From: washingtonexaminer.com, by Byron York, on June 18, 2015, see the article HERE. Emphasis is Garnet92’s
Last March, when Hillary Clinton made her first public comments on the secret email system she maintained while secretary of state, she took care to say she had turned over everything to the State Department. “I … provided all my emails that could possibly be work-related,” Clinton told reporters. “I believe I have met all of my responsibilities and … the State Department will be able, over time, to release all of the records that were provided.”
The message was clear. Clinton had turned over everything, and the State Department would make it all public. Liar, liar, pants(suit) on fire!
Then State sent Clinton’s emails that concerned Libya to the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Chairman Trey Gowdy immediately expressed skepticism about the claim that everything had been turned over. “There are gaps of months and months and months,” Gowdy said.
How could that be possible? Months of gaps in Clinton’s emails? Only two ways that could happen – either State didn’t turn them over or (and this is my favorite) Hillary didn’t print them for State. She deemed them as “incriminating to her” and deleted them.
Gowdy’s suspicions appear to have been confirmed (the plot thickens). As part of the committee’s questioning of Clinton friend and defender Sidney Blumenthal, who exchanged many emails with Clinton on the subject of Libya, Blumenthal turned over a bunch of emails with Clinton that the committee had never seen before. The State Department had not given them to the committee when State originally turned over what were purported to be all of Clinton’s Libya-related emails.
Which led investigators to ask: Did the State Department fail to turn over all the Clinton emails it had pertaining to Libya? Or did Clinton not give all her Libya-related emails to the State Department, which in turn could not pass them on to the committee?
Shorter version: Did the State Department withhold information from the committee, or did Clinton? My bet is on Hillary – she decided that she’d rather deal with the fallout related to deleted emails and a secret server rather than risk the contents of those “missing” emails becoming known to the Benghazi committee.
The first possibility is entirely consistent with State Department foot-dragging on Benghazi that has been going on from the beginning. Just last month, Gowdy told Secretary of State John Kerry that “the pace of State Department document production has become an impediment to the progress of the committee.”
The second possibility — that Clinton did not turn over all of her work emails as claimed — would call into question everything she has said publicly about the secret email system. That could, in turn, reignite the Benghazi issue in the presidential campaign.
Clinton, of course, has said nothing about the Blumenthal emails. As far as the State Department is concerned — well, try to make sense of this exchange Wednesday between reporters and spokesman John Kirby:
QUESTION: You said that the emails that were provided by Mr. Blumenthal to the committee … were not shared with the Department. Does that mean that the committee didn’t share them, or you did not have them to give to the committee?
KIRBY: No, no. I meant that the documents that Mr. Blumenthal turned over to the — we — they were not shared with us either by him or by the committee.
QUESTION: Well, did you have them?
KIRBY: I can’t speak to their contents.
What does that mean? Certainly the Benghazi investigators don’t know. When the State Department originally turned over the Clinton emails earlier this year, Gowdy asked State to certify that it was turning over all of Clinton’s communications related to Libya. State officials would not do that, arguing they only had what Clinton gave them, although they accepted Clinton’s word that they had everything.
Also baffling to investigators is what is going on with Blumenthal. The materials he turned over could undermine Clinton’s claim of having given all of her work-related emails to the State Department. Yet Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton acolyte who owes his livelihood to the Clintons — during the time in question, he received $10,000 a month from the Clinton Foundation and another $10,000 from a Clinton-related media watchdog group — seems the last person in the world who would give Republicans anything they could use against Clinton. So that is another mystery.
This latest tangle illustrates the difficulty Gowdy and his fellow lawmakers face in trying to figure out the Benghazi story. Yes, they have made progress — remember, the world would not even know about Clinton’s secret email system had it not been for Gowdy’s committee. But they face a daunting challenge in getting information not only from Clinton but from her inner circle and the State Department. It’s taken a long time to get this far, and there is still quite a way to go.
Thank God for someone as dogged and determined as Gowdy. A lesser and more politically malleable Chairman would have just succumbed to the democrat’s political pressure and just let her slide, but that ain’t Trey Gowdy. He’s a man with John Wayne style “true grit.”
There will be lots of egg on democrat faces (especially Elijah Cummings) when the Benghazi Committee is finally able to reconstruct Hillary’s activities surrounding the gun running activities leading up to the attack, the reluctance to provide minimal security, as well as the cover-up following it. And Hillary was up to her ax-handle-wide flabby bottom in all of it. This is obviously all conjecture on my part, but the pieces of the puzzle are beginning to fall into place.