How are Hillary Clinton AND Huma Abedin not going to prison...Warrant Release revelation...

So I was reading through the warrant they released for Abedin's laptop that Weiner had and this is in there plain as day:




So 81 email chains contained classified info all the way to Top Secret at the time they were sent with 68 of them remaining classified to this day according to the warrant.

They also said this:



There were 22 that were Top Secret which if released could have exceptionally grave damage to national security.....

So I ask again....this is ALL known and is IN this warrant yet HRC, Huma and team are somehow remaining above the law on this? What reality are we living in?

This stinks of such a massive cover up it is insane. I truly believe all the crap in the MSM right now about Trump and Russia is to cover this stuff up....likely to cover up that HRC and team actually exposed this info, and if it was Russia then I would say that is a MUCH bigger story than anything Trump related.

It's like an alternate reality is happening here....I don't understand.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

They're not in jail because they've got friends (or dirt on people) in high places.

Simple as that.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

I think there are 2 possibilities
1. Obama is involved and theyre covering this up to save him or the office from scrutiny
2.if they charge HRC, or Huma now, Obama would pardon them

Something really does stink in all of this and I also agree that the Russian hack malarky is obfuscation

And yet during the electoral college announcement in NY, they referred to her as "the honorary Hillary Clinton" when stating the winner.

I must ask to what honor they were referring to?

a reply to: VinylTyrant

Indeed
Honor my left foot

I say Obama will issue pardons in the email case(s) around Jan 19th.

"In the interests of national stability" will be the cover story.

originally posted by: VinylTyrant
And yet during the electoral college announcement in NY, they referred to her as "the honorary Hillary Clinton" when stating the winner.

I must ask to what honor they were referring to?

Former Secretary of State ranked higher than just a former U.S. Senator.

Nothing else.

If I recall the FBI press conference correctly they could not prove there was "intent" to violate the law, so they just chalked it up to being careless.

Trump has said he will not prosecute Hillary et al. That in itself is frustrating enough. They're all in cahoots. Trump has already stepped back from many of his promises now that he has won.

Wall Street is taking over and I don' believe it's going to be a much of a plus for the middle class-maybe they'll throw a few coins at us to keep us quieted.

Believe it or not, Trump was a globalist for decades only now he can really ramp it up and it just might be the best for the country as a whole. It will be a bumpy and uncomfortable ride for most of us-unless you work on Wall Street or have global interests.

Que the music.... O Canadaaaa

originally posted by: jjkenobi
If I recall the FBI press conference correctly they could not prove there was "intent" to violate the law, so they just chalked it up to being careless.

Isn't there something in the law books everywhere that says something to the extent of ignorance not being an excuse? Seems like I have heard that before....just not sure.

a reply to: BlueJacket

Well screaming about Russian involvement has took the spotlight off of her incompetence/criminality and also off the actual CONTENT.
Diversion tactic #1, make them look over there when the real dirt is right here.
#2, repeat the lie from every outlet available.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

And to think she is still blaming it on everyone but herself,
This could be used as evidence to show she has no remorse.

For the record, full 21 pages of warrant and supporting documents.

Full 21 pages are available here at The New York Post.
nypost.com...

Not holding my breath, Alas, she did not win the prize.

a reply to: Justso

I don't think he will prosecute....not even calling for him to. I think someone else will though, and likely at Trump's direction. I don't think this is something that people who voted for him, and are seeing the left for who they really are now, will let slide.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

The left apparently had the popular vote for Hillary-they don't want her prosecuted-Trump knows that-he doesn't want to continue to poke at that-he has his own agenda. He wants the power of an economic globalist leader.

She's not on his radar now that she has lost power and he's not gonna want to get back in the ring with her/she's history.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Definitely. For normal people. Someone posted a about 6 months ago some executive order Bill had done back in the 90's where the DOJ could rule this 'non-intent' copout. I think I had went back and dug it up to include somewhere, maybe in the repository thread... damnit, its not on Page 3 anyways.

originally posted by: BlueJacket
a reply to: Vasa Croe

I think there are 2 possibilities
1. Obama is involved and theyre covering this up to save him or the office from scrutiny
2.if they charge HRC, or Huma now, Obama would pardon them

Something really does stink in all of this and I also agree that the Russian hack malarky is obfuscation

I am of the same train of thought....Obama was definitely involved here and that is the only possible reason I can think of that this has not been THE topic of discussion by MSM. The undeniable cover up going on in relation to HRC and her team is WAY too big to be only them involved. This would seem to HAVE to involve folks at the highest levels of government, up to and including Obama methinks....

I see no Clinton lovers wanted to touch this thread.

originally posted by: VinylTyrant
I see no Clinton lovers wanted to touch this thread.

LOL...not sure what they would say. This is direct from the warrant issued for the Huma/Weiner laptop. If they even viewed this thread it may cause extreme reality distortion to occur and challenge the very fabric of their minds....and we know what can happen then....TRIGGER ON!!!!

Why is it a threat to 'our national security' when the names on the warrant are not 'the people of USA' ???

It's not a threat to national security, it's a threat to the people of USA.

Isn't there a law provided to prosecute aiding and abetting?
Who enforces that law?

Well- get to it.