Skip to comments.Get Your Popcorn:Judicial Watch to Interview Susan Rice,Slew of Other Obama Officials Under Oath
Posted on 03/14/2019 2:38:05 PM PDT by DeathBeforeDishonor1
Government watchdog Judicial Watch is set to interview former White House National Security Advisor Susan Rice and Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes about Benghazi and Hillary Clinton's illegal email server. They've been given the green light by a federal court to do so.
Here's what they're looking for: -Whether Clinton intentionally attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a non-government email system;
-Whether the State Departments efforts to settle this case beginning in late 2014 amounted to bad faith;
and -Whether the State Department adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watchs FOIA request.
Other officials who will answer questions under oath include former Bill Clinton aide Justin Cooper, Ben Rhodes, former Hillary Clinton Chief of Staff Jacob Sullivan, Clinton confidential assistant Monica Hanley, Clinton special assistant Lauren Jiloty, FBI official E.W. Priestap and former or current Department Officials John Hackett, Sheryl Walter, Gene Smilansky, Monica Tillery, Jonathan Wasser, Clarence Finney, Heather Samuelson and Eric Boswell.
In January, United States District Judge Royce Lamberth ordered these individuals to cooperate.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Should be enough “fifths” to fill a few cases..
“Should be enough fifths to fill a few cases..”
And more then a few “I don’t recall’s”
Wanna bet they lie under oath? They’re amoral and corrupt so lying comes naturally.
Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley and South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham released an email by Susan Rice to Susan Rice that seemed odd in both its timing and content.
Fifteen minutes after Donald Trump was sworn in as the 45th President of the United States Susan Rice, who had just become the former National Security Adviser sent out her last email using her official White House email account. It was strange email, about a meeting fifteen days before regarding Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election, whose attendees included Rice, the POTUS, the SCHMOTUS Joe Biden, former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates
The strange part of the email was that its purpose seemed to be to get on the record that the Obama administration did nothing wrong in the Russia investigation. She noted repeatedly how Obama emphasized during the meeting on Russian that he wanted every aspect of the issue handled by the book.
President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities by the book. The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.
After a section that remains classified Rice wrote that Obama discussed sharing the information with the incoming Trump administration.
The president asked Comey to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team. Comey said he would.
One could almost see Ms. Rice doing an exaggerated wink while sending this email.
Why would she write an email about the Jan. 5th meeting on Jan 20th, on Inauguration Day, during her last moments as a federal employee? Why the emphasis on by the book? To quote Hamlet, The lady doth protest too much. Why was Obama was concerned that there might be reasons why certain classified information would need to be withheld from Team Trump?
It seems as if she is trying to rewrite history and that maybe something happened during those 15 days that moved Rice to write that email to herself.
The Senators sent Rice a letter demanding answers. It said in part:It strikes us as odd that, among your activities in the final moments on the final day of the Obama administration, you would feel the need to send yourself such an unusual email purporting to document a conversation involving President Obama and his interactions with the FBI regarding the Trump/Russia investigation. In addition, despite your claim that President Obama repeatedly told Mr. Comey to proceed by the book, substantial questions have arisen about whether officials at the FBI, as well as at the Justice Department and the State Department, actually did proceed by the book.In order for the Committee to further assess the situation, please respond to the following by February 22, 2018:
- Did you send the email attached to this letter to yourself? Do you have any reason to dispute the timestamp of the email?y reason to dispute the timestamp of the email?
- When did you first become aware of the FBIs investigation into allegations of collusion between Mr. Trumps associates and Russia?
- When did you become aware of any surveillance activities, including FISA applications, undertaken by the FBI in conducting that investigation? At the time you wrote this email to yourself, were you aware of either the October 2016 FISA application for surveillance of Carter Page or the January 2017 renewal?
- Did anyone instruct, request, suggest, or imply that you should send yourself the aforementioned Inauguration Day email memorializing President Obamas meeting with Mr. Comey about the Trump/Russia investigation? If so, who and why?
- Is the account of the January 5, 2017 meeting presented in your email accurate? Did you omit any other portions of the conversation?
- Other than that email, did you document the January 5, 2017 meeting in any way, such as contemporaneous notes or a formal memo? To the best of your knowledge, did anyone else at that meeting take notes or otherwise memorialize the meeting?
- During the meeting, did Mr. Comey or Ms. Yates mention potential press coverage of the Steele dossier? If so, what did they say?
- During the meeting, did Mr. Comey describe the status of the FBIs relationship with Mr. Steele, or the basis for that status?
- When and how did you first become aware of the allegations made by Christopher Steele?
- When and how did you first become aware that the Clinton Campaign and the Democratic National Committee funded Mr. Steeles efforts?
- You wrote that President Obama stressed that he was not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. Did President Obama ask about, initiate, or instruct anything from any other perspective relating to the FBIs investigation?
- Did President Obama have any other meetings with Mr. Comey, Ms. Yates, or other government officials about the FBIs investigation of allegations of collusion between Trump associates and Russia? If so, when did these occur, who participated, and what was discussed?
Everything about the Russia investigation as it relates to the Obama administration seems strange and seems to be getting stranger every day. Perhaps there was nothing nefarious about Rice sending an email to herself to get into the national record that everything was done by the book, On the other hand, it seems as if she is trying to rewrite history and perhaps something happened during those 15 days that moved Rice to write that email to herself. Like so much else about the Obama administrations handling of the Russia investigation it sure smells rotten.
The Graham, Grassley letter demands an answer by Feb. 22nd. It will be interesting to see what (or if) she answers. And if she answers will it be truthful. Remember Ms. Rice went on five Sunday news shows to lie about Benghazi was incited by a YouTube video.
Donald Trump TRICKED her into setting up her bootleg email server! IMPEACH!
All you are going to get is “I don’t recall”
Judicial Watch is not a law-enforcement or executive-government entity. Its a private corporation/non-profit
How can “cross-examine” anyone, especially “under oath?”
Wow, they’ll be on her like white on...
Din’t do nuf’fin.
Pay per view?
No Loretta Lynch?
White on Kamela. In the Michael Jackson mode
But, are the required to answer? Or will it be a “I don’t recall” fest.
How can cross-examine anyone, especially under oath?
Don’t remember, no comment, don’t recall, etc. etc. etc.
Under Oath means ZERO in this day
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.