A lawyer whose RICO case against Bill and Hillary Clinton hit a road block this week when a federal judge blocked depositions that had been scheduled for the former – and possibly future – tenants of the White House says he wants to argue the issues in court.
Attorney Larry Klayman filed a renewed request for oral argument with U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida in his case against the Clintons and their foundation.
“In light of the court’s recent order of July 23, 2015, which stayed discovery pending disposition of defendant’s motions to dismiss, and the court’s having ruled on prior motions to quash prior to the time for plaintiff to respond, plaintiff respectfully requests that oral arguments be held with respect to defendants’ motions to dismiss.
“The issues on this case are too important not to allow for oral argument. Oral argument will give this court an opportunity to ask questions and also to access the demeanor of counsel. Plaintiff, who is representing himself pro se, has been subject to a number of unprofessional ad hominem attacks by defendants which may have prejudiced this court,” Klayman wrote.
It was U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks who earlier in the week granted a protective order that prevents any questioning of the Clintons until the court resolves their requests to halt discovery and throw the case out.
The civil lawsuit from Klayman, who is of Freedom Watch, alleges the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation operated as a criminal enterprise.
It was filed under the Racketeer and Corrupt Organizations Act.
Freedom Watch had scheduled videotaped depositions next week in Washington.
Middlebrooks, who was appointed by Clinton in 1997, did not include any reasoning for his order.
The complaint alleges not only did the Clintons engage in RICO violations, but Hillary Clinton covered up crimes by destroying her personal emails.
Klayman had scheduled Bill Clinton’s deposition for 9 a.m. July 29 at the offices of a Washington law firm and Hillary Clinton’s deposition a day earlier at the same time and place.
“Such deposition will be upon oral examination conducted before a Notary Public in and for the District of Columbia, or some other officer duly authorized by law to take depositions, and will continue until completed and is being taken for discovery purposes, for use at trial, or any other purpose permitted,” the notices stated.
The well-known Washington watchdog has sued the Clinton Foundation and Bill and Hillary Clinton under RICO for allegedly running a criminal enterprise.
A federal court in Florida already has scheduled a trial for early next year.
“This is a classic RICO lawsuit,” Klayman argued in a recent filing, “Indeed … few people – if any – can even attempt to refute the hard evidence that Bill and Hillary Clinton and their foundation have over a 10-year history of actually selling government access and influence in exchange for hard cash to fill their coffers and the coffers of their foundation, which not coincidentally, as pled, does not operate as a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization but instead operates as defendants Bill and Hillary Clinton’s own alter-ego in furthering their criminal enterprise.”
He said the case is about much more than access to hidden documents, which he is seeking.
“The production of documents at issue is relevant because they evidence a criminal enterprise under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act … created and further by each of the defendants, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation, acting in concert as part of a conspiracy, to extort hundreds of millions of dollars in money – that is, bribes – from individuals, entities and persons upon which the defendants have bestowed favors and gratuities, principally in the form of granting waivers to do business with Iran. ”
The allegations, he explained, set “forth all of the operative facts to plead a valid RICO claim.”
He said the case “must proceed expeditiously” because of a discovery deadline of Sept. 28 and the trial date of Jan. 25, 2016.
“Defendants’ attempts to delay discovery are as transparent as their non-meritorious motions to dismiss. Needless to say, the court should not accept defendants’ lack of reasoned analysis of the factual content of” the complaint,” he wrote.
“It is simply too early to dismiss any portion of plaintiff’s claims where so much information is alleged to provide both notice and a likelihood that more material and predicate acts will be learned through discovery.”
The case brought by Klayman pleads “multiple acts of racketeering activity by travel in interstate or international travel for the purpose of bribery, money laundering and obstruction of justice.”
“These actions were done with the specific purpose of defrauding plaintiff and others out of hundreds of millions of dollars in donations.”
He alleges, for example, that Hillary Clinton as secretary of state “granted a waiver to Victor Pinchuk and his company Interpipe Group as an exemption from U.S. congressional sanctions against doing business with Iran.”
He alleges that was “as a quid pro quo for bribes disguised as donations made to The Clinton Foundation.”
He said the company “then, using the wires and mails and other illegal means fraudulently, donated $2.35 million to The Clinton Foundation.”
WND reported Klayman was urging the court to take physical custody of Hillary Clinton’s infamous private email server because of the evidence it could contain.
In a supplement motion, Klayman said there was new relevant information to bolster his case.
Klayman submitted copies of a Washington Times report that the Clintons’ foundation “set up a fundraising arm in Sweden that collected $26 million in donations at the same time that country was lobbying Hillary Rodham Clinton’s State Department to forgo sanctions that threatened its thriving business with Iran.”
Further, another article submitted by Klayman, from the Miami Herald, reported banks were paying huge fees to Bill Clinton for speeches at a delicate time.
“Many of the speeches and donations were made at times when the host banks were under Justice Department scrutiny. … All told, the same 11 banks have paid more than $81 billion – yes, that’s with a B – over the last six years to resolve federal investigations into alleged corruption,” the report said.
The case charges the Clintons schemed “to reap hundreds of millions of dollars personally and for their foundation by selling government access and influence.”
Klayman, for years a Washington watchdog, engaged Bill Clinton in court battles during his presidency. Klayman also has taken on terror interests and foreign influences in the United States. Recently, he won a federal court judgment against the National Security Agency’s spy-on-Americans program and brought a case against Obama over his amnesty-by-executive-memo strategy.
WND’s attempts to obtain a comment from the New York office for Bill Clinton or the foundation have not been successful.
When the Clintons left the White House in 2000, they were “broke,” Hillary Clinton has claimed.
But estimates are that since that time, they have been paid well over $100 million, oftentimes in $250,000 and $500,000 increments for speaking. Speaking fees for Bill Clinton have been as high as $750,000.
The Clintons’ foundation also has been embroiled in scandal, with foreign governments making donations when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and, as WND has reported in a series, a respected Wall Street analyst charging financial irregularities that indicate the Clintons have skimmed millions from the foundation for themselves and their colleagues.