Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    ACLJ: DOJ Document Dump Shows Lynch-Clinton Tarmac Summit Planned, Media Coverup

    ACLJ: DOJ Document Dump Shows Lynch-Clinton Tarmac Summit Planned, Media Coverup

    “There is clear evidence that the main stream media was colluding with the DOJ to bury the story”

    When former President Bill Clinton met with then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch at an Arizona airport, the gross impropriety of the “tarmac summit” was immediately evident.  Clinton’s wife and 2016 Democrat presidential hopeful was then under FBI investigation for her server and email scandals.  The impropriety was pooh-poohed away by a defensive AG, a disinterested media, a complicit FBI, and the corrupt Clinton clan.

    The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) has released 413 pages of memos obtained from the DOJ that show the “tarmac summit” was planned and that the media was working with the Obama-Lynch DOJ to downplay and bury the entire incident.

    The ACLJ in their article entitled, “DOJ Document Dump to ACLJ on Clinton Lynch Meeting: Comey FBI Lied, Media Collusion, Spin, and Illegality,” reports:

    We have just obtained hundreds of pages in our ongoing investigation and federal lawsuit on former Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton while the Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI had an ongoing criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. The results are shocking.

    First, the Comey FBI lied to us. Last July, we sent FOIA requests to both the Comey FBI and the Lynch DOJ asking for any documents related to the Clinton Lynch plane meeting. The FBI, under the then directorship of James Comey, replied that “No records responsive to your request were located.”

    The documents we received today from the Department of Justice include several emails from the FBI to DOJ officials concerning the meeting.  One with the subject line “FLAG” was correspondence between FBI officials (Richard Quinn, FBI Media/Investigative Publicity, and Michael Kortan) and DOJ officials concerning “flag[ing] a story . . . about a casual, unscheduled meeting between former president Bill Clinton and the AG.” The DOJ official instructs the FBI to “let me know if you get any questions about this” and provides “[o]ur talkers [DOJ talking points] on this”. The talking points, however are redacted.

    Not only was Comey’s FBI less than forthcoming, but the emails reveal that Clinton’s and Lynch’s security details coordinated prior to the tarmac summit.

    http://media.aclj.org/pdf/FBI-Security-Lynch-Clinton.pdf

    The ACLJ continues:

    Another email to the FBI contains the subject line “security details coordinate between Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton?”

    On July 1, 2016 – just days before our FOIA request – a DOJ email chain under the subject line, “FBI just called,” indicates that the “FBI . . . is looking for guidance” in responding to media inquiries about news reports that the FBI had prevented the press from taking pictures of the Clinton Lynch meeting. The discussion then went off email to several phone calls (of which we are not able to obtain records). An hour later, Carolyn Pokomy of the Office of the Attorney General stated, “I will let Rybicki know.” Jim Rybicki was the Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor to FBI Director Jim Comey. The information that was to be provided to Rybicki is redacted.

    Also of note several of the documents contain redactions that are requested “per FBI.”

    It is clear that there were multiple records within the FBI responsive to our request and that discussions regarding the surreptitious meeting between then AG Lynch and the husband of the subject of an ongoing FBI criminal investigation reached the highest levels of the FBI.

    . . . . On July 1, 2016 – just days before our FOIA request – a DOJ email chain under the subject line, “FBI just called,” indicates that the “FBI . . . is looking for guidance” in responding to media inquiries about news reports that the FBI had prevented the press from taking pictures of the Clinton Lynch meeting.

    When efforts by Comey’s FBI to keep the tarmac summit a secret failed, the emails reveal that both the Obama-Lynch DOJ and the mainstream media leapt into spin mode to try to downplay and bury the grossly improper meeting.

    http://media.aclj.org/pdf/Clinton-Lynch-FBI-Just-Called.pdfThe ACLJ continues:

    [T]he hundreds of pages of (heavily redacted – more on that below) documents paint a clear picture of a DOJ in crisis mode as the news broke of Attorney General Lynch’s meeting with former President Clinton. In fact, the records appear to indicate that the Attorney General’s spin team immediately began preparing talking points for the Attorney General regarding the meeting BEFORE ever speaking with the AG about the matter.

    [T]here is clear evidence that the main stream media was colluding with the DOJ to bury the story. A Washington Post reporter, speaking of the Clinton Lynch meeting story, said, “I’m hoping I can put it to rest .” The same Washington Post reporter, interacting with the DOJ spin team, implemented specific DOJ requests to change his story to make the Attorney General appear in a more favorable light. A New York Times reporter apologetically told the Obama DOJ that he was being “pressed into service” to have to cover the story. As the story was breaking, DOJ press officials stated, “I also talked to the ABC producer, who noted that they aren’t interested, even if Fox runs with it.”

    Two days after the meeting, DOJ officials in a chain of emails that includes emails to Attorney General Lynch herself stated that the media coverage of the meeting “looks like all or most are FOX” and that “CBS . . . just says a few lines about the meeting.”

    Unsatisfied with the numerous redactions in the released emails, the ACLJ states that it will continue to seek full disclosure on this matter.

    DOJ bureaucrats have redacted all the talking points, discussions of talking points, a statement on the meeting that was apparently never delivered because there was not enough media coverage on the meeting, and its substantive discussions with the FBI on the matter. They absurdly claim the “deliberative process exemption” to FOIA, which is only supposed to apply to agency rulemaking processes.

    Discussions about Attorney General Lynch’s ethically questionable meeting with former President Clinton during her investigation into Hillary Clinton clearly has nothing to do with any rule making process. We will be taking these redactions back to federal court. The law is on our side. We will keep pressing on with our investigation of former Attorney General Lynch until we get to the bottom of this.

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments



     
     1 
     
     5
    MattMusson | August 6, 2017 at 8:25 am

    Time to change the inscription on the Supreme Court from You Shall Know the Truth and the Truth Will Set You Free

    To: Money Talks.


     
     0 
     
     5
    Humphrey's Executor | August 6, 2017 at 9:34 am

    Here’s a theory: The careless dissemination of sensitive info via unsecured email is widespread, especially in the upper ranks where they can’t be bothered with such mundane rules — rules are for the little people you see.

    So the Clinton Lynch confab included something like this: “You know Loretta, if Hillary goes down for this she’s gonna take a whoooole lot of other people with her.”

    So Comey et al had to whitewash the Hillary email scandal to keep from opening a massive can of worms and that coverup may well be carrying over to the current admin.

    “Yes, her implication is crystal clear, and it is nothing even remotely like what you represent it as….”

    If her implication is ‘so clear,’ what do YOU think her implication was?


       
       0 
       
       1
      Milhouse in reply to TheFineReport.com. | August 6, 2017 at 4:45 pm

      Exactly what she said: That we can’t just sit back and expect change to happen by itself. That every achievement in the past has come about through difficulty, through hard work and sacrifice. People marched, bled, and died to achieve change, and we look up to them and should learn from their example. It’s completely anodyne. How could anyone object to it? To portray it as a call for violence, for making ones opponents bleed and die, is beyond dishonesty, it’s absolutely defamatory.


         
         1 
         
         3
        Daiwa in reply to Milhouse. | August 6, 2017 at 6:15 pm

        A black woman saying those things in the Time of BLM? Yep, means absolutely nothing but the simple words, folks. Just a little history lesson for our edification, apropos of nothing.


           
           0 
           
           0
          Milhouse in reply to Daiwa. | August 7, 2017 at 12:20 pm

          In the time of BLM or any other time, there is no possible way to interpret her words as a call for violence. On the contrary, it’s a call for people to put themselves and their own safety on the line, to be willing to bleed and die for what they believe. And who could object to that?

    I had a dream last night: People that elected Trump descended on Washington one weekend late this summer for a peaceful demonstration. Oh, they were, most of them, armed all right, but they were threatening no one. They came by the hundreds of thousands, traffic handled by Harley bikers.

    They heard speeches by people of national stature, urging the country to return to lawful conduct, to forget about
    purges and putsches, and to apply the law equally to all.

    Then they all left, as quickly as they had arrived.

    You know, when it comes right down to it, the Silent Majority
    will only gain full recognition, when the people unite.

    There is little doubt, that in one form or another, this will happen. It is badly needed if we want to continue as a country.


     
     0 
     
     0
    Unknown3rdParty | August 7, 2017 at 8:22 am

    Remember, this involves the Clinton family, so remember to take into account how many people have died who have had some degree of involvement in, whether uncovering the cloud of scandal that hovers over the Clintons or who, in some way, have incriminating information that would put the family in (further) disrepute or stand in their way of pushing through their agenda (think of Scalia and the lack of any autopsy). Although we can be fairly certain that the conversation wasn’t recorded, I wouldn’t put it past Slick Willy to have pointed out what could happen to Lynch while they talked about golf and their grandchildren.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend