Posted on 03/13/2019 1:59:25 PM PDT by detective
The first of several former Obama administration officials and former aides to Hillary Clinton is set to be deposed Thursday after a judge ruled in January that they must answer questions under oath about the 2012 Benghazi terror attacks and the Clinton email scandal.
U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered the discovery after a lawsuit was brought by conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, which is seeking to uncover “whether the Benghazi scandal was one reason for keeping Mrs. Clinton’s email secret.”
The conservative group announced Wednesday that Justin Cooper, a former Clinton Foundation adviser who played a role in setting up and administering the former secretary of state’s unauthorized private email server, will answer questions under oath and in-person on Thursday.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
My God, is it possible my Twitter page will no longer be needed? Should I hold my breath?
https://twitter.com/Hillary4Priso12
She didn’t intend to do anything wrong.
He has to choose between lying in his deposition or risking being Fort Marcy Parked. No-win.
*PING*
Judicial Watch - doing God’s Work to root out the evil ‘Rats!
She didn’t intend to . . . get caught.
Here’s a full transcript of the exchange:
_____________________________________________
Gowdy: Good morning, Director Comey.
Secretary Clinton said she never sent or received any classified information over her private e-mail, was that true?
Comey: Our investigation found that there was classified information sent.
Gowdy: It was not true?
Comey: That’s what I said.
Gowdy: OK. Well, I’m looking for a shorter answer so you and I are not here quite as long. Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her e-mails sent or received. Was that true?
Comey: That’s not true. There were a small number of portion markings on I think three of the documents.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said “I did not e-mail any classified information to anyone on my e-mail there was no classified material.” That is true?
Comey: There was classified information emailed.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton used one device, was that true?
Comey: She used multiple devices during the four years of her term as Secretary of State.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said all work related emails were returned to the State Department. Was that true?
Comey: No. We found work related email, thousands, that were not returned.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said neither she or anyone else deleted work related emails from her personal account.
Comey: That’s a harder one to answer. We found traces of work related emails in — on devices or in space. Whether they were deleted or when a server was changed out something happened to them, there’s no doubt that the work related emails that were removed electronically from the email system.
Gowdy: Secretary Clinton said her lawyers read every one of the emails and were overly inclusive. Did her lawyers read the email content individually?
Comey: No.
Gowdy: Well, in the interest of time and because I have a plane to catch tomorrow afternoon, I’m not going to go through any more of the false statements but I am going to ask you to put on your old hat. Faults exculpatory statements are used for what?
Comey: Well, either for a substantive prosecution or evidence of intent in a criminal prosecution.
Gowdy: Exactly. Intent and consciousness of guilt, right?
Comey: That is right[]
Gowdy: Consciousness of guilt and intent?
In your old job you would prove intent as you referenced by showing the jury evidence of a complex scheme that was designed for the very purpose of concealing the public record and you would be arguing in addition to concealment the destruction that you and i just talked about or certainly the failure to preserve.
You would argue all of that under the heading of content. You would also — intent. You would also be arguing the pervasiveness of the scheme when it started, when it ended and the number of emails whether
They were originally classified or of classified under the heading of intent. You would also, probably, under common scheme or plan, argue the burn bags of daily calendar entries or the missing daily calendar entries as a common scheme or plan to conceal.
Two days ago, Director, you said a reasonable person in her position should have known a private email was no place to send and receive classified information. You’re right. An average person does know not to do that.
This is no average person. This is a former First Lady, a former United States senator, and a former Secretary of State that the president now contends is the most competent, qualified person to be president since Jefferson. He didn’t say that in ‘08 but says it now.
She affirmatively rejected efforts to give her a state.gov account, kept the private emails for almost two years and only turned them over to Congress because we found out she had a private email account.
So you have a rogue email system set up before she took the oath of office, thousands of what we now know to be classified emails, some of which were classified at the time. One of her more frequent email comrades was hacked and you don’t know whether or not she was.
And this scheme took place over a long period of time and resulted in the destruction of public records and yet you say there is insufficient evidence of intent. You say she was extremely careless, but not intentionally so.
You and I both know intent is really difficult to prove. Very rarely do defendants announce ‘On this date I intend to break this criminal code section. Just to put everyone on notice, I am going to break the law on this date.’
It never happens that way. You have to do it with circumstantial evidence or if you’re Congress and you realize how difficult it is prove, specific intent, you will form lathe a statute that allows for gross negligence.
My time is out but this is really important. You mentioned there’s no precedent for criminal prosecution. My fear is there still isn’t. There’s nothing to keep a future Secretary of State or President from this exact same email scheme or their staff.
And my real fear is this, what the chairman touched upon, this double track justice system that is rightly or wrongly perceived in this country. That if you are a private in the Army and email yourself classified information you will be kicked out.
But if you are Hillary Clinton, and you seek a promotion to Commander in Chief, you will not be. So what I hope you can do today is help the average person, the reasonable person you made reference to, the reasonable person understand why she appears to be treated differently than the rest of us would be. With that I would yield back.
(the source of this transcript is closed captioning)
Backup link:
If something ever comes of this, I’ll be shocked.
While I don’t condone such activity, this latest admissions scandal pales to 0.0001% of the stuff we know the Clinton’s participated in.
They get tossed in jail from the get-go, and the devil’s spawn walks...
Thank God. Maybe now we will find out who decided (yes, decided) to let noble Amricans die at the hands of the terrorist enemy, find out who would not same them, one of the few times they left our own guys on their own in battle to die alone. Thank you Ms Clinton. (There, I said it, and I'm glad!)
Ignorance of the lawyer is no excuse.....................
I was wrong..I thought a few low level players would take the fall for hill and barac.
In actuality NOT a ONE PERSON has gone to jail over this..
What a weird whatever. It’s my default contention that every move in this ridiculously long saga is merely a misdirection and/or exercise.
Why would the admin of her server know her motivation? Could said admin know with the certainty of one prepared to testify that HRC’s motivation was this or that? Did the admin ever receive a communication from HRC that “...you have to keep this under wraps, because for me to transact on this server would be highly illegal”? Or “I’m trying to keep whatever I do on this server out of Congressional scrutiny, so be sure you don’t tell anyone about it”. Highly doubt it. The admin probably received a signed purchase order from Teneo or the Clinton Foundation or Podesta, Inc and began executing same as a piece of normal business, without regard to the security implications and probably without regard to whether top (and higher) secret communications would transit such a server. And probably never considered whether he/she would incur any liability for being the situs of unauthorized classified info transfer.
Tell me, would YOU agree to handling what you knew was going to be highly sensitive top secret communication; knowing that your location in Colorado was pretty much not Washington DC where such traffic should probably be located? If you knew?
IT DOESN’T &*@^!$ MATTER why, how, where, with whom, or in what room or powered by whatever motivation she kept her private &*()#$ server!!
Each and every conceivable variation different from “the secure government server you have been assigned” is illegal and a violation of the espionage act. In every variation and every permutation. These are what are known as “the rules” and she signed under penalty of perjury and various regs relating to top secret information handling that she knew those were the rules and would adhere to them.
Hhmmmmmm.....
Why is Hillary so scared of Benghazi?
Maybe because someone will THINK about why she, as our Secretary of State, with billions of dollars worth of spy stuff, decided to fund and run her own intelligence service in Libya.
Why would The Old tightwad spend her own money for that?
It is if you are a Democrat.
Well, actually several Trump people have, primarily for the purpose of diverting attention from Clinton’s crimes.
Maybe somebody will stop and THINK about why, in the middle of a huge national crisis, Hillary and Obama went to their bedrooms and hid.
Two of the biggest loudmouths in the world suddenly go quiet?
I am fed up with the Democrats playing this “Nobody Can Touch Hillary Game”.
It’s bullshit.
It’s a damn bluff.
Let me give the Democrats a choice.
She goes to trial or NOBODY in this country is obligated to follow ANY law or regulation.
ANY law or ANY regulation.
Is that what they want?
They’re willing to destroy this country so that nobody hurts Hillary’s feelings?
Bullshit.
Seven years this bluff has gone on.
SEVEN YEARS!
They killed Qadaffi by shoving a bayonet up his ass!
And Granny Hillary laughed about it!
OUR Secretary of State!
Bullshit!
The old crook stands trial or NOBODY has to follow ANY law or regulation.
She’s just a lying, thieving, bullying, cheating, dirty little shit from Nowhere, Illinois.
Dems ? How bout the AWAN GANG that Wasserman permitted access to 3 dozen or so congresscritters computers ?..Think they ever sent anything back to Pakeeestan (Close to Russia) Nah, they wouldn’t COLLUDE with their buddys, the Ruskies...
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.