(CNN)Hillary Clinton left the 9/11 commemoration ceremony Sunday early after she felt overheated and went to her daughter’s apartment, the Clinton campaign said.
“Secretary Clinton attended the September 11th Commemoration Ceremony for just one hour and 30 minutes this morning to pay her respects and greet some of the families of the fallen. During the ceremony, she felt overheated so departed to go to her daughter’s apartment, and is feeling much better,” Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said in a statement.
The pool accompanying Clinton says she left the ceremony around 9:30 a.m.
Yes, they have a long, long history of being incredibly scummy people. One might even say that they have a history of being deplorable people.
One of the most irritating aspects of the 2016 presidential election — and God knows there are so many to choose from — is this moral superiority Democrats display over the GOP’s unfortunate nomination of Donald Trump. As if choosing one of the most mendacious and corrupt people in American politics makes them exemplars of responsible governance.
Younger voters who weren’t around in the 1990s may not be fully aware of the range and depth of the Clintons’ duplicitous behavior. We’re getting a little taste of it now, but it’s worth remembering that these are people who used the execution of a man with a partial lobotomy to divert attention away from Bill’s lying about an extramarital affair.
“To just be grossly generalistic, you can put half of Trump supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables,” Clinton said. “Right? Racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic, you name it.”
There does seem to be a planned, concerted effort by the Clinton campaign to smear and shame Trump supporters instead of trying to appeal to them. The Clinton strategy is designed to depress turnout from potential Trump supporters by shaming them away from the polls. Meanwhile, Trump is appealing directly to Hillary’s voters. During the NFL game on Thursday night, I repeatedly saw a Trump commercial in which he touted how much better America would be under his leadership. More jobs, higher pay, etc. Meanwhile, Hillary is just bashing without offering much for a wobbly Trump supporter to grab on to.
Yup. There’s nothing in the world that would have prevented them from releasing the documents on Monday of last week, or Tuesday of this week, or any other day. They made a choice in the interests of what they believed would best help Hillary Clinton.
Washington (CNN)House Speaker Paul Ryan accused the FBI Tuesday of playing politics with the release of details about their investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email, citing the bureau’s decision to publicly reveal information at the onset of Labor Day weekend.
“It’s like the most buried time you could ever put out a story. I’m surprised. I can’t believe that they would do what is such a patently political move. It makes them look like political operators versus law enforcement officers,” Ryan said in a radio interview with WRJN’s Glenn Klein.
“The fact that they chose the Friday before Labor Day to put all this out there — it mystifies me as to why they thought that was a smart thing to do.”
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has the power to force the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Health Access Initiative to publicly disclose the names of foreign governments and the millions they donate each year to the charities but he’s not doing it, a Scripps News investigation has found.
Schneiderman’s failure to require compliance with New York law and written instructions from his own office keeps the public in the dark about whether the foreign governments that gave money to the Clinton charities also had special access to Hillary Clinton when she was secretary of state, experts in private foundation law say. New York state has long required more transparency from non-profits operating within its borders than many other regulators.
A Scripps Washington Bureau review of tax returns and regulatory filings found that year after year the Clinton charities have ignored New York law and related instructions. However, the office of Attorney General Schneiderman, a Democrat whom Hillary Clinton named to her campaign’s “leadership council” in New York, did not respond to Scripps’ questions about the Clinton Health Access Initiative (CHAI), which has never publicly disclosed in New York filings the identity of its foreign government contributors or the amounts they give each year. Scripps also discovered CHAI did not report hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign government donations to the state.
My column for the West Bend Daily News is online. Here you go:
On the cusp of a long weekend in which the news was dominated by a hurricane landing in Florida and the opening of the college football season, the FBI finally released the notes from its interview of Hillary Clinton regarding her criminal handling of classified material during her time as Secretary of State. Of course, President Barack Obama’s FBI declined to call the Democratic nominee’s actions criminal, but the material they released tells us that either Clinton is a pathological liar who intentionally endangered our national security for personal reasons, or that she is a doddering simpleton. Her history suggests the former, but either conclusion disqualifies her from being president.
The 58 pages released by the FBI are notes from its interview with Clinton. The FBI, in apparent deference to the presidential contender, declined to transcribe the interview or record it as is routine for less powerful suspects, but even the heavily-redacted notes contain dozens of stunning revelations.
One of the most revealing admissions was Clinton directed her henchmen to delete records and wipe the servers after her use of a private email system became public and after there was already an active investigation looking for her records. The New York Times first broke the story of Clinton’s private email server on March 3, 2015. Between March 25 and March 31, Clinton ordered her server wiped clean using an advanced program called BleachBit.
That mass deletion of public and classified records occurred long after several government agencies were conducting official investigations regarding the Benghazi butchery for which Clinton holds some responsibility. Also, at the same time as Clinton was having her emails purged, she was publically telling the public that she wanted her emails released. Simply put, Clinton was actively shredding government documents at the same time she was lying to public about wanting them disclosed.
In another revelation, Clinton claimed to not understand what the letter “C” meant in emails. In government communications, the “C” designation marks the information as “Confidential.” It is a simple practice that is easily understood by thousands of government officials who handle classified material every day. Clinton feigned ignorance and indicated that she “could only speculate it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order.” One wonders if the FBI agent laughed out loud at this explanation, but the notes do not say if she was asked to point out the paragraphs labeled “A,” “B,” or “D.”
One must remember that Clinton was not just some intern at the State Department. She was the Secretary of State and was one of few Original Classification Authorities, giving her the power to determine what is classified and at what level. Her responsibility was not to just handle classified material appropriately, but to actually determine what was or wasn’t classified.
Also, remember that Clinton was a U.S. Senator for eight years and served on the Senate Armed Services Committee. She routinely read and worked with classified documents including some of our most profound national defense secrets. Clinton is a Yale educated lawyer who has spent a lifetime parsing government documents. The notion that she did not understand what the “C” designation meant is preposterous. It is clear that she lied about her ignorance to avoid admitting that she deliberately mishandled and deleted national secrets in violation of the law.
The jaw-dropping admissions continue, including the fact Clinton’s lawyers sifted her emails without any official oversight, she “lost” at least 13 mobile devices with classified information on them, Clinton claimed to be ignorant of the government’s document retention and disclosure rules and partially blamed her concussion, she did not consider discussions of drone strikes to be confidential, and much, much more.
The guest list for a private State Department dinner on higher- education policy was taking shape when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton offered a suggestion.
In addition to recommending invitations for leaders from a community college and a church-funded institution, Clinton wanted a representative from a for-profit college company called Laureate International Universities, which, she explained in an email to her chief of staff that was released last year, was “the fastest growing college network in the world.”
There was another reason Clinton favored setting a seat aside for Laureate at the August 2009 event: The company was started by a businessman, Doug Becker, “who Bill likes a lot,” the secretary wrote, referring to her husband, the former president.
Nine months later, Laureate signed Bill Clinton to a lucrative deal as a consultant and “honorary chancellor,” paying him $17.6 million over five years until the contract ended in 2015 as Hillary Clinton launched her campaign for president.
Just read it. Even you lefties… just read it. The only rational conclusions are that Hillary Clinton is either a lying crook or that she’s a blithering idiot. Is that who you really want as president?
Bill Clinton’s staff used a decades-old federal government program, originally created to keep former presidents out of the poorhouse, to subsidize his family’s foundation and an associated business, and to support his wife’s private email server, a POLITICO investigation has found.
Taxpayer cash was used to buy IT equipment — including servers — housed at the Clinton Foundation, and also to supplement the pay and benefits of several aides now at the center of the email and cash-for-access scandals dogging Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
This investigation, which is based on records obtained from the General Services Administration through the Freedom of Information Act, does not reveal anything illegal. But it does offer fresh evidence of how the Clintons blurred the line between their nonprofit foundation, Hillary Clinton’s State Department, and the business dealings of Bill Clinton and the couple’s aides.
The thousands of pages of newly uncovered records reveal sometimes granular detail about how Bill Clinton’s representatives directed the spending of taxpayer cash allocated by the GSA under the Former President’s Act.
The Act authorizes the GSA to fund the pensions, correspondence, support staff and travel of ex-presidents. It was passed in 1958 to “maintain the dignity” of the presidency by helping former commanders in chief avoid hard times like those that befell Harry S. Truman. He complained that, without help from Uncle Sam, he would be forced to “go ahead with some contracts to keep ahead of the hounds.”
Remember when Clinton swore under oath that she had handed over all of her work-related emails? Yeah, I do too.
The State Department says about 30 emails that may be related to the 2012 attack on U.S. compounds in Benghazi, Libya, are among the thousands of Hillary Clinton emails recovered during the FBI’s recently closed investigation into her use of a private server.
Government lawyers told U.S. District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta on Tuesday that an undetermined number of the emails among the 30 were not included in the 55,000 pages previously provided by Clinton. The State Department’s lawyer said it would need until the end of September to review the emails and redact potentially classified information before they are released.
Mehta questioned why it would take so long to release so few documents and urged that the process be sped up. He ordered the department to report to him in a week with more details about why the review process would take a full month.
by Owen | 1724, 27 Aug 1616 | Politics | 2 Comments
Yep. Lesser people have gone to jail for this kind of behavior. It is pretty obvious how the Clintons made themselves mega-millionaires – they sold access to themselves.
Mrs. Clinton’s problem—as we now know from this week’s release of emails from Huma Abedin’s private Clinton-server account—was that there was no divide between public and private. Mrs. Clinton’s State Department and her family foundation were one seamless entity—employing the same people, comparing schedules, mixing foundation donors with State supplicants. This is why she maintained a secret server, and why she deleted 15,000 emails that should have been turned over to the government.
Most of the focus on this week’s Abedin emails has centered on the disturbing examples of Clinton Foundation executive Doug Band negotiating State favors for foundation donors. But equally instructive in the 725 pages released by Judicial Watch is the frequency and banality of most of the email interaction. Mr. Band asks if Hillary’s doing this conference, or having that meeting, and when she’s going to Brazil. Ms. Abedin responds that she’s working on it, or will get this or that answer. These aren’t the emails of mere casual acquaintances; they don’t even bother with salutations or signoffs. These are the emails of two people engaged in the same purpose—serving the State-Clinton Foundation nexus.
The other undernoted but important revelation is that the media has been looking in the wrong place. The focus is on Mrs. Clinton’s missing emails, and no doubt those 15,000 FBI-recovered texts contain nuggets. Then again, Mrs. Clinton was a busy woman, and most of the details of her daily State/foundation life would have been handled by trusted aides. This is why they, too, had private email. Top marks to Judicial Watch for pursuing Ms. Abedin’s file from the start. A new urgency needs to go into seeing similar emails of former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills.
Mostly, we learned this week that Mrs. Clinton’s foundation issue goes far beyond the “appearance” of a conflict of interest. This is straight-up pay to play.
While that may sound like the kind of Big-Government proposal Republicans typically hate, Clinton and the plan’s creator, Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), have found the key to bipartisan appeal: a funding formula that will help millions of poor white voters who live in GOP-held districts as well as African-American voters who live in Democratic districts.
Story Continued Below
Speaker Ryan has effectively given his blessing, spurring the plan’s inclusion in several of this year’s bills to fund the government. Donald Trump, who recently began new outreach to minority voters, has yet to weigh in, effectively ceding the political benefit to his Democratic rival.
[…]
The math of the so-called 10-20-30 proposal is simple: At least 10 percent of a federal program’s funds should go to counties where 20 percent of the population has lived below the poverty line for 30 years.
Nearly 500 counties across the United States suffer from the kind of persistent poverty that would make them eligible for the plan’s targeted funding, Clyburn says — and it would give more Republican lawmakers something to brag about to constituents than Democrats. In 2009, Clyburn likes to note, 84 Republicans represented those counties, compared with 43 Democrats. The GOP held 311 counties and Democrats represented 149. (In terms of total population, the parties were more evenly split, with Republicans representing 8.3 million people from those counties and Democrats representing 8.8 million; another 14 counties with 5.3 million people were split between Republicans and Democrats.)
If there’s anything that the last 40+ years has taught us, it’s that gigantic federal poverty programs don’t actually solve poverty. It’s just not that easy.
But as this story illustrates, politicians love these programs because they can dump a pile of our money into communities where they want votes. Then they get to pose for pictures and give quotes to reporters about how they are helping their constituents. And people in those communities can feel good about their government for a few minutes.
And then the money runs out and they are all still poor. Because it’s just not that easy.
by Owen | 2152, 21 Aug 1616 | Politics | 2 Comments
The sun rises in the east; none of us will escape death; and Clinton lies. Some things are just inevitable.
On Friday, the New York Times reported that Clinton told FBI officials former Secretary of State Colin Powell had advised her to use a personal email account while she held the Secretary of State office herself.
“Her people have been trying to pin it on me,” Powell, 79, told PEOPLE Saturday night at the Apollo in the Hamptons 2016 Night of Legends fête in East Hampton, New York.
“The truth is, she was using [the private email server] for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did,” Powell added.
My column for the West Bend Daily News is online. Here you go:
In an effort to look seriously at the presidential election that smells like a dumpster fire fueled by shredded emails and bad hair, an evaluation of Donald Trump’s and Hillary Clinton’s tax plans reveal very different approaches to governing.
It must be noted that tax plans released during a political campaign are pieces of fiction. They are almost never enacted as promised because of the legislative process and the math, based on fanciful financial projections and dubious notions of human behavior, never adds up. A candidate’s plan is more of a tax manifesto laying out their priorities and revealing how they view the tax code.
On income tax, Trump would cut the number of income tax brackets from 7 to 3 and cut the highest rate from 39.6 percent to 33 percent. Clinton would not change much in the income tax code except to confiscate a 4-percent tax surcharge for people earning more than $5 million per year and implementing rules to forbid people earning more than $1 million per year from paying less than an effective 30 percent income tax rate.
Both Clinton and Trump would offer more tax benefits for childcare. The difference is Trump proposes allowing parents to deduct childcare expenses, which reduces the tax burden for those paying income taxes, while Clinton is proposing a tax credit for childcare, which would be paid to parents even if they do not pay income taxes.
Both candidates have also voiced staunch support for not increasing taxes on America’s lowest earners. Currently 45.3 percent of Americans do not pay anything in federal income taxes. In fact, the average person in the bottom 40 percent of income earners actually receives more than $600 through various tax-redistribution schemes like the Earned Income Tax Credit. Both candidates are promising to maintain that system.
Overall, Trump’s plan would more aggressively reform the complexity of the federal income tax code and reduce the tax burden for far more Americans. Clinton’s plan would keep taxes where they are for most Americans and increase taxes on the highest earners. Both candidates firmly support an overly progressive income tax code where a huge number of Americans view it is a source of income instead of an obligation to pay their fair share to fund our government.
Trump’s tax plan calls for eliminating the death tax while Clinton’s plan would increase the rate and make it apply to more people. Currently, the federal government confiscates 40 percent of people’s estates if they are valued at more than $5.45 million for an individual or $10.9 million for a married couple. Clinton would increase the rate to 45 percent and make it applicable to estates valued at $3.5 million and $7 million, respectively.
The notion that the government should seize an enormous chunk of a dead person’s wealth that was accumulated over a lifetime is a detestable practice rooted in the greed of politicians and envy of constituents. Trump is dead right on this one.
The candidates’ plans for business taxes are starkly different. At 35 percent, the United States has one of the highest corporate tax rates of any advanced economy. Clinton would leave the tax rate where it is, but implement regulations designed to punish American corporations for taking measures to reduce their tax burden, like tax inversions and interest deductions. Clinton’s plan would use the tax code to further flog corporations for having the temerity to do business in our nation.
Trump would lower the corporate tax rate to a more reasonable 15 percent. He would also impose that rate for other types of businesses like partnerships and limited liability corporations. Currently, profits from most noncorporate businesses are taxed at the owners’ individual income tax rate. For successful businesses, this could be as high as the top tax rate of 39.6 percent in the current tax code. By taxing profits at 15 percent, it would represent a massive tax decrease for a huge number of American businesses. The lower corporate tax rate would also encourage America’s largest multinational corporations to repatriate foreign profits and invest in America.
There are more details of the candidates’ respective tax plans, but the themes are the same. Trump intends to simplify and reduce the tax burden for Americans, which will stimulate the national economy out of the Barack Obama malaise. Clinton would increase taxes for Americans and use the tax code to further punish Americans and their businesses.
Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, released 296 pages of emails from the Democratic presidential nominee, including 44 that Judicial Watch says were not previously handed over to the State Department by Clinton. The emails, many of which are heavily redacted, raise questions about the Clinton Foundation’s influence on the State Department and its relations during her tenure.
In one instance, top Clinton Foundation official Doug Band lobbied Clinton aides for a job for someone else in the State Department. In the email, Band tells Hillary Clinton’s former aides at the department — Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin — that it is “important to take care of (redacted).” Band is reassured by Abedin that “Personnel has been sending him options.”
So Clinton was using her position as Secretary of State to sell access and favors in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation, which was, in turn, used to pay for the Clinton’s lavish lifestyle. This has all been well known and documented for anyone to see. The only things in question are some of the details of exactly who bought favors and what those favors were.
And it should be noted, again, that these are more emails that Clinton did not give to the State Department as required to by law.
Once it quickly becomes apparent that immigration reform is stillborn on Capitol Hill, Clinton will take a dog-eared page out of President Obama’s playbook and accuse Republicans of “obstructionism” and declare that the immigration problem must be addressed “for the good of the nation” with legislation being written and passed in the West Wing instead of by Congress.
Obama took extra-consitutional action and was batted down by the Supreme Court, which blocked his decree legalizing millions of illegal immigrants who are parents of legal residents. What Clinton and Kaine surely know is that they won’t be facing the same problem.
Obama’s end run around Congress was stopped by a lower court and the ruling was let stand by a deadlocked 4-4 Supreme Court, which would have rejected it outright had Justice Antonin Scalia not passed away. During the same 100 days Clinton and Kaine will ostensibly be trying to push doomed immigration, the White House on a parallel tracking will be working to have Congress confirm a new justice who will provide the fifth vote needed to uphold the executive action written by Obama — and whatever other decrees Hillary and her claque can think of. By the time Hillary and Tim recoil in “disgust” from Congress, a new justice will be in place to solve the problem.
Clinton’s decision to choose Kaine began when John Podesta brought the candidate two-dozen binders to her home in Chappaqua, New York, in April, according to a campaign aide.
Oh, and she chose Tim Kaine (yawn) as her running mate. She was so excited about it that she slipped it into the news cycle on a warm Friday evening in July.
My column for the West Bend Daily News is online. Here it is:
Late in 1971, the USS Halibut, a highly modified nuclear attack submarine, snuck through a shallow channel between the Kuril Islands into the Sea of Okhotsk. It was the middle of the Cold War and the Halibut was deep into the roaming territory of the Soviet Union’s Pacific fleet on a mission about which only a handful of people knew.
The Halibut was seeking an undersea communications cable no more than 5 inches in diameter that the Americans believed would be carrying unencrypted communications from Soviet military leaders in Moscow to their facilities in Petropavlovsk on the Kamchatka peninsula. The Americans found the cable and placed a tap on it that recorded communications for years. It was an intelligence coup that took a considerable amount of money, time, and bravado to achieve that reverberated for years during the Cold War without the Soviet Union, or most Americans, ever knowing it happened.
All that a hostile nation needed to intercept years’ worth of classified and unclassified communications of America’s Secretary of State was a mediocre hacker with a laptop sipping a latte at his local coffee shop. That is the reality that FBI Director James Comey made clear after concluding the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email use.
The framework of Clinton’s email management has been known for some time, but the details are even more shocking. Against State Department rules and federal law, Clinton chose to set up and use a private email system for her official correspondence rather than using the secure system provided by the government.
According to the FBI, Clinton’s private email system included several servers and multiple devices — none of which had any more security than what is commonly used in the private sector. With this system, Clinton sent and received tens of thousands of emails. More than 100 of those emails were deemed classified at the time they were sent, which is in direct contradiction to Clinton’s statements.
Using her private email system, Clinton sent many of these emails while in nations that are hostile to the United States and using their networks. Barring utter incompetence by those foreign nations, everything she sent and received was intercepted. One hacker has already credibly claimed to have hacked Clinton’s email system and it is naïve to think that almost every sophisticated foreign power has not done the same.
Before turning over the emails from her private system to the government, as required by law, Clinton’s lawyers sifted through the emails even though they were not cleared to view classified material. Even though Clinton claimed that she had turned over all work-related emails, the investigation identified thousands of missing emails that Clinton did not turn over.
After all of that, Comey disgraced himself and his agency by not recommending charging Clinton because the FBI claims she did not intend to break the law. Instead, they said, she was simply “extremely careless.” The fact remains that America has been prosecuting people for breaching national security for as long as we have been a nation whether they intended to or not. The laws that Clinton broke do not require intent in order to be broken.
Even though intent is not relevant, it is clear that Clinton did intend to break the law. The mere act of setting up a private email system for her official communications was an intentional act to circumvent all of the laws that require her communications to be both secure and archived for future scrutiny. It was that scrutiny that she wanted to avoid. She wanted to hide her emails so that investigators and the public would only ever be allowed to see what Clinton allowed them to see. When Clinton was scrutinized by the FBI, she lied and obstructed the investigation. Clinton was far more concerned with the American public seeing her communications when she was a high official of our government than she was with our enemies seeing them.
The evidence is clear that America’s former Secretary of State intentionally and willfully concealed her communications, including classified emails, from any scrutiny from our government and the people while leaving those same communications exposed to being read by hostile powers. At best, she was criminally negligent. At worst, the intentionally subverted our national security for her own personal gain. Either way, she is a criminal.
And yet, a Democratic president with a Democratic attorney general have refused to charge the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee after their FBI director debased himself for them. In failing to charge Hillary Clinton for her actions, this administration has forfeited our nation’s security for the political ambitions of the Democratic Party.
Clinton sent and received emails that concerned matters that were classified at the top-secret special access program level at the time of the communications, he said. That flatly contradicted the former first lady’s public assertion that she never sent or received classified information.
“There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation,” Comey said.
Comey also said “it is possible that hostile actors gained access” to Clinton’s private email account, noting that her use of that system was widely known and that she sent and received work emails “in the territory of sophisticated adversaries.”
Let’s fill in the picture a little… on the merits of the case, the FBI can prove that she knowingly sent classified material on an unsecured system, kept a private server in the first place, and lied the whole time about it, but didn’t recommend charges because they don’t believe she intended to break the law? That’s pure, unaltered BS. Not only is intent moot in the laws she broke, but a simpleton can see that she darn well intended to do what she did and that she knew it was against the law. Any other reading of the facts assumes that either Clinton is a drooling imbecile.
The FBI discredited itself today and opened the door to decades of challenges from people who breach our national security.
Next, let’s look at the timeline that reveals the politics.
– For weeks, Democrats have been telegraphing that she wouldn’t be charged (how did they know?).
– The week before, Bill Clinton huddles with the Attorney General.
– After getting caught, the AG says that she will take whatever the recommendation of the FBI (easy to do when you know what it will be).
– The FBI interviews Clinton on the Saturday of the Independence Day weekend. Why? Because it gets minimal media attention. Remember that this investigation has been going on for months. They could have interviewed her any time.
– On the day after Independence Day, the FBI announces its decision to not recommend charges.
– THAT DAY, President Obama is campaigning with Clinton. Campaign events – especially with a sitting president – are booked well in advance. There’s no way Obama would have campaigned with her had she been charged. His simple presence tells us that he knew all along that she wouldn’t be charged. And why wouldn’t he? The FBI and DOJ work for him.
This whole episode confirms what American have known, but hoped wasn’t true, for a while now: laws are only for the rest of us. The rich and powerful need not worry.
(CNN)Attorney General Loretta Lynch will accept the determinations and findings of the FBI and career prosecutors who are investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state, Lynch said Friday.
Lynch made the pledge Friday at Aspen Ideas Festival, following questions raised when she met privately with former President Bill Clinton at a Phoenix airport earlier this week.
“I certainly wouldn’t do it again because I think it has cast this shadow over what it should not, over what it will not touch,” Lynch said at the event, adding, “It’s important to make it clear that that meeting with President Clinton does not have a bearing on how this matter will be reviewed and resolved.”
