I'm not buying half this BS. And I hope the committees stay on top of this regardless. We the people haven't seen a tenth of what's really going on.
Quote:
"Our efforts have resulted in the committees finally getting access to information that was sought months ago, but some important requests remain to be completed," Strong said in a statement Saturday. "Additional time has been requested for the outstanding items, and based on our understanding of the process we believe that request is reasonable. We expect the department to meet its full obligations to the two committees."
These efforts by the Justice Department over the last week to deliver documents to the House Republicans are just a feeble attempt to temporarily diffused a months long standoff with Congress. Of course the Democrats have criticized the multiple document requests, charging that they are intended to discredit the department and distract from or even undermine special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into the Trump campaign's Russia ties and whether there was obstruction of justice. Which is nothing but BS partisan fodder.
What they are requesting is just fluff. They have yet to produce the unredacted EC, a key document in the chain of events and a hinge on which a lot of this crap teeters on. They have been sitting on the request for this for months, in fact most if not all of these requests they claim to have just fulfilled are months old, in some cases a year.
The letters also say that the FBI is also working to address a request about
"proposed, recommended or actual" surveillance on the Clinton Foundation. Tyson said the department was responding in a separate, classified letter, and that the request had proven
"difficult to address." She said the department hoped to talk to lawmakers further about it.
See this is an interesting response. First because of the subject, i.e. the Clinton Foundation. We know there is an open investigation going on with the CF, is that what makes it "difficult to address" or is it embarrassing as hell? how much of a botched investigation they were doing the first time. And is it the memos and emails from higher ups trying to tamp down the truth leading up to the investigation? Lynch's email to Amanda Renteria that "she would not let the FBI investigation into Clinton go too far". And if you remember Lynch denied allegations that she assured a Hillary Clinton campaign staffer that the FBI investigation into Clinton's email server wouldn't "go too far," under oath before the Senate Judiciary committee, which Grassley said to her face he believed otherwise. However when the email was produced that she sent using her pseudonym Elizabeth Carlisle, she's refused to address the subject again, and then Amanda Renteria tried to say Russians jacked her email. Problem with that is, Renteria didn't originate that email, Elizabeth Carlisle (Lynch) did. And this was not some Gmail account,
elizabeth.
carlisle@
usdoj.
gov wasn't hacked. No she wrote the email and thanks to Kenneth Whittle it came to light.
In the letter from the Office of Informational Policy, you can see that she picked the pseudonym May 4, 2015, one week after she was sworn in as AG. Lynch used this email account to conduct official Department business throughout her tenure as AG. This is deliberate tradecraft to avoid FOIA. My question is this, how is this not a crime, a direct violation of the spirit of the FOIA law. The administration that vowed from day one to be the most transparent administration ever, was anything but transparent.
Never take a hostage you aren't willing to shoot,
Remember, America doesn’t negotiate with terrorists.
Code 7 10-42
