Breaking News

Hillary Clinton Seeks To Block The Court's Request To Testify


The US District Court of Appeals of Columbia said it would hold a hearing to determine if Clinton's efforts to subpoena are justified.

Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton argued that she did not need to testify in court because she was a former senior government official, and because the case is being handled by the FBI trying to recover her email from various sources.

Clinton was investigated on allegations that the confidential information she had stored or transmitted improperly from her personal email server when she was Secretary of State.
The district court said it would hold a hearing on Mrs. Clinton's testimony of evasion, and former Clinton Office Cheryl Mills, at 9:30 am on June 2.

Judicial Watch, a legal watchdog, argues that neither Clinton nor Mills have demonstrated that they do not need to follow common appellate rules to challenge District Court orders, and that the lawsuit Not a debate.

Legal experts say the FBI's effort is incomplete, as evidenced by the discovery of 30 more Clinton emails at the end of last year, among other developments and other emails that could be restored. if the government is forced to find them.

The hearing was part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking records related to "talking points or updates about the Benghazi attack". 

In 2014, the Judicial Watch discovered the "talking points" created by Obama's White House, showing statements about the attack on the eve of the 2012 National Security Advisor's election.

This FOIA lawsuit led directly to the disclosure of Clinton's email system in 2015.

On March 2, 2020, District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth said it would take testimony (under oath) from Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Mill, regarding Mrs. Clinton's emails and the existence of the lakes. Profile of the attack in Benghazi.

In April, Judicial Watch and the Department of State, represented by attorneys of the Justice Department, submitted responses opposing Clinton and Mill's requests to oppose their witness request.

No comments