Posted on 07/29/2019 7:58:31 PM PDT by bitt
The ACLJ has just obtained previously unreleased documents related to the Clinton investigation and immunity agreements given to top Clinton aids. These agreements reveal that James Comey’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Loretta Lynch’s Department of Justice (DOJ) granted immunity to Hillary Clinton’s aids and lawyers, Cheryl Mills and Heather Samuelson, from prosecution for anything found on their laptops violating multiple felony criminal statutes governing the mishandling of classified information and/or the removal or destruction of records, including Espionage Act provisions. Further, the DOJ and FBI also agreed to evade the statutory requirements of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by purporting to deem the contents of the laptops as not under DOJ or FBI “custody or control.”
These laptops were critical to any meaningful investigation of Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified emails and records. According to the DOJ Inspector General, who identified these as the “culling laptops,” “[a]ll 62,320 emails pulled from the Clinton servers were stored at one time on these laptops.” Having taken control of these laptops, agreeing to severely limit its searches, agreeing to unlawfully shield the laptops from FOIA, then agreeing to dispose of the laptops, it appears the Comey FBI and Lynch DOJ did everything in their power to protect Clinton’s senior aids and lawyers from both criminal liability and public scrutiny.
While these immunity agreements and related news have been publicly discussed to some extent, the ACLJ has now obtained the actual documents so the public may see and judge them accordingly.
Background
At the ACLJ we have been busy litigating multiple FOIA lawsuits against the Deep State and Obama-era holdovers in various agencies in Washington, D.C., including the DOJ and FBI.
(Excerpt) Read more at aclj.org ...
p
Must be nice to have friends in high places.
L
What possible justification could there be for granting immunity and getting nothing in return?
How long till Nadler starts screaming his demands for every piece of paper that was generated during the decision-making process that preceeded this document release?
I’ve just had friends that were high :)
“What possible justification could there be for granting immunity and getting nothing in return?”
You already know the answer. We are holding on to America by a thread at this point. The radical left is a metastatic cancer, and eradicating it from the body politic will take a very courageous and difficult fight.
“What possible justification could there be for granting immunity and getting nothing in return?”
They’re cut outs.
L
I’m sure there is a racist angle yet to play out here...
Remember, Hillary! was going to win.
These agreements were never going to see the light of day, the FOIA requests would have been flipped off, and the Media which has been attacking Trump 24/7/365 for the last three years would have been cleaning the stool from the Queen of America's posterior while burying any inquiries into this reeking vomitorium.
Equal justice under the law! ROTFLMAO!!
Jordan Sekulow son of Jay
IOW, the DOJ/FBI were not conducting an investigation but were themselves part of a criminal conspiracy with Clinton to destroy evidence.
Okay, can these be undone or charges beyond there scope made? So many people in Obama administration got away with crimes that would put most of us in jail. How do we see justice done?
Americans live in a corrupt banana republic.
Those that are wise will keep that in mind, act accordingly, and keep their powder dry.
Uhh ... ACLJ ... Maybe if you spelled something as simple as “aides” correctly, more people would take you seriously.
Criminals cannot give each other immunity to commit crimes.
... with low morals / ethics....
Assuming you aren’t Arkancided you’re set.
Coverup.
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.