Federal Judge orders Hillary Clinton deposed

icanhelp1

Literotica Guru
Joined
Mar 23, 2019
Posts
19,354
Judge orders Hillary Clinton deposition in email flap - POLITICOwww.politico.com › news › 2020/03/02 › hillary-clinton-email-deposi...


A federal judge has ordered former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to sit for a sworn deposition for the first time in connection with her use of a private email account during her State Department tenure. U.S. District Court Royce Lamberth issued the order Monday in connection with a five-and-a-half-year-old Freedom of Information Act lawsuit the conservative group Judicial Watch filed seeking emails related to the deadly 2012 attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya.

Clinton was previously required to submit a sworn written statement about her email use, but the deposition—if it takes place—would be the first time she has had to submit to live questioning under oath on the subject. During her four years in President Barack Obama's Cabinet, Clinton relied on a private email account and server for both her work-related and personal messages. The practice led to a storm of controversy that roiled her 2016 presidential bid and is widely viewed as contributing to her ultimate defeat by Donald Trump.

In response to press questions during the campaign and in the sworn statement, Clinton said she kept the private account and server after taking over as secretary of state in 2009 as a matter of convenience and not to avoid FOIA or other disclosure requirements. The FBI investigated, interviewed Clinton and recommended against criminal charges, but it did find dozens of messages in her account that officials said contained highly classified information.
However, Lamberth said in his ruling Monday that the FBI probe and representations by the State Department have not adequately put to rest questions about the episode and Clinton's deposition is needed to address those concerns.

"To argue that the Court now has enough information to determine whether State conducted an adequate search is preposterous," wrote Lamberth, who has tangled with Clinton aides for decades in a series of cases.

The judge, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan, said the fact that more Clinton emails continue to dribble out from the State Department raises questions about the thoroughness of the government's earlier actions to recover Clinton's messages.
 
Last edited:
Saw that.

"What difference, at this point, does it make?"

She cut her teeth on the obstruction of Watergate and learned well: deny, deflect and dissemble. The entire point of the email server was to be able to avoid oversight and to cherry-pick who gets to see what. She has managed to obstruct investigation for years now. And as he continues to obstruct they continue to claim that there is "no evidence" of the very thing that she's obstructing justice on. If obstructing Congress is an actual thing, she definitely did it.

No court anywhere can countenance you destroying emails under subpoena. You can argue in court whether a particular email is relevant or discoverable but what you can't do is just decide which ones you're going to destroy when you were under noticie not to destroy anything.

The same people who insist they have a right to know the content of a president private communications with his closest advisers see no problem with Hillary violating the public records Act.
 
Saw that.

"What difference, at this point, does it make?"

She cut her teeth on the obstruction of Watergate and learned well: deny, deflect and dissemble. The entire point of the email server was to be able to avoid oversight and to cherry-pick who gets to see what. She has managed to obstruct investigation for years now. And as he continues to obstruct they continue to claim that there is "no evidence" of the very thing that she's obstructing justice on. If obstructing Congress is an actual thing, she definitely did it.

No court anywhere can countenance you destroying emails under subpoena. You can argue in court whether a particular email is relevant or discoverable but what you can't do is just decide which ones you're going to destroy when you were under noticie not to destroy anything.

The same people who insist they have a right to know the content of a president private communications with his closest advisers see no problem with Hillary violating the public records Act.


Obama's DOJ was corrupt. With Jeff Sessions's recusal,
Lynch and Comey taking one for the team.... impanelling a special grand jury 'WAS JUST NOT IN THE CARDS!!
 
This could cause a wave of "suicides."

This could cause a wave of "suicides." Anyone in the circle of this thing better watch their back Jack. The swamp creatures will be slithering around this issue.
 
I'm sure of course this will ruin her presidential campaign.

:rolleyes:
 
I'm sure of course this will ruin her presidential campaign.

:rolleyes:

It runs your narrative that she "did nothing wrong," that she has been the least bit forthright with various investigations, committee hearings, and court proceedings, and that she has been in any way exonerated.

It's the standard but highly elongated in this case Clinton dodge of putting off the Day of Reckoning so long that they can get sycophants like you to whine that it's old news, it's all been looked into, and it's not worth pursuing.
 
It runs your narrative that she "did nothing wrong," that she has been the least bit forthright with various investigations, committee hearings, and court proceedings, and that she has been in any way exonerated.

It's the standard but highly elongated in this case Clinton dodge of putting off the Day of Reckoning so long that they can get sycophants like you to whine that it's old news, it's all been looked into, and it's not worth pursuing.

Hypocrite says what?

Spare us your faux outrage and your bandwagoning.

:rolleyes:
 
Not even remotely analogous, but you go ahead and pretend your false equivalency carries any water at all.

Yes, it's a given to you bootlickers that it is different. Because reasons.

To be fair however there are differences. Hillary never hypocritically called for Trump to be locked up, or Ivanka, or Jared, or Bannon, or Priebus. Or any of the several others. Nor did she use what's app. Which leads us to another important difference - Hillary was just one individual. Trump's admin is full of people using private emails.

Your frothing at the mouth over HRC has your hypocrisy on full display.

But yes we know, it's totally different. Because... reasons. :rolleyes:
 
Yes, it's a given to you bootlickers that it is different. Because reasons.

To be fair however there are differences. Hillary never hypocritically called for Trump to be locked up, or Ivanka, or Jared, or Bannon, or Priebus. Or any of the several others. Nor did she use what's app. Which leads us to another important difference - Hillary was just one individual. Trump's admin is full of people using private emails.

Your frothing at the mouth over HRC has your hypocrisy on full display.

But yes we know, it's totally different. Because... reasons. :rolleyes:

Instead, Hillary called Trump a Russian asset and started a years long multiple agency investigation that involved Congress.

Over what we now know was a LIE.

Because, reasons. Right?
 
Yes, it's a given to you bootlickers that it is different. Because reasons.

To be fair however there are differences. Hillary never hypocritically called for Trump to be locked up, or Ivanka, or Jared, or Bannon, or Priebus. Or any of the several others. Nor did she use what's app. Which leads us to another important difference - Hillary was just one individual. Trump's admin is full of people using private emails.

Your frothing at the mouth over HRC has your hypocrisy on full display.

But yes we know, it's totally different. Because... reasons. :rolleyes:

You should probably wipe the spittle-flecks off of your screen.
 
Instead, Hillary called Trump a Russian asset and started a years long multiple agency investigation that involved Congress.

Over what we now know was a LIE.

Because, reasons. Right?

It was nice of all those witnesses at the Senate trial to exonerate 45.

Granted it wouldn't have altered the opinions of his fan base.

You should probably wipe the spittle-flecks off of your screen.

:rolleyes:

Go post 50 more times to display your emotional and personal self control.

3 threads made by deplorables regarding hillary. sad!

B-b-b-but Hillary!!

The glass houses apparently offer very limited vistas.
 
It was nice of all those witnesses at the Senate trial to exonerate 45.

Granted it wouldn't have altered the opinions of his fan base.



:rolleyes:

Go post 50 more times to display your emotional and personal self control.



B-b-b-but Hillary!!

The glass houses apparently offer very limited vistas.

The thread is about Hillary. She is in the news today because she is finally being deposed.The wha-what-whataboutism came from you, snowflake.
 
Last edited:
The thread is about Hillary. She is in the news today because she is finally being deposed.The wha-what-whataboutism came from you, snowflake.

And of course we all know you are equally upset about Trump, Ivanka, Jared, Priebus, Bannon etc using private emails. I am sure you are incensed over the use of What's App with its encryption skirting the freedom if information laws.

No? Oh that's right IOKIYAR. Or at least not a democrat. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Again, your hypocrisy is on display.
 
This isn't about "using private emails" especially by non-cabinet officials. This is about actual, willful defiance of subpoenas, actual obstruction of justice, actual destruction of devices and evidence, actual perjury, and actual obstruction of congress, if there was such a thing.

Repeating your false equivalency again doesn't make it any more analogous.

Try again, snowflake.
 
The thread is about Hillary. She is in the news today because she is finally being deposed.The wha-what-whataboutism came from you, snowflake.


The article is a factual recounting of US District Court judge Royce Lamberth's issuance of an order to Hillary Clinton in connection with a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch. She is ordered to appear personally for a sworn deposition which she has never done in the past. It's quite amusing how the DELUSIONAL LEFT are dancing like a Daddy Longlegs on a red hot griddle.
 
Back
Top