Hillary Clinton Must Answer Two New Questions About Her Emails Under Oath: Judge

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton makes a concession speech after being defeated by Republican president-elect Donald Trump in New York on Nov. 9, 2016. (Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images)
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton makes a concession speech after being defeated by Republican president-elect Donald Trump in New York on Nov. 9, 2016. (Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images)
By Zack Stieber

Former secretary of state and former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton must answer new questions about her emails under oath, according to a new ruling.

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan held a hearing on the case on Nov. 14. It stems from a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit from conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch over the status of Clinton aide Huma Abedin.

Clinton had answered that she “does not recall” to 20 out of the 25 written questions from Judicial Watch in October 2016. All of the questions related to her use of a private email and a server she set up at her upstate New York home.

She used the private email for years while serving as secretary of state under President Barack Obama, and her server was reportedly hacked by China. Foreign actors accessed Clinton’s emails, according to an FBI agent.

Judicial Watch took issue with the “does not recall” answers.

View image on Twitter

Tom Fitton

Sullivan ruled that Clinton must address two of the questions she refused to answer under oath.

“Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational,” is one of the questions.

The other regards a statement Clinton made in an appearance before a congressional committee.

“During your October 22, 2015, appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi, you testified that 90 to 95 percent of your emails ‘were in the State’s system’ and ‘if they wanted to see them, they would certainly have been able to do so,’ reads the statement put to Clinton.

“Identify the basis for this statement, including all facts on which you relied in support of the statement, how and when you became aware of these facts, and if you were made aware of these facts by or through another person, identify the person who made you aware of these facts.

Sullivan ruled against Judicial Watch on another matter. The group wanted to make public audiovisual recordings of the depositions from top Clinton aides and State Department officials, including Abedin and Cheryl Mills, but Sullivan denied the request. He also ruled that Clinton didn’t have to answer the other questions in which she said she didn’t recall the details.

“A federal court ordered Hillary Clinton to answer more questions about her illicit email system—which is good news,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement.

“It is shameful that Judicial Watch attorneys must continue to battle the State and Justice departments, which still defend Hillary Clinton, for basic answers to our questions about Clinton’s email misconduct.”

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply