Victory! Court Orders Hillary Clinton Deposition on Emails, Benghazi Attack Documents

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Quote

 

We’ve been in court for years over Hillary Clinton’s emails — as you know, we are persistent for justice.

The great news is that U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth has granted our request to depose the former secretary of state about her emails and Benghazi attack documents. The court also ordered the deposition of Clinton’s former Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills, and two other State Department officials.

 

Quote

Remember, it was Judicial Watch that discovered in 2014 that the “talking points” that provided the basis for Susan Rice’s false statements were created by the Obama White House. This FOIA lawsuit led directly to the disclosure of the Clinton email system in 2015.

Quote

 

In December 2018, Judge Lamberth first ordered discovery into whether Secretary Clinton’s use of a private email server was intended to stymie FOIA; whether the State Department’s intent to settle this case in late 2014 and early 2015 amounted to bad faith; and whether the State Department has adequately searched for records responsive to our request. The court also authorized discovery into whether the Benghazi controversy motivated the cover-up of Clinton’s email. The court ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.” The State and Justice Departments continued to defend Clinton’s and the agency’s email conduct.

Judge:

Quote

With each passing round of discovery, the Court is left with more questions than answers.

 

 

Quote

Additionally, Judge Lamberth said that he is troubled by the fact that both the State Department and Department of Justice want to close discovery in this case:

[T]here is still more to learn. Even though many important questions remain unanswered, the Justice Department inexplicably still takes the position that the Court should close discovery and rule on dispositive motions. The Court is especially troubled by this. To argue that the Court now has enough information to determine whether State conducted an adequate search is preposterous, especially when considering State’s deficient representations regarding the existence of additional Clinton emails

Quote

 

With respect to Clinton, the court found that her prior testimony, mostly through written sworn answers, was not sufficient:

The Court has considered the numerous times in which Secretary Clinton said she could not recall or remember certain details in her prior interrogatory answers.

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/03/09/vfitton-victory-court-orders-hillary-clinton-deposition-on-emails-benghazi-attack-documents/

 

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/485523-judge-orders-hillary-clinton-deposition-in-judicial-watch

 

While I don't necessarily think it's a victory, it's positive news. 

 

 

 

Quote

 

 

Edited March 10, 2020 by Burnt Reynolds