Another nail…?


"Citing indications of wrongdoing and bad faith, a federal judge has overruled government objections by declaring that a conservative group is entitled to more details about how Hillary Clinton's private email account was integrated into the State Department recordkeeping system and why it was not searched in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.

U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth entered an order Tuesday agreeing that Judicial Watch can pursue legal discovery — which often includes depositions of relevant individuals — as the group pursues legal claims that State did not respond completely to a FOIA request filed in May 2014 seeking records about talking points then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice used for TV appearances discussing the deadly attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi in September 2012.

Lamberth is the second federal judge handling a Clinton email-related case to agree to discovery, which is unusual in FOIA litigation. Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan gave Judicial Watch the go-ahead to pursue depositions of Clinton aides in a lawsuit for records about former Clinton Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin." 

Read more:
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook


As I wrote here before, I have testified in Lamberth's court.  He is a tough, smart man.  This can't be good news for HC and company.  Perhaps the lawyers here might want to comment?  pl

This entry was posted in As The Borg Turns, Justice, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Another nail…?

  1. Allen Thomson says:

    Rumor in former FBI agent circles is that the Bureau is negotiating immunity for Huma Abedin.
    Could be interesting.
    P.S.: Could those lawyers here explain how immunity is actually granted? I’d assume a DA, acting on advice from the FBI, actually hands the immunitee’s lawyers an offer. Is that right?

  2. DC says:

    According to the Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel, the FOIA lawsuits in civil court could result in more politically disqualifying information than any result from the FBI’s investigation into criminal negligence concerning the email server:
    The article raises strong points concerning the Clintons’ long history of seeking to avoid public scrutiny of their efforts to bootstrap political power into personal $$ gain.

  3. steve says:

    Yes, in a federal investigation it is offered through the US attorney’s office.

  4. cynic says:

    Maybe they need another coffin. Now it’s been alleged that she and her husband were collecting donations to their foundation from those who wanted to influence American foreign policy in their own favour. Money for access. Political pimping and whoring could hardly be more blatant. Is there any sign that her husband is also under investigation? Perhaps they could serve their sentences in adjacent jails.

  5. Old Microbiologist says:

    In a perfect universe they will be punished. But, we don’t live in that universe. Obama can, and likely will, grant an open-ended pardon for any and all crimes. The question is really a matter of timing. If the FBI keeps dragging its feet, and then the DOJ conducts a second investigation, it might not happen until after the election. However, She might not win the election so that could offer several potential outcomes. Trump would take it to the limit and I believe he will pursue it with vigor. Sanders will pardon her. Cruz it is anyone’s guess but given he is another apparichnik he would also likely grant pardons as well. If Trump survives to the election and actually wins, which I give long odds on happening, then I believe they will flee the country to some ME Gulf state to avoid prosecution.nif she wins the presidency which is what I sadly believe will happen, is pardoned, then she is still impeachable as double jeopardy does not apply to impeachment so. But,as we really have only one political party now that won’t happen either.
    If she is indicted soon, before the convention, then a pardon absolves her of any legal consequences. From what I see her supporters are not even remotely concerned about her illegal corrupt practices, so it would be of no real consequence. I think Americans are dulled to the noise and smell coming off the Clintons to the point of not caring.

  6. KHarbaugh says:

    I would like to see a comparison of the Clinton situation to that, well-known in Virginia, of former VA governor Robert McDonnell, which the feds were so hot to prosecute.

  7. steve says:

    I think there are a number of critical events yet to go before indictments, if any, are handed down, particularly any scheduled interview between Hillary and the FBI, which has been rumored for months now.
    Normally most attorneys would tell her not to talk to them. There’s nothing to gain and if you get caught in a lie, that’s a felony even if the FBI finds no underlying crimes with the emails. But refusing to cooperate would hurt her politically, so she’s pretty well stuck.
    Then of course there are other concerns–the aides that were mentioned upthread.

  8. EGrise says:

    As it was put over at Naked Capitalism, “bad faith” is not the sort of idea you want to put into a judge’s mind.

  9. In this case an Assistant U.S. Attorney!

  10. IMO no pardon for HRC by any President unless she loses or withdraws from the November election.

  11. Old Microbiologist says:

    I think the real point is that there is overwhelming evidence, just from what we have seen, and I am certain we haven’t seen much, to put her and her aides all away. There are quite a few people prosecuted by this administration for a single document now sitting in prison. But, no indictment and a kids glove treatment? It smacks of corruption and a flagrant disregard for the law except when used to punish whistleblowers or perceived enemies. She will not be prosecuted, ever, for anything. Maybe she will toss an aide or 2 under the bus but I doubt she or her husband will ever be found culpable for their actions.
    However, not all is lost. If she is elected it will further collapse the nation with crony capitalism, additional benefits to the rich, more R2P expeditions expanding to the nations surrounding Russia, more debacles in the ME, and of course, more adventurism against China. The US cannot put pressure on so many nations simultaneously without blowback and at some point someone will lose control and take it seriously. Any serious pushback from Russia or China will result in nuclear war and she is, IMHO, very clearly insane and seems to disregard this potential. She is the neocon dream candidate. I personally believe we have pushed the environmental and overpopulation to the extreme and that natural forces will occur to reduce the threat to the world. We are, just inhabitants of this planet which we are abusing to a point where something must occur to stop it. The natural process includes disease, starvation, and war and we likely will see that soon with her. So perhaps this was meant to be?

  12. Is my understanding correct that with over 300 persons with access to the HRC server [unknown as to those with access having a need to know] there must be first a security review to determine what was classifiable on the server [or classified?] and whether there was a security breech of national security info? That report when issued is also subject to FOIA but also redaction!

  13. Seamus says:

    I can’t see anything serious happening to Mrs Clinton unless her many mainstream media helpers can be sidelined. See

  14. Joe100 says:

    John Helmer’s website had some quite damning publicly available information on a couple of examples of favorable HRC State Department rulings (for some really bad actors) closely following very large Clinton Foundation contributions. I have tried to recover these posts and will make another serious attempt to dig this info up over the weekend.
    I have thought for some time that the Clinton Foundation issues may be more damaging politically as they are easier to understand and involve big sums of money. I think even some hard core HRC supporters might have second thoughts given the Clinton Foundation matters as they are harder to “dismiss as relevant” than the server issues that can be readily dismissed (by those inclined to give HRC the benefit of the doubt and who don’t understand this “space”) as “petty over classification”, etc.
    The Clintons also have deep relationships with some of the “dirty” Ukraine oligarchs and as I recall there are Clinton Foundation contributions floating around in this space as well.

  15. cynic says:

    Thank you. It is amazing that such openly dishonest people are allowed to dominate public life. That says much about both their owners and their supporters, and the corruption of the legal and judicial institutions.

  16. Gary Orton says:

    Former US Attorney for the District of Columbia and consummate Washington insider Joseph diGenova was recently interviewed on C-Span about Hillary Clinton’s six private servers on which she conducted government business. Asked about criminal intent (at 4:15 into the interview), he answered by saying, “[4:55] The question I ask myself as an investigator is ‘Why would someone set up a private server to all of their government business?’ . . .The answer I get is to avoid disclosure, to evade, to prevent people from finding out what’s there.”
    Later (beginning at 20:22), he discloses information “from published reports” and “from conversations with former FBI agents” that agents are focusing on a $900,000 donation made by Boeing to the Clinton Foundation shortly after “Boeing went after Mrs. Clinton to help them get a multi-billion dollar contract with the Russians for Boeing aircraft,” explaining that Boeing was then fighting with Airbus for the contract. “[The FBI agents] have six servers in their possession. They are trying to recover the 30,000-plus emails that Mrs. Clinton has said were personal and were deleted. The agents are operating under the theory the personal emails (that personal equals Clinton Foundation and therefore thing were deleted about the Foundation) which [sic] have something to do with cash and official acts.”
    He also discusses the involvement of a grand jury, issuance of subpoenas, and grants of immunity.

  17. rjj says:

    couldn’t wait. Clintons + Ukrainian + oligarchs
    turns up a lot of stuff of which this seems to be the main source?
    which leads to Victor Pinchuk
    and then check meaning of vomitorium.

  18. “In a perfect universe they will be punished. But, we don’t live in that universe. Obama can, and likely will, grant an open-ended pardon for any and all crimes.”
    Hey, it’s what Bill would do! Remember Marc Rich?

  19. Seamus says:

    I just came across this gem by the late Christopher Hitchens which provides a fascinating history (to me anyway) of Mrs. Clinton’s shenanigans over the years.

  20. Allen Thomson says:

    > In this case an Assistant U.S. Attorney!
    Who is it?

  21. Nancy K says:

    she is, IMHO, very clearly insane”. I notice you refer to yourself as a microbiologist, not psychiatrist. Clinton is hardly insane, narcissistic probably, as are most politicians. I would not be voting for her if I thought she was going to bring about the demise of the world as we know it. She has more experience than Cruz, more brains than Trump and she is not a socialist. She also does not believe in Armageddon, has not been married to two immigrants yet feel that immigrants should be kicked out of the country. I like Bernie Sanders, but I do not believe a liberal socialist can be elected president in the US. Clinton is a little too centrist to my liking yet I feel she is the only real choice I have. By the way, I’m not a psychiatrist either but I was a nurse for 37 years and 25 of those years were as a psychiatric nurse. I have seen a lot of insanity and Clinton does not fit that description.

  22. cynic says:

    It’s not only the politicians who are getting away with murder. Here’s an account of a ‘biznesman’ in the health care ‘industry’, who should be under a judicial hammer – but who isn’t even being investigated.

  23. Apparently the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice has written to the Department of State requesting termination of all internal Department of States collateral civil/criminal investigations relating to HRC’s personal servers. The text would be of great interest but apparently not subject to FOIA. Why this action? Routine to prevent corruption of the criminal investigatory process.

Comments are closed.