Judicial Watch Releases Former Clinton Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin Deposition Testimony

Apparently while other items of interest have occupied people in the news, some other items seem to have slipped past unnoticed. I'm just now beginning to dig in to the deposition and will report back with any findings of interest.

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released the deposition transcript of Huma Abedin, former deputy chief of staff to Hillary Clinton throughout her four years as secretary of state and who also had an email account on the clintonemail.com system. The deposition transcript is available here.

Abedin testified it was Clinton’s decision to use her non-state.gov email; to her knowledge that only Hillary Clinton, Abedin and Chelsea Clinton had accounts on the clintonemail.com system; and that the clintonemail.com system may have interfered with Mrs. Clinton’s ability to do her job.

Judicial Watch

Anyone else who might be interested can find the deposition at the following link for download.

Related threads:

"Spread Islam Throughout The World" The Clinton's & MVP HUMA ABEDIN (Hillary's Girl)

Judicial Watch Releases Clinton Email Deposition Testimony of Karin Lang

Judicial Watch Releases Clinton Email Deposition Testimony of Amb. Stephen Mull

Judicial Watch Releases Former Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills Deposition Testimony

First deposition in email scandal reveals Clinton’s computer illiteracy

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

Clinton IT aide ordered to produce immunity agreement

Additionally....



Aide said Clinton didn't want emails accessible to 'anybody'

Longtime Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin said in a legal proceeding that Clinton did not want the State Department emails that she sent and received on her private computer server to be accessible to "anybody," according to transcripts released Wednesday. Her comments provided new insights into the highly unusual decision by the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate to operate a private email server in her basement to conduct government business as secretary of state.

Abedin also said under oath that she was not aware whether Clinton personally deleted any emails during her tenure as secretary.

******

Clinton’s Private E-Mail Use Said to Frustrate Top Aide Huma Abedin

She said she saw the decision by Clinton, who like many lawmakers also used a private e-mail while in the Senate, to use a private address as the top U.S. diplomat as a continuation of "what she was doing before she arrived at the State Department."

Apparently people still believe that judicial watch isint a joke, i remember just like yesterday, Bush Jr. and dick Cheney where to be arrested for war crimes, brings back so many good memories.

Hillary is evil and yes she deserves to rot in jail, is it going to happen, nope. Both democrats and the gop wont lift a finger, if she goes to jail, it opens Pandora box, no career politician wants that to happen.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Here's the first bit I find of interest:

I always had an e-mail account associated with the Clinton family to deal with their -- to deal with their personal matters.

Q Okay. And was this before starting at the State Department?

A Yeah, I -- I -- it would have been prior to starting at the State Department when we had the conversations, because we were -- I was losing -- in the process of transitioning. So, yes.

I wonder if she almost slipped up and said something other than "personal matters?"

Back to the depo...

Clif notes:

They ask a question

Humas lawyers object and(or) she does not recall

a reply to: avgguy

Yep, there a lots of objections but not a lot (a few) of "I don't recalls" yet and I have only gotten through a small part of the transcript so far. I'm also following other threads as well so this may take a while to get all the way through.

Next bit of interest:

Q Okay. Did the Secretary have a BlackBerry for her use as the -- while she was the Secretary of State?

A Yes, she did.

Q Okay. And how did she come to have that BlackBerry?

A That --

MR. BRILLE: Objection to form.

Go ahead.

A That was the BlackBerry that she had received, you know, in late 2008 at the conclusion of the presidential campaign.

This was the same Blackberry she used during her 2008 presidential bid. But she also used other devices:

Q Okay. Was -- did the Secretary have any other electronic devices, such as smart phones, iPads, mini iPad, that was also connected to her @Clintonemail.com account?

MS. WOLVERTON: Objection. Foundation.

A When she arrived at State?

Q Anytime during her tenure at the State Department.

MS. WOLVERTON: Same objection.

A While she was at State, I -- she did -- she did obtain an iPad, and that did -- that did have her e-mail account. She could access her e-mail on that, on that iPad.

It was not her practice to do so, but when her system on her BlackBerry went down, there was a period where I know she did use her e-mail on her iPad for maybe a week or two, if I remember correctly.

Did Huma almost slip up again here and say that she was the one who got Hillary the iPad?

Back to reading...



It also seems that some people still think that if they have no interest in a topic then others are wasting their time posting about said topic. I really wish such people would scroll on by posts they aren't interested in or have no substantive commentary to add, but they'd rather crap all over something than leave it alone.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

wow

looks like she had an unsecured ipad too.

Indeed xuenchen.

Not only that, it seems as though it was her standard procedure:

Q Do you know why Secretary Clinton did not want to use a state-issued e-mail account for her state-related work?

Objections follow, but she does eventually answer:

A So from my understanding, I just saw it as continue doing what she was doing before she arrived at the State Department.

She had always had a personal device since she had started using e-mail. That's what she used when she was in the Senate. She did not have a Senate.gov account. And she also did not have a Hillary Clinton campaign account.

She -- I experienced it as continuing the practice that she had had prior to arriving at the State Department, and continuing to use her personal device.

If personal use of electronic devices is a common practice among government officials, there is an additional problem including Hillary's use of personal electronic devices to conduct official business. This practice needs to be put to a stop for several reasons, not the least of which is security.

As we can see, it also allows government officials to determine what documentation is provided of their activities. If they can pick and choose what is delivered as "official business," then there is no way to know if they've done anything shady whilst in office and using that office for their personal gain.

Wonder what else will be in the depo?

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

She had always had a personal device since she had started using e-mail. That's what she used when she was in the Senate. She did not have a Senate.gov account. And she also did not have a Hillary Clinton campaign account.

This sounds like a "justification" attempt by Huma.

The old "they did it too" thing.

And Hillary had no senate.gov account ??

WoW

Hillary has been circumventing the system all along.

I bet she used a Clinton Foundation account.

What was her excuse (reason) back then I wonder?

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

I've been able to quickly peruse the document and I fail to see anything earth shattering.

Looks like there was another IT person Huma mostly dealt with other than Bryan Pagliano, a Justin Cole. That's a new name to me. I wonder if he's been interviewed by the FBI.

He is mentioned quite a but by Huma as her usual first point of contact if there were email issues that needed to be addressed, sometimes he would direct her to Pagliano. It also seems that Pagliano used a non State.gov email address but Huma does not know what the address was specifically.

Back into the transcript. Not that I expect to find anything earth shattering (), but there may still be some bits of interest...

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

These are critical findings, especially the other IT guy.
Neither of these guys had clearances, as far as I know.

That alone would make it highly illegal for them to be
granted access to the server, which held classified information.

Its a giant CF CF.

Ah, now they get to asking her about "not emailing anything sensitive:"

Q Where you write, "Don't e-mail HRC anything sensitive," HRC refers to Secretary Clinton. Is that right?

A Yes.

Q Okay. And then you write, "I can explain more in person."

A Yes.

Q What did you explain to Ms. Mills and Mr. Sullivan?

She said prior to reviewing the email chain, that she did not recall having this conversation until she had been shown the exhibit. She also said that it was one of the documents reviewed with counsel prior to the deposition.

Her eventual answer regarding this particular conversation:

A I wouldn't be able to recall the conversation exactly. But having seen this chain, what I would have said is, Justin e-mailed me to tell me that someone was trying to hack the system, and I would have told them that. I would have told them that in person.

The above referenced email exchange took place in January 2011.



a reply to: burntheships

Not only Justin Cole, but a Doug Band was involved as well, He was:

A He was President Clinton's senior advisor, chief of staff, in the period after he left the White House.

Yet another IT person who was involved with the back end operations of the @clintonemail.com server.

No wonder there was spillage.

Using her own get up while in the Senate is no excuse. SD IG already stated it would have not been approved and she never asked. Therefore it was never officially allowed other than her saying it was allowed by someone but she has yet to present a name or document that allowed it. She got away with it because she just did it and nobody could confront her on it but Obama or a SD IG but there was none at the the time for like a couple of years so she just kept rolling.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Q Where you write, "Don't e-mail HRC anything sensitive," HRC refers to Secretary Clinton. Is that right?

A Yes.

Obviously that indicates they were emailing "sensitive" info in the past, and after.

What a boondoggle !!!

Ok now they're into the FOIA questions.

Huma is saying that her usual practice, in order to comply with FOIA regs was to forward stuff from her clintonemail.com account from or to her @state.gov account.

So I -- my -- my understanding, my practice, from what I -- how I was functioning, I -- I wasn't perfect, but I did the best I could, was putting everything on State.gov. There were documents that were forwarded from State.gov to Clinton e-mail. Those were captured in the system. And so that's -- that is how I operated. And I understood that everything that was on the State.gov system was kept in the system and retained in the system.

Then they ask her a zinger:

Q All right. But it is your testimony that there were times that you communicated with Secretary Clinton where both of you used only the Clintonemail.com accounts for State Department business. Right?

A Yes. There were instances where that occurred.

Q Okay. With respect to those State Department work-related e-mails on the Clintonemail.com accounts, what did you do, if anything, to preserve those e-mails?

A I did -- those -- I did not do anything to preserve those e-mails.

But again, many of those e-mails were sent from State.gov. The instances where it was Clintonemail to Clintonemail, there were instances where the content of those e-mails had personal matters in there, and there may have also been State Department matters in there, too. It was a -- a combination.

But I did not -- I did not preserve those e-mails.

Here's the thing about FOIA violations, they are only punishable while the one who violates those rules is in office. Once someone is no longer in office, they cannot be held accountable for FIOA violations after they are out of office.

Now FOIA violations are a minor accent in the symphony of destruction that is the Clinton machine, but it does speak to obstruction if information was purposely deleted that should not have been.



Wow!

Huma's attorney is the one who instructed her to not cooperate with the State Department OIG investigation!

... Were you contacted by the State OIG's office in connection -- in connection with their investigation?

...

A Yes. I was contacted through my attorneys.

Q Okay. And did you refuse to speak with the State OIG's office in connection with their investigation?

MR. BRILLE: Objection. Form.

A On the advice of my attorneys I did, yes.

The above is a big deal, I think.

Appreciate you guys posting all this info., & doing all of this research for us! I know you have better things you could be doing, but I for one, sure appreciate your dedication to bringing all of this to us! Thank you! S&F OP

This testimony is damning.

Additional confirmation so far:
The private email was used for sensitive emails.
The server was hacked.
Hillary must have known it was hacked, so she lied when she said it was not.
Intentionally using the server to avoid FOIA and hide information.
etc.

Ok, plowing through the rest of the deposition, there was not much more of note (other than one thing I will note below*) but there were a lot of "I don't know"s and "I don't recall"s

* Clinton Executive Service Corporation

This is the first time I have seen this entity mentioned anywhere. Going to go look this up and see what can be found about it. May reply here, may begin a new thread if enough interesting information s found about the referenced corporation.

Thank you everyone who has participated in the thread so far. Your encouragement is duly noted and very much appreciated!

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
Ok, plowing through the rest of the deposition, there was not much more of note (other than one thing I will note below*) but there were a lot of "I don't know"s and "I don't recall"s

* Clinton Executive Service Corporation

This is the first time I have seen this entity mentioned anywhere.

This rang a bell, I recall that Clinton Executive Service had something
to do with Platte River Networks.

In another document exclusively obtained by CompleteColorado.com, a separate invoice billed to CESC (Clinton Executive Services Corp) includes a service line item that states “Datto Month of Private Cloud Service (auto-recurring).” The invoice is dated August 1, 2015.

Datto is a Connecticut IT company whose home webpage boasts, “No matter where your data lives, it’s safe with Datto.” Federal authorities investigating the Clinton server learned sometime in September or early October that some of Clinton’s emails hosted on her private server may have been duplicated on Datto servers because of cloud services provided by Platte River Networks.

completecolorado.com...

completecolorado.com...

There are documents at the links.