Judicial Watch Files ‘Discovery’ Action for Clinton Email Scandal


To further grill the State Department on the debacle that was Hillary Clinton’s private email handling, Judicial Watch has filed a plan for a “narrowly tailored discovery” which calls for the deposition of several key State Department Officials. Allowing eight weeks for this matter to be addressed, this action plan is, no doubt, another serious threat to the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential bid.

A previously filed motion by Judicial Watch was recently ruled on by a judge, which seeks to investigate the State Department, and Hillary Clinton’s roles in the deliberate obfuscation of FOIA requests made regarding the matter. This motion, as well as many others related to Hillary Clinton and the State department, have all been filed after revelations related to her knowing involvement in the harboring of sensitive materials outside of Governmental oversight. Namely, this ordeal is focused on the private email communications that Hillary Clinton was found to have been routing through her own private email server, located in a private residence, and outside the ability of governmental investigation (the kind they’ll go on record about anyway.)

Hillary’s stances have been  going through the stages of grieving for over the better part of two years, and many that have followed the—painful at times—coverage are waiting patiently for the acceptance stage. It is truly a testiment to the power of the media to sweep something under the rug, as well as a candidate with vested polictical and business interests being protected, that Hillary Clinton hasn’t been brought up on charges. While coverage of this topic has brought many to question just how wrong she was to have kept classified communications on her own private servers, the fact that it is illegal isn’t debatable. She broke laws. Period. The Fiscal Times sums this aspect up well:

What could bring Hillary down? According to some who have followed the case closely, Mrs. Clinton could be charged with breaking several laws, including willfully transmitting or retaining Top Secret material using a private server, unauthorized removal of classified information from government control or storing such information in an unauthorized location, lying to Congress, destruction of government property (wiping the server), lying under oath to a judge about having given the government all her emails or obstruction of justice.

The subject has been debated extensively, perhaps so much so that the public has grown weary—allowing legal action to go un-taken. As we near the 2016 election however, it seems an almost near certainty that the bandages will get ripped off and expose some old wounds. The following subjects reflect overlying aspects of what the latest Judicial Watch actions seek to learn regarding the Hillary Clinton email scandal:

  1. Who was responsible for processing and/or responding to record requests, including FOIA requests, concerning emails of Mrs. Clinton and other employees of the Office of the Secretary;
  2. Who was responsible for the inventorying or other accounting of Mrs. Clinton’s and Ms. Abedin’s emails, records, and information;
  3. Who was responsible for responding to Plaintiff’s FOIA request from the date of submission to the present; and
  4. Which State Department officials and employees had and/or used an account on the clintonemail.com system to conduct official government business.

Hillary Clinton has been infamously recorded as answering grilling questions with such remarks as “What difference does it make” when asked about the deaths of American in Benghazi. To expect her to take a series of email inquiries seriously borders on the insane. With the focused intent of such groups as Judicial Watch however, there may still be a chance that she is forced into the hard light of justice; cutoff from the protection of corrupt system of selective prosecution.