Huma Abedin
Months after a federal judge ruled that Hillary Clinton might be ordered to give a deposition in a lawsuit over her emails and other issues, lawyers for the presumptive Democratic nominee for president just now are going to court to try to block that possibility.
According to a report in Politico on Tuesday, her lawyers submitted arguments trying to convince a federal judge that she doesn’t know anything that would be significant in the case.
Many of her assistants and aides already have given answers in the action brought by Judicial Watch, and the judge originally had said if the group needed answers from the former secretary of state, they’d have to get special permission.
Now, officials have asked for that permission and a hearing is scheduled in a few days on the question.
Politico said Clinton’s lawyers on Tuesday filed their argument that Clinton should be exempted from any such questioning.
“Clinton’s legal team said her testimony was unnecessary and superfluous in light of her questioning before the House Benghazi Committee last October and several State Department inquiries into the issue,” the report said.
“Despite this public testimony and the various investigative reports, Judicial Watch claims that it needs to depose Secretary Clinton, a former cabinet secretary, about six purportedly unanswered questions. The record, however, already answers those questions or makes clear that Secretary Clinton has no personal knowledge to provide.”
The emails Clinton created while secretary of state have been the source of many problems for her. The FBI, after a months-long investigation, announced just days ago that she was extremely careless with her handling of secret information, but she probably shouldn’t be charged.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch jumped on that conclusion and said she endorsed it almost immediately, after having a private meeting with former President Bill Clinton just days earlier, a meeting that reportedly included conversations about grandchildren and golf.
WND reported that Washington watchdog Judicial Watch asked a judge in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia for permission to put Clinton under oath and ask her questions about her emails.
The Freedom of Information Act lawsuit is investigating aide Huma Abedin’s job at the State Department.
The organization earlier deposed seven former and current State Department officials and aides of Clinton.
“As the primary driving force behind and principal user of the ClintonEmail.com system, however, Secretary Clinton’s testimony is crucial to understanding how and why the system was created and operated,” Judicial Watch explained, noting that Clinton is an “indispensable witness.”
Abedin had served as Clinton’s deputy chief of staff at the State Department. But in 2012, she assumed a senior adviser role, a position with “special government employee” status, which permitted her to earn outside income as well.
Abedin also worked for the Clinton-affiliated global consulting firm, Teneo, and the Clinton Foundation.
She is now vice chairwoman of Clinton’s campaign for president.
Related: Hillary’s HUGE scandal list explodes to 25!
Judicial Watch first began probing Abedin’s special arrangement in September 2013.
The organization agreed to dismiss the lawsuit in March 2014 after the State Department said it had given the group all the documentation.
But by March 12, 2015, Judicial Watch learned that Clinton and her aides had used private email accounts, so the organization asked that the lawsuit be reopened.
“Hillary Clinton’s misconduct and the resulting fraud by the State Department disrupted and ended our FOIA lawsuit about Huma Abedin, one of Hillary Clinton’s closest political associations,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement posted online at the time.
“Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration concealed records and lied to obstruct a federal court and Judicial Watch from finding out about the secret emails,” Fitton said.
In February of this year, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan gave Judicial Watch permission to question Clinton’s closest aides under oath.
At the time, Sullivan left open the possibility that Hillary Clinton could be questioned.
“There’s a constant drip, drip, drip of declarations. When does it stop?” Sullivan asked. “This case is about the public’s right to know.”
from PropagandaGuard https://propagandaguard.wordpress.com/2016/07/12/hillarys-lawyers-she-has-no-personal-knowledge-of-email-scandal/
from WordPress https://toddmsiebert.wordpress.com/2016/07/12/hillarys-lawyers-she-has-no-personal-knowledge-of-email-scandal/
No comments:
Post a Comment