BREAKING: Clinton Email Case Just Reopened!

originally posted by: schmae
a reply to: Throes

So not made up but not ' breaking news'. TY

It's breaking as of last night that MSM actually reported it.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: SudoNim
They're (Wikileaks) warning that part of the information involves child porn related to Clintons. How serious is that Sudonim!?

It's a very serious subject.

But like most of these things the Trumpeters spout on here there's no proof as yet. Just rumour, and since so so so many of these have come and gone with no actual proof, only a fool would blindly accept that its true based on a rumour.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: butcherguy
If this is real.... could be the mother lode and the final coffin nail!
Wikileaks to dump all of it within the hour.
Link to ATS post....

Is this the final nail or the final final nail, it feels like there have been 10 of these final nails and yet nothing ever really comes out.

"Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me... fool me another 8 times, it's pretty obvious I'm just a fool."

If Hillary was any other American citizen, the final nail would have been driven quite a while ago.... like July of this year, and she would have been indicted then.
But the DOJ and FBI addressed her case differently.

In your opinion. Which you are entitled to, but its the same as me saying if all these scandals involving Trump surfaced when he wasn't running for President and the Republicans only hope they wouldn't be protecting him.

FBI agent dies in freak Tesla accident:
www.indystar.com...

Edit:
Why this sad story is odd (aside from the Tesla accident) is that this man was also a software designer who developed this:
casepacer.com...

What is also odd, is that his system is mentioned in Podesta Email #35856.

HERE IT COMES:
From Wikileaks:

Follow WikiLeaksVerified account ‏@wikileaks
Stay tune for our FBI-DoJ #PodestaEmail special circa 4pm EST.

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: thepixelpusher

I'm skeptical - if this was true how are people not already in handcuffs, or already fleeing the country?

Obviously these rumors must have evidence to prove it, but already the NYPD sex victims unit has already stated if this drags on in DOJ and FBI, they will release what they know in a press conference. I posted a link to that a few posts back and repeated it below.

BREAKING BOMBSHELL: NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails: Money Laundering, Sex Crimes with Children, Child Exploitation, Pay to Play, Perjury

Meanwhile, FBI sources said Abedin and Weiner were cooperating with federal agents, who have taken over the non-sexting portions the case from NYPD. The husband-and-wife Clinton insiders are both shopping for separate immunity deals, sources said.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: thepixelpusher

I'm skeptical - if this was true how are people not already in handcuffs, or already fleeing the country?

Obviously these rumors must have evidence to prove it, but already the NYPD sex victims unit has already stated if this drags on in DOJ and FBI, they will release what they know in a press conference. I posted a link to that a few posts back.

No names and no link to any official statement by anyone. Mmmmkay.

How about if I say that the NYPD has found some info on Trump that proves he raped that 13-year-old girl, and they have stated they will release it reeeaaaally soon. Must be true right?

a reply to: IAMTAT

Isn't this the same (or very similar) system to what PROMIS was originally designed for?

The one MME made a thread about here?

originally posted by: kaylaluv

originally posted by: thepixelpusher

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: thepixelpusher

I'm skeptical - if this was true how are people not already in handcuffs, or already fleeing the country?

Obviously these rumors must have evidence to prove it, but already the NYPD sex victims unit has already stated if this drags on in DOJ and FBI, they will release what they know in a press conference. I posted a link to that a few posts back.

No names and no link to any official statement by anyone. Mmmmkay.

How about if I say that the NYPD has found some info on Trump that proves he raped that 13-year-old girl, and they have stated they will release it reeeaaaally soon. Must be true right?

Hey, if this is real you won't have to question it. It will be released for either criminal charges or not. I bet this is either disproven or proven within the week. Before the election. Big names are saying this is true, not the crap proganda on Trump

originally posted by: SudoNim
Is this the final nail or the final final nail, it feels like there have been 10 of these final nails and yet nothing ever really comes out.

"Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me... fool me another 8 times, it's pretty obvious I'm just a fool."

I think it would be more appropriate to say Clinton has a severe case of "Death by a thousand paper cuts".

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: SudoNim
They're (Wikileaks) warning that part of the information involves child porn related to Clintons. How serious is that Sudonim!?

It's a very serious subject.

But like most of these things the Trumpeters spout on here there's no proof as yet. Just rumour, and since so so so many of these have come and gone with no actual proof, only a fool would blindly accept that its true based on a rumour.

Plenty of evidence already that got Dems fired already and the lastest leaks shows Podestas link to DOJ lawyer trying to cover for Hillary. Only brain dead Hillbots cannot see the evidence that created issues and firings so far.

originally posted by: thepixelpusher

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: SudoNim
They're (Wikileaks) warning that part of the information involves child porn related to Clintons. How serious is that Sudonim!?

It's a very serious subject.

But like most of these things the Trumpeters spout on here there's no proof as yet. Just rumour, and since so so so many of these have come and gone with no actual proof, only a fool would blindly accept that its true based on a rumour.

Plenty of evidence already that got Dems fired already and the lastest leaks shows Podestas link to DOJ lawyer trying to cover for Hillary. Only brain dead Hillbots cannot see the evidence that created issues and firings so far.

The word your looking for and missing is proof.

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: thepixelpusher

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: SudoNim
They're (Wikileaks) warning that part of the information involves child porn related to Clintons. How serious is that Sudonim!?

It's a very serious subject.

But like most of these things the Trumpeters spout on here there's no proof as yet. Just rumour, and since so so so many of these have come and gone with no actual proof, only a fool would blindly accept that its true based on a rumour.

Plenty of evidence already that got Dems fired already and the lastest leaks shows Podestas link to DOJ lawyer trying to cover for Hillary. Only brain dead Hillbots cannot see the evidence that created issues and firings so far.

The word your looking for and missing is proof.

Shocking. Isn't it.

I went through all of this with the "Bush Bones" years ago. Same old, same old stuff.

Nothing ever came of any of it.

Not 100% related but I think related enough. This just came across my local feed.
www.dallasobserver.com...

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: thepixelpusher

originally posted by: SudoNim

originally posted by: thepixelpusher
a reply to: SudoNim
They're (Wikileaks) warning that part of the information involves child porn related to Clintons. How serious is that Sudonim!?

It's a very serious subject.

But like most of these things the Trumpeters spout on here there's no proof as yet. Just rumour, and since so so so many of these have come and gone with no actual proof, only a fool would blindly accept that its true based on a rumour.

Plenty of evidence already that got Dems fired already and the lastest leaks shows Podestas link to DOJ lawyer trying to cover for Hillary. Only brain dead Hillbots cannot see the evidence that created issues and firings so far.

The word your looking for and missing is proof.

The proof is there... As has been stated many times before FBI Director Comey added his own element into a statute that does not exist. When Congress drafted the espionage statute they kept in mind that prior to the statute the only available federal statute that applied to crimes dealing with national security was treason. By drafting the new law they created a lesser charge where the only requirement to violate was gross negligence. It was designed for the sole purpose of creating a law that punished a persons actions where there was no intent on committing treason.

So yes their is proof. Clinton and her aides did in fact violate the law. Intent is not a requirement contrary to what Mr. Comey claims.

When people talk about fairness, the law and its application one has to ask - Is it fair for an executive branch agency to decide to add its own elements into a statute in order to get out of charging a person with a famous last name while not holding the same standard to Joe and Jane Smith, allowing them to be prosecuted when they also had no intent?

a reply to: Xcathdra

Hillary Clinton is not being charged with treason, and her "negligence" didn't result in anything near treason.

"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open Court.
18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xcathdra

Hillary Clinton is not being charged with treason, and her "negligence" didn't result in anything near treason.

"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open Court.
18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

Good.. Now go back and read my post in its entirety and maybe understand it before commenting on it. This time around don't do what Comey did and add stuff to it that doesnt exist.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xcathdra

Hillary Clinton is not being charged with treason, and her "negligence" didn't result in anything near treason.

"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open Court.
18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

You can argue she aided our enemies by letting them steal secrets from her insecure email server.

a reply to: schmae

From back in July:

At roughly 11:15pm CT, a police SWAT team was filmed entering a parking garage on the corner of Wood and Griffin St., just south of the Earle Cabell Federal Building, which houses the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas and a U.S. attorney’s office. The DPD bomb squad was also reportedly dispatched to investigate a suspicious package nearby.

www.dailydot.com...

Could be nothing but is worth noting.

a reply to: windword

...giving them aid...

If the case is proven that her server was in fact hacked by other countries, would you then consider that her having an unsecured server, by her own choice and request, was worthy of some kind of punishment?

I think it would be a good idea if you declared what you consider important enough for indictment.