Bret Baier starts off his interview with Rep Trey Gowdy (R-SC) with a clip of Clinton propagandist and campaign manager Robby Mook explaining how the labeling of Hillary Clinton’s email cover up as a cover up by a participant in the cover up didn’t mean it was really a cover up.
Mook plays the role of stupid robot, repeating the nonsensical falsehoods that FBI Director Comey said Clinton wasn’t guilty, that there was no case, that there was no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Clinton. Jake Tapper interjects as question, asking, “So what’s the Hillary cover up operation the IT worker was referring to?”
Mook then falls back to another Democrat standard, blame the Republicans as partisans for pointing out the crimes of Democrats. It was Pagliano, an employee of Clinton that made the comment and it has nothing to do with the Republicans.
Congressman Trey Gowdy knows better, saying, “Well it was a cover up but the folks who aided and abetted that cover up is the State Department. He reminds the audience that Clinton had this arrangement for her full tenure at the State Department and for almost two years after. It was only because the Benghazi committee wouldn’t go away that it came to light. He says the State Department has been covering for Hillary Clinton since she left office.
He’s asked about the odd immunity deal with four Clinton staffers and an outside contractor who destroyed evidence, including himself in the number of people who don’t understand why the deal was made, at least, not from a standpoint of law enforcement or justice.
Gowdy points out one inconsistency saying, “If you think there is evidence that is relevant to an investigation on a piece of physical property, you use a subpoena, a grand jury subpoena. You don’t strike an immunity agreement with a computer, you go get the computer.”
He also points out that the attorney for two of the staffers is on the record as having said the DOJ assured her that her clients did nothing wrong. Gowdy injects some logic saying, “Well, people who’ve done nothing wrong typically don’t ask for immunity. So my question would be immunity from what. What is it that you were worried about the FBI finding on those computers.”
Gowdy says he believes he knows what the scheme was. He says of Cheryl Mills, “She had classified information on those computers. So you offer immunity to Cheryl Mills, who has classified information on her computer. How can you then possibly prosecute Hillary Clinton for having classified information on her computer? You couldn’t do it.”
He has other insights and ideas as well.
Please like Rick on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/RickRWells/ and at Stop The Takeover, https://www.facebook.com/StopTheTakeover/ and please follow on Twitter @RickRWells I’d also appreciate it if you SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar on my website at http://RickWells.us.