"We Need To Find That Guy": New Docs Reveal FBI Focus On Leaker In Clinton-Lynch Tarmac Meeting

Back on June 29, 2016, Obama"s Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, tried to convince us that the following "impromptu" meeting between herself and Bill Clinton at the Phoenix airport, a private meeting which lasted 30 minutes on Lynch"s private plane, was mostly a "social meeting" in which Bill talked about his grandchildren and golf game.  It was not, under any circumstances, related to the statement that former FBI Director James Comey made just 6 days later clearing Hillary Clinton of any alleged crimes related to his agency"s investigation.

Now, newly released FBI emails obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, reveals that, in the days following Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton"s brazen display of government corruption, the FBI seemingly made no attempt to ascertain whether that meeting might have been conducted in an effort to undermine an ongoing investigation of Hillary Clinton but rather focused on tracking down the whistleblower, allegedly a member of the Phoenix Police Department, for leaking details of the outrageous meeting. 

Per the following email chain sent on July 3, 2016, a pair of FBI agents discuss who might be responsible for alerting reporters of the now-infamous tarmac meeting with one of the agents saying "we need to find that guy and bring him [in]."

Meanwhile, another email chain goes so far as to label the leaker as a "security threat"...guess there is a fine line between "security threat" and "whistleblower"...and determining on which side of that line you fall just may depend on your political affiliation.

And here is an even larger blast, which appears to go to every FBI field office, that chastises agents for "violating the trust" of the Attorney General "in our team"...what if the Attorney General violates the trust of the entire American public by undermining an ongoing criminal investigation solely for political purposes?  Is that not an issue for the FBI?

And here is more targeting...

Of course, in light of all the leaks that have occurred since President Trump moved into the White House, we do wonder whether the FBI is pursuing each of them with the same vigor as they apparently pursued this Phoenix police officer...

Here is the full FOIA dump from Judicial Watch for your reading pleasure:

"The Cover-Up Begins To End": Judicial Watch Hints At Explosive New Clinton-Lynch Tarmac Docs

Back on June 29, 2016, Obama"s Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, tried to convince us that the following "impromptu" meeting between herself and Bill Clinton at the Phoenix airport, a private meeting which lasted 30 minutes on Lynch"s private plane, was mostly a "social meeting" in which Bill talked about his grandchildren and golf game.  It was not, under any circumstances, related to the statement that former FBI Director James Comey made just 6 days later clearing Hillary Clinton of any alleged crimes related to his agency"s investigation.

Not surprisingly, following the above media clip several concerned watchdog groups filed FOIA requests seeking any and all DOJ and/or FBI documents related to what was either (i) a really poorly timed meeting, in the best case, or (ii) a clear attempt by a former President of the United States to apply leverage over the current Attorney General to obstruct justice and get his wife elected President, in the worst case. 

After originally being told by the FBI there were no documents to produce in response to their July 2016 FOIA request, Judicial Watch"s Tom Fitton was subsequently told in October 2017 that the FBI had simply overlooked 30 pages worth of relevant docs...30 pages which Fitton now says will mark the "beginning of the end" of the DOJ"s "cover-up" when they"re released this Thursday.

FBI Hid Clinton/Lynch Tarmac Meeting Records. But the cover-up begins to end -- thanks to @JudicialWatch -- the day after tomorrow. @RealDonaldTrump needs to clean house at FBI/DOJ.

FBI Hid Clinton/Lynch Tarmac Meeting Records. But the cover-up begins to end -- thanks to @JudicialWatch -- the day after tomorrow. @RealDonaldTrump needs to clean house at FBI/DOJ. https://t.co/tytBp28sYL

— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) November 28, 2017

Of course, Fitton expressed his frustration with the botched FOIA response back in October after describing the FBI as "out of control" and saying it"s "stunning that the FBI ‘found’ these Clinton-Lynch tarmac records only after we caught the agency hiding them in another lawsuit."  Per Judicial Watch:

“The FBI is out of control. It is stunning that the FBI ‘found’ these Clinton-Lynch tarmac records only after we caught the agency hiding them in another lawsuit,” stated Judicial Watch Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch will continue to press for answers about the FBI’s document games in court. In the meantime, the FBI should stop the stonewall and release these new records immediately.”

 

This case has also forced the FBI to release to the public the FBI’s Clinton investigative file, although more than half of the records remain withheld.  The FBI has also told Judicial Watch that it anticipates completing the processing of these materials by July 2018.

 

There is significant controversy about whether the FBI and Obama Justice Department investigation gave Clinton and other witnesses and potential targets preferential treatment.

So what say you?  Will Judicial Watch finally manage to release documents that expose collusion between a former U.S. President, the FBI and the sitting Attorney General to cover-up a massive Clinton scandal or will they simply release more heavily redacted documents that tell us precisely nothing.  We"ll let you know on Thursday.

FBI Denies FOIA Request For Hillary Documents Due To "Lack Of Public Interest"

It was just over a year ago that James Comey boldly consolidated the roles of investigator, lawyer, judge and jury when he announced that, although Hillary was "extremely careless" in her mishandling of classified State Department emails, no reasonable prosecutor would be willing to bring charges against her. 

The decision sparked national outrage, particularly since it came just a few days after Bill Clinton happened to be spotted by a local reporter meeting privately with then Attorney General Loretta Lynch on a tarmac in Phoenix.  Combine that with Comey"s admission under oath that Loretta Lynch clearly attempted to interfere in the FBI"s investigation and it all wreaked of just another Clinton coverup...said another way, just a bunch of Republicans trying to "criminalize things that are normal."

Be that as it may, at least one attorney, Ty Clevenger of New York, has been working diligently to make sure that Hillary and various members of her staff face at least some consequences for their alleged crimes which range from perjury under oath to willful destruction of evidence protected by a Congressional subpoena (see: The "Oh Shit" Moment: Hillary Wiped Her Server With BleachBit Despite Subpoena), among many others. We noted the efforts of Clevenger to get Hillary disbarred in the state of Arkansas back in June in a post entitled "Hillary Not "Out Of The Woods": Arkansas Bar Considers Disciplinary Action Over Email Scandal."

Alas, it seems as though Clevenger"s pursuit of Hillary has been has been held up by the FBI for a rather curious reason, namely a "lack of public interest."  As the Washington Times points out, after filing a FOIA request for Hillary documents with the FBI, Clevenger received the following emailed response:

“You have not sufficiently demonstrated that the public’s interest in disclosure outweighs personal privacy interests of the subject,” FBI records management section chief David M. Hardy told Mr. Clevenger in a letter Monday.

“It is incumbent upon the requester to provide documentation regarding the public’s interest in the operations and activities of the government before records can be processed pursuant to the FOIA,” Mr. Hardy wrote.

Dear FBI, on behalf of Mr. Clevenger, please allow us to submit Exhibit A regarding the public"s interest in this and all future FOIA requests regarding Mrs. Clinton"s records...there are roughly 63mm people (and probably a couple of Democrats as well) who are very eager to learn anything you might have to disclose regarding Hillary"s alleged transgressions.

FOIA Dump Reveals Collusion Between Lynch, FBI And Media To Bury Bill Clinton Meeting

OATH KEEPERS:
ORDERS WE WILL NOT OBEY

Click here to read full length version.

1. We will NOT obey orders to disarm the American people.


2. We will NOT obey orders to conduct warrantless searches of the American people
.

3. We will NOT obey orders to detain American citizens as “unlawful enemy combatants” or to subject them to military tribunal.


4. We will NOT obey orders to impose martial law or a “state of emergency” on a state.


5. We will NOT obey orders to invade and subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.


6. We will NOT obey any order to blockade American cities, thus turning them into giant concentration camps.


7. We will NOT obey any order to force American citizens into any form of detention camps under any pretext.


8. We will NOT obey orders to assist or support the use of any foreign troops on U.S. soil against the American people to “keep the peace” or to “maintain control."


9. We will NOT obey any orders to confiscate the property of the American people, including food and other essential supplies.


10. We will NOT obey any orders which infringe on the right of the people to free speech, to peaceably assemble, and to petition their government for a redress of grievances.

Click here to read full length version.

---

Loretta Lynch Communicated With DOJ Officials Using Grandmother's Name As Alias

Submitted by @ZeroPointNow, originally published at iBankCoin.com

Loretta Lynch has been busted using an alias to communicate with DOJ officials, per a tweet by Kim Dotcom last night. The revelation comes after internet sleuths sifted through a new release of emails obtained via FOIA request by the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) last week (link here to PDF) and found an email from “Elizabeth Carlisle” to colleagues, thanking “to all who worked on this.”

BREAKING: Did Loretta Lynch use an alias to communicate with DOJ officials and why? Who is Elizabeth Carlisle? Dear Internet, investigate! pic.twitter.com/oqngTKDhLY

— Kim Dotcom (@KimDotcom) August 5, 2017

            

And as Jim Hoft reported last night, users in Reddit’s  “The_Donald” forum discovered that “Lizzie Carlisle” was Lynch’s grandmother’s name – Lizzie Carlisle Harris!

The hunt begins for all communications with Loretta “Elizabeth Carlisle” Lynch…

Sneaky

This isn’t the first case of a high level Democrat using an alias. Contained within leaked emails released by Wikileaks during the 2016 election is an email from then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to “Dianne Reynolds” – later identified as daughter Chelsea Clinton, from the night of the Benghazi attack. Of note, Hillary tells Chelsea that the attack was conducted by an ‘Al Queda-Like’ group, and not an ‘angry mob’ protesting over an anti-Islam YouTube video, as the Obama administration told the American Public.

Not only was this top-secret information that Chelsea wasn’t cleared to know, it suggests that high level Democrats and/or their families employed aliases in order to covertly communicate.

What was Chelsea"s security clearance when Hillary told her Chris Stevens was killed by an "Al Queda-like" group? Surely this was top secret pic.twitter.com/7u81hMgQpt

— ZeroPointNow (@ZeroPointNow) July 10, 2017

Which begs a few questions

Why are top Democrats using aliases to communicate with each other? How many other former government officials or their family members have done so? And what does this mean for any current investigations into the previous administration?

Tarmac Meeting

Another bombshell revealed in ACLJ’s release concerns several of the emails obtained address the secretive “tarmac” meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch, which happened right around the time the Obama administration began issuing FOIA requests to unmask the Trump team.

Per ACLJ:

One with the subject line “FLAG”was correspondence between FBI officials (Richard Quinn, FBI Media/Investigative Publicity, and Michael Kortan) and DOJ officials concerning “flag[ing] a story . . . about a casual, unscheduled meeting between former president Bill Clinton and the AG.” The DOJ official instructs the FBI to “let me know if you get any questions about this” and provides “[o]ur talkers [DOJ talking points] on this”. The talking points, however are redacted.

Another email to the FBI contains the subject line “security details coordinate between Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton?”

On July 1, 2016 – just days before our FOIA request – a DOJ email chain under the subject line, “FBI just called,” indicates that the “FBI . . . is looking for guidance” in responding to media inquiries about news reports that the FBI had prevented the press from taking pictures of the Clinton Lynch meeting. The discussion then went off email to several phone calls (of which we are not able to obtain records). An hour later, Carolyn Pokomy of the Office of the Attorney General stated, “I will let Rybicki know.” Jim Rybicki was the Chief of Staff and Senior Counselor to FBI Director Jim Comey. The information that was to be provided to Rybicki is redacted.

Lynch had previously said that the tarmac meeting was ‘unscheduled’ described as ann ‘ambush’ by former President Bill Clinton, and that she ‘wouldn’t do it again.’ The ACLJ’s document dump suggests otherwise, as the FBI and DOJ scrambled to do damage control.

Between the tarmac meeting and new evidence that Lynch’s meeting with Clinton was scheduled and coordinated, it appears a cadre of former high ranking Democrats have some explaining to do, again.

h/t Cuchulian

Loretta Lynch Plot Thickens as New Details Emerge of her Dealings with the Hillary Campaign (VIDEO)

[image: David/Flickr Photo by aphrodite-in-nyc/Flickr | US Department of Labor/ Flickr | Remix by Max Fleishman]

By: Zero Hedge | 

We asked a very simple question about why the DNC has failed to cooperate with Russia investigators by handing over their infamous email server to either the FBI or Robert Mueller’s team (see: DNC Server: Most Critical Evidence To Proving “Russian Hacking” Is Being Withheld From Mueller, Why?). After all, if Russia did “hack the election”, as we’ve been told 24/7 by CNN going on 8 months now, then the evidence could very well be on that server. Which prompted us to ask this very simple question:

All of which brings us back to our original question: If the DNC is in possession of actual tangible evidence that could prove once and for all that Russians hacked their servers and attempted to undermine the campaign of Hillary Clinton, why not share that evidence with investigators and enjoy the blissful vindication that its public release would provide?

We concluded by wondering whether the stonewalling from the DNC just might have something to do with this “purely coincidental’ meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton on a tarmac in Phoenix and/or Loretta Lynch’s ‘assurances’ to members of the Clinton campaign that the FBI’s investigation (or, “matter” if you prefer) of Hillary Clinton “wouldn’t go too far“? After all, if evidence of “Russian hacking” were on that server, so to would there be evidence of Lynch’s transgressions…if they existed, of course.

But we’re not the only ones wondering whether there’s more to the Lynch story. According to an article in the New York Post, some testimony that Lynch offered under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee last year could come back to haunt her. In that testimony, Lynch said that she had “not spoken to anyone on either the campaign or transition or any staff members affiliated with them.”

That said, and as we’ve reported before, that statement seems to contradict reports that Lynch personally assured members of Clinton’s campaign, potentially Amanda Renteria, that the FBI’s investigation “wouldn’t go too far“…more from the Post:

When former Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified last year about her decision not to prosecute Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information, she swore she never talked to “anyone” on the Clinton campaign. That categorical denial, though made in response to a series of questions about whether she spoke with Clintonworld about remaining attorney general if Hillary won the election, could come back to haunt her.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, which has launched a bipartisan investigation into Lynch for possible obstruction of justice, recently learned of the existence of a document indicating Lynch assured the political director of Clinton’s campaign she wouldn’t let FBI agents “go too far” in probing the former secretary of state.

Lynch’s lawyer says she is cooperating with committee investigators, who are seeking answers to several questions, as well as relevant documents. Among other things, they want to know if she or any of her Justice Department staff “ever communicated with Amanda Renteria,” who headed Clinton’s political operations during the campaign. Renteria, who has been identified in the document as the senior Clinton campaign aide with whom Lynch privately communicated, has also been asked to testify.

And then there is that inconvenient Comey testimony in which the former FBI director says that he was instructed by Lynch to refer to the Clinton investigation as a “matter” rather than what it actually was, an investigation.

Now, as The Post points out, there are new developments which would suggest that Comey confronted Lynch about the alleged communication with Amanda Renteria and promptly asked to leave.

And it will press her to explain the discrepancy — along with why she reportedly asked former FBI Director James Comey to leave her office when he confronted her with the document.

And then there is that meeting with Bill Clinton on that Phoenix tarmac that just happened to get noticed by a local reporter who just happened to be on scene.

After all the drama around the Clinton email investigation, which included multiple people being offered immunity and the revelation of what appeared to be numerous federal crimes committed by several people on Clinton’s staff, wouldn’t it be ironic if Obama’s Attorney General were the only one to take the fall? Scandal free administration indeed…

Lawsuit Filed Over Bill Clinton’s Secret Tarmac Meeting With Loretta Lynch (VIDEO)

Remember how convenient it was when FBI Director James Comey decided not to recommend charges against crooked Hillary right after then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton? We are talking of course about their supposedly informal meeting on the tarmac where the official story is that they were merely talking about their grandchildren. The head prosecutor meeting with a potential defendant one week before the no charges recommendation? Nothing suspicious at all!

In the following video, Right Wing News looks at how despite the dishonest media’s efforts to downplay this so-called informal meeting, that some people are rightfully pushing hard for truth. Watchdog group Judicial Watch has now filed a lawsuit requesting transcripts of all records of communication between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton.

Judicial Watch has previously requested the information from the Justice Department, which unsurprisingly refused to respond. Well the stakes have been raised, and Judicial Watch is now officially filing a suit to get the information. It will be interesting to see how they DOJ tries to dodge this lawsuit, and what dirty laundry it will expose.

Townhall writes:

Government watchdog Judicial Watch has issued a lawsuit to the Department of Justice seeking information about the June 27, 2016 meeting between former President Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch on her private plane in Phoenix. As a reminder, the meeting took place in secret just days before the FBI announced a non-indictment for former Secretary of State and Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton over her mishandling of top secret information on a private email server.

Here’s what Judicial Watch is looking for: 

-All records and/or transcripts of a meeting held between Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton in June 2016.

-All records of communication sent to or from officials in the Office of the Attorney General regarding the meeting held between Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton in June 2016.

-All records of communication sent to or from officials in the Office of the Deputy Attorney General regarding the meeting held between Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton in June 2016.

-All references to the meeting held between Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton contained in day planners, calendars and schedules in the Office of the Attorney General.

Lynch was caught off guard when a local Phoenix reporter asked her about the meeting at a press conference. She claimed at the time the discussion with the former President, which lasted 30 minutes, was simply about golf and grandchildren. After Hillary Clinton lost the White House to Donald Trump in November, Lynch said the meeting was regrettable.

YOU KNOW WHAT WAS REGRETTABLE?

THIS ATTORNEY GENERAL AND THE PRESIDENT THAT APPOINTED HER!

“The infamous tarmac meeting between President Clinton and AG Lynch is a vivid example of why many Americans believe the Obama administration’s criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton was rigged,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement about the new lawsuit. “Now it will be up to Attorney General Sessions at the Trump Justice Department to finally shed some light on this subversion of justice.”

---

THE VOICE OF REASON is the pen name of Michael DePinto, a graduate of Capital University Law School, and an attorney in Florida. Having worked in the World Trade Center, along with other family and friends, Michael was baptized by fire into the world of politics on September 11, 2001. Michael’s political journey began with tuning in religiously to whatever the talking heads on television had to say, then Michael became a “Tea-Bagging” activist as his liberal friends on the Left would say, volunteering within the Jacksonville local Tea Party, and most recently Michael was sworn in as an attorney. Today, Michael is a major contributor to www.BeforeItsNews.com, he owns and operates www.thelastgreatstand.com, where Michael provides what is often very ‘colorful’ political commentary, ripe with sarcasm, no doubt the result of Michael’s frustration as he feels we are witnessing the end of the American Empire. The topics Michael most often weighs in on are: Martial Law, FEMA Camps, Jade Helm, Economic Issues, Government Corruption, and Government Conspiracy.

Sessions Considering "Outside Special Counsel" To Review "Highly Politicized" Actions Of Obama DOJ

Even though Obama spent the waning days of his administration boasting about how he had managed to spend 8 years in the White House without a single "scandal", current Attorney General Jeff Sessions seems to have a slightly different view of how to define "scandal". 

But perhaps Obama just "did not recall" some of the highly controversial efforts of his administration including the intentional IRS targeting of conservative political groups, Eric Holder"s "Fast and Furious" gun running program which ultimately resulted in him being held in contempt of Congress and, of course, that infamous meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch on the tarmac in Phoenix just as the DOJ and FBI were contemplating whether or not to press charges against Hillary Clinton over her email scandal.

Appearing on the air with radio host Hugh Hewitt, Sessions was asked if he would consider designating an outside counsel "not connected to politics" to take a second look at Justice Department actions that provoked Republican ire over the last eight years. Hewitt contended during his radio interview that the department had become "highly politicized" during the Obama administration and floated the idea of a special review by an attorney with the authority to bring criminal charges and "just generally to look at how the Department of Justice operated."

While Sessions was somewhat noncommittal, he did leave the door open, saying he would do everything he could to "restore the independence and professionalism of the Department of Justice." According to the AP, Sessions said that "generally, a good review of that internally is the first step before any such decision is made" but continued on to say that he "would have to consider whether or not some outside special counsel is needed."

Hewitt:  Now let me switch to the Department itself, Mr. Attorney General.  It has a bad eight years.  I"m a proud veteran of the Department of Justice as you are, but the IRS case, the Fast and Furious case, Secretary Clinton"s server.  The Department of Justice came under great criticism.  How about an outside counsel, not connected to politics, to review the DOJ"s actions in those matters with authority to bring charges if underlying crimes are uncovered in the course of the investigation, and just generally to look at how the DOJ operated in the highly politicized Holder-Lynch years.

Sessions:  Well, I"m going to do everything I possibly can to restore independence and professionalism of the DOJ, so we"re going to have to consider whether or not some outside special counsel is needed.  Generally, a good review of that internally is the first step before any such decision is made.

<

Sessions went on to say the outcome of the IRS case, in particular, remained "of real concern." The Justice Department in 2015 found mismanagement at the tax agency but no evidence that it had targeted a political group based on its viewpoints or obstructed justice.

But we"re sure this is just all "much ado about nothing" as they say...after all Loretta Lynch already said Bill just stopped by her plane to chat about his grandkids for 30 minutes...surely she wouldn"t attempt the mislead the American people just to protect her administration, right?

Sessions Disputes Obama&#039;s "Racism" Allegations Among Chicago Cops; Warns Of Rise Of Violent Crime In America

Just over a month ago we wrote about the Obama administration"s parting middle finger to the Chicago police force after the Department of Justice, led by then Attorney General Loretta Lynch, released what appeared to us to be a politically motivated report accusing the CPD of a "pattern of racial discrimination" and "unconstitutional use of force."  And while the DOJ"s 164-page report was heavy on accusations and innuendo, it was mysteriously lacking on scientific facts to support their highly controversial claims.  Here"s how we summarized the DOJ"s findings:

With one week left in office, Obama"s Department of Justice has released a report effectively labeling the Chicago police department as nothing more than a bunch of racist, hate-mongering bullies who routinely resort to the use of "deadly force" in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.

Justice Department Finds a Pattern of Civil Rights Violations by the Chicago Police Department ? https://t.co/600C0xV3yX

— Justice Department (@TheJusticeDept) January 13, 2017

And while our characterization is probably somewhat more colorful than Attorney General Leretta Lynch would like, that Chicago Police are "racist" and "brutal" will nonetheless undoubtedly be the key takeaways from the press release and supporting documents posted earlier to the DOJ website.

That said, Trump"s new Attorney General Jeff Sessions wasted precious little time dismissing the Obama administration"s crusade against law enforcement departments across the country saying the DOJ"s findings in Chicago were "pretty anecdotal and not so scientifically based."  Per The Hill:

Sessions said the findings in the report were "pretty anecdotal and not so scientifically based,” though he also said that he had read summaries rather than the full documents.

"You have 800,000 police in America. Imagine a city of 800,000 people," Sessions said. "There"s going to be some crime in it, some people are going to make errors."

Sessions, who has enjoyed broad support from the police community and is widely viewed as a law-and-order style attorney general, said that, rather spending time and money suing police departments around the country, his Department of Justice would focus on how best to work with local police forces to combat the recent surge in violent crime in cities like Chicago, Baltimore, Milwaukee and Memphis.  Per The Hill:

However, Sessions warned that there are clear warning signs — “like the first gusts of wind before a summer storm” — that the nation is at a tipping point and that the trend is about to reverse.

The attorney general said those trends continued into the first half of 2016, with the number of violent crimes up more than 5 percent year-over-year and the murder rates in 27 of the nation’s 35 larges cities — Chicago, Baltimore, Milwaukee and Memphis among — skyrocketing.

“These numbers should trouble all of us,” Sessions said. “My worry is that this is not a ‘blip’ or an anomaly, but the start of a dangerous new trend that could reverse the hard-won gains of the past four decades — gains that made America a safer and more prosperous place.”

“While we can hope for the best, those of us charged with protecting public safety can’t afford to be complacent or take for granted the achievements of recent years, because when crime rates move in the wrong direction, they can move quickly,” he continued. “So we need to act decisively at all levels – federal, state and local — to reverse this rise in violent crime and keep our citizens safe. This will be a top priority of the Department of Justice during my time as Attorney General.”

Meanwhile, Sessions blasted Eric Holder for creating an environment where police as a whole were targeted and "maligned" for the inappropriate behavior of a "few bad actors" resulting in a reluctance of officers to actually do their jobs for fear of being the next victim of a viral video.

“They tell us that in this age of viral videos and targeted killings of police, many of our men and women in law enforcement are becoming more cautious,” Sessions said.  “They’re more reluctant to get out of their squad cars and do the hard but necessary work of up-close policing that builds trust and prevents violent crime.”

The attorney general said that, under former attorney general Eric Holder’s Justice Department, “law enforcement as a whole has been unfairly maligned and blamed for the unacceptable deeds of a few bad actors.”

“Our officers, deputies and troopers believe the political leadership of this country abandoned them,” Sessions said. “Their morale has suffered.  And last year, amid this intense public scrutiny and criticism, the number of police officers killed in the line of duty increased 10 percent over the year before.”

Sessions vowed to work more closely with local law enforcement groups so they would know “they have our steadfast support.”

“For the federal government, that means this: rather than dictating to local police how to do their jobs – or spending scarce federal resources to sue them in court – we should use our money, research and expertise to help them figure out what is happening and determine the best ways to fight crime,” Sessions said. “We should strengthen partnerships between federal and state and local officers.  And we should encourage proactive policing that ensures our police and citizens are communicating and working well together.”

Looks like Chicago"s violent gangs just got their first "shot across the bow" from America"s new attorney general.

AG Lynch Admits She "Regrets" Tarmac Meeting With Bill Clinton

As yet another member of President Obama"s administration desperately attempts to define their own legacy (with words other than "failed", "rigged", or "favoritism"), Attorney General Loretta Lynch put on her gentlest, quietest voice for an "exit" interview with CNN"s Jake Tapper, admitting she "regretted sitting down" with Bill Clinton because "it gave people concern" and wants to be remembered for ensuring justice to "all Americans."

As The Hill reports, Lynch said Sunday that the fallout from her tarmac meeting with former President Bill Clinton was "painful" for her.

Lorettya Lynch on the fallout over her meeting with Bill Clinton: "It was painful for me" #CNNSOTU https://t.co/w3ewyrtBNb pic.twitter.com/bZA9V0qzrC

— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) December 18, 2016

"I do regret sitting down and having a conversation with him, because it did give people concern. And as I said, my greatest concern has always been making sure that people understand that the Department of Justice works in a way that is independent and looks at everybody equally," Lynch said on CNN"s "State of the Union."

"And when you do something that gives people a reason to think differently, that"s a problem. It was a problem for me. It was painful for me, and so I felt it was important to clarify it as quickly and as clearly and as cleanly as possible."

The Clinton campaign has cited Comey"s decision to send a letter to Congress just days before the election about newly discovered emails as one of the reasons she lost.

"But certainly if Bill Clinton hadn"t gotten on the tarmac that time and gone to you, things might have been different," said host Jake Tapper. "You would have had more say. You would have been able to control Comey more ... It might have changed the letter that he gave at the end there."

Lynch replied: "I don"t think it would have changed his view of what he had to say or not say to Congress."

So to be clear, Lynch regrets the meeting only because she was caught and it caused controversy... not because it was clearly a bad judgment call!

But, as Lynch went on to explains, she wants her legacy at DOJ to be one of inclusion...

Once again, defining the narrative is key - "inclusion" - which appears to defined by her and the DoJ as easing and deciminalizing any law-breaking activity that appears to bias against poor or minorities (whether or not they actually broke the law or not). As a reminder, The New York Post noted earlier this year that even a senior Justice Department official predicts the decriminalization-cum-deincarceration movement will backfire in higher crime nationwide. “In five years the crime rate is going to be crazy again,” he said.

The official, who oversees probation of felons paroled from federal prisons and who requested anonymity, worries the new department policy will be abused.

“I don’t see liberal judges even attempting to make people pay or spending the time making an accurate determination of a person being ‘indigent,’ ” he said. “It’s another way of not holding people accountable for their actions.”

The Justice guidance defines “indigent” as anybody who might be “eligible for public benefits,” but not actually receiving them. “Jurisdictions may benefit from creating statutory presumptions of indigency for certain classes of defendants,” the source said.

The administration claims cops and courts conspire to exploit poor blacks to generate city revenue in some kind of shakedown. But data show blacks fail to pay their fines at far greater rates than whites, so why not target whites if cash extortion is the objective?

Many of the cities with the highest fines, such as Philadelphia, are run by Democrats; and the Justice Department is no piker when it comes to levying fines.

“US attorneys always want fines and restitution amounts in the millions from people who have little chance of ever paying it back,” the department official said.

Liberals are actually to blame for the trend they’re trying to reform. Court fines and fees help pay for all the new costs liberals have added to the system, such as drug counseling and home electronic monitoring. They’ve also pushed judges to assess more fines in lieu of incarceration, especially for drug offenders.

Yet now they claim the whole court fine and bail system is racist.

Former federal civil rights attorney Hans Bader, now with the Competitive Enterprise Institute, describes the latest reforms as a “massive assault on the criminal justice system.”

It’s a slippery slope to clemency for criminals, large and small.