A federal judge speaks out about some shocking truths in regards to the State Department, FBI, Benghazi, and Hillary Clinton.
U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth has accused the State Department officials of telling lies and signing false affidavits in hopes to derail lawsuits that sought information about Hillary Clinton's private email server and how she handled the Benghazi terror attack in 2012.
This took place during a hearing in Washington, D.C.
The judge said he was "shocked" to learn that Clinton's former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, had been granted immunity by the FBI during their investigation of Clinton's private email server.
In a combative exchange at a hearing Friday in Washington, D.C., a federal judge unabashedly accused career State Department officials of lying and signing "clearly false" affidavits to derail a series of lawsuits seeking information about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's private email server and her handling of the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
"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 she had been given immunity in — by the Justice Department in the Hillary Clinton email case," Lamberth said during the hearing.
The Department of Justice's Inspector General (IG), Michael Horowitz, noted in a bombshell report in June that it was "inconsistent with typical investigative strategy" for the FBI to allow Mills to sit in during the agency's interview of Clinton during the email probe, given that classified information traveled through Mills' personal email account. "[T]here are serious potential ramifications when one witness attends another witness' interview," the IG wrote.
A group called Judicial Watch, who focuses on transparency, had actually sued the State Department back in 2014. They were trying to gather information about the Benghazi attack and how the government responded, or didn't respond, to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Fox News revealed that other lawsuits by Judicial Watch came up during this particular litigation.
This is where it gets murky. The State Department wanted to have the first case by Judicial Watch dismissed "on a motion for summary judgment, saying in an affidavit that it had conducted a search of all potentially relevant emails in its possession and provided them. The affidavit noted that some more documents and emails could be forthcoming."
Lamberth denied the request for dismissal. The hearing that just occurred, with Judge Lamberth, is where he expressed that he was happy he did not dismiss the previous case because now he sees that he was intentionally misled.
But Lamberth denied the request to dismiss the lawsuit at the time -- and on Friday, he said he was happy he did, charging that State Department officials had intentionally misled him because other key documents, including those on Clinton's email server, had not in fact been produced.
"It was clear to me that at the time that I ruled initially, that false statements were made to me by career State Department officials, and it became more clear through discovery that the information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the search and this – what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system," Lamberth said Friday.
In a statement, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, who was present at the hearing, pushed the White House for answers.
“President Trump should ask why his State Department is still refusing to answer basic questions about the Clinton email scandal,”
Fitton said. “Hillary Clinton’s and the State Department’s email cover up abused the FOIA, the courts, and the American people’s right to know.”
Looks like we have one big mess after another.
This will go on for years.