home

In response to Rep. Cummings, Gowdy confesses he "redacted" document

After much bluster and obfuscation, Rep Trey Gowdy admits he altered the documents that he used to make false claims against Hillary Clinton in a response to a letter from Rep Elijah Cummings. The key parts:

[M]y understanding is the CIA advised the Committee in a very brief email late Saturday night that it had reviewed the material in question and asked for no material to be redacted [. . . ]

Our Committee has access to career civil servants, former federal prosecutors, former intelligence experts as well as military experts who are uniquely well suited to gauge intelligence information and how it should be handled. Although the Executive Branch is ultimately responsible for classification, we remain concerned with the naming of sources and methods and will continue to protect that information now and going forward where it is readily apparent to us. As such, we will continue to redact certain information to protect sensitive information regardless of how others treat that information [...] [My emphasis.]

Gowdy admits that he decided to make this improper redaction. That he attempts to obfuscate the point by stating the "Executive" branch, AFTER Gowdy appointed himself as arbiter of classification, asked for the redaction on PRIVACY grounds, something Cummings himself stated in his letter, does not obviate the fact that Gowdy purposefully altered a document in order to falsely accuse Clinton of wrongdoing.

It is a scandal. Will anyone in the Media care?

< Rep Cummings: Gowdy altered documents in order to make false allegations against Clinton | CIA Confirms: Trey Gowdy A Bald Faced Liar >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Maybe the DOJ will (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by oculus on Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 01:19:22 PM EST
    prosecute Gody for tampering.

    I expect Hillary will do that (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 02:09:27 PM EST
    On Thursday.

    Parent
    Sure they will (none / 0) (#5)
    by Zorba on Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 03:47:46 PM EST
    And if you really believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale..........   ;-)

    Parent
    Anybody (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 01:19:32 PM EST
    doubt my saying for quite a while that Gowdy is an idiot? I mean somebody has the originals and Gowdy not being too bright felt like he could get away with making crap up.

    Fundamentalists like Gowdy are not interested in the truth. He's a perfect example of what is called "lying for Jesus.

    The media didn't care when ... (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 05:19:49 PM EST
    ... the House Oversight Committee staff, presumably at then-Chair Darrell Issa's directive, manufactured phony White House emails on Benghazi and then fed them to to ABC News' chief D.C. stenographer, Jonathan Karl. Why should they start caring now?

    After all, BTD, you know as well as I do that the Clinton Rules require one to implicate the Clintons with selective fact-picking, manufactured controversy and titillating innuendo, and prohibit any attempts to seek their exoneration with actual exculpatory evidence.

    Aloha.

    It may be that the latest Trump claim (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by christinep on Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 05:59:33 PM EST
    about safety of American personnel & 9/11 will influence anew a different way of thinking.  As I note below, most of the press today--save the New York Times in its capacity as Gowdy's water-boy--is substantively covering the whole question of safety in a way by suggesting and asking questions about the ongoing emphasis on Administration (namely, SOS Clinton) in the Benghazi matter while beginning to contrast with the almost 3000 lives lost on American soil on 9/11 during the Bush administration.  

    For whatever reason, it took Trump to open up just a bit the questions/comparisons that should have been apparent to the media and others years ago.  The comparison is potentially explosive in more ways than one: With Trump pushing it & Bush blustering in defense, the story is out there in caps AND it is out there just as the Benghazi inquisition panel is starting to be seen as highly partisan while trying to take down HRC AND here she comes to testify in public, in the open this week when she has regained an aura of strength, competence, confidence AND the entire selling point of the Repubs for years that they know best when it comes to foreign policy and defense may be about to take a huuuge, deserved hit.

    Parent

    CNN (5.00 / 4) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 07:20:16 PM EST

    "Obviously al Qaeda was responsible for the terrorist attacks of 9/11," the CNN host pressed. "But how do you respond to critics who ask if your brother and his administration bear no responsibility at all, how do you then make the jump that President Obama and Secretary Clinton are responsible for what happened at Benghazi?"



    Parent
    Trump is better than a Dem superpac (5.00 / 7) (#9)
    by ruffian on Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 07:52:08 PM EST
    Silly (none / 0) (#3)
    by FlJoe on Sun Oct 18, 2015 at 01:20:32 PM EST
    Republicans can't even conduct a decent Witch Hunt, they need to reschedule the hearing for Halloween night, amateurs.

    As for the media it's always trick or treat, too bad they always fall for the tricks and throw away the treats.