Loretta Lynch’s DOJ – Clinton Had The “Right” To Wipe Her Personal Emails – She Can Decide What’s Personal?

Share With Your Friends On Facebook, Twitter, Everywhere
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

271 hillary clinton 940

[AdSense-C]

Our current Attorney General, who has infamously stated publicly that she “serves at the pleasure of the first African-American ‘president,’” while also making the same observation of her predecessor, Eric Holder, placed heavy contextual emphasis on the racial composition of those individuals and the positions they hold.

Given her demonstrated inherent racism, Loretta Lynch cannot be expected to administer justice in an objective manner any more than her predecessor or the occupant of the White House have separated racial preference from their actions. They are black first, Marxists second, Democrats third, law officers fourth, and Americans following somewhere later, at a minimum a distant fifth place.

[AdSense-A]

Just as the State Department is obstructing justice in delaying, heavily redacting and refusing to release records which could be damaging to Hillary Clinton, the Department of Justice is arguing that the truth she so desperately wants to keep hidden from public view regarding her violations of her security clearances and the espionage act should remain secret. Some lawbreaking is to be prosecuted and other is to be ignored, dependent upon the identity of the perpetrator.

[AdSense-B]

In a legal filing this week, Justice Department attorneys argued that the use of personal emails as a shield to protect Clinton from having to release incriminating and improperly accessed, sequestered and stored government emails should be allowed and upheld as an effective and valid tactic. Not unlike the intermingling of soldiers with human shield civilians to prevent them from being targeted militarily, government documents have been labeled as personal or at a minimum stored among documents labeled in that manner in order to prevent their access by law enforcement and intelligence agencies as well as Congressional investigators. Their deletion is also easily explained away through mislabeling.

The DOJ arguments were made in response to a Judicial Watch lawsuit seeking access to the Clinton emails. According to an article in The Daily Mail, DOJ contended that “Judicial Watch had presented no evidence to suggest Clinton had mistakenly or intentionally deleted government records instead of personal emails, and said ‘government agencies are not required to take steps to recover deleted material based on unfounded speculation that responsive information had been deleted.”

Of course there is that bothersome investigatory concept of probable cause, defined as “the legal standard by which a police officer has the right to make an arrest, conduct a personal or property search, or obtain a warrant for arrest.” Maybe the Department of Justice hasn’t heard of that notion or perhaps they’re simply choosing to ignore lawbreaking when a Clinton is the one targeted by an investigation. Under probable cause, the information is obtained and then used as part of the evidence in the case to which it relates. The evidence isn’t general expected to spontaneously appear in a file folder somewhere marked “sure fire prosecution.”

They also argued, “There is no legal basis in the (Freedom of Information Act) for requesters to obtain employees’ personal records and, therefore, there is no legal basis for the court to order the State Department to preserve, or to take steps to preserve, the personal records of the former secretary or any other current or former federal employee.”

They seem to be deliberately missing the point. It’s not a question of genuine personal emails. It’s a matter of those which were government property or which contained government information. That, by definition, removes them from being classified as personal.

This places the law enforcement agency which is currently investigating Ms Clinton’s inappropriate email activity, which is in possession of her server upon which emails were previously improperly and illegally stored,  dangerously close to being on the record in support of her “right” to do so, in violation of federal policies, regulations and law.

The question needs to be asked, “Why is DOJ on the wrong side of this issue? Why are they not pursuing the documents relative to lawbreaking instead of working to keep them hidden?

Perhaps Loretta Lynch is the political tool most of us outside of the U.S. Senate recognized her to be when she was appointed.

The stench of the emails is all over the White House as well as the Justice Department, State Department and who knows where else. Lynch is a firewall to investigation, a partisan who will protect her first black ‘president’ regardless of how immoral, illegal and unjust it might be to do so. That is her job. That is what she was hired to do as the first female black Attorney General.

For anyone who hasn’t seen it or has forgotten what a racist political hack we have in the Attorney General’s office, the video below may serve as a reminder that blind justice does not exist under the Obama regime. She also voiced her support of Obama’s politically motivated and racist amnesty policies and his refusal to enforce immigration law during Senate hearings, but was inexplicably still confirmed.

Rick Wells is a conservative writer who recognizes that our nation, our Constitution and our traditions are under a full scale assault from multiple threats. Please “Like” him on Facebook, “Follow” him on Twitter or visit www.rickwells.us & www.truthburgers.com


Share With Your Friends On Facebook, Twitter, Everywhere
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*