Posted on 03/12/2015 2:44:19 PM PDT by jazusamo
Full title: Citing Misconduct and Misrepresentation by Hillary Clinton and State Department, Judicial Watch Asks Federal Court to Reopen Lawsuit Seeking Information on Top Clinton Aide Huma Abedin
(Washington, DC) – Following up on revelations of the secret email accounts created by Hillary Clinton and other top State Department officials, Judicial Watch announced that it has asked a federal court to reopen a closed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case that sought records about Huma Abedin, who had been Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary State Hillary Clinton ( Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).
Judicial Watch’s lawsuit sought information about Huma Abedin, who was Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations from January 22, 2009, to June 2, 2012. She then became a senior advisor in the same office and was classified as a special government employee authorized to represent individual clients and engage in outside employment. Ms. Abedin held this special position until February 15, 2013.
By letter, on February 12, 2014, the State Department assured Judicial Watch that it had searched the Office of the Executive Secretary, which would have included the offices of the Secretary of State and top staff. Relying upon the State Department’s misrepresentation that the agency conducted a reasonable search, Judicial Watch agreed to dismiss its lawsuit on March 14, 2014.
Judicial Watch filed a Motion for Relief and Request for Hearing today in Washington, D.C., with U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan:
Because the FOIA request at issue in this litigation included communications of Secretary Clinton and Ms. Abedin, Judicial Watch seeks to reopen this litigation to remedy the Department’s failure to retain, records-manage, and search for these records. The State Department should be required to search the 55,000 pages of records returned by Secretary Clinton, conduct additional, broader searches for responsive records that may not have been captured by earlier searches, and otherwise remedy any spoliation.
Judicial Watch is seeking to reopen this lawsuit under a federal court rule (Rule 60(b)(3)) that allows a party to reopen a case due to “fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party”:
The State Department had an obligation under the Federal Records Act to properly preserve, maintain, and make available for retrieval records of its official functions. In fact, it is the obligation of the head of every federal agency to do so. Secretary Clinton plainly violated her own legal obligations. Doing so was misconduct.
Judicial Watch alleges that it is “incomprehensible” that the State Department did not know that its “searches” did not capture emails of Hillary Clinton and other top State officials:
Despite knowing that the emails of Secretary Clinton and likely the emails of Ms. Abedin and other high level officials were not searched, the State Department represented to Judicial Watch that the records of the Executive Secretariat had been searched. At no point did the State Department inform Judicial Watch that the Secretary’s emails and the emails of Ms. Abedin and other high level officials could not be searched. These were misrepresentations.
Judicial Watch relied upon the State Department’s misrepresentation that it conducted a search of the Office of the Executive Secretariat [which would have included emails of Hillary Clinton’s and other top State officials]. It was lead to believe that the State Department’s search was proper. It now knows it was not. Had Judicial Watch known that the State Department’s search excluded Secretary Clinton’s emails and the emails of Ms. Abedin and other high level officials, Judicial Watch would not have stipulated to the dismissal of this case …
“Hillary Clinton’s misconduct and the resulting fraud by the State Department disrupted and ended our federal FOIA lawsuit about Huma Abedin, one of Hillary Clinton’s closest political associates,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch. “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. Time is of the essence. Immediate court action is imperative to retrieve, recover and secure these public records from Mrs. Clinton.”
Judicial Watch has upwards of 20 pending and dismissed lawsuits for records that may have been impacted by the Clinton email issue. Additional requests for court relief are planned.
Huma Abedin left the State Department in February 2013, and in May 2013, Politico broke the story that, since June 2012, she had been working as a “special government employee” (SGE), a consultant position allowing her to represent outside clients while continuing as a top adviser at State. While working as a SGE, Abedin’s outside clients included Teneo, a strategic consulting firm co-founded by former Bill Clinton counselor Doug Band. According to Fox News, Abedin earned $355,000 as a consultant to Teneo, in addition to her $135,000 SGE compensation.
While Abedin has failed to disclose the exact nature of her work on behalf of Teneo, the firm describes its activities as providing “the leaders of the world’s most respected companies, nonprofit institutions and governments with a full suite of advisory solutions.” [Emphasis added] Outside of the U.S., it maintains offices in Dubai, London, Dublin, Hong Kong, Brussels, Washington, and Beijing. Teneo was also the subject of various investigative reports, including by the New York Times, which raise questions about its relationship with the Clinton Foundation.
The Associated Press also recently filed suit for copies of Clinton’s documents concerning “her department’s decision to grant a special position to longtime aide Huma Abedin.”
Eww.
Well you have to admit if those surface, it will mean weeks of fun on FR....
Limbaugh: The Media’s Starting to Treat Hillary Like She’s Sarah Palin
http://www.mediaite.com/online/limbaugh-the-medias-starting-to-treat-hillary-like-shes-sarah-palin/
No doubt.
I wonder if this will be the bridge too far for Hillary to overcome?
Rush may be right and it’s overdue but well deserved by Hillary.
How dare they do the Job Congress was elected to do.
Congress has ALL the power in washington, the executive and judicial branch operate according to the whims of CONGRESS!
Congress can Remove the President
Congress can remove the head of every executive agency
Congress can remove ALL of their employees
Congress can Abolish every agency they so choose
Congress can remove EVERY JUDGE IN AMERICA, including every supreme court justice.
Congress can abolish every federal court except the supreme Court
Congress can decide which cases the Judicial Branch can hear and decide
CONGRESS can Imprison ANYONE they want for any reason they so desire for as long as they wish.
Congress can declare WAR
No other governing body has even 10% of the power CONGRESS has!!
CONGRESS IS ALLOWING ALL OF IT!!!
Congress has the authority to arrest and imprison those found in Contempt. The power extends throughout the United States and is an inherent power (does not depend upon legislated act)
If found in Contempt the person can be arrested under a warrant of the Speaker of the House of Representatives or President of the Senate, by the respective Sergeant at Arms.
Statutory criminal contempt is an alternative to inherent contempt.
Under the inherent contempt power Congress may imprison a person for a specific period of time or an indefinite period of time, except a person imprisoned by the House of Representatives may not be imprisoned beyond adjournment of a session of Congress.
Imprisonment may be coercive or punitive.
Some references
[1] Joseph Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume 2, § 842
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_5s21.html
[2] Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204 - “And, as to the distance to which the process might reach, it is very clear that there exists no reason for confining its operation to the limits of the District of Columbia; after passing those limits, we know no bounds that can be prescribed to its range but those of the United States.”
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/204/case.html
[3] Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/294/125/case.html
73rd Cong., 78 Cong. Rec. 2410 (1934)
https://archive.org/details/congressionalrec78aunit
[4] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 - Under a warrant issued by the President of the Senate the Deputy to the Senate Sergeant at Arms arrested at Cincinnati, Ohio, Mally S. Daugherty, who had been twice subpoenaed by the Senate and twice failed to appear.
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/273/135/case.html
[5] Rules of the House of Representatives, Rule IV Duties of the Sergeant at Arms - [] execute the commands of the House, and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to him by the Speaker.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/HMAN-105/pdf/HMAN-105-pg348.pdf
[6] An analysis of Congressional inquiry, subpoena, and enforcement
http://www.constitutionproject.org/documents/when-congress-comes-calling-a-primer-on-the-principles-practices-and-pragmatics-of-legislative-inquiry/
I will continue to beat this drum until everyone else catches on, that it is CONGRESS ALLOWING IT
You’re correct, Congress is allowing it and now that Republicans control both Houses it’s more pathetic.
By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Updated: 6:01 p.m. on Thursday, March 12, 2015
excerpt:
The State Department agreed to reopen at least one open-records court case that involved former Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails, a conservative watchdog group told a federal court Thursday as the scandal over her personal email server continued to develop.
Judicial Watch, which had earlier sued to try to get a look at emails from Mrs. Clinton and top aide, Huma Abedin, said the revelation earlier this month that Mrs. Clinton exclusively used a private email address suggests the State Department may not have been doing a full search of its records when it responded to requests.
In a motion filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., Judicial Watch said it had conferred with the State Department, which “does not oppose reopening the case in this particular circumstance.”
The department didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday evening, though in the court papers Judicial Watch said the department, while agreeing to reopen the case, opposed some of the proposed remedies.
Still, State’s willingness to reopen the case could signal an acknowledgement that the department’s previous searches for documents were incomplete because they lacked Mrs. Clinton’s emails.
Fifty Shades of Gay?
Great post!
Will watch for more!
Details
Many thanks for the ping, hoosiermama!
I think JW may have been able to get that FOIA request rolling again:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3267263/posts?page=8#8
One of the representative said that this case is just one of several that will be coming “fast and furious” in the near future
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.