Appeals Court Revives Clinton Email Server Suits

An appeals court reversed a lower court’s ruling on Tuesday saying two U.S. government agencies did not do enough to recover emails pertaining to the investigation involving former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server when she served as secretary of state. The three-judge panel — comprised of Judges Stephen Williams, Brett Kavanaugh and Robert Wilkins — ruled that the lower court judge should not have thrown out the cases as moot after the State Department received thousands of emails from the FBI and Clinton. Williams of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said Tuesday the State Department and the National Archives should have done more than just requesting the FBI and Clinton to hand over copies of the emails.

“Even though those efforts bore some fruit, the Department has not explained why shaking the tree harder — e.g., by following the statutory mandate to seek action by the Attorney General — might not bear more still. It is therefore abundantly clear that, in terms of assuring government recovery of emails, appellants have not ‘been given everything [they] asked for,’” Williams wrote. “Absent a showing that the requested enforcement action could not shake loose a few more emails, the case is not moot.”

Americans DEMAND John Podesta be placed under intense scrutiny.
L/E needs to (a) uncover Podesta's hidden agenda, and, (b) determine exactly who is directing Podesta's activities.

Podesta has been close to power for years, effortlessly getting numerous top level, high-powered govt jobs, and he even controls the media.

Podesta got rich trading on insider info, and is paid off for his powerful connections. Podesta received valuable stocks in a Russian-connected energy company.The Saudi Royal Court paid Podesta's PR Group $200,000 for a month-long project to provide “public relations services”. (verified to date).

People paying large sums of money expected payback if Hillary got elected. Powerful money interests could be directing Podesta to overturn the election to insure they get payback.

<><> Podesta chaired Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

<><> Podesta is 2016 Hillary Clinton's campaign Chair.

<><> Podesta was President Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff 1998-2001.

<><> Podesta owns the Podesta Group with his brother Tony, a major lobbying firm (has a website).

<><> Podesta Chairs the Center for American Progress, his Washington DC-based think tank.

<><> Podesta headed Obama’s transition team in fall 2008.

<><> Podesta once served as Counselor to Obama.

<><> Podesta once worked at Hillary's State Dept.

<><> Podesta serves as the Clinton Foundation decision-maker.

<><> Podesta had been tapped for Hillary's COS, if elected.

<><> Podesta founded Progressive Media w/ CNN, HuffPo, MediaMatters, WaPo, Dem SPAC’s, etc.

================================================

Podesta as Clinton's COS.

Podesta as Counsellor to Obama.

Podesta as Hillary's campaign manager

Chaffetz Grills Comey: 'You've Set a Dangerous Precedent'
by Cortney O'Brien, townhall.com / Jul 07, 2016

Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) opened Thursday’s House Oversight Committee hearing on the FBI’s decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton by noting he has "great admiration" for the FBI. Yet, he and his colleagues are “mystified” by FBI Director James Comey’s laying out the damning fact pattern about Clinton’s use of a private email server, yet opting not to pursue criminal charges.

“The average Joe, if they had done what you laid out in your statement, they’d be in handcuffs,” Chaffetz said. "You've set a dangerous precedent."

It seems an awful lot like a double standard, the chairman noted.

Hillary Clinton laid out this mess, made a very conscious decision to set up a system to bypass the protocol of the State Department, Chaffetz continued. Her actions put American lives at jeopardy, yet there doesn’t seem to be any consequence waiting for her.

“I have defended your integrity, but I am mystified and confused,” Chaffetz said to Comey.

Comey began his opening statement by saying he was “proud” of the work the FBI did in its investigation and welcomed the panel’s questions. “I’m a big fan of transparency.”

There was no evidence to suggest Clinton was guilty of gross negligence, he explained.

“That’s just the way it is,” he said. "No reasonable prosecutor" would pursue criminal charges.

Prompted by Rep. Elijah Cummings’ (D-MD) line of questioning, Comey contrasted Clinton’s case with that of David Petraeus’s, who Comey said acted deliberately in his abuse of classified information. Unlike Clinton, Comey said Petraeus's act was a clear obstruction of justice that justified prosecution.

Chaffetz also asked Comey about Clinton’s private server in her basement in her New York home. Was it an unauthorized or an authorized location? he wondered.

It was an “unauthorized location for the transmitting of classified information,” Comey answered.

Would someone with Clinton’s record ever be given a security clearance from the FBI? Chaffetz later asked. Comey refused to directly answer, but noted it was certainly be a serious consideration.

“It would be an important consideration in a suitability determination.”

Comey also acknowledged that if someone in the FBI had done what Clinton did with her emails, they would face a range of discipline, such as termination or loss of clearance.

Panelist Rep. Trey Gowdy (S-SC) agreed with Chaffetz's assessment that the FBI had set a dangerous precedent in its investigation, fearing that the FBI's decision will do nothing to prevent future secretaries of state from using the same email scheme.

Update: Chaffetz let Comey know that he will be sending the FBI a congressional referral to investigate whether Clinton lied under oath.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2016/07/07/comey-hearing-n2189236

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.