Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Federal Judge: Deposition of Hillary Clinton May be Necessary

Federal Judge: Deposition of Hillary Clinton May be Necessary

Uh oh

This is not good news for Hillary Clinton. A federal judge indicated deposing the embattled Democratic frontrunner may be necessary in the ongoing investigation of her use of a private email account and home-brewed server while Secretary of State.

Julian Hattem reports for The Hill:

Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia laid out the ground rules for interviewing multiple State Department officials about the emails, with an eye toward finishing the depositions in the weeks before the party nominating conventions.

Clinton herself may be forced to answer questions under oath, Sullivan said, though she is not yet being forced to take that step.
“Based on information learned during discovery, the deposition of Mrs. Clinton may be necessary,” Sullivan said in an order on Wednesday. [READ THE ORDER BELOW] Discovery is the formal name for the evidence-gathering process, which includes depositions.

“If plaintiff believes Mrs. Clinton’s testimony is required, it will request permission from the Court at the appropriate time.”

The order, which came in the course of a lawsuit from conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, leaves open the possibility that Clinton will be forced to answer detailed questions on the eve of her formal selection as the Democratic presidential nominee about her creation of the server.

Any deposition would surely roil the presidential race and force her campaign to confront the issue, which has dogged her for a year.

“Her legal team is really going to fight that really hard,” predicted Matthew Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney who has raised questions about Clinton’s email setup.

“You have to take her deposition in this case to fully understand how it was designed and the whys and the what-fors.”

While leaving the door open to Clinton’s eventual deposition, Sullivan on Wednesday ordered at least six current and former State Department employees to answer questions from Judicial Watch, which has filed multiple lawsuits over the Clinton email case.

That list includes longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin, former chief of staff Cheryl Mills, under secretary for management Patrick Kennedy, former executive secretary Stephen Mull and Bryan Pagliano, the IT official believed to be responsible for setting up and maintaining the server.

The judge also ordered the State Department to prepare a formal answer about Clinton’s emails. Donald Reid, a senior security official, may also be asked to answer questions, if Judicial Watch so decides.

It was Judicial Watch’s law suit against the State Department that helped unearth the emails of Clinton aides.

Judicial Watch v Dept of State by Julian Hattem

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

JackRussellTerrierist | May 4, 2016 at 5:55 pm

“…may be necessary….” sounds like a politically frightened rabbit begging for any plausible legal excuse to NOT allow the deposition or, at the very least, an intent to delay delay delay until Hillary is elected.

In my experience, “….may be necessary…” is judge for “will be required by the court upon a proper showing.” Considering that this was her server operating her way, under her personal direction and control, her acts are in issue in the case.

This is not good news for Hillary Clinton.

On the other hand, the obvious fact that—still—nothing’s actually happening is very good news for Hillary Clinton.

TX-rifraph | May 4, 2016 at 6:24 pm

How will the transcript show a cackle as a response to a tough question?

Any non-Clinton citizen would already be in her second year of prison for this act by Hillary. I have never seen such a slow pace to an investigation in my entire life. Sickening.

Realize it is Obama and his ‘justice’ department who accessories after the fact.

snapper451 | May 4, 2016 at 7:55 pm

Perhaps Judge Sullivan could run the FBI under Trump? Heck, he’s getting more things accomplished and appears to have a sense of urgency.

    Rick in reply to snapper451. | May 4, 2016 at 8:09 pm

    With respect, I do not see the judge acting with any sense of urgency. In this legal proceeding the government should be given 10 days at most to do anything.
    I say again: We are being played.

Q: Did you know there was classified information on your private email server?

A: That depends on what the definition of “know”, “classified”, “information”, and “you” is… I mean are.

This entire proceeding does nothing but showcase how politicized our so-called ‘Justice’ department has become and how little politicians care about laws.

There was enough evidence to indict and convict Clinton months ago. The second they announced that they had 20+ emails that would not be released because the information they contained was too sensitive, that should have been it.

As somebody that actually was in charge of IA at one point when I was in the Marine Corps, I can guarantee you that anybody who did what she did would have been in prison right now.

Literally the only reason they haven’t announced they aren’t going to indict her is because that MIGHT be just what Bernie needs to boost him over the top.

So instead the pieces of shit in charge of the FBI and ‘Justice’ department are just stringing this along until she is safely the nominee and they’ll quietly mutter that they won’t pursue it any more.

And the Republican pieces of shit in Congress will be mad and make a few sound bytes out of it and then they’ll forget about it.

I can’t wait until somebody else is indicted for mishandling classified information and they use the Clinton defense.

    assemblerhead in reply to Olinser. | May 4, 2016 at 9:15 pm

    Its already happening.

    Military officers convicted / sent to Ft. Leavenworth are now putting THIS in their appeal filings.

    Just wait until the filings start up on the civilian side!
    No way to bury it.

    The Ultimate Get Out Of Jail Free Card!

YourMaster | May 5, 2016 at 5:11 am

….I’m sure bill clinton is skilled enough to stall this investigation long enough to secure hillary the nomination

…while she might not end up in jail….

….the DNC have to realize (and they don’t or won’t)
Hillary is royally screwed now if she runs against Trump.

hahahaha …this is the best election… I doubt bernie will win… even if he wins California and all the rest of the states…

….he still loses to hillary, unless he takes them all by a majority 50-60% …something he has zero chance of doing. …he may beat her by 2-3 points in some… he won’t beat her by 50-60%. …and if he don’t, he loses.

holdingmynose | May 5, 2016 at 5:37 am

This news is even more interesting in light of the Fox News exclusive interview with hacker “Guccifer” who claims that he and as many as 10 other hackers had gained easy access to Shrillary’s email server.

Sneaky Pete | May 5, 2016 at 7:54 am

Not to be mundane, but what the hell is wrong with the DC DC word processors, they can’t even get the font right. Or is it Scribd?

    assemblerhead in reply to Sneaky Pete. | May 5, 2016 at 8:52 am

    The font problem is all “Scribd”.

    They are specifying a font-to-use that you and I don’t have installed/available on our computers.

    Ever get e-mail with small/unreadable fonts? Same problem.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend