Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 37 of 37
Like Tree19Likes

Thread: FBI recommends no charges to be filed against Clinton

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,815
    Rand Paul Believes Clinton Could Get 5 Years In Prison

    “It’s a felony ..."



    Kevin Whitson August 12, 2016 at 4:40pm

    In 2013, Hillary Clinton testified before Congress about her role as Secretary of State during the Benghazi terrorist attacks which left Ambassador Christopher Stevens and four other Americans dead.

    Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., asked Clinton while she was under oath, “Is the U.S. involved with any procuring of weapons, transfer of weapons, buying, selling, anyhow transferring weapons to Turkey out of Libya?”

    “To Turkey? I will have to take that question for the record. No one has ever raised that with me,” Clinton responded.

    Paul responded that there were news reports of ships leaving Libya reportedly carrying weapons. He asked again, “What I’d like to know is, is the annex that was close by (in Benghazi), were they involved with procuring, buying, selling, obtaining weapons, and were any of these weapons transferred to other countries, any countries, Turkey included?”

    “Well, senator you’ll have to direct that question to the agency that ran the annex,” Clinton said, referring to the CIA. “And I will see what information is available.”
    “You’re saying you do not know?” Rand asked.

    Clinton replied, “I do not know. I don’t have any information on that.”

    Three years after Clinton testified to Paul before Congress, a full investigation of Clinton’s email server came to a close, without FBI Director James Comey recommending an indictment against Clinton for her handling of classified information on an unsecured private email server.

    But no sooner had Comey’s conclusion been rendered than news the Democratic Party’s emails had been hacked and the contents exposed for the world to see how the DNC supposedly worked against one of its own candidates in supporting Clinton over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

    The news led to the resignation of DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz and it may now lead to another possible investigation of Clinton if what Julian Assange says is true.

    Assange, founder of Wikileaks (the organization responsible for disseminating the leaked Democratic Party emails), told Democracy Now in July the information he’s obtained from those emails indicate Clinton, contrary to her sworn testimony to Rand, was fully aware of arms shipments and transfers, and was pushing those weapons into Syria and the hands of ISIS.

    Assange stated, “Weapons flows, going over to Syria, being pushed by Hillary Clinton, into jihadists within Syria, including ISIS, that’s there in those emails.”

    As of yet, however, there is no proof to substantiate Assange’s claims because he has not yet released those emails.

    Paul went on the record Thursday stating Clinton could get up to five years in prison for lying to Congress under oath when she personally stated to him she had no knowledge of weapons transfers.

    Paul said Thursday it “was not fair” to enlisted men and others that Clinton wasn’t prosecuted over her handling of classified information. And when asked about the Wikileaks’ claim and his belief Clinton should be put in jail, Paul told Fox News’ Eric Bolling, “It’s a felony to lie to Congress. You can get five years in prison. And we can’t continue to say the Clintons are above the law.”

    Paul then stated his belief the gun-running operation was underway and Clinton knew about it.

    “I do believe that the CIA annex in Benghazi was procuring weapons, some of them to get them away from the jihadists in Libya,” Paul said. “But some of it to ferry those weapons through Turkey, into Syria.”

    Paul quoted several news sources who have reported gun-running operations were taking place. “There have been many, many first-hand accounts, The New York Times, London Times, Washington Times have all reported upon this,” he said.

    Paul pinpointed the source of his incredulity, saying, “I find it hard to believe that Hillary Clinton, who all the news reports have said she was the biggest advocate for arming the Islamic rebels in Syria, many of whom turned out to be not only enemies of ours, some of them also turned out to be enemies of Israel as well.”

    Wikileaks has not released those emails but has promised to do so, as Western Journalism has reported, “in batches” leading up to the presidential election in November.


    http://www.westernjournalism.com/ran...ars-in-prison/

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    856
    They are all blowhards, each and every one of them. The deal with Clinton and Trump should be as follows:

    Clinton reveals her speech she gave to GS and the 33,000 e-mails in exchange for Trumps tax return. Case closed, it is a basic wash unless the e-mails contain anything felonious.

  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,815
    “It’s a felony to lie to Congress. You can get five years in prison. And we can’t continue to say the Clintons are above the law.”
    without a doubt....let's have some action on that. Can we see some op-eds in major papers on that?

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,815
    "Clinton Defense" Popularity Surges In Espionage Cases


    by Tyler Durden
    Aug 20, 2016 3:01 PM

    Earlier this week we wrote about 29-year-old Navy sailor, Kristian Saucier, who had plead guilty to espionage charges for snapping 6 photos of classified areas of a nuclear submarine and was facing up to 78 months in prison for his "crime" (see "Convicted Spy Is Using Hillary's "Lack Of Intent" Defense To Seek Leniency"). Even though he knew the pictures were classified, Saucier said he took them to "be able to show his family and future children what he did while he was in the Navy" and denied ever showing the pictures to any "unauthorized recipients."



    Saucier's attorney used the "Clinton Defense" at his sentencing hearing earlier this week, arguing that he possessed just 6 sensitive photographs which was "far less than Clinton’s 110 emails" that were ultimately deemed to contain classified information. Saucier's attorney went on to argue that “...it will be unjust and unfair for Mr. Saucier to receive any sentence other than probation for a crime those more powerful than him will likely avoid.

    Unsurprisingly, Saucier didn't make out quite as well as Clinton but the "Clinton Defense" may have resulted in some level of leniency in his sentencing. According to The Hill, Saucier was facing up to 78 months in prison for his admission to "mishandling information" but a federal judge on Friday sentenced him to 12 months instead. Greg Rinckey, Saucier’s lawyer, said that while the judge indicated Clinton's case did not factor into the sentencing, he believes it played a small, albeit favorable role.
    “Honestly did it help our case? I’m sure it did. We were very concerned that some people that are in high, powerful positions within the United States are selectively prosecuted. So I think it was a valid rationale.”
    Clinton will also be mentioned in a separate upcoming case involving Major Jason Brezler. Brezler is being discharged from the Marine Corps for "mishandling classified information" after using his personal email account in 2012 to send a classified briefing document to fellow Marines in Afghanistan. The email was intended to warn fellow soldiers about the potential threat posed by an Afghan police chief. Brezler subsequently self-reported his actions to the military. Brezler's attorney, Michael Bowe, commented on the apparent double standard in applying the same laws to Clinton versus others who have committed "far less alleged misconduct":

    “The FBI has found that Secretary Clinton was ‘extremely careless’ in her handling of classified information by, among other things, intentionally setting up a secret home server housing highly classified information."

    “Nevertheless, the current commander-in-chief has publicly stated that none of this impairs her 'excellent ability to serve', including as the next commander-in-chief. If that is so, then the current commander-in-chief should apply the same standard to Major Brezler and all those serving in his administration who have been found unfit to serve for far, far less alleged misconduct.

    “Certainly, if Secretary Clinton becomes the next commander-in-chief it would the ultimate hypocrisy for her to declare others unfit for service based on alleged misconduct equal to or less serious than that she herself engaged."
    Meanwhile, Bradley Moss, a lawyer specializing in national security and security clearance law, said he did not expect the "Clinton Defense" to necessarily be "effective" in getting cases tossed out. That said, he does suspect it will continue to be used as "leverage" to help get reduced sentencing for the accused.

    “It’s being brought in to say, ‘Look, my guy is a simple rank-and-file person who did these three little things. Hillary Clinton … did all this, and they didn't do anything to her. It’s just being thrown in to try to sway the judge however little much it can, to say that something stinks in the state of Denmark.”

    “It's meant to be something that says, ‘And given everything else I’ve told you, let me throw on this one last piece to try to push you across the finish line to get you to agree with my theory’. It's just an additional piece of leverage ... just to try to put some icing on the cake.”
    Rear Admiral Thomas Brooks, and former head of Navy intelligence, recently wrote about the "Clinton Defense" in the August issue of Proceedings Magazine. Among other things, Brooks points out that if Clinton were still a government employee her actions would have repercussions which could include loss of security clearance and/or termination. Brooks pointed to the case of Major Brezler to highlight the double standard between "political elites" and "rank-and-file" personnel.

    Were Mrs. Clinton still a government employee, administrative actions could be taken against her, to include the loss of clearances and possibly termination. But she is no longer a government official, and no action of any kind is likely to be taken.
    ...leaves the appearance that political elites are not subject to the same rules as the rank-and-file and need not live up to the security oaths they sign. Other government employees will be held to the letter of the law, sometimes applied in what appears to be an arbitrary and capricious fashion. Recent examples here include the Navy reservist who was punished for accidentally possessing classified material on a personal thumb drive and a Marine in Afghanistan who used his personal email to warn his comrades of danger.
    We too are somewhat skeptical of the "effectiveness" of the "Clinton Defense" when applied to the cases of rank-and-file personnel who don't carry the benefits that come along with Clinton's political clout. Nor do we suspect the hypocrisy of such double standards will in any away impact Clinton's path to the Presidency.

    Alas, anything less would require a discerning electorate motivated by facts and figures rather than the overly polarized, blindly loyal lemmings which currently determine national elections.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-0...oubt-?AID=7236

  5. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,815
    Colin Powell Completely Blows Away Hillary’s Lame Email Alibi With 1 Key Sentence

    Who's telling the truth? It's not even a contest.
    Joe Saunders August 19, 2016 at 1:19pm

    Who are you going to believe, Hillary Clinton or Colin Powell?

    Ever since Hillary realized just how much trouble the private email server she used as secretary of state was going to cause her bid for the presidency, she has hidden behind one of the most respected names in American foreign policy to justify her email practices.

    Former Secretary of State Colin Powell — the architect of George H.W. Bush’s victory in the first Gulf War, and secretary of state for George W. Bush — had used a personal email account, too, Hillary and her defenders maintained. But what the Democrat nominee told the FBI — and what Powell has now said about that — only serves to amp up the controversy and underscore Hillary’s dishonesty.

    In her interview with the FBI prior to the Bureau director’s decision not to recommend a criminal indictment against her, Clinton said Powell himself had advised her to do what he did — use a private email server separate from the official government system. But in a statement released on Thursday, Powell essentially called that a lie.

    According to the Hillary-friendly New York Times, which cited a source knowledgeable about Hillary’s FBI interview, Clinton repeated a story for the investigating agents that she and Powell had met at a private dinner party given by former Secretary of State Madeline Albright. It was there, said Clinton, that Powell advised her to use a personal email account, as he had done while in office.

    But in true Clinton fashion, that statement appears to be a combination of parsed language, twisted truth and outright falsehood.

    In his statement to The Times, Powell denies any recollection of discussing email use with Clinton at the dinner party. He also makes clear that his use of personal email was limited to non-classified matters – and that it was based on the technology available to him during his tenure at the State Department from 2001 to 2005.

    By the time Hillary assumed the post in 2009, the technology situation had changed considerably – as it does at virtually every American enterprise over a four-year time span. Here’s the Powell statement in its entirety, as posted on Twitter by NBC’s Bradd Jaffy.
    General Powell has no recollection of the dinner conversation. He did write former Secretary Clinton an email memo describing his use of his personal AOL email account for unclassified messages and how it vastly improved communications within the State Department. At the time there was no equivalent system within the Department. He used a secure State computer on his desk to manage classified information. The General no longer has the email he sent to former Secretary Clinton. It may exist in State or FBI files. For a complete discussion of his use of private emails he refers you to chapter 16, “Brainware” of his recent book, “It Worked For Me — In Life and Leadership,” published in 2012.
    The key words here, of course, are “At the time there was no equivalent system within the department.” (Words that were somehow left out of The Times’ account – probably because they damned Hillary’s story.)

    As emails obtained by the watchdog gr
    oup Judicial Watch show
    , and as Western Journalism has reported, the State Department had numerous secure email options available for Clinton’s use when she was the country’s top diplomat, but she turned all of them down.

    “Let’s get separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible,” Clinton wrote.

    It’s important to note that Clinton’s concern isn’t for the nation’s secrets here — it’s for her own personal information being accessible to oversight of the government she was supposed to be working for. And what exactly did she consider “personal” — communications, possibly, indicating how she was involved in a tangled web of personal enrichment and official action involving the Clinton Foundation and State Department business?

    So to sum up, Colin Powell gave Hillary advice about State Department technology in the context of his time at Foggy Bottom – an eternity in computer years from when she later took office. She twisted that advice to justify her own behavior.

    She also claimed that a dinner party conversation took place which Powell essentially denies.

    And that’s the he-told me-to-do-it-too defense she sold the FBI? And is this new indictment of Hillary’s trustworthiness contained in the materials the Bureau has turned over to congressional investigators pushing for a perjury charge against Clinton?

    Maybe FBI Director James Comey should have asked Colin Powell the way The New York Times did.
    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...n-email-227255


    Colin Powell's remark came just days after it was reported that Hillary Clinton told FBI agents that Powell told her to use her own email. | AP Photo

    Powell on Clinton email: 'Her people have been trying to pin it on me'

    By Nick Gass
    08/22/16 06:28 AM EDT

    Colin Powell is blaming Hillary Clinton's "people" for "trying to pin" the Democratic nominee's use of a personal email server on him.

    "Her people have been trying to pin it on me," Powell told People magazine on Saturday at event in East Hampton, New York, in an article published Sunday night. The New York Post's Page Six reported similar quotes from Powell at the Apollo in the Hamptons 2016 Night of Legends event.

    The remark came just days after The New York Times reported that Clinton told FBI agents that Powell told her to use her own email at a small dinner gathering of former secretaries of state, except for classified communications, as he had done while secretary of state, according to a forthcoming book. Powell's office responded to that story, remarking that "General Powell has no recollection of the dinner conversation."

    "He did write former Secretary Clinton an email memo describing his use of his personal AOL email account for unclassified messages and how it vastly improved communications within the State Department," Powell's office said in a statement.

    Powell objected to Clinton's characterization, telling People that "[t]he truth is, she was using [the private email server] for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did."

    Asked why he believed that to be the case, Powell responded, "Why do you think? ... It doesn't bother me. But it's okay; I'm free."

    http://www.westernjournalism.com/the...-key-sentence/
    Last edited by artist; 08-22-2016 at 09:45 PM.

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,815


    Also another video from fox news link at link below re her use of Bleachbit to clean server "so even God can't read them" - Gowdy calls hillary a serial liar...
    Gowdy: Clinton’s Method Of Deletion Proves Nature Of Her Emails

    Clinton said there is “a lot of smoke and there’s no fire” concerning the Clinton Foundation.

    “It’s arson. It’s pyromania. It’s not smoke,” Gowdy insisted.
    by Jack Davis August 26, 2016 at 3:01pm

    The clearest evidence that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had something to hide in her emails is the way she made sure their contents stayed hidden, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C. said Thursday.

    Clinton famously laughed off a question about whether she had wiped her private email server.

    “What? Like with a cloth or something?” she asked. “I don’t know how it works digitally at all.”

    Gowdy said that, in fact, Clinton’s lawyers used a computer software called BleachBit to delete files on the personal server Clinton used while she was secretary of state.

    Clinton has claimed the personal emails she deleted from the server were “boring,” only discussing personal topics such as yoga and her daughter Chelsea’s wedding plans. However, this past week almost 15,000 more of Clinton’s work-related emails were recovered from the server by the FBI.

    Gowdy scoffed at Clinton’s claim that everything deleted was personal or benign.

    “She and her lawyers had those emails deleted. And they didn’t just push the delete button; they had them deleted where even God can’t read them,” Gowdy said in an interview on Fox News Channel’s America’s Newsroom. “They were using something called BleachBit. You don’t use BleachBit for yoga emails or bridemaids emails. When you’re using BleachBit, it is something you really do not want the world to see.”

    During the interview, Gowdy suggested the media ask the Democratic nominee whether she considers emails about the Clinton Foundation personal. The Foundation has come under fire lately due to emails which show Foundation officials had Clinton’s State Department do favors for Clinton Foundation donors.

    Gowdy grew heated when listening to an interview in which Clinton said there is “a lot of smoke and there’s no fire” concerning the Clinton Foundation.

    “It’s arson. It’s pyromania. It’s not smoke,” Gowdy insisted.
    “Even listening to her talk about the Clinton Foundation, I couldn’t help but go back and remember the press conference she gave on her emails where every single thing she said proved to be false.”

    When the FBI released the results of its investigation into Clinton’s email server, FBI Director James Comey stated that the FBI found evidence to contradict Clinton’s claims that she never read or sent classified email on her private server, that only one server had been used and that she had not deleted work-related emails.

    “That’s the interesting thing about credibility and believability: You can’t just keep it in one compartment,” Gowdy said Thursday. “When you are a habitual, serial liar in this facet of life, it tends to make people not believe you in other facets of life.”

    “So when she’s talking about the Clinton Foundation, I go back and remember her saying there’s no classified information, I only used one device, I did it for convenience. All of which were proven to be false,” Gowdy concluded.

    http://www.westernjournalism.com/gow...of-her-emails/






    Last edited by artist; 08-28-2016 at 06:08 PM.

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,815
    FBI: Hillary Deleted 30 Emails About Benghazi

    AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

    By:Ben Shapiro August 30, 2016

    It now turns out that Hillary Clinton was – wait for it – lying about her missing emails!

    Try to steel yourself for the shock. I know – it’s nearly as shocking as the time Rosie O’Donnell came out of the closet. Nonetheless, it’s true: according to the State Department, among the thousands of emails recovered by the FBI from Hillary’s BleachBit-ridden personal server are some 30 emails about the 2012 terrorist attacks in Benghazi, Libya.

    Unless there were yoga classes being held at the consulate, that means that Hillary trashed information clearly related to State Department business. Actually, she didn’t just delete them: she had them wiped clean, to make them nearly unrecoverable.

    The State Department has already informed a federal judge that it would require until the end of September to vet the materials for classified information – a weird requirement, given Hillary’s explicit promise that classified material never even hit her private server. Perhaps the State Department is merely concerned over Chelsea’s wedding plans. Or perhaps Hillary was lying.

    The revelation that Hillary deleted emails concerning Benghazi means that there is likely a fair bit of other material Hillary deleted. Almost certainly, some concerns Hillary’s corrupt relationship with the Clinton Foundation. And barring a technological miracle, we’ll never know what sorts of emails Hillary sent to aides including Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, who also had private server email accounts.

    But the only reason to ask about Hillary’s emails, or to consider her a corrupt liar, is because she’s a woman. At least that’s the logic of the left that simply can’t understand why so many Americans think she lied about setting up a private server and then trashing its contents without turning them over to proper government agencies.

    http://www.dailywire.com/news/8779/f..._campaign=lead

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Grand jury recommends criminal charges against Kane
    By Newmexican in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-09-2015, 10:34 AM
  2. First criminal charges filed in BP oil spill
    By JohnDoe2 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-24-2012, 01:27 PM
  3. Pandemic Charges filed...
    By grandmasmad in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-20-2009, 02:40 AM
  4. Ethics charges filed against Sutton
    By FedUpinFarmersBranch in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 05-22-2008, 08:05 PM
  5. New charges filed against Egyptian students
    By butterbean in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-16-2008, 06:07 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •