Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except they didn't have these emails which in testimony they claimed to have deleted and were not able to be recovered.
And which have now been recovered. And which are the subject of this article.
This evidence was never considered by those previous committees, as the IRS and the Obama political appointees heading the IRS insisted that the hard disks that they were on had all simultaneously self destructed and there were no backups.
As it turns it, these assertions were some of the most brazen lies ever told by US Government officials in the history of this country. These emails do exist, they have been found, and the assertions made by the IRS and the Obama political appointees heading that department were just flat out lies.
Somebody will go to jail over this before it is all done. Certainly Louis Lerner should be one such person. But all those people who promoted the lie that these emails mysteriously just disappeared should certainly be locked away in a cage for a very long time.
The other investigations did not have this information the lefties here seem to not understand that. so their natural position is to attack the messenger while disregarding the facts. I give them a great deal of credit for being really successful at this ploy. I do not see one lefty so far actually discuss what is in the newly released information
"Judicial Watch announced today (2/26/15) that on February 11, 2015, it uncovered documents from the U.S. Department of State revealing that top aides for then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, including her then-chief of staff Cheryl Mills, knew from the outset that the Benghazi mission compound was under attack by armed assailants tied to a terrorist group. The documents were produced as a result of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the State Department (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State ((No. 1:14-cv-01511). The documents make no reference to a spontaneous demonstration or Internet video, except in an official statement issued by Hillary Clinton. Judicial Watch lawsuit focused on Mrs. Clinton’s involvement in the Benghazi scandal."
Despite her three top staff members being informed that a terrorist group had claimed credit for the attack, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, issued an official statement, also produced to Judicial Watch, claiming the assault may have been in “a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.”
Cheryl Mills asks that the State Department stop answering press inquiries at 12:11 am on September 12, despite the ongoing questions about “Chris’ whereabouts.”
In an email to State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland, Jacob Kennedy, and Phillipe Reines (then-Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Strategic Communications and Senior Communications Advisor), Mills writes: Can we stop answering emails for the night Toria b/c now the first one [Hillary Clinton’s “inflammatory material posted on the Internet” statement] is hanging out there. Earlier in the chain of emails, Nuland told Mills, Sullivan, and Patrick Kennedy (Under Secretary of State for Management) that she “ignored” a question about Ambassador Steven’s status and whereabouts from a CBS News Reporter.
There has been 50 briefings about this. I didn't make it up.
I am not voting for her, but please quit spending my tax payer money just to attack a political rival. It's BS of the highest order.
So let's make up a story.
YOU are a person of interest in a murder case. the police finds "some" evidence that YOU are the murderer. You KNOW you didn't do it.
The police arrest and charge you. You go to trial. The "investigation" did NOT verify your alibi that you were out of town when the murder happened.
Based on the info they had and presented to the court you are found guilty.
By your "reasoning" or lack thereof, they had an investigation and found enough to put you on trial for the murder and found guilty based on THAT INVESTIGATION AND THE INFO THEY HAD.
I don't think you would feel the same way if YOUR neck was on the line.
To even claim they held , "50 briefings" means absolutely NOTING if they don't have ALL THE INFORMATION, and you know it.
A very poor attempt, even by you, to dismiss this.
YOU are a person of interest in a murder case. the police finds "some" evidence that YOU are the murderer. You KNOW you didn't do it.
The police arrest and charge you. You go to trial. The "investigation" did NOT verify your alibi that you were out of town when the murder happened.
Based on the info they had and presented to the court you are found guilty.
By your "reasoning" or lack thereof, they had an investigation and found enough to put you on trial for the murder and found guilty based on THAT INVESTIGATION AND THE INFO THEY HAD.
I don't think you would feel the same way if YOUR neck was on the line.
To even claim they held , "50 briefings" means absolutely NOTING if they don't have ALL THE INFORMATION, and you know it.
A very poor attempt, even by you, to dismiss this.
My point is a heck of a lot more simple than that:
Quit wasting my tax money on political witch hunts.
If you want to play with the ambassadors bones, you can do it on your own dime.
There has been 50 briefings about this. I didn't make it up.
I am not voting for her, but please quit spending my tax payer money just to attack a political rival. It's BS of the highest order.
Judicial watch obtained them, you might have known that if you had looked at the link: "Documents Obtained by Judicial Watch...."
If this Obama admin would release documents and emails when requested, all of this would have been over years ago. But no, Obama continues to refuse cooperation by blocking, withholding, deleting documents, dragging out this whole thing. so blame him for all the endless investigations.
BTW, do we know yet where Obama and Hilary were during the assaults on the consulate? Did Panetta or Demsey have contact with Obama or anyone at the White House during the attacks? No? Hmmm, seems odd for such a transparent and open administration.
This is why these investigation drag on for so long, we have a president and an administration who refuse even the simplest answers to the most benign questions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
...'ol sailor-mouth would never do that.
