It’s Heavily Redacted With Privilege Claimed



Why do you have to redact notes about a meeting about your grandchildren?

Quote:Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch is clashing with the Trump Justice Department over access to “talking points” the DOJ prepared under the Obama administration to explain the controversial tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton last year.

Judicial Watch is seeking the documents as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The group complained late Wednesday that it had received “heavily redacted” emails pertaining to the department’s internal preparations last year to press inquiries on the Lynch-Clinton meeting.

“It’s jaw-dropping that the Trump administration is blacking out key information about how the Obama Justice Department tried to spin Loretta Lynch’s scandalous meeting with Bill Clinton,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a written statement.

Keep reading here...

They were probably talking about adoption.

thanks Oblunder!

It's pretty clear the trump administration is blacking out data that proves the meeting was about...well...nothing.

(08-04-2017 09:46 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  It's pretty clear the trump administration is blacking out data that proves the meeting was about...well...nothing.

You dont fail to self-report this type of action because it was about...well...nothing.

(08-03-2017 10:25 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  It’s Heavily Redacted With Privilege Claimed



Why do you have to redact notes about a meeting about your grandchildren?

Quote:Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch is clashing with the Trump Justice Department over access to “talking points” the DOJ prepared under the Obama administration to explain the controversial tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton last year.

Judicial Watch is seeking the documents as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The group complained late Wednesday that it had received “heavily redacted” emails pertaining to the department’s internal preparations last year to press inquiries on the Lynch-Clinton meeting.

“It’s jaw-dropping that the Trump administration is blacking out key information about how the Obama Justice Department tried to spin Loretta Lynch’s scandalous meeting with Bill Clinton,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a written statement.

Keep reading here...

Based off the the comments of Judicial Watch's President ("...the Obama Justice Department tried to spin Loretta Lynch’s scandalous meeting with Bill Clinton"), I'm going to guess they were looking for incriminating evidence that simply wasn't there.

(08-03-2017 10:25 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  It’s Heavily Redacted With Privilege Claimed



Why do you have to redact notes about a meeting about your grandchildren?

Quote:Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch is clashing with the Trump Justice Department over access to “talking points” the DOJ prepared under the Obama administration to explain the controversial tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton last year.

Judicial Watch is seeking the documents as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The group complained late Wednesday that it had received “heavily redacted” emails pertaining to the department’s internal preparations last year to press inquiries on the Lynch-Clinton meeting.

“It’s jaw-dropping that the Trump administration is blacking out key information about how the Obama Justice Department tried to spin Loretta Lynch’s scandalous meeting with Bill Clinton,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a written statement.

Keep reading here...

And why do you feel the need to redact when you remove redactions for everybody else?

(08-04-2017 09:57 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-03-2017 10:25 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  It’s Heavily Redacted With Privilege Claimed



Why do you have to redact notes about a meeting about your grandchildren?

Quote:Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch is clashing with the Trump Justice Department over access to “talking points” the DOJ prepared under the Obama administration to explain the controversial tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton last year.

Judicial Watch is seeking the documents as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The group complained late Wednesday that it had received “heavily redacted” emails pertaining to the department’s internal preparations last year to press inquiries on the Lynch-Clinton meeting.

“It’s jaw-dropping that the Trump administration is blacking out key information about how the Obama Justice Department tried to spin Loretta Lynch’s scandalous meeting with Bill Clinton,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a written statement.

Keep reading here...

Based off the the comments of Judicial Watch's President ("...the Obama Justice Department tried to spin Loretta Lynch’s scandalous meeting with Bill Clinton"), I'm going to guess they were looking for incriminating evidence that simply wasn't there.

Judicial Watch is a right-wing group, period.

This is what many consider "news", however. It's why mainstream news is no longer relevant to these folks.

(08-04-2017 11:12 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  This is what many consider "news", however. It's why mainstream news is no longer relevant to these folks.

Mainstream news has lost its luster and confidence with the American people in general primarily because they lack objectiveness, honesty and integrity.

Kind of like the politicians they propagandize for.

(08-04-2017 11:20 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 11:12 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  This is what many consider "news", however. It's why mainstream news is no longer relevant to these folks.

Mainstream news has lost its luster and confidence with the American people in general primarily because they lack objectiveness, honesty and integrity.

Kind of like the politicians they propagandize for.

When people become accustomed to hearing what they want to hear, they tune out what they don't. This is a casualty of end of the fairness doctrine and the proliferation of media. The left is late to the game, but is quickly catching up. Pretty soon, there will be zero common ground.

(08-04-2017 11:30 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Pretty soon, there will be zero common ground.

Pretty soon? There's more than zero now? Where?

(08-04-2017 11:33 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 11:30 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Pretty soon, there will be zero common ground.

Pretty soon? There's more than zero now? Where?

Call me an optimist

(08-04-2017 11:30 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 11:20 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 11:12 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  This is what many consider "news", however. It's why mainstream news is no longer relevant to these folks.

Mainstream news has lost its luster and confidence with the American people in general primarily because they lack objectiveness, honesty and integrity.

Kind of like the politicians they propagandize for.

When people become accustomed to hearing what they want to hear, they tune out what they don't. This is a casualty of end of the fairness doctrine and the proliferation of media. The left is late to the game, but is quickly catching up. Pretty soon, there will be zero common ground.

Call it the optimist in me but I think generally people want to hear facts without bias. We can think for ourselves.

But that's the problem. Politicians (regardless of party) don't want people to think for themselves. They prefer to control thought & belief of the masses.

(08-04-2017 11:41 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 11:30 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 11:20 AM)umbluegray Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 11:12 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  This is what many consider "news", however. It's why mainstream news is no longer relevant to these folks.

Mainstream news has lost its luster and confidence with the American people in general primarily because they lack objectiveness, honesty and integrity.

Kind of like the politicians they propagandize for.

When people become accustomed to hearing what they want to hear, they tune out what they don't. This is a casualty of end of the fairness doctrine and the proliferation of media. The left is late to the game, but is quickly catching up. Pretty soon, there will be zero common ground.

Call it the optimist in me but I think generally people want to hear facts without bias. We can think for ourselves.

But that's the problem. Politicians (regardless of party) don't want people to think for themselves. They prefer to control thought & belief of the masses.

If that's what they wanted, then CSPAN would outperform Fox, CNN & MSnbc

Trump should get the unredacted report, declassify it, and Tweet it to the public. Regardless of what is in it, pro or con.

(08-04-2017 02:45 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Trump should get the unredacted report, declassify it, and Tweet it to the public. Regardless of what is in it, pro or con.

What makes you think he hasn't already seen it, but didn't release it because there's nothing in it?

(08-04-2017 03:41 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-04-2017 02:45 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  Trump should get the unredacted report, declassify it, and Tweet it to the public. Regardless of what is in it, pro or con.

What makes you think he hasn't already seen it, but didn't release it because there's nothing in it?

Because Obama didnt release it.

(08-03-2017 10:25 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  It’s Heavily Redacted With Privilege Claimed



Why do you have to redact notes about a meeting about your grandchildren?

Quote:Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch is clashing with the Trump Justice Department over access to “talking points” the DOJ prepared under the Obama administration to explain the controversial tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton last year.

Judicial Watch is seeking the documents as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The group complained late Wednesday that it had received “heavily redacted” emails pertaining to the department’s internal preparations last year to press inquiries on the Lynch-Clinton meeting.

“It’s jaw-dropping that the Trump administration is blacking out key information about how the Obama Justice Department tried to spin Loretta Lynch’s scandalous meeting with Bill Clinton,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a written statement.

Keep reading here...

Must've been some really schitty golf scores they discussed...

(08-04-2017 09:57 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-03-2017 10:25 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  It’s Heavily Redacted With Privilege Claimed



Why do you have to redact notes about a meeting about your grandchildren?

Quote:Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch is clashing with the Trump Justice Department over access to “talking points” the DOJ prepared under the Obama administration to explain the controversial tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton last year.

Judicial Watch is seeking the documents as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The group complained late Wednesday that it had received “heavily redacted” emails pertaining to the department’s internal preparations last year to press inquiries on the Lynch-Clinton meeting.

“It’s jaw-dropping that the Trump administration is blacking out key information about how the Obama Justice Department tried to spin Loretta Lynch’s scandalous meeting with Bill Clinton,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a written statement.

Keep reading here...

Based off the the comments of Judicial Watch's President ("...the Obama Justice Department tried to spin Loretta Lynch’s scandalous meeting with Bill Clinton"), I'm going to guess they were looking for incriminating evidence that simply wasn't there.

And a guess is all anyone apparently will get cause anything of substance has been blacked out.


Now, why's that? Most transparent Admin Evaaaah!