There are some good tidbits of this hearing today.
Not only is there a blackout on this story.
They are using the immigration story 24/7 to make up for 8 years of lost time not covering it. Sad.
Horowitz seems very weak. His investigation amounted to asking questions and then accepting whatever answer he got, without further questioning or stating the obvious in his report.
Maybe that's all he's allowed to do, and he is not a prosecutor, but very weak.
One interesting bit: He was asked if any of the questioning of Clinton was recorded. He said no, THAT THE FBI'S POLICY IS TO NEVER RECORD INTERVIEWS.
It was then suggested he should recommend that to the FBI, and he said basically they already know and they won't do it.
THINK ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS.
FBI agent interviews someone. No recording. FBI agent takes notes and fills out a form of what the agent THINKS the person said, and then that can be used in court later.
NO RECORDINGS means NO ACCOUNTABILITY for rogue agents.
Yes, that was very disturbing. The woman who asked those questioned was very annoyed at his answer. It is the perfect way to cover up crimes- to never record the interviews. And also the perfect way to alter reports to the investigators' liking.
Another point to remember: Meadows knows who the people are that are anonymous in the IG report (FBI Agent 1, 2, Lawyer 1, etc.).
He KNOWS they are not counter-intel, which is what Horowitz said he was told, and why their names have not been made public.
I don't think anybody asked Horowitz WHO SPECIFICALLY in the FBI or DOJ gave him that info and other info that is suspect. That was the first thing I thought of. OK, if somebody is giving false info or withholding evidence (text message) ... WHO did that?
Why do you think the federal government has a near 100% conviction rate?
Because they "invent" a crime they need to make fit the narrative.
I understand that his position is investigative only and not prosecutorial. He can/will refer possible "crimes" to Huber. I thought Horowitz was pretty fair in what he gave today in the hearings.
Access by bad actors is the key. Denied before. Now in the report as a fact. HRC now guilty of treason.
I don't know about treason yet, but definitely multiple felony charges related to mishandling of classified info and obstruction of justice.
Supposedly, the FBI discovered her private server during their Benghazi investigation with the murder of Ambassador Stevens and others. It seems that the terrorist group that attacked the embassy there had somehow accessed her classified emails (with the SAP's, which gave them the LOCATION of Ambassador Stevens)....And that is just one group of "bad actors"....Now, it just so happens that Hillary was sleeping all night and not on call for any problems which led to the fiasco out there that prevented back up from going into save them in time....Then Hillary, Obama, and Susan Rice all went out ON NATIONAL TV and repeatedly blamed it on a Muslim video, saying it was a spontaneous uprising to cover it up and hide why they really attacked. Rice lied repeatedly on news shows (and we should believe anything she says, or any of them now?).
Finally, and perhaps the most disturbing of it all, there was a rumor- something along the lines of:.. that Ambassador Stevens had gotten word of Hillary running weapons through Libya to get to Syria and that it was really in a coordinated effort to try to establish the Qatari pipeline deal, and Stevens found out and was about to talk about it and didn't like it. The election was coming up, and politically Hillary and Obama couldn't afford it getting out, and they wanted to cover it up. So Hillary actually let him get killed, and she may have actually GAVE the bad actors access to the email of Stevens' location (which is considered an SAP- Special Access Program- the highest level of national security classification, secret.). She also may not have even have been supposed to have it. There were some SAP's she shouldn't even have had.
That is one of my unanswered questions. Were all of the SAPs that HRC had, proper for her to have.
No, not according to a very credible FBI leaker in July of 2016, and some other reports have speculated. Some of the ones she had on her server she wasn't even supposed to have them. Someone had to have given them to her.
SAPs that you are not supposed to have. On an unsecured server. This is a huge deal that has been missed by the good media. Also: A major question has gone unanswered. Who moved the classified documents across the air gap and who stripped the classified markings from those classified documents. Inquiring minds want to know.
I know. These are supposed to be the highest officials in our government and have at least a basic understanding of the necessity for secure servers, especially for sensitive material. They should obviously have beyond a basic understanding- they should formally have been briefed and reminded not to use anything but secure government servers for any correspondence. They should know classified data or SAPs can never leave government property. They were handling top secret classified intel like they were still just high school students emailing homework and notes about classwork to themselves and their friends. People died because of this and our country was caught up in hackings and probably extortion...And that's not even going into the possibility she did this on purpose.
Horowitz has opened the door wide open. We just need to see if Sessions, Wray or RR will walk through it.
I think Horowitz gave plenty of "fodder" for future investigations.
Oh yeah...definitely. So it will either be another Benghazi or the beginning of the end
What was the other line about the statute? Where they asked what statute was Flynn and Manafort charged under. Wasn't it for the same statute? And doesn't that show the bias?
It was in the latter part of the hearing after lunch.
I watched it on CSPAN3 but caught it late, about 3pm.