthestreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Propagandalf

Do you think there is an ongoing criminal investigation of the Clinton Foundation? Do you think that all evidence of such an investigation should be public? The "whistleblowers" seemed to be quite equivocal about that.


On the other hand, there was no criminal investigation of Bret and SCOTUS confirmation proceedings are, generally, public.

edit on 12/14/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Propagandalf

Do you think there is an ongoing criminal investigation of the Clinton Foundation? Do you think that all evidence of such an investigation should be public?

On the other hand, there was no criminal investigation of Bret and SCOTUS confirmation proceedings are, generally, public.


I think the media should inform the public of the facts. I understand you don’t want to know about this stuff, but I know many, myself included, who do.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage




Do you think there is an ongoing criminal investigation of the Clinton Foundation? Do you think that all evidence of such an investigation should be public? The "whistleblowers" seemed to be quite equivocal about that.


Yes. Given the gravity of this political situation that has divided our nation with interest of foreign Nations above the U.S.'s interest. So yes.




On the other hand, there was no criminal investigation of Bret and SCOTUS confirmation proceedings are, generally, public.



It was a She said/He said case. There were no wittnesses to create a criminal investigation. I am pretty sure everyone in the country knew that now was the time to come forward with any eye wittness testimony. The FBI could not find any? That isn't saying much though.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:53 PM
link   
a reply to: highvein


So yes.
I think that making public the proceedings of a criminal investigation will, without fail, impede such an investigation.


It was a She said/He said case. There were no wittnesses to create a criminal investigation.
I agree. A long time ago, statutes of limitation. But then, it was not a criminal investigation. Only a question of character.

edit on 12/14/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimNasium
a reply to: Propagandalf


Well, they must read ATS™ because many of Us here KNEW TheClintonFraudation™ was lining their pockets w/foreign cash for when She won the Presidential Erection, luckily the 'lesser of 2 evils' won and those of Us that don't play the '2 Party Paradigm™' game get screwed again.. When #44 was 'IN' We had 8 years of (R)s dragging their feet due to the Kenyan President...

Wait a minute...

Wasn't the LOUDEST and didn't Twitter™ get the most action from the guy who is now #45?

How does that happen? (rhetorical really...)

You have a bunch of folks still stuck playing the 2 Party Paradigm Game... Funny how that happens.. Who woulda thunk?


You... you see Trump as "just another Republican"?

You... you see Trump's Presidency as a continuation of "the same ole same ole 2 Party system"?

Like, seriously??

Excuse my French, but, Holy #...

Seriously?!?!

You... you didn't notice Anything different this time? Just another Republican taking his turn, huh? Wow...

Just wow.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage





I think that making public the proceedings of a criminal investigation will, without fail, impede such an investigation.


You think that giving the public the truth about the matter at hand, so they can make their own minds up about it will impede such an investigation?

How?



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Good to see you up to your old tricks and contributing so well.

Did any of you other than IamTat and Popagandalf watch the video?

1. These aren't "whistleblowers" they clearly denote in their opening testimony they are doing this for money.
This is their full time job, they have done a forensic accounting of the foundation through foia "and other means legally available to investigators."

2. They say they found clear evidence which voids the foundations tax exempt status. Thus this group studying the Clinton Foundation are set for a financial windfall as the IRS gives a portion of the proceeds which in this case will be in the billions to those providing the evidence to the IRS.

3. They also denote this also allows the IRS to go after Clinton Foundation DONORS under listed IRS law which they list in their testimony.

4. The Clinton Foundation violated FARA an conceited they acted as a foreign agent. FARA This also voids their tax exempt status.

5. They state it was not a legal charity as it voided it's charter and was a "closely held family partnership."



They are not law enforcement group, or whistleblower group, they are legal group who are going to get a huge payout for proving to the IRS the Clintons were not a Charity and have filed all their findings with the IRS.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: pianopraze




They are not law enforcement group, or whistleblower group, they are legal group who are going to get a huge payout for proving to the IRS the Clintons were not a Charity and have filed all their findings with the IRS.

Correct. I didn't say otherwise.

But they are using "whistleblower" laws to seek a reward. Which is not really relevant. They presented no evidence to the committee.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: pianopraze




They are not law enforcement group, or whistleblower group, they are legal group who are going to get a huge payout for proving to the IRS the Clintons were not a Charity and have filed all their findings with the IRS.

Correct. I didn't say otherwise.

But they are using "whistleblower" laws to seek a reward. Which is not really relevant. They presented no evidence to the committee.


They presented their findings which are a bombshell.

The evidence was presented to the appropriate government agencies. IRS etc.

I searched the front page of CNN, MSNBC, even Fox News and saw not a peep about this.

Amazing double standard of Journalism.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: pianopraze




They presented their findings which are a bombshell.

According to whom?
Hard to say without the actual evidence. Even Meadows said so.

edit on 12/14/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Anyone not defending the Clinton's.

Also I presume several thousands (tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands? you tell me) of donors to their Clinton Foundation who are now open to IRS tax collection based on "donations" they made.

They are in very deep tax trouble.

This is huge news.



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: pianopraze




Anyone not defending the Clinton's.

Yeah? The Clinton's what?




Also I presume several thousands (tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands? you tell me) of donors to their Clinton Foundation who are now open to IRS tax collection based on "donations" they made.

Not really.


This is huge news.
But not new.
nypost.com...
edit on 12/14/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: 3n19m470


I don't know where You got "just another Republican™..." Nothing I'd ever type about Herr Drumpf. I guess You don't recall the Debates?? When He boasted (Odd I know) not only has He voted Democrat in the past but also has "given millions"...

You like Him, thats great for You. Look back when He ruined the USFL™...

Would You label Yourself a BIG fan or YUGE fan? Then answer this...

What number is higher, Medical Deferments or Bankruptcies?

Bonus Question: Your Dad leaves You millions when He dies, in 15 years You have LESS $$$ than You would've had if You just put it in the bank would this make You a "great business man"?



posted on Dec, 14 2018 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: pianopraze

According to them, they are “an outside whistleblower, not and inside whistleblowers”. They filed the claim under whistleblower status.



posted on Dec, 15 2018 @ 12:52 AM
link   
General Michael Flynn gets indicted for lying to authorities about what color underwear he was wearing on March 18, 2016. But Hillary Clinton has lied to authorities countless times, as demonstrated by:

twitter.com...

When is the Trump Administration going to stop playing games with Hillary?
Many are Perplexed: www.americanthinker.com...

LOCK..HER...UP!



posted on Dec, 15 2018 @ 06:23 AM
link   
Phage, let one go every now and then. You sound like the angry old cat lady here.



posted on Dec, 15 2018 @ 07:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Propagandalf

Perhaps you should attempt to express yourself more clearly then.


Whistleblowers accuse Clinton Foundation of criminal activity. Media silent.


People arguing semantics are wrong about most of this imo but the Title I would suggest a tweet too. If there was a "largely" adjective in front of 'the media is silent', it would've been able to stop that nit pick diversion to your valid points.



posted on Dec, 15 2018 @ 07:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Propagandalf
a reply to: Phage




Ok.

What were you talking about?


Was I not clear enough again?


Sure you were. Some people are so full of it that even the whites of their eyes are brown.







 
55
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join