Bret Baier of Fox News Channel Special Report interviewed Attorney General Loretta Lynch today. Ms. Lynch was completely noncommittal on the status of the investigation (no surprises). Baier asked if she would use a private server multiple times but her answer was the same - 'I use the internal DOJ servers for all my email correspondence." Baier also asked whether a grand jury had been convened, which dept of the DOJ was involved in the Clinton email matter, and what responsibility the DOJ had in bringing this to a close as soon as possible due to the Presidential election in Nov. She would not provide details. The WaPo however was able to determine that the same attorney involved in the Patreaus case was handling the Clinton case. Ms. Lynch is obviously keeping information close but curiously provided much more detail when discussing the Apple I phone matter. http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/special-report-bret-baier/videos#p/86927/v/4776283589001
Here's a summary of her answers. I don't comment on ongoing investigations. I can answer that because there is an ongoing investigation. You can fill in your own questions, it doesn't matter.
What a politician! She spoke for 1/2 an hour, sounded very articulate and reasonable; and said absolutely nothing.
She wouldn't even responds to request for clarification of the laws involved. I can understand questions about specifics to THIS investigation being off limits. But questions about the laws involved as to handling classified information.
Not definitively, IMO. Her equivocation went something like: " We use the server designated to us by the DOJ." Which in political speak is not saying she would not use an unauthorized server, but we, here at the DOJ, use the officially designated server. (There's some paraphrasing there as I cant remember her exact circuitous rhetoric.) If the interview lasted another 5 minutes, I though she was gonna quote the great prevaricator's legendary line: "That depends on what the word is is."
IMO, her response was definitive. She was asked more than once about a private server and indicated each time that she would use the DOJ secure servers provided. I hope that she is indeed carrying out an independent investigation - she claims that no one from the Obama White House is being briefed although it is hard to believe that one or more political DOJ appointees is doing just that. I was dismayed a bit by her not acknowledging the urgency of bringing closure one way or another to the matter in light of the political implications.
Lynch is a big step up from Eric Holder. I think she is honest but may be in a very difficult spot. I'm hoping her integrity wins out. http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Bil...ttorney-general-nominee/2014/11/11/id/606666/
All I'm saying is all of them does what the WH admin says. Obama appointed her to the position, she's going to make him happy. Integrity is not found in politics.......... - - - Updated - - - I wouldn't be surprised if the SCOTUS job goes to Eric Holder...
This needs a special prosecutor, this is EXACTLY what special prosecutors are for. We saw the independent career prosecutors decision on the IRS scandal with it's clear violations.
I think that a appointing a special prosecutor would result in long delays. It seems that there is enough to indict now and worrisome that a grand jury has not been convened. - - - Updated - - - You are probably right but I'm hoping that Lynch will do the right thing. Holder on the Supreme Court would be a disaster.
I hope she does the right thing to, but........we'll see. I don't trust any of them of either party. You bet Holder would be a disaster in the SC, but Obama would see him as a perfect fit......
First there has to be a prosecutoral decision to take it to a grand jury and to do the investigation and legal work to present it and that means interviewing witnesses going over the evidence the FBI has produced etc etc etc. That can either be established within the DOJ or through a OIC,. This needs to be through an OIC with a special prosecutor not a under the control of the political appointee AG. She needs to step aside.
The irony of this whole fiasco is that you can have a Federal Government security clearance, and a personal email server on which classified information is received and transmitted -- BUT -- the email server must (MUST) be installed inside a completely secure Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) in accordance with TEMPEST standards. And, of course, there must be no attempt to hide the fact that classified information is contained in the server, and, the server MUST be available for thorough inspection of all contents at any time such an inspection is duly authorized. Hillary's motives for having an unsecured personal email server, which DID have highly-classified information on it, remain unclear. The "what she did" part is already a matter of evidence, but the "why she did it" is the subject of a separate FBI investigation. From what we know, she was so stupid that she hadn't even made certain that the server was properly installed in a SCIF. Democrats don't even bat an eye at the idea of anyone as reckless, careless, and stupid as Hillary Clinton being President of the United States. And neither do our adversaries throughout the world... they'd be thrilled to have even more opportunities to peruse our most secret, sensitive information as easily as our own idiotic, top-echelon officials....
The "why" might be contained in the deleted emails which the FBI has been able to recover last summer. The FBI has not of course had to release any of these emails unlike the State Dept. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-fbi-pulls-deleted-emails-from-hillary-clintons-server/
Honest people answer questions directly and truthfully. Loretta Lynch did neither. She was more evasive than O.J. before his murderous rampage.
Lynch is certainly not comparable to Simpson and has acted honorably in the past. Hopefully she will continue on that track as will James Comey. IMO she is being extra careful not to communicate any information which might lead to premature judgments about the course of DOJ actions until all the work is done. I'm not a D but I'd also argue that remaining silent with the seemingly overwhelming amount of evidence showing that Hillary has broken the law hurts the D's - the closer to the election day in Nov the indictment occurs the more damage to the D effort to win the Presidency.
Some new information/speculation on the subject of a Grand Jury Investigation and the immunity granted to Pagliano by a federal judge at the request of the DOJ. He thinks that a grand jury has indeed been convened. A federal judge is the only person who can grant immunity. Federal prosecutors have called Pagliano into a meeting where he basically answered questions completely off the record. The prosecutors were interested in what he said and brokered an immunity deal (granted by the judge) for his testimony. If Hillary instructed him to set up the private server and move all the material on her gov server and gave him access to her password to do so .... This ^ cannot be confirmed but it sounds reasonable. http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4784...-their-nightmare/?intcmp=hphz01#sp=show-clips And some follow up information from Catherine Herridge on the use of passwords and the NDA signed by Hillary. Two emails will not be released - one between Hillary and Pres Obama (no issue there) but a second which has not been released at the request of law enforcement. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ared-passwords-to-access-classified-info.html
