The FBI files are not files on individuals, that would be illegal to release the content of those files.
It’s different files and it’s perfectly legal to release the content of the files.
Don’t think Hillary didn’t try getting the files, she did, her plan fell through.
In November 2006 the dems began a campaign against Bush for firing the US Attorneys.
According to the dems, Bush just had to have fired the US Attorneys for some type of cover up.
Right before the Easter break in 2007, Sharon Eubanks (SP?) with CREW claimed she had heard there were problems in the Civil Rights Division at Justice.
DING! DING! DING! That’s where the files are coming from.
Complaints filed against police for civil rights violations, the exact same kind of FBI files Reno said she would release if she was confirmed as AG but instead of releasing the files she fired all the US Attorneys.
In 1991 with the R King beating , Bush first ordered the FBI then the US Attorneys in 1992 to review all complaints filed against police with the FBI for the previous 5 years.
There was roughly 15,000 complaints(files) and somewhere around 42, IIRC, were ever pursued in court. The dems claimed this proved police weren’t being held accountable because of republican racism.
Of the apx. 42 cases that was pursued, one was against Governor Bill Clinton for ordering his state troopers to “Racial Profile”.
As part of the settlement Clinton was ordered and he agreed to stop the racial profiling.
With a review of the complaints filed against police it showed Clinton didn’t stop the racial profiling and the complaints continued.
Little Bill was in defiance of a court order thus the need for Reno to fire the USA’s instead of releasing the content of the files.
You get anywhere from 3-3500 new complaints filed against police with the FBI every year.
Since police are agents of the city govt and city govts are liable for their actions, city govt will orchestrate a cover up to avoid or lessen their civil liabilities.
It’s your dem controlled city govt, not republican racism, that is responsible for police not being held accountable for abuse and misconduct.
That’s the info Hillary is after. An official report showing it’s dems not repubs responsible for the police not being held accountable.
Not only would Hillary have a sledge hammer to use against the dem party as a whole, she also has “the spark to ignite the flame” of race riots, just like with R King in 1992.
Race riots and the threat to burn down every city in the US is what the term “Scorched Earth Policy” means.
In 2007 Hillary was well on her way to getting theses files and orchestrating race riots but her little plan got derailed.
Leakey Leahy was having hearings on Bush’s firing of the USA’s, Sharon Eubanks brings up problems in civil right division, Leaky Leahy jumps and starts his pursuit of problems in civil rights division.
Meanwhile Sharpton is hell bent to gin up civil unrest with the “Jenna 6”.
Everybody was doing their part and everything was coming together to do a repeat of the R King case when it all got derailed by the Virginia Tech shooting bumping it all out of the news for over a week.
Try as they could they couldn’t get the publics attention back after loosing it for over a week.
In 2009, Little Miss Vindictive Hillary was still hell bent on blaming Bush and republicans for “racial profiling’ and police not being held accountable because of republican racism.
With the Gates dust up “racial profiling” suddenly jumped to the top again. The Congressional Black caucus immediately call for a review of all complaints against police with the FBI. Leaky Leahy once again started farting in the wind about Bush’s firing of the USA’s.
The idea was to make it appear as if Bush had fired the USA’s to cover up racial profiling, which is what Clinton had fired the USA’s for.
Simple projection. Accuse others of doing what you are guilty of.
There was also a terrorist attack planned for NYC subway.
Not only had Bush told Obama about the planned attack, but the Brits had also warned Obama about the attack several months before.
Obama and Hillary tried to orchestrate civil unrest prior to the attack.
Sound familiar?
Orchestrate civil unrest/race riots carry out terrorist attack.
That’s the Weather Underground Playbook from BO’s buddy Bill Ayres.
HILLARY FIRED FROM WATERGATE IVESTIGATION
FOR LYING AND FOR UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR
Excerpted from EO-History: The now-retired general counsel and chief of staff of the House Judiciary Committee, who supervised Hillary when she worked on the Watergate investigation, says Hillary’s history of lies and unethical behavior goes back farther – and goes much deeper – than anyone realizes.
Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.
Why?
“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”
How could a 27-year-old House staff member do all that? She couldn’t do it by herself, but Zeifman said she was one of several individuals – including Marshall, special counsel John Doar and senior associate special counsel (and future Clinton White House Counsel) Bernard Nussbaum – who engaged in a seemingly implausible scheme to deny Richard Nixon the right to counsel during the investigation.
Why would they want to do that?
Because, according to Zeifman, they feared putting Watergate break-in mastermind E. Howard Hunt on the stand to be cross-examined by counsel to the president. Hunt, Zeifman said, had the goods on nefarious activities in the Kennedy Administration that would have made Watergate look like a day at the beach – including Kennedy’s purported complicity in the attempted assassination of Fidel Castro.
The actions of Hillary and her cohorts went directly against the judgment of top Democrats, up to and including then-House Majority Leader Tip O’Neill, that Nixon clearly had the right to counsel.
Zeifman says that Hillary, along with Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar, was determined to gain enough votes on the Judiciary Committee to change House rules and deny counsel to Nixon. And in order to pull this off, Zeifman says Hillary wrote a fraudulent legal brief, and confiscated public documents to hide her deception.
The brief involved precedent for representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding. When Hillary endeavored to write a legal brief arguing there is no right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding, Zeifman says, he told Hillary about the case of Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas, who faced an impeachment attempt in 1970.
“As soon as the impeachment resolutions were introduced by (then-House Minority Leader Gerald) Ford, and they were referred to the House Judiciary Committee, the first thing Douglas did was hire himself a lawyer,” Zeifman said.
The Judiciary Committee allowed Douglas to keep counsel, thus establishing the precedent. Zeifman says he told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files. So what did Hillary do?
“Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public,” Zeifman said. Hillary then proceeded to write a legal brief arguing there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding – as if the Douglas case had never occurred.
The brief was so fraudulent and ridiculous, Zeifman believes Hillary would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.