Skip to comments.Judicial Watch Releases New Hillary Clinton Email Answers Given under Oath
Posted on 10/13/2016 6:50:12 PM PDT by blueyon
Judicial Watch today released received responses under oath from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton concerning her email practices. Judicial Watch submitted twenty-five questions on August 30 to Clinton as ordered by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.
The new Clinton responses in the Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit before Judge Sullivan was first filed in September 2013 seeking records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former deputy chief of staff to Clinton. The lawsuit was reopened because of revelations about the clintonemail.com system (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).
Judicial Watch has already taken the deposition testimony of seven Clinton aides and State Department officials.
Below is text from the document filed with the court today:
NON-PARTY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTONS RESPONSE
TO PLAINTIFFS INTERROGATORIES
Pursuant to the Courts August 19, 2016 order and Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Non-Party Hillary Rodham Clinton hereby responds to Plaintiffs Interrogatories dated August 30, 2016. The General Objections and the Objections to the Definitions set forth below are incorporated into each of the specific responses that follow. Any specific objections are in addition to the General Objections and Objections to the Definitions, and failure to reiterate a General Objection or Objection to the Definitions does not constitute a waiver of that or any other objection.
(Excerpt) Read more at judicialwatch.org ...
Thank you Judicial Watch for trying to honestly get answer
Maybe: “I was at home baking cookies for my daughter.”
Lying liars lie
I cannot recall....I cannot recall....I cannot recall....I cannot recall....I cannot recall....I cannot recall....
The old “Try to remember” parody song that Rush Limbaugh played during the original clinton years is now being done in reality and under oath.
Here is the link:
The answers were prepared by Sargent Schultz. I don’t know nothing!
These non answers are way of delaying real answers until after election. Hillary knows the motion to compel real answers won’t get heard by court before election.
Hillary and Comey under oath. Different conclusions. The only way out is for Obama to pardon both of them. Special investigation maybe but special prosecutor no.
But does bh0 pardon them before or after Nov 8?
This is a refreshing change from pointless vanities, mis-represented emails, click-bait blog pimping, and nutjob conspiracy threads.
LOL I remember that
It is getting tiring to hear “Bombshell” and then nothing isn’t it
And if Hillary has so many gaps in her memory, is she medically capable of being president? It appears that her mind and ability to remember anything not on a teleprompter is failing quite rapidly.
Well, it certainly wasn't: I was at home baking cookies for Bill's son.
That and "Breaking!!!"
Most of these aren't "Bombshells". They are just flat wrong.
No, Hillary didn't use an American pejorative for blacks.
No, Hillary didn't "destroy" Muslims.
No, Hillary's campaign didn't conspire to commit murder.
No, Trump's latest accuser doesn't have the same phone number as the Clinton Foundation.
No, Podesta didn't withhold emails from the State Dept.
I could go on and on. I don't know why I care, but I'm trying to my part to keep FR from turning into a cesspool of nutjobs.
Killary, or rather her lawyers, answered these questions in the manner expected: deny, delay, obfuscate.
Nothing new here. Nothing expected either.
Elect Trump/Pence! Put an end to the Clinton Crime Machine.
And some people think she has Parkinson’s disease. It’s obvious she has Alzheimer’s.
You guys are horse shit.
least that is what your boss shows.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.