Judicial Watch Announces the Schedule for Deposition Testimony in Clinton Email Lawsuit

What a lot of people fail to realize is the scope of the legal troubles former Secretary Clinton is facing. There are 39 separate lawsuits pending, multiple FBI criminal investigations, as well as the security reviews the State Department has placed on hold due to the FBI criminal investigations. Of the legal actions currently working their way through the court system are several FOIA lawsuits, one of which has now scheduled depositions of key members of State Department staff during Hillary's tenure as Secretary of State.

First Witness to Testify Wednesday

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it has scheduled the depositions of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s top aides Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, as well as top State Department official Patrick Kennedy, and former State IT employee Bryan Pagliano regarding the creation and operation of Clinton’s non-government email system. The first witness, Lewis A. Lukens, will be deposed on Wednesday, May 18.

From the legal filing:

NOTICE OF DEPOSITION SCHEDULE

1. The parties have conferred and have agreed on dates for the depositions of the current State Department employees. Specifically, Plaintiff will take the following depositions on the following days:

Lewis A. Lukens: May 18, 2016;

Stephen D. Mull: June 3, 2016;

30(b)(6) witness(es): June 8, 2016; and

Patrick F. Kennedy: June 29, 2016.

2. After conferring with Defendant as well as the attorneys for the former State Department employees, Plaintiff served subpoenas on the former State Department employees. Plaintiff intends to take the following depositions on the following days:

Cheryl D. Mills: May 27, 2016;

Bryan Pagliano: June 6, 2016; and

Huma Abedin: June 28, 2016.

These FOIA lawsuits are taking place concurrently with the FBI investigations, and thus far have not been adversely affected by the ongoing criminal investigations. In fact, the efforts Judicial Watch is putting forth may:

... finally reveal new truths about how Hillary Clinton and the Obama State Department subverted the Freedom of the Information Act,” stated Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton

This is a follow up to a prior ATS thread:

2nd Federal Judge Grants Legal Discovery into Clinton's Use of Private Server

More grist for the mill...

This was the judge that determined that the State department did NOT act in good faith in response to a previous FOIA request.

Oh this is Deluxe !!!

Right in the middle of the primaries and real close to the Convention.

The tricky part for the "interviewees" will be to avoid conflicting testimonies.

If they get caught lying, the exposures will be to much for the Hillary Campaign to dispute.

So that means the Campaign will simply keep lying in attempts to hold votes.

Some of these characters have already talked to the FBI, and to Congress.

Thanks for the info OP. I don't have much to add other than I hope she pays for her mistakes just like everyone else. With the amount of emails found to hold classified information. She put our country and its citizens in danger time and time again. We have no room for such a lackadaisical President.

this is why bernie is hanging around......

a reply to: amicktd

We have no room for such a lackadaisical President.

Indeed. If she did not know the information in question was sensitive enough to warrant being classified after having to undergo a special indoctrination as to the nature of SAPs, then she shouldn't be in any position ever which might require one to access such information, and I'm betting the the pres probably is going to be dealing with classified information.

How would a security review of her past experience with classified information go?

Who is "30(b)(6) witness(es)"?
Hillary?

ETA: I looked it up. Should have done that first. That means that someone from the defense who is knowledgeable about the questions must testify. It can probably be whoever the State Department assigns.

a reply to: BlueAjah

This is the FOIA case in which Hillary could be called to testify if JW determines it needs to once this first round of depositions goes through.

All while they've got the FBI examining them and scrutinizing their answers against what they already know from combing the server, the Platt River backups, and whatever Guccifer snagged which is what all of this came from in the first place.

Nothing , absolutely nothing will ever come about from anything either one of the Clintons have done. You are talking about our next President.
Supreme Being , please help and watch after us all.

Yeah I wish it would work out for the guy. They have been tossing around Joe Bidens name the past few days as an alternative but they wont come out and say alternative to what. Hillary and the DNC treats Bernie like he was the women that Bill assaulted.

a reply to: MEDIKATED

Here's my prediction...

Hillary gets recommended for indictment and pardoned or goes to jail (unlikely). Or maybe all of her close aides take the blame and she says she trusted them to do everything right and they let her down.

If nothing happens everything gets leaked and she's forced to step down and either Biden or Kerry jump in...

a reply to: SonOfThor

You know, I'm afraid nothing will happen, everything will get leaked, and because most people really don't have a clue just how badly former Secretary Clinton broke the law, they won't face any consequences.

Oh maybe one or two if her lackeys get tossed under the bus, but nothing seems to stick to thr Clintons.

The only thing left to hope for is a random lightning or meteor strike to intersect their coordinates simultaneously to their occupation of such.

Mans laws don't seem to apply to them, eventually entropy has to get them...doesn't it?

originally posted by: xuenchen
Oh this is Deluxe !!!

Right in the middle of the primaries and real close to the Convention.

The tricky part for the "interviewees" will be to avoid conflicting testimonies.

If they get caught lying, the exposures will be to much for the Hillary Campaign to dispute.

So that means the Campaign will simply keep lying in attempts to hold votes.

Some of these characters have already talked to the FBI, and to Congress.

There's been so much time for them to get their stories straight. And the time between those depo's is laughable. They will have no problem making sure their stories are the same.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: amicktd

We have no room for such a lackadaisical President.

Indeed. If she did not know the information in question was sensitive enough to warrant being classified after having to undergo a special indoctrination as to the nature of SAPs, then she shouldn't be in any position ever which might require one to access such information, and I'm betting the the pres probably is going to be dealing with classified information.

How would a security review of her past experience with classified information go?

I'd assume she would lose her clearance. As I've said before, I served with a guy that had some college loans not paid up. He ended up losing his Secret clearance over it and basically lost his job as a Sonar Technician. I bolded Secret due to the fact that Secret is like child's play when in comparison to "Special Access Programs".

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Bryan Pagliano will NOT give a deposition on June 6, 2016. Instead:

We are writing to inform you that, with the advice of counsel, Mr. Pagliano will decline to answer any and all questions that may be put to him in the scheduled deposition in reliance on his rights under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

JW v. State Pagliano refusal of deposition 01363

Taking the 5th in a FOIA deposition?

What's up with that?

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Pagliano has some major issues.

I bet he has spilled so many beans, nobody can get around it.

He has immunity anyway.

Major player he is.

Witness protection when this is over.

a reply to: xuenchen

Yeah
That dude has the goods that's why he made a deal.
I am surprised Hillary didn't get to him before the FBI did.

Judicial Watch today released the deposition transcript of Ambassador Lewis Lukens, former deputy assistant secretary of state and executive director of the State Department’s executive secretariat. The transcript is available here. Amb. Lukens was deposed last week as part of the discovery granted to Judicial Watch

www.judicialwatch.org...

Transcript

I read about 1/2 of the transcript so far. It's very interesting. He was questioned regarding who made which decisions about Clinton's use of computer devices, regarding restrictions on wireless devices, and about Huma, Pagliano, Mills, etc.

It's difficult to quote specific sections due to the format of the document, but if I have the patience later I might pull out some interesting parts. I thought I would just add it here now, in case others want to take a look at it.

originally posted by: BlueAjah

Judicial Watch today released the deposition transcript of Ambassador Lewis Lukens, former deputy assistant secretary of state and executive director of the State Department’s executive secretariat. The transcript is available here. Amb. Lukens was deposed last week as part of the discovery granted to Judicial Watch

www.judicialwatch.org...

Transcript

I read about 1/2 of the transcript so far. It's very interesting. He was questioned regarding who made which decisions about Clinton's use of computer devices, regarding restrictions on wireless devices, and about Huma, Pagliano, Mills, etc.

It's difficult to quote specific sections due to the format of the document, but if I have the patience later I might pull out some interesting parts. I thought I would just add it here now, in case others want to take a look at it.

Thanks for posting! Got about a third of the way thru, gonna bookmark and come back in the morning to finish it.

Interesting to see some of the angles they are taking but based on what I'm seeing so far, doubting there will be anything earth shattering at least until there are other depos to compare against. We shall see!

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Bryan Pagliano will NOT give a deposition on June 6, 2016. Instead:

We are writing to inform you that, with the advice of counsel, Mr. Pagliano will decline to answer any and all questions that may be put to him in the scheduled deposition in reliance on his rights under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

JW v. State Pagliano refusal of deposition 01363

Taking the 5th in a FOIA deposition?

What's up with that?

I thought he was granted immunity?

schnit must be getting biblical behind them doors!

a reply to: burgerbuddy

I have a feeling that Pagliano is cooperating with the FBI due to his immunity deal, and they probably instructed him not to give the deposition to Judicial Watch. If he gave away confidential information, it might jeopardize the FBI investigation. The FBI will not want to let the defense know what they know until they are ready for them to know it.