Connect with us

Federal Judge Just Dropped The Hammer On Hillary – Case Blown Wide Open

Published

on

Hillary Clinton has enjoyed years of protection from her more numerous to count crimes, becoming exceptionally arrogant along the way. She fought so desperately to become president so that she could carry on this corruption and continue to get away with it, but since she lost that majorly expensive battle, she’s paying a major price for it now.

Hillary knew that Donald Trump wasn’t just going to ignore her years of crimes and let her deepest political scandals go without investigation. Proving he’s true to his word, karma is coming about now and the Clintons are about to be held accountable.

It’s long overdue and there’s no way they’re going to be able to snake their way out of this one.

According to Judicial Watch, a  federal judge has just opened a discovery into Hillary’s infamous email usage:

Court Excoriates Obama State Department/Justice Department for Possibly Acting in “Bad Faith” and Colluding “to Scuttle Public Scrutiny” of Clinton Private Email Server

Court Criticizes Current Justice Department for “Chicanery”

District Court Judge Lamberth Orders “Proposed Plan and Schedule for Discovery Within Ten Days”

Discovery Must Also Explore Whether Clinton Intentionally Used Private Email Server to “skirt FOIA”

Judicial Watch announced today that, in a ruling excoriating both the U.S. Departments of State and Justice, U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth has ordered both agencies to join Judicial Watch in submitting a proposed schedule for discovery into whether Hillary Clinton sought to evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by using a private email system and whether the State Department acted in “bad faith” by failing to disclose knowledge of the email system.

This new investigation comes as the result of an FOIA lawsuit related to the Benghazi terrorist attack, when she went back to bed, leaving some of our nation’s greatest heroes fighting for our country to die.

Judge Lamberth laid it out in his ruling on the matter that was not at all what Clinton was expecting:

… the Court ORDERS the parties to meet and confer to plan discovery into (a) whether Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email while Secretary of State was an intentional attempt to evade FOIA; (b) whether the State Department’s attempts to settle this case in late 2014 and early 2015 amounted to bad faith; and (c) whether State has adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s requests.

Lamberth even went as far as to refer to Hillary’s use of her private email system as “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.” It’s refreshing to see a justice actually take this case seriously and give it the investigation it deserves, rather than ignoring it.

In his MEMORANDUM OPINION, Lamberth explained his outrage about the total lack of accountability:

… his [President Barack Obama’s] State and Justice Departments fell far short. So far short that the court questions, even now, whether they are acting in good faith. Did Hillary Clinton use her private email as Secretary of State to thwart this lofty goal [Obama announced a standard for transparency]? Was the State Department’s attempt to settle this FOIA case in 2014 an effort to avoid searching – and disclosing the existence of – Clinton’s missing emails? And has State ever adequately searched for records in this case?

At best, State’s attempt to pass-off its deficient search as legally adequate during settlement negotiations was negligence born out of incompetence, Lamberth added. At worst, career employees in the State and Justice Departments colluded to scuttle public scrutiny of Clinton, skirt FOIA, and hoodwink this Court.

Once Lamberth had finished excoriating Hillary, he directed his next verbal outrage at the Department of Justice, writing the following:

The current Justice Department made things worse. When the government last appeared before the Court, counsel claimed, ‘it is not true to say we misled either Judicial Watch or the Court.’ When accused of ‘doublespeak,’ counsel denied vehemently, feigned offense, and averred complete candor. When asked why State masked the inadequacy of its initial search, counsel claimed that the officials who initially responded to Judicial Watch’s request didn’t realize Clinton’s emails were missing and that it took them two months to ‘figure [] out what was going on’… Counsel’s responses strain credulity. [citations omitted]

Judicial Watch had filed a request for Benghazi FOIA, specifically regarding Hillary emails as “smacks of outrageous conduct.” The court followed through on that by granting this discovery now.

Judicial Watch had obtained one of Hillary’s emails in their lawsuit on the matter which Lamberth cited when announcing that there will be a much deeper discovery into her correspondence. This particularly incriminating email proved that  Hillary had acknowledged that Benghazi was a terrorist attack immediately after it happened.

Judge Lamberth asked:

Did State know Clinton deemed the Benghazi attack terrorism hours after it happened, contradicting the Obama Administration’s subsequent claim of a protest-gone-awry?

Did the Department merely fear what might be found? Or was State’s bungling just the unfortunate result of bureaucratic redtape and a failure to communicate? To preserve the Department’s integrity, and to reassure the American people their government remains committed to transparency and the rule of law, this suspicion cannot be allowed to fester.

“The historic court ruling raises concerns about the Hillary Clinton email scandal and government corruption that millions of Americans share,” stated Judicial Watch Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch looks forward to conducting careful discovery into the Clinton email issue and we hope the Justice Department and State Department recognize Judge Lamberth’s criticism and help, rather than obstruct, this court-ordered discovery.”

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


Clinton IT aide created Gmail address to forward Hillary’s emails: report

Published

on

...

* By

Continue Reading

New York Times Editor: We’re Switching From Russia Collusion To ‘Trump Is Racist’

Published

on

The New York Times and others have repeatedly tried to take down President Trump with libelous statements on the Russian collusion front and have failed spectacularly every single time. Now, New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet has accidentally admitted that for two years his far-left newspaper was “built” around spreading a hoax. Oops. But it’s never too late to shift propaganda in this political war.

He was secretly recorded saying just that and it got out. Baquet also admitted the Times’ staff is loaded with left-wingers “who cheer us when we take on Donald Trump, but they jeer at us when we take on Joe Biden.” Do tell. I’m shocked I tell you. Simply shocked.

What is actually shocking is this recording comes by way of the leftist rag, Slate. They got their mitts on the recording of a company-wide meeting Baquet held with his staffers and it is an illuminating look at how leftist media utilizes and manipulates propaganda for political effect. Why Slate would let that out is puzzling, to say the least.

Baquet has now admitted that for two long years his leftist newspaper was “built” around the Russia Collusion Hoax: “It got trickier after [inaudible] … went from being a story about whether the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia and obstruction of justice to being a more head-on story about the president’s character. We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well.”

Truly well? Do you mean by lying and falsifying facts? They did that very well. There was not a shred of evidence that Trump colluded with Russia yet the NYT reported on it as fact for two years and in actuality, made stuff up to fit that narrative.

But the New York Times has seen the light, so to speak. The Russia collusion hoax hasn’t worked so now they are switching tactics… Trump is now a racist and everything will revolve around that lie: “Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story. I’d love your help with that. As Audra Burch said when I talked to her this weekend, this one is a story about what it means to be an American in 2019. It is a story that requires deep investigation into people who peddle hatred[.]”

The truth is that if Trump were actually a racist it would have come out decades ago. This is a last-ditch effort to besmirch a sitting president so a communist can take his place in the next election. It’s subversion and in my book… a form of treason.

You can still taste the salty leftist tears from being disappointed that Mueller did not take down Trump: “The day Bob Mueller walked off that witness stand, two things happened. Our readers who want Donald Trump to go away suddenly thought, “Holy shit, Bob Mueller is not going to do it.” And Donald Trump got a little emboldened politically, I think. Because, you know, for obvious reasons. And I think that the story changed. A lot of the stuff we’re talking about started to emerge like six or seven weeks ago. We’re a little tiny bit flat-footed. I mean, that’s what happens when a story looks a certain way for two years. Right?”

So, while the NYT, WaPo, and other lefty rags spewed lies and propaganda, outlets such as Breitbart, The Daily Wire, and The Daily Caller among others did real reporting and told the truth. For their efforts, a number of them have been banned on social media.

From Breitbart:

“Baquet pretty much spends the rest of the 90 minutes meeting fielding questions from individuals who are supposed to be professionals but who only want to know how they can call Trump and his supporters racists even more often.

“You see, according to the Times’ staff, everything is racist because everything really is racist.

“You probably think that whole “everything is racist” thing is me being sarcastic. Here’s a direct quote from a staffer [emphasis added]:

Hello, I have another question about racism. I’m wondering to what extent you think that the fact of racism and white supremacy being sort of the foundation of this country should play into our reporting. Just because it feels to me like it should be a starting point, you know? Like these conversations about what is racist, what isn’t racist. I just feel like racism is in everything. It should be considered in our science reporting, in our culture reporting, in our national reporting. And so, to me, it’s less about the individual instances of racism, and sort of how we’re thinking about racism and white supremacy as the foundation of all of the systems in the country.

“Good grief. What a dispiriting and not-at-all surprising look at the ignorant whack jobs in charge of our media — and in the case of the New York Times, not just the media, but what is considered the elite of the media elite. What are they obsessed with? What do these conspiracy-loons see everywhere in 2019 America…?

“Raaaaaaacism.

“Here we sit in the most tolerant, diverse country in the world just a few years after having twice elected a black president with the middle name “Hussein,” and the people in charge of the media are breaking down into pools of self-pity because they want to scream racist at us even more than they already have.

“And again, let’s not forget that the only way they can try to pretend America is racist is by way of massive hoaxes: the Very Fine People Hoax, the Covington Hoax, the George Zimmerman Is White Hoax, the Hands Up Don’t Shoot Hoax, the Jussie Smollett Hoax, and the countless hoax hate crimes they spread over and over and over again without scrutiny.”

Good grief is an understatement. The NYT does not cover real news anymore like the rising tide of anti-Semitism in this country. They are too busy protecting terrorists and radicals, while smearing the president and conservatives, to do their actual jobs.

The New York Times openly admits that anti-Jewish hate crimes don’t interest the Times because white supremacists are not behind them: “If anti-Semitism bypasses consideration as a serious problem in New York, it is to some extent because it refuses to conform to an easy narrative with a single ideological enemy. During the past 22 months, not one person caught or identified as the aggressor in an anti-Semitic hate crime has been associated with a far right-wing group, Mark Molinari, commanding officer of the police department’s Hate Crimes Task Force, told me.”

But young white males are domestic terrorists according to these people. Geez. Not communist Antifa or Black Lives Matter or the Nation of Islam or the Black Panthers… white boys are the ticket, y’all.

Since the media is out of Russian ammo and they detest Trump, they have to have another way of smearing him and throwing the race card is their final desperate move in this political dance. Nothing else has stuck to Teflon-Don. Look for them to cry ‘racism’ non-stop for the next two years in their latest contrived hoax against the president. But you won’t hear them cover actual racism because it does not fit their political narrative. It has to be Trump, Trump, Trump! or it’s not news.

The NYT is a peddler of hate. No wonder they had to stop publishing political cartoons because the editorial staff can’t recognize blatant anti-Semitism. These aren’t journalists anymore… they are Brown Shirts. They feel they’ll get away with calling Trump a racist. After all, they got away with the Russian crap for two years.

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Latest Articles

[ifform list="4174" submit="Subscribe"]

Send this to a friend