Posted on 03/09/2015 5:54:23 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross
A journalist informed me this morning that a source close to Congressman Trey Gowdy (R., S.C.) and the Houses select committee on the Benghazi terrorist attack, which Mr. Gowdy chairs, has responded to points raised in my weekend column.
In the column, I expressed surprise and disappointment that, while Chairman Gowdy by his own account learned about Secretary of State Clintons use of private email over six months ago, the committee took no meaningful responsive action: It did not reveal that alarming information publicly, issue subpoenas for those emails, or issue preservation letters to the relevant telecommunication service providers to retain records.
The source close to Gowdy and the committee reports that the State Department only recently told the committee that Secretary Clinton exclusively used personal email. The source says that once the committee learned that State never had her emails to begin with, the circumstances changed hence the subpoena directly to her. The source adds that this is why Chairman Gowdy, in a Sunday appearance on Face the Nation, said hes lost confidence in the State Department.
This is what I told the journalist who asked for my reaction:
Chairman Gowdy says he is running the committee like a prosecutor conducting a meticulous investigation. When a prosecutor learns that a subject of his investigation is using private email, he issues a subpoena forthwith. From the investigators standpoint, whether the use of private email is occasional or exclusive does not affect his responsibility his job is to obtain the evidence.Im relieved to hear that Chairman Gowdy has lost confidence in the State Department, but that begs the question why he had confidence in the first place. State has a history of withholding and misrepresenting information about Benghazi. In fact, [as I noted in my column,] the week Chairman Gowdy held his first Benghazi hearing, a witness [whom the committee did not call at the hearing] came forward to say that hed seen Secretary Clintons top aides removing documents from what was supposed to be disclosed to Clintons hand-picked Accountability Review Board.
So if the chairman continued to have confidence in the State Departments transparency in this particular matter, that is baffling. But that is almost beside the point. The State Department is a subject of the investigation that Mr. Gowdy says he is conducting like a meticulous prosecutor. A prosecutor does not rely on the good graces of the subjects of his investigation to produce evidence. He uses his subpoena power.
McCarthy for AG!
Ms. Lindsay and her BF John also involved in Benghazi and prevailed on Gowdey to confine investigation to mere TV drama...?
The use of the private email was not a “warning light” when first know, Mr. McCarthy. The presence of ms. hitlery’s own web server in her home with the capability of erasing any and all emails.... permanently... WAS a warning buzzer and reason for a subpoena.
The server of last resort is the NSA which has ALL of hitlery’s emails... whether she erased them or not at her server. And this is where this case may have to go.
Clintons are complete utter facile liars and grifters— all of them.
Photo: Reuters
GOWDY: It strains credibility to believe that if youre on your way to Libya to discuss US Libyan foreign policy, that theres not a single document turned over to Congress."
Gowdy has requested emails related to Libya, before, during, and after, the attack that killed four Americans.
=================================================
INCONVENIENT FACTOID---Hillary was Secy of State for 1460 days.....and " supposedly" turned over 55,000 pages...
But, but........ Marie Harf said that was a "big number."
Who you gonna believe? A bodacious blonde bimbo? Or the cold, hard facts?
I second the motion!
Well I’m glad that McCarthy’s column got the attention of Gowdy. Fairly weak response at this point though. And via a journalist?
Just so we remember, Gowdy’s committee includes
Elijah Cummings, Maryland, Ranking Member
Adam Smith, Washington
Adam Schiff, California
Linda Sánchez, California
Tammy Duckworth, Illinois
Gowdy is NOT a prosecutor. He knows almost nothing that isn’t known by the Dem members, and if the Dem members know it, so does Hillary and Obama.
When was the last time A DEMOCRAT went to jail based on the results of a Congressional investigation?? What did Daryl Issa accomplish?? All the hand waving and pontificating has just resulted in the overpowering smell of fish....
AND NO RESULTS FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, in spite of these Congressional investigative clowns being buried in criminals.
Much as I like McCarthy, I think he’s a little out in left field on this one. Almost everyone in the world has a private email account, and can rent a personal domain name for ten bucks a year. I have half a dozen (all but one of which I hardly ever use). I also have no significant, if any, business emails on my private accounts. The key issue here is that Hillary had her own SERVER, and had NO State Department account. The key to me is when did Gowdy find out this information, not when did he find out Hillary had a private email address.
Adam Schiff, California? I thought he was the NY DA in Law and Order...:)
The reason it got Gowdy’s attention is that it was McCarthy who penned it. The great thing about McCarthy being on the trail is that it might force, or at least pressure, Gowdy to go further in this thing than Boehner / Graham, etc, have instructed him to.
“Hillary was Secy of State for 1460 days.....and “ supposedly” turned over 55,000 pages...”
And that 55k pages only contained 300 emails.
Does anyone believe she only sent/received 1 email a week?
thanks for the clarification
Yes. Though Gowdy is not now a prosecutor, he clearly harbors the conceit that he still has prosecutorial chops. That McCarthy is casting an unimpressed eye upon his efforts can only work to up Gowdy's game - a good thing.
Not sure what you mean by that. His claim to fame prior to Congress was as a Fed prosecutor. He was chosen for this seat precisely because of that experience. He questions very much like a prosecutor, and harkens back to that in his questioning as well. Can you clarify?
He is the Chairman of a bipartisan committee. His job is to write a report, not get indictments. There are a couple Democrats on that committee that have been prosecutors too.
Hearings like these usually involve the witness being given the questions ahead of time and writing answers to them ahead of time, mostly not even under oath. Anyone know if that’s the case here?
Gowdy needs to be upfront about that instead of pretending like he’s doing something when the boss (media and public) look in.
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.