Posted on 11/10/2018 6:43:59 AM PST by lyby
Sessions set four goals for his tenure: to reduce the rates of murder, violent crime generally, opioid prescription fraud and drug overdose deaths. He achieved all four... just as impressive has been the refocusing of the department’s efforts under Sessions’s leadership to protect the liberties of Americans.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
All the people on here praising Sessions are typical of why the Republican party was on the brink of collapse before Trump ran for President. While the democrats and deep state we’re aggressively implementing strategies to control every aspect of the government, Republicans were just trying to not offend anyone. The deep state is still largely intact. Sessions did nothing for two years, except for the occasional verbal endorsement of their attacks.
"I was waiting for a secure fax that could give me the whole picture. But oftentimes there’s a lot of information that isn’t at all classified. So whatever information can be appropriately transmitted unclassified often was — that’s true for every agency in the government and everybody that does business with the government"
Anyone who knows anything about classified information knows you can't just pick some facts from a classified document and declare them unclassified, on the fly. There's a process for declassifying or downgrading unless the facts being sent unclassified are a few trivialities that anyone can tell are unclassified. She instructed her underlings to bend the rules. She will never be prosecuted for that. Beyond that there is the theory she used an insecure server to funnel classified information to adversaries.
I have seen no prosecutable evidence but certainly the fact that some of our Chinese assets were killed and their transmissions could have been picked out by Chinese authorities. For example they could have planted specific different information with each suspect (could be essentially unclassified info) and see what shows up on the server. But that is speculative even though extremely serious.
Suspect that there is more to come.
So who clearly broke the law? I'll even help you out with a diagram: https://services.epoch.cloud/public-labs/files/spygate.jpg That diagram has a boatload of deep state plotters who tried (and are still trying) to take Trump down. Which one (you only have to pick one for now) broke the law, which law, and what evidence will you present?
The reason a mob was emboldened to go to Tucker Carlson’s home was because the Department of Justice has neglected to uphold the civil rights of the victims of antifa and BLM.
***************
IMHO, a direct product of the 0bama regime’s policies to divide and destroy our country.
“Sessions took office after the previous administration’s policies had undermined police morale, with the spreading “Ferguson effect”...
“For heaven’s sake folks, whose job is it to indict people who have clearly broken the law at the federal level?
There are probably at least a dozen people that are indictable, perhaps many more.
The man didn’t indict one person.
That was also his mandate.
What is more important than taking government criminals down?”
_________________________________________
Excellent point; worth repeating!!
If our elected officials continue to be allowed to commit blatant crimes and disregard the Constitution without ANY repercussions, it only gets worse. They seem to double it down every administration.
When you have rats destroying your property, you KILL the rats, you dont work with them.
Otherwise, they multiply and destroy even faster.
“I sense Swamp Critters.”
The alpha critters — attorneys.
Attorneys become judges. Attorneys become politicians. Attorneys become AGs. Attorneys are always litigating. Attorneys bury us with laws and legalese. Attorneys kill our liberties. Attorneys make everything cost more
and take longer. Attorneys rule pubic school boards.
I can hold no AG in high esteem.
Thank you to those who politely and graciously contributed to discussion of the commentary by former attorney generals in regard to Sessions’ accomplishments as ag. I had not heard or read anything positive pertaining to his tenure and wanted to share. Although the commentary appeared in today’s edition of our local newspaper, I searched for the original source.
To those of you who posted ugly comments seemingly directed to me personally, well, bless your hearts.
All you are proving is that you are clueless.
Hillary is not responsible for having a private server set up against the law, and having top secret government information sent to it on a regular basis, that information then hacked and disbursed globally?
She sent Huma Abadeen some of that top secret information to her laptop. A sitting Congressman had access to it.
No, I can’t think of anyone who did anything actionable. Can you?
Guess not.
"In 2011, a notice to all State employees was sent on Clinton's behalf, which recommended employees avoid conducting State business from personal e-mail accounts due to information security concerns. Clinton stated she did not recall this specific notice, and she did not recall receiving any guidance from State regarding email policies."
That's from the Hill. She also claims that her server was more secure than using a private email service like gmail. What exactly is actionable here? It is guidance, not a law. It was claimed to be more secure (even though it was not).
We are former attorneys general. We salute Jeff Sessions.
They all must have been as brain dead and incompetent as sessions. Birds of a feather.
Your claim that the handling of top secret information is only guidance (not a law), says a lot more than I need to say.
There are numerous criminal codes covering these matters.
Thanks.
Wow. Anyone that thinks Slepy Jeff did a good job are why we are now a joke of a country and a Banana Republic.
The stupidest move was to lose a Senate seat to fill a cabinet position. Sessions as AG was a complete zero.
Simple. Her underlings typed most of the emails, and even if they were transcribing from a terminal showing top secret emails (many were allowed to have secure and unsecure terminals side-by-side) they would certainly not type the top secret markings into the email they sent to Hillary. That makes them criminals, but like I said, they all got immunity. By the time she got the emails there were no more top secret markings, only a few Confidential markings ("C") that slipped through their revisions.
There was no law disallowing the use of her private server and private email for unclassified business, but she clearly violated policy. She also violated the law by using the same system for top secret information. But again, I ask you, where is the evidence? The State Dept went through the emails from the server and said some were top secret. Her reply was that was "after the fact' classification. She also had ample opportunity to delete classified emails including any marked as classified in the 30,000 or so that she claims were about "yoga" or the wedding of her daughter.
We all know that is BS, doesn't pass the sniff test. But prosecution requires evidence and evidence comes from investigation. Obama's FBI did no serious investigation and we can guess from the biases of the investigators that they probably destroyed evidence.
The rule of law requires investigations, evidence, indictments and trials. I would love to see her indicted today, but that would not be the rule of law.
Nobody knew that would happen. The stupidest move in that case was to have dated underage girls.
“He’s my former U.S. Senator too. He was terrible as Attorney General.”
He wasn’t terrible. He was walled off from the biggest criminal conspiracy against the Constitution in US history.
The final chapter is not yet written. People here are as hysterical as usual these days. I’m not sure I can tolerate all this batshit emoting much longer. It’s like DU from the other side.
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.