Judicial Watch's Pursuit of Clinton Goes Too Far

[Botany]

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-09-04/judicial-watch-s-pursuit-of-clinton-goes-too-far

The Clintons have been subject to fishing expeditions before, but why is a federal court making Hillary Clinton give sworn responses now to questions about her use of a private e-mail server back when she was secretary of state? This all stems from a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by a conservative group seeking State Department information about Clinton’s aide Huma Abedin. With a series of permissive rulings, the judge has allowed the suit to get out of hand. It’s now an inquiry into Clinton’s motives in using her private server -- something well beyond the contemplation of the freedom of information laws.

Judicial Watch, which initiated the suit, is a founding member of Hillary Clinton’s “vast right-wing conspiracy.” Founded by the lawyer Larry Klayman and given early funding by conservative billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife (remember him?), it brought some choice lawsuits against Bill Clinton back in the 1990s. Its favored method is the FOIA suit.

The latest iteration was filed in 2013 against the State Department, seeking information about the employment of Abedin, at one time Clinton’s deputy chief of staff at State and a magnet for Clinton conspiracy theorists.

snip

That’s how the current suit started -- and for a moment, ended. After the State Department gave Judicial Watch the documents it was seeking, the two sides agreed to have the case dismissed in 2014.

******

Liberal Media =

[GWC58]

1. Liberal Media?

That makes me LOL! I know of no such beast!

[romana]

2. Judicial Watch

The media needs to stop being an arm of this organization, IMO. They should do their own investigation and reporting, not report JW's press releases and spin as news.

[Botany]

3. Every morning Joe S. and CNN repeat Judicial Watch's lies

Judicial watch is a right wing hit group .... end of story

[meow2u3]

4. Judicial Watch ought to be countersued

for defamation and investigated for vexatious litigation. Larry Klayman knows his allegations are nowhere near the truth, yet that doesn't stop him from pulling a Captain Ahab and persecuting the Clintons. I think HRC can prove defamation despite the hoops a public figure has to jump through to prove Klayman as the calumnious liar he is.

This persecution of HRC will end overnight if they successfully sue their RWNJ enemies. It wouldn't and shouldn't be for the money, but for the proof that she's been truthful--and maliciously slandered--all along. All she has to ask for in damages is a token amount of money.

[Historic NY]

5. Exactly they need to be taken on and exposed for what they are

swift-boaters using the guise of FOIL to intimidate.

[MichMan]

6. Apparently we only support the FOIA when it is used against the other side

Unfortunately, the Clinton advisors helped facilitate the FOIA requests being dragged out so close to the election.

Not sure how you prevail in a lawsuit against JW when the courts have consistently ruled in their favor. The only way to avoid the FOIA being used by your political opponents is to repeal it. Don't see anyone advocating for that

[politicaljunkie41910]

7. There was a post here on DU about a month ago regarding the fact that the State Dept

had recently stated that they had to hire an additional 44 employees to handle FOIA requests. The need to hire an additional 44 employees in order to respond to FOIA requests in a timely manner represents an abuse of the the law, and if it was happening against a GOP administration you can be damn sure they would be screaming "foul". Taxpayers should be pissed about this abuse of the FOIA law as well.

[UCmeNdc]

8. The Media does not even cover Trump's bribing of Texas' and Florida's DA ofices

This is how messed up the US press has become.

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/09/cnn-and-fox-news-keep-mum-about-trump-pay

[OnDoutside]

9. Whenever there's a JW associated release of Clinton/Democratic documents, the Democratic Party

need to be rushing out condemning whatever it is as part of a HIT JOB. They need to consistently frame it as such, and over time, it will force the narrative that it is of less value. But as a party the Democrats have been focused on dealing with the fallout from their release rather than the source. It has been an horrific mistake.