FBI Proves Hillary Committed Perjury

lol, it's amazing how little people still know and understand of IT in this day and age.
I guess the FBI guy tossed the coins and come in spinner on this one when he was using
all his bull# spin keywords.
I laughed, I cried, i sighed and at the end of it all i came away with a whole new perception of America.

FRIENDLY OP REMINDER...
BE NICE TO EACH OTHER...AND PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC.
--TYVM

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: EternalShadow
" But, I ask you...knowing she will lie to anyone, anytime, anywhere...to protect herself...and knowing it has now been 'officially' proven by the FBI that she is a serial liar and perjurer...WHY would you vote to make her POTUS? "

I'm not voting for her, but this is a great question for those that are. Instead of dodging or deflecting the question, will some of her supporters here on ATS answer this?? I'm extremely curious as to why none of this seems to matter to her voter base.

I am a registered Democrat, and in the fall, I will be voting for the Democratic candidate.

That will apparently be Hillary Clinton.

If it is not, I will still be voting Democratic, because, with likely millions of American voters, I tend to be voting AGAINST a candidate rather than FOR one.

As far as "answering for Clinton" ... I can't. While she is not the epitome of evil that staunch right-wing Clinton hater's portray her as ... she's a politician. That tells me all I need to know about her ethics. Her primary ethic, like any other politician's, particularly those who run for national office is POWER. Pure and simple.

I have to make a choice between how I think that power would be the LEAST abused and the LEAST harmful to me and the rest of the American people.

That will be the Democratic candidate.

Hope that helps.

I appreciate your input.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: boncho

Got it:
'Everyone lies' and 'it's the Mossad's fault'. --TYVM

Ah right, sorry its all just coincidence US policy seems to follow Mossad end game operations all the time. Im sure it's all entirely coincidental. Those 50 odd False-Flag operations which Mossad has been a part of, linked to, or the 10 which are outright historical fact, they have no bearing on the situation.

Im sure the Zionist lobby, not to mention the politicians themselves who've come out and admitted proudly they are Zionists, they have no effect on US policy.

Im sure the billions in aide is not part of a larger political game being played which started a long time ago and involves disrupting almost the entire ME, destroying other countries' security while beefing up a singular nation (the one with the giant lobby and strongest intelligence arms in the world)

The only reason they can't bring down Hillary is because the Clinton's have dirt on every single politician in the US power pyramid. If anything, as much as people might hate Hillary, it's being made pretty obvious from pro-Zion publications she is no friend of Israel right now (though she's trying to project that image for obvious reasons.)

Don't take it from me though, "Hillary is no friend of Israel", "a sane Jew does not vote for Hillary", and "Hillary is no friend of Israel".

Is it any wonder Benghazi was investigated more than 9/11? and then is it any wonder there is so much pressure on Benghazi right around the time Pro-Zion publications are all calling Hillary an enemy of Zion?

It's all coincidence Im sure.

1946 - The King David Hotel Bombing

1954 - The "Lavon Affair"

1967 - Attack on the USS Liberty

1984 - Murder of Policewoman Yvonne Fletcher (Directly related to Libya policy)

1986 - LaBelle Disco (Directly related to Libya)

1988 - Lockerbie Bombing (Directly related to Libya)

One only has to ask themselves "Cui bono?" It's a pretty repeated patterns you will notice over and over again. Consider the false flags which were basically admitted to or proven by scholars or determined by security officials, then consider how many operations haven't been uncovered. Also consider who benefits to investigations when they are quickly shut without fully explaining everything. Then consider Benghazi, a minor affair considered to much larger incidents which were whitewashed.

Cui bono?

originally posted by: EternalShadow
" But, I ask you...knowing she will lie to anyone, anytime, anywhere...to protect herself...and knowing it has now been 'officially' proven by the FBI that she is a serial liar and perjurer...WHY would you vote to make her POTUS? "...
nstead of dodging or deflecting the question, will some of her supporters here on ATS answer this??

Im not a supporter of her, but she may actually be the lessor of two evils here. Ill explain it best as I can. What's apparent, (the reason she isn't being prosecuted) is because she has dirt on everyone. The media is basically ignoring this and its for good reason, I think the political establishment would implode if she was properly prosecuted.

Instead, I think a very powerful lobby is trying to bring her down with Benghazi.

The very fact she is able to withstand this politically, shows her political might. Now, consider that most politicians that make it into high office are on someone's payroll, or in their pocket. The best politician is one you have dirt on, so if they try to go against your wishes, you end their career with leaks or dissemination of information.

The very fact she can withstand a frontal assault on her character and her eligibility, likely means she actually is a much stronger and more independent politician than other options.

It's about picking the lessor of two evils. I can't even tell you if she is that or not however. I can just point out politically she is much stronger than her equals. Though it's obvious a very powerful group is not a fan of her, or Bill, considering Bill himself was impeached-but not impeached out of office.

It's not like Trump is any better, he's a 1%er who thinks of himself first and will do whatever he can too benefit himself in office. He will bow faster than weak kneed eunuch. He has no political edge, he has no political advantage. So while the ideal he presents might win over some clouded thinkers, he stands no chance politically. You are basically handing over the country to TPTB for the next 4 years.

Consider this, Bush started a war on fiction, an entire WAR that caused hundreds of thousands of deaths directly, cost 1.7 Trillion dollars, all built on a foundation of lies, as bad or worse than Hillary (but not proven or leaked) and he made it through this relatively unscathed without any direct attacks on his office and himself in general.

The real question is who was Bush working for, who was covering or backing Bush (because while he is political he doesn't have political power the way Clintons do), and who exactly is Hillary fighting against.

In Summary: Hillary has political power, which actually means as POTUS she likely has more power to act independently. This may be a good or bad thing. Putting someone in office with none however can only create a puppet of the worst kind. If we actually knew what happens behind the scenes we could make an educated guess, or at least understand what each leader is willing to do or likely what direction they will steer the ship to. Without knowing this you are missing a huge part of the puzzle. Though some can be gleamed by understanding who's attacking who.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Ok, now this is an interesting point in light of Congress' intent to question Comey. Not that I have confidence that Congress will do anything but protect the corrupt system, but I would think it would be difficult for Congress to ignore the fact she perjured herself according to Comey.

S&F.

House Benghazi Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy said back in October that Clinton lied during the hearing. The South Carolina representative said, “I’ve always injected an element of wholeness and completeness, and also truthfulness in the definition of cooperative. So did she cooperate in answering the question? Yes. Was it accurate answer? No.” (RELATED: Trey Gowdy: Hillary Clinton Lied Under Oath At Benghazi Committee Hearing [VIDEO])

The crime Clinton may have committed back in October was perjury. According to Title 18, Section 1621 the “perjury generally” statute prohibits people from lying to Congress while under oath. The punishment for perjury include fines up to $100,000 or up to five years in jail.

However, “The perjury statute is a technical statute,” says Mark Hopson, managing partner at Sidney Austin LLP. “It is especially difficult, if not impossible to prosecute statements that may be misleading or evasive but subject to an arguably truthful interpretation.” Read more: dailycaller.com...

originally posted by: PLAYERONE01
lol, it's amazing how little people still know and understand of IT in this day and age.

Say more??

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: IAMTAT

Exactly.

I guess it's Hitler's legacy. Instead of openly saying they hate Jews, people just say they hate the Zionists.

Everything bad in the world is being contributed to those evil Zionists and the US. It's ridiculous

No. If you feel that way it's because you've been brainwashed by (controlled) mass media. And I get it, I really do. I used to see anti-Zionist writings and think it was racist in some way (before actually looking into the issue.)

A Zionist is a Zionist, a Jew is a Jew. Not all Jews are Zionist, but you can be damn sure all Zionists will use or call on Jews and imply that any pro-Zion movement is pro Jew. This is what clouds the perception and fuzzes the lines. It's why pro-Zionist publications will 'call on all Jews' for xyz movement or political issue. Then if someone criticizes the pro-Zionist writings, 'they are racist'. Uh, no. Sorry. Doesn't work like that (I mean it does, but it shouldn't.)

Some of the absolute worst cases of racism can be linked back to pro-Zionist movements, as they seek to divide Jews, rally them for their interests, and actually cause greater divide by radicalizing Muslins while preaching and teaching that any criticisms of Zionist interests are racist.

Considering there are traditional Jews who are anti-Zionist, the claim you are making does not make a lick of sense though:







So, now that we got that out of the way. Should we ignore that Zionist political influence plays a large part in US policy and very well could be playing a large role in Benghazi (considering its got more attention than many other incidents, especially ones linked back to Mossad operations?) Or do we just ignore it altogether and pretend it doesn't exist?

a reply to: IAMTAT

In your heart...and your mind...you simply MUST realize she's a serial liar. The FBI made that determination 'Official'.

I believe the word is sociopathic liar with narcissistic tendencies.

A candidate based on lies with be nothing more than an administration based on lies.

In other words.

Snip in. Snip out.

Just to keep it pg-13.

a reply to: introvert

Thanks.
Looks like Comey, the FBI...AND Gowdy all agree with you that Clinton is a liar.

OK.

The FBI pretty much told everyone what everyone already knew.

*shrug*

There isn't much I or anyone else can do about it at this point (except not vote for her). Repeating the same findings and gong in circles isn't going to suddenly change the FBI's mind or magically convince the DOJ to decide to move indictment proceedings along.

Face it, the people are on the outside and have been for decades. The government is outside the control of the people, and has been for a very, very, long time. The Princeton studies prove we live in an Oligarchy, and those that believe otherwise are deluding themselves.

If we want to change the government and country, we need to start at the local level. Get elected to your town's local assembly. Run for offices in your city's government. Support state senate and congressional candidates who aren't bought and paid for. Elect governors who will bring in real change.

Get a job with the government and bring your personal politics with you. Run for office yourself, work for campaigns. Sit on the committees for your local Republican or Democrat parties.

Get involved at the local level.

Top-down change won't work. That's like asking the boss to take a pay cut.

Bottom up change through infiltration is the only way to weed out the corruption.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: introvert

Thanks.
Looks like Comey, the FBI...AND Gowdy all agree with you that Clinton is a liar.

Sure. The point of that post is to show how a perjury charge is very unlikely.

originally posted by: introvert

However, “The perjury statute is a technical statute,” says Mark Hopson, managing partner at Sidney Austin LLP. “It is especially difficult, if not impossible to prosecute statements that may be misleading or evasive but subject to an arguably truthful interpretation.”

Love how that article conveniently mis-spells "Sidney Austin".

The correct name is "Sidley Austin"

And that's the place the Obamas worked at when they were lawyers !!!!!

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: introvert

Thanks.
Looks like Comey, the FBI...AND Gowdy all agree with you that Clinton is a liar.

Sure. The point of that post is to show how a perjury charge is very unlikely.

Perjury is the EXACT reason Martha Stewart went to prison.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Using the Hillary-fan defense, Hitler was alright because other people hated jews also.
Stalin was okay, because ukranians would have died anyway.
Mao was alright because, overpopulation.

0_o

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: introvert

Thanks.
Looks like Comey, the FBI...AND Gowdy all agree with you that Clinton is a liar.

Sure. The point of that post is to show how a perjury charge is very unlikely.

Perjury is the EXACT reason Martha Stewart went to prison.

She was also convicted of obstructing justice. Hardly comparable.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: introvert

Thanks.
Looks like Comey, the FBI...AND Gowdy all agree with you that Clinton is a liar.

Sure. The point of that post is to show how a perjury charge is very unlikely.

Perjury is the EXACT reason Martha Stewart went to prison.

She was also convicted of obstructing justice. Hardly comparable.

Like Deleting emails, and and her husbands meeting with Lynch ?

Completely comparable.

originally posted by: xuenchen
originally posted by: introvert

However, “The perjury statute is a technical statute,” says Mark Hopson, managing partner at Sidney Austin LLP. “It is especially difficult, if not impossible to prosecute statements that may be misleading or evasive but subject to an arguably truthful interpretation.”

Love how that article conveniently mis-spells "Sidney Austin".

The correct name is "Sidley Austin"

And that's the place the Obamas worked at when they were lawyers !!!!!

Damned Excellent catch, X.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: introvert

Thanks.
Looks like Comey, the FBI...AND Gowdy all agree with you that Clinton is a liar.

Sure. The point of that post is to show how a perjury charge is very unlikely.

Perjury is the EXACT reason Martha Stewart went to prison.

Yeah. Hillary's hubby Bill was found guilty of Perjury too...nothing happened but losing his law license.
The Clintons are quite a pair.