US judge rules against Clinton giving sworn testimony over emails

[DonViejo]

Source: Reuters

Democratic Party presidential candidate Hillary Clinton does not need to give sworn testimony in a lawsuit brought by a conservative watchdog group over her use of an unauthorized private email system while she was U.S. secretary of state, a judge ruled on Friday.

Clinton must instead respond in writing within 30 days to questions submitted by Judicial Watch, a group that has long been critical of her conduct and which is suing the Department of State over Clinton-era records.

Judge Emmet Sullivan’s ruling in U.S. District Court in Washington is likely to be a relief to Democrats, who did not welcome the prospect of Clinton having to submit to hours of questioning by lawyers in the middle of her campaign for the Nov. 8 election against Republican Party candidate Donald Trump.

Clinton, who served as the country’s top diplomat from 2009 to 2013, has apologized for her decision to use the unorthodox email set-up, which had the effect of shielding her communications from public-records laws until the arrangement came to light last year. Voters have said in opinion polls that the email server issue contributes to impressions that Clinton is untrustworthy. The U.S. Department of Justice concluded last month there were no grounds to prosecute Clinton for the arrangement following a year-long investigation.

-snip-

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/us-judge-rules-against-clinton-giving-sworn-testimony-over-emails/

[louis-t]

1. The lawsuit is just another campaign tactic.

As is "BENGHAZI", "Lying Killer", "Hang the Bitch", etc.

[yeoman6987]

2. She should just have her lawyer fill in the answers and she sign it

Safest way I believe.

[elleng]

10. That's the way it works.

[mrmpa]

7. From wikipedia, the funding.........

comes from: Between 1997 and 2002 Judicial Watch received $7,069,500 in 19 grants from a handful of foundations. The bulk of this funding came from three foundations – the Sarah Scaife Foundation, The Carthage Foundation, and the John M. Olin Foundation, Inc.,[citation needed] which folded in 2005.[81] As of 2010, the Sarah Scaife Foundation was the group's largest contributor.[82]

When you see the name Scaife, the Scaife family are the ones who accused President Clinton of being involved in the "murder" of Vince Foster.

[GreydeeThos]

4. Message to conservatives: Go pound sand

[Cryptoad]

5. Ohhhh NO,,, EMAILS,,,,, Oh the horror of it all!,,Drink!

[mrmpa]

6. Nowhere do I see/read that the written answers...........

she has to provide have to be answers that she has sworn to under oath. But this is the headline on Judicial Watch's website:

FEDERAL COURT ORDERS HILLARY CLINTON TO ANSWER QUESTIONS UNDER OATH IN EMAIL SCANDAL

[cstanleytech]

9. If a judge ordered it then the odds are it will be under oath.

Its still purely a political witch hunt meant both to try and weaken her supporting other Democratics in the upcoming election as well as hopefully get the Republican base riled up so as to show up and vote.

[Grassy Knoll]

8. LOL...