Clinton official pleads guilty to treason for China collusion

a reply to: projectvxn

You know, when the Clintons have been in government, it seems that EVERY TIME coincides with the Chinese gaining lots of U.S. secrets...

In fact, under Bill Clinton's watch China changed from an agrarian, and backwards, far left-wing economy into the third largest economy in the world.

Chasing the Dragon: Clinton's China Policy

Chinagate: The FBI has arrested one of the top Beijing-tied bagmen who funneled funny money to the Clinton administration. He was busted in New York with a suitcase full of cash. Some Chinese money-laundering for Hillary? Stay tuned.

The defendant is a major Clinton fundraiser named Ng Lap Seng, aka "Mr. Wu." He and Clinton pal Charlie Trie visited the White House several times in the 1990s, snapping photos with both Bill and Hillary.

Federal investigators are charging him with lying to agents about why he brought more than $4.5 million into the U.S. over the last two years, including a suitcase full of $400,000 in cash to New York.
...

The Clintons' Chinese Bagmen Are Baa-aack

a reply to: TheRedneck

I'm sorry; I have seen some seriously inept attempts to try and twist something back on our current President, but I think you just set a new (low) bar.

This is pretty ironic considering that the entire point of this thread was to smear Hillary Clinton. Perhaps you could spare some of that admonishing tone for the peanut gallery?

a reply to: theantediluvian

This is pretty ironic considering that the entire point of this thread was to smear Hillary Clinton.

That was not the point of this thread. In fact:

At no point has this story been publicized. I didn't even know that such a trial was ongoing. You'd think a legitimate trial for TREASON in this day and age would be grounds for wall to wall coverage.

With regard to this point:

With all we know of how the Clinton State Department dealt with classified materials and the disbursement thereof, this adds another layer of intrigue to the Clinton saga.

Is there something within this part of the post that you disagree with factually?

The rest is my opinion, of course, but certainly not a wild inference considering the circumstances at play. How is that a smear?

a reply to: theantediluvian

This is pretty ironic considering that the entire point of this thread was to smear Hillary Clinton. Perhaps you could spare some of that admonishing tone for the peanut gallery?

It was? Here I thought it was about a official in the State Department finally pleading guilty to an offense arising from her activities related to espionage.

Could you do us all a favor and make the second post in all threads from here on out, so the rest of us will know what theantediluvian says the topic is? It would save us all quite a bit of time. Thank you.

Sarcasm aside, if there is any "smearing" of the Clintons, it is not a result of this thread; it is the result of their own actions. Perhaps you should save some of your own admonishment for the likes of Bill and Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama for smearing their otherwise good name?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Thread title: Clinton official pleads guilty to treason for China collusion

What exactly makes this traitor any more a "Clinton official" than a "Bush official," "Obama official" or considering that she was arrested after Trump was inaugurated, a "Trump official?"

You certainly seem to take great offense at the insinuation that this woman had anything to do with Donald Trump, when you said:

I'm sorry; I have seen some seriously inept attempts to try and twist something back on our current President, but I think you just set a new (low) bar.

And of course it wasn't just the title, the bulk of the commentary in the OP is about...Hillary Clinton, her email and unsubstantiated rumors from walked back news reports about her private email server having been hacked by the Chinese (the walked back claim was as many as 5 different nations).

With all we know of how the Clinton State Department dealt with classified materials and the disbursement thereof, this adds another layer of intrigue to the Clinton saga. Emails were just the beginning. There have also been reports of Chinese hacking into this server with data stolen. That report is certainly given more credibility considering the depth to which this traitor was involved with the Clintons and the Chinese.

This was some mid-level cog who was selling out our country across two 8-year administrations and parts of two others and yet it "adds another layer of intrigue to the Clinton saga."

originally posted by: [post=24342365]

At no point has this story been publicized. I didn't even know that such a trial was ongoing. You'd think a legitimate trial for TREASON in this day and age would be grounds for wall to wall coverage.

Really. At no point has this story been publicized? What do you call the following?

NBC News

Newsweek

Washington Times

Washington Post

That you were unaware of some mid-level employee of the Department of Justice being charged with and eventually pleading guilty to conspiracy to defraud the United States does not mean there was no publicizing of her arrest, charges, or conviction.

a reply to: erwalker

I love how you people are downplaying this as a "mid-level employee" when this person had a top secret clearance.

a reply to: erwalker

At no point has this story been publicized? What do you call the following?

All of those are from March 29th 2019. Nary a mention until the Washington Times article on April 24th.

So no, this story was not publicized.

Try a little critical thinking.

a reply to: theantediluvian

What exactly makes this traitor any more a "Clinton official" than a "Bush official," "Obama official" or considering that she was arrested after Trump was inaugurated, a "Trump official?"

Let's start with the fact that her career in the State Department started under Bill Clinton's administration. That can be shrugged off somewhat, as no President can know the background of everyone who works in the Executive Branch. But then let's consider that it continued unabated while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State. Now add that there is still a case to be made that her email was indeed hacked by other countries, and that China would be quite interested in them. After all, the servers were never turned over to the FBI, so how could anyone know if they were hacked or not? And finally, one of the big scandals during the Clinton Presidency was the leaking of top secret files to China.

If you want to blame Bush or Obama as well as the Clintons, I have no issue with that. But to try and blame the guy who actually caught her? I'm sorry, that is as inane a statement as I have ever heard, and frankly, had I made a statement so preposterous, I wouldn't be able to look myself in the mirror without seeing a dunce cap on my head. She should have been charged back in 1999, or at least 2000... Clinton failed to do so, Bush failed to do so, and Obama failed to do so. The only President to actually ferret her traitorous activities out was the very one you want to blame for her doing them in the first place!

I know you can see how utterly ridiculous that is... and I also know your TDS will never let you admit it. You do realize that term started as a joke, right? It was statements like yours that made it into an actual conspiracy theory.

TheRedneck

And your point is?
A) Hillary is not president, and
B) your commander in chief is a puppet of Russia.

Sleep well tonight with that sobering fact, commerade

a reply to: Abbby

A) Hillary is not president,

Thank god.

B) your commander in chief is a puppet of Russia.

Hahahahahahahahahahaha

Sleep well tonight with that sobering fact, commerade

I have a hard time believing sobriety is a state of mind you're familiar with.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: TheRedneck

I'm sorry; I have seen some seriously inept attempts to try and twist something back on our current President, but I think you just set a new (low) bar.

This is pretty ironic considering that the entire point of this thread was to smear Hillary Clinton. Perhaps you could spare some of that admonishing tone for the peanut gallery?

Uh yeah...not quite.

The OP was crystal clear in his view and none of what he wrote comes even remotely close to a smear campaign against Hillary Clinton.

Here is what the OP wrote:

At no point has this story been publicized. I didn't even know that such a trial was ongoing. You'd think a legitimate trial for TREASON in this day and age would be grounds for wall to wall coverage. With all we know of how the Clinton State Department dealt with classified materials and the disbursement thereof, this adds another layer of intrigue to the Clinton saga. Emails were just the beginning. There have also been reports of Chinese hacking into this server with data stolen. That report is certainly given more credibility considering the depth to which this traitor was involved with the Clintons and the Chinese.

The OP makes an excellent point about this story not being publicized which he is absolutely correct. For 2 years we've heard nothing but total BS from the MSM about a fake Russian collusion story which turns out has ZERO evidence. This story, however, has provable evidence and facts to back the collusion and treason.

The OPs statements regarding the Clintons (not just Shillary) are accurate as well. Everything the OP states about the Clintons is backed by stories covered by the MSM.

Here is the definition of a smear campaign to refresh your memory:

Smear campaign
A smear campaign, also referred to as a smear tactic or simply a smear, is an effort to damage or call into question someone's reputation, by propounding negative propaganda. It can be applied to individuals or groups.

None of what the OP posted is negative propaganda as the story is based in facts.

However you can most certainly apply your definition of a smear campaign to the false Russian collusion BS pushed by the MSM for 2 years.

Accepting dubious gifts and donations? Soooo this chick is like 99.9% of politicians and government officials?

When are people going to learn, not just learn but act also.

Oh well you got your sacrificial lamb, that'll satiate some people's appetites for the time being.

Who needs to look at what the right hand you like is up to while the left hand you hate is doing something?

Keep letting the government do what their employers, the tax paying people, should be doing. Keep being surprised when the corrupt politicians aren't lynching themselves and feeding you the occasional sacrifice to keep your outrage appeased.

Keep impotently screaming on the internet and little else. Still pretending to be surprised that nothing ever changes.
(Well except when you're racist enough to get off the internet and go hog tie mexicans for fun... I mean out of patriotic duty)

But seriously, you have all this information. You folks copy and paste it all day every day.
But when are you actually going to do something about it?

Seriously what is the point of all these discussions online when they go nowhere and nothing comes from them?

Do people really care like they claim or is it just fun to vent?

reply to: projectvxn

You claimed that the arrest, charges, and conviction were never publicized. They were even if the amount of publicity does not reach the level that you believe it should have.

The fact that a person has a top secret clearance does not mean they weren't some mid-level employee. You get the security clearance that is required to handle the information you deal with and then only get access to information on a need to know basis.

I had a secret security clearance because of the job I did for some 27 years. Why? Because I was privy to technical information regarding military aircraft radar systems, ew systems, and crypto equipment that was all classified as secret. I know of persons who were were lowly privates but had top secret clearance simply because their job gave them access to information that was classified to that level. But those same persons with top secret clearance were NOT authorized to have the secret information I was privy to because they had no need to know it.

You are making much of a story that, while important, was not earth-shaking news or evidence of some malfeasance on the part of the Clintons, Bush, Obama, or some cheetos-coloured twat.

a reply to: erwalker

Having a clearance for what you did and having one for what she did are two totally different worlds.

I've held a clearance before as well when I was in the army a couple of years ago.

My level of access was high enough to cause damage, should I have been a bad actor, but limited to my immediate AO. Her level of access is enough to cause huge damage at international levels, and that's exactly what she did. For years. Having developed extensive contacts within Chinese government, we have no real way of knowing just how deep the damage goes.

This is a highly important story that, while reported on, has CLEARLY not be PUBLICIZED.

I wonder why?

Oh yeah...Russians.

a reply to: projectvxn

It still did not make her anything more than a mid-level State Department employee and pretending that the Clinton's are somehow to blame for her actions is just foolish.

That it didn't get the publicity that you feel it deserved is merely your personal opinion.

a reply to: erwalker

It still did not make her anything more than a mid-level State Department employee and pretending that the Clinton's are somehow to blame for her actions is just foolish.

I did no such thing. Please read what I am actually saying instead of what you want me to say.

That it didn't get the publicity that you feel it deserved is merely your personal opinion.

Maybe. But it gives the anti-Trumpers heartburn to have to answer for anything their cronies do.

a reply to: projectvxn

State Department Employee Arrested and Charged

"At her court appearance today, Clairborne pleaded not guilty before the Honorable Magistrate Judge Robin M. Meriweather. A preliminary hearing was set for April 18."

Why lie?

a reply to: D_Mason

Lie about what?

The TDS is thick with a few in this thread. Crazy how bad it is when the truth comes out about their people, rather than orange man bad.