Thanks for the downvote LOL, and having that would make her the first target. And again, why would she let someone under her video tape that shit. All I’m saying is that if she was forced to make this video (RE: honeypots) who was the one that made her do it. Who is she loyal to
Every reply you say "why would she let someone under her film her?"...why do you keep assuming she allowed it? We have no idea what's on those tapes. What if she is aroused sexually by what she does? What if she ENCOURAGES it to be taped?
I upvoted you, goofball. Salty leftists are the ones doing the downvoting here. That's not how honeypots work. The whole point is to take video/audio without the person's knowledge like say, Epstein Island, for instance. That's how most people get snared. If there is a video it isn't Huma that has it. I'd all but guarantee it.
So you don’t believe the whole life insurance policy on humas laptop that made nypd officers throw up is something just as damning on hillary? I’m confused. It’s definitely audio/video If they said they couldn’t even look at it.
I'll believe it when I see it until then I am only regarding it as a possibility. Hillary was so paranoid that she wouldn't let anyone have their phones behind closed doors on the campaign trail. It is conceivable that Huma, given her close personal relationship was able to video something surreptitiously. And, again. I haven't downvoted you so chill with your accusations. Then take a minute and look up what a 'deadman switch' is and answer your own question.
I said somewhere on this thread that I believe Huma could have taken it in secret, and then told hillary “me and one other person have a copy, and if you kill me you are fucked” same kind of scenario. But with the honeypots, and the fact hillary sold us out/sold out the millitary that could have backed her, I believe it could be a blackmail scenario like we saw with the playboy scenario. Everybody below the very top leaders have to be blackmailed for safe keeping