Federal Court Hearing on Clinton Emails

Judicial Watch announced that a federal court ordered a hearing for Thursday, August 22, 2019, on the Clinton email issue. On December 6, 2018, U.S. District Court Judge Lamberth ordered Obama administration senior State Department officials, lawyers and Clinton aides to be deposed or answer written questions under oath. The court ruled that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”

The court ordered discovery into three specific areas: 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 Judicial Watch’s request. Judicial Watch deposed nearly a dozen witnesses and will seek addition witnesses and documents from the court, including the deposition of Hillary Clinton and Cheryl Mills, her chief of staff at State and personal lawyer who directed the destruction of 33,000 State Department Clinton emails. Lawyers for Clinton and Mills are expected at the hearing Thursday.

READ: [http://jwatch.us/T2g9ki]

1 Like

I guess she missed some thst weren’t wiped or washed out !!!

From 6 months ago, this topic gets a momentous upgrade…from Judicial Watch. This was published about an hour ago.

Maybe the bitch will forget her answers from the last interview and get a perjury charge. :rofl:

1 Like

Good! She was ahead of a major federal agency and new exactly what she was doing when she decided to break the law. She didn’t want anyone to be able to FOIA her communications. She wanted to use private servers and infrastructure to secretly communicate official government messages. People have gone to prison for a long time for much less. She should be no different.

As the liberal talking point used to refer to President Trump goes, “Nobody is above the law!”

If they apply this to Hillary, she will see the inside of a prison cell.

Here’s more commentary on the decision.

Not if Biden gets the nomination and names her as VP. Then she will use the argument that she is being persecuted by her political enemies. That’s what’s in the cards.

I think Biden’s advisors would not favor this as it might possibly cost him votes. IMHO, the American public has had their fill of the Clintons.

I think Biden will choose Kamala Harris as VP running mate.

Judicial Watch has a history of making explosive claims that go nowhere.

I agree. No way Biden will choose Clinton. He regrets not running last time.

What is the obsession with Clinton for so many Trump supporters? They have talked relentlessly about her running and now the discussion switches to her being the VP pick.

Kamala Harris would be a good choice for Biden.

You wish!

https://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/2001/printer_966.shtml

…and that’s a partial listing from 2001.

https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/tom-fitton/fast-and-furious-court-victory-judicial-watch

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/judicial-watch-wins-court-fight-200708596.html

These are COURT VICTORIES…not a list of things that have gone nowhere.

Perhaps you should keep up with the news rather than make up your own history.

2 Likes

…and choosing Hillary would do little more than increase the probability that Biden would commit suicide after the inauguration party.

1 Like

Let’s start with the fact that she’s a criminal and belongs in jail for what she did…and that’s just on her emails. She left Americans to die in Benghazi which makes her a traitor. Then she tried covering up what she did in Benghazi.

And how many times was Benghazi investigated? Get over it. Move on. Trump has had nearly 4 years to direct his DOJ and we have had nothing. Yet his supporters still chant lock her up as he looks gormlessly on.

Remember her saying, What does it matter!!!

Sure do. An ambassador who represented the president of the United States was killed and dragged through the street for the camera. The men at Benghazi put up a fight but ultimately lost due to sheer numbers.

What difference does it make? Apparently none to someone who doesn’t care about the lives of their fellow Americans. Let this bitch rot in prison.

3 Likes

Judicial Watch is also pursuing a court decision to open an investigation into Benghazi…another coverup the James Comey slicked over for her.

1 Like

Funny how that woman to the right of her remains in today’s shadows. Cheryl Mills needs to be deposed as well as prosecuted!

I do not tend to use a organizations own website As a impartial source it whatever floats your boat.

…and I do not put any credence whatsoever in your opinion without independent coroberation.

If you want to debunk any of their claims for court victories, you can check court records. Be my guest. These are not subjective claims or opinions they make here.

What they generate is what they claim is a list of objective historical facts regarding court cases they have won.

Since your claim was that “Judicial Watch has a history of making explosive claims that go nowhere.”, it is on you to prove your claim be debunking a significant number of them.

Put up or shut up.