• June 20, 2024

Judge Lowers the Boom on the State Department

Judge Emmet Sullivan of the US District Court for the District of Columbia, during the oath of office ceremony of new Chief Judge of the D.C. Superior Court Lee Satterfield. September 24, 2008. Photo by Diego M. Radzinschi/LEGAL TIMES.

This is what we have been waiting for the longest time.  A judge has finally gotten tired of the State Department stonewalling on an FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) request made by Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch.   Judge Emmet G. Sullivan has granted Judicial Watch the right of discovery.  This is huge because they can now interview anyone in the State Department they want.  They can ask just about anything they want and they are bound by law to answer.  You can only take the Fifth if you can reasonably believe that you may have done something wrong.

Questions they are expected to ask include who gave the authorization for Hillary’s private server.  They can ask the names of all State Department employees who knew about the server.  They can also ask what other State Department employees, including Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills. (No relation to that great war hero General Mills.)  The scope of discovery is a fairly narrow one but it covers everything they asked about in their suit.  No congressional committee has been able to squeeze as much information from the Obama caliphate than Judicial Watch has.

To make matters worse for Hillary is that the judge said that he will eventually subpoena the entire Clinton email system.  He decided that it was too soon for such a drastic step but said that he wants to see what comes out of discovery.  A reasonable belief that a crime has been committed could be enough to nudge the judge to take that step.

Judge Sullivan said:

 “How on earth can the court conclude there is not at minimum a reasonable suspicion of bad faith?”

The judge says he isn’t ready to say that Hillary’s email system was set up for illegal purposes but that the entire process of creating a private system, hidden from the government and not subject to FOIA requests raises questions about whether the system was created to circumvent the law.

Related post