Historic Court Action in Hillary Email Scandal
Last Friday, a federal court judge did something we had never seen before - U.S. District Court Judge Reggie B. Walton reopened a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.
The lawsuit had sought documents about an advertisement intended to air
in Pakistan entitled "A Message from the President of the United States
Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton."
Judge Walton issued the ruling on Friday, May 8, in response to a joint motion by
Judicial Watch and the State Department. This is historic. My
attorney colleagues at Judicial Watch tell me they are aware of no
precedent of another FOIA lawsuit being reopened by a federal court.
Judicial
Watch filed suit in December 2012, after the State Department failed to
respond to a September 24, 2012, FOIA request for all records
concerning the advertisement produced
by the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad intended to air in Pakistan. The
advertisement was an absurd and dishonest "apology" for the Internet
video that President Obama, then-Secretary of State Clinton, and other
administration officials falsely blamed for inspiring "spontaneous
demonstrations" resulting in the attack on the U.S. Special Mission
Compound in Benghazi, Libya. The disgusting ad was a misuse of tax
dollars and part of the cover-up of the truth about the Benghazi
terrorist attack.
That
being said, we ended the lawsuit after we were told that the State
Department searched Hillary Clinton's office but found no records. In
November 2014, JW agreed to dismiss the suit based, in part, upon the State Department's claim that
its search "of the Office of the Secretary, the Office of the Executive
Secretariat, and the U.S. Consulate General in Peshawar have been
completed and have resulted in the retrieval of no documents responsive
to your request."
We
had our suspicions, but at that time we did not know about Clinton's
secret email cache that the State Department was covering up. The least
the State Department could do was not to oppose our case to go back to
court for justice.
In the compromise joint motion,
JW and the State Department asked Judge Walton to reopen the lawsuit
under a federal court rule allowing for consideration of "newly
discovered evidence:"
In
March 2015, media sources reported that former Secretary Clinton, and
possibly other senior State Department officials, used non-"state.gov"
email account to conduct government business. Thereafter, [Judicial
Watch] informed the Department that based on this information, which was
previously unknown to [Judicial Watch], it would seek to reopen the
case.
Now
that the lawsuit is reopened, the State Department has promised the
court, at a minimum, to search the email records allegedly turned over
by Clinton to the State Department last year.
This
court ruling, once again, shows that Judicial Watch's various
litigation is the last, best chance to make public any secret emails of
Hillary Clinton and her appointees at the compromised State Department.
I told you last week about JW's massive new court push, which included
the filing of seven new
FOIA lawsuits about the Clinton email scandal, including emails of her
top aide Huma Abedin and records about the Benghazi and Clinton
Foundation scandals. We also just filed a lawsuit for records on Hillary Clinton's use of an iPad and iPhone.
There
are approximately 18 other lawsuits, 10 of which are active in federal
court, as well as about 160 Judicial Watch FOIA requests that could be
affected by Clinton and her staff's use of secret email accounts to
conduct official government business. In Judicial Watch's various FOIA
lawsuits, lawyers for Judicial Watch have informed attorneys for the
Obama administration that Hillary Clinton's and any other secret
accounts used by State employees should be secured, recovered, and
searched. Judicial Watch's litigation against the State Department has
already exposed key documents about both the Benghazi and Clinton cash scandals.
While
we are opening new avenues inquiry and new lawsuits, we are still
awaiting word from another court on a separate bid to reopen a FOIA
lawsuit over records about Clinton aide Huma Abedin's controversial work
arrangements.
Our
team is asking the court to reopen a case under a rule that allows a
party to reopen a case due to "fraud (whether previously called
intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing
party":
The
State Department had an obligation under the Federal Records Act to
properly preserve, maintain, and make available for retrieval records of
its official functions. In fact, it is the obligation of the head of
every federal agency to do so. Secretary Clinton plainly violated her
own legal obligations. Doing so was misconduct.
The State Department did not originally oppose the idea that Clinton's misconduct justified reopening this other case.
This
decision by a federal judge to reopen our Clinton-Benghazi lawsuit is
an extraordinary legal development that spells real trouble for Hillary
Clinton and the Obama administration.
There
is also no precedent for Hillary Clinton's stealing, hiding, and
destroying State Department records. Rather than defend its and Hillary
Clinton's fraud on the courts overseeing this and other FOIA lawsuits,
the State Department stood down and joined Judicial Watch in asking for
the lawsuit to be reopened. The Clinton machine may run rings around
Congress and much of the media, but I suspect this cover-up effort won't
work as well on federal judges in Judicial Watch's two dozen lawsuits.
Our big victory garnered national headlines and coverage from outlets such as Fox News. You can see a special JW Fox News interview on the topic here.
Thanks
to your support, JW is able to act and get what you and almost every
other American want done -someone, indeed anyone, to do something
effective about politicians like Hillary Clinton who think they are
above the law. In this case, we are so effective that we even forced
the Obama administration to take action!
Tune into the Benghazi Televison Network for more details and attempts to bring down our first woman president.
ReplyDeleteAnkle biters.
60% of the nation thinks Hillary is hiding something. Duh !! And, it is a Federal Court that has opened the investigation.
DeleteHow does the email and Benghazi scandals compare to Reagan's incompetence and corruption?
ReplyDeleteAfter Reagan stupidly got 241 Marines blown up in their woefully-defended barracks in Beirut and then our still woefully-defended embassy in Lebanon was truckbombed again 11 months later, killing two more Americans (and scores of others again), Reagan was asked the next day by a reporter why 18 months after the first embassy truckbombing killing 17 Americans and the truckbombing of the Marine barracks six months later, the anti-truck bombing fortifications at the embassy still hadn't been installed 11 months after the second bombing.
Reagan's pathetic response, "Anyone that's ever had their kitchen done over knows that it never gets done as soon as you wish it would."
Yeah, great solace for the family members of the killed. Where was the investigation then - for a real scandal of incompetence that cost hundreds of lives?
Soooo, you admit that Hillary's email scandal and her coverup on Benghazi real scandals on a par with whatever you think happened under Reagan?? Cool. Thanks for your honesty.
Delete"if you tell the same story five times, it's true," Larry Speakes, Reagan's press secretary. Modern conservatism's rejection of facts in favor of narratives began with Reagan and has evolved into a cottage industry of "thought leaders" pushing narratives 24/7, facts be damned, which is why we have a "Benghazi scandal" and an "IRS scandal" and an "email scandal" and . . . . whatever Fox News decides to peddle next.
ReplyDeleteYou think Fox News orders the Federal Court system? BTW, Reagan's wild popularity is, in part, due to the fact that he followed Jimmy NutCase Carter.
Delete