DOJ Claims Revealing FBI Declaration Will Jeopardize Clinton Email Investigation

Looks like some "conflicts of interests" are existing between the U.S. Department of Justice and a court that has a case involving some FBI documents about the Hillary Clinton email scandal.

Not sure, but it could be due to the ongoing FBI investigation(s) that could become partly compromised if certain info is released in court proceedings.

Very confusing, but this does clearing indicate the FBI is on to the possible illegal activities surrounding the entire Hillary private email system she used while she was Secretary of State.

I bet there is dozens of people connected to this mess and many will end up indicted for criminal activities.

A 12 page court paper is in the story.

This is NOT from un-credible sources.

DOJ Claims Revealing FBI Declaration Will Jeopardize Clinton Email Investigation

Attorneys with the U.S. Department of Justice say they cannot make public a classified FBI declaration because it would “adversely affect the ongoing investigation” into Hillary Clinton‘s private email server. The recent filing by DOJ attorneys, obtained by LawNewz.com, is significant because it not only acknowledges the ongoing federal probe, but also asserts that if the declaration is made public, it could “reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.”

The DOJ’s memorandum is part of a FOIA lawsuit that was originally filed in federal court by Vice News reporter Jason Leopold. Leopold is seeking Clinton’s emails that the DOJ obtained from her private server. He is also seeking correspondence between the FBI and Clinton referencing the Clinton email server.

Hearts are Pounding

Nerves are Shattering

tick tick tick

S&F

a reply to: AlaskanDad

I would prefer to see her work on a Federal chain gang.

a reply to: xuenchen

And I would prefer to see her swinging by the neck on a short rope from the highest branch of a tall tree.

I think she won't face any consequences and will indeed be our next president.

:barf emoticon:

Love her or hate her, she is innocent until PROVEN guilty.

So, is this Obama's DOJ trying to stop the FBI from recommending indictment by heading them off at the pass?

originally posted by: Blueracer
Love her or hate her, she is innocent until PROVEN guilty.

True. I would just love for all of the games to stop and someone actually charge her with something. It's time to put up or shut up with those guys. It was like all the stuff from Benghazi, but when the hearings finally got here, she came off looking good. There was nothing there or...the republicans were totally inept. Or...the powers that be really want Clinton to be President and are doing EVERYTHING they can to make sure nothing sticks. but...who really has that much power. Mind boggling.

So what is an FBI declaration? What does that mean?

a reply to: HUMBLEONE

ex parte means a legal proceeding brought by one person in the absence of and without representation or notification of other parties.

Wiki

So, the FBI has issued legal proceedings against a person or persons without notifying said people about such proceedings.

Here is the paper filed Vice News' reporter Jason Leopold.

The reason the DOJ and FBI used to deny the FOIA request - it could “reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.”
That reason is valid under U.S. Code § 552 - Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings.

(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information (A) could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, (B) would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication

(1) Whenever a request is made which involves access to records described in subsection (b)(7)(A) and—
(A) the investigation or proceeding involves a possible violation of criminal law; and
(B) there is reason to believe that (i) the subject of the investigation or proceeding is not aware of its pendency, and (ii) disclosure of the existence of the records could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings, the agency may, during only such time as that circumstance continues, treat the records as not subject to the requirements of this section.

www.law.cornell.edu...

It sounds like they are getting closer to a decision to indict!

a reply to: HUMBLEONE

"In March, the government filed a motion for summary judgement in the case, and incorporated this classified declaration as one of the supporting documents."

FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Email Server

March 26, 2016 | 10:05 am

The FBI submitted a classified declaration to a federal court judge late Friday explaining details about the bureau's "pending investigation" into the use of a private email server by Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton. The declaration addresses why the FBI can't publicly release any records about its probe in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by VICE News.

from the link in my post above:

"Materials that were retrieved from any server equipment and related devices obtained from former Secretary Clinton for the investigation, which would be responsive to [VICE News' FOIA request], are potential evidence in the FBI's investigation, or may provide leads to or context for potential evidence," Hardy wrote. "As this is an active and ongoing investigation, the FBI is continuing to assess the evidentiary value of any materials retrieved for the investigation from any such server equipment/related devices. Disclosure of evidence, potential evidence, or information that has not yet been assessed for evidentiary value while the investigation is active and ongoing could reasonably be expected to undermine the pending investigation by prematurely revealing its scope and focus."

... just to clarify for those who keep saying there is no ongoing investigation
March 26, 2016

a reply to: HUMBLEONE

I'm wondering that, too. I'd like to see some clarification on that.

If they publicly declared something that would endanger the case, if any, against Clinton, someone needs to lose a job.

so there are other butts on the line, and it will likely get swept away is how I read it

originally posted by: Blueracer
Love her or hate her, she is innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Unless dealing with a broken and corrupt judicial system. There's no such thing as a fair trial these days.

Just because a person gets off in courts does not make them innocent, nor does being found guilty make someone actually guilty.

I'm sorry but knowing how borked our criminal justice system is. In the end, regardless of the court's ruling, I'll keep my own council, thank you very much.

a reply to: syrinx high priest

That's what I fear, too.

a reply to: xuenchen

originally posted by: UnBreakable
a reply to: xuenchen

Bill looks more like he is trying to conceal his laughter! Thanks for the laugh!

As a matter of idle curiosity, if Clinton were to be found guilty, where would she be doing her time and how long would she be there?

a reply to: BlueAjah

Just to add -

Under Federal FOIA there are several areas where a FOIA can be denied. The federal level allows a FOIA denial if the information requested is part of a law enforcement investigation.

FOIA FAQs

Not all records can be released under the FOIA. Congress established certain categories of information that are not required to be released in response to a FOIA request because release would be harmful to a government or private interest. These categories are called "exemptions" from disclosures. Still, even if an exemption applies, agencies may use their discretion to release information when there is no foreseeable harm in doing so and disclosure is not otherwise prohibited by law. There are nine categories of exempt information and each is described below.

Exemption 1: Information that is classified to protect national security.

Exemption 2: Information related solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of an agency.

Exemption 3: Information that is prohibited from disclosure by another federal law.

Exemption 4: Trade secrets or commercial or financial information that is confidential or privileged.

Exemption 5: Privileged communications within or between agencies, including:

Deliberative Process Privilege
Attorney-Work Product Privilege
Attorney-Client Privilege

Exemption 6: Information that, if disclosed, would invade another individual's personal privacy.

Exemption 7: Information compiled for law enforcement purposes that:

7(A). Could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings
7(B). Would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication
7(C). Could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy
7(D). Could reasonably be expected to disclose the identity of a confidential source
7(E). Would disclose techniques and procedures for law enforcement investigations or prosecutions
7(F). Could reasonably be expected to endanger the life or physical safety of any individual

Exemption 8: Information that concerns the supervision of financial institutions.

Exemption 9: Geological information on wells.


What are exclusions?

Congress has provided special protection in the FOIA for three narrow categories of law enforcement and national security records. The provisions protecting those records are known as “exclusions.” The first exclusion protects the existence of an ongoing criminal law enforcement investigation when the subject of the investigation is unaware that it is pending and disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. The second exclusion is limited to criminal law enforcement agencies and protects the existence of informant records when the informant’s status has not been officially confirmed. The third exclusion is limited to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and protects the existence of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence, or international terrorism records when the existence of such records is classified. Records falling within an exclusion are not subject to the requirements of the FOIA. So, when an office or agency responds to your request, its response will encompass those records that are subject to the FOIA.

Reference comments by some about the FBI.

I cant see the FBI trying to protect Clinton. I CAN see the AG trying to protect her though. From everything I have seen the FBI is going to make sure all the t's are crossed and i's dotted. If the AG refuses to prosecute for political reasons several FBI officials have stated the info will be released to the media followed by resignations from the FBI in protest. The current head of the FBI went head to head with Bush over wiretaps and other means that bypassed court process. He wanted the practice stopped as it was illegal.

Mr. Comey won that battle.


ETA -
Obama, sometime back, stated in an interview he didn't think Clinton did anything wrong and made comments about the emails. A media outlet is using that interview in court to get the emails released. If Obama does not consider them dangerous then there should be no reason for them not to be released.

That to me smacked of Obama trying to undermine the investigation.

Recently the State department got caught trying to hide emails about her private server. That revelation means someone / persons at state tried to protect Clinton. It means the person / persons who did that committed perjury when they were interviewed and stated everything was released.

By the time this is done I see people going to prison. If not, the Democrats are done.