Loretta Lynch LIED Under Oath, Used Fake Name In Cover Up - Democrat Busters
News -Commentary

Loretta Lynch LIED Under Oath, Used Fake Name In Cover Up

Thanks to another document dump from the Department of Justice, it has now been discovered that former President Barack Obama’s attorney general Loretta Lynch used a fake name in some of her email correspondence.

The latest release of documents by the Department of Justice came after the American Center for Law and Justice filed suit after being denied a Freedom Of Information Act request by the FBI. The ACLJ’s question was simple:

What records exist regarding the mysterious and “impromptu” meeting between Lynch and former President Bill Clinton on the tarmac of the Phoenix airport – while Hillary Clinton was still being investigated for her private email scandal?

The previous dump shows that The FBI did in fact have emails about the meeting on file, and the new information shows that Lynch was reportedly going by the name “Elizabeth Carlisle” in some of her correspondence with the DOJ.

Researchers on the internet found that the name may be that of Lynch’s grandmother.

The practice of using a fake name for official correspondence seems to have been a regular occurrence in the Obama administration. President Obama used a pseudonym when communicating with Hillary Clinton on her private server, and former Attorney General Eric Holder also used fake names when conducting official business.

Lynch, however, could be in trouble considering the fact that she swore under oath that she only used official email to conduct official business and never used a personal account.

While officials in the Obama administration have said that officials using fake names did not do so to skirt around FOIA requests, some private organizations are not so sure.

Chris Farrell from Judicial Watch told the Independent Journal Review that “the question is whether FOIA officials include those government email accounts in their search for responsive records.”

So When FOIA requests are made, there’s no guarantee that the official in charge of responding to the request will include all of the pseudonyms and phony email accounts when searching for answers and choosing records to release.

In that way, these pseudonyms could have been an avenue for hiding official correspondence from the public eye.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Most Popular

To Top

Send this to friend