Patterico's Pontifications

7/1/2016

AG Lynch – Bill Clinton Meeting Follow-Up

Filed under: General — Dana @ 8:06 am



[guest post by Dana]

Two days ago, we learned about an allegedly unplanned meeting between AG Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton on a tarmac in Phoenix. The appearance of impropriety and massive conflict of interest has naturally caused an uproar given that Hillary Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee, is currently the subject of an official FBI investigation along with the Clinton Foundation, in which Bill Clinton is a key player:

Untitled

Since then, several important things have occurred. I’m just going to tick off what has taken place in the space of a few days.

First, according to the reporter who broke the story, Christopher Sign of ABC 15 in Phoenix, the F.B.I. gave unusual orders to those in the vicinity of the impromptu meeting:

“The former president steps into her plane. They then speak for 30 minutes privately. The FBI there on the tarmac instructing everybody around ‘no photos, no pictures, no cell phones.’”

Since when are photos of a former president off limits? Especially when that ex-president is Bill Clinton?

Second, after learning about the now-infamous meeting, Judicial Watch filed an official ethics complaint requesting an investigation into the meeting:

Attorney General Loretta Lynch met privately with former President William J. Clinton on board a parked private plane on the west side of Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix, Arizona on June 29, 2016, according to multiple press reports.

President Clinton is the spouse of Hillary Rodham Clinton, the former Secretary of State, who is purportedly the subject of a national security crime investigation pertaining to the mishandling of national defense information processed by Mrs. Clinton’s personal server during her tenure as secretary.

Additionally, there are press reports that a federal public corruption investigation is on-going concerning conflicts of interest and abuse of official government office involving the financial “commitments” to the Clinton Foundation, speaking fees for President Clinton and former Secretary Clinton’s official acts. President Clinton may be a target of that investigation.

Attorney General Lynch’s meeting with President Clinton creates the appearance of a violation of law, ethical standards and good judgment. Attorney General Lynch’s decision to breach the well-defined ethical standards of the Department of Justice and the American legal profession is an outrageous abuse of the public’s trust. Her conduct and statements undermine confidence in her ability to objectively investigate and prosecute possible violations of law associated with President Clinton and Secretary Clinton. This incident undermines the public’s faith in the fair administration of justice. Simply stated, Attorney General Lynch’s June 29, 2016 meeting with former President Clinton creates the broad public impression that “the fix is in.”

Judicial Watch requests your immediate and thorough investigation of the facts, circumstances, and appearances of ethical, regulatory and legal violations by Attorney General Lynch in connection with her meeting with former President William J. Clinton – and that you report your findings and recommendations to the American public.

Third, according to the New York Times, which for some mysterious reason ignored the Lynch-Clinton story for several days, a Justice Dept. official claims that Lynch will announce later today that she will accept the F.B.I. recommendation:

Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch plans to announce on Friday that she will accept whatever recommendation career prosecutors and the F.B.I. director make about whether to bring charges related to Hillary Clinton’s personal email server, a Justice Department official said. Her decision removes the possibility that a political appointee will overrule investigators in the case.

The Justice Department had been moving toward such an arrangement for months — officials said in April that it was being considered — but a private meeting between Ms. Lynch and former President Bill Clinton this week set off a political furor and made the decision all but inevitable.

Republicans said the meeting, which took place at the Phoenix airport, had compromised the independence of the investigation as the F.B.I. was winding it down. Some called for Ms. Lynch to recuse herself, but she did not take herself off the case — one that could influence a presidential election.

Do you believe that Lynch will accept whatever recommendation is made?

She’s keeping her options open, just in case…

Untitled

ADDED: I missed this important point from J. Christian Adams:

Many won’t believe Lynch and Clinton only discussed grandkids and golf in her cozy jet. But I do.

That’s all they needed to discuss for Bill to interfere with a criminal prosecution. Sophisticated insiders don’t need to use clumsy and explicit language. Merely having the tarmac summit interferes with the investigation, even if golf and grandkids were the only topics discussed.

The tarmac summit sent a signal. It is a signal to all of the hardworking FBI agents who have the goods on Hillary.

The attorney general has made it clear what team she is on. The attorney general isn’t on the side of justice. She’s on the Democratic Party team.

This is the unspoken message from Lynch to all of the FBI agents on the case and to all the front-line lawyers at the Justice Department:

When you send your recommendation to refer Hillary’s case to the grand jury, you had better realize your burden to convince me I should sign off on a grand jury request is higher than you thought. These are my friends.

Sounds about right.

–Dana

44 Responses to “AG Lynch – Bill Clinton Meeting Follow-Up”

  1. When have the Clintons not been involved in a scandal? Does such a time exist?

    Dana (995455)

  2. racist

    mg (31009b)

  3. I don’t know why Judicial Watch would believe the public has “faith in the fair administration of justice,” or that this is when “the fix is in.” With this president and this justice department we know that there is no fair administration of justice and the fix is always in.

    Jim (a9b7c7)

  4. Just as the Clinton Crime Family managed to strike a deal with Bernie Sanders for a large enough sum even an avowed communist can’t ignore to go silent for the rest of the campaign this happens. Finally we stop hearing about “The Bern” now we get hit with “The Bribe”. If the Clintons keep doling out payola at this rate they won’t be billionaires any more. It cost hundreds of millions to get a job that pays $400,000 a year, so where’s the catch? Obviously there is a lot more money involved in the Presidency than 400k so where does it come from? Why would I trust a person willing to pay $100 million for a job that pays $400,000?

    Rev. Hoagie® (0f4ef6)

  5. In between all of their chatter about “grandkids” and the American League pennant race, I imagine ol’ Bill hinted that President Hillary would like to keep Loretta on board as AG during her Administration.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  6. Well maybe this is an incentive to poll truthfully for a change – maybe if that margin reaches Trump 55, Clinton 40 by the time ceremonies kick off in Cleveland, they pull the plug.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  7. Why would I trust a person willing to pay $100 million for a job that pays $400,000?

    I know, right? http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/23/trump-forgives-50-million-in-loans-to-his-campaign-trump-finance-chief.html

    nk (dbc370)

  8. Obama is giving us the finger, like he always has. The Clintons always double down not back down on their sleaze.

    nk (dbc370)

  9. If Lynch says she will take the recommendation of the FBI, then you can be sure that the Machine has gotten to the investigators and that recommendation will be that not only did Hillary do nothing wrong but that she will be given a Unicorn.

    If nothing happens, Hillary, and now Lynch, had better make sure that Trump doesn’t end up in the WH. Even Trump can see the obvious right thing to do here.

    Rich (ddc02c)

  10. This was a negotiation of how much money the Clinton foundation will keep. The rest will be donated to the Michelle Obama campaign fund. Michelle Obama will be nominated by acclamation at the convention.

    Paul (56ad83)

  11. The FBI there on the tarmac

    How and why would the FBI be theer?

    Is he sure that’s not the Secret Service? The Secret Service would probably be acting under Bill Clinton’s instructions.

    Q. Are they required to follow the instructions of the protectee, or is that general policy,, and if so, for protectees or just for Bill Clinton? I could see it being general policy not to allow photographs, or anything, to take place within the protective perimeter that had not been authorized by the protectees, since any person might be carrying a secret weapon, and any camera might be a bomb. If the protectee authorizes it, then, if anything happens, it’s his fault for trusting someone, and the fault is not that of the Secret Service.

    I think Bill Clinton thought he could keep this meeting secret, but he couldn’t manage it.

    Third, according to the New York Times, which for some mysterious reason ignored the Lynch-Clinton story for several days,

    The New York Daily News did not print it until today. I wondered why they printed this ant-Clinton story, until I saw CBS This Morning and saw that Attorney general Loretta Lynch was about to make an announcment, so it’s become too big to be ignored. The Wall Street Journal had a quite good story on page 4 on Thursday, with some details that didn’t make into most news reports, like that they discussed Brexit and Janet Reno (who in other places was referred to as “a mutual acquaintance”)

    There are all kinds of people leaking but we don’t know who they are, or even if the reporters are 100% sure of who they are.

    Sammy Finkelman (09e4a9)

  12. I’ve updated the post:

    I missed this important point from J. Christian Adams:

    Many won’t believe Lynch and Clinton only discussed grandkids and golf in her cozy jet. But I do.

    That’s all they needed to discuss for Bill to interfere with a criminal prosecution. Sophisticated insiders don’t need to use clumsy and explicit language. Merely having the tarmac summit interferes with the investigation, even if golf and grandkids were the only topics discussed.

    The tarmac summit sent a signal. It is a signal to all of the hardworking FBI agents who have the goods on Hillary.

    The attorney general has made it clear what team she is on. The attorney general isn’t on the side of justice. She’s on the Democratic Party team.

    This is the unspoken message from Lynch to all of the FBI agents on the case and to all the front-line lawyers at the Justice Department:

    When you send your recommendation to refer Hillary’s case to the grand jury, you had better realize your burden to convince me I should sign off on a grand jury request is higher than you thought. These are my friends.

    Sounds about right.

    Dana (995455)

  13. “Career prosecutors” means some Clinton/Obama stooges at the DoJ will tell Comey and the FBI, close, but no grand jury indictment. That is how it will go.

    Bugg (54d892)

  14. I expect the recommendation to be released tonight – Friday night news dump, start of 3-day 4th of July weekend. Perfect timing.

    Dana (995455)

  15. How and why would the FBI be theer?

    Because it was Lynch’s plane and the FBI provides security for the Attorney General.

    Edoc118 (4606e5)

  16. I know I am a glutton for punishment, but read the reader’s replies to the NYTimes article Dana linked to above and focus on the ones that the paper has chosen as Times Picks. Marvel at the degree to which there is literally nothing that bothers the Clintonistas — no level of corruption or sleaze which they won’t attribute to an overreaction among Republicans and enemies of the Clintonic Empire. It’s very instructive as to why it’s apparent that her floor in this race is 44% and that she will likely win in the end.

    JVW (eabb2a)

  17. Now, take what JVW just said in comment 15, and replace the name Clinton with the name Trump.

    It would be about as accurate.

    The GOP knew four years ago that the Democratic Party was going to nominate the sleaziest, most corrupt candidate for POTUS in history (well, maybe Aaron Burr comes close). They hd four years to prepare.

    And they gave us Trump….

    kishnevi (71bac0)

  18. Can you folks spend time on Hillary and Bill working over the AG?

    Rodney King’s Spirit (e2dd8e) — 6/30/2016 @ 9:33 pm

    You mean, like this post?

    Bill H (971e5f)

  19. “Career prosecutors” at the DoJ are the same people who railroaded D’Souza. All hired by Holder and his ilk of race-baiting lawfare shysters.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  20. #16 kishnevi,

    The GOP didn’t “give us” Trump.
    He won the primaries. The primary voters gave us Trump.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  21. yes yes Mr. Trump is a gift

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  22. 14. Rush Limbaugh said it was the Secret Service and the FBI, so maybe both.

    Sammy Finkelman (09e4a9)

  23. Lynch and golf are an unlikely couple.

    Lynch and Christie at a pizza joint on the other hand …

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe)

  24. yes yes Mr. Trump is a gift

    which makes the Clintons believe in Santa again

    nk (dbc370)

  25. 12. J. Christian Adams called into the Rush Limbaugh show, and confirmed that there does exist a Justice Department guideline not to indict someone when it could influence an election. Rush Limbaugh didn’t quite really pick up on it. It’ll be in the transcript at rushlimbaugh.com later today and you can see exactly what he said on that point.

    He mentioned this guideline where he said there were two conflicting principles – not to use criminal law to influence an election, and that nobdody is above the law. I have not seen the text of this guideline posted anywhere, and maybe it’s confidential.

    That supports my theory as to the purpose of the meeting – not for it to become known, at least to insiders at the Justice department and send a signal to anyone else, but for Bill
    Clinton to receive an (unintentional) signal for himself.

    I mean that would have been the number one purpose of him contriving this meeting: To see if the request to meet her would be turned down or not.

    Sammy Finkelman (09e4a9)

  26. Rush Limbaugh also has the theory that maybe we’re being played. Say, an indictment is close. This could all be upset by getting a special prosecutor. He would have to start from scratch and could not possibly bring an indictment before the election.

    Rush remembers what hapepned at the time Bill Clinton gave testimony to Kenneth Starr. It was secret, but videotaped and scheduled to be released later. There was a big leak that Bill Clinton had lost it when he was asked about the cigar. The were stories all about that. So when the time cme for it to be released, everybody covered it, and they said something like it’s 2 hours and ten minutes into the video. So everybody was watching it…and Bill’s Clinton;s eyes opened wide, but then he just went on, and retained his compsoure and everything. so people couldsay it’s all abig nothing. The Clintons know how to play people like that, he said.

    In other words, they might be trying to get a special prosecutor in order to stop an imminent indictment.

    What I think is, they are always telling people – I think they are responsible for the leaks – – that she is about to get indicted. I think the purpose is to tell people don’t waste your time trying to find or fund another candidate for president – it’ll all take care of itself.

    Sammy Finkelman (09e4a9)

  27. If all that’s going on in American politics doesn’t bring about the revival of the Whig Party, I don’t know what can.

    Sammy Finkelman (09e4a9)

  28. it’s so good to stand united against piggy-pie and lynch-bynch

    these one are criminals, these ones are fascists

    (yale-filth and harvardtrash respectively btw)

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  29. …that there does exist a Justice Department guideline not to indict someone a Democrat when it could adversely influence their an election.*

    FTFY

    Republican Senators however, are fair game. Even to the extent of conspiring to hide exculpatory evidence.

    *In some Democrat strongholds, obvious signs of criminality are judged to be a positive factor ensuring their reelection. Discretion is advised.

    BobStewartatHome (a52abe)

  30. The interesting thing is that a prosecutor once made an indictment that did influence a presidential election, intentionally, I suspect.

    Can you guess (or remember) when?

    Sammy Finkelman (09e4a9)

  31. “it’s apparent that her floor in this race is 44% and that she will likely win in the end”

    JVW,

    The subsidy receiving floor is 48-49%. Trump has been very careful not to threaten subsidy and he is even more careful about not touching the abortion sacrament. There is an unstated neverClinton faction which might bring her to a 40-42% floor outside of the Deep Blue Hells but if the FBI gives her a pass we’ll see her floor shift from 44% to 48% right after the convention.

    Rick Ballard (0e6252)

  32. The republicans gave us Issa and Gowdy.
    place head between knees, open bag and puke.

    mg (31009b)

  33. This mess is 100 times greater than watergate. From obama down through the rank and file. About time Trump gets the blame from the non toilet cleaning crew.

    mg (31009b)

  34. mg,

    3…2…1…until they start whining about the traffic ticket that Trump received back in 1977.

    Cruz Supporter (102c9a)

  35. I think Watergate is quite likely part of this mess. Certainly the House Judiciary committee investigation, in which Hillary Rodham played a crucial (but secret) role.

    Did you ever hear of the “Democratic trap” theory? (that the Democrats, or some Democrats in the McGovern campaign, knew about Liddy’s spying efforts) The details in taht theory are probably wrong, anyway.

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  36. it’s apparent that her floor in this race is 44% and that she will likely win in the end

    The race is likely Clinton’s to lose, however, the wildcard is the possibility that polls are significantly understating Trump’s support, and maybe overstating Clinton’s. We’ve seen some polls that were significantly off in foreign elections lately (UK, Israel).

    Gerald A (76f251)

  37. The race is likely Clinton’s to lose, however, the wildcard is the possibility that polls are significantly understating Trump’s support, and maybe overstating Clinton’s.

    Well, the even better example was the 2014 midterms when all of the polling companies grossly overestimated the degree to which Democrats would come out to support their party when Obama was not on the ballot. However, that said, most of us on the right were sure that the polling in 2012 which consistently showed Obama leading Romney was badly skewed, but in the end it turned out to be pretty close to on the nose. I concede that this year may be way different than any other year, but the polling outfits here have a pretty good track record in Presidential election years.

    JVW (eabb2a)

  38. Hence if the Clintons are poll-driven beasts, might it be better to poll emphatically for Trump in the near term – then they quit. That should be paramount, if Clinton is the greater of the possible evils. Then let it fall back to a intraparty fight, which Trump may still win. I think we are also over-estimating the appeal of any NotHillarys that may emerge (Biden, Warren, Sanders, Kaine, Rendell, et al) – in a milquetoast NeitherTrumpNor Hillary race, the R would have the advantage as the non-incumbent party.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  39. 36. In 2012, Bradley effect on race was balanced out by Bradley effect on religion.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  40. Here is the transcript of J. Christian Adams’ call to the Rush Limbaugh show (and some more)

    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/07/01/j_christian_adams_tells_us_why_lynch_met_with_clinton_and_what_it_means

    Sammy Finkelman (643dcd)

  41. She’ll “accept” the recommendation as in “take it under advisement”, then ignore it and say there was no criminal element, seal the order and threaten prosecution against anyone that dares reveal any information about the closed investigation.

    njrob (bed043)

  42. If I was a Socialist like Obama and wanted to further frack the United States, I’d wait until Trump was the nominee and then indict Clinton the day after the Convention, nuking his big roll-out. THen spend the next couple of weeks with the press ignoring Trump (making Donnie get crazier and crazier trying to break through to page one) speculating about the Democrat replacement.

    And waiting in the wings? Red Bernie. Who could only win against someone as terrible as Trump.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  43. I guess it all depends on what your definition of indictment is.

    ropelight (596f46)

  44. Trump should be worried for his life. With all the clintoon republicans losing their go along get along theory of politics, they have one choice – kill the leader, kill the party.

    mg (31009b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 2.0858 secs.