The Christian Broadcasting Network

Browse Videos

Share Email

Bombshell: ACLJ Uncovers Secret Email Alias for Fmr Obama AG Loretta Lynch

Bombshell: ACLJ Uncovers Secret Email Alias for Fmr Obama AG Loretta Lynch Read Transcript

The headlines-- the American Center for Law and Justice--

has been quietly working to find out

what was going on behind the scenes in the United States

after that secret meeting between then Attorney General

Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton

last year during the presidential election.

Jay Sekulow is with us to tell us what they've learned.

Hey, good to see you.

You've been at the forefront of a whole lot of these things.

I understand I can't talk about some of it with you.

But I do want to talk about the things

the American Center for Law and Justice--

you bought a FOIA request to learn more details

about the meeting with Attorney General

Lynch and the President.

Where'd you find them?

So here's what we did.

We initially-- in FOIA matters, you

send a letter in requesting information--

we wanted to know what took place

on that tarmac between the former President of the United

States, Bill Clinton, and the then

Attorney General of the United States, Loretta Lynch.

Because the time frame of this was just days

before the former Secretary of State--

Bill Clinton's wife, Hillary Clinton--

was going to be questioned about the whole email situation--

that whole scandal that was erupting.

And then you had this unusual meeting.

So when the meeting was reported we

sent the FOIA requests into both the Department of Justice

and the FBI.

The FBI responded back pretty quickly saying,

we have no documents responsive to your request.

The Department of Justice did not respond at all.

So what we did was we filed a federal lawsuit

in October of last year demanding the documents--

demanding any documents relevant to what

took place on the tarmac.

So here's what we get.

The first thing we get is this-- we win the case in court

and get an order that requires production.

We've got about 420 pages of documentation.

We've been going through that, looking at timelines,

looking at who was on it.

First thing we saw was-- number one--

the FBI lied to us.

Because in fact there was email exchanges

between the Department of Justice and the FBI,

and the FBI and the Department of Justice.

So saying there were no documents

responsive to a request from the FBI was a false statement.

There obviously was because the Department of Justice

ended up handing those over.

That was number one.

Number two, we learned, in the timeline of events--

and this took place very quickly--

by the time this question started

coming in from the media this was immediately brought

to the Deputy Attorney General's office

and very quickly to the Attorney General, herself, who

we find out is using an alias.

There you go.

Now, it also goes to a Deputy Attorney General

whose job description in the law firm he's now with

includes this statement-- that he handled crisis management

for the Department of Justice.

Obviously, if you look at the scale of e-mails here,

there was serious crisis management going on.

They were trying to figure out how

they were going to spin, how they were going to control,

the information coming out on this.

Then, as we continue to delve deeper into this situation,

we see that there's an email exchange between, not just

the Department of Justice and the FBI,

but the Department of Justice and the White House, actually

to the Assistant Press Secretary.

And that's despite the fact that Jay Carney and the others said,

hey, we don't know anything about that.

Run that to the Department of Justice.

We've not been given notice of any of this.

That's something they should handle.

Well, that ended up being incorrect, as well.

Then to complicate it more Pat-- if you

could complicate it more.

You need a white board to figure this out.

There's an ongoing Senate investigation

right now by the Senate Judiciary Committee

by Chuck Grassley and Dianne Feinstein

on this whole matter of what took place during the Hillary

Clinton email scandal, the fact that the Attorney General would

not call it a criminal investigation, would call it

a matter.

James Comey made the statement, very clearly,

that the reason he went forward with that unusual statement he

did was because of that tarmac meeting.

Well, lo and behold, one of the lawyers on the chain of emails,

who was in the office of Attorney General, one

of the senior counselors to the attorney general,

is now the Deputy Counsel to Dianne Feinstein.

So she could possibly be a witness in this matter.

So you see the tangled web this was.

And all this showed was that many had the whole media

side of this, where the media was reluctant to engage

on this-- you got a statement coming in from the Washington

Post, who says, that we've corrected the story

to include what you've asked.

They also made the statement, the Washington Post said,

just answer a couple of more questions.

I think I could kind of basically clamp this down.

So you had this of media collusion going on.

And one of them say, well, even if Fox News covers it,

we're not necessarily going to cover it.

It's not going to be picked up by other stations.

So all of this was going on.

What does it show you?

What took place at that airport in Phoenix

was not the right thing to do by the Attorney

General of the United States.

She never recused herself, and that whole matter

needs to be investigated.

Well, if you find at the bottom of it, what's

going to happen?

Was Colby involved?

He mentioned that he had enough evidence to bring an indictment

but he chose not to do so.

I mean, there's terrible collusion.

It looks like some laws are being broken up.

People want to win--

You know, I'm always quick to point out that there's not

a crime of collusion.

You have to have an underlying crime that you can then

be in conspiracy with.

James Comey, by the way, what he said,

he didn't say it enough to indict.

He said he listed all the evidence and said,

no reasonable prosecutor would bring a prosecution

against Hillary Clinton because she was extremely careless.

Which by the way is the definition of gross negligence

under the criminal statute.

That's just an aside.

So that's what he utilized.

But he did say, Pat, that the basis upon which he'd made that

unusual public statement-- which was unheard of within

the Department of Justice, and it created a lot of angst

within the Department of Justice, and for lawyers,

generally, that were monitoring this--

he said he did this because of that tarmac meeting.

So what has to happen now is the Senate Judiciary Committee

is reviewing portions of this.

They now need to do a thorough review.

And I frankly think that inside the Department of Justice

they need to have investigators on this.

Because what took place there was so inappropriate--

remember this, Secretary Clinton was never put under oath.

There's a discussion with her husband four days before.

She's to testify.

And then three days later, or four days later,

they announce no charges to be brought.

So you just look at the facts, and now we've

got them all with all these requests that we've received.

The one thing we didn't get, by the way,

was they redacted the talking points.

They were developing talking points

for the Attorney General.

We're going back to court to get those.

A conspiracy of some kind--

what do we do about that?

I mean, are they just going to get away with it, skate free?

I mean, all the attention is-- now they got Mueller.

And I know you're not supposed to talk about Mueller

and what he's doing with Trump.

But the attack has been on Trump and the dark state

has been trying to undermine Trump and get him indicted,

or get him somehow thrown out of office,

shouldn't it be time that--

there's an attack on Hillary Clinton

to show the evil that was in that situation?

I think what has to happen is--

everybody's been talking about grand juries lately--

they should get a grand jury to investigate this entire matter.

From the emails, to the tarmac meeting,

to everything in between, to the bleach bit, all of that

needs to be reviewed.

And it needs to be reviewed by FBI agents in conjunction

with a grand jury so they can issue

subpoenas, which is the normal course of what happens here.

None of that happened, in this previous matter,

as Loretta Lynch called it.

And James Comey willingly acquiesced

to calling it a matter.

So I think now you need to have a full investigation.

As I said, Senate Judiciary Committee says,

they're going to look at it.

They're already looking at it.

The issue there is, as I said, the deputy counsel to Dianne

Feinstein is a witness.

She was on these email exchanges--

Miss Herwig.

So she was on these email exchanges.

So she'd have to be recused from the case.

But it needs to be fully investigated.

Can you get Sessions, the Attorney General,

to follow through on what you're talking about?

I mean, the American You're not able to do it.

You can't convene a grand jury.


No, I don't get to convene grand juries, no.

So what happens here is, we're going

to bring all of the information we

have to these various Senate committees.

And the Department of Justice knows

what they have because they sent it to us.

So it's going to be up to them to decide

if they're going to move forward on this in a criminal case.

But we're going to send this to the Senate Judiciary Committee,

and to the House Judiciary Committee,

so they have all this information.

We're developing a memo that just puts the timeline together

of what took place.

There's an aspect of law that's called res ipsa loquitur--

the thing speaks for itself.

When you look at the context of all these emails together

it speaks for itself what was going on here.

This was a massive crisis management situation

where they did not want to, obviously, give us

what the final determination of how they were going

to handle what it was going to be.

But what it points to is the interplay between justice,


FBI and justice, and then justice and the White House.

And again, all of that needs to be investigated.

Now, see these guys are being portrayed as the Fellows

with the white hats.

They are the heroes.

And Trump and his team are being portrayed

as the guys in the black hats.

They are the evil ones.

It looks like we ought to switch the narrative.

Can you do that?

Well, it's not a question of just switching the narratives.

The facts here do speak for themselves.

And so the left is playing with narratives on this stuff.

I'm going to just give you the facts.

And these are the facts.

I mean, I'm holding them in my hand, the evidence.

I mean, we took a federal court case to get it.

So what happens now is the investigations

need to go forward now that we have the evidence.

We're going to ask for more.

We're going back into court, actually,

to ask for additional documentation

that we think we're entitled to.

But we've already got enough here for an investigation

to start.

No question about it.


Related Podcasts | Do You Know Jesus? | Privacy Notice | Prayer Requests | Support CBN | Contact Us | Feedback
© 2012 Christian Broadcasting Network