21 Burst results for "Judicial Watch"
"judicial watch" Discussed on WMAL 630AM
"That these songs do you take me back to my youth. Invent. Some stipulates 6 32 b m A. L K T McFarland biggest concern right now. China Fair enough. I think that we have all witnessed what the Communist Party in Beijing that regime can do to the world. I am concerned about the attempt to silence all of us. Either through the big tech oligarchs who can at the push of a button. The silence the likes of Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch or even the president of the United States. And I'm concerned that the federal government will basically doubled down those attempts and permitted with the force of law it forget about permitted. Mandate the voices be silenced through the force of law. We should all be concerned about that. That's what was behind the calls for unity. I'll repeat it again. Unity. In and of itself is not any sort of value based goal. Because clearly you can unify around a terrible idea, even an evil idea. Unity is not the end goal. If you think our founding fathers were unified, you really need check your history. They found one or two things that they could unite behind. The meantime, they were fighting like cats and dogs over everything else, and there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, there's something wrong with the people who say we should unify around all of these things. We should you know that unity is the end goal. No, it's not. It really isn't so I'm worried about that. I'm also worried about this executive order yesterday with regard to transgender sports, mandating Mandating that men who identify as women be allowed to participate in all girls sports This is a brand new glass ceiling put over women in America. Women at the high school level will be excluded. Your daughters will be excluded from the opportunities that they have. With regard to the great things that collegiate sports in high school sports organized sports do for young women. I am a true believer in that I have a daughter who really benefited from organized sports. And I worry that those opportunities will be taken away from so many of our daughters because of this mandate. Now. How about you? What are you worried about? Georgia and ST Mary's Maryland. Georgia. You are next up. What concerns you about the direction of this new administration, Georgia. Larry. Thank you for taking my call. I am concerned about everything that they're gonna do. The big lies they're telling. But my biggest concern is what they've gotten away with. The biggest lie that they've gotten away with the effect of our government. Yesterday you were talking about how you don't want to scream into the sky like the left, saying he's not My president, and he was selected well. I think one of the reasons I love your show, and I tune in it because you're always talking about truth. And I really believe that it's a great sin against truth. Call him the president, and the big difference between their spiel is theirs was a subjective opinion. That Trump was not their president. The big difference now is its objective truth. Said Biden is not the president. Okay, George, listen, and I'm glad you got it off your chest and I hear what you're saying. But I mean, now we're now we're in the middle of a debate about what Truth means and what truth is, and George. I appreciate the call, but I I think it's fair to say that the fact of the matter is Georgia, Georgia and I do appreciate the call. I really do. The fact of the matter is Joe Biden was inaugurated as the president yesterday. Joe Biden is now in charge.
"judicial watch" Discussed on 860AM The Answer
"We are back with judicial watches Chris Farrell. He is the man who is right there 20 years ago, checking Out the suppression off voting the How shall I say this once by this favorite phrase, the malarkey, the shenanigans, Basically, the corruption that is endemic in set in jurisdictions in America. I'm going to ask you a very simple question. You know, the Army has a red teaming function where you try and think like the enemy to predict predict your vulnerabilities. How hard on what does it take to steal an election in America? Chris file. The strength and the weakness of entire system is that it's all basically conducted at the county level. So counties are easily overwhelmed by mischief. Yeah, it's normally a small staff. Depending on the size of the county. It could be three people. Already 15 people would run a county election office and so if you have targeted efforts To go in and disrupt what's going on at the candidate level, creating mischief, everything from overloading voting rolls to turning in light down, there's all sorts of ways of generating mischief. And you have a small rural county or big Logan County. You can get in there and create total chaos. The those county results have been turned in at the state level stratified a certified by secretary of state the reach of individual states. Every state has their own laws and having to elections. Is a federal standard, but the details are left up to the state. And that's again a strength and a weakness. It's a strength because it's hard to monopolize it. Figure it out. But it's a weakness because again it is small numbers and Folks, principally on the left, frankly, look to manipulate and attack the system. It was ways of getting around it. There's three solutions to election dispute. Morning in the court, some kind of judicial intervention to preserve the election. The second is that in the case of someplace like Patterson, New Jersey, they're simply order. A new election has been total chaos or confusion. You know what do over try it again. And then the third option. Mrs. Congressional question is, Congress can reject electors from various states because of questions about the legitimacy of the electors are being sent. Teo to ratify the election. So we're talking about an internal function of the electoral college. Correct. And what does that take? What? How? How can Congress on or what grounds? Can it rejected? Electra? Well, you have to have some ability to articulate a claim. That there's there's irregularity, or there's some legitimacy to the people that are being sent. By the state's these air governors Now who actually sort of commission dispatch these folks? That there's some fraudulence to be a representation of their legitimacy as electors. There's only three ways to challenge it here in the courts a new election for problem areas and then the electors themselves can be challenged by Congress. Andi, That's you know, that's the level of getting too and I'm telling you You know you really need if there's ever a time for the American people to snap out of it, wake up. And make sure their voice was heard loud and clear. Now is the time and it is not something that sit and watch television, cross your fingers and hope it all turns out. This is not the day to do it. Just listen to this man. If there was ever a time in your life, however old, however young, you may be to actually make a difference and not just be a spectator. Just another re Ashkelon observer. It is now. It is the time to get out there to protest. Get that Red Maga hat on and make it as hard as possible for them to steal. He'll vote because that's what they're doing. It's not about the president's election. It's about your election. It's about America's election support this superb organization, Judicial Watch O RG. Follow them on Twitter at Judicial Watch. We've been talking to Chris File Next Chris Buskirk from Arizona with an update from that key.
Hillary Clinton can be deposed about her emails, judge rules
"A federal judge in Washington has ruled former secretary of state Hillary Clinton must sit for a deposition in a lawsuit over her use of a private email server Clinton was sued by the conservative route judicial watch the judge also ruled Clinton can be questioned about the existence of any emails documents or text messages related to the twenty twelve terrorist attack on Americans in Benghazi
Comey violated FBI policies in handling of memos
"Catherine Herridge our chief intelligence correspondent fox news joins me in studio Catherine some very major news today breaking from the inspector general at the DOJ involving the fired FBI director James calmly and his handling of some classified and other materials tell us what we're learning well first of all guy it's not every day that the inspector general investigates a former FBI director because they're held to the highest standard because they set the tone for thirty five thousand F. B. I. government employees and what the inspector general found is that director call me violated F. B. I. policy violated his F. B. I. employment agreement and took matters into his own hands when he removed seven government memos documenting his private conversations with the president in order to achieve his own personal agenda which was the kick starting of the special counsel investigation an inspector general Michael E. Horowitz use the word dangerous example being set by director call me so this was misconduct and that is laid out over the course of dozens of pages and you use the phrase personal agenda that's not your editorializing at all although I think it's true it was actually written by the inspector general those words about coming that's right that he took the memos he shared them outside the bureau not only with his legal team who was who was not authorized to receive this information but also a New York times reporter and it was to pursue this personal agenda to kickstart a special counsel investigation and what's important if we just back up a little bit is that this is the same accusation which is made against his former deputy Andrew McCabe that he lied information about the existence of the Clinton foundation investigation in the fall of twenty sixteen to benefit himself personally to make it look like he was objective that he wasn't somehow beholden to the Democrats because of money his wife had received for state race in Virginia so McCabe we might circle back to him because there's a chance he might get prosecutor we had Andy McCarthy on the show yesterday talking about potential indictments coming down the pike for McCabe that will not be the case for calling me right so they outlined all of the abuses or example he's got you know he colored outside the lines of established FBI procedure and he's a leaker that's the other thing that the report found yes and that's important because part of his job as the chief law enforcement investigator for the nation is to prevent leaking and to track down leakers and when you look at the record today by the inspector general and you look at his FBI interview which was recently obtained by judicial watch you don't see the picture of an individual whose candid and forthcoming you see someone who is spinning information to their benefit and yes there will not be a prosecution in this case call me is sort of try to take a victory lap which is almost astonishing on Twitter quoting one part of the IG report he said the I. G. found no evidence that call me or his attorneys released any of the classified information contained in any of the memos to members of the media then he went on to say I don't need a public apology from those who defamed me but a quick message sorry lied about you would be nice that is from call me of course he is omitting all of the damning stuff in the report but he will not be prosecuted that's correct the justice department has declined to prosecute in this particular case the IG report is eighty three pages long it really is a laundry list of actions by the former director that went against all of the policies and the procedures that he was meant to uphold and he is correct he did not leak a memo to the media that a classified information what the document shows is that he shared memos one with classified information with his lawyers and he did that using a personal scanner and a personal on security email account and on its face that starts to check the boxes for something called eighteen U. S. C. seven ninety three south which is the gross negligence statute for mishandling classified information and if that rings a bell that was the same statute that they investigated Hillary Clinton for violating with her use of a personal server and her violations I think just objectively were far more numerous and far more serious on that front and call me is I mean she was sharing through that leg server other was taught was secret was top secret but the law doesn't you in this particular case what I've heard from former agents is they they know that he was fired very publicly and he was shamed publicly I mean this report does that but then they say there's no carve out in the law for getting fired and being shamed which allows you to escape prosecution and this is what is say unsettling to people because so far we had a handful of FBI executives who violated ethics rules by accepting gifts from journalists they have this led investigators they call it lack of candor or they have released information to reporters which was non public I think in one case it was under seal and none of these people have been prosecuted and there's kind of a joke that circulates in Washington they say maybe there are three tiers of justice there's justice for the average person there's justice for the powerful and connected and then there's the department of it just us to give a pass to F. B. I. N. DOJ people who are coloring outside the lines Catherine last question and I think it's important for the broader contacted by the way folks at home can hear her phone blowing up she is the chief intelligence correspondent she's getting info all the time so she's one of the few people that we allow to have our phones on here in the studio because she could have a breaking news group as soon as she walked out of the studio Catherine some people hearing okay cold the memos leaking you know Russia trump all of that is this the long awaited inspector general that distinction for the inspector general Michael E. Horowitz has had several investigations running in parallel one has been focused really on the actions of the FBI director and the handling of these memos that's what we got right now but the awaited reports deal with Faiza abuso alleged surveillance abuse and targeting of the trump campaign that's really kind of the mother lode in the situation and I believe there's going to be an additional investigation which looks at leaking whether this was a culture within the F. B. I.'s also from the IGS under director call me and then the the violation of ethics rules so accepting gifts from sources or from journalists there's also yet another investigation into this correct issue sat ordered by the Attorney General John Jerome is running at do you have any sense from your sources on the time line of when we might start to see some of these other investigations wrap up and go public with the conventional wisdom was that we would get the call me investigation first which is what's happened this week and it would be the precursor to any big findings on the FISA investigation I think what you the folks at home have to I would not be surprised if some of the files investigation is redacted in part because the US attorney in Connecticut is still pursuing these issues and there may be information they don't want out in the public to me but is the term investigation and possible criminal prosecution which would be the one that's most concerning to some of these
Will Gavin Newsom try to kick Trump off the California ballot?
"A conservative legal group is suing California over a new law aimed at forcing president trump to releases federal tax returns from member station KQED Scott Shafer reports the bill signed last week by governor Gavin Newsom requires any candidate wishing to appear on the March third presidential primary ballot in California to release five years of personal income taxes something Donald Trump has refused to do the group judicial watch filed the lawsuit on behalf of four voters claiming among other things that the U. S. constitution bars states from adding qualifications for being president former governor Jerry Brown vetoed a similar bill two years ago saying it could be unconstitutional for NPR news I'm Scott Shafer in San
"judicial watch" Discussed on 790 KABC
"Road diets and the ramifications of the homeless, plus Tom fitting of Judicial Watch all the craziness out of DC, Larry O'Connor, right after Jillian and Johnny em seven ninety KABC. This is the Ben Shapiro show south the New York Times has tired of reporting apparently. And now they're just going to speculate. So the New York Times editorial board has a piece titled what is Donald from hiding, and then it's just a series of speculative announcements. Maybe President Trump is hiding body in his trunk. Who knows maybe President Trump has a secret squirrel lover? I don't know. Do you know, no one knows? This is what they are with his tax returns right now. They right. President from owes the American people a fuller account of his financial dealings, including the release of his recent tax returns because politicians should keep their promises because the public deserves to know whether his policies are lining his pockets, and because the integrity of our system of government requires everyone, particularly the president's will obey the law. Okay. So far. I don't find anything there. Supremely objectionable, I'm fine with the president turning over his tax returns. He has said before that he would. However, we then get to ninety thousand paragraphs is speculation about what exactly is in those tax returns. They say Mr. Trump has provided some information including the annual financial disclosures. He filed as a candidate and as president but his tax returns and provide a fuller record, including previous investments and obligations. Attach return is far from a complete picture of a person's financial life for one thing. It's an accounting of income rather than wealth, so not establish whether Trump is a billionaire, but Mr. Trump's tax returns could provide significant information about matters of public import including his debts and the source of his income, for example. And here we get into the ranks speculation in the New York Times. Yeah. Again, I remember when Barack Obama didn't turn over his birth certificate and a lot of people decided that it was worthy to speculate on whether he was thus born in Kenya. This was a silly rank piece of speculation. It was silly at the time. Now, the New York Times engaging in speculation about Trump's tax returns with no actual evidence to support it. They say, for example. If Mr. Trump deducted the interest payments on a loan from his taxable income. He would be required to disclose information about the source and amounts of that load. Another attempt a partnership that sells real estate and includes foreign partners. Most disclose information about those partners. If Mr. Trump was money in foreign tax havens, those investments would be listed to the disclosure of Mr. Trump's tax returns could also help to verify or falsify a range of assertions from his made about his own life. One. Straightforward fact, check Trump repeatedly said he would not benefit from the tax cuts passed by congress in two thousand seventeen he said he'd be a big loser. And the plan is going to cost me a fortune. The claim is absurd on its face. Is it absurd on the face? I make a lot of money. Thank god. I paid a lot more taxes under Trump's tax plan because I live in California. They also suggest that perhaps Trump is in hock to leave for an interest in the return could shed light on mysteries. In the decade before he became president. Mr. Trump went on a four hundred million dollars shopping spree paying cash for real estate around the world, the binge first reported by the Washington Post. It was a market break from Mr. Trump's longstanding habit of using other people's money. It remains unclear word from got the money and why he decided to spend it there turns could also help to clarify whether Mr. Trump continues to cheat on his taxes. Okay. Well, it's a hell of an accusation. We do have an Internal Revenue Service. That's supposed to check those things out. The times has previously reported that Trump engaged in fraud to avoid taxation during the nineteen nineties in requesting from tax returns. The house has said it seeks to evaluate whether he's being properly audited by the IRS the congressional effort to obtain Trump's returns to the second best solution. The house committee would be able to evaluate the information, but not to share their returns at the public instead from simply released this stuff to the public. In other words, what here's what's happening right now. Basically the Democratic Party is deeply interested in pushing forward a bunch of unverified. Rumors about the president, which they did for two years to the great applause of the media on Russia. Now, they're doing it about his taxes. Now, here's what I think Trump actually is hiding it his taxes. This is rank speculation. But I will say some supported by the fact that his prior tax returns show losses. He's not as rich as he says, he is that is the most likely thing that is in his taxes that embarrasses President Trump. And so he doesn't want it out there. But there is an IRS and their job is to in fact, pursue all sorts of crime in the tax fear. Meanwhile, Democrats continue to proclaim it constitutional crisis taking place Jerry Nadler over at the House Judiciary committee. He says that William bar President Trump by refusing to turn over grand jury information. They cannot legally turn over there. Now engaged in a constitutional crisis. We kind of have a government whip all the information is in the -secutive branch where the American people, and the congress are stonewalled is information that they need to make decisions to know what's going on. It's attack on the will of the ability of the American people to know what the executive branch is doing and to have responsible government is in tack on the essence of our democracy. And we must oppose this with every fight regard. Being we've talked for a long time about approaching a constitutional crisis. We are now in it. Okay..
"judicial watch" Discussed on WMAL 630AM
"Refusing to provide disclosure about the questions they're asking the customers about hey, how we're doing? And so when you see the run around our client has gotten into just getting his basic information, they finally gave him a few questions that said, you know, whether the demographics age groups things like that. But they refuse to provide the answers to that. So they gave them the he gave after back and forth. They gave him the twenty nine page survey Twenty-eight pages of which are completely blacked out. We dact it. Yes. They had to redact the sensitive, and it's more minutes Mullery. Talk about talking about metro being out of it. But they're required by law to provide this information, right? The freedom of information act makes it pretty clear that so long as they're not coughing a personal data on any particular individual. They've got to provide this to you know, we're not suing under the federal for your information act, but you know, more or less it is an open records lawsuit. So the law applies they got their government entity. There's a right to access formation from government entities such as this. And it shows you the arrogance of it's not just at the federal level is at the local level. The government doesn't want you to know what it's up to in our experience, which is significant I've been Judicial Watch for twenty one years and typically when you get this type of illegal secrecy. It means the government has something to hide this case metro doesn't want people to know, even what they're asking their customers about certainly not the answers. Yeah. A customer satisfaction survey that they don't want you to know about. It's kind of obvious what the results are. Only in Washington only. Yeah. I just loved it. They wouldn't even give you the questions. That's hilarious. All right. Thank you, Tom Fenton. Great to see you keep up the good work. Seven fifty on wwl baseball.
"judicial watch" Discussed on KSFO-AM
"This guy's made for TV. This is what he puts out. This guy is made for TV. He oh my gosh. Well, he wasn't reality. Tv star. What do you expect? Right. He has bald this collusion situation and fast pitching it at everybody. I wonder if he's got Mark Burnett, the TV producer if he's got him producing these. Because somebody you're right because somebody produce that I don't think he's doing it himself. No that was so great. He's not on windows movie maker at the house. This is good. So that the other thing here is Trump says that they look at the other side. Well, let me tell you something this is this is something that the other side isn't talking about. But it occurred in March and Judicial Watch that's an equal opportunity. Destroyer they go after both sides. They uncovered more classified emails in Hillary Clinton's unsecured Email system. I I thought we had them all. So Judicial Watch on March twenty first announced it received seven hundred fifty six pages of newly uncovered emails that were among the materials former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton tried to delete or destroy. Well, she didn't delete her destroy these. They got him. They got they got from a freedom of information act lawsuit. Because Hillary Clinton repeatedly told us, right? She told us route of fifty five thousand pages of documents have been turned over to the State Department, all of my work related emails, and in response to a court order in another Judicial Watch case, she declared under penalty of perjury that she had quote directed that all my emails on Clinton mail dot com in my custody that were are potentially federal records be provided to the department of state at on information believe this has been done. This is what she said. Well, it hadn't been so I guess she worded that carefully. So it doesn't appear as if she was lying. Well, I was mistaken. They told me. She has lying down into like, an art form these people are so so unscrupulous and so clever with their words, so at twenty seventeen the FBI and covered seventy two thousand pages of documents Clinton attempted to delete or did not otherwise disclose. And now Judicial Watch is found another seven hundred and some odd pages worth. And I'm looking at some of these, you know, we could get into the weeds on this really really quick. But I'm looking at one here, for example to over twenty two thousand nine Clinton foundation of ploy close Clinton advisors said Blumenthal forwards a proposal for a commercial contract related to improvised explosive devices from a retired CIA officer turn contractor to Clinton. So in other words, this was a private citizen contacting Hillary Clinton with a favor for another private citizen that was in the arms trading business. This is how this is how slimy is so we'll be talking about that here. Okay. So now as long as we're talking about military, just briefly. Katie you've got to see this video is I put it at the top of my feet. Okay. Hat tip to what of our listeners of assuming. He's a listener Frank ferocious anyway, great video it titled never try to rob a store where marine veteran works. Oh my gosh. This is the best. This guy ups over the counter at Knox this gun-wielding robber out so fast. Oh, this guy had no idea. What not not the not that marine? The robber had no idea. What was coming as? Well. Oh my gosh. This guy had a hood over his face. And he tries to rob the store. This guy jumped over the counter at took it to this guy. So quick you didn't know what hit him. You've got to see this guy. So quick he took his hoodie off. Oh, yeah. And then before the cops come the guy is knocked out cold on the ground gun out of his waistband heads behind his back ready to become oh my gosh. You messed with the wrong guy. Absolutely. God bless our troops. What he's six past six..
"judicial watch" Discussed on WTVN
"Eight hundred nine four one Sean if you wanna be a part of the program, some other breaking news is has to do with Judicial Watch which I think is very very smart on their part nave actually done a lot of good work. We just got back one of their reports what a week or weaken a half or so ago, and we've found out a lot of information of internal communications within the FBI when actually discovered holy crap. Hillary Clinton does have top secret and classified information on this server, and they only sampled forty emails what over sixty thousand of them thirty three thousand subpoenaed, then of course, destroyed because there's an underlying crime in the intent was to destroy the evidence. And so they've. Done a lot of good work in this process. Tom and company they have now announced today that they filed a freedom of information act request and lawsuit against the department of Justice for records, a communications payments between the FBI and the former British intelligence officer was fired Christopher Steele and his private firm Orbis business intelligence, by the way, there there isn't for mation law suit down in Florida, and we're waiting. There's information apparently about Christopher Steele down there that I'm told is going to be very interesting. But when that gets released we'll let you know Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the FBI failed to respond to their September twenty seven twenty eighteen for your request, which is standard operating procedure.
"judicial watch" Discussed on KNST AM 790
"During the show, dude. I better get ready to take over. So we've had a Ma I don't ask for much ready for these. These. Deviousness industry that expect engineers to like cater to them and do things I never asked them for anything. And they're like, why didn't you ask us for this? I don't I feel guilty bothering you before three things. So the monitor we have three monitors in front of me one of them. I made one as been flickering on and off for a week now and the guy that were engineer finally fixed it yesterday. I thought game he didn't give you a new one. But all of a sudden now, it's flickering back and forth again, and again, and again, I'm gonna have to blame you for this. You gave a bad diagnosis. I don't. I don't want to say, exactly. You use your voice, and and you you convince talking about your, and you said it's something called a video card. Yes. Something called a video card magically makes video and a box shirts. Whatever I don't know. Something that doesn't make a seizure, please. So it. Yeah. It's nice. All right three things. I think you need to know number one still no public apology from the U of a president Bob Robbins, nothing at all. But I'm getting more or listener, sending me emails copying, the letters or emails are sending Bob Robbins and on top of that this is a Butte right ear Clark. Because the interview that that I sent I did the interview I did with that you have a student Judicial Watch picked it up, and she said that the U of a staffer protected the the crazy girl Judicial Watch now wants answers, and they said a certified letter to the U of A, again describing the entire interview the link the guy that works for that immigration immigrants student resource center. So it's on their second thing. I know it's a long thing. But the second thing that I think you need to know. John mccain. Oh, baby old audio has come out where he denied he or his staff. Giving the dossier to any of the media yet. We have found out what that his right hand. Man. That ran the McCain institute up at ASU gave the dossier to twelve different journalists. We'll get to that third thing.
"judicial watch" Discussed on WMAL 630AM
"You. I love your bumper music here. I big fan. Joining us in studio, Tom fit in the president of Judicial Watch, Tom. Thank you for coming in. We appreciate it. Thank you for having me. So doing what Judicial Watch does wonderfully. You guys file foia requests, you get ignored. So you file lawsuits. Couple of years later, you finally get a bunch of documents that you were looking for the latest though, making news because of what you've found regarding Hillary Clinton's personal Email server and some of the emails that were contained on that server. What did you find more classified emails, and these are not these aren't these aren't the emails that she turned over to the State Department? This comes for the batch that she tried to destroy or otherwise high because they weren't they didn't have anything relating to government business, right? There were all personal and outrageously. She was able to hide twenty thousand because the FBI was only able to recover five thousand. So they've been getting those five thousand records in batches. And this is the final batch so far as we know there's nothing else. They've recovered that. They're turning over to us. There may be materially haven't turned over to us, obviously. But includes classified information about Israel about Gaza. With Tony Blair. And it shows you just how at -rageous it is that Hillary Clinton's been able to get away what she's gotten away with by as a result of the sham investigation by the FBI Justice department, and I hope you know, attorneys-general bar season other story about classified emails that not only did they find. But she tried to destroy in hide and think better of the Justice department FBI investigation that came before him and said, we know we gotta we gotta look at this. Shelves yotam. What's so outrageous about this is look, I'm I'm a former federal government employees. And and there are a lot of federal government employees. Current former who listening to this radio station, and every single one of them knows that if they had mishandled classified materials the way Hillary Clinton did they would have been prosecuted by the department of Justice. Well, exactly, right. And she knew she was warned. In this in this batch of emails, she talks about having to get a secure, computer. So she knew that she was handling sensitive information and on top of this the emails show. She's getting emails again from Sidney Blumenthal. The nasty anti e kind of a conspiracy theorist worked at the Clinton foundation. Even the Obama White House to want him in the State Department's. She secretly was taking advice from them. And she sends he sends her some virulent anti Israel conspiracy theory. Israel, governments colluding with the Jews here in America type Email Lanny Davis, the Cohen lawyer friend of Hillary, she's he's sending her obsequious emails on top of that. You've got Clinton foundation people could working with the State Department is well, remember we were told Clinton foundation nothing to do with the State Department. So it's good reason. They've wanted to hide this material for my sense of reason that a court on another cases authorized us. To begin taking testimony from Clinton Email witnesses about what was going on. Here was all of this designed to avoid the freedom of information act. No, no, of course, that we're suggests this department, where's congress effect, your -partment opposing our efforts to get this information from these witnesses key, a key thing there, Tom that you just said and people need to understand what's important was the emails, you uncovered about the Clinton foundation working closely with the the secretary of state and the State Department, and and that's really important why because the Clinton foundation during that period was getting huge amounts of money donations from foreign governments and foreign individuals, and you have to sit there and take. Well, why were they doing that was that because they wanted to influence the US secretary of state? Well, certainly they were able to influence a US secretary of state. We had prior emails that came out where you had a foreign leader being unable to get a diplomatic meeting with the secretary of state. So he went through the Clinton foundation. To get the meeting accomplished. And on top of that you obviously had all of this uranium one type money Russia money flowing into the Clinton foundation, including a personal speech Bill Bill Clinton made that netted them personally five hundred thousand dollars from a firm associated with uranium one. And Russia a government entity, essentially. You know, there's a lot here to investigate and his attorney general bar going to ratify the corrupt decisions of Lynch the general under Obama and James Comey. I think that's the question of the day. Well, didn't she also say under oath in twenty fifteen under a penalty of perjury? Then she had directed all of those emails in her custody that to be turned over. Now, we know that that's not true because we know that she tried to hide them. We know that she tried to get rid of some of them you've gotten them. And we know that they contain some of them contained classified information. She lied under oath under penalty of perjury. Yes. She testified to us as far she knew everything was turned over. But I recall, she was much more specific and broad in her testimony to congress about it. And from what I recall, they referred that testimony over for investigation. But again Justice department has been spending all of its time harassing the president and investigating his tweets chasing, a non Russia collusion story and again in collusion with Hillary Clinton. So they don't want to look at Hillary Clinton. And seems so you don't think this is going to change. You know, when you run your advertisements for investments, they say past experience or past. Future performance. Actually, that's a pretty good rule of thumb Napolitano's. What has been going on in the past will likely continue absent pressure from Judicial Watch. Or maybe the president says what the Justice department needs to do its job and the general should do its job. I don't know if Mrs Clinton should be prosecuted, or or or indicted, but I do know the American people still want an honest legitimate investigation went on here, and we're just not going to ignore it anymore. Doesn't talk about how long did this take. Got filed suit. How many how long ago did always again ask you for emails back in two thousand eleven. Gosh, more with Tom fit and coming up at you're listening to the best of mornings on.
"judicial watch" Discussed on KTLK 1130 AM
"Or go to Judicial Watch dot org. We've got carried the other day. There was a story about how allegedly nine hundred thousand people who are not legally allowed to vote vote in the last election. And again, the left always says not one illegal has ever voted not one person legally allowed to vote has ever voted. There's no proof, which of course, is proven untrue every single day. But Tom Tom gonna tell us how he got that number. We'll talk about that. There's vote harvesting ballot harvesting in California. Do you know what that is? I don't know that it is offhand. I asked him that Tom. Can you explain to us what ballot harvesting is in California? And it's happening in California. And it's going to be really something that distresses you when you hear it. You're. Not going to believe they're doing this in California. But they are. And I think there's there's going to be a push to do this in other places as well. So we talk about that. We also talk about the Muller probe. Tom does maybe it should be a Muller? Prob-? I agree with him. He thinks that Muller should be funded in the whole thing should be closed down. I think we'll get the interest this week on that. And will there ever be an investigation into Hillary Clinton? We talk about all that with Tom fit and coming up by the make sure you stick around and go to the phone lines. In the meantime, a lot of people want to be heard on the Muller probe. I've now described to you have explained exactly what it's based on. Which makes it even more foolish that we're spending even a dime on a pro that is completely fictitious in a witch hunt. Thomas what's going on in Akron high? Hey, buddy. I love it. Right back. Real quick points. I think it goes back to the. Smirk at Lisa page. What was it? Whether they call it the insurance policy in case one goes back to that. And it certainly goes your emails. You're exactly right. But I think it's not so much about the Hillary emails, but maybe the Podesta emails because I believe that just goes right back to the top. Yeah. Very tippy pop, and that's Barack Hussein Obama. Why? I agree that Barack Obama absolutely was party to to this this silent coup this of this effort to stop Donald Trump from ever even being inaugurated. And then even since he was inaugurated still trying to get rid of him. The this thing is going to be a colossal failure in good. I'm glad but that Thomas, you're right. I believe this had everything to do with Obama and Clinton and the democrat machinery trying to change this country forever. Well, it'll it'll all come around the boomerang is coming around and one more thing in in Akron, Ohio here, some carry lobby and Sam..
"judicial watch" Discussed on 77WABC Radio
"Within a democracy. So why can't the request be made released information has been based based on that. Oh, it has. It has been many not not only not only from members of of of of congress, you know, using their congressional subpoenas. But by Judicial Watch Judicial Watch probably more successful than than any that. We've set at times Judicial Watch a citizen's watchdog group has been has been at times more successful in getting information about what's going on in the government. But you've had the government refusing the requests or d'alene the documents that for example, Judicial Watch wants that the federal judge has had to get involved and has had to go after the department of Justice and other entities of the federal government saying you can't do this. You got to release these forms. So just because a freedom of information. Act exists doesn't mean. The government will cooperate unless the courts get involved as we've seen with Judicial Watch. They've had to get involved. Well, I mean, you look at the oversight committee's when the Republicans held the house, the the oversight committee's couldn't get anything from the the FBI wouldn't give it to the oversight committees. They weren't giving it to the citizens committee. That's the entire point the bureaucracy thought that they were in and still thinks today, not the elected representatives, but the bureaucracy and who's oversight is by the elected representatives believe that what they think supersedes the elected representatives of the United States. And it does not it does not. And that's the problem. So just because the freedom of information act exist. Doesn't.
"judicial watch" Discussed on KTAR 92.3FM
"Society within a democracy. So why can't the request be made to release the information has been based based on that? Oh, it has. It has been many not only not only from members of of of of congress, you know, using their congressional subpoenas. But by Judicial Watch your watch probably more successful than than any. We've said at times Judicial Watch a citizen's watchdog group has been has been at times more successful in getting information about what's going on in the government. But you've had the government refusing the requests or delaying the documents that for example, Judicial Watch wants that the federal judge has had to get involved and has had to go after the department of Justice and other entities of the federal government Saint you can't do this. You got to release these forms. So just because the freedom of information act exists doesn't mean. The government will cooperate unless the courts get involved as we've seen with Judicial Watch. They've had to get involved. Well, I mean, you look at the oversight committee's when the Republicans held the house, the the oversight committee's couldn't get anything from the the FBI won't give it to the oversight committees. They weren't giving it to the citizens committee. That's the entire point the bureaucracy thought that they were in and still thinks today, not the elected representatives, but the bureaucracy the and who's oversight is by the elected representatives believe that what they think supersedes the elected representatives of the United States. And it does not it does not. And that's the problem. So just because the.
"judicial watch" Discussed on KGO 810
"I am your ringmaster James t Harris underlying we have Mark Spencer of Judicial Watch. And I tell you Mark Judicial Watch it's been tracking. And exposing the Komi crew for some time. What do you make of McCague's McCain's revelation? I mean, can we believe him? He's a known liar at what else is going on with this case. Well, you know, when you when you look up McCabe in the dictionary synonymous with era, and that's exactly what we're seeing here. What what's fascinating James here. You have read the page Rosenstein and Coby and McCabe and Mueller and besides there FBI and the thorny that comes with it. What it into the negative world all attorneys dangerous thing when you get badges and guns, the people that are turning, and this is what can happen. You can spin out of control and caused a lotta damage and a lack of accountability we do know that the reason why he's talking now is because he has a book out he's going to be on sixty minutes. But the things that he is saying is damaging the confirms with a lot of us believe that there's a soft coup was going on to destroy that only candidate Donald Trump, but the Trump administration president Donald Trump's administration, Rebecca. Let's go back to the dictionary. Again, James if you look up who you'll see synonymous with obstruction of Justice who needs to be investigated for destructing Justice, not Donald Trump here, you have an attorney with a badge and a group of of a gaggle of attorneys with badges and guns who wanna wear wires and secretly record the president in the White House in continua fix Eunice Russian investigation and abuse Pfizer warrants and utilize the twenty fifth amendment like it's a game. The people have spoken. But apparently, these people think they're smarter than general public. It is said to ring of a conservative circus. We have Mark Spencer from Judicial Watch. What are you hearing about the Mueller investigation? I mean, it's supposed to be winding down. But I know that Judicial Watch center complaint to the DOJ I g calling for investigation into leaks about Mueller's probe. But what else what else are we finding out about this? Well, a couple of things. Yes. We're Judicial Watch did make a complaint to the deal j I g in other words to investigate leaks. Here you have a tactical war which was uncalled for for stones warned attack award served by here, we go again, the FBI that is leaked to CNN. Here's the CNN video guy out there. What an hour before it's an wide. It's unwarranted. It's awful. And then you get BuzzFeed being told that Colin was told by Trump, though, I it's fictional and someone is leaking over there like a sponge tub, it's problematic. It's at the direction in at the tenor and tone of the leadership over there. You're just drug in front of the Pfizer court for the abuse of fighter warranty. Clear back to two thousand and two. It's a bad habit. Retinue easily one hundred warrants is a police officer Jews, and you take a warrant and the affidavit in front of judge find probable cause I tell you if you didn't take each Faisal much before JPL Phoenix state with a laugh him out of the office because they are making fictional probable. Cause. Once again, you give a badge and gun, and it's going to be problematic. You have IB stroke and Peter stroke, and you have the his paramour page with McCabe speaking about the what was going on in the White House. How us afraid looking for Russia collusion? They're all of a sudden thrust back into the picture, aren't they? That's right. That's right in hopefully, the new leadership at the deal. Jay will find a little bit of Justice. Another very interesting thing that that. Uncovered at this week here, we get an Email from Hillary Clinton's secret server, you legal server, it can change an Email from Lisa page. The attorney at the FBI and Lisa page is in contact with the State Department, wheeling and dealing. Here's the wheel and deal. Hey, we'll get rid of this term classified for Hillary Clinton. Something else if you give us some bobby's at the FBI J fa. Here. We are extracting Justice. That's like saying. Well, I'll tell you what we'll take that sexual assault. And rape, it will drop it down to a disorderly conduct. If you give us the more cops on the street at once again offensive unlawful, and it's very dangerous for the public. Be Mark Spencer from judicial washing the center ring of the conservative circus, Mark the here, you talk about as you put it in such stark terms. But we gotta ask you now that the investigation that gets into nothing is winding down can we expect for for the Clinton crew? Can we expect for the Obama crew to come under scrutiny? Can we expect for them to be investigated where the true collusion existed? I think we can expect that to happen. Yeah. Two things at least two things are in place. If President Trump doesn't act like Lee presidents that have preceded him. In other words, who wants to make a difference for good in the country? But the second thing is the deal Jay who he puts into action to enforce the law at their job function does their job in pursues and enforces the rule of law on behalf of taxpayers. If those things are in place. We might be the rule of law come to take place Mark Spencer from Judicial Watch. You know, yesterday, we talked about an incident that happened in the legislature where there was a prayer to to no one Nathan has prayed, and we had another Representative who responded by asking to introduce his guests in the in the in the legislature who happened to be God. Well, we have that legislator on the talk about what happened with the whole prayer incident..
"judicial watch" Discussed on WMAL 630AM
"The Judi Judicial Watch had filed a twenty fifteen freedom of information loss file a lawsuit a foia lawsuit because they couldn't get the information that they wanted on. How much Nancy Pelosi have been spending on all of these trips that she's been taking over the years. They wanted to know what was being spent. So they finally got it. And she took a trip to Italy and the Ukraine from July thirtieth to August. Sixth of twenty fifteen flew on an air force jet. She had four family members with her including her husband what they dined in Milan. At a James beard American restaurant, where a five course meal costs up to one hundred and ninety dollars day toward the Vatican. They met up with the talian dignitaries, including the president. And at the time the prime minister, according to their literary. They found out that it cost the American taxpayers one hundred eighty four thousand five hundred and eighty seven dollars and eighty one cents to take Nancy Pelosi and her four family members on their excursion around the world well to Italy in the Ukraine. Yes. That to Italy. Yeah. Okay. I would kill for that trip. Yeah. I would also kill to eat in a James beard American restaurant in Milan, where a five course meal costs almost two hundred dollars. But apparently, I paid for it. And so it's kinda like I did he they're just without the food. I mean, the second one of the second things about this particular thing is why is she sticking the taxpayers with the Bill when she kings so easily afford this now also on a poor woman at all no, she's not also on the trip. The delegation was also made up of nine other members of congress as well, including democratic representatives and it s you and Marcia fudge. So. They took those numbers and they compared them to a Republican who traveled. This is what you digital tell tell the Republican Colorado Senator Cory Gardner, he took a trip with multiple stops in East Asia in August of two thousand fifteen this same year. So they compared apples to apples. Same exact same timeframe. The trip was led by Gardner who is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, it costs twenty six thousand dollars twenty six thousand nine dollars and three cents because he flew commercially. And they only had premiums. Oh, jeez. So the Republican with his trip to East Asia where he's on the Senate Foreign Relations committee twenty six thousand dollars Pelosi and the Democrats one hundred eighty four thousand dollars. Yes. Almost one hundred and what year was this again, two thousand fifteen twenty fifteen okay. Not even speaker of the house. She was the minority leader. So isn't that interesting? That's why when the president canceled her flight, I thought it wasn't just Nancy Pelosi. There were family members. There were buses of people that were going on. Right. Exactly that were going on this trip flying via the air force. I don't understand why we allow that. I mean, she could she could very easily fly fly commercially case sly commercially in hurricanes again, she's she's more than capable of affording it she's filthy rich. These congressional delegations Coquelles, I'm you know, I don't think the average person is even aware of how often they occur and how much money is being spent to fly lawmakers around the world. There's obviously upside into having elected officials serve diplomats and have communications, especially if you're in the Senate, and your job is to handle some of these foreign things that makes sense to me that that you would be out there. I just think that there's government largess involved that we don't ever pay attention to and the president did actually something of a public service by calling attention to it unintentionally. I think he was obviously trying to stop Nancy Pelosi from traveling away during the shutdown. Also, he saw it as a big ways to tax dollars in the midst of a shutdown where we need to come up with some funding, but he called attention to something that a lot of people just don't even realize happening the millions and millions and millions of dollars that are spent to send lawmakers off to places like Italy eating. At incredible restaurants and being wined and dined on the tax payers Bill. That's happening. All the time is not exclusive Nancy Pelosi. It's not an exclusive to Democrats Republicans. Do it to you pick Cory Gardner? He obviously the Judicial Watch he chose to fly commercial and God bless him for it. But there's plenty of evidence of lawmakers just burning through taxpayer cash at reckless levels. Well, Judicial Watch has been doing this and so nine calling on Nancy Pelosi in what they deem abuse of travel perks in twenty sixteen. They released a statement saying that in the beginning of tornado nine they started filing foia acts to expose her abuse of travel perks. It's amazing Pelosi's military travel. This is as of two thousand sixteen cost the United States Air Force two million one hundred thousand seven hundred seventy four dollars and fifty nine cents over one two year period. So million dollars over two years. Just put this in perspective lower ranking government officials. Have to live by a standard. That is so much stricter than the one Nancy Pelosi is able to so she's got this like I can break four family members with it or whatever like this thing that she's invented for herself. My I know secret, my father is a marine general. He can't be picked up at his house. If a driver has to take him to an event he has to go to work in order to be picked up. He can't if he's flying to visit a military base. My mother can't fly with him just because the plane is flying there. There has to be an official government approved reason for her to even be on the plane. It is ludicrous to think that Nancy Pelosi is getting government taxpayer funded vacations day Italy. To that level on private jets. And this this is part of just another another example of those who make the laws don't live by the laws that they impose on the rest of us laws for the not hardly the two standard so kudos to the president on grounding initial watch yet again forgetting the details at five forty four and WMA AM Dacian.
"judicial watch" Discussed on Bill O'Reilly's Free Podcast
"Huge story now to me, I want somebody who is going to make the accusation responsibly. And I'm not sure this was responsible. Now, I'm not sure about that. As an American are. No, I don't happen. And I've said that from the very beginning. But to me, I mean, this doesn't look like the crew that you go to it's such a polarized law firm, it's so anti Republican and anti Cavanaugh. So that she's going into the most virulent. Int- anti Republican anti-trump situation. She could possibly go into. Yeah. I mean. My point was that you can have political lawyers who are good lawyers. But in this case of their political lawyers who put politics above. Yeah. The representation there, and it was quite quite obvious that they wanted to destroy cavenaugh for political reasons not they don't know what happened lawyers. Don't know. What happened they have to believe their clients, and they don't want so forensic evidence at all and no corroboration. All's we know last question quickly. Just quickly the goal. The Democrats was getting to hear it, and you know, by keeping their their client in the dark as it seems about the opportunities to avoid wouldn't have gone to hearing. When it got. Well, they would've eventually because Feinstein would have made sure of that that got out leaks and all of that, you know, that now last question avenue avenue, ATI, and sweat, Nick. Okay. How fast if that disappear sweat Nick makes one appearance on television whole story collapses? And she went to a liberal interviewer wasn't even you know, challenging her that might whole thing fell apart. Okay. Now, d- I hope you follow this because you're going to have to do a freedom of information act or year from now because I know the FBI not gonna they're not gonna present it in a way, it should be presented to the public. I don't have any confidence in them at all. Well, you know, I wish I could say that past experience shows that you're wrong about that. But. I agree that you are right to be skeptical. But a good for Chuck Grassley for at least good for him to the Justice department. But that there was this obvious effort to mislead congress and lie, and whether is partially responsible for that needs to be investigated. Now, it's interesting is in a letter, I read Grass's either I didn't realize this. But did you know that sweating was cats as a client for a period of time? I did not know that. So she was she was Dr Ford's lawyers client as well. Gee. What a small world. Yes. Convenient is it boy I'd like to see I really like to see the whole thing unravel. And I'm sure you're going to have to do it with freedom of information, foia requests, because I don't think the folks are going to give what really is going on here. So Judicial Watch we love them. They're watching the powerful people and Tommy really appreciate you taking the time tonight. Thank you Bill. Thank you. Okay..
"judicial watch" Discussed on Unfilter
"It has no thanks to Judicial Watch. Come to light that Peter Struck had some hiring demands. So like you know, probably many of you and our audience when you've got a new job, maybe you've been fortunate enough to say, all right, I will come work for you, but you gotta buy me a nice laptop or I'll come work for you, but I have to have a standing desk like maybe you've been able to have a requirement. Well, Peter had some requirements Peterhead some requirements that didn't really seem to match up with his new roles which gave him unprecedented access information that he probably shouldn't have had access anymore. But it was part of his hiring demands comes from. Our license right now, talk more about that. He's a member of the house oversight judiciary and foreign affairs committees and congressman is always a pleasure to see you. Thank you for joining us. Thanks for me on. Thanks for teeing it up with the fact that the more we know about Peter Struck the more we need to know more. Well, that's what ask you. I mean, I want to ask you where your investigation stands right now, but I, what about this idea that Pierce struck did not want to give up his security clearances a moment ago is talking to congressman Peter King about this revolving door about how security clearances perpetuate top level corruption in the United States because they're using their security clearances as their bona fides to get a new job. And then they're using that job to actually lash out at President Trump if they don't agree with him. Exactly. And this isn't new. At the end of the Clinton administration, we had people showing up and putting classified documents into their clothes and walking out with one of a kind documents because they still had access. This is a problem in the case of Peter Struck was interesting was he didn't just want to keep his clearance. He wanted to keep to use a term special powers powers that even the the speaker of the house doesn't have issuing national security letters, meaning doing investigations without the normal protections of of a court order. And the ability to declassify documents selectively meaning to create an environment in which you could leak something and say, it isn't classified because you've declassified it for molar. These were special powers that no one understood he he had and Peter brought to the to the fight if you will, you understand what he's saying that, right? You understand what he's saying is these are my special qualifications that may. Me a great candidate for you, Bob, I can do these things for you Bob, that other people can't do and you think, well doesn't work like that. That's exactly how fucking worse. Don't be naive. That's exactly how it works. Your level of clearance and who you know in the government, your connections, your network. That's what makes you valuable at these levels. That's what they hire you on. They don't hire you on the work you do. You don't do any work. They don't hire you on that. You know that think about it for a second. They hire you on your connections, they hire you on your clearance that hire you on your friends with and they have to be savvy to survive in this government. If you're going to be Bob Muller and you're going to be in this shit for the better half of your life, you know how to navigate this stuff, you know what makes people valuable. And if he didn't, it would be negligent if he didn't. He would be stupid. So which one is it? It's either he's actively participating in this corrupt system and hiring people based on their. Access and clearance and their ability to leak and their willingness to participate. Or which is in my opinion, worse, if you think about it, they're they're so inept and they're so out of touch that they don't understand. This is how it works. Is that who you want investigating Russia collusion. No, you want somebody who saffy who knows how to navigate DC, who knows how to get what he wants. Well, this is what you get. Shit shit out everybody. That's how it works. It reminds me of Bob Muller during the nine eleven investigation same exact situation shit in shit out. Here we have Bob again. Can't wait for these guys to all right. Well, speaking of people dying. I can't believe I just transition..
Ten-month old puppy dies in overhead bin on United flight
"And am six thirty washington's mall w on aol now washington mornings on the mall am six thirty good morning coming up on mornings on the mall hans von spaghetti is going to be here since six thirty this morning talk about whether or not you should mark whether you're a citizen on the census felt like that's common sense but at seven oh five dr brickland is gonna be here he's a clinical psychologist we're going to chat about our students in our schools and what's driving some of them to the chaos that we've seen seven thirty five steve moore and economists and friend larry cudlow who has got a new job at the white house eight oh five bone steal from the washington post march madness boom and tom fitna beer at eight thirty five from judicial watch on andrew mccabe so much to talk about i'm vince ghana is longtime mary walter fly with me let's way can you with a pet with a family member that has for you might wanna rethink flying you might wanna drive if you can i don't know take a slow boat something along those lines so so to recap we know that united airlines had an incident with a puppy at ten month old puppy that was flying with the family in an airline approved case hope carrier and the carrier under they allegedly put the carrier under the seat in front of them and the people who are around them corroborate their story a long story short these stewardess or flight attendant to be politically correct insisted that they put the carrier in the overhead bin and it kept saying there's a dog in the carrier and she said has to go in the overhead bin it's blocking the aisle goes in there a dog's whining through through for a couple of hours the dog calms down they they land they take the crate down and the dog is dead the puppies debt ten month old puppy was an english pub and they say they have problem breathe but apparently there's not a whole lot of air up there in the in the.
"judicial watch" Discussed on No Agenda
"The judicial watch is the one who broke it okay are they quoting sources no no they do everything from from freedom of information act s requests defined documents i couldn't fight this far as i know it was cnn who broke this which was very good have been cnn abroad alberda didn't followed closely because i've always assumed that this was a this was going on well be stupid to think it isn't it right now the to us and especially when everyone applauds it i mean that's wrong message no that's not good that's the message that's what people believe it sadder than giving the wrong message this is your typical american and tourist in new york douche but these are the dumb people and there's lots of them hate to say it well wait until you get to the miss america materials geez okay and one of the worst offenders are just teasing yes miss texas is rubbing it in to this past week we had a hearing on the hill in these united states of get more nation about says stop fest which is to stop sex trafficking an ax to stop sex trafficking yeah this has been whose very unusual the people responded to it well and and i i don't i did deep dive into it and it revolves round section two of three of the communications decency act which is which were set in place i believe for all the right reasons and we can have a little debate about this if it should be there are not afraid to change and in essence there's really only one paragraph that matters that says if you if you host they service on the internet then you cannot be held liable for what other people or other services post on your service and that is what.
"judicial watch" Discussed on Unfilter
"And so you can you can mix up hillary's email server with russia hacking the dnc and judicial watch is suing and freedom information requests many of the leaks many of the leaks i'm gonna say one more time you really got to hear this many of the quote unquote leaks of hillary's emails that are being attributed to russians actually came from judicial watch if you don't know what i'm talking about google search judicial watch judicial watch hillary clinton emails judicial watch hillary clinton emails judicial watch hillary clinton emails google search that they threw actual legal means got access to a ton of emails via the state department that has nothing to do with russia has nothing to do with wikileaks and it's a fact that she just tries to whitewash away see there's it's confusing it's hard to follow because there's the email hack there's leaks there's the fishing of john podesta there's trump campaign collusion supposedly with michael flynn and then there's the actual possibility that as a nation russia attempted to represent their best interests and influence the election and they may have gone too far in doing so those are all separate things is very hard to keep track of it all and so it it generally gets muddied in the conversation in.