It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Specifically, in exchange for Combetta providing truthful information
during FBI interviews as well as truthful testimony during any grand jury or court
appearances
Combetta was interviewed subject to the terms of the immunity agreement
on May 3, 2016, by the same two FBI case agents, this time in the presence of the
SSA, the CART examiner, all four line prosecutors, and Combetta’s attorneys.
According to the FD-302 and contemporaneous notes of the two agents and the
CART Examiner, Combetta provided the FBI additional detail regarding his removal
of emails from the culling laptops, stating that Mills had requested that he “securely
delete the .pst files” in November or December 2014 but had not specifically
requested that he use “deletion software.” He told the FBI that he was the one who
recommended the use of “BleachBit” because he had used it for other clients. He
also acknowledged removing the HRC Archive mailbox from the PRN server
between March 25, 2015, and March 31, 2015, and using BleachBit to “shred” any
remaining copies of Clinton’s email on the server, despite his awareness of
Congress’s preservation order and his understanding that the order meant that “he
should not disturb Clinton’s email data on the PRN server.” According to the FD302 and contemporaneous notes, Combetta told the FBI that he had an “oh #”
moment upon realizing that he had failed to comply with Mills’s request in late 2014
or early 2015 to “change the retention policy for Clinton’s and Abedin’s existing and
ongoing mail to 60 days.” He further told the FBI that Mills had contacted him on
or about March 8, 2015, to assess what was still on the servers, including whether
there were any “old back up data or copies of mailboxes hanging out there on old
equipment.” However, he stated that he did not tell Mills that he subsequently
realized the archived emails were still on the PRN server or that he deleted them in
late March. In addition, he stated that he “could not recall the content” of the
March 25, 2015, call with Kendall and Mills. In sum, Combetta took responsibility
for the deletions, without implicating Clinton or her attorneys.
You can also imagine given that you’re experienced people the
challenge in trying to get a lawyer to give you their laptop that you
use for all of their legal work. Huge concerns there about attorney-
client privilege, attorney work product. We had a few options there.
One was to serve them with a Grand Jury subpoena and then litigate
the work product protection and the attorney-client protections for
probably the next five years, or reach some agreement with them to
voluntarily produce it and give them some sort of assurance as to how
the information will be used on that laptop.... Department of Justice
reached an agreement at the request of the lawyer for these two
lawyers that for act of production of immunity is the way I understand
it in my career that is you give this laptop, we will not use anything on
the laptop against you personally in a prosecution for mishandling of
classified information or anything else related to classified information.
Reasonable to ask for a lawyer to ask to give us the laptops and
enabled us to short circuit the months and months of litigation that
would've come otherwise. I was actually surprised they agree[d] to
give us the laptops.
originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: JinMI
Nothing in there says anything about him pleading the 5th after being granted immunity.
Specifically, in exchange for Combetta providing truthful information
during FBI interviews as well as truthful testimony during any grand jury or court
appearances
Source: theconservativetreehouse.com...
The core issue centers around what appears to be clear coordination between the USAO, likely with the approvals of Main Justice (Monaco, Garland) and the Biden defense team, to structure the wording and placement of legal mechanisms inside the plea agreement to not only excuse the current criminal infractions, but also protect Hunter Biden from future criminal liability.
originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: carewemust
Did you see who it is? I mean, you could not write a worse Netflix script with this....
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Threadbare
Negotiating for a month.
nypost.com...
What does that tell you?
The resistance tells me plenty.
originally posted by: WingDingLuey
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Threadbare
Negotiating for a month.
nypost.com...
What does that tell you?
The resistance tells me plenty.
this is why president so timid and afraid
originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: carewemust
Graham, Senate Republicans Call for Hunter Biden Prosecutor to be Given Special Counsel Authority