Posted on 05/03/2019 7:08:07 PM PDT by TaxPayer2000
[McCarthy has evolved. I can remember his indignance at the thought anyone would call the DOJ or FBI corrupt. (and his ‘lil buddy Jim Comey.)]
Not a chance!
Mueller belongs in jail. That snake knew there was no crime to investigate right after he started but he put the country through 2 years of bull Obama anyways. What a treasonous scumbag Herr Mueller is proving himself to be.
bkmk
Whoa, after dinner, I need the Cliff notes version.............
The RATS here remind me of a song I heard at a recent Buddy Guy Concert: “While You Were Sneaking Out, Someone Else Was Sneaking In!”
The Derp State has without a doubt video of Nap putting it to an eight-year-old boy...
After her 2016 loss, the Clintons....and Obama (who was getting a cut of everything)....moved quickly to destroy most of the evidence.
========================================
(AFTER SHE LOST OBAMA "SUDDENLY" REMEMBERED)
Obama Had a Deal With Hillary Allowing Removal Of State Dept Records.
By RYAN SAAVEDRA, dailywire.com, Dec 15, 2017
Newly-revealed documents obtained by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch reveal that the Obama State Department allowed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her top aide Huma Abedin to remove sensitive documents that were not to be made public records (including official “Muslim Engagement Documents”).
Judicial Watch received the records on Thursday in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that sought all DS-1904 forms completed by or on behalf of Former Secretary Hillary Clinton, Former Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, Former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin, and Former Deputy Chief of Staff Jacob Sullivan.
Clinton and Abedin were permitted to remove both electronic and physical records, claiming “they were ‘personal’ materials and ‘unclassified, non-record materials,’ including files of Clinton’s calls and schedules, which were not to be made public.”
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton noted the gravity of the latest revelations, stating they showed further corruption in the Obama administration and with Clinton.
“We already know the Obama State Department let Hillary Clinton steal and then delete her government emails, which included classified information,” Fitton said in a statement. “But these new records show that was only part of the scandal. These new documents show the Obama State Department had a deal with Hillary Clinton to hide her calls logs and schedules, which would be contrary to FOIA and other laws.”
Electronic records Clinton was allowed to remove:
Copy of “daily files.”
Non-record copy of a log of calls the Secretary made since 2004.
Official and personal copy of the Secretary’s “call grid” which is a running list of calls she wants to make.
Physical records Clinton was allowed to remove: 16 boxes of personal schedules from 1993-2008 (prior to her becoming Secretary of State).
29 boxes of miscellaneous public schedules ranging from her time as FLOTUS up to her State Dept tenure.
1 box of personal reimbursable receipts. 1 box of personal photos. 1 box personal schedule.
Personal correspondence.
Daily file binders. Gift binders. Gifts (actual). Topic binders.
Electronic records Abedin was allowed to remove
Outlook contacts.
Physical records Abedin was allowed to remove (5 boxes):
Travel Records
Muslim Engagement Documents
Newspaper Articles
Gift Archive Binder
FLOTUS “Courtesy Storage/Box Content List” Binder
CODEL Trips Binder
Menu Cards & Table Arrangement Binder
Personal Event Planner (2001 thru 2011)
“The originals of some Clinton documents were retained, such as the call logs and schedules,” Judicial Watch reports. “For other records, including material that predates Clinton’s tenure, there is no indication that a copy was made. The most significant of these are Hillary's personal correspondence and gift binders, which could reflect Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative ties.”
SOURCE https://www.dailywire.com/news/24711/obama-state-dept-made-deal-hillary-allowing-ryan-saavedra#exit-modal
=======================================
NOTE WELL--Hillary listed the removed items itemized above.....making it totally unverifiable.
How evil do you have to be to deliberately and collectively set out to destroy lives the way they do
They know whats coming
After this horror show, I'm hoping that Mr. Barr adjusts his policy of being imminently-reasonable and responsive to the rats' ridiculous demands, and becomes a strictly by-the-book hard-ass.
Follow the law and give them no quarter or wiggle room.
PERFECT
“”I suppose, means that 20 years from now we’ll be reading about what a straight-arrow Barr was compared to whomever Democrats are savaging at that point).””
Nope. Because there is nowhere to go from here. We don’t have another 20 yrs of backing up. We are at the line.
“CRIST: Reports have emerged recently, General, that members of the special counsel’s team are frustrated at some level with the limited information included in your March 24th letter . . . that it does not adequately or accurately necessarily portray the report’s findings. Do you know what they’re referencing with that?
BARR: No, I don’t. I think — I think . . . I suspect that they probably wanted more put out..”
The most important word in the question is the word “know”. For Barr to say he “knows” what unnamed people, referenced in a news article, are “frustrated” about, would mean that 1) he knows the new article is true - so he would have to assume that anything reported in the New York Times is TRUE LOL OMG - and then 2) he would have to know more about the substance of what these people are “frustrated” about than is given in the article. The question mentions 3 things, “limited information”, “adequately” and “accurately”. So which part of the 3 part question was Barr answering? Barr said he suspected the “limited information” was what they were frustrated about, but how could he say he “knows” that “they” (the people who are not named) are “frustrated” about “adequacy” of his letter if he himself believes the letter was “adequate”? If someone says they are frustrated because I am wearing green shoes, but I’m not wearing green shoes, do I really “know” what they are frustrated about if they simply say the are frustrated by my green shoes? They are frustrated by nothing, so I would say I don’t know what they are frustrated about. This question also puts Barr in the position where he is being asked to say he “knows” what someone else is thinking - based on a newspaper article. The article might be false or misleading. Who is Mueller’s “team”? Chris Cuomo is part of Mueller’s “team” in a sense. Are the 40 FBI agents part of the “team” or just the 19 lawyers? What if the article is false? Or what if the “team” members said they were frustrated with the “adequacy” of Barr’s letter, but in reality they were frustrated because they spent 2 year trying to prove something (collusion) and failed? How is Barr supposed to “know” what they really think?
For Pelosi to grasp at this pathetic attempt to allege perjury shows the Dems have very serious problems.
Very few political writers have been on the side of truth during the time of the attempted coup. Andy McCarthy is one of the best.
Hard to lie when one also provides the documents he quoted from....
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.