Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

amborin

(16,631 posts)
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 05:16 PM Feb 2016

Federal Judge U.S. orders discovery to go forward over Clinton’s private email system



A federal judge on Tuesday ruled that State Department officials and top aides to Hillary Clinton should be questioned under oath about whether they intentionally thwarted federal open records laws by using or allowing the use of a private email server throughout Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of Washington came in a lawsuit over public records brought by Judicial Watch, a conservative legal watchdog group, regarding its May 2013 request, for information about the employment arrangement of a longtime Clinton aide, Huma Abedin.

While it was not immediately clear whether the goverment would appeal, Sullivan set an April deadline for parties to lay out a detailed investigative plan that would go extend well beyond the limited and carefully worded explanations of the use of the private server so far given by department and Clinton officials.

Sullivan also suggested from the bench that he might at some point order the department to subpoena Clinton and Abedin, to return all records related to Clinton’s private clintonemail.com, not just those their camps have previously deemed work-related and returned.

“There has been a constant drip, drip, drip of declarations. When does it stop?” Sullivan said, saying that months of piecemeal revelations about Clinton and the State Department’s handling of the email controversy create “at least a ‘reasonable suspicion’?” that public access to official government records under the federal Freedom of Information Act was undermined.“This case is about the public’s right to know.”


snip

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-judge-orders-discovery-to-go-forward-over-clinton%e2%80%99s-private-email-system/ar-BBpRuJO?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp
34 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Federal Judge U.S. orders discovery to go forward over Clinton’s private email system (Original Post) amborin Feb 2016 OP
The public's right to know. Thank you. We pay to run the State Department. merrily Feb 2016 #1
This is only the 20th post on this in the last 24 hours. Thanks for letting us know....again leftofcool Feb 2016 #2
It's actually only the second. Ruling was at 1 pm today. But, you're fair and accurate as usual. leveymg Feb 2016 #3
We're way past the second vdogg Feb 2016 #5
First time I've seen it. Do you spend too much time here? closeupready Feb 2016 #30
Not at all vdogg Feb 2016 #31
They just can't contain themselves vdogg Feb 2016 #4
Imagine that, Democrats discussing a Democratic candidate NWCorona Feb 2016 #6
If we would just not talk about it, it wouldn't exist! Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #9
kinda Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #10
no kidding. n/t one_voice Feb 2016 #13
Well someday all those Bernie Supporters will be purged and you can have DU all to yourself. nt el_bryanto Feb 2016 #32
Criminal referral is coming this summer...right after the conventions... hoosierlib Feb 2016 #7
"what splendupertubrious timing!", said the muffinheaded anusmouthman. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #12
For the record, I actually think Rubio will get the nomination in a brokered convention... hoosierlib Feb 2016 #19
I watched Trump's victory speech in SC. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #20
It's going to be a three-way race for a while... hoosierlib Feb 2016 #22
I have no quarrel with that outcome. Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #23
He's luvin' it yourpaljoey Feb 2016 #26
Where did you read this? DCBob Feb 2016 #14
I'll answer your question with a question; Director Comey is a registered what? hoosierlib Feb 2016 #18
So you admit you made it up. DCBob Feb 2016 #24
I didn't make anything up and you didn't answer my question... hoosierlib Feb 2016 #25
You didnt answer mine. DCBob Feb 2016 #33
Well this is the supposedly politically invincible nominee we're likely getting foisted on us, Warren DeMontague Feb 2016 #8
“at least a ‘reasonable suspicion" Motown_Johnny Feb 2016 #11
She shouldn't be running for president. SammyWinstonJack Feb 2016 #16
Now THAT is an avenue worth investigating yourpaljoey Feb 2016 #28
K & R AzDar Feb 2016 #15
Isn't there also an investigation of the Clinton Foundation? panader0 Feb 2016 #17
Clinton Foundation subpeona from State Department.... Avalux Feb 2016 #21
That's the one that concerns me yourpaljoey Feb 2016 #29
Time for truth to come to light NowSam Feb 2016 #27
I'm curious as to the timing and mechanics of how this actually happens Babel_17 Feb 2016 #34

merrily

(45,251 posts)
1. The public's right to know. Thank you. We pay to run the State Department.
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 05:23 PM
Feb 2016

We are the employer. She was the employee.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
3. It's actually only the second. Ruling was at 1 pm today. But, you're fair and accurate as usual.
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 05:41 PM
Feb 2016

Thank you for your service to DU.

vdogg

(1,384 posts)
5. We're way past the second
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 05:43 PM
Feb 2016

Just look at latest threads. The titles are different but the links are to the same story from different news sources (Washington post, msn, cnn, nbc).

vdogg

(1,384 posts)
31. Not at all
Wed Feb 24, 2016, 11:36 AM
Feb 2016

Anyone can look through today and yesterday's latest threads and see several posts on the issue.

vdogg

(1,384 posts)
4. They just can't contain themselves
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 05:41 PM
Feb 2016

Sometimes I wonder if RU....err...I mean DU is actively trying to elect the republican candidate.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
9. If we would just not talk about it, it wouldn't exist!
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 06:12 PM
Feb 2016

Is that some sort of quantum mechanics deal, or what?

 

hoosierlib

(710 posts)
19. For the record, I actually think Rubio will get the nomination in a brokered convention...
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 09:58 PM
Feb 2016

Pissing off and alienation Trump's supporters and inviting a 3rd part run...

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
20. I watched Trump's victory speech in SC.
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 11:05 PM
Feb 2016

I will say that I don't think any of us should underestimate the guy as a candidate.

The hope is he will go too far or implode, but if he doesn't he may be stronger than people think.

 

hoosierlib

(710 posts)
22. It's going to be a three-way race for a while...
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 11:10 PM
Feb 2016

I don't think Trump get a majority and the powers that be will "steal" the nomination from him after the first round of voting and ultimately give it to Rubio...that gives him an excuse to run as an independent and it splits the Republican vote like Perot did in 1992.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
23. I have no quarrel with that outcome.
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 11:20 PM
Feb 2016

However, if the GOP establishment really had any power this cycle, they would have got Jeb!

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
14. Where did you read this?
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 09:36 PM
Feb 2016

The article says likely no decision until well after the elections.. maybe years.

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
8. Well this is the supposedly politically invincible nominee we're likely getting foisted on us,
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 06:11 PM
Feb 2016

whether we like it or not.

If more shoes drop on this deal between now and November, I'm sure we'll see all sorts of mea culpas from the crowd that has spent the last 8 months throwing the worst sort of shit at anyone who dares support a different nominee.

I'm sure.

Unless they can figure out some way to argue that the FBI is run by "racist berniebro mens rights activists" or some shit.



 

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)
11. “at least a ‘reasonable suspicion"
Tue Feb 23, 2016, 06:25 PM
Feb 2016

How can we nominate someone who has “at least a ‘reasonable suspicion’?” that public access to official government records under the federal Freedom of Information Act was undermined" hanging over their head?



We are asking for a President Trump and his Supreme Court Nominees.




NowSam

(1,252 posts)
27. Time for truth to come to light
Wed Feb 24, 2016, 11:14 AM
Feb 2016

Ms. Clinton asked why there is a different standard for her regarding her taking our bail out $ from the banks. Well if the truth be told she needs to be held to the highest standards if we are to have faith in the system.

Bernie is the one who will deliver a more perfect union.

Babel_17

(5,400 posts)
34. I'm curious as to the timing and mechanics of how this actually happens
Wed Feb 24, 2016, 11:58 AM
Feb 2016

Edit: The article seems to suggest things will go slowly, and with back and forth motions and arguments. I guess that's the most that can really be said right now.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Federal Judge U.S. orders...