Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wikileaks Asks If This Is The "Smoking Gun" Email That Will Bring Down Hillary
zero hedge ^ | 5/31/16 | tyler durden

Posted on 05/31/2016 8:13:20 PM PDT by Nachum

All along Hillary Clinton has pled that when it comes to her violation of Federal regulations, she was at worst naive, hardly malicious and - as of recently - merely doing what each of her state department predecessors has done; and she has been very careful to make it clear that she never purposefully and intentionally "stripped" confidential data in order to send it through her unsecured server as such an act would imply not only a breach of email retention policy, but a willful abuse of confidential documents.

Well, moments ago Wikileaks unveiled what it believes may be the FBI's "smoking gun" in its case against Hillary. In a tweet, Wikileaks highlights one specific email and asks "Is this email the FBI's star exhibit against Hillary Clinton ("H")? "

The email in question (link)

(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: email; hillary; hillarycriminalprobe; hillaryemails; wikileaks
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last
To: upchuck

True. But the fact that it is Wikileaks indicating they think it is a smoking gun of Hillary’s criminality makes it very hard for RATS and media types to ignore it anymore (which they have largely done.)

Headers like “Wikileaks exposes Hillary as a Criminal.”

Might make it happen.


41 posted on 06/01/2016 2:45:13 AM PDT by rod1 (CTLY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

Another point she will make:
(http://www.cbsnews.com/news/state-department-releases-more-clinton-emails-several-marked-classified/)

“according to the Associated Press, the State Department said a review showed that the document in question was sent ‘apparently by secure fax, after all,’ and was never was sent to Clinton by email.”

That is, she will say the order to de-classify was never given - and see? nothing like that was ever executed.


42 posted on 06/01/2016 3:27:50 AM PDT by ReaganGeneration2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Here is what Jacob Sullivan e mailed to Hillary:

If they can’t,turn into non-paper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.

Seems pretty clear obvious criminal activity.


43 posted on 06/01/2016 3:50:27 AM PDT by rodguy911 (The U.S.A.: home of the Free because of the brave--Go Palin/Donald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Inside sources said months ago that the FBI had recovered nearly all of the deleted emails.

IMO, this is why Cheryl Mills had 7 lawyers with her for the JW depo, all paid for by the Clintons. They objected to all the questions about Pagliano because he cut a deal and they know he is singing; perhaps leading the FBI to the deleted emails he stashed in cloud storage somewhere. This is a very dangerous time for Hillary and her minions. They have not been charged with anything and they don't really know what the FBI knows. They have to assume the FBI recovered everything. Did they keep a copy of everything they deleted? They seemed to be naive enough to think deleting them would hide them from the FBI. They could be completely blindsided with evidence the FBI has that they no longer have copies of. If your a defense lawyer, that is a very BAD spot to be in. Every word they say is potentially incriminating. I don't see the Clintons weaseling out of this. This is a bit more serious than ruining an interns blue dress. Their naiveté' and ignorance of technology is going to be their downfall.

44 posted on 06/01/2016 4:09:23 AM PDT by IamConservative (There is no greater threat to our freedoms than Bipartisanship.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: IamConservative

Are you certain she is personally paying for those attorneys. Remember these are the cheapskates who take deductions for used undies and took whitehouse belongings with them. My guess Kendall is being paid by the foundation. Those at mills dispo were paid by the taxpayers except for her own attorney perhaps.


45 posted on 06/01/2016 4:16:02 AM PDT by Mouton (The insurrection laws maintain the status quo now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mouton
Are you certain she is personally paying for those attorneys.

Not certain I suppose. Clintons always intertwine their personal, professional and criminal activities to the point you can't tell what is going on. Kendall may be being paid by the Foundation. Same as being paid for by the Clintons. Cheryl Wilkinson was supposedly there as Mills attorney. I read somewhere prior to the deposition that Clinton's were paying for attorneys to represent Mills. Kendall was the only name directly mentioned in that article.

46 posted on 06/01/2016 4:41:03 AM PDT by IamConservative (There is no greater threat to our freedoms than Bipartisanship.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

It’s just as clear as if the Justice department decided to sue Citibank,or Bank Of America knowing they would not want to spend years in court litigating and would rather settle.
So the Justice Dept. Writes the settlement to say these banks pay billions of dollars,not to the poor people who lost homes in the so called bundling of mortgages,but to the Justice Department itself so they could pay out the billions to left wing community organizing groups like Laraza,after of course skimming 3% off the top for themselves,all of thus with NO Congressional or treasury dept oversight.
Imagine if A Trump Justice Dept doing this and giving the money to the NRA or Judicial Watch


47 posted on 06/01/2016 4:44:12 AM PDT by ballplayer (hvexx NKK c bmytit II iyijjhihhiyyiyiyi it iyiiy II i hi jiihi ty yhiiyihiijhijjyjiyjiiijyuiiijihyii)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
As others have noted, this came out last fall and there is at least one other with a similar suggestion. Contrary to the spin by wikileaks she didn't request intentionally "stripped" confidential data She ordered the heading stripped. That means just stripping the marking that it was confidential but the confidential data was to be left in.
48 posted on 06/01/2016 6:25:16 AM PDT by palmer (Net "neutrality" = Obama turning the internet over to foreign enemies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rod1
But the fact that it is Wikileaks indicating they think it is a smoking gun

Wikileaks is anti-American. They want Hillary to win.

49 posted on 06/01/2016 6:58:56 AM PDT by palmer (Net "neutrality" = Obama turning the internet over to foreign enemies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Nice work, particularly the FJB son in law description!


50 posted on 06/01/2016 7:21:10 AM PDT by COUNTrecount
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ReaganGeneration2

I thought that she doesn’t know how to send emails.SARC!


51 posted on 06/01/2016 7:26:29 AM PDT by COUNTrecount
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
I won't hold my breath waiting for a prosecution. After they steal the election for Hillary, Obama will effectively own her. (500 FBI files? I've got 30,000 emails.) If she follows orders she can continue to get rich and enjoy the trappings of power as long as she doesn't try to actually exercise any real authority. My guess is that Obama isn't moving out of DC because he expects to still be running the place. He'll have control and she gets the blame for the failures but, as the first woman President, historians will absolve her of any wrongs.

Trump needs to win beyond the margins of stealability and then not go McConnell and fall in line with the establishment.

52 posted on 06/01/2016 7:39:12 AM PDT by Armando Guerra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

I know everyone thinks she’s untouchable, but the fact that Trump looks like he might pound her into a grease stain may mean Obama will sic the dogs on her to get her off the ticket.


53 posted on 06/01/2016 9:17:53 AM PDT by Maverick68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Thx for posting


54 posted on 06/01/2016 9:30:57 AM PDT by thinden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReaganGeneration2
"She will simply say she meant to order Sullivan to sanitize the hard copy, re-type, and email unclassified."

That is still a felony. The subject, itself is usually a basis for classification.

I have rigorously protected classified knowledge for the last 50+ years -- and I would gladly volunteer to be on the firing squad for anyone who trashed US security the way the witch did.

55 posted on 06/01/2016 10:06:09 AM PDT by TXnMA (Recorded for posterity...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TXnMA

You’re correct of course (unless the sanitizer is authorized, which I doubt Sullivan is).

But, IMHO, most of her current LIV’s won’t care - the line, in their minds, is too fine.


56 posted on 06/01/2016 10:18:23 AM PDT by ReaganGeneration2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: IamConservative

Hard to believe that anyone at that level of gov is that darned stupid isn’t it?
But criminals do stupid things.


57 posted on 06/01/2016 10:22:08 AM PDT by TigersEye (This is the age of the death of reason and rule of law. Prepare!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Why are some animals more equal than others?

I would be doing ten years at Leavenworth by now.

5.56mm


58 posted on 06/01/2016 10:33:11 AM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
Hard to believe that anyone at that level of gov is that darned stupid isn’t it?

Unfortunately, when they asked Hillary about "wiping the server" and she replied "like with a towel", I don't think that was an act. I believe she is that naive about technology. She carried a Blackberry everywhere she went, not realizing she was enabling anyone to track her whereabouts.

59 posted on 06/01/2016 10:36:47 AM PDT by IamConservative (There is no greater threat to our freedoms than Bipartisanship.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Nachum; newgeezer
Wikileaks Asks If This Is The "Smoking Gun" Email That Will Bring Down Hillary

That's like asking if there is an invisible outfit that the emperor could wear that would make people see that he is naked.

Answer: NO!

60 posted on 06/01/2016 10:38:23 AM PDT by DungeonMaster (Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson