BREAKING: Cheryl Mills To Destroy Emails About Boss Hillary Clinton

[mick silver]

BREAKING: Cheryl Mills To Destroy Emails About Boss Hillary Clinton By Sidney Powell | 08/07/15 8:36pm Comment https://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/gettyimages-137031157.jpg?w=635&h=452Cheryl Mills (Getty Images) In a letter sent to the U.S. State Department and just filed today with U.S. federal Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, the counsel for Cheryl Mills wrote: “Ms. Mills does not believe that she has paper copies of potential records in her possession. Following our production on August 10, 2015 [of the defense counsel’s version of the electronic records], we have instructed her to delete any and all electronic records in her possession.” That is a far stretch from a statement by Ms. Mills under penalty of perjury, and she and her lawyers are planning to delete the emails Judge Sullivan wants produced? Judicial Watch has made an emergency filing in Judge Sullivan’s court to stop the further destruction of evidence of what may very well be assorted criminal conduct and violations of numerous federal laws. This all just surfaced in State Department’s status report filed today in response to Judge Sullivan’s order. Yesterday evening, State finally produced some correspondence between it and Hillary’s right and left hands—Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills. It has not produced its correspondence with Ms. Clinton, and it is now clear that Ms. Clinton, Ms. Abedin and Ms. Mills plan to thumb their noses at the Judge and the State Department. No one is “cooperating,” despite their empty rhetoric to the contrary. The correspondence that has been produced verifies that the State Department itself has not been forthcoming with Judge Sullivan, with Congress, or with anyone else. Using her private server allowed Ms. Clinton to use an off-the-grid system for her entire tenure in the Department, and the State Department kept that startling fact a secret as long as possible. It is simply shocking that the State Department did not immediately inform Congress, the Court, and Judicial Watch that Ms. Clinton operated solely on a private email server and that the State Department did not have her records. It took months even to discover those crucial facts. And as Judge Emmet G. Sullivan bores toward the truth, more revelations continue to surface. https://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/emmet-sullivan-nasullivan00302.jpg?w=300&h=200Judge Emmet G. Sullivan (Photo Credit DOMINIC BRACCO II) It is especially telling that there was no Inspector General at the State Department while Ms. Clinton led the department. That independent watchdog surely would have put a stop to such an illegal and unauthorized practice immediately. Obviously, that is why Ms. Clinton didn’t allow an Inspector General. As soon as the Inspector General had the opportunity to review her first 40 emails, he immediately identified classified or sensitive information that should never have been outside the State’s secure channels. And despite the Obama administration’s countless claims that it knew nothing of her private account, the few emails already produced by Ms. Clinton, and by Clinton consigliere Sidney Blumenthal, themselves belie that—as does the address itself. When one writes an email to the address Clinton.com, one must know that it is not state.gov—and Clinton.com was the way she communicated with everyone in the administration and other branches of government. David Axelrod is only the first to be caught red-handed. Equally remarkable now is a false assertion in the letter from Ms. Mills to the State Department in which she claimed that “Like Secretaries of State before her, Secretary Clinton at times used her personal email account when engaging with other officials. On matters pertaining to the conduct of government business, it was her practice to use the officials’ government email accounts.” We already know that Ms. Clinton used her personal server exclusively and that classified and sensitive information was improperly transmitted through it. In addition, she has failed and refused to return it—another offense in itself. There is a lot more that we don’t know. With all of this deceit, delay, and destruction past, present and planned, how long will it be before Judge Sullivan issues a show cause order to hold Secretary Kerry, Ms. Mills and/or others in contempt, issues an order to prevent the destruction of Ms. Mills or anyone’s electronic records, and appoints a special prosecutor to investigate the entire corrupt cabal? The train a comin’ right now is driven by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan—the man who named a special prosecutor to investigate the Department of Justice and its “Public Integrity Section.” Sidney Powell worked in the Department of Justice for 10 years and was lead counsel in more than 500 federal appeals. She is the author of Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice. SEE ALSO: CLINTON’S CONTINUED OBSTRUCTION—Hillary’s Actions Belie Her Words Comment Read more at http://observer.com/2015/08/breaking-cheryl-mills-to-destroy-emails-about-hillary-clinton/#ixzz3iKXs6vOk Follow us: @observer on Twitter | Observer on Facebook Read more at: http://tr.im/z4cbv

[mick silver]

DOJ Inaction Against Hillary Proves of Selective Prosecution in the United States Pursuit of Gen. Petraeus—and of the author—speaks volumes about out-of-control prosecutorial power By Bernard B. Kerik | 08/07/15 12:30pm FacebookTwitterLinkedInGoogle+Email Comment https://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/gettyimages-470854626.jpg?w=635&h=447Former director of CIA and former commander of U.S. Forces in Afghanistan Gen. David Petraeus exits the federal courthouse after facing criminal sentencing on April 23, 2015 in Charlotte, North Carolina. Petraeus faced criminal sentencing for giving classified information to his former mistress and biographer. (Photo: John W. Adkisson/Getty Images) In April of this year, former CIA Director David Petraeus, one of the most accomplished military generals in our nation’s history, was prosecuted and sentenced to two years of probation plus a $100,000 fine for giving his biographer classified material while they were working on the book. What was lost in the shuffle is that his biographer was a Reserve Army Intelligence Officer, who herself possessed a Top Secret clearance, and that no classified materials were ever published or provided to anyone who didn’t have clearance. Mr. Petraeus’ plea agreement carried a possible sentence of up to a year in prison, and in court papers, prosecutors recommended two years of probation and a $40,000 fine. U.S. District Judge David Kessler, however, increased the fine, in his words to, “reflect the seriousness of the offense.” The zeal with which the government prosecutors pursued Petraeus, and have pursued other Americans who have spent their lives and careers defending and fighting for this country in battlefields, and in the war against terrorism, has raised questions and concerns about selective and political prosecutions – in Mr. Petraeus’ case, persecution. But nothing amplifies, validates, and exacerbates those concerns and questions more than the government’s inaction, and outright refusal to initiate a full-fledged criminal investigation into the shadow government and secret server of Hillary Clinton while she ran the Department of State. Selective and political prosecution is a threat to every American. In December 2004, after an impeccable 30-year career in law enforcement, and after being nominated by President George W. Bush to be Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, I withdrew my name from consideration, declining to serve in the President’s cabinet upon my own admission that I had failed to withhold employment taxes for my children’s nanny over a two-year period. That revelation was met by a state grand jury investigation and resulted in two ethics violations to which I pleaded guilty. These were not felonies, but rather, unclassified misdemeanors, and the court imposed a fine. Not content with my professional and personal embarrassment, my immediate efforts to correct my errors, and my loss of a Cabinet position, the Justice Department piled on. Prosecutors used my guilty plea in state court to ramp up a federal grand jury investigation on a parallel equaled in vengeance to their pursuit of Al Capone and John Gotti. State investigators suborned perjury — ordering a city inspector general to testify falsely against me in a grand jury; federal and state investigators conspired to suppress exculpatory evidence that they were obligated to provide to my attorneys and me, and state and federal investigators threatened witnesses so badly that the witnesses couldn’t distinguish reality from the prosecutors’ insistence and theory of their case. And for context, my alleged crimes were false statements for the position from which I had withdrawn, tax charges, primarily concerning my children’s nanny, and other charges that could have and should have been handled civilly. I provide this context for one very important reason: The investigation against me didn’t have anything to do with a U.S. Ambassador and three of his staff members being murdered in Libya. It had nothing to do with leaking classified material to unauthorized recipients; it didn’t involve destruction of evidence or the obstruction of transparency in government by maintaining a secret server on which classified correspondence was communicated. It was about false statements or errors and tax charges, which for anyone else would have been handled civilly. How is it that Secretary Clinton’s server hasn’t been seized as evidence? FBI SWAT teams descended on Mr. Petraeus’ home and the home of his biographer, but nobody is taking any action to search or secure the classified information on Ms. Clinton’s server. Why haven’t Grand Jury subpoenas been issued concerning her shadow government and secret server to everyone and anyone who communicated with her through her off-the-grid email system instead of through State.gov as required? Why was she ever allowed to have a system that could bypass the Federal Records Act and the Freedom of Information Act? Her personal system could not possibly have been secured in compliance with federal law, and it certainly was not maintained to facilitate production of the documents and all records as required. It seems to me that it will take the appointment of a special prosecutor to get to the bottom of this outrage. Everyone who wrote to her at Clinton.com about any government business knew that she was using a private email yet conducting government business. Does that make all who emailed her from the White House, the Department of Justice, the FBI, the CIA, and Congress itself complicit in allowing her secret record keeping? Assuming that they used their government email accounts, as they should have, one way to recover Clinton’s emails is to obtain them from the government servers for everyone who communicated with her. A special prosecutor appointed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan could probably accomplish that in a few days—as did the Inspector General for the IRS. The persecution of General David Petraeus, and the intentional inaction of our government to aggressively investigate what appear to be flagrant violations of U.S. law, which in all probability jeopardized our national security, are clear indications that selective and political prosecution are rampant in our country. That is a threat to every American.Read more at http://observer.com/2015/08/doj-inaction-against-hillary-proves-of-selective-prosecution-in-the-united-states/#ixzz3iKYgKOes Follow us: @observer on Twitter | Observer on Facebook Read more at: http://tr.im/kDspb