It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(Reuters) - A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that U.S. State Department officials and aides to Hillary Clinton should be questioned under oath about whether the former secretary of state's use of a private email system was an effort to skirt open records laws.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan is likely to add to the uncertainty hovering over Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination for the November U.S. presidential election, about the legal consequences of her decision to exclusively use a private email server in her New York home for her government work.
The State Department and Judicial Watch, the conservative watchdog group suing for records about the employment of a senior Clinton aide, must agree on a plan for the depositions by April, Sullivan said in his order on Tuesday, according to court documents.
Sullivan, a judge in federal court in Washington, D.C., said there was at least "a reasonable suspicion" that open records laws were undermined, The Washington Post reported. Sullivan, who was appointed by Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton, said he may order the department to subpoena Clinton to return all records connected to her private email server, the newspaper reported.
Clinton returned about 30,000 emails to the State Department in 2014, but said she deleted thousands of others her staff deemed not to be work-related.
Judicial Watch told the court it wanted to get sworn testimony from several senior State Department officials and Clinton associates, both past and present, who set up or knew about the system or dealt with requests from the public for copies of Clinton's records, according to court documents.
In court filings, the group mentioned Patrick Kennedy, the department's under secretary for management, and Cheryl Mills, Clinton's former chief of staff at the department, among others. In a statement to the media, the group said it may later seek to have Clinton testify under oath.
The State Department said it was reviewing the order but could not comment further on ongoing litigation. The department may appeal the ruling.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced that District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan today granted Judicial Watch’s motion for discovery into whether the State Department and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton deliberately thwarted the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for six years. The developments come in a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit that seeks records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former Deputy Chief of Staff to Clinton. The lawsuit was reopened because of revelations about Clinton’s separate email records (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Azureblue
If shes not charged / takes a deal and a Republican is elected she most likely will be. Better for her to try and resolve it now with a Democrat in control of the DOJ than the alternative.
The other thing is the anger of the American people at the federal government. Failing to act could cause a backlash towards democrats who are up for election this time around.
originally posted by: TheTengriist
a reply to: Xcathdra
Well, if there's one thing we've learned, it's that corrupt people under oath have terrible memories. "I do not rcall. I do not recall. I do not recall"
Sullivan, who was appointed by Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton
originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
Cruz still allowed to be running after being proven to be Canadian born also makes no sense...
originally posted by: Xcathdra
originally posted by: TheTengriist
a reply to: Xcathdra
Well, if there's one thing we've learned, it's that corrupt people under oath have terrible memories. "I do not rcall. I do not recall. I do not recall"
Then their is the flip side -
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky".
My personal favorite was just recently when asked if she ever lied to the American people -
""You're asking me to say I have never, I don't believe I ever have. I don't believe I ever will. I'm going to do the best I can to level with the American people," Hillary said, conclusively."
originally posted by: JIMC5499
originally posted by: BigBrotherDarkness
Cruz still allowed to be running after being proven to be Canadian born also makes no sense...
This cracks me up. If Cruz isn't eligible to run for President, Obama shouldn't be President. It is the same law that allowed Obama to be President that allows Cruz to run.