Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Spoiler alert: It's in the link I provided and have now pointed you toward, more than once.
...The FBI found no evidence that either Hillary Clinton or her aides ordered an IT technician to delete an email archive that was under congressional subpoena, Director James Comey testified Wednesday.
”We did not have evidence to disbelieve [the technician’s account] and establish someone told him to do that. No email, no phone call, nothing,” Comey told the House Judiciary Committee during an oversight hearing that was largely taken up with questioning about Clinton’s server...
When Hillary associates plead the 5th then that is their Right but if the walls that the Dems have been pushing for years finally close in on Trump and he or his family end up pleading the 5th is there any question how that will be perceived by the Left??
According to the Left Trump has been guilty since 2016. They are not sure of what but he is red handed guilty of something.
We know how this works.
Except not everyone criticizing the Trumps if that comes to pass will be a Hillary supporter/voter, nor a Democrat.
Spoiler alert: It's in the link I provided and have now pointed you toward, more than once.
...The FBI found no evidence that either Hillary Clinton or her aides ordered an IT technician to delete an email archive that was under congressional subpoena, Director James Comey testified Wednesday.
”We did not have evidence to disbelieve [the technician’s account] and establish someone told him to do that. No email, no phone call, nothing,” Comey told the House Judiciary Committee during an oversight hearing that was largely taken up with questioning about Clinton’s server...
You clearly don't understand that your link is from 2016.
You can say you've provided your link as much as you want, but you've already stated that you agree that YOUR link is from 2016.
Did you forget that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee
Your link is from 2016
You do understand there have been updates in the last 6 years, yes?
Her campaign manager said yes to which? Both? What I read is that Mook said she instructed him to release the information to the press, not the FBI. I may have missed some reporting, though, I don't really give a **** about Hillary.
I'm not aware of any reason he would lie, no.
That Clinton okay’d the creation of a false document, releasing a false story to the media, supply the FBI with false documentation and worked with foreign entities to make it all happen.
What do you think would happen if this was all done by that moron in the horned hat who sat in Pelosi’s chair?
What have Sussman or Mook said about the server? As I told Stephan, that ship has sailed. Nothing's ever going to happen. Make your peace with it and move on.
OMG......wow.......just wow. See this is your problem. You're so desperate to be right, that you keep clinging onto the damn server. The server is something we already knew she had and is a whole different part of the case. For the millionth time, Mook confessed that Hillary was briefed to go along with the allegations with Alfa Bank they fabricated about Trump, so it could line up with the fake evidence her team created:
Mook took the stand during the trial of Michael Sussmann who is charged in special counsel John Durham's probe with lying to the FBI during the Trump-Russia investigation after he brought the FBI unverified evidence concerning Trump and Alfa Bank. The scope of the trial is narrow, focusing on whether or not Sussmann, whose law firm represented Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, was acting on behalf of a client.
Mook said the decision to release the Alfa allegations to a reporter was discussed with senior campaign officials, including senior policy adviser and now the White House national security adviser, Jake Sullivan; campaign chairman John Podesta and communications director Jennifer Palmieri.
Clinton was briefed about the decision to go to the press with the allegations in the fall of 2016, and according to Mook, "she thought we made the right decision."
Mook testified he did not see the Alfa allegations as a "silver bullet" that would end the Trump campaign, referring to other information being published linking Trump to Russia.
What "spies" did she hire? Trying to link opposition research to the Espionage Act appears to be an extremely loose interpretation of that law, IMO, but I'm not a lawyer.
Are you trolling? Was Christopher Steele not a former British Intelligence agent that she hired for private espionage work on Trump? She orchestrated the right people to hire him in hopes that it couldn't come back to her.
Again, unless you're trolling, this shouldn't be hard to figure out.
Also, I'm not going to make my peace with it and move on. This that weak mindset and logic you have that allows these slimy politicians to know they can continue to keep doing it. If no one cares, it's more of a reason to keep pulling these type of stunts.
I've asked it before and I'll ask it again - has Sussman or Mook provided new testimony about the server/emails? If not, I don't see your point.
Jesus Christ man. Again, why are you so hung up on that? It's not our fault you failed to skip the beginning of the Durham trial where the servers and emails were already discussed. They literally had a chart showing the process of how it was done and it involved the emails and the servers. The topic is about the latest info from the trial that was received back on Friday. And that info was.....wait for it.....Robby Mook testifying under oath that Hilary was in fact briefed on the Alfa Bank story they were going to fabricate, and agreed to go through with it.
Do you always act this immature and petty when you can't win an argument?
OMG......wow.......just wow. See this is your problem. You're so desperate to be right, that you keep clinging onto the damn server. The server is something we already knew she had and is a whole different part of the case.
I didn't bring up the server/emails, professor. Try reading the thread. I was responding to other posters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DK736
For the millionth time, Mook confessed that Hillary was briefed to go along with the allegations with Alfa Bank they fabricated about Trump, so it could line up with the fake evidence her team created:
Mook took the stand during the trial of Michael Sussmann who is charged in special counsel John Durham's probe with lying to the FBI during the Trump-Russia investigation after he brought the FBI unverified evidence concerning Trump and Alfa Bank. The scope of the trial is narrow, focusing on whether or not Sussmann, whose law firm represented Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, was acting on behalf of a client.
Mook said the decision to release the Alfa allegations to a reporter was discussed with senior campaign officials, including senior policy adviser and now the White House national security adviser, Jake Sullivan; campaign chairman John Podesta and communications director Jennifer Palmieri.
Clinton was briefed about the decision to go to the press with the allegations in the fall of 2016, and according to Mook, "she thought we made the right decision."
Mook testified he did not see the Alfa allegations as a "silver bullet" that would end the Trump campaign, referring to other information being published linking Trump to Russia.
None of that is a crime, as far as I'm aware. Which is what I've said, repeatedly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DK736
Are you trolling? Was Christopher Steele not a former British Intelligence agent that she hired for private espionage work on Trump? She orchestrated the right people to hire him in hopes that it couldn't come back to her.
Again, unless you're trolling, this shouldn't be hard to figure out.
Also, I'm not going to make my peace with it and move on. This that weak mindset and logic you have that allows these slimy politicians to know they can continue to keep doing it. If no one cares, it's more of a reason to keep pulling these type of stunts.
I highlighted the salient bit for you. Hiring a former intelligence officer to investigate a private citizen does not fall under the Espionage Act, to the best of my knowledge. Unless you have some precedent to cite?
Well, you're free to shout into the void about the server if you like. No skin off my nose. It's not going to change anything, however.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
