Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

JUDICIAL WATCH UNCOVERS 1.8 MILLION CLINTON WHITE HOUSE E-MAIL
Judicial Watch e-mail ^ | January 17, 2002 | JW

Posted on 01/17/2002 10:38:33 AM PST by litany_of_lies

GOVERNMENT ADMITS 1.8 MILLION E-MAIL FOUND AS A RESULT OF JUDICIAL WATCH‚S EXPOSING HIDDEN CLINTON-GORE E-MAIL ˆ RESTORED AT A COST OF OVER $12 MILLION

E-MAILGATE UPDATE

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest law firm that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, said today that the government, in a court filing January 9, 2002, has admitted that it found 1,844,242 e-mail from the Clinton-Gore White House. This e-mail has never been searched in response to subpoenas and documents requests from Judicial Watch, Congress, and independent counsels. The e-mail were restored at a cost to taxpayers thus far of $12,066,346. The e-mail, which is in the custody of the National Archives, must now be searched pursuant to court orders.

Judicial Watch, which is prosecuting the Filegate $90 million class action lawsuit on behalf of those whose FBI files were misused by the Clinton White House, first exposed the e-mail scandal in early 2000 through its client Sheryl Hall, a former top computer official at the Clinton White House, who testified that incriminating e-mail concerning virtually all the Clinton-Gore scandals had never been produced as they should have in response to document requests and subpoenas. Another Judicial Watch client, former White House computer contractor Betty Lambuth, also testified (along with others) that high-level White House officials threatened Northrop Grumman White House computer contractors to keep quiet about the hidden e-mail or face jail and firing. These threats occurred in the middle of the Lewinsky scandal. The scandal was the subject of a months long evidentiary hearing that included the testimony of the late Charles Ruff, John Podesta, and Cheryl Mills. The court is in now considering whether to commence criminal contempt proceedings. A decision is expected soon.

„If not for Judicial Watch‚s heroic clients, this e-mail would have been lost forever. We are confident that the e-mail contains a treasure trove of information concerning Filegate, Chinagate, and, yes, even Enrongate. Any incriminating e-mail will be part of renewed Judicial Watch efforts to put the Clintons in jail,‰ stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: chinastuff
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-143 next last
To: litany_of_lies
If the press release truly represents the fact there should be some people going to jail for contempt of court. There also should be a justice department investigation to find and prosecute those responsible for obstrution of justice. I suspect that the release is truthful but I doubt anyone will suffer the consequences of their contempt and obstruction.
101 posted on 01/18/2002 8:27:02 AM PST by FreePaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thinden
thinden said: "...like the original whitewater, the statutes will run before anything of consequence comes out of this."

The original crimes and conspiracies may become too old for charges, but I thought that any provable obstruction or perjury restarts the clock. Is that not so?

102 posted on 01/18/2002 11:25:35 AM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: William Tell, FreePaul
I believe that obstruction of justice starts the statute of limitations clock all over again. I also believe that Judge Lamberth can cite, and sentence. proven obstructors or liars in front of his court for contempt, and doesn't need DOJ's help to do so (which is good, because DOJ is asleep on anything that doesn't relate to 09/11).
103 posted on 01/18/2002 11:52:08 AM PST by litany_of_lies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

bttt
104 posted on 01/18/2002 12:45:07 PM PST by GretchenEE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BluH2o
"My experience with JW (and I've made contributions in the past ... not recently) they always seem to come up empty. They may have something here, but I'm not optimistic ... we'll see. If nothing else it may give the Clintonistas a few sleepless nights." Vampires don't sleep
105 posted on 01/18/2002 12:53:17 PM PST by klgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Nothing will come of this. Nothing ever does.

my thoughts, exactly!

106 posted on 01/20/2002 5:35:48 PM PST by ken21
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
"Nothing will come of this. Nothing ever does."

Chin up Eeyore. We'll get 'em!

107 posted on 01/20/2002 5:37:34 PM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WIladyconservative
Don't worry about the price too much. Odds of this being true are slim.
108 posted on 01/20/2002 5:39:26 PM PST by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Interesting, but Klayman seems to be somewhat of a nutcase with his cheerleading press releases like this one.

What's he supposed to do when few others seem to care?

109 posted on 01/20/2002 5:52:36 PM PST by StopGlobalWhining
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
DSL ping
110 posted on 01/20/2002 6:26:00 PM PST by TPartyType
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies
bttt
111 posted on 01/20/2002 7:25:34 PM PST by PatrioticAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies
How IS Larry Klayman?

What is the deal?

I saw him Thursday night (I think) at the annual MRC Media Dishonors Awards Dinner in D.C. and he looked thin & was so subdued and ill-looking, I wasn't even sure it was Larry, but he responded when I said hello and we talked, briefly.

He looked VERY ill.

I am worried for him.

(If it wasn't Larry, it was someone else Named Larry, who resembled Klayman; honestly, he was so subdued, I cannot be absolutley sure it was Klayman.

112 posted on 01/20/2002 7:31:43 PM PST by FReethesheeples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BeAChooser; goldilucky; KLT; SnowBunny; Bigg Red; GretchenEE; flamefront; Black Jade...
"Sorry but I'm just hearing more DEFLECTION and EXCUSES from those attacking Klayman the loudest."
42 posted on 1/17/02 2:03 PM Pacific by BeAChooser

EXACTLY!

113 posted on 01/20/2002 8:47:48 PM PST by ChaseR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: TPartyType
Hi there!!! It is soooo good to see you! Thank you for the heads up!
114 posted on 01/20/2002 9:38:47 PM PST by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies
Can we get a change of venue from D.C. because of all the publicity? I'd like that.
115 posted on 01/20/2002 9:42:21 PM PST by 185JHP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 185JHP
Change of venue would normally make sense, but with Lamberth as the judge on this case, I'd rather it stay in DC.
116 posted on 01/20/2002 9:44:58 PM PST by litany_of_lies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies
Lamberth is a stand-up guy. I was thinking about a D.C. jury.
117 posted on 01/20/2002 10:20:38 PM PST by 185JHP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: litany_of_lies; Registered
JUDGE LAMBERTH VINDICATED: JAIL FOR CLINTONS, GORE?
118 posted on 01/21/2002 3:43:50 AM PST by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChaseR
evening bump!
119 posted on 01/21/2002 6:51:26 PM PST by goldilucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

Comment #120 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-143 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson