Connect with us

The Swamp

Loretta Lynch Exchanged Classified Information With Clinton Campaign

Published

on

Former attorney general Loretta Lynch faces potential charges stemming from her interactions with the Hillary Clinton campaign during the 2016 election. Lynch exchanged classified information with Amanda Renteria, a senior staffer on the Clinton campaign. This could have violated laws pertaining to mishandling of classified information and also obstruction of justice.

Trending: Democrats Move to Ban Trump Supporters From Joining the Military and Holding Federal Jobs

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024?

  • POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Now here’s where it gets even more interesting. James Comey announced no charges against Hillary Clinton in his first announcement, supposedly because he saw a Russian intelligence document showing that Lynch was compromised due to her relationship with Renteria. Was the Russian document real or fake? Nobody seemed to know at the time, but it was enough to influence Comey’s thinking. Now, thanks to Horowitz, we know that Lynch almost certainly did assure Renteria that no charges would be filed against Hillary Clinton.

The Washington Post reported in 2017: “In the supposed email, Wasserman Schultz claimed Lynch had been in private communication with a senior Clinton campaign staffer named Amanda Renteria during the campaign. The document indicated Lynch had told Renteria that she would not let the FBI investigation into Clinton go too far, according to people familiar with it. Current and former officials have argued that the secret document gave Comey good reason to take the extraordinary step over the summer of announcing the findings of the Clinton investigation himself without Justice Department involvement. Comey had little choice, these people have said, because he feared that if Lynch announced no charges against Clinton, and then the secret document leaked, the legitimacy of the entire case would be questioned.”

But there’s more.

President Donald Trump knows that Bill Clinton offered Loretta Lynch the attorney general job in a Hillary administration while on the tarmac in their now famous meeting.

Former president Bill Clinton offered Loretta Lynch the Attorney General job in a Hillary Clinton administration while secretly meeting with Lynch on an airplane tarmac, according to documents reviewed by President Donald Trump.

President Trump discussed the information with top lawmaker Rep. Ron DeSantis, a member of the House Oversight and Government Reform committees. Big League Politics exclusively confirmed these facts with a U.S. Senate committee adviser.

This news comes on the heels of Lynch’s interview with TV’s Lester Holt, in which she continued to claim that she and Bill Clinton did not discuss anything nefarious and directly contradicted James Comey’s testimony about the meeting. At the time of the tarmac talk, Hillary Clinton was mired in the email-scandal investigations. Clinton and Lynch were caught on the tarmac by a local reporter. Lynch served as attorney general in the Barack Obama administration and wanted to keep her job.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under director James Comey carefully plotted logistics and security for President Bill Clinton’s meeting on an airplane tarmac with then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch during the 2016 campaign.

The FBI then attempted to cover up the tarmac meeting by targeting a Bureau whistleblower. The FBI worked with its offices around the country to execute the plan.

Breaking Judicial Watch emails (READ THEM HERE) show an FBI plot to cover up Bill Clinton’s meeting with Lynch, which Lynch claimed was just about golf and grandchildren…

A knowledgeable FBI insider tells Big League Politics that it was bizarre and completely revealing that different security units, including apparent city police departments, were contacted about security detail for the trip before it happened…

But there’s more.

The National Security Agency (NSA) blocked the release of a purported tape of Bill Clinton and former Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s private airplane talk with a rare legal justification used to protect top national security secrets.

The NSA’s block of the release of this information — citing one of President Obama’s executive orders — undercuts Hillary Clinton’s claim that her husband and Lynch had a “purely social” conversation about grandkids and golf on June 27, 2016, two weeks before Lynch dropped the Department of Justice investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email scandal…

The Swamp

What Happens If John Roberts Decides Not to Preside Over Trump’s Post-Presidency Impeachment Trial?

Trying to make sense of a messy situation.

Published

on

Several Republicans and Democrats familiar with the negotiations over Donald Trump’s second impeachment trial have said that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts does not want to preside.

A Politico report that broke the news reads as follows: “We’re hearing that Roberts, who for years has sought to keep the courts apolitical, was not happy he became a top target of the left during Trump’s first impeachment trial. ‘He wants no further part of this,’ one of our Hill sources says. A spokesperson for the chief justice declined to comment.”

As if it weren’t unprecedented enough for a president to have been impeached twice, Democratic lawmakers are hell-bent on holding an impeachment trial for a man who is no longer president. And it sounds like they’re going to get their wish: Senate leaders agreed Friday that the trial would begin Tuesday, February 9. It does not appear that Roberts’ decision is a factor either way.

This clown show needs some unpacking. First off, Roberts has very good reason to reject presiding over Trump’s impeachment trial. The Constitution states that the chief justice will preside when the president is tried. Not the ex-president, the current president. That alone should be sufficient.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024?

  • POLL: Will Republican Senators vote to impeach Trump and ban him from running in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Despite this, there may not be anything that expressly forbids Congress from impeaching and convicting former officials. Some legal experts have pointed out that “nothing in the text of the Constitution bars Congress from impeaching, convicting, and disqualifying former officials from holding future office.”

In light of all this, the radio silence of the Founders on this matter allows both sides to justify their support or opposition. Those in opposition say that because there’s nothing in the Constitution about trying a former president, there are no grounds to hold the trial. Those in support say that because there’s nothing in the Constitution about trying a former president, there is no legal reason to oppose the trial.

Furthermore, law professor Frank Bowman, speaking to the Washington Examiner, argued that if a trial is going to be held, it might be prudent for Roberts to preside.

“The vice president does have a personal interest in the outcome, insofar as conviction would eliminate Trump as a future political rival, either to President Biden or to Harris herself,” Bowman said. “I think the constitutionally safer call is that he should preside. That way, there can never be a later objection on the ground that the tribunal was not properly constituted.”

If Chief Justice Roberts decides to extricate himself from this mess, Democrats are said to be discussing the possibility of having Vice President Kamala Harris, who is also the president of the Senate, preside. Also being floated is president pro tempore and longest-serving senator Patrick Leahy.

Harris has a conflict of interest if she were to preside, however. And indeed that is why the Founders wanted the chief justice of a (theoretically) non-political entity of government to do so. Harris is not only of the opposite party and was on the ticket that defeated the Trump/Pence ticket, she might very well have aspirations for the presidency if Biden decides not to seek reelection. Trump himself may have his eye on the presidency once again as well, meaning that Harris would be presiding over the impeachment trial of a potential political opponent.

So if the legality of convicting an ex-president is gray, then it becomes a question of prudence. And prudence dictates that the impeachment trial should not proceed. The side that’s calling for “unity” is engaging in something fundamentally disunifying. Any attempt to convict a former president with no clear legal grounds is most definitely not a recipe for “unity” and “healing.” Our senators should just move on and worry about governing. Enough with the political shams and shenanigans.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending