Ty Clevenger, an Attorney whose FOIA request for documents on Hillary Clinton was recently turned down by David Hardy, a dirty cop inside the bureau, joins Tucker Carlson to explain just what happened.
Hardy ruled Clinton’s privacy rights outweighed any public interest in their release. Clevenger says the FBI is acting like Obama is still in charge, not the first person to make that observation.
Clevenger explains that he’s writing a book about corruption in the legal profession and the courts, noting that “most state bars will cover up for politically prominent lawyers. So I thought, ‘Well, this would be the perfect case study, to file a grievance against Mrs. Clinton and her attorneys for destroying email evidence.”
He continues, “And so as part of that I filed FOIAs to get evidence in support of the grievances, and then I got this letter from the FBI telling me it was not a matter of public interest.” Carlson attempts to clarify the way in which “interest” is being used, saying, “meaning it’s not in the public’s interest, not meaning the public doesn’t care but it’s not good for the country.”
Clevenger replies, “Actually, no, they’re saying the public doesn’t care. That’s one of the, in this particular circumstance there are three reasons not to release it. They can say that the subject, which would be Mrs. Clinton, is either dead, which she’s not, or she’s consented to release, which she hasn’t, or that this isn’t a matter of public interest.”
“And the FBI, despite the fact that I sent them newspaper articles,” says Clevenger, “said it was not a matter of public interest. Having said that, though, I think they are changing course. I got an email this afternoon from the Justice Department. I appealed the denial to DOJ and now DOJ has already granted my request to expedite its response.”
Clevenger notes, “The reason that’s significant is because my grounds for requesting the expedited response was this was a matter of public interest. So DOJ has already conceded this is a matter of public interest. Carlson laughs at the absurdity, saying, “Well, yeah, you’re talking about it on television right now.”
He says, “It just seems very odd that they could ever make that claim.” He asks Clevenger for his opinion as to the motive behind all of this. He replies that he’s actually changed his view. At first he thought it was just an Obama holdover doing what they do and trying to cover this up.
He raises the “letter sent by Senators Graham and Grassley which indicated that the former FBI director, James Comey, had already decided to exonerate Mrs. Clinton before she had ever even been interviewed. And so at this point I think that the FBI is trying to cover its own rear end. I think they know this thing’s going to look terrible for them.”
He adds, “They deep-sixed this, they whitewashed it and they don’t want the documents coming out just showing how badly they covered it up.”
He notes that, “If an average lawyer destroyed thirty thousand pieces of evidence he would be disbarred and prosecuted, criminally. Anybody else would have been prosecuted criminally and as an attorney disbarred under these exact same circumstances.”
Thank you for reading and sharing my work – Please look for me, Rick Wells at https://www.facebook.com/RickRWells/, https://gab.ai/RickRWells, https://plus.google.com/u/0/+RickwellsUs and on my website http://RickWells.US – Please SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar at RickWells.US – not dot com, and also follow me on Twitter @RickRWells.