Hillary Has Until September 29 To Respond - Under Oath To These 25 Questions

a reply to: xtradimensions Hillary's still dodging these questions?

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: xtradimensions Hillary's still dodging these questions?

HEY...what happened to the questions? They were a part of the post that started this thread, but now they're GONE. Clinton Mafia coerce the OP into removing them?

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: xtradimensions Hillary's still dodging these questions?

HEY...what happened to the questions? They were a part of the post that started this thread, but now they're GONE. Clinton Mafia coerce the OP into removing them?

LOL

Looks like somebody really chopped up the op.



Hmmm.

a reply to: carewemust

Link in the OP still works: Hillary Has Until September 29 To Respond - Under Oath - To These 25 Questions

Expect something like this.

Has until the 13th.... times up again. I can't find any news on this at all (anyone else?) has she asked for more time?

The questions in question...The questions are:

Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational.
Describe the creation of your clintonemail.com email account, including who decided to create it, when it was created, why it was created, and, if you did not set up the account yourself, who set it up for you.
When did you decide to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and whom did you consult in making this decision?
Identify all communications in which you participated concerning or relating to your decision to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and, for each communication, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the communication.
In a 60 Minutes interview aired on July 24, 2016, you stated that it was “recommended” you use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business. What recommendations were you given about using or not using a personal email account to conduct official State Department business, who made any such recommendations, and when were any such recommendations made?
Were you ever advised, cautioned, or warned, was it ever suggested, or did you ever participate in any communication, conversation, or meeting in which it was discussed that your use of a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business conflicted with or violated federal recordkeeping laws. For each instance in which you were so advised, cautioned or warned, in which such a suggestion was made, or in which such a discussion took place, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the advice, caution, warning, suggestion, or discussion.
Your campaign website states, “When Clinton got to the Department, she opted to use her personal email account as a matter of convenience.” What factors other than convenience did you consider in deciding to use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business? Include in your answer whether you considered federal records management and preservation requirements and how email you used to conduct official State Department business would be searched in response to FOIA requests.
After President Obama nominated you to be Secretary of State and during your tenure as secretary, did you expect the State Department to receive FOIA requests for or concerning your email?
During your tenure as Secretary of State, did you understand that email you sent or received in the course of conducting official State Department business was subject to FOIA?
During your tenure as Secretary of State, how did you manage and preserve emails in your clintonemail.com email account sent or received in the course of conducting official State Department business, and what, if anything, did you do to make those emails available to the Department for conducting searches in response to FOIA requests?
During your tenure as Secretary of State, what, if any, effort did you make to inform the State Department’s records management personnel (e.g., Clarence Finney or the Executive Secretariat’s Office of Correspondence and Records) about your use of a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business?
During your tenure as Secretary of State, did State Department personnel ever request access to your clintonemail.com email account to search for email responsive to a FOIA request? If so, identify the date access to your account was requested, the person or persons requesting access, and whether access was granted or denied.
At the time you decided to use your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business, or at any time thereafter during your tenure as Secretary of State, did you consider how emails you sent to or received from persons who did not have State Department email accounts (i.e., “state.gov” accounts) would be maintained and preserved by the Department or searched by the Department in response to FOIA requests? If so, what was your understanding about how such emails would be maintained, preserved, or searched by the Department in response to FOIA requests?
On March 6, 2009, Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Eric J. Boswell wrote in an Information Memo to your Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills, that he “cannot stress too strongly, however, that any unclassified BlackBerry is highly vulnerable in any setting to remotely and covertly monitoring conversations, retrieving email, and exploiting calendars.” A March 11, 2009 email states that, in a management meeting with the assistant secretaries, you approached Assistant Secretary Boswell and mentioned that you had read the “IM” and that you “get it.” Did you review the March 6, 2009 Information Memo, and, if so, why did you continue using an unclassified BlackBerry to access your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business? Copies of the March 6, 2009 Information Memo and March 11, 2009 email are attached as Exhibit A for your review.
In a November 13, 2010 email exchange with Huma Abedin about problems with your clintonemail.com email account, you wrote to Ms. Abedin, in response to her suggestion that you use a State Department email account or release your email address to the Department, “Let’s get a separate address or device.” Why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business after agreeing on November 13, 2010 to “get a separate address or device?” Include in your answer whether by “address” you meant an official State Department email account (i.e., a “state.gov” account) and by “device” you meant a State Department-issued BlackBerry. A copy of the November 13, 2010 email exchange with Ms. Abedin is attached as Exhibit B for your review.
Email exchanges among your top aides and assistants in August 30, 2011 discuss providing you with a State Department-issued BlackBerry or State Department email address. In the course of these discussions, State Department Executive Secretary Stephen Mull wrote, “[W]e are working to provide the Secretary per her request a Department issued BlackBerry to replace her personal unit which is malfunctioning (possibly because of her personal email server is down). We will prepare two versions for her to use – one with an operating State Department email account (which would mask her identity, but which would also be subject to FOIA requests).” Similarly, John Bentel, the Director of Information and Records Management in the Executive Secretariat, wrote, “You should be aware that any email would go through the Department’s infrastructure and [be] subject to FOIA searches.” Did you request a State Department issued Blackberry or a State Department email account in or around August 2011, and, if so, why did you continue using your personal device and clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business instead of replacing your device and account with a State Department-issued BlackBerry or a State Department email account? Include in

Spoke too soon...

Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released received responses under oath from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton concerning her email practices. Judicial Watch submitted twenty-five questions on August 30 to Clinton as ordered by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. The new Clinton responses in the Judicial Watch…

So received (stated as "released received" above) so is it received or released? Most importantly... when do we get to see them?

www.judicialwatch.org...

M

a reply to: Mickierocksman
From your link:
www.judicialwatch.org...

a reply to: Phage

Thanks Phage, time to find my glasses

Tom Fitton. “Our lawyers will be reviewing the responses closely. Mrs. Clinton’s refusal to answer many of the questions in a clear and straightforward manner further reflects disdain for the rule of law"

It certainly does IMO, but would not expect anything less.

I thought that she was supposed to answer the questions herself, in her own handwriting? Maybe I misread that somewhere?

M

a reply to: Mickierocksman

The legal requirements set forth dont apply to her Majesty Clinton.

What we are seeing is another delaying tactic. They got the 2 week extension and in order to drag it out further she responds with I dont recall or they challenge the scope of the question being asked.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Mickierocksman

The legal requirements set forth dont apply to her Majesty Clinton.

What we are seeing is another delaying tactic. They got the 2 week extension and in order to drag it out further she responds with I dont recall or they challenge the scope of the question being asked.

You have to admit, many of those questions are broad and vague. On a few of them, you could write a term paper. If I were Hillary (or anyone else being investigated for this), I'd give them brief, vague answers. I'm not going to do their work for them.

From: www.foxnews.com...

"Clinton and her legal team objected to all or part of 18 of the 25 questions put to her by Judicial Watch. She also filed eight separate general objections to the process under which the questions were being asked.

In her responses, Clinton used some variation of "does not recall" at least 21 times."

Does Amnesia and/or Dementia disqualify someone from being President of the United States?

a reply to: carewemust

Sadly no.. The Constitution sets out the requirement - at least 35 years old and a natural born citizen. If she is elected I see an impeachment within the first year.

a reply to: Greggers

Here is the issue people are ignoring. The 5th amendment offers protection for "criminal" questions. In a criminal setting a person invoking their 5th amendment cant have that used against them.

Judicial Watch's suit is civil and the 5th amendment does not apply the same way. A judge can order a person who invokes the 5th to answer the questions anyways. Also in a civil proceeding a person who invokes the 5th can in fact have that action used against them.

In criminal settings a judge instructs the jury that they cannot infer any guilt from a refusal to answer questions.
In a civil setting a jury can in fact infer whatever they want from a person who invokes the 5th.

Her "I dont recall" and challenging the questions is a political move to get past the election date without having to answer questions that can and should be used against her.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: carewemust

Sadly no.. The Constitution sets out the requirement - at least 35 years old and a natural born citizen. If she is elected I see an impeachment within the first year.

IF America is dumb enough to elect Hillary, I see a STROKE the first 6 months. She's so prone to BOTH bleeding AND clotting, the stress of the Presidency will make Hillary even more of a vegetable than she is now.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Greggers

Here is the issue people are ignoring. The 5th amendment offers protection for "criminal" questions. In a criminal setting a person invoking their 5th amendment cant have that used against them.

Her "I dont recall" and challenging the questions is a political move to get past the election date without having to answer questions that can and should be used against her.

What we need is to see more e-mails that were originated from Hillary's e-mail. Their content will answer a lot of questions.

a reply to: carewemust
She has already positioned herself on that possibility as well by stating emails and memos were sent out by subordinates with her name attached to it but without her direct knowledge.

originally posted by: Mickierocksman
Has until the 13th.... times up again. I can't find any news on this at all (anyone else?) has she asked for more time?

Shannon Bream of Fox news has the answers.

I heard a couple.

Xeun was right.

Bunch of "not me's and I don't recalls"