“The DOJ and State have said that Hillary Clinton has gone too far
for their liking,” Tom Fitton states in this week’s Weekly Update.


[Action]

HILLARY CLINTON’S “INAPPROPRIATE” APPEAL TO AVOID JUDICIAL WATCH
TESTIMONY

[[link removed]]

“THE DOJ AND STATE HAVE SAID THAT HILLARY CLINTON HAS GONE TOO FAR
FOR THEIR LIKING,” TOM FITTON STATES IN LAST WEEK’S WEEKLY UPDATE
[[link removed]].


Hillary Clinton’s “desperate motion to the appellate court” has
done little to stop Judicial Watch’s unrelenting effort to uncover
the full extent of the Clinton email scandal. Filing a writ of
mandamus, “essentially suing the court for… abusing her
‘indisputable right’ not to testify,” Clinton and Mills claim a
protected status as ex-high government officials. However, their
appeal “doesn’t offer a single case from this court or any other
suggesting that high level government officials should not be required
to follow regular appellate channels,” Fitton continues.

Judicial Watch has also challenged Clinton’s argument that she
“held the server under a claim of right,” despite containing
thousands of federal records. Contrary to legal precedent, “Clinton
did not obtain an opinion from State’s legal advisor as to whether
she could take the federal records prior to her departure from
State.”

In recent statements, the State Department and Justice Department have
also openly clashed with Clinton’s claim, describing it as
“inappropriate” according to Fitton. However, despite the fact
that “many questions remain unanswered, the Justice Department
inexplicably still takes the position that the court should close
discovery and end the case.” In response, the District Court
followed by stating the following:

> _“To argue that the court has now enough information to determine
> whether State conducted an adequate search is preposterous,
> especially when considering State’s deficient representations
> regarding the existence of additional Clinton emails. Instead, the
> court will now authorize a new round of discovery.” _

Having “reasonably concluded that Clinton’s previous explanations
for using a private server are cursory, incomplete and seemingly at
odds with what discovery has yielded to date,” it would indeed be
“preposterous” to end the case here. With her original deposition
scheduled for May 16th, “I expect the appellate court should move
pretty quickly,” Fitton states. “My guess is that they’ll have a
phone hearing, which may be live-streamed.”

Even though Hillary Clinton considers a new round of discovery in the
District Court to be “an abuse of discretion, the court agrees with
Judicial Watch. It’s time to hear more from secretary Clinton,”
Fitton concludes.



[Contribute]
[[link removed]]


<a
href="[link removed]"
target="_blank"><img alt="CC01"
src="[link removed]"
style="width:100%; height:auto;" /></a>

[32x32x1]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x2]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024

202.646.5172



© 2017 - 2020, All Rights Reserved
Manage Email Subscriptions
[[link removed]]
|
Unsubscribe
[[link removed]]

View in browser
[[link removed]]