Judge Andrew Napolitano is furious about a Justice Department cover up that has taken place under the Trump administration. Stuart Varney begins the discussion by noting that the former attorney general in the Hussein Obama administration, Loretta Lynch, used an alias to disguise her identity in a sort of cloak and dagger, James Bond style of hiding who she was on communications.
Eric Holder, her predecessor, initiated the deceptive practice. He went by the name of Lew Alcindor, the birth name of Muslim NBA legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, to hide who was behind his correspondence. Lynch also chose an actual name of an real person for her secret identity, not a code name such as “ham hocks” that would be easily recognizable as a pseudonym.
She used the name of her grandmother, Elizabeth Carlisle, a name that would not trigger anyone’s curiosity, to shield her identity. We know Hussein Obama also used an email pseudonym when he was communicating with Hillary Clinton on her illegal server, though his entire persona is a series of fabrications, creating a huge false identity and deception.
Varney notes that Lynch corresponded using her false identity during the period of time in which she and others inside the DOJ and Obama regime were scrambling after she was discovered meeting with Bill Clinton on the Phoenix tarmac. He asks Judge Andrew Napolitano, “Why would she use an alias if she’s got nothing to hide?”
Nobody said she’s got nothing to hide, although the question is a rhetorical one, with Napolitano replying, “I really don’t know. You’d really have to ask her. I doubt we’re going to get the opportunity to do so.”
He says, “There is nothing illegal or nothing unethical about using the alias, but it is odd and it does raise the intent. Now she did tell the Freedom of Information Act people that she used the alias.” He then shows what was turned over. When those emails from “Elizabeth Carlisle” were produced, they were in the form of worthless, completely redacted, white sheets of paper with large black squares blocking out the text.
Napolitano asks, “Who did the blacking out?” He answers his own question, saying, “the Jeff Sessions Justice Department. That’s what has me infuriated. I would have expected the Obama Justice Department trying to protect its attorney general. But if she did something untoward with Bill Clinton and she apparently did, we have the right to know about it.”
Varney says, “No wonder the President is angry at Jeff Sessions.” Judge Napolitano responds, “I don’t know if the President is aware of this kind of blacking out but this is a violation of the public policy that requires transparency.”
The miffed Napolitano asks, “Why is it that the present administration wants to protect its predecessor? So it’s successor, the Justice Department of president whoever, fill in the blank, won’t come after it. That’s the dirty little secret of the Justice Department and it’s condemnable. We have the right to know what’s going on and people that break the law should be prosecuted no matter whether they’re the predecessor or the present Justice Department.”