╌>

FBI has 'reopened' case on search for Lynch-Clinton tarmac meeting records

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  vic-eldred  •  7 years ago  •  26 comments

FBI has 'reopened' case on search for Lynch-Clinton tarmac meeting records

The FBI has "reopened" its consideration of a request for records on the infamous 2016 tarmac meeting between then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton, the group behind that request told Fox News. 

American Center for Law and Justice President Jay Sekulow called the development a “positive sign,” in an interview Wednesday on “Fox & Friends.”

Sekulow said the FBI sent him a letter saying it had reopened his Freedom of Information Act request for documents related to the June 2016 meeting. At first, the FBI and DOJ said they did not have documents detailing the tarmac meet-up, before recently releasing a batch of emails. They are now searching for more records. 

“While we appreciate that the FBI has ‘reopened’ the case file and is now ‘searching’ for documents responsive to our duly submitted FOIA request from more than a year ago, it stretches the bounds of credulity to suggest that the FBI bureaucracy just discovered that ‘potentially responsive’ records ‘may exist’ on its own accord,” Sekulow said in a  written statement .

 


 

FBI’s newest letter to the ACLJ – dated one week after the government watchdog group accused the government of lying to them about the existence of records – now states that “records potentially responsive to your request may exist.”

Last week, ACLJ released 400 emails from the initial batch they received. The documents revealed that Lynch used an  email alias  to discuss the secret meeting that took place between her and Clinton and that DOJ staffers were concerned about the optics of the situation.

The tarmac meeting fueled Republican complaints at the time that Lynch had improperly met with the husband of an investigation subject, Hillary Clinton, just before the probe into her personal email use was completed with no charges filed.

A week after the meeting, then-FBI Director James Comey called Clinton’s actions “extremely careless” but did not recommend charges. The criminal investigation was closed and then briefly re-opened in October just days before the 2016 presidential election.

Sekulow, who also serves on President Trump’s legal team, said the ACLJ will continue to “press on in our legal fight to ensure that the details of the secret Clinton-Lynch meeting and the subsequent cover-up and withholding of information from the public comes to light.” 

JUDICIAL WATCH CLASHES WITH DOJ OVER LYNCH-CLINTON MEETING NOTES

He added that his organization will continue to “legally hold the FBI’s feet to the fire” and said he is “willing to go to court to get (the records) if necessary.” 

The conservative group Judicial Watch also has clashed with the DOJ, after receiving similar documents it complained were "heavily redacted." 

In response to those complaints, a Justice Department spokesperson referred Fox News to a  letter  sent by the DOJ Office of Information Policy on Aug. 1, 2017 to Judicial Watch explaining their decision to maintain redacted materials.

The letter explains that those sections pertain to “certain inter- and intra-agency communications protected by the deliberative process privilege, and information release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of the personal privacy of third parties.”

A Justice spokesperson told Fox News that decisions to claim the deliberative process exemption are routine.

In his June testimony, Comey cited concerns with Lynch's handling of the Clinton investigation. Comey told lawmakers that Lynch directed him to describe the email probe as a “matter” and not an “investigation.”

Comey said the tarmac meeting was a “deciding factor” in his decision to act alone to update the public on the Clinton probe—and protect the bureau’s reputation.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
link   seeder  Vic Eldred    7 years ago

It may be too little too late. Questions should have been asked while the strange events like the granting of immunity for no reason, were taking place.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Participates
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Vic Eldred   7 years ago

Granting immunity to whom for what?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell    7 years ago

American Center for Law and Justice President Jay Sekulow called the development a “positive sign,” in an interview Wednesday on “Fox & Friends.”

Interesting fellow. He repeats falsehoods on tv almost as often as Trump does. 

 

The Lynch-Clinton tarmac is an attempt by right wing media to distract from the woes of the most unqualified person to ever run for or win the presidency on a major party ticket. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
link   Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell   7 years ago

            "most unqualified person to ever run for or win the presidency on a major party ticket. "

And it still burns your ass that, as an outsider, he beat the OTHER unqualified person ever to run for the presidency doesn't it?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC   7 years ago

          "most unqualified person to ever run for or win the presidency on a major party ticket. "

And it still burns your ass that, as an outsider, he beat the OTHER unqualified person ever to run for the presidency doesn't it?

 

What burns my ass is that he is still not qualified after seven months in office. In fact, he's less qualified.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Expert
link   Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell   7 years ago

The whole thing boils down to opinion.  Fact of the matter is, he IS qualified or he wouldn't have been permitted to run.

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Participates
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC   7 years ago

Again, he lost by 3 million to Clinton and 11 million short of the majority, he didn't win the country and that's why he faces so much opposition.  You can crow about the EC all you want but the people of this country think he stinks by a 2:1 ratio.  The EC isn't going to change that or help him get anything done.  He's a lame duck right out of the gate. 

 
 
 
OldUSAFGuy
Freshman Silent
link   OldUSAFGuy  replied to  Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו   7 years ago

Hillary is Soooo Qualified but yet LOST Twice? 

Hmmm Go Figure............

Oh and BTW she lost the second time with a system she publicly supported.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
link   seeder  Vic Eldred    7 years ago

John, I like the Avatar - one of my favorite movies (I just had to say it)

Interesting fellow. He repeats falsehoods on tv almost as often as Trump does. 

Can you be a little specific about Mr Sekulow's falsehoods?

The Lynch-Clinton tarmac is an attempt by right wing media to distract from the woes of the most unqualified person to ever run for or win the presidency on a major party ticket. 

It never really got looked at. There were many irregularities by the Lynch Justice Department which was in control of the Clinton investigation. At the very least the people & their representatives should get to ask questions.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred   7 years ago

It never really got looked at. There were many irregularities by the Lynch Justice Department which was in control of the Clinton investigation. At the very least the people & their representatives should get to ask questions.

ask away. Clinton's nemesis , Trump, has a 34% popularity rating.  His problems are beyond being saved by a Clinton distraction.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred   7 years ago

PRIOR to Loretta Lynch meeting Bill Clinton, there were various legal experts who wrote online that Clinton would not be indicted because it wasn't justified by the evidence.

It took no trickery or shenanigans for Comey to reach that conclusion. He followed precedent and the law.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell    7 years ago
  1. ANALYSIS: No, Hillary Clinton Did Not Commit a Crime ...

    abcnews.go.com /Politics/analysis-hillary- clinton -commit-crime...

    Feb 01, 2016  · ABC News legal analyst Dan Abrams makes ... Hillary Clinton Did Not Commit ... to predict that the FBI would soon recommend she be indicted ...

  2. Why Hillary Clinton Will Not Be Indicted | Uchambuzi …

    why-hillary-clinton-will-not-be-indicted

    Why Hillary Clinton Will Not Be Indicted ... Hillary Clinton Did Not Commit A Crime ... and apart from the analysis Dan Abrams provides in the article linked ...

  3. Legal experts, Dan Abrams and Richard Lempert, believe ...

    https:// www.democraticunderground.com /12511764217

    The existing legal analysis of this issue has mostly been done by ABC legal analyst Dan Abrams , ... Dan Abrams and Richard Lempert, believe Clinton will not be indicted .

 
 
 
sixpick
Professor Quiet
link   sixpick  replied to  JohnRussell   7 years ago

Oh yes, Dan Abrams, general manager of MSNBC should be the last word anyone should need to hear.  After all, NBC only altered or should I say phonoshopped George Zimmerman's 911 call to make him appear to be a racist.

Fact check: 12 questions and answers about Hillary Clinton’s emails

 

Yes, we should continue to be the fools we've been for years by ignoring anyone who questions these liars.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
link   Sean Treacy  replied to  sixpick   7 years ago

He was a Court Reporter for Court TV!
Who wouldn't trust that guy to render opinions on  espionage laws.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy   7 years ago

Why Hillary Won't Be Indicted and Shouldn't Be: An Objective Legal Analysis

There is no reason to think that Clinton committed any crimes with respect to the use of her email server.

 

 

Richard O. Lempert is the Eric Stein Distinguished University Professor of Law and Sociology emeritus at the University of Michigan.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy   7 years ago

I have no interest in rehashing all this with you Sean.

Suffice to say there is more than enough expert opinion that Clinton committed no crime to justify Comey's decision without needing to go to a conspiracy theory.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
link   JohnRussell  replied to  sixpick   7 years ago

Oh yes, Dan Abrams, general manager of MSNBC should be the last word anyone should need to hear.  After all, NBC only altered or should I say phonoshopped George Zimmerman's 911 call to make him appear to be a racist.

This is an odd comment to say the least. Is it your first or last, Sixpick?

 
 
 
Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו
Junior Participates
link   Atheist יוחנן בן אברהם אבינו    7 years ago

Ah, the next obvious step of a fascist government is to create a phony legal reason to put down any political oppsition. Jess Sessions is just doing what he was chose to do. 

 
 

Who is online

Right Down the Center


59 visitors