Clinton Email "scandal" Meet Dustbin of History! 3-0.
A federal appeals court panel has unanimously overturned a lower-court order requiring Hillary Clinton to provide a sworn deposition about her use of a private email account and server during her four years as secretary of State.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled, 3-0, that the conservative group Judicial Watch was not entitled to depose Clinton in connection with an 8-year-old Freedom of Information Act lawsuit seeking records of details about information national security adviser Susan Rice discussed during interviews in 2012 about the deadly attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya.
During the protracted litigation surrounding the email saga, Clinton answered written questions under penalty of perjury about her email practices.
However, in March of this year, U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered the former first lady, Cabinet official and two-time Democratic presidential candidate to sit for a deposition. Lamberth, an appointee of President Ronald Reagan who has tangled with Clinton administration aides in a series of cases for decades, called Hillary Clinton’s earlier answers "incomplete, unhelpful, or cursory, at best."
But the appeals court ruled Friday that Lamberth’s order was a “clear abuse of discretion.”
D.C. Circuit Judge Robert Wilkins suggested it was time to consign the Clinton email imbroglio to the history books.
“Secretary Clinton … provided eleven hours of public testimony before the House Select Committee, and has answered countless media inquiries on the matter,” wrote Wilkins, an appointee of President Barack Obama. “These facts underscore both the impropriety of the District Court’s Order and the appropriateness of turning the page on the issue.”
Wilkins called the proposed topics for Clinton’s deposition “completely attenuated from any relevant issue in this case.”
Wilkins’ 25-page opinion was joined by George W. Bush appointee Thomas Griffith and Obama appointee Nina Pillard.
|
Posted: 08/14/2020 at 4:09PM