Hillary Clinton is in real trouble now. She has been able to get away with all that she has because the State Department ran interference for her and refused to turn over any documents or other evidence against her. Federal judge Royce lamberth had expanded discovery back in September and then expanded it to allow for Hillary giving a deposition to Judicial Watch (JW) under oath.
The over under for Hillary testifying that she can’t remember is 117 times. I am taking the over but picking JW to win. Hillary is in court right now trying to get the deposition order thrown out but there is a twist. Both the State Department and the DOJ have told the judge they think she should have to do the deposition. That just about assures that she will have to answer questions posed by Tom Fitton and the rest of his team.
Via Judicial Watch:
Judicial Watch announced today that it and the State Department, which is represented by Justice Department lawyers, filed responses opposing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her former Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills’ Writ of Mandamus request to overturn a U.S. District Court order requiring their testimony under oath regarding Clinton’s emails and Benghazi attack records. At the same time, the government argued that it did not engage in “bad faith” in failing to disclose the Clinton non-government email system to Judicial Watch and the court. The briefs were filed on April 3 with the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Judicial Watch argues that Clinton and Mills “must demonstrate that they have no other adequate means of relief,” which they failed to show. Also, Clinton and Mills do not demonstrate “that the District Court’s order was a judicial usurpation of power or a clear abuse of discretion, or that [Clinton and Mills] have a clear and indisputable right to a writ.” In fact, “the District Court reasonably concluded that Clinton’s previous explanations for using a personal email server are cursory, incomplete, and seemingly at odds with what discovery has yielded to date.”
Judicial Watch further argues that Clinton and Mills are trying to avoid their deposition testimony by relying on, “their status as former high-level government officials.” Clinton and Mills, “do not offer a single case from this Court or any other, holding that former high-level government officials should not be required to follow regular appellate channels to challenge a discovery order.” Particularly in Mills’ case, Judicial Watch notes that they, “identify no case in which a court entertained a mandamus petition to stop the deposition of even a sitting cabinet member’s chief of staff.”