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.
originally posted by: toolgal462
a reply to: chr0naut
You are wrong. They never charged Clinton therefore the courts never made any determination.
They exonerated her before they even investigated. They exonerated her despite her destroying subpeonad evidence. They gave her a million breaks despite blatant criminal behavior and said, "well, there was no intent so we wont prosecute".
No, courts didn't get the chance to determine anything.
The FBI report says that Cheryl Mills, a longtime Clinton aide and attorney, requested in December 2014 that the email retention policy be shortened to 60 days. The FBI report says Mills "instructed [redacted] to modify the email retention policy on Clinton's clintonemail.com e-mail account" but that "according to [redacted] he did not make these changes to Clinton's clintonemail.com account until March 2015."
The report says the person, essentially identified as Combetta by The New York Times, realized in late March 2015 -- after Clinton's use of a private email account was first reported that month by the Times -- that he had not made the retention change and "had an 'oh sh--' moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015, deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the [Platte River Networks] server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server system containing Clinton's emails."
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: toolgal462
a reply to: chr0naut
You are wrong. They never charged Clinton therefore the courts never made any determination.
They exonerated her before they even investigated. They exonerated her despite her destroying subpeonad evidence. They gave her a million breaks despite blatant criminal behavior and said, "well, there was no intent so we wont prosecute".
No, courts didn't get the chance to determine anything.
Judicial Watch filed for discovery.
Some evidence was destroyed, but not by anyone involved in the investigation, and prior to subpoena.
originally posted by: carewemust
Nancy Pelosi said today that Barr's summary of Mueller's findings are "condescending".
Poor thing: www.foxnews.com...
Maybe Nancy's opinion of herself is higher than is warranted.
originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: carewemust
They took down his 'bull#' comment from last night...LOL
originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: chr0naut
We get it, you asked for Mueller con carne and got soy toast instead. I would be angry too
Don't take it out on the rest of us by making us hear this ridiculous theories as if *somehow* a magical piece of information that 2 congressional investigations, and FBI investigation, a 2 year long special council probe and thousands of breathless Internet search-artists missed is going to somehow come along and prove collusion, prove obstruction and remove Trump from office all in one swoop.
Give it a rest. This kind of BS has divided this country to no end and continues to despite the probe Dems demanded/touted/compare to Christ's second coming coming up empty