You can't use political spin with Trey Gowdy. That's a lesson Hillary Clinton's attorney David Kendal learned on Thursday. Kendal send the House Select Committee Chairman a letter saying that the former Secretary of State had already answered all the questions about her email therefore she didn't need to testify on that subject.
Gowdy responded with a letter (embedded below) containing 136 unanswered questions about the email and issued this statement:
“I appreciate Mr. Kendall’s timely response to our letter but respectfully disagree with his assertion former Secretary Clinton has answered all questions surrounding the unusual email arrangement she had with herself. The press conference held by former Secretary Clinton and the subsequent efforts at clarifying her remarks served to create more questions than answers. I also would note that if the Committee had called former Secretary Clinton when Democrats and her attorney first encouraged us to, the committee would not have had possession of the 300 emails we now have or known about her exclusive use of a personal server and email account to conduct official business."
“The committee is now in possession of thousands of pages of documents from the ARB review no other committee has had access to and the committee expects more ARB documents to be produced by the Department of State in the days ahead. These documents, as well as other documents never before produced to any committee of Congress and transcribed interviews with witnesses never before questioned by any committee of Congress, will aid the committee as it prepares to invite Secretary Clinton to appear."
“Beyond that, the committee has Mr. Kendall’s letter under advisement and will issue a response tomorrow setting out a reasonable path forward with respect to Secretary Clinton's appearances to discuss both Benghazi as well as congressional efforts to ensure the public record is complete with respect to her tenure as Secretary of State.”
2 comments:
Does anyone in the world not see the connection between A: the maintenance of a private email system and subsequent deletion of some or all of the emails on that system, B: the contributions (willing or unwilling) of individuals, businesses, and foreign governments to the Clinton Foundation, various other slush funds, and the Clintons themselves, and C: actions taken (or not taken) by the State Department during Secretary Clinton's tenure? This is as plain as it can possibly be.
It's probably only tangentially related to Benghazi with respect to a handful of email communications that could prove what Secretary Clinton knew, when she knew it, and what her role was in the ridiculous YouTube video cover story, but it's easy to see why they will cover this up and drag it out. Sandy Berger went down for stuffing records from the National Archives in his pants so that the 9/11 Commission wouldn't see them; I take it for granted that someone is going to fall on his or her sword (hopefully not literally, like Vince Foster) to keep any of these emails from ever being part of the public record. But they will fight disclosure tooth and nail, not because of any potential Benghazi smoking gun, but because there are communications in there that are far, far worse and show massive corruption at the highest levels.
Go get 'em Trey! Someone in America has to latch onto Hillary and not let go until We the People have the answers we deserve as her collective bosses. She forgets in America, the gov't is s'posed to serve the people, not the other way around.
Post a Comment