The 25 questions Clinton must answer UNDER OATH on her secret server

Daily Mail UK ^ | August 30, 2016 | Geoffrey Earle

[COUNTrecount]

The 25 questions Clinton must answer UNDER OATH on her secret server - including whether she directly ordered the destruction of thousands of missing messages

Conservative group Judicial Watch has presented Clinton with questions she must answer under court order by September 29 The group tried but failed to force Clinton to have to testify Instead, the former secretary of state will provide sworn responses Questions probe Clinton's original decision to set up a private server – who she consulted about it and why she did it Why was suggestion from Huma ignored? Asked if she ever read memo that using Blackberry on State's top floor was 'highly vulnerable' Quizzed on federal record keeping laws Must reveal whether State officials ever asked about her private email for records searches Pressed on 'matter of convenience' excuse 'When did you decide to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and whom did you consult in making this decision? ' Limited by federal rules to 25 questions Here's a document Hillary Clinton almost certainly wishes she could just delete: a 30-page list of interrogatories about her private email server that the former secretary of state must answer under court order.

The questions, prepared by attorneys for conservative open government group Judicial Watch, were transmitted to Clinton on Tuesday.

Under an order by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, Clinton must respond by Sept. 29th.

The group had sought in July to depose Clinton directly.

The questions are an effort to finally force Clinton to acknowledge how she set up her unusual private email server run out of her home – and whether she knew about staff warnings about the security risks of using mobile devices and urgings from her own aides to use an official government email.

[bkopto]

1. I don’t recall.
2. I don’t recall.
3. I don’t recall.
4. I don’t recall.
5. I don’t recall.
6. I don’t recall.
7. I don’t recall.
8. I don’t recall.
9. I don’t recall.
10. I don’t recall.
11. I don’t recall.
12. I don’t recall.
13. I don’t recall.
14. I don’t recall.
15. I don’t recall.
16. I don’t recall.
17. I don’t recall.
18. I don’t recall.
19. I don’t recall.
20. I don’t recall.
21. I don’t recall.
22. I don’t recall.
23. I don’t recall.
24. I don’t recall.
25. I don’t recall.

[Chewbarkah]

Oath Lies Matter. Perjury during his deposition in the Paula Jones civl case was the basis for Bill Clinton’s impeachment.

Hillary’s lawyers will have much joy trying to answer the questions without patently lying, exposing Hillary’s prior statements as lies, or gasp, revealing the truth. JW’s will demonstrate in court where she has lied, as the basis for other remedies (possibly forcing a live deposition?) and sanctions. So maybe it will matter in some small way.

[outofsalt]

Running a bing search on this subject produced no results from the MSM except Fox. Lots of interest from the internet media but not so much from the drive by news.

[Chewbarkah]

Of course she will lie. Forcing her to dodge questions and lie on the record is the whole point.

[COUNTrecount]

Daily Mail UK!

Doing the job our eneMedia refuses to do.

[Bigg Red]

Yeah, oaths are for us little people.

[Calvin Locke]

If I was an attorney, I would hate to have Hillary as a client.

No you wouldn't. Bob Bennett had to settle for substantially less than what he billed to save The Bent One from all those charges so long along.

Hillary, in particular, was very ungrateful when it came time to pay up.

Makes you wonder what she would do if somebody tried to stiff, shaf.., um, cheat her out of her billable work hours, especially in a successful defense.

[arthurus]

I am sure that she will answer them all but will not her answers will provide no actual information.

[ExSES]

"I don't recall" (repeated 25 times!)

[Montana_Sam]

“I don’t recall.” Second verse, same as the first.

Yeah, that pretty much says it all. The only real question is #1 when asking about WHY she did it. That is not technical, and she will have to lie her head off. A competent questioner could have her dancing and flopping around like a rag doll on meth.

Sharyl Attkisson also made a brilliant point about Clinton cutting her ties to the foundation now, or if/when she becomes President: the money has already been paid for the access. Very perceptive, and right on the money.

[ilovesarah2012]

I heard Google is quashing searches about her health. I wouldn’t know. I use Bing.

[ilovesarah2012]

I really hope they go after Huma. Maybe she will get scared and throw Hillary under the bus.

[TXnMA]

Judicial Watch (and, apparently, the FBI) failed to ask the most important questions -- which are raised by this HRC statement:

~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Let me repeat what I have repeated for many months now,”

“I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified."

Hillary Clinton, July 2, 2016

~~~~~~~~~~~~

1. Secretary Clinton, did you make the above statement, and do you maintain that it is true?

2. Does it apply to e-mail messages sent from or received by your Blackberry via your private server?

3. Messages with classification markings were found on your server by the FBI.

   How, and by whom, were (marked) classified messages moved from the classified "CLASSNET" or "POEMS" networks within Department of State SCIF(s) -- and transferred to your private server?

4. Messages identified as containing classified content -- but, with the classification markings removed were found on your private server.

   How, and by whom, were the classification markings removed from the above messages before they were sent to your private server?

5. Did you ever allow any foreign national or agent thereof, access to your private server?

6. Did you, or any component of the Clinton Foundation, ever receive any form of quid pro quo remuneration for information stored on your private server?

7. You were the de jure Chief Classifying Authority for the Department of State. And, a major fraction of the communications of the Department involve classified information.

   Please explain how it was that you "never sent any material that was marked classified".

8. Does the above-quoted statement mean that you never, yourself, classified any information that you originated -- no matter its level of sensitivity or the damage it might do to U.S. interests?

9. Please list the levels of security clearances held by you, your aide, Huma Abedin, and your Counsel, Cheryl Mills -- and name the investigating authorities who issued those clearances.

10. As you can see, the above-cited statement is far less a "lawyerly disclaimer" than it is a de facto admission of criminal acts.

    Mrs. Clinton, in clothing, do you prefer solid orange -- or black and white stripes?

[TXnMA]

My just-posted list of questions disregards the fact that Judicial Watch is constrained to questions related to their FOIA lawsuit.

FYI, the list of questions arose from my own graphical analysis of secure and non-secure communications systems within the D.O.S. -- and HRC's disuse and misuse of them.

The graphical presentation/video on the results of my analysis is well underway...

[TXnMA]

FReepMail for you...

[Grampa Dave]

Yes, we have been down this Mickey Mouse sucker game too many times.

[LucyT]

The 25 questions Clinton must answer UNDER OATH on her secret server

Check out article, and see the 25 questions at # 1 .

"I don't recall?"

[bitt]

http://liberallyconservative.com/hillary-clintons-laundry-list-of-lies/

[bitt]

http://www.dailynews.com/opinion/20160901/hillary-clinton-seems-to-be-fighting-the-law-of-gravity-susan-shelley

The Guinness world record for plate spinning is held by David Spathaky, who kept 108 plates spinning on sticks in a TV appearance in Bangkok in 1996.

Hillary Clinton might break that record. Although the FBI closed a year-long investigation into her private email server without recommending criminal charges, she is still standing in the middle of a forest of spinning plates that threaten to come crashing down before election day.

Before Clinton was nominated to be secretary of state in 2009, she and her husband agreed to abide by strict ethics rules to avoid any conflict of interest between Hillary’s work as secretary of state and Bill’s work raising money for the Clinton Foundation.

That’s when the private e-mail server was set up.

Secretary Clinton used the private server for all her government e-mail, which meant the State Department could not search her email correspondence when it was responding to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for public records. The State Department asked Clinton for her email records in 2014. She turned over 55,000 printed pages of what she called “work-related” emails and deleted about 30,000 e-mails she said were “personal.”

But 14,900 deleted emails were recovered by the FBI and are in the hands of the State Department. People who had filed FOIA lawsuits to get State Department records went right back to court to get them.

Meet the federal judges who are enforcing the Freedom of Information Act:

U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dept. of State, No. 1:15-cv-00687) has ordered the release of all the deleted Clinton emails starting on Sept. 13.

U.S. District Court Judges William P. Dimitrouleas (Larry Kawa v. U.S. Dept. of State, No. 9:15-cv-81560) and Amit P. Mehta (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dept. of State, No. 1:15-cv-00692) have ordered the release of Benghazi-related emails to begin on Sept. 13 and 30, respectively.

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Dept. of State, No. 1:13-cv-01363) has ordered the release by Sept. 30 of emails related to the dual employment of Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin, who worked for a consultant with ties to the Clinton Foundation at the same time she worked for the government. Sullivan allowed Judicial Watch to send Clinton written questions about the private server (answers due back Sept. 29), and to question (by October 31) a State Department official who warned employees “never to speak of the secretary’s personal e-mail system again.”

Still more plates are spinning.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon (Associated Press v. U.S. Department of State, No. 1:15-cv-00345) is overseeing the release of the Clinton daily schedules that the AP is using to connect the dots between foundation donors and government meetings.

And more: The State Department inspector general is investigating Clinton Foundation projects, the families of two Americans killed in Benghazi have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Clinton over insecure communications, and two congressional committees just sent subpoenas to three tech companies that worked on Clinton’s private server.

And Wikileaks has promised to release the Clinton emails collected by hackers.

We don’t yet know the content of Clinton’s deleted emails, but we do know two things: She set up the private server right after she promised to abide by strict ethics rules to avoid the appearance of selling influence.

And she has been spinning like crazy ever since we found about it.