Headlines
Killary Quotes
- Thread starter Bobcat
- Start date
Ratickle
Founding Member / Super Moderator
Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Orders State Department to Conduct a Search of Benghazi Emails of Hillary Clinton’s Closest Advisors
(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch announced that on August 8, 2017, D.C. District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta ordered the State Department “to search the state.gov e-mail accounts of Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Jacob Sullivan,” former aides of Hillary Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State. The State Department is ordered to search in those accounts “for records responsive to [Judicial Watch’s] March 4, 2015, FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] request.” (A separate Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit first broke open the Clinton email scandal.)
Judge Mehta described Judicial Watch’s Clinton Benghazi FOIA lawsuit as “a far cry from a typical FOIA case. Secretary Clinton used a private e-mail server, located in her home, to transmit and receive work-related communications during her tenure as Secretary of State.” Further:
f an e-mail did not involve any state.gov user, the message would have passed through only the Secretary’s private server and, therefore, would be beyond the immediate reach of State. Because of this circumstance, unlike the ordinary case, State could not look solely to its own records systems to adequately respond to [Judicial Watch’s] demand.
[The State Department] has not, however, searched the one records system over which it has always had control and that is almost certain to contain some responsive records: the state.gov e-mail server. If Secretary Clinton sent an e-mail about Benghazi to Abedin, Mills, or Sullivan at his or her state.gov e-mail address, or if one of them sent an e-mail to Secretary Clinton using his or her state.gov account, then State’s server presumably would have captured and stored such an e-mail. Therefore, State has an obligation to search its own server for responsive records.
State has offered no assurance that the three record compilations it received [from Secretary Clinton and her aides], taken together, constitute the entirety of Secretary Clinton’s e-mails during the time period relevant to Plaintiff’s FOIA Request. Absent such assurance, the court is unconvinced “beyond material doubt” that a search of the state.gov accounts of Abedin, Mills and Sullivan is “unlikely to produce any marginal return.”
Accordingly, the court finds that State has not met its burden of establishing it performed an adequate search in response to Plaintiff’s FOIA Request and orders State to conduct a supplemental search of the state.gov e-mail accounts of Abedin, Mills, and Sullivan.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...azi-emails-hillary-clintons-closest-advisors/
(Washington, DC) — Judicial Watch announced that on August 8, 2017, D.C. District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta ordered the State Department “to search the state.gov e-mail accounts of Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Jacob Sullivan,” former aides of Hillary Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State. The State Department is ordered to search in those accounts “for records responsive to [Judicial Watch’s] March 4, 2015, FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] request.” (A separate Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit first broke open the Clinton email scandal.)
Judge Mehta described Judicial Watch’s Clinton Benghazi FOIA lawsuit as “a far cry from a typical FOIA case. Secretary Clinton used a private e-mail server, located in her home, to transmit and receive work-related communications during her tenure as Secretary of State.” Further:
f an e-mail did not involve any state.gov user, the message would have passed through only the Secretary’s private server and, therefore, would be beyond the immediate reach of State. Because of this circumstance, unlike the ordinary case, State could not look solely to its own records systems to adequately respond to [Judicial Watch’s] demand.
[The State Department] has not, however, searched the one records system over which it has always had control and that is almost certain to contain some responsive records: the state.gov e-mail server. If Secretary Clinton sent an e-mail about Benghazi to Abedin, Mills, or Sullivan at his or her state.gov e-mail address, or if one of them sent an e-mail to Secretary Clinton using his or her state.gov account, then State’s server presumably would have captured and stored such an e-mail. Therefore, State has an obligation to search its own server for responsive records.
State has offered no assurance that the three record compilations it received [from Secretary Clinton and her aides], taken together, constitute the entirety of Secretary Clinton’s e-mails during the time period relevant to Plaintiff’s FOIA Request. Absent such assurance, the court is unconvinced “beyond material doubt” that a search of the state.gov accounts of Abedin, Mills and Sullivan is “unlikely to produce any marginal return.”
Accordingly, the court finds that State has not met its burden of establishing it performed an adequate search in response to Plaintiff’s FOIA Request and orders State to conduct a supplemental search of the state.gov e-mail accounts of Abedin, Mills, and Sullivan.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...azi-emails-hillary-clintons-closest-advisors/
Ratickle
Founding Member / Super Moderator
Hillary Clinton‘s new book What Happened will be released next week, but numerous excerpts from her tell-all from the 2016 election have been shared, including one about her Democratic primary rival, Bernie Sanders.
Tom Watson tweeted this page from her book. Wow – “I am proud to be a Democrat and wish Bernie were, too.”
September 4, 2017
She took aim at Sanders for “impugning” her character during the primary, which she believed ultimately helped Donald Trump win in the election. “Because we agreed on so much, Bernie couldn’t make an argument against me in this area on policy, so he had to resort to innuendo and impugning my character,” she wrote. “When I finally challenged Bernie during a debate to name a single time I changed a position or a vote because of a financial contribution, he couldn’t come up with anything. Nonetheless, his attacks caused lasting damage, making it harder to unify progressives in the general election and paving the way for Trump’s ‘Crooked Hillary’ campaign.” Clinton expressed appreciation for the Vermont Senator for campaigning for her during the general election, but she also expressed her frustration that he himself wasn’t a Democrat to begin with and accused him of not necessarily wanting a Democrat to win the White House.
Full story on: mediaite.com
Bobcat
Founding Member
Ratickle
Founding Member / Super Moderator
When it came time to vote on the 2006 Border Fence Act, 26 Senate Democrats voted in favor of the Act, while 19 voted against. Among those voting in favor were Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Diane Feinstein, and Chuck Schumer. In effect, they voted for a 700 mile border fence to be constructed — not very far off from the 1,000 mile long “big beautiful wall” that President Donald Trump wants.
Then Sen. Obama said of the Act, at the time, that it’ll aid in building “better fences and better security along our borders” and would also “help stem some of the tide of illegal immigration in this country.” Hillary, meanwhile, acknowledged her 2006 vote as recent as November of 2015 when she said “Well, look. I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And, I do think you have to control your borders.”
Then Sen. Obama said of the Act, at the time, that it’ll aid in building “better fences and better security along our borders” and would also “help stem some of the tide of illegal immigration in this country.” Hillary, meanwhile, acknowledged her 2006 vote as recent as November of 2015 when she said “Well, look. I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And, I do think you have to control your borders.”
fund razor
Founding Member
Hillary Clinton is to "what happened" as OJ Simpson is to "If I did it."
Similar threads
