Judge slams government lawyers, orders more discovery in Clinton FOIA case

Make sure to let us know what you think... we now have comments turned ON below the article!

While the majority of the media and even much of the country have largely moved on from concerns over former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized use of an unsecured private email server to conduct government business, the folks at Judicial Watch have doggedly continued to dig for answers in the case, with the help of the federal district judge overseeing the process.

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth recently granted a request from Judicial Watch for even more discovery in the case and slammed attorneys from the Justice and State Departments for their apparent efforts to slow walk, if not shut down completely, the effort to get to the bottom of the Clinton email saga.

Judge grows impatient

In an op-ed for Breitbart by Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, portions of the transcript of the recent hearing were shared to highlight Judge Lamberth’s increasing impatience with the manner in which the government lawyers have handled this years-old case thus far.

The case actually dates back to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the watchdog group in 2014 seeking documents related to the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack. It was that inquiry that led to the discovery of Clinton’s private email server in 2015, and it was the Obama administration’s efforts to cover that discovery up that has led us to where we are today.

It was recently revealed in a Senate investgation that, despite ongoing insistence to the contrary, there were in fact copies of the purportedly “missing” emails from Clinton’s server, emails that had never been properly searched in accordance with federal records laws. Judge Lamberth encouraged Judicial Watch to “shake this tree” and continue the pursuit of the truth.

The judge also called out the government attorneys for their apparent prioritization of “political expedience” and the “bureaucratic incompetence” evidenced by their handling of the FOIA requests and demands for discovery in the case to date.

He further blasted those lawyers for making “preposterous” arguments and for assuming that prior discovery granted in the case had been closed and that the cooperation of the departments was no longer required, a mistaken perception the judge quickly and brutally corrected by suggesting the attorneys had been acting in “bad faith.”

Discovery continues

The transcript of the hearing reveals that Judge Lamberth made it very clear that he never did close the discovery portion of the case and that the two departments still needed to provide all requested documentation and facilitate depositions requested by Judicial Watch. The judge then ran through a timeline highlighting all of the various ongoing efforts by the government to knowingly slow walk or stymie those requests since 2014.

Lamberth also also listed a number of outstanding concerns and questions raised by Judicial Watch and all but accused the attorneys and their respective departments of purposefully covering up and refusing to turn over certain information that had been lawfully requested, if not already ordered to be turned over by the court itself.

“When I authorized discovery back in December, I described my goal: to rule out egregious government misconduct and vindicate the public’s faith in the State and Justice Departments. That’s still my goal today,” Lamberth said. “This isn’t a case I relish, but it’s the case before me now, and it’s a case of the government’s making.”

As such, the judge granted additional discovery to Judicial Watch and gave attorneys representing Clinton and former top aide Cheryl Mills 30 days to formally oppose requested depositions.

In other words, the Judge Lamberth has grown tired of the government’s attempts to delay and obstruct and has made it plain that he expects the government to quit stalling and fully comply so that the truth about the Clinton emails may finally be known.

378 Responses

  1. Wonderful site you have here but I was curious if you knew of any user discussion forums that cover the same topics discussed here? I’d really love to be a part of community where I can get feed-back from other knowledgeable individuals that share the same interest. If you have any recommendations, please let me know. Thank you!

  2. Hello There. I discovered your weblog the usage of msn. This is a very well written article. I’ll make sure to bookmark it and return to learn more of your useful info. Thanks for the post. I will certainly comeback.

  3. I in addition to my guys came going through the best key points on your website then all of the sudden I had an awful feeling I never thanked the website owner for those strategies. My people became consequently happy to study all of them and already have clearly been taking pleasure in these things. Appreciate your indeed being considerably considerate and also for making a choice on these kinds of incredible issues most people are really desperate to discover. My honest apologies for not expressing gratitude to you earlier.

  4. Do you mind if I quote a few of your articles as long as I provide credit and sources back to your weblog? My website is in the very same area of interest as yours and my visitors would certainly benefit from a lot of the information you present here. Please let me know if this alright with you. Cheers!

  5. My partner and I absolutely love your blog and find nearly all of your post’s to be exactly I’m looking for. Would you offer guest writers to write content to suit your needs? I wouldn’t mind writing a post or elaborating on most of the subjects you write in relation to here. Again, awesome site!

  6. Write more, thats all I have to say. Literally, it seems as though you relied on the video to make your point. You obviously know what youre talking about, why throw away your intelligence on just posting videos to your site when you could be giving us something informative to read?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Popular