My call is that she will be indicted.

She can fool the american public all she likes (with help of MSM), but she cant fool James Comey and the FBI.

The crimes were committed, she won't be able to bullshit her way out of this one. I don't see the FBI conducting a year long investigation on a sloppy criminal like HRC and saying 'we found nothing'. If DOJ doesn't act, expect mass resignations.

(07-04-2016 09:59 PM)Kaizen Wrote:  My call is that she will be indicted.

She can fool the american public all she likes (with help of MSM), but she cant fool James Comey and the FBI.

The crimes were committed, she won't be able to bullshit her way out of this one. I don't see the FBI conducting a year long investigation on a sloppy criminal like HRC and saying 'we found nothing'. If DOJ doesn't act, expect mass resignations.

You can get indictment for a quarter on the dollar. I'm not that confident it will happen before the Trump Inauguration.

https://www.predictit.org/Contract/1792/...on-in-2016

Didn't see this posted yet.

NYP: Clinton burned daily schedules
DailyMail version

Quote:Hillary Clinton’s closest aide revealed in a deposition last week that her boss destroyed at least some of her schedules as secretary of state — a revelation that could complicate matters for the presumptive Democratic nominee, who, along with the State Department she ran, is facing numerous lawsuits seeking those public records.

Huma Abedin was deposed in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit into Clinton’s emails — but her admission could be relevant to another lawsuit seeking Clinton’s schedules.

“If there was a schedule that was created that was her Secretary of State daily schedule, and a copy of that was then put in the burn bag, that . . . that certainly happened on . . . on more than one occasion,” Abedin told lawyers representing Judicial Watch, the conservative organization behind the emails lawsuit.

Abedin made the surprising admission in response to a question about document destruction at the Department of State. A lawyer for Judicial Watch asked: “And during your tenure at the State Department, were you aware of your obligation not to delete federal records or destroy federal records?”

(07-04-2016 11:10 PM)Adonis Wrote:  Didn't see this posted yet.

NYP: Clinton burned daily schedules
DailyMail version

Quote:Hillary Clinton’s closest aide revealed in a deposition last week that her boss destroyed at least some of her schedules as secretary of state — a revelation that could complicate matters for the presumptive Democratic nominee, who, along with the State Department she ran, is facing numerous lawsuits seeking those public records.

Huma Abedin was deposed in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit into Clinton’s emails — but her admission could be relevant to another lawsuit seeking Clinton’s schedules.

“If there was a schedule that was created that was her Secretary of State daily schedule, and a copy of that was then put in the burn bag, that . . . that certainly happened on . . . on more than one occasion,” Abedin told lawyers representing Judicial Watch, the conservative organization behind the emails lawsuit.

Abedin made the surprising admission in response to a question about document destruction at the Department of State. A lawyer for Judicial Watch asked: “And during your tenure at the State Department, were you aware of your *obligation* not to delete federal records or destroy federal records?”

Anything less than "lawful requirement" doesn't mean squat. I don't know if what they did was illegal, but if it was only an "obligation" then she's not going to the wall for ignoring it.

It's been said before but I'll say it again.

If any other republican candidate were running then they'd politely ignore this tidal wave of evidence, dismissing raising it as "dirty politics".

Meanwhile every imaginary skeleton in their closet would be paraded on centre stage, and they would make a grand display of flagellating themselves without hesitation.

(07-04-2016 09:59 PM)Kaizen Wrote:  My call is that she will be indicted.

She can fool the american public all she likes (with help of MSM), but she cant fool James Comey and the FBI.

The crimes were committed, she won't be able to bullshit her way out of this one. I don't see the FBI conducting a year long investigation on a sloppy criminal like HRC and saying 'we found nothing'. If DOJ doesn't act, expect mass resignations.

The FBI will recommend indictment but the AG won't follow through. She will either not indict or just recuse herself and stretch it out until after the election. Most likely she will time it out to give herself plausible deniability.

Whether the FBI will leak the indictment recommendations or not is a guess. If the AG stalls this I doubt the FBI will take any action.

Many on the forum prefer indictments don't go through because Crooked Hillary is a terribly wounded candidate. I'll admit that she is bad and had no charisma to boot, however, this isn't a simple Trump versus Hillary, it's him against the Clinton Machine and that is something to be afraid of.

House Democrats mistakenly release transcript confirming big payout to Clinton friend Sidney Blumenthal

It doesn't have anything that we don't already know, but it's nice to get more evidence of the Clinton Foundation corruption, and the Democrats apparently mistakenly offered it up this time on a silver platter.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-be...story.html

Quote:The Democrats on the House Benghazi committee released their final conclusions from the inquiry into attacks on Americans in that Libyan city in 2012, and in the report they say, once again, that the investigation is a politically motivated sham aimed at damaging the reputation of Hillary Clinton.

But the report, which the Democrats published as a preemptive strike before the Republican majority releases findings likely to charge ineptitude and deception by the former secretary of State, also revealed, apparently unintentionally, details about the eye-popping amount of money a close Clinton friend and advisor made in a contract with a pro-Clinton nonprofit.

Democrats released but redacted a transcript of Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal answering the committee’s questions to make the point that Republicans do not want the public to know what went on during the his interrogation, during which GOP members arguably used their subpoena power to conduct political opposition research unrelated to Benghazi.


But the redaction marks are easily erased by anyone able to use a computer’s cut-and-paste function. Once the marks are lifted, the transcript portion reveals some unflattering things for any partisans on the committee, Republican or Democrat. It shows that Republicans did, indeed, leverage their subpoena of Blumenthal for political gain, digging into his financial contracts with David Brock and forcing him to reveal the details of a lucrative financial arrangement that congressional sources would ultimately leak to Fox News.

And for Democrats, the exchange exposes once again the absurd amounts of money people in the orbit of the Clintons sometimes seem to rake in just for, well, being in the orbit of the Clintons. “I’d say it’s about $200,000 a year,” Blumenthal said when asked by a committee member how much the part-time work offering up advice and ideas was worth.

“Redacted due to Chairman Gowdy’s refusal to allow release of transcript,” says a footnote to the pages of thick black redaction marks. “If released, the transcript would show that Republicans asked Mr. Blumenthal questions about his relationship with Media Matters, David Brock and Correct the Record.” Brock is a longtime Clinton loyalist, and Correct the Record and Media Matters are among the nonprofits he uses to attack Clinton opponents.

And how did Blumenthal get such a contract? “I have had a very long friendship with the chairman of Media Matters, whose name is David Brock, from before he founded this organization, and I have sustained that friendship. And he asked me to help provide ideas and advice to him and his organizations,” Blumenthal said.

Actually, the two got to know each other during the impeachment of Bill Clinton, during Brock’s former incarnation as a right-wing “hit man” journalist. He was starting to undergo his political conversion and in the process was feeding then-White House aide Blumenthal intelligence about what the right was plotting against Bill Clinton. Both men wrote about it in their books.

Below is the full transcript excerpt that Democrats intended not to publish. It is unclear who the questioner is in the first section.

Q: Did you ever receive any payment from an organization called Media Matters?

A: Oh, yes. I did — I did receive payment in that period from Media Matters.

Q: Okay. And what was your relationship with Media Matters at that time period?

A: I was a consultant to Media Matters. I’m sorry I—

Q: That’s okay.

A: I overlooked that.

Q: When did you become a consultant for Media Matters?

A: I would say the very end of 2012.

Q: Okay. And how did that come about, that you became a consultant for Media Matters?

A: I have had a very long friendship with the chairman of Media Matters, whose name is David Brock, from before he founded this organization, and I have sustained that friendship. And he asked me to help provide ideas and advice to him and his organizations.

Q: So you began your relationship, your paid relationship, with Media Matters at the end of 2012.

A: Right.

Q: Does that continue to this day?

A: It does.

Q: Okay. And what is your salary or your contract with Media Matters? How much money are you earning from them?

A: I’d say it’s about $200,000 a year.

Q: And has that been roughly consistent from when you began receiving payment from Media Matters?

*[redacted due to Chairman Gowdy’s refusal to allow release of transcript].

A: I would say it’s — I’d have to check. I think it’s increased a little bit. It’s increased some.

Q: Okay. Are you familiar with the organization American Bridge?

A: Yes.

Q: Have you received any compensation from American Bridge over the last five years?

A: Yes.

Q: Okay. And how much compensation have you received from American Bridge?

A: Well, when I talk about that amount of money, I mean all of those organizations.

Q: So all of David Brock’s entities —

A: Right.

Q: — combined are 200,000?

A: About.

Q: Okay.

A: Something like that.

Q: Okay. So there’s American Bridge.

A: Yes.

Q: There’s Media Matters.

A: Right.

Q: Are there any other organizations on which you have done work for Mr. Brock?

A: Correct the Record

Q: Okay.

A: — is another organization.

Q: Okay.

A: And then there’s the American Independent Institute, which is a journalistic foundation.

Q: So, when you receive your paycheck, who signs the paycheck? Where does that come from?

A: It’s deposited directly. I imagine it comes from David Brock.

Q: Okay. Not David Brock personally but one of his —

A: Whoever — whoever is responsible for that payment.

Blumenthal and Republican Select Committee Member Mike Pompeo had the following exchange about Correct the Record:

Q: Fair enough. I’m going to jump around a little bit. You said I think earlier this morning that you still are working for Correct the Record?

A: I am.

Q: And tell me what the mission of Correct the Record is.

A: Correct the Record is pretty much what it says, to correct — it’s a nonprofit organization to correct the record about public misstatements about prominent Democrats.

Q: Including this committee. If this committee said something, Correct the Record might comment on things that it said incorrectly and indeed it has?

A: That may well be so.

Q: Have you written any of that?

A: No.
Q: Yeah. So you haven’t made any comments as part of your role in Correct the Record related to this committee’s work? You haven’t written any —

A: I have not written those.

(07-04-2016 11:46 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(07-04-2016 11:10 PM)Adonis Wrote:  Didn't see this posted yet.

NYP: Clinton burned daily schedules
DailyMail version

Quote:Hillary Clinton’s closest aide revealed in a deposition last week that her boss destroyed at least some of her schedules as secretary of state — a revelation that could complicate matters for the presumptive Democratic nominee, who, along with the State Department she ran, is facing numerous lawsuits seeking those public records.

Huma Abedin was deposed in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit into Clinton’s emails — but her admission could be relevant to another lawsuit seeking Clinton’s schedules.

“If there was a schedule that was created that was her Secretary of State daily schedule, and a copy of that was then put in the burn bag, that . . . that certainly happened on . . . on more than one occasion,” Abedin told lawyers representing Judicial Watch, the conservative organization behind the emails lawsuit.

Abedin made the surprising admission in response to a question about document destruction at the Department of State. A lawyer for Judicial Watch asked: “And during your tenure at the State Department, were you aware of your *obligation* not to delete federal records or destroy federal records?”

Anything less than "lawful requirement" doesn't mean squat. I don't know if what they did was illegal, but if it was only an "obligation" then she's not going to the wall for ignoring it.

Burning anything that belongs to the public for future release is absolutely illegal.

Hillary was a Nixon intern. She learned not to make the same mistakes he made perhaps.

http://millercenter.org/presidentialclas...-the-tapes

It's debatable if Nixon would have had the impeachment process done to him had he burned the tapes, but it would not have been done as easy, for sure.

EDIT: historical accuracy.

(07-02-2016 10:51 AM)Cobra Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:43 AM)TravelerKai Wrote:  

(07-02-2016 10:31 AM)Cobra Wrote:  I'm still not sure how Bill Clinton played this well at all.

The media was sweeping the email scandal under the rug and here comes swinging dick Billy who basically broke the MSM media's liberal barrier to entry and removed much perception of some conservative agenda to make it more real.

I might have just missed something.

He undermined the validity of the investigation and the prosecution by doing that. There will be more calls for people to recuse themselves, but when that happens, momentum and knowledge transfer because an issue moving onto a new team of investigators.

I don't think he exposed the media as a TPTB instead of a liberal/conservative thing. If anything the last 50 big stories this year helped more with that, than what Bubba did.

His stunt might backfire, but Bubba is the king of, "Hey sweetheart, come over here and let me talk to ya." You know he told her something like, "Do what you can to fix Hillary's situation, or maybe even told her that she owes him." She isn't foolish enough to admit that on TV of course.

He gave Lynch her career and he knew she would be silly enough to come over.

That is getting played sir.

I do see what you mean about the media and the investigation. It makes sense but to me that's semantics or mechanics of the machine. To your point this situation doesn't change that much.

That being said, what I'm hung up on is the 3rd wheel though - the voters and the public at large. I think people are smarter than that. We at the forum blast liberals for being stupid, and rightfully so. However, I think we're underestimating their intelligence and morality as human beings which may give in.

What I'm saying is that now people will be even more pissed even if Bill steered things in a favorable direction for Hillary.

I would love to hear yours and others' thoughts on this.

The situation already changed because of Bill's actions. Everyone is not only talking about it, but many others are calling for recusals and special investigators. Too many chefs in one pot can lead to details being missed or things getting lost in transition.

This meeting was about as bad as the local cops playing golf with a Italian Mafia Capo, when they are under investigation, by the local DA. There is a reason why the FBI became the default organization to investigate the mob. Local law enforcement was not capable. Now we have the head of the Justice Dept. meeting up with a former president, whose wife (or himself) is under investigation for RICO violations, like the old mafia.

The American public is not as smart as you give them credit for. The mainstream media is the gatekeepers that will get to decide what the masses will learn. Most are not willing, able, nor interested to go read alternative sources like infowars, counterpunch, drudge, etc. In another life I was a pollster in college and the amount of ignorance your average voter has is staggering. For every 1 informed voter you could question, there might be 3-5 or more that cannot name the current Vice President.

Jay Leno used to do those street quizzes for a reason. It was mind blowing.
Also, no one can blame Bill if they are too ignorant to even realize why he rolled up on Lynch. The MSM is not going to talk about his move being slick and demonize him. That would be too much opinion and is not standard journalism. Alex Jones or Hannity would be in the right domain to say something like that.

I will give the public this much credit: If the FBI recommends RICO charges, the public will drop support. That is my bold prediction, if you can call that bold.

(07-02-2016 02:49 PM)The Black Knight Wrote:  Voluntary my ass.

"Either you can come in on your own will or we will come and get you."

Voluntold is more like it.

I wonder if she even plead the 5th on any of the questions. If they press charges, we will get to see which questions she plead on.

LOL Pleading the fifth is not selective ... you answer one question you must answer them all or face further charges typically obstruction of justice - if you take the fifth then the classic answer is the answer to everything - "I regretfully refuse to answer that question under my 5th amendment rights not to incriminate myself".

(07-02-2016 08:29 PM)Canopus Wrote:  Half my mind is in agreement with Bacchus on his take that she will absolutely not be indicted - that the pressure on the FBI not to do it is simply too extreme.

The other half...well.

Read this. It's long, and considering it came from the 'Chans, it's 99% likely to be pure Aspergers fantasy. But damned if it doesn't put the seed of doubt in my mind. And I have no doubt whatsoever that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton absolutely have nothing but the most arrant hatred for one another. I could see a scenario like this unfolding.

Or it's wishful thinking. Still, I don't know. My gut tells me there's something around the corner that's going to completely blow my mind.

That was a good read, if legit. It read like a legit insider. I don't agree with everything he said, but he is right about several things:

1. Hillary and Bill been doing dirt for a very very long time. I personally think they had Vince whacked.

2. If there are CIA field officers in those emails, this will make the Bradley and Snowden leaks look like nothing in comparison. Goes back to how sloppy she is and how sloppy she ran that office.

3. He is dead on about how Hillary has embarrassed the FBI, Comey, Obama, and the AG office several times in the past. Too many people know what she has done now. Something has to be done now because it is too painfully obvious. She ignored all the warnings like an arrogant dictator. Comey may want to nail her personally for getting away with Whitewater all those years ago. He might want to step away from the case as much as possible, but Hillary's defense lawyers will still point to that and other past involvement.

4. I agree with him that if this were to drag out to November, the SCOTUS would get dragged in to prevent her from attaining office until her trial would end. I have no idea what they would decide, (With Scalia gone the votes are weird). Too many people and groups would not want a candidate with multiple RICO charges still in the race. (Bernie, Trump, Judicial Watch, RNC, etc.)

5. He is right about how much Obama hates her. He appointed her Sec of State in a deal with Bill and the rest of the senior leadership of the DNC. Does he hate her enough to throw her under the bus? That's anyone's guess. I think it is too hard to predict that.

Also, Obama is extremely partisan. He definitely wants to make sure a Democrat gets the office, because all of his staff needs their jobs. If he fucks up his defense of her, it might fuck up his speaking engagement cash a little bit as well, with all those donors and organizations. Trump has made it clear to Dems and Repubs that he isn't going to keep anybody's job. Right or wrong, Trump has made his race harder than it should be, because of that one factor alone. No coalitions or alliances? Expect the kitchen sink.

6. He is right that Guccifer, Putin, and the NSA knew about her server. I would even say the Chinese knew about it as well. Like Samseau posted earlier, they were not afraid of her and Obama on the South China Sea. If I could break into her mailserver, named after herself, I am 100% certain other countries did as well as the lone hacker named Guccifer. Just a heads up, any company losing out on bids for business contracts with the Chinese, usually got hacked and do not know it.


Reading through the emails last night, you cannot help but get the impression that she and her staff are amateurish in the way they work. Reading Salon, HuffPo, and Politico articles all day long. They care way too much about how others view them. They even discussed a strange comment that Tavis Smiley made, that they did not understand. Like, who gives a good shit what Tavis thinks?!

I also saw emails where they were essentially cheerleading and seeming like they wanted to recruit feminist opinion writers, that wrote about women's rights and other issues in Muslim countries. This probably deserves it's own thread, but why are our heads of state (Hillary in this case), confronting Muslim leaders about the treatment of women during times of war and nation building? Priorities please? She was very unqualified for the job and these emails will at a minimum show that, if they all get released.

Folks on Reddit/4Chan saying the real crime is the Clinton Foundation and to ignore the emails. There is some truth to that, but the coverup is always worse than the crime. She ordered that server and all the mail deleted for many reasons. Her jackass IT guy, couldn't have been bothered to run a 7 pass DoD style wipe on the disk drives. Dumbass probably deleted the partitions and reinstalled the OS, like some fucking amatuer. 88gb of email would wipe in under a week if done correctly. There is an email where her staff were upset about getting Amazon Kindles for cheaper than what they previously ordered, and it wasn't very much of a difference in price. It was piddly. I guess she was too cheap when she was shopping for an IT henchmen too.

(07-05-2016 08:16 AM)Deepdiver Wrote:  LOL Pleading the fifth is not selective ... you answer one question you must answer them all or face further charges typically obstruction of justice - if you take the fifth then the classic answer is the answer to everything - "I regretfully refuse to answer that question under my 5th amendment rights not to incriminate myself".

Right, so if she answered the first 10 or 20 questions, then plead out the rest of them, that's okay right? Pleading on one question does not invalidate the others does it?

Hillary was a good lawyer in her heyday so it's quite possible that she could have just said, she does not recall, or things of that nature.

Comey seems nervous.

Edit: Comey says no recommendation for indictment.

Youtube chat on the live stream went batshit crazy with 'Shut it Down' when the stream failed.

(07-05-2016 10:11 AM)MidJack Wrote:  Comey seems nervous.

There it is, not recommending charges. Fuckers.

Edit: Didn't say shit about the foundation, don't know if thats good or bad.

Wow. Just wow

Assange it's now or never. Leak that shit

Sigh. Well that sucked. Gross negligence is not even worth charges? Not even a piddly misdemeanor? This country is beyond rigged. Even China gets rid of it's corrupt leaders better than this.

No mention of Clinton Foundation either?

Trump could use this to flog her all campaign long. That's about all that's useable now.

Just so everyone knows, if an ordinary person mishandled 8 email chains of Top Secret information like she did, they would be in a military jail if they were a serviceman or even a regular citizen. Charles Barkley must be laughing at us all right now.....

Blatant gross negligence and no charges recommended.

Coordinated with Obama campaigning with Hillary.

The media will spin this as her being innocent and backed by the FBI.

Corrupt to the core.

America is fucked. I never expected Comey to do this. Is anyone going to buy this bullshit?

   

Breaking News - ABC News Special Report - FBI Director Comey FBI is wrapping up its work and referring the case to the Justice Department for a prosecution decision.

No coordination has been done with any agency and no one in the government knows what I am about to say.

FBI Looked to see if classified info was stored or forwarded on the HRC Email Servers in violation of federal felony statutes. FBI under counter intelligence mandates investigated if the servers in question were hacked and compromised.

Clinton used several different servers and admins plus various mobile devices.

110 Emails in 52 email chains contained classified emails and 8 contained Top Secret and 36 Secret and 2,000 additional emails were up classified to confidential.

Found traces of tens of thousands of additional emails. Recovered many millions of email fragments of a server decommissioned in 2013.

Because she was not using a gov or gmail type account there was no archiving.

More than 60,000 emails were reviewed from the end of 2013... all emails were deleted after her lawyers submitted the emails to State. Lawyers scrubbed all machines afterward to eliminate all traces.

No clear evidence that Sec Clinton and colleagues intentionally mishandled classified information [Even though 8 SAP Special Access Program Ultra Top Secret emails were in fact found on her servers]. Any reasonable person in high government positions should have known not to handle this classified information in this way.

Evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person should have known that NO private unclassified system should have been used for the presence of these highly classified emails.

Subject of marking - most of these emails were not properly marked to indicate the level of classification of these emails.

FBI does assess that hostile actors accessed accounts of individuals Secretary Clinton was in correspondence with and that Hostile Actors highly likely.

Comey: NO reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case - can not find a case that would justify prosecution on these facts... THE FBI DIRECTOR COMEY GLOBALISTS FIX IS IN!!!!! "No charges are appropriate in this case". FBI director just successfully prejudiced the Justice Department potential prosecution decision in Hillary's favor.

Comey: No outside influence brought to bear on the FBI's investigation. [Lying if you're trying Meter pegged at 100%]

Never the less if highly classified information was found on insecure unclassified systems it is a de-facto federal felony...

State Department was lax in handling sensitive highly classified information.

Obamanation and Billy Bubba Clinton's globalists finger prints are all over this effective public pardon of Hillary Rotten Clinton.

With this level of criminal negligence I don't believe for a second it was just accidental mishandling of information.

She just doesn't give a fuck and is willing to override people that actually know better for her own convenience. She's arrogant and untrustworthy.

If she gets in office America is seriously fucked. I don't think this is going to be a normal run of the mill presidency. It will be the most corrupt thing imaginable. She has no integrity whatsoever.