[dp0622]

I didn’t have much hope for anything coming of it, but a FReeper sent me an article showing how there IS an investigation going on for a while and it will bear fruit.

Who the heck knows when is the question?

I’m pretty lazy but if anyone wants, i’ll send the link :)

[Bon mots]

[Lurkinanloomin]

Old news.

Move on. org

I’ll be amazed if anyone really looked into it.

[Revel]

“A department lawyer said in court last year that senior officials insisted the document of Sessions directing the DOJ to revisit probes of Clinton didn’t exist. “

The beauty of it is that Sessions did not “direct” anyone. He only “Recommended”. Therefore no lie was told.

[rktman]

No doubt the evil orange man had it made up to make hillary look ba......... Yeah, I almost said it. 😹

[montag813]

Looks like “American Oversight” does not want ANY oversight of the Clintons.

[ExTexasRedhead]

My faith and trust is in Donald J. Trump to protect and defend this nation from enemies foreign and domestic.

I have total and absolute faith and trust in him and those who helped him get elected. Case closed.

[taxcontrol]

So ... somebody is lying for Clinton. Surprise.

[bitt]

p

[philman_36]

Total BS! They screwed up the FOIA request!

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5764384-DOJ-11-18-MSJ-Declaration.html#document/p8/a485896

Do take the time to find and read pages 7 & 8 and, most especially...pages 102 and 103. (PAGES tab, upper left)

And
notwithstanding the use of a plural in DOJ’s responses, Ms.
Brinkmann’s declaration establishes
that the only senior prosecutor former Attorney General
Sessions “directed” to carry out the
evaluation of issues raised by Chairman Goodlatte’s letter,
in the sense indicated by the
November 13 letter, is Mr. Huber. Brinkmann Decl. ¶ 14.
Plaintiff’s dissatisfaction with the results of the search
it requested is not a reason to
conduct additional searches outside the scope of its
request. Plaintiff can always request a search
of such records separately if it desires. Accordingly, this
argument provides no sound reason to
call the adequacy of DOJ’s search into question.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, DOJ respectfully requests that
the Court grant its motion and
enter summary judgment in its favor.
And then the 2 page "smoking gun" that really isn't?
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5764383-DOJ-2-19-Extension-Request.html#document/p1/a485898

Read that again!
Plaintiff’s dissatisfaction with the results of the search
it requested is not a reason to
conduct additional searches outside the scope of its
request.