Judicial Watch presses to make sure Hillary can't slither out of testimony

Hillary Clinton (video screenshot)

Government watchdog Judicial Watch is asking a federal appeals court to uphold an order for Hillary Clinton to testify under oath about the private email system she used as secretary of state to transmit classified information.

It was Judicial Watch's inquiry of Clinton's handling of the Benghazi terror attack that exposed the former secretary of state's use of a private email system.

A federal judge recently ruled Judicial Watch could question Clinton under oath, and she immediately appealed.

Judicial Watch's brief to the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit argues Clinton and onetime aide Cheryl Mills "must demonstrate that they have no other adequate means of relief" and they failed to show that.

TRENDING: Trump campaign launches 'The Right View,' a competitor to ABC's 'The View'

Also, Clinton and Mills do not demonstrate "that the district court's order was a judicial usurpation of power or a clear abuse of discretion, or that [Clinton and Mills] have a clear and indisputable right to a writ," Judicial Watch said.

In fact, Judicial Watch said, "the district court reasonably concluded that Clinton's previous explanations for using a personal email server are cursory, incomplete, and seemingly at odds with what discovery has yielded to date."

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said Clinton's "desperate appeal to avoid testimony is even too much for her defenders at the State and Justice Department."

"A federal court rejected Clinton and the Deep State's attempts to shut our email inquiry down and agreed with Judicial Watch – that is time to hear from Hillary Clinton," he said. "The appellate court should quickly reject Mrs. Clinton's gambit."

Clinton's lawyers contend she held the private server for her email system under "claim of right," when it contained thousands of federal records.

However, Judicial Watch argues that unlike other secretaries of state, Clinton did not obtain an opinion from the State Department's legal adviser on whether she could take the federal records prior to her departure from the department.

Judicial Watch liked Clinton’s "claim of right" argument to bank robbery.

"A bank robber who stuffs bills into a duffel bag during a robbery may own the bag, but has no 'claim of right' to the stolen cash," the organization said. "Is Clinton claiming a legal right to the agency records stored on the server? If so, petitioners offer no factual or legal support for such a claim. While the server may have been Clinton’s property, the agency records on the server plainly were not."

U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth granted the deposition of Clinton to Judicial Watch after ordering discovery two years ago in a lawsuit probing whether Clinton set up the private email system to avoid Freedom of Information requests. The complaint also alleged the State Department's plan to settle the case was in "bad faith" and that State conducted an inadequate search for Clinton's records.

Clinton and Mills want the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to overturn the order.

Judicial Watch said the Clinton request comes in its lawsuit seeking records concerning "talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack."

The watchdog famously found in 2014 that the "talking points" that provided the basis for Susan Rice's false statements about the attack were created by the Obama White House. The Freedom of Information Act lawsuit led directly to the disclosure of the Clinton email system in 2015.

Judge Lamberth has called the unsecure email system "one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency."

"Discovery up until this point has brought to light a noteworthy amount of relevant information, but Judicial Watch requests an additional round of discovery, and understandably so. With each passing round of discovery, the court is left with more questions than answers," he has said

The court found Clinton's prior testimony, mostly through written sworn answers, was not sufficient.

"The court has considered the numerous times in which Secretary Clinton said she could not recall or remember certain details in her prior interrogatory answer," Judicial Watch said. "In a deposition, it is more likely that plaintiff's counsel could use documents and other testimony to attempt to refresh her recollection. And so, to avoid the unsatisfying and inefficient outcome of multiple rounds of fruitless interrogatories and move this almost six-year-old case closer to its conclusion, Judicial Watch will be permitted to clarify and further explore Secretary Clinton's answers in person and immediately after she gives them. The court agrees with Judicial Watch – it is time to hear directly from Secretary Clinton."

Dozens of highly sensitive classified materials were sent to and from Clinton through the unsecure email system. The FBI said the private system was vulnerable to compromise by hackers outside the United States and by foreign intelligence operatives.

Lamberth also has encouraged Judicial Watch to "shake this tree" for evidence. He warned the State Department, "There is no FOIA exemption for political expedience, nor is there one for bureaucratic incompetence."

Clinton eventually turned over to the federal government some 33,000 emails from her private server, but she didn't allow the government to have another 30,000, alleging they were "private."

A letter sent to Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, revealed a federal investigation found 38 current and former State Department officials violated government email regulations by using Clinton's private system.

Judicial Watch says it already has learned:

• John Hackett, former director of information programs and services (IPS), testified under oath that he had raised concerns that Clinton’s staff may have “culled out 30,000” of the secretary’s “personal” emails without following strict National Archives standards. He also believed there was interference with the formal FOIA review process related to the classification of Clinton’s Benghazi-related emails.
• Heather Samuelson, Clinton’s White House liaison at the State Department, and later Clinton’s personal lawyer, admitted under oath that she was granted immunity by the Department of Justice in June 2016.
• Justin Cooper, former aide to President Bill Clinton and Clinton Foundation employee who registered the domain name of the unsecure clintonemail.com server that Clinton used while serving as secretary of state, testified he worked with Huma Abedin, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, to create the non-government email system.
• In interrogatory responses, E.W. Priestap, assistant director of the FBI Counterintelligence Division, stated that the agency found Clinton email records in the Obama White House.
• Jacob Sullivan, Clinton’s senior advisor and deputy chief of staff when she was secretary of state, testified that both he and Clinton used her unsecure non-government email system to conduct official State Department business.
• Eric Boswell, former assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security during Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, testified that Clinton was warned twice against using unsecure BlackBerrys and personal emails to transmit classified material.