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

U.S. District Senior Judge Royce C. Lamberth today ruled that Judicial Watch may question under oath State Department officials, and HRC's aides in particular, " about her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state". Judicial Watch has specifically targeted the explaination offered by Susan Rice, then-U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, of the eplaination and motives offered by her in the aftermath of the Bengazi attacks.

In a three-page order, U.S. District Senior Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the District granted a request from Judicial Watch, which has sought public records of talking points used by Obama national security adviser Susan E. Rice, then-U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, in television appearances after the deadly Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya. Appearing five days later on Sunday morning talk shows, Rice said the assaults appeared to have stemmed from a spontaneous protest of an anti-Islam video. U.S. investigators subsequently concluded that the attacks were brought by terrorist groups

Lamberth's reasoning behind the ruling is: "“Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare”.

The article went on to name those to be listed for deposition:

Judicial Watch subsequently proposed questioning seven current and former officials, including Cheryl D. Mills, who was Clinton’s chief of staff at State; Abedin, a top aide who served as Mills’ deputy and who now is vice chairman of Clinton’s presidential campaign; and Bryan Pagliano, a Clinton staff member during her 2008 presidential campaign who helped set up the private server. Others designated for deposition include Undersecretary for Management Patrick F. Kennedy; Stephen D. Mull, executive secretary from June 2009 to October 2012; Lewis A. Lukens, executive director of the executive secretariat from 2008 to 2011; and Donald R. Reid, senior coordinator for security infrastructure in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security

The hits just keep coming, don't they? At what point will those so enamored with the thought of supporting HRC for POTUS see their tainted candidate for what she truly is? I just want some answers, and I'm not the only one.

breaking911.com...

Good find !!

Can't wait for the "live" interviews.

Congress will get transcripts too I bet.

And a special prosecutor will be "informed".

a reply to: Boscowashisnamo

Hillary will kick ass in November, and republicans are getting desperate...lol

by the way, which "hits" keep on coming???.....do you mean, every nutball theory that the pinhead right-wingers can dream up?.....let's not forget that the republicans have in the past accused the clintons of murder, drug running, treason,
etc.....it's just another day of false accusations...but, stay tuned for tomorrow's episode of "Hillary basher's of America"...there's sure to be MORE OUTRAGE FUN!!!!

a reply to: xuenchen
The explanation offered by Rice and Clinton after the attacks display their contempt and dismissal of the citizens of this Country, with the backing of the current administration. It smelled then, and still does. Any efforts to peel back the layers of deception should be welcome by citizens who hold elected officials and those they place in positions of authority fully accountable for their actions.

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: Boscowashisnamo

Hillary will kick ass in November, and republicans are getting desperate...lol

by the way, which "hits" keep on coming???.....do you mean, every nutball theory that the pinhead right-wingers can dream up?.....let's not forget that the republicans have in the past accused the clintons of murder, drug running, treason,
etc.....it's just another day of false accusations...but, stay tuned for tomorrow's episode of "Hillary basher's of America"...there's sure to be MORE OUTRAGE FUN!!!!

Are you PUI?

Posting Under the Influence?

Either way, you made me laugh!

a reply to: jimmyx

Keep telling yourself that its worked SO FAR.

When the evidence of criminal wrongdoing is so abundant and overwhelming, a judge has no choice but to rule as this one has.

It just goes to show how corrupt and inept Obama's DOJ is for not charging Hillary long ago.

The Democrats simply can't afford to throw their lot in with Hillary.

If they thought it was stupid how the Republican/Tea Party folks pounced on the birth certificate and about a dozen smaller things with Obama...it'll be worse with Clinton.

Even if she wins, the GOP will hammer at her with everything they've got constantly. We think the gridlock is bad now? Hillary will be paralyzed and unable to do anything except executive order, further playing into the GOP's hands. They'll claim she's a tyrant, doing whatever she wants (because they won't work with her to do things the proper way).

Hillary has to much baggage to be elected POTUS, imaginary or not. The GOP will hammer at her constantly for so long the people of the USA will probably begin to believe the rhetoric. Tell something long enough and people will believe it.

She'd be a totally neutered, lame duck POTUS and effectively give the White House to the GOP in 2020.

No, the Democratic party simply can't fall in line behind Hillary if they want any kind of long term strategy to work. She's to much of a liability. Even if none of the charges stick, the stigma alone is far to great.

a reply to: jimmyx

Some people are experiencing all 5 stages of denial simultaneously.

The Federal investigations are real not fantasy.

a reply to: jimmyx

When it takes 147 FBI agents to process all of the evidence and leads against her, it might be time to reevalute your delusions of her innocence.

Joe Rogan recently interviewed a CIA operative and he stated clearly that he would be in jai had he had done he same thing.

I think she wanted someone to see the information.

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: Boscowashisnamo

Hillary will kick ass in November, and republicans are getting desperate...lol

by the way, which "hits" keep on coming???.....do you mean, every nutball theory that the pinhead right-wingers can dream up?.....let's not forget that the republicans have in the past accused the clintons of murder, drug running, treason,
etc.....it's just another day of false accusations...but, stay tuned for tomorrow's episode of "Hillary basher's of America"...there's sure to be MORE OUTRAGE FUN!!!!

The following threads would appear to be "false allegations" and "nutball theory"s to you, but they are backed with sourced materials. How bout you refute the allegations with your own sourced materials.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I judge HRC by her actions, and hold her accountable. Most people do, unless blinded by partisan politics.

If there was a chance in hell she'd end up in jail or indicted -- she wouldn't be wasting the money of so many other people.

Trust me.

You don't spend powerful and rich people's money if you're going to be going away to prison or loose the election because of a scandal like this.

Hillary knows charges won't be brought against her.

It's only the GOP and Hillary haters that keep salivating at any tiny shred of news, working themselves up into a frenzy -- pointing and shouting "we're so close to an indictment!" ........ when the truth is, she'll never be arrested or charged with anything.

If that was even a possibility, she wouldn't be running for office.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

How can she be eligible for security clearances now?

Yeah, when a Federal Judge says

"Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here,"

... someone is in trouble.

And:

Second judge says Clinton email setup may have been in 'bad faith'

Referring to the State Department, Clinton and Clinton's aides, he said there had been "constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials."

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Hillary knows charges won't be brought against her.

Do you think this because she's evaded responsibility for her actions in the past(MB support, Grande Castle deal, email, etc)? Or do you think the FBI investigation will bear no fruit? Or perhaps AG Lynch won't prosecute?

Hillary haters that keep salivating at any tiny shred of news, working themselves up into a frenzy

I detest HRC for the repeated incidents that she replied "don't recall", used her position for personal gain(UBS deal), and for her perpetuating a lie as to the motive for the attacks. I think that a person with her questionable history and integrity shouldn't be POTUS, and want to hold her accountable for her actions. It's not a D vs R thing to me, it's more of a right vs wrong.

a reply to: Boscowashisnamo

no it doesn't....the explanation they offered at the time was the information they were given before any in-depth investigation took place. they weren't there in Libya, and after a weeks investigation, they admitted they got it wrong....what deception is there???.....

a reply to: MystikMushroom

It seems she sincerely believes that she is above the law and that no one would dare touch her.

You say that she would not be wasting money on a campaign - but it is mostly not her money, so what would she care?

I doubt the federal government would be spending a fortune on a continuing investigation if they did not believe that there was good cause. It is just taking a while because they want the case to be solid. And because they have to overcome the constantly shifting admissions" as all of the people involved keep trying to get their stories straight.

a reply to: jimmyx

So it *really* was the video.

by the way...has anyone looked into republicans that are currently serving in the federal government, and who have security clearances, if they use private e-mail servers?....yup thought so....