State Dept. Withheld Key Email From Clinton’s Private Server in FOIA Lawsuit

[seafan]

Source: LawNewz

The State Department has now acknowledged that it withheld a key Benghazi e-mail in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed in July 2014. The State Department acknowledged finding the e-mail in 2014, but it was withheld in its entirety until last week.

This latest admission comes in a FOIA lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch, a conservative legal watchdog group, that seeks records related to the drafting and use of the Benghazi talking points. According to Judicial Watch, it contradicts an earlier admission made by the State Department in the same lawsuit. In a letter dated April 18, 2016, the State Department writes:

.....
.....

The document in question is an e-mail from then Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan addressed to Hillary Clinton concerning Benghazi talking points to be used in discussions with Senators. Although redacted almost in its entirety, the e-mail is important because it contains Clinton’s private e-mail server address, [email protected]. Had the State Department disclosed the e-mail at the time of the 2014 FOIA request, it would have exposed Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server to conduct official State Department business in the early fall of 2014. The timing is significant because the disclosure would have occurred several months before the Clinton campaign says she deleted several thousand “personal” e-mails.

.....

As LawNewz.com previously reported, U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth was the second federal judge to grant discovery to Judicial Watch in a FOIA lawsuit. In his order, Judge Lamberth found discovery was appropriate due to the “evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith” on behalf of the State Department in the manner in which they responded to these FOIA requests.


Read more: http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/state-dept-withheld-key-email-from-clintons-private-server-in-foia-lawsuit/

---

The wheels of justice grind onward.

[zalinda]

2. The more lies that Hillary tells. eom

[pnwmom]

63. Of course you don't want to hear what the State Department response is.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/watchdog-says-state-department-withheld-clinton-email-two-years/

Update 5:06 P.M.: A State Department official told the Free Beacon that the November 2014 date in the court filing was an administrative error. The State Department said it first received the document in June 2015, and disclosed the decision to withhold in July 2015. The department said it would be filing a correction.

“The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation,” said a State Department official. “Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.”

[leveymg]

76. "Admin error" is basically the same as an admission. It's called Contempt, maybe Obstruction. Judge

Lamberth is not amused.

[pnwmom]

78. No, it isn't. It was equivalent to a typo. And Judge Lamberth is a notorious Rethug. nt

[leveymg]

80. Please explain how this is plausibly a "typo"?

He's the senior federal judge in the DC Circuit. Show us how he's biased. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

[CoffeeCat]

79. Free Beacon? You insult us whenever anything is posted from that site

Can't have it both ways.

Anyway, this is nothing more than the State Department coming up with an excuse. Administrative error? Hilarious.

[NWCorona]

85. Exactly! I've seen fox, twitchy, free beacon, Christian science monitor used against Bernie

But God help a Bernie supporter who uses a video purely of Hillary that happens to have a fox logo.

[840high]

89. Christian Science Monitor is a good

news source - always has been.

[NWCorona]

91. But let it be used against Hillary.

I'm not arguing against your point.

[tabasco]

4. Nope, just more poor judgment by a former Secretary of State.

Poor judgment seems to be the hallmark of H. Clinton's career.

[pnwmom]

73. No, just another false anti-Obama administration story being spread on DU.

The original story had a State Dept. correction but why post that? That's no fun.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/watchdog-says-state-department-withheld-clinton-email-two-years/

Update 5:06 P.M.: A State Department official told the Free Beacon that the November 2014 date in the court filing was an administrative error. The State Department said it first received the document in June 2015, and disclosed the decision to withhold in July 2015. The department said it would be filing a correction.

“The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation,” said a State Department official. “Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.”

[tabasco]

82. Is it false that H. Clinton showed bad judgment

by using a home server for classified government email?

[sharp_stick]

7. Now it's Judicial Watch being lauded

interesting company being kept on a so called Democratic message board.

Just in the last couple of days I've seen breathless quotes from the above named shithole itself along with Brietbart, The Washington Times and even fucking Newsmax and the website of Larry Klayman.

[Kelvin Mace]

11. Yep, nasty people

That, however, in no way changes the facts at hand. HRC showed incredibly poor judgment, at best, in running an government email server from the basement of her home.

[Human101948]

12. I have vehemently defended Hillary on this issue for a long time...

and then I realized that, yes, she was incredibly stupid to set up her own server and email.

[Kelvin Mace]

13. For a person who is supposed to a savvy politician

she seems clueless as to how things she does look to people, especially her enemies.

[TipTok]

26. Why would she care? She's never faced any consequences for it.

Last edited Wed Apr 27, 2016, 11:16 AM - Edit history (1)

The worst that she has faced was her loss in 2008 with the knowledge that she was 'due' in 2016.

[Hiraeth]

65. and they said Regan was teflon .

[KoKo]

84. Recommend...very interesting

[frylock]

19. Any opinion on the actual subject of the OP?

[sharp_stick]

29. It's just more Benghazi bullshit

No more no less.

[frylock]

30. No, it's more Clinton secretive governance.

[sharp_stick]

33. It's a Republican witch hunt

Fuck them all.

[frylock]

37. You keep telling yourself that.

In fact, I encourage the denial. It's going to make it all the sweeter to behold when the shit hits the fan.

[sharp_stick]

44. I'll keep that in mind

When the FBI recommends no charges I look forward to the same people howling and quoting Larry Klayman about the massive conspiracy.

[frylock]

48. Whatever it takes to get you through the night.

[Ash_F]

59. One of the judges was appointed by her husband.

[840high]

90. If it lets you sleep

at night - keep denying the truth.

[pnwmom]

70. The State Department issued a statement saying they did NOT withhold the email.

And the original Free Beacon article updated their report but the update isn't spreading to all the other outlets that jumped on the story.


http://freebeacon.com/issues/watchdog-says-state-department-withheld-clinton-email-two-years/

Update 5:06 P.M.: A State Department official told the Free Beacon that the November 2014 date in the court filing was an administrative error. The State Department said it first received the document in June 2015, and disclosed the decision to withhold in July 2015. The department said it would be filing a correction.

“The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation,” said a State Department official. “Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.”

[frylock]

83. "administrative error"

mmm-hmmmnn.

[angrychair]

21. Give it a rest

No one here is supporting the mission or issues supported by Judicial Watch.
What we are supporting is a lawfully submitted Freedom of Information Act request that the State Dept made the choice to ignore and therefore likely broke the law.
Just because you don't like them, does not mean you can just ignore a lawful and legitimate FOIA request.

More importantly, though the JW request seems to get a lot of press here, there is a much bigger picture. That same FIOA request in question was also part of one by the Associated Press, which was also ignored. That is just one example among many from several organizations that potentially had lawful and legitimate FOIA request ignored by the State Dept.
There is a bigger picture here, it's about the law and government transparency. Not everything and everyone are partisan.

[Ferd Berfel]

28. did SoS leave out a key email or not?

Regardless of who discovered the blatant omission

[floppyboo]

39. I'm guessing this is the gap in emails discovered by hacker Guccifer

who leaked a hacked Sid Blumenthal account and extradited by the FBI.

[JimDandy]

32. How awful

that no liberal news sources are reporting this, but it's no longer surprising.

[sharp_stick]

45. Well mainstream and liberal sources sometimes do a decent job of avoiding

Republican horseshit.

[truebluegreen]

56. Who are you kidding?

They wallow in it, as long as it suits their purposes.

"mainstream" and "liberal"

[Lordquinton]

47. That might mean something

If Clinton's negative campaign weren't being run by David Brock, the guy who brought us Justice Thomas.

[AlbertCat]

57. Now it's Judicial Watch being lauded

Lauded? Where?

They may be asking for info, but I don't see any adoration for the group being displayed.

[pnwmom]

67. The story was corrected by the State Department but of course we're still repeating the false

report.


http://freebeacon.com/issues/watchdog-says-state-department-withheld-clinton-email-two-years/

Update 5:06 P.M.: A State Department official told the Free Beacon that the November 2014 date in the court filing was an administrative error. The State Department said it first received the document in June 2015, and disclosed the decision to withhold in July 2015. The department said it would be filing a correction.

“The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation,” said a State Department official. “Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.”

[AlbertCat]

81. Fascinating!

But I still don't see Judicial Watch being "lauded".

[frylock]

18. Yeah, I'm sure it was a mere oversight.

drip drip drip

[2naSalit]

3. The world is coming to an end

The sky is falling! But of course, it's because Sec. Clinton continues to breathe.

[JDPriestly]

10. After her public and very ugly dismissal of Bernie on MSNBC last night,

I do not want Hillary Clinton in charge of our military or our foreign policy. She is by virtue of her personality completely unqualified to manage the foreign affairs of our country.

She could not even manage her marriage, much less our foreign policy. I say that as a woman who has been married 53 years to the same man. Her outburst in her response to Rachel's question about whether she would adopt any of Bernie's stances showed why Hillary should not be president. A president cannot say the first ugly, angry thing that comes to his or her mind. Hillary should not have been Secretary of State or in any way dealing with the leaders of other countries. She doesn't know how to negotiate or show respect for others.

[2naSalit]

14. It's your

right to feel that way and I am not one to deny you that. But I tend to disagree.

[reddread]

20. thank you

I am pleased to realize I had no idea of your gender or age bracket and honored to benefit from your postings.
A little honest, intelligent insight and opinion is like a watering hole in the desert.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

27. She has no respect for others.

This I know from personal experience with her. She has never changed, she only has gotten more devious and sky in her lies.

[Ferd Berfel]

31. never charged

neither were any of the heads of teh Wall Street banks who crashed the economy then blackmailed us.

[silvershadow]

35. The Hill-Billy Express is on a singular, narcissistic train track. Me! Me! Me! nt

[840high]

93. Always has been - always will be.

[2banon]

36. +1000

[drokhole]

61. And I'd say brazen and unapologetic.

And her sycophantic fan club (and digital task force!) only emboldens her.

[dchill]

46. I know, right? It's like one meltdown after another.

And that's before you even get to the corrupt.

[JDPriestly]

49. It's horrible. I want Bernie to stay in the race no matter what

because Hillary could easily completely, as you say, melt down before the November election.

Hillary appears to be losing it, losing control of herself.

This primary is a test of a candidate's ability to deal with enormous stress, and she is not doing well.

Obama is a master of dealing with stress. We are going to miss him for that reason. He is just amazing at remaining in control of himself no matter what happens. We are really going to miss him. I don't agree with everything he has done but what a great man.

[dchill]

52. He will.

He said he would. He's not the flip flopper in this deal.

[Enthusiast]

54. Right on, JD!

[nyabingi]

5. Her emails show the inner workings

of how the US goes about regime change. That all our State Department is used for these days and Hillary was quite busy during her short tenure.

[COLGATE4]

17. Yeah, that must be it.

[840high]

92. Yes she was.

[demwing]

6. "wrong-doing and bad faith"

The de facto Clinton campaign slogan

[leftofcool]

8. Rethuglican judicial watch. LMAO

[Human101948]

15. It's not about Judicial Watch, it's about her incredibly bad decision to set up her own email system

Without that they would not have anything to go after her about.

It's about the perception, fair or not, that the Clintons are always doing something that isn't quite above board.

[angrychair]

23. being so entitled that the law doesn't apply to you is so funny right

No one here is supporting the mission or issues supported by Judicial Watch.
What we are supporting is a lawfully submitted Freedom of Information Act request that the State Dept made the choice to ignore and therefore likely broke the law.
Just because you don't like them, does not mean you can just ignore a lawful and legitimate FOIA request.

More importantly, though the JW request seems to get a lot of press here, there is a much bigger picture. That same FIOA request in question was also part of one by the Associated Press, which was also ignored. That is just one example among many from several organizations that potentially had lawful and legitimate FOIA request ignored by the State Dept.
There is a bigger picture here, it's about the law and government transparency. Not everything and everyone are partisan.

[2banon]

38. Just like Bush/Cheney.. that's what we're in for. Ground Hog Day again and again and again

being so entitled that the law doesn't apply to you is so funny right

[Ash_F]

60. Ruled against by a judge her hubby appointed LMAO

[SoapBox]

9. The Corrupt Clintons...

How can people even think of voting for her?

She has no morals, no scruples and it untrustworthy.

[2naSalit]

16. Not from my perspective...

and I will be voting for her every time she comes up on the ballot, which I suspect will be twice.

[pnwmom]

66. The State Department corrected this story in response to the Free Beacon's original

report.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/watchdog-says-state-department-withheld-clinton-email-two-years/

Update 5:06 P.M.: A State Department official told the Free Beacon that the November 2014 date in the court filing was an administrative error. The State Department said it first received the document in June 2015, and disclosed the decision to withhold in July 2015. The department said it would be filing a correction.

“The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation,” said a State Department official. “Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.”

[Laser102]

88. I don't believe the Hillary haters are interested in facts. It doesn't mesh with their opinions.

[vkkv]

22. The people who DO CARE about HRC's emails will be voting GOP anyway.. no vote count gets changed..

Still, I'm not a huge fan of hers...

Not one politician is completely clean of wrong-doing.

[2pooped2pop]

25. I care about the emails, and I will not vote for her

[vkkv]

34. In the General Election? That was what I meant.. not the the Primary, I wasn't clear there..n/t

[2pooped2pop]

75. no vote for Clinton, now or ever

not from me. There comes a time when you have to say enough. They don't take the left seriously because they know they will always fall for that "you'd let a republican get elected?" bullshit.

If you don't want a republican as president, I guess you should not have voted for republican lite.

[haikugal]

77. They don't want us and we won't vote for her. Period.

Enough is enough and besides, they're counting on republicans to recognize one of their own and vote for her. So they think they can win with that.

[Cryptoad]

24. Ohhhh NO,,, EMAILS,,,,, Oh the horror of it all!,,Drink!

[Arizona Roadrunner]

40. Bernie better stay in the race. Clinton may be a goner soon!!!

[JDPriestly]

51. The stress is getting to her. If she can't deal with the stress of the

campaign, how will she deal with the stress in the White House?

I'm a woman, and I am not being sexist.

I have dealt with a lot of stress in my life, not the kind she is facing, but I have been the rock for my family and often for my friends. Hillary is losing it. Her answer to Rachel Maddow's question about adopting some of Bernie's stances showed just how much she is losing her cool. I don't want her in the White House after seeing that.

[Uncle Joe]

41. Drip drip drip.

Thanks for the thread, seafan.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

42. Interesting that her email address begins with the initials "hdr..."

I wonder if she wants to be sworn in as "Hillary Rodham Clinton" or "Hillary Diane Rodham".

[Autumn]

43. So Obama's State Department had this e mail and withheld it? She was gone by then?

[AzDar]

50. She is corrupt AND incompetent...How can anyone support a candidate so thoroughly compromised?

[Kingofalldems]

53. Oh my God! Hillary received an email!!

Throw her in jail right now.

Benghazi!!

[dlwickham]

55. Lots of bridges have been left unattended

Some of these posters need to go home

[antigop]

58. So why was it released last week? Was this part of the discovery process or something else? nt

[seafan]

86. Some things of note:

In the letter from the State Dept. to Judicial Watch on April 18, 2016:

Also, upon further review, the Department has determined that one document previously withheld in full in our letter dated November 12, 2014 may now be released in part.

An enclosure explains the FOIA exemptions and other grounds for withholding material. Where we have made excisions, the applicable FOIA exemptions are marked on each document. For the five documents withheld in full, we have cited FOIA Exemption 5, 5 U.S.C. § 552 (b)(5). In some cases, two or more exemptions may apply to the same document. All non-exempt material that is reasonably segregable from the exempt material has been released. All released material is enclosed.

The letter is signed by Eric F. Stein, Acting Co-Director of the Office of Information Programs and Services at the U. S. Department of State.


Interestingly, the Exemption 5, 552 (b)(5) refers to 'interagency or intra-agency communications forming part of the deliberative process, attorney-client privilege, or attorney work product.'

Concerning close adviser Sidney Blumenthal, perhaps, where she is 'the attorney'? The guy that Obama banned from any capacity at State? The one that SOS Clinton relied on anyway for 'interesting' intel from Libya, for example?

To cite another striking example, Mr. Blumenthal sent then-Secretary of State Ms. Clinton reports on the political situation in Libya written by a former senior CIA officer, the recently deceased Tyler Drumheller. Those reports, which Mr. Blumenthal emailed to her in 2011 and 2012, apparently were intended to influence American policy toward Libya in a way favorable to a business project with which Mr. Blumenthal and Mr. Drumheller were involved.

Yeah, that Sid Blumenthal.


And here is the withheld email that is under scrutiny, written September 29, 2012.

It's nearly 100% redacted, but clearly visible is Clinton's private email address, '[email protected]' .

This is going to end up being the least of her problems. Why she expects this country to continue to carry all of this crushing Clinton baggage into the White House for another era of turmoil is both unthinkable and profoundly dismaying.


It's time we moved beyond this morass and chart a new course for our country.

[One_Life_To_Give]

62. (Obama) Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government.

For all the Pledges coming from the Whitehouse, re being transparent. It appears the bureaucracy is still committed to telling the Peons to FOAD.

[pnwmom]

64. The State Department corrected this story in response to the Free Beacon's original

report.

Normally, I wouldn't post a story from the Free Beacon, but they are the outlet that posted the original story that was then echoed elsewhere, such as LawNewz, and the State Department contacted them with a correction.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/watchdog-says-state-department-withheld-clinton-email-two-years/

Update 5:06 P.M.: A State Department official told the Free Beacon that the November 2014 date in the court filing was an administrative error. The State Department said it first received the document in June 2015, and disclosed the decision to withhold in July 2015. The department said it would be filing a correction.

“The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation,” said a State Department official. “Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.”

[Justice]

68. Thank you for posting the correction.

[Sunlei]

69. The State Department made an error, it was 2015, NOT 2014. They have informed Judicial watch.

of course our political/corporate driven American media and never-Clinton-club, will hang on to the error forever.

[pnwmom]

71. Right. Here's more.

http://freebeacon.com/issues/watchdog-says-state-department-withheld-clinton-email-two-years/

Update 5:06 P.M.: A State Department official told the Free Beacon that the November 2014 date in the court filing was an administrative error. The State Department said it first received the document in June 2015, and disclosed the decision to withhold in July 2015. The department said it would be filing a correction.

“The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation,” said a State Department official. “Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.”

[Festivito]

87. ^^^ This ^^^ DU LINK to UPDATE on correction from State Department.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027783233

[GummyBearz]

72. If she becomes president after this fiasco, I wonder if she will request her server returned for use

I mean, she can't figure out how to use the secure computers, so she will need it back right?

[pnwmom]

74. Why did you omit the State Dept's official response that the claim was untrue?

From your link:


6:40 p.m. UPDATE:

On Tuesday afternoon a State Department official issued the following statement:

The State Department generally does not comment on matters in litigation. Here, however, there is confusion arising from an administrative error in recent correspondence in which the Department said that the document in question was withheld in November 2014. That is incorrect. The complete facts surrounding this document are set forth in a public court filing from July 2015. As described in the attached filing, the Department received the document in June 2015 from members of former Secretary Clinton’s senior staff, and did not withhold it until that time. The Department regrets any confusion and will be sending corrected correspondence to Judicial Watch.?