Update on reposted article from yesterday.
Another comment with useful information about the ramifications of the interview the FBI and DoJ conducted of Cheryl Mills.
Note: the claim of attorney client privilege cannot be made when the attorney and the client are co-conspirators.
4 • Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Bonicushead • 19 hours ago
Before each of the Benghazi investigations, State received notices and then subpoenas for all relevant info pertaining to the Secs communications for that time period. As part of answering to those, State asked Clinton, Mills and Uma if they had any material relating to that period, to which they answered "no." The investigation reached conclusion believing they had all reasonably attainable info.
After each investigation, by way of other related investigations, the panel would become aware of material relating to the period, that was available during the investigation but not handed over. That would render the investigation null and void, it's conclusions, while still available, were stricken from the record, causing a new investigation.
This act of asking for info...answering no...investigation concluding and then forcibly re-opening because of uncovered info repeated itself SEVEN times and at great expense to the tax payers.
Only upon the eighth and current investigation, after a news article revealed Hillary's private server, did a federal judge step in and demand that Clinton's top aids all appear under oath and threat of perjury did Hillary admit to still possessing 55,000 pages of the material that had been under subpoena since the very first investigation.
She then turned over the 55,000 pages, representing over 30,000 emails of state dept property. Not just each email, but each page, meaning all 55,000 pages are 55,000 individual felonies. Obviously most prosecutors would stipulate along with a defense attorney to count each email, reducing that number down to 30,000+ individual felonies.
Well, not so fast.
Make that 30,000+ individual crimes, comprising multiple felonies and at least one misdemeanor for EACH of the 30,000+ emails.
Still possessing the material after leaving state in most cases is a misdemeanor. Answering "no" to an official (at any level) inquiry is a lesser felony (class 6 or class 6 open end). Answering "no" with knowledge of an investigation is a very serious felony, even more so if responding "no" to a subpoena.
Hillary thinks that she escapes these more serious possibilities because it was the State dept under subpoena, NOT Clinton. Clinton was just a box to be checked by state as they made their way thru their own check list to cover all bases searching for the info.
That is why the very moment...after SEVEN investigations...the very moment a judge addressed her and her staff and explained subpoenas were coming with THEIR names on them, did Hillary all of a sudden come up with the 55,000 pages of material she lied to state about for 2yrs. Lying to state is not a serious felony...unless it can be shown she knew there was an investigation.
HELLO?! Is thing on? How could she NOT know about each Benghazi investigation when each carried the possibility of having her testify. Although she wasn't called to most of the time, the fact remains she was perfectly aware she could have been called to testify, and that is proof she knew of the investigation. Once it's established that she knew of the investigations, now it doesn't matter that she was not directly subpoenaed. Now all that matters is she answered "no."
How can the question about how this unfolded for 8 investigations, NOT be the first question needing to be answered to set the foundation for ALL follow up questions?
Before you can ask "why", you first must show that something happened, in this case, the refusal to turn over the questioned material.
Foundation is one of the most basic tenets of law, nothing can be introduced without it. By justice agreeing to make it off limits, that destroys any case going forward. It will take those with character within the FBI to leak this out.
Especially justice illegally allowing Mills or any other assistant to claim privilege, when they are co-conspirators.
