Hillary doesn’t have to answer questions in court after all

0
2937

In March,  a judge ruled that Judicial Watch could depose both Hillary Clinton and her chief of staff over the email server scandal.

Predictably, that has been overturned since the appeals court thinks the decision was only based on suspicions. No one will get the facts because they want to keep it in the suspicion category.

A federal appeals court on Friday overturned the order.

The case had arisen from a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from Judicial Watch to the State Department. Clinton argued that she has already answered questions about the controversy and should not have to do so, but D.C. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth said in his ruling that her past responses left much to be desired.

The appeals court rebuked Lamberth of abusing his ‘discretion’:

The appeals court accused the district court of having abused its discretion. They said they used suspicions of bad faith by the government to open the door to “far-reaching” depositions. Nice twist by the appeals court!

“The mere suspicion of bad faith on the part of the government cannot be used as a dragnet to authorize voluminous discovery that it is irrelevant to the remaining issues in a case,” the ruling said.

“The District Court has impermissibly ballooned the scope of its inquiry into allegations of bad faith to encompass a continued probe of Secretary Clinton’s state of mind surrounding actions taken years before the at-issue searches were conducted by the State Department,’ the ruling said.

The ruling was unanimous, two of the judges were Obama judges and one was a George W. Bush appointee.

As Mark Levin stated, this is the same court that protects Judge Sullivan in the Michael Flynn case:

JUDICIAL WATCH PRESIDENT TOM FITTON RESPONDS

“Today’s extraordinary Appeals Court decision protecting Hillary Clinton from having to obey a court order requiring her to testify about her emails is contrary to longstanding precedent and undermines the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).  The opinion’s deviation from a long line of earlier mandamus cases creates the appearance of favoritism towards Clinton and undermines the public’s confidence in the fair administration of justice. One need only contrast the DC Circuit’s agony over granting General Flynn mandamus relief with the unprecedented mandamus relief so easily given to Clinton.

As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton hid her government emails, then stole them when she left office.  Her lawyers unilaterally determined what would be returned later. The State Department knew this occurred but tried to game a federal trial court into shutting down Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuit before Clinton’s scheme became public.  In response, the trial court rightly ordered Clinton to testify about the reasons for her actions and their impact on the public’s right to know. That this was too much for the DC Circuit is a miscarriage of justice.

In addition to today’s political decision, the Justice and State Departments’ continuing efforts to avoid getting to the bottom of Clinton’s email misconduct are a scandal. President Trump should hold Secretary Pompeo and Attorney General Barr accountable for their failures of leadership.”


PowerInbox
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments