<p><strong><img class="size-medium wp-image-748 alignleft" src="https://punchingbagpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/hillary-clinton-benghazi-hearing-640x480-1-300x225.png" alt="" />Not everyone has forgotten about the Hillary Clinton email scandal.</strong></p>
<p>Last Friday, Judicial Watch went to federal court seeking depositions from Hillary Clinton, Cheryl Mills, and other State Department officials regarding the agency&#8217;s processing of an FOIA request and Clinton’s emails.</p>
<p>The FOIA request, filed in 2014, seeks copies of talking points given to Ambassador Susan Rice regarding the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi in 2012.</p>
<p>[The Clinton State Department has largely been blamed for the attack, which killed four Americans. Rice repeatedly claimed the attack was caused by a YouTube video.]</p>
<p>Judicial Watch sued the State Department in 2014 after it failed to respond to the FIOA request. The case exposed the email scandal to the public and was put on hold while investigations were being conducted by the State Department and the FBI.</p>
<p>“In March 2016, Judge Lamberth grand us ‘limited discovery,’ ruling that ‘where there is evidence of government wrongdoing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is extremely rate in FOIA cases,” said Judicial Watch.</p>
<p>In May 2016, Judicial Watch filed an initial Proposed Order for Discovery seeking more information. The State Department refused the request, and in December 2016 Judge Lamberth asked both parties to file new proposed orders based on information uncovered since May.</p>
<p>Judicial Watch says it has been “unable to reach agreement on a discovery proposal” because the State Department refuses to cooperate.</p>
<p>“It is frankly unbelievable that the State Department is still protecting Hillary Clinton and her aides from being asked basic questions about her illicit email system,” said Judicial Watch. “The courts were misled and obstructed by Hillary Clinton’s email scheme and we hope to get some more answers about this scandal.”</p>
<p>During the hearing last week, US District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth criticized the FBI and Justice Department for providing false information regarding the Clinton email issue:</p>
<p>“The information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the [Clinton email] search and…what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system,&#8221; said Lamberth, adding that he was “dumbfounded” by the DOJ’s decision to give immunity to top Clinton aide Cheryl Mills.</p>
<p>“I had myself found that Cheryl Mills had committed perjury and lied under oath in a published opinion I had issued in a Judicial Watch case where I found her unworthy of belief, and I was quite shocked to find out that she had been given immunity,” said Lamberth.</p>
<p>Lamberth was also unaware that Mills had been allowed to sit in during the DOJ’s interview of Clinton during the email probe.</p>
<p>The decision to allow Mills to attend the interview was “inconsistent with typical investigative strategy,&#8221; wrote DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz. “There are serious potential ramifications when one witness attends another witness’ interview.&#8221;</p>
<p>&#8212;<br />
In December 2014, Hillary Clinton claimed she turned all of her work-related emails over to the State Department. Multiple caches of emails have been discovered since, including classified information she tried to hide or destroy.</p>
<p>As Judicial Watch continues to find more evidence of Clinton’s wrongdoing, the organization has urged Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the Justice Department to “finally undertake a complete and legitimate criminal investigation.”</p>
<p>Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, who attended last week&#8217;s hearing, pushed the Trump Administration for answers:</p>
<p>“President Trump should ask why his State Department is still refusing to answer basic questions about the Clinton email scandal,” said Fitton. “Hillary Clinton’s and the State Department’s email cover up abused the FOIA, the courts, and the American people’s right to know.&#8221;</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Clinton “tries to remain relevant by encoring incivility toward her opponents,” said the watchdog. “She perhaps is also trying to deflect attention from our continuing exposure of her irresponsible use of email when she was Secretary of State.”</p>
<p><em>Lamberth is expected to issue a ruling soon.</em></p>