Posted on 07/02/2016 5:13:10 AM PDT by detective
The fallout from Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s private, off-the-record meeting with ex-President Bill Clinton in an airplane at the Phoenix airport is expanding, with Washington watchdog Judicial Watch now asking the Department of Justice inspector general to investigate.
“Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s meeting with Bill Clinton severely undermined the already low public confidence in her agency’s criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “In addition to this IG investigation, Judicial Watch has already sent Freedom of Information Act requests about this scandalous meeting.”
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Judicial Watch has sent a FOI about the Bill Clinton Lynch meeting and has demanded that the DOJ investigate and determine what was said at the meeting. Bill Clinton and Lynch may be subpoenaed to testify under oath about what was really said at the meeting.
This will end up in the same round file as everything else.
I can’t recall which Freeper suggested it but I wonder if Bill didn’t somehow plan this out in an attempt to discredit her and deflect heat from Mrs. Bill.
Yes, but it will be Judicial Watch’s round file, which leaks with discriminating purpose.
The Clintons are a disease which has no cure once you contract them. They infect everyone they enter into an agreement with. It’s eventually death or jail if you try to shed the disease.
From what I've read, it was Clinton who ambushed Lynch.
Yes, that’s what I suggested.
Deflect?
Did Lynch commit suicide? political suicide?
Is she just as dead as Vince?
Clintons: scandal, cover deflect, deny, lather, rinse, repeat.
“Snakes on a Plane.”
—NY Post.
They all practice Taqiyya. There is no telling the truth among the ruling elite.
I understood you, I should have worded my reply better.
If you feel are injured by this incident, you may be able to sue under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
Historically, under the doctrine of “sovereign immunity,” you were not permitted to sue the king. Sovereign immunity has carried over to modern times in the form of a general rule that you cannot sue the government — unless the government says you can.
Fortunately, the Federal Tort Claims Act (”FTCA”) allows certain kinds of lawsuits against federal employees who are acting within the scope of their employment. And not doing their job to protect the US from high crimes and misdemeaners is one of them,
If you believe you may have a claim for negligence (careless conduct, or other wrongful or “tortious” conduct) against a federal agency or employee, you must first determine whether you can sue the federal government under the FTCA.
Although the limitations and exceptions are too numerous to review here, here are some general guidelines regarding the limitations on FTCA claims:
• Only federal employees can be sued under the FTCA, not independent contractors hired by the federal government (unless they are treated like employees).
• The negligent or wrongful conduct must have been done within the scope of the defendant’s employment.
• In general, only claims of negligence — as opposed to intentional misconduct — are allowed (though some claims for intentional misconduct can be brought against certain federal law enforcement officers).
• The claim must be based on — and permitted by — the law of the state in which the misconduct occurred.
Despite these and numerous other limitations on FTCA lawsuits, the federal government still pays out millions of dollars each year to compensate FTCA claims. Maybe it will get someone’s attention. And I’ll bet I can find at least one hundred lawyers and a number of organizations that would like to get a piece of Uncle Sugar. (hat tip FReeper redwood)
Has any of JW’s investigations led to anything other than headlines?
At least the National Enquirer sells papers.
Our system has been totally corrupted by allowing the Kenyanesian Usurpation.
When we refused to uphold the natural born citizen clause we forfeited everything.
Why is what Lynch is doing such a surprize ? Why is she even there ? She was up front with the Senate before she was confirmed and told them she would support Obama’s amnesty plan even after it was not being supported by SCOTUS ruling ? Why was she confirmed ?
Has any of JW’s investigations led to anything other than headlines?
****************
I sometimes wonder if Larry Klayman ever thinks about his
decision to leave JW for his failed Senate run.
Widely reminiscent of my hearings before the Senate committee when Pantaglia's brother from Sicily was walked into the hearing chamber. He didn't say anything but Frank (AG Lynch) got the message.
Don Corleone AKA The GODFATHER
1. Lynch kept her husband with her. Did she also have access to all recording device?
2. Who gave the “order” to FBI to not allow any photography? Since this was not at the level of national security LEO should NOT have followed through Misuse of security detail
This whole Lynch/Clinton matter was probably a ploy to
take the spotlight off Hitler-y. Then when the FBI cuts
Hitler-y loose and deemed “innocent”, Hitler-y will
holler “SEE?! Harrassing a WOMAN again!” HITLER-Y fully
intends being President, even if the Almighty does not
like it. Bill promised!
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.