"Hillary Clinton’s Email Scandal Continues with Huma Abedin In Spotlight"

[easyt65]

The whole world of real journalism and law enforcement believes ....

...the words you hear / read just before a snowflake / Dem attempts to drop a truck load of BS on your head....

Any time a snowflake attempts to engage in 'absolutes' by telling you what 'everyone else' thinks and / or attempts to convince you that everyone else in the whole world - except for you - believes the BS they are trying to sell / push, you KNOW they are lying their ass off.

 

[OKTexas]

SLOWLY, ever so slowly ALL the skells will be outed....I think late summer of 2020 would be the perfect time for a few dozen INDICTMENTS to be presented to the public 2 a week from August until early Nov.....just in time for the DeathRATS AND the MSM to lose their collective minds...ROTFLMFAO!!!!!"

Don't get your hopes up.. Abedin and Mills and others now all have immunity.. Thanks to Comey.. And every accommodation was made to them in their previous testimony... Smaller players will have to take the hits....

If "epoch news" doesn't know this -- you should fire them and get better sources...

You do know a judge can vacate an immunity agreement if it's found that it was improperly issued by the DOJ. Emails of the folks participating in the probe knew they were being lied to and issued the immunity agreement anyway. The whole damn thing stinks to high heaven.

.

Oh? How can a judge revoke immunity on an individual who's not charged with a crime?

more...

You tell me, the DOJ handed out immunity like candy during the bitches email probe.

The Immunized Five: Meet The People Covering For Hillary

Here's another not included in the first link.

FBI: Huma Abedin Granted Immunity Too in Hillary Clinton Email Probe – True Pundit

.

"You tell me..."

There's nothing for me to tell you. I asked you to back up your claim.

Seems you can't. Thanks for playin'. Now go play with your participation trophy.

Why would they need immunity if they weren't guilty of a crime? Evidence is coming out that several lied, and took the 5th in congressional testimony. Like I said, it all stinks.

.

 

[westwall]

Yeah, well she was always the fox in charge of the investigation into her hen house raids.

Where did she get ALL of this power you claim she has had all of these 30 plus years? Why have you picked her to be the Boogeyman for everything?

If she had so much power, as you claim.... why did Comey intentionally F- her, with his two press conferences/announcements, during the campaign period?

Comey didn't indict her, which he should have done for her multiple violations of the Espionage Act.

So no, he didn't screw her.

She and her Foundation took in 175 million dollars, and according to the Foundations tax filings for 2014, they only gave 4 percent to charity. So you tell me, she has been in, and around government for 40 years, and she has zero to show for it.

So you tell me, why do you support such an epic failure as she is?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Comey didn't indict her, which he should have done for her multiple violations of the Espionage Act.

So no, he didn't screw her.

She and her Foundation took in 175 million dollars, and according to the Foundations tax filings for 2014, they only gave 4 percent to charity. So you tell me, she has been in, and around government for 40 years, and she has zero to show for it.

So you tell me, why do you support such an epic failure as she is?

Care4all

 

[Faun]

Don't get your hopes up.. Abedin and Mills and others now all have immunity.. Thanks to Comey.. And every accommodation was made to them in their previous testimony... Smaller players will have to take the hits....

If "epoch news" doesn't know this -- you should fire them and get better sources...

You do know a judge can vacate an immunity agreement if it's found that it was improperly issued by the DOJ. Emails of the folks participating in the probe knew they were being lied to and issued the immunity agreement anyway. The whole damn thing stinks to high heaven.

.

Oh? How can a judge revoke immunity on an individual who's not charged with a crime?

more...

You tell me, the DOJ handed out immunity like candy during the bitches email probe.

The Immunized Five: Meet The People Covering For Hillary

Here's another not included in the first link.

FBI: Huma Abedin Granted Immunity Too in Hillary Clinton Email Probe – True Pundit

.

"You tell me..."

There's nothing for me to tell you. I asked you to back up your claim.

Seems you can't. Thanks for playin'. Now go play with your participation trophy.

Why would they need immunity if they weren't guilty of a crime? Evidence is coming out that several lied, and took the 5th in congressional testimony. Like I said, it all stinks.

.

So? If they lied, they opened themselves up to perjury charges. And one can't get immunity and plead the 5th. If they did, they open themselves up to contempt charges.

But it at least we cleared up your nonsense about judges revoking immunity deals.

 

[OKTexas]

You do know a judge can vacate an immunity agreement if it's found that it was improperly issued by the DOJ. Emails of the folks participating in the probe knew they were being lied to and issued the immunity agreement anyway. The whole damn thing stinks to high heaven.

.

Oh? How can a judge revoke immunity on an individual who's not charged with a crime?

more...

You tell me, the DOJ handed out immunity like candy during the bitches email probe.

The Immunized Five: Meet The People Covering For Hillary

Here's another not included in the first link.

FBI: Huma Abedin Granted Immunity Too in Hillary Clinton Email Probe – True Pundit

.

"You tell me..."

There's nothing for me to tell you. I asked you to back up your claim.

Seems you can't. Thanks for playin'. Now go play with your participation trophy.

Why would they need immunity if they weren't guilty of a crime? Evidence is coming out that several lied, and took the 5th in congressional testimony. Like I said, it all stinks.

.

So? If they lied, they opened themselves up to perjury charges. And one can't get immunity and plead the 5th. If they did, they open themselves up to contempt charges.

But it at least we cleared up your nonsense about judges revoking immunity deals.

If it's found immunity was not justified or granted with corrupt intent and judge can reverse it. Only a fool would think otherwise.

Note to the dumbass, judges can also reject plea deals, which are also agreements with prosecutors.

.

 

[Faun]

Oh? How can a judge revoke immunity on an individual who's not charged with a crime?

more...

You tell me, the DOJ handed out immunity like candy during the bitches email probe.

The Immunized Five: Meet The People Covering For Hillary

Here's another not included in the first link.

FBI: Huma Abedin Granted Immunity Too in Hillary Clinton Email Probe – True Pundit

.

"You tell me..."

There's nothing for me to tell you. I asked you to back up your claim.

Seems you can't. Thanks for playin'. Now go play with your participation trophy.

Why would they need immunity if they weren't guilty of a crime? Evidence is coming out that several lied, and took the 5th in congressional testimony. Like I said, it all stinks.

.

So? If they lied, they opened themselves up to perjury charges. And one can't get immunity and plead the 5th. If they did, they open themselves up to contempt charges.

But it at least we cleared up your nonsense about judges revoking immunity deals.

If it's found immunity was not justified or granted with corrupt intent and judge can reverse it. Only a fool would think otherwise.

Note to the dumbass, judges can also reject plea deals, which are also agreements with prosecutors.

.

Great, post a link to corroborate that....

 

[Care4all]

Yeah, well she was always the fox in charge of the investigation into her hen house raids.

Where did she get ALL of this power you claim she has had all of these 30 plus years? Why have you picked her to be the Boogeyman for everything?

If she had so much power, as you claim.... why did Comey intentionally F- her, with his two press conferences/announcements, during the campaign period?

Comey didn't indict her, which he should have done for her multiple violations of the Espionage Act.

So no, he didn't screw her.

She and her Foundation took in 175 million dollars, and according to the Foundations tax filings for 2014, they only gave 4 percent to charity. So you tell me, she has been in, and around government for 40 years, and she has zero to show for it.

So you tell me, why do you support such an epic failure as she is?

i've read the espionage act.... which is for espionage, and there was no espionage with foreigners... so what part of the ACT did she or staff break?

the ''gross negligence'' part, requires top secret defense information being taken from its proper storing place...and leaked... that did not happen, nothing was TAKEN from its proper storing place, there were NO MARKED classified documents taken from the top secret server....nor anything leaked or inadvertently leaked due to the negligence, to our enemies.

You do NOT charge people, just to charge people Westwall....

Law enforcement Charges people when they believe beyond a reasonable doubt, that they can get a conviction. Prosecutors did not believe they could get a conviction on any of what they did.

In addition to this Petraeus did take top secret coded defense documents from their proper storing place and MARKED classified, and gave them to his mistress that was writing a book on him, and lied 3 times to the FBI about it, and Petraeus was not charged with any of the felonious espionage act crimes

He was charged with a misdemeanor, and served NO JAIL TIME for it.... Comey testified before Congress, that what Patraeus did was much much much worse than Hillary's staff and Hillary did....

WHY would you all want Hillary to be locked up, while NOT demanding that Patraeus be locked up and charged with a felony?

Is it because your hatred for her is so so deep in you all, that you simply can't think straight? Or men can get a free pass but not a woman? Why be so unfair on this?

 

[westwall]

Yeah, well she was always the fox in charge of the investigation into her hen house raids.

Where did she get ALL of this power you claim she has had all of these 30 plus years? Why have you picked her to be the Boogeyman for everything?

If she had so much power, as you claim.... why did Comey intentionally F- her, with his two press conferences/announcements, during the campaign period?

Comey didn't indict her, which he should have done for her multiple violations of the Espionage Act.

So no, he didn't screw her.

She and her Foundation took in 175 million dollars, and according to the Foundations tax filings for 2014, they only gave 4 percent to charity. So you tell me, she has been in, and around government for 40 years, and she has zero to show for it.

So you tell me, why do you support such an epic failure as she is?

i've read the espionage act.... which is for espionage, and there was no espionage with foreigners... so what part of the ACT did she or staff break?

the ''gross negligence'' part, requires top secret defense information being taken from its proper storing place...and leaked... that did not happen, nothing was TAKEN from its proper storing place, there were NO MARKED classified documents taken from the top secret server....nor anything leaked or inadvertently leaked due to the negligence, to our enemies.

You do NOT charge people, just to charge people Westwall....

Law enforcement Charges people when they believe beyond a reasonable doubt, that they can get a conviction. Prosecutors did not believe they could get a conviction on any of what they did.

In addition to this Petraeus did take top secret coded defense documents from their proper storing place and MARKED classified, and gave them to his mistress that was writing a book on him, and lied 3 times to the FBI about it, and Petraeus was not charged with any of the felonious espionage act crimes

He was charged with a misdemeanor, and served NO JAIL TIME for it.... Comey testified before Congress, that what Patraeus did was much much much worse than Hillary's staff and Hillary did....

WHY would you all want Hillary to be locked up, while NOT demanding that Patraeus be locked up and charged with a felony?

Is it because your hatred for her is so so deep in you all, that you simply can't think straight? Or men can get a free pass but not a woman? Why be so unfair on this?

You are incorrect. A navy sailor was jailed for a year for taking pictures of his work station on a sub.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

SLOWLY, ever so slowly ALL the skells will be outed....I think late summer of 2020 would be the perfect time for a few dozen INDICTMENTS to be presented to the public 2 a week from August until early Nov.....just in time for the DeathRATS AND the MSM to lose their collective minds...ROTFLMFAO!!!!!"

Don't get your hopes up.. Abedin and Mills and others now all have immunity.. Thanks to Comey.. And every accommodation was made to them in their previous testimony... Smaller players will have to take the hits....

If "epoch news" doesn't know this -- you should fire them and get better sources...

You do know a judge can vacate an immunity agreement if it's found that it was improperly issued by the DOJ. Emails of the folks participating in the probe knew they were being lied to and issued the immunity agreement anyway. The whole damn thing stinks to high heaven.

.

Life is so exciting on the ever inventive garbage propaganda machine. This has all been investigated and there's nothing to it at all anyway except your propaganda.... Poor America.

Wrong

Just lies to cover up lies by the fake media

This fake stuff destroys a nation because learning becomes impossible

This is the highest treason acts and must be set of an example for the future

These names with the most severe penalty must go down in history front and center

These democrat voters will also go down in history as the most foolish of all voters ever

The whole world of real journalism and law enforcement believes you are nuts, brainwashed functional moron. All GOP voters are conspiracy nutjobs at this point....

The men of America agrees. These are the real power of America

Men have the highest logic ability and will always win

 

[francoHFW]

The whole world of real journalism and law enforcement believes ....

...the words you hear / read just before a snowflake / Dem attempts to drop a truck load of BS on your head....

Any time a snowflake attempts to engage in 'absolutes' by telling you what 'everyone else' thinks and / or attempts to convince you that everyone else in the whole world - except for you - believes the BS they are trying to sell / push, you KNOW they are lying their ass off.

Yes yes it's all a huge conspiracy of every news organization in the world except those owned by Rupert Murdoch. The French the British the Japanese the Indians etc etc all believe you are nuts too. Also all the law enforcement including our excellent law enforcement. You are all conspiracy nut jobs now great job GOP!

 

[francoHFW]

Yeah, well she was always the fox in charge of the investigation into her hen house raids.

Where did she get ALL of this power you claim she has had all of these 30 plus years? Why have you picked her to be the Boogeyman for everything?

If she had so much power, as you claim.... why did Comey intentionally F- her, with his two press conferences/announcements, during the campaign period?

Comey didn't indict her, which he should have done for her multiple violations of the Espionage Act.

So no, he didn't screw her.

She and her Foundation took in 175 million dollars, and according to the Foundations tax filings for 2014, they only gave 4 percent to charity. So you tell me, she has been in, and around government for 40 years, and she has zero to show for it.

So you tell me, why do you support such an epic failure as she is?

yes yes let's go over all the phony scandals that nobody gives a crap about except super dupes like you. The Clinton foundation was the charity-- they had the people to spend the money in other countries. You are an idiot like so many. All of that was pure propaganda. Ignoramus.

 

[westwall]

Yeah, well she was always the fox in charge of the investigation into her hen house raids.

Where did she get ALL of this power you claim she has had all of these 30 plus years? Why have you picked her to be the Boogeyman for everything?

If she had so much power, as you claim.... why did Comey intentionally F- her, with his two press conferences/announcements, during the campaign period?

Comey didn't indict her, which he should have done for her multiple violations of the Espionage Act.

So no, he didn't screw her.

She and her Foundation took in 175 million dollars, and according to the Foundations tax filings for 2014, they only gave 4 percent to charity. So you tell me, she has been in, and around government for 40 years, and she has zero to show for it.

So you tell me, why do you support such an epic failure as she is?

yes yes let's go over all the phony scandals that nobody gives a crap about except super dupes like you. The Clinton foundation was the charity-- they had the people to spend the money in other countries. You are an idiot like so many. All of that was pure propaganda. Ignoramus.

What are you bleating about little hater dupe sheeple person?

The Clinton foundation was a pay to play operation. That is proven by the fact that after she lost the election they stopped getting multi million dollar donations...but sheep, like you, don't care.

Because you are little stupid hater dupes.

 

[flacaltenn]

If she had so much power, as you claim.... why did Comey intentionally F- her, with his two press conferences/announcements, during the campaign period?

Comey didn't screw her. He EXONERATED her.. Let's explore the true meaning of that word.. It does not mean that when a jury posts a not guilty verdict that the subject is EXONERATED. It was recently misused by our Tweet in Chief for not having charges posted against him...

BUT -- when you lay out all the statutes and all the guilty evidence and at the end you simply say -- "she was too naive and incompetent and stupid to REALIZE she was violating all those laws" --- and that "no reasonable prosecutor would pursue the case" ---- THEN you've EXONERATED her.. Essentially just granted HER immunity from prosecution also by virtue of her stupidity and incompetence...

And as I've explained before to you and others, the "no reasonable prosecutor" thing was an unelaborated statement about how security issues and infractions are generally handled WITHIN the agencies or the contractors where they occur instead of public courtrooms...

That's the topic of this very thread. Because 3 years later, we're getting the agency review by the Dept of State. Except that they are REVIEWING the former BOSS and HEAD of Security at State. Which is kinda ackwards and unprecedented...

So -- whatever damage was done was because SHE was incompetent, lazy and arrogant and you can not HIDE crimes like that when you run for President. They CLEANED her act up.. And just in case "they damaged her" with the royal treatment she and her cronies got from the FBI, they decided to go damage up the Trump campaign just a bit in case she did not win and this whole affair was buried 1/2 mile under the Wash monument on her inauguration day...

 

[flacaltenn]

You tell me, the DOJ handed out immunity like candy during the bitches email probe.

The Immunized Five: Meet The People Covering For Hillary

Here's another not included in the first link.

FBI: Huma Abedin Granted Immunity Too in Hillary Clinton Email Probe – True Pundit

.

"You tell me..."

There's nothing for me to tell you. I asked you to back up your claim.

Seems you can't. Thanks for playin'. Now go play with your participation trophy.

Why would they need immunity if they weren't guilty of a crime? Evidence is coming out that several lied, and took the 5th in congressional testimony. Like I said, it all stinks.

.

So? If they lied, they opened themselves up to perjury charges. And one can't get immunity and plead the 5th. If they did, they open themselves up to contempt charges.

But it at least we cleared up your nonsense about judges revoking immunity deals.

If it's found immunity was not justified or granted with corrupt intent and judge can reverse it. Only a fool would think otherwise.

Note to the dumbass, judges can also reject plea deals, which are also agreements with prosecutors.

.

Great, post a link to corroborate that....

One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify.. And that's dangerous enough. Because any NEW perjuries or lying they commit constitutes an "uncovered independent" matter... So the computer tech and her aides can be compelled to give further testimony even if they have their own immunity deals....

 

[Faun]

"You tell me..."

There's nothing for me to tell you. I asked you to back up your claim.

Seems you can't. Thanks for playin'. Now go play with your participation trophy.

Why would they need immunity if they weren't guilty of a crime? Evidence is coming out that several lied, and took the 5th in congressional testimony. Like I said, it all stinks.

.

So? If they lied, they opened themselves up to perjury charges. And one can't get immunity and plead the 5th. If they did, they open themselves up to contempt charges.

But it at least we cleared up your nonsense about judges revoking immunity deals.

If it's found immunity was not justified or granted with corrupt intent and judge can reverse it. Only a fool would think otherwise.

Note to the dumbass, judges can also reject plea deals, which are also agreements with prosecutors.

.

Great, post a link to corroborate that....

One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify.. And that's dangerous enough. Because any NEW perjuries or lying they commit constitutes an "uncovered independent" matter... So the computer tech and her aides can be compelled to give further testimony even if they have their own immunity deals....

"One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify"

LOL

Who said otherwise?

What remains unproven, is the claim a judge can revoke an immunity deal.

 

[flacaltenn]

Why would they need immunity if they weren't guilty of a crime? Evidence is coming out that several lied, and took the 5th in congressional testimony. Like I said, it all stinks.

.

So? If they lied, they opened themselves up to perjury charges. And one can't get immunity and plead the 5th. If they did, they open themselves up to contempt charges.

But it at least we cleared up your nonsense about judges revoking immunity deals.

If it's found immunity was not justified or granted with corrupt intent and judge can reverse it. Only a fool would think otherwise.

Note to the dumbass, judges can also reject plea deals, which are also agreements with prosecutors.

.

Great, post a link to corroborate that....

One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify.. And that's dangerous enough. Because any NEW perjuries or lying they commit constitutes an "uncovered independent" matter... So the computer tech and her aides can be compelled to give further testimony even if they have their own immunity deals....

"One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify"

LOL

Who said otherwise?

What remains unproven, is the claim a judge can revoke an immunity deal.

Mueller just revoked Comey's immunity and for all practical purposes special counsels are pretty much judge and jury.. Especially with the bogus plea deals that Mueller came up with in multiple cases where he added charges that had ZERO CHANCE of being proven at trial....

 

[Faun]

So? If they lied, they opened themselves up to perjury charges. And one can't get immunity and plead the 5th. If they did, they open themselves up to contempt charges.

But it at least we cleared up your nonsense about judges revoking immunity deals.

If it's found immunity was not justified or granted with corrupt intent and judge can reverse it. Only a fool would think otherwise.

Note to the dumbass, judges can also reject plea deals, which are also agreements with prosecutors.

.

Great, post a link to corroborate that....

One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify.. And that's dangerous enough. Because any NEW perjuries or lying they commit constitutes an "uncovered independent" matter... So the computer tech and her aides can be compelled to give further testimony even if they have their own immunity deals....

"One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify"

LOL

Who said otherwise?

What remains unproven, is the claim a judge can revoke an immunity deal.

Mueller just revoked Comey's immunity and for all practical purposes special counsels are pretty much judge and jury.. Especially with the bogus plea deals that Mueller came up with in multiple cases where he added charges that had ZERO CHANCE of being proven at trial....

Holyfuckingshit!

When did Mueller become a judge??

 

[flacaltenn]

If it's found immunity was not justified or granted with corrupt intent and judge can reverse it. Only a fool would think otherwise.

Note to the dumbass, judges can also reject plea deals, which are also agreements with prosecutors.

.

Great, post a link to corroborate that....

One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify.. And that's dangerous enough. Because any NEW perjuries or lying they commit constitutes an "uncovered independent" matter... So the computer tech and her aides can be compelled to give further testimony even if they have their own immunity deals....

"One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify"

LOL

Who said otherwise?

What remains unproven, is the claim a judge can revoke an immunity deal.

Mueller just revoked Comey's immunity and for all practical purposes special counsels are pretty much judge and jury.. Especially with the bogus plea deals that Mueller came up with in multiple cases where he added charges that had ZERO CHANCE of being proven at trial....

Holyfuckingshit!

When did Mueller become a judge??

When he starts weighing in on whether on Trump was "exonerated" or not for starters.. The legal system doesn't grant exonerations unless you were proven guilty and later reversed...

But when he indicted the 13 Russian trolls KNOWING the case would never see a courtroom, you can pad all the all goofy evidence you want to make yourself look manly... Or stick in an indictment in the Cohen matter that is POLITICALLY important but would probably get tossed on pre-trial motions....

 

[Faun]

Great, post a link to corroborate that....

One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify.. And that's dangerous enough. Because any NEW perjuries or lying they commit constitutes an "uncovered independent" matter... So the computer tech and her aides can be compelled to give further testimony even if they have their own immunity deals....

"One thing's for certain.. An immunized person can be COMPELLED to testify"

LOL

Who said otherwise?

What remains unproven, is the claim a judge can revoke an immunity deal.

Mueller just revoked Comey's immunity and for all practical purposes special counsels are pretty much judge and jury.. Especially with the bogus plea deals that Mueller came up with in multiple cases where he added charges that had ZERO CHANCE of being proven at trial....

Holyfuckingshit!

When did Mueller become a judge??

When he starts weighing in on whether on Trump was "exonerated" or not for starters.. The legal system doesn't grant exonerations unless you were proven guilty and later reversed...

But when he indicted the 13 Russian trolls KNOWING the case would never see a courtroom, you can pad all the all goofy evidence you want to make yourself look manly... Or stick in an indictment in the Cohen matter that is POLITICALLY important but would probably get tossed on pre-trial motions....

Nope, that still doesn't make him a judge. It also doesn't show judges can revoke an immunity deal.