According to FOX News, Hillary Clinton might be eyeing a second run against President Donald Trump in the 2020 election. However, while she may continue to dismiss her email scandal as tried, done and settled in her favor, her insouciance does little to stop the scandal in its wake. In fact, the more Judicial Watch investigates the email scandal, the more comes out of the political woodwork. Recent documents released from the State Department reveal that high-ranking officials were aware of her deleting 30,000+ emails from her private server – a practice which raised eyebrows throughout the Agency. Read Judicial Watch’s latest press releases on the Clinton email scandal below to understand how our legal efforts continue to uncover the truth.
“Speculation is growing that Hillary Clinton will make a last-minute entry into the 2020 presidential race after reports published Tuesday said members of the Democratic establishment doubted any of the party’s current top candidates can beat President Trump next November.
But those Democrats already running said Clinton is doing more harm than good for the party by taking aim at Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii, in recent remarks.
Clinton in recent weeks has privately stated she would enter the 2020 presidential race if she were certain she could win, The New York Times reported Tuesday. The story, titled “Anxious Democratic Establishment Asks, ‘Is There Anybody Else?’,” said about a half-dozen Democratic donors gathered in New York City questioned whether former front-runner Joe Biden could stand strong against Trump, citing Biden’s lackluster debate performance in Ohio last week.
They also raised concerns about Biden’s fundraising struggles and his need to defend his family’s business dealings in Ukraine amid the ongoing Trump impeachment inquiry.
They also said Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders were likely too liberal to win the general election.
Meanwhile, The Washington Post, citing unnamed sources, reported that Clinton was considering a 2020 rematch against Trump after the State Department concluded this week there was “no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information” regarding Clinton’s use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state.”
Read the Full Story Here.
From Judicial Watch:
“(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice seeking draft copies of FBI charts containing information on potential “statutory violations” committed by Hillary Clinton in the former Secretary of State’s use of a non-secure, non-government email server to conduct government business.
Judicial Watch is also suing for draft copies of talking points prepared by the FBI for its officials to use following then-Director James Comey’s July 2016 press conference during which he recommended against prosecuting Clinton for mishandling classified information.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia after the DOJ failed to respond to a December 3, 2018, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00800)). Judicial Watch seeks:
- All final and draft copies of talking points prepared by the FBI for its Executive Assistant Directors (EADs) relating to the “Mid-Year Exam” investigation (“MYE Talking Points) following the July 5, 2016 James Comey press conference in which he indicated he would not recommend prosecuting Hillary Clinton.
- All final draft copies of a one-page version of the aforementioned MYE Talking Points created for FBI Special Agents-in-Charge (SACs).
- All final and draft copies of charts of the “statutory violations considered during the investigation [of Hillary Clinton’s server], and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute.”
In February 2019, Judicial Watch uncovered DOJ records in a related lawsuit that include an email chain written three days after Comey’s press conference announcing that he would not recommend a prosecution of Clinton in which special counsel to the FBI’s executive assistant director in charge of the National Security Branch, whose name is redacted, wrote to Strzok and others that he was producing a “chart of the statutory violations considered during the investigation [of Clinton’s server], and the reasons for the recommendation not to prosecute…”
Read the Full Press Release Here.
2. Judicial Watch Goes To Court to Depose Hillary Clinton – (10/10/2019)
“(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced that a federal court will soon rule on whether Hillary Clinton and her top aide can be questioned under oath by Judicial Watch lawyers about the email and Benghazi controversies. The court has already granted additional discovery to Judicial Watch and is now considering Clinton’s objections, filed on September 23, to being questioned. Judicial Watch filed its response to Clinton on October 3 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)).
The court previously 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. The court specifically 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.”
On August 22, 2019, the court then ruled that Clinton and Mills had 30 days to oppose being questioned in person under oath by Judicial Watch related to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. Additionally, Judicial Watch was granted seven new depositions, three interrogatories and four document requests. In granting the additional discovery, U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth commented: “I’ll tell you everything they’ve discovered in this period raises serious questions about what the hell the State Department’s doing here.”
Clinton’s lawyers, in opposing the request to question her, argued that she’s already answered all important questions about her emails and Benghazi. Judicial Watch rejects this, noting her answers about her email use raise additional, important questions:
Judicial Watch should be permitted to directly question Secretary Clinton about her motives, thoughts, and efforts regarding the “convenience” she relies upon in justifying her use of a secret, private server and email address in direct violation of federal records laws and State Department policies.
Clinton also suggests that her emails would have been captured by State Department records systems, which is contradicted by Tasha Thian, a retired senior State records official, recently questioned by Judicial Watch:
According to Ms. Thian’s testimony, there are at least six occasions Secretary Clinton was or should have been fully informed of federal records management, including email records, and compliance responsibilities. Yet Secretary Clinton’s actual understanding of her obligations with respect to official State Department records is completely absent from the record.”
Read the Full Press Release Here.
“(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that John Hackett, the former Director for Information Programs and Services (IPS), which handles records management at the State Department, testified under oath that he had raised concerns that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s staff had “culled out 30,000” of the secretary’s “personal” emails without following strict National Archives standards. The full deposition transcript is available here.
John Hackett, as part of a series of court-ordered depositions and questions under oath of senior Obama-era State Department officials, lawyers, and Clinton aides, also revealed that he believed there was interference with the formal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) review process related to the classification of Clinton’s Benghazi-related emails.
Hackett served first as deputy director then as director for Information Programs and Services, which handles the FOIA request program and the retirement of and declassification of documents at the State Department. He was at the department from April 2013 to March 2016.
In March 2015, Clinton told reporters that she and her staff had deleted more than 30,000 emails “because they were personal and private about matters that I believed were within the scope of my personal privacy.” ABC News reported: “However, after a year-long investigation, the FBI recovered more than 17,000 emails that had been deleted or otherwise not turned over to the State Department, and many of them were work-related, the FBI has said.”
(Heather Samuelson, the Clinton lawyer who deleted the Clinton emails, separately testified to Judicial Watch that she received immunity from the Justice Department.)
Hackett answered during the deposition that he recalled a conversation that he had when he was at the State Department about requesting rules or parameters from Secretary Clinton or her attorneys that they used to segregate her personal and official work emails.”
Read the Full Press Release Here.
The post NewsLink: Hillary’s Email Vindication? Think Again. appeared first on Judicial Watch.