[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Corrupt Government Title: Judicial Watch: Docs Reveal FBI Cover Up of ‘Chart’ of Potential Violations of Law by Hillary Clinton Ill make sure Andy tells Mike to keep these in his pocket (Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today it received 186 pages of records from the Department of Justice that include emails documenting an evident cover up of a chart of potential violations of law by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Judicial Watch obtained the records through a January 2018 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the DOJ failed respond to a December 4, 2017 FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00154)). Judicial Watch is seeking all communications between FBI official Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page. The newly obtained emails came in response to a May 21 order by U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton to the FBI to begin processing 13,000 pages of records exchanged exclusively between Strzok and Page between February 1, 2015, and December 2017. The FBI may not complete review and production of all the Strzok-Page communications until at least 2020. [Redacted] writes: I am still working on an additional page for these TPs that consist of a chart of the statutory violations considered during the investigation, and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute, hopefully in non-lawyer friendly terms
Strzok forwards to Page, Jonathan Moffa and others: I have redlined some points. Broadly, I have some concerns about asking some our [sic] senior field folks to get into the business of briefing this case, particularly when we have the Ds [Comeys] statement as a kind of stand alone document. In my opinion, theres too much nuance, detail, and potential for missteps. But I get they may likely be asked for comment. [Redacted] writes to Strzok, Page and others: The DD [Andrew McCabe] will need to approve these before they are pushed out to anyone. At the end of last week, he wasnt inclined to send them to anyone. But, its great to have them on the shelf in case theyre needed. [Redacted] writes to Strzok and Page: Im really not sure why they continued working on these [talking points]. In the morning, Ill make sure Andy [McCabe] tells Mike [Kortan] to keep these in his pocket. I guess Andy just didnt ever have a moment to turn these off with Mike like he said he would. Page replies: Yes, agree that this is not a good idea. Neither these talking points nor the chart of potential violations committed by Clinton and her associates have been released. Rybicki writes: By NLT [no later than] next Monday, the Director would like to see a list of all cases charged in the last 20 years where the gravamen of the charge was mishandling classified information. It should be in chart form with: (1) case name, (2) a short summary for content (3) charges brought, and (4) charge of conviction. If need be, we can get it from NSD [National Security Division] and let them know that the Director asked for this personally. Please let me know who can take the lead on this. Thanks! Jim Page forwards to Strzok: FYSA [For your situational awareness] Strzok replies to Page: Ill take the lead, of course sounds like an espionage section question
Or do you think OGC [Office of the General Counsel] should? And the more reason for us to get feedback to Rybicki, as we all identified this as an issue/question over a week ago. Page replies: I was going to reply to Jim [Rybicki] and tell him I can talked [sic] to you about this already. Do you want me to? A Wilkinson Walsh attorney, emails [Redacted] FBI National Security Division Officials: We wanted to follow up on our conversation from a few days ago. We would like to schedule a time to speak with both you and [Redacted] early next week. Is there a time on Monday or Tuesday that could work on your end? [Redacted] FBI National Security Division official emails: See below. I am flexible on Monday and Tuesday. [Redacted] can chime in with her availability. It is my understanding that Toscas [George Toscas, who helped lead Midyear Exam] may have called over to Jim or Trisha [former Principal Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson] regarding some high-level participation for at least the first few such calls. I am happy to discuss further but wanted to send you this so you could raise within the OGC [Office of the General Counsel] and give me a sense of scheduling options. I am around if you want to talk. *** [Redacted] FBI National Security Division official writes: In the meantime, Ill tell Hal that we will certainly schedule a call and will get back to him as to timing. Since he knows Beth [Wilkinson] personally, it could be useful to have Jim on the phone if she is going to be haranguing us re: the laptops. [Redacted] FBI Office of the General Counsel writes: More
I guess this is [Redacteds] rationale for why we need to have the GC on the call to discuss the fact that we will be following all of our legal obligations and FBI policies/procedures with regard to the disposition of the materials in this case. Strzok writes: You are perfectly competent to speak to the legal obligations and FBI policy/procedures. We should NOT be treating opposing counsel this way. We would not in any other case. [Redacted] NSD official responds: Would like to see what you have on your agenda so we could see what we might want to add on our end. I will mention to [Redacted]. Also interested in understanding FBI OGCs analysis of the privilege and ethics issues we are facing. Strzok forwards to Page: Pretty nonresponsive.
Page responds: Why provide them an agenda? I wouldnt do that until you have a sense of how Andy [McCabe] wants to go. So no. Well talk about what were going to talk about and then they can talk about what they want to talk about. Also, seriously Pete. F him. OGC needs to provide an analysis? We havent done one. But they seem to be categorical that its just impossible, Id just like to know why. And now Im angry before bed again.? Total indulgence, theres a TV in here. Heres hoping I can find something to sufficiently melt my brain??? Strzok replies: Because I want to make this productive! Why NOT provide them an agenda!?!? We all talk about what we want to talk about and thats a waste of time. They havent done one either (legal analysis) Assume noble intent. How do we maximize this use of time? Page writes: Im ignoring all this and going to bed. Strzok and Page were discussing a meeting that the Justice Department and FBI were about to have concerning, among other things, privilege and ethics issues we are facing. Strzok writes: Were looking into it and will get back to you this afternoon; the answer may require some tweaking, the question is whether this is the forum to do it. The email is addressed to FBI intelligence analyst Moffa; Rybicki; Michael Kortan, FBI assistant director for public affairs, now retired; Lisa Page and others. Strzoks suggested press response is fully redacted, but included is his deferral to the 7th floor as to whether to release to this reporter or in another manner. When asked should we provide any additional information to FactCheck.org or would any updates more appropriately be give [sic] directly to Congress? Strzok defers to Jim/Lisa [Page] and [Redacted]. Judicial Watch caught the FBI in another cover-up to protect Hillary Clinton, stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. These records show that the FBI is hiding a chart detailing possible violations of law by Hillary Clinton and the supposed reasons she was not prosecuted. Judicial Watch recently released 215 pages of records from the DOJ revealing former FBI General Counsel James Baker discussed the investigation of Clinton-related emails on Anthony Weiners laptop with Clintons lawyer, David Kendall. Baker then forwarded the conversation to his FBI colleagues. The documents also further describe a previously reported quid pro quo from the Obama State Department offering the FBI more legal attaché positions if it would downgrade a redaction in an email found during the Hillary Clinton email investigation from classified to something else. ### Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread |
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|