Jeff Sessions’ Letter Shows DOJ Followed Trump’s Demand To Investigate Hillary Clinton

Inquistr ^

[MNDude]

In a letter released to the public for the first time, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions has been found ordering U.S. Attorney for Utah John Huber to investigate Hillary Clinton, according to watchdog group American Oversight.

The watchdog got hold of the letter after filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation. The letter’s existence, which was written in November 2017, was denied a year later in response to American Oversight’s litigation. The Justice Department maintained that Sessions didn’t direct Huber in writing and that any order was passed verbally.

In a letter released to the public for the first time, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions has been found ordering U.S. Attorney for Utah John Huber to investigate Hillary Clinton, according to watchdog group American Oversight.

Since before the 2016 presidential elections, Donald Trump has repeatedly called for the DOJ to investigate Hillary Clinton. He often invoked the infamous “Lock her up” chant at rallies in front of his supporters — and continued his calls for prosecuting Clinton even after becoming president.

Austin Evers, American Oversight executive director, said the letter is proof that Sessions followed Trump’s arbitrary and “authoritarian” demands.

“‘Lock her up’ was wrong at campaign rallies, and it’s even worse coming from the Department of Justice. Even after this long, it’s still deeply shocking to see the black-and-white proof that Jeff Sessions caved to President Trump’s worst authoritarian impulses and ordered a wide-ranging investigation of his political opponents based on demands from Congress instead of the facts and the law.”

[philman_36]

Ponder this...do you have evidence that she wasn't arrested?
She could be out and about having been released on her own recognizance.
See? Two can play that game.

[philman_36]

Q originates from a chanporn site.

But nobody has to go to that site. Right?
There are other ways to see what is there, as you so obligingly showed.

Let's review you (sic) bulls*t:
I didn't write that so how is it my bulls*t?

[philman_36]

Why the bulls*t from Dear Leader?
Who is Dear Leader?

[Para-Ord.45]

LOL Let's review more Bullsh*t from you Q:

[Para-Ord.45]

Semantics. The last refuge of a zealot such as yourself.

[philman_36]

But nobody has to go to that site. Right? There are other ways to see what is there, as you so obligingly showed.

Do you visit a porn chan site?
You do.

You know what! Now that I'm thinking about it...you're a liar and A TROLL!

[philman_36]

Let's review more Bullsh*t from you Q:

I'm philman_36, not a letter from the alphabet.

[Para-Ord.45]

"I'm philman_36, not a letter from the alphabet. " Semantics. Last refuge of a zealot. Let's review the Q bulls*t:

[philman_36]

Semantics.
the meaning of a word, phrase, sentence, or text.

I'm asking you for clarification on the meaning of the semantic expression you used.

The last refuge of a zealot such as yourself.
It seems to me that you sought the zealot's refuge first.

[philman_36]

Let's review the Q bulls*t:

And?
Sounds to me like there was a contest going on.
One can never know the outcome of a contest
with 100% certainty.
Just ask Shrillary, she knows that for a fact...twice over!

[Para-Ord.45]

LOL With certainty Q predicted a red wave or a tsunami , not a loss.

[Para-Ord.45]

Let's Review more Q bulls*t:

[philman_36]

With certainty Q predicted a red wave or a tsunami , not a loss.
How odd. I see a question mark. What do you think that means?
UNcertainty, perhaps?

[Para-Ord.45]

LOL I'm sure Dear Q omitted to add the word "lose" to the option list. Let's review more Q Bullsh*T

[philman_36]

Let's Review more Q bulls*t:

Perhaps you simply don't have the requisite cognitive ability to understand it.
That doesn't mean that others don't have the ability to understand it.

That must suck for you.

Is that why you are filled with so much angst and call it "bulls*t"...because you can't understand it?

[Para-Ord.45]

Let's review more Q bulls*t:

[Para-Ord.45]

[philman_36]

I'm sure Dear Q omitted to add the word "lose" to the option list.
Perhaps you could go to 8chan yourself and ask if that is so.

Isn't it all anonymous over there?

I hate to tell you this, but you're doing more to promote this "anonymous conspiratorial nonsense" outside of the prescribed location of such things than anyone I've ever seen.

Aren't you afraid your replies will be found to be in violation of established protocol?

[philman_36]

AGAIN...Perhaps you simply don't have the requisite cognitive ability to understand it.
That doesn't mean that others don't have the ability to understand it.

[Para-Ord.45]

You Qtips were warned to stop infesting normal FR business and keep to yourselves. Let's review more Q bulls*t. Claim, Lynch was turning State`s evidence. Pure BS: