After 25 seasons on the bench, “Judge Judy” is calling it quits: https://bit.ly/2VO31rZ
She’ll be missed.
Hillary Clinton Ordered To Give Sworn Deposition After Judge Tosses ‘Preposterous’ Defense
The ruling is in response to the conservative legal group’s lawsuit, “Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State” - specifically regarding “talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack.”
Judicial Watch famously uncovered in 2014 that the “talking points” that provided the basis for Susan Rice’s false statements were created by the Obama White House. This Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit led directly to the disclosure of the Clinton email system in 2015. -Judicial Watch
On Monday, Judge Lamberth overruled Clinton and the State Department’s objections to limited additional discovery, writing “Discovery up until this point has brought to light a noteworthy amount of relevant information, but Judicial Watch requests an additional round of discovery, and understandably so. With each passing round of discovery, the Court is left with more questions than answers.”
Lamberth also said that he is troubled by the fact that both Clinton and the State Department want discovery to end.
T]here is still more to learn. Even though many important questions remain unanswered, the Justice Department inexplicably still takes the position that the court should close discovery and rule on dispositive motions. The Court is especially troubled by this. To argue that the Court now has enough information to determine whether State conducted an adequate search is preposterous, especially when considering State’s deficient representations regarding the existence of additional Clinton emails. Instead, the Court will authorize a new round of discovery -Judge Lamberth
Furthermore, Lamberth found that Clinton’s prior testimony in the case - mostly given through sworn answers, was insufficient.
The Court has considered the numerous times in which Secretary Clinton said she could not recall or remember certain details in her prior interrogatory answers. In a deposition, it is more likely that plaintiff’s counsel could use documents and other testimony to attempt to refresh her recollection. And so, to avoid the unsatisfying and inefficient outcome of multiple rounds of fruitless interrogatories and move this almost six-year-old case closer to its conclusion, Judicial Watch will be permitted to clarify and further explore Secretary Clinton’s answers in person and immediately after she gives them. The Court agrees with Judicial Watch – it is time to hear directly from Secretary Clinton. -Judge Lamberth