Clinton Email Scandal – New Development
by John Sexton
February 16, 2017
via Judicial Watch

Rep. Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, sent a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions today asking Sessions to consider convening a grand jury or bringing charges against Hillary Clinton’s former IT guy, Bryan Pagliano. Pagliano was subpoenaed to testify before the committee last year but refused to appear on two occasions. After the second refusal, the Oversight Committee voted to hold Pagliano in contempt.

Chaffetz’ letter to AG Sessions reads in part, “Because Pagliano’s job functions included supporting mobile computing issues across the Department, he was uniquely positioned to answer questions regarding State Department policies and practices for preserving records, as well as the technological procedures utilized to do so.” The letter concludes, “In light of Pagliano’s contumacious conduct in refusing to testify, the Department should bring the matter before a grand jury for its action or file an information charging Pagliano with violating 2 U.S.C. § 192.”

In a statement released by the committee, Chaffetz says, “The authority to compel witnesses is integral to Congress’s and the Committee’s investigative powers. Allowing Mr. Pagliano’s conduct to go unaddressed would gravely harm Congress’s ability to conduct oversight.”


…On September 22, 2016, after his second refusal to appear, the Oversight Committee voted to hold Pagliano in contempt. In a report by Politico published the day of the contempt vote, MacDougall said, “Bryan already asserted his Fifth Amendment right on the record before this Congress. He was ready to do it again today in Executive Session. But the Republicans voted for contempt because he wouldn’t play the role they had scripted – in the campaign ad that they wanted to tape six weeks before the election.”

Pagliano did appear and give testimony in a lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch last year. During the deposition he invoking the 5th Amendment around 125 times. No video of the deposition was released but journalist Phelim McAleer made a short film based on the verbatim transcript. Watching this you can see why Pagliano did not want to appear before Congress in public.




When Jeff Sessions was being confirmed, one of the questions asked him was about the Clintons. His response emphatically was to say he would recuse himself in this case. Now my question is now that the letter has been submitted, where will Jeff Sessions go from here? Will he have staff he can trust who would strongly follow-up on this particular individual or will Jeff’s recusement against the Clintons not affect a case against Pagliano?

This will be interesting to follow and see where Jeff Sessions plans to go with his agency and its purpose. Will this new group of DoJ members actually perform their duties according to the written constitution and rule of law? Will the DoJ find the teeth necessary to bring to trial cases where there is a clear breach of national security protocol? Will they continue to work for the citizens to bring to justice those who would do our country harm regardless of wealth, influential standing, ideological, or political affiliations?


About Uriel

Retired educator and constitutionalist
Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Clinton Email Scandal – New Development

  1. Shar says:

    Hopefully his Deputy Asst. AG will pursue it. He shouldn’t have recused himself. It was a set up question knowing HRC is guilty.

    • Uriel says:

      I think it was too. However Sessions is honorable enough to recuse if he knows it would be questionable later. Unlike those two zombies before.

  2. SafeSpace says:

    Verrry interesting. Several months ago when the HRC email problem was front and center, Sean Hannity repeatedly admonished us listeners to “watch for the name Bryan Pagiano”. Apparently Hannity read the tea leaves (or had the inside scoop).

  3. Popular Front says:

    Totally off-topic but here’s some Aussie humour:

    A man’s wife goes missing while diving off the West Australian Coast .

    He reports the event, searches fruitlessly and spends a terrible night wondering what could have happened to her.
    Next morning there’s a knock at the door and he is confronted by a couple of Police officers, the old Sargeant and a younger Constable.

    The Sarge says, “Mate, we have some news for you, unfortunately some really bad news, but, some good news, and maybe some more good news.”
    “Well,” says the bloke, “I guess I’d better have the bad news first.”

    The Sarge says, “I’m really sorry mate, but your wife is dead. Young Bill here found her lying at about five fathoms in a little cleft in the reef. He got a line around her and we pulled her up, but she was dead.”

    The bloke is naturally distressed to hear of this and has a bit of a turn. But after a few minutes he pulls himself together and asks what the good news is.
    The Sarge says, “Well when we got your wife up there were quite a few really good sized lobsters and a swag of nice crabs attached to her, so we’ve brought you your share.” He hands the bloke a bag with a couple of nice lobsters and four or five crabs in it.

    “Geez thanks. They’re bloody beauties. I guess it’s an ill wind and all that …. So, what’s the other possible good news?”
    “Well,” the Sarge says, “if you fancy a quick trip, young Bill and I get off duty at around 11 O’clock and we’re gonna shoot over there and pull her up again.”

  4. Hardnox says:

    I agree the question that led to the recusal was a set-up. However, he did leave himself an out. He said the recusal was based on the charges so far. The FBI hasn’t suggested charges YET.

    Further, recusal would be an abrogation of his oath of office.

    Sessions gets to pick his assistant. This whole email thing is far from over. Pagliano was already given immunity. Time to interrogate him again.

    Now that Batears is out of power, Comey may have new fortitude as he attempts to resurrect his reputation.

    Lastly, they need to wait until all the cabinet appointments are confirmed before dropping this bomb.

    • Uriel says:

      Lol wait. Yeah if not – kiss appointments goodbye. True FBI to date never provided “charges”. Comey I am shocked over. We heard for a long time how wise and professional a choice he is was but over the last three years all I have seen is indecision and flipping however he was told to do. Except for that quick email maneuver just before election. Even that I think was staged.