FBI says lack of public interest in Hillary emails justifies withholding documents
Hillary Clinton’s case isn’t interesting enough to the public to justify releasing the FBI’s files on her, the bureau said this week in rejecting an open-records request by a lawyer seeking to have the former secretary of state punished for perjury.
Ty Clevenger, the lawyer, has been trying to get Mrs. Clinton and her personal lawyers disbarred for their handling of her official emails during her time as secretary of state. He’s met with resistance among lawyers, and now his request for information from the FBI’s files has been shot down.
“You have not sufficiently demonstrated that the public’s interest in disclosure outweighs personal privacy interests of the subject,” FBI records management section chief David M. Hardy told Mr. Clevenger in a letter Monday. More here
Above the law and always will be. Now she is behind the total destruction of free speech. Anything she can do to hurt America she will do in my opinion.
The "Federal Bureau of Matter" has lost all its credibility as a true and honest top law enforcement agency. The people certainly would like to know but that is their way of saying no, we are going to cover up her crimes.
Ridiculous! Reason enough to clean house at the FBI! So if I commit a crime....no matter what it entails....and I can get enough signatures of disinterested people....they would let me off? I don't think so!
One for "we, the people" (the strict, you-go-to-prison, and give us all your money before you leave type of law enforcement) and there is the one SHE falls under, which is the very lenient, too-big-to-prosecute and too rich to go to prison type where there is little to no fear of the law. And you lemmings cannot stop cheering this criminal. And her legion of cheerleaders.
Over one-half of voters last November have a deep and continuing interest in all aspects of the Clinton e-mail quagmire.
Part of draining the swamp requires a genuine look at what happened (sic) and aggressive pursuit of the truth.
If it entails arrest, trial and conviction of those involved, so be it. They are credentialed; many are lawyers and knew full well what they were about.
An honest and accurate answer is need by the beginning of the next fiscal year on October 1, 2017.
I don't think the law requires "public interest" for compliance. The request itself is public interest. A DJT judge will put the FBI in its place. Apparently the Clinton insiders are still trying to call the FBI shots.
She made Americans Loose any Respect they had for the so called Laws in America....since Nothing Done to Her !!!! Now we all can clearly see ....There IS a Double Standard !! Nothing for COMEY either after admitting on TV he LEAKED !! Nothing for former Atty Gen Lynch either NOTHING !!!
12:10 pm - You have no clue what you are talking about. The only part of Maryland that was not Red was the gerrymandering area in Baltimore that voted Democrats complements of O'Malley. Martin O'Malley Admits To Gerrymandering In Deposition Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley admitted that he, along with other Maryland Democrats, gerrymandered the state’s 6th district to oust long-time Republican incumbent Rep. Roscoe Bartlett in 2012, the Baltimore Sun reported.
A lawsuit filed in 2013 alleged gerrymandering has been moving through Maryland’s courts, forcing Democrats to talk about what the Baltimore Sun says many already suspected: Democratic redistricting was unconstitutional. Following the 2010 census, Democrats expanded Bartlett’s 6th district into the heavily-Democratic Montgomery and Frederick counties.
“That was my hope,” O’Malley told attorneys in his deposition. “It was my intent to create … a district where the people would be more likely to elect a Democrat than a Republican.”
Above the law and always will be. Now she is behind the total destruction of free speech. Anything she can do to hurt America she will do in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteThe "Federal Bureau of Matter" has lost all its credibility as a true and honest top law enforcement agency. The people certainly would like to know but that is their way of saying no, we are going to cover up her crimes.
ReplyDeleteThey're only asking the folks that wanted her to win - and voted for her.
ReplyDeleteThe rest of us want her locked up - with Holder, Lynch, and the Turd-in-Chief himself!
J Edgar just rolled over in his grave !
ReplyDeleteWe, the public, are interested. 'Nuf said.
ReplyDeleteNOT!
ReplyDeleteRidiculous! Reason enough to clean house at the FBI! So if I commit a crime....no matter what it entails....and I can get enough signatures of disinterested people....they would let me off? I don't think so!
ReplyDeleteTwo Sets of Laws.
ReplyDeleteOne for "we, the people" (the strict, you-go-to-prison, and give us all your money before you leave type of law enforcement) and there is the one SHE falls under, which is the very lenient, too-big-to-prosecute and too rich to go to prison type where there is little to no fear of the law.
And you lemmings cannot stop cheering this criminal. And her legion of cheerleaders.
You voted for her just like the rest of YOUR state.
DeleteLet's have a survey to see how many are interested in Hillary's email contents.
ReplyDeleteShe must have so much dirt on republicans they are afraid to go after her.
ReplyDeleteSociety as a whole says there is a "lack of public interest in Hillary."
ReplyDeleteAmazing how this dead horse keeps breathing!
12:22 you're full of crap
ReplyDeleteSo we have our own interest here in a cover up within our own boarders, yet we are supposed to persecute Trump for Russia?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteDear FBM,
Over one-half of voters last November have a deep and continuing interest in all aspects of the Clinton e-mail quagmire.
Part of draining the swamp requires a genuine look at what happened (sic) and aggressive pursuit of the truth.
If it entails arrest, trial and conviction of those involved, so be it. They are credentialed; many are lawyers and knew full well what they were about.
An honest and accurate answer is need by the beginning of the next fiscal year on October 1, 2017.
Sincerely,
The Deplorables
cc: J. Sessions
This photo reminds me of what Candidate Trump said about the other hack. "Look at that face".
ReplyDeleteShe already DESTROYED All the important ones Before the
ReplyDeleteElection (She Lost) ......everyone knows that !!!!
She got Rid of all the Dirt on her by now ....none Left !
What was on Weener's computer and his wife ?? Look at that
ReplyDeleteI don't think the law requires "public interest" for compliance. The request itself is public interest. A DJT judge will put the FBI in its place. Apparently the Clinton insiders are still trying to call the FBI shots.
ReplyDeleteShe is so SMUG and has No care about anyone but Herself !!!
ReplyDeleteShe made Americans Loose any Respect they had for the so
ReplyDeletecalled Laws in America....since Nothing Done to Her !!!!
Now we all can clearly see ....There IS a Double Standard !!
Nothing for COMEY either after admitting on TV he LEAKED !!
Nothing for former Atty Gen Lynch either NOTHING !!!
Until she runs for any office again it will not be an issue, but we won't forget!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDelete12:10 pm - You have no clue what you are talking about. The only part of Maryland that was not Red was the gerrymandering area in Baltimore that voted Democrats complements of O'Malley. Martin O'Malley Admits To Gerrymandering In Deposition
ReplyDeleteFormer Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley admitted that he, along with other Maryland Democrats, gerrymandered the state’s 6th district to oust long-time Republican incumbent Rep. Roscoe Bartlett in 2012, the Baltimore Sun reported.
A lawsuit filed in 2013 alleged gerrymandering has been moving through Maryland’s courts, forcing Democrats to talk about what the Baltimore Sun says many already suspected: Democratic redistricting was unconstitutional. Following the 2010 census, Democrats expanded Bartlett’s 6th district into the heavily-Democratic Montgomery and Frederick counties.
“That was my hope,” O’Malley told attorneys in his deposition. “It was my intent to create … a district where the people would be more likely to elect a Democrat than a Republican.”
Another lie by another liberal.
ReplyDelete