Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

seafan

(9,387 posts)
76. “Based on information learned during discovery, the deposition of Mrs. Clinton may be necessary,”
Wed May 4, 2016, 06:05 PM
May 2016
The Hill: Federal judge opens the door to Clinton deposition in email case, May 4, 2016


A federal judge on Wednesday opened the door to interviewing Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton as part of a review into her use of a private email server while secretary of State.

Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia laid out the ground rules for interviewing multiple State Department officials about the emails, with an eye toward finishing the depositions in the weeks before the party nominating conventions.

.....

“Based on information learned during discovery, the deposition of Mrs. Clinton may be necessary,” Sullivan said in an order on Wednesday.

.....

Any deposition would surely roil the presidential race and force her campaign to confront the issue, which has dogged her for a year.

“Her legal team is really going to fight that really hard,” predicted Matthew Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney who has raised questions about Clinton’s email setup.

“You have to take her deposition in this case to fully understand how it was designed and the whys and the what-fors.”

While leaving the door open to Clinton’s eventual deposition, Sullivan on Wednesday ordered at least six current and former State Department employees to answer questions from Judicial Watch, which has filed multiple lawsuits over the Clinton email case.

That list includes longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin, former chief of staff Cheryl Mills, under secretary for management Patrick Kennedy, former executive secretary Stephen Mull and Bryan Pagliano, the IT official believed to be responsible for setting up and maintaining the server.

The judge also ordered the State Department to prepare a formal answer about Clinton’s emails. Donald Reid, a senior security official, may also be asked to answer questions, if Judicial Watch so decides.

That process is scheduled to be wrapped up within eight weeks, putting the deadline in the final week of June.

.....



The final week of June is going to be an interesting one.

Added to this mix is the US release of the documentary film Clinton Cash, on July 24 in Philadelphia, on the eve of the Democratic National Convention. This film examines the intersection of her tenure as Secretary of State with the massive accumulation of private funds taken in by the Clinton Foundation, much of it from foreign sources, as she allegedly directed favors toward those entities. This separate track of investigation of Secretary Clinton's activities while at State is now ongoing by the FBI, in addition to the homebrew server under current scrutiny.

And today, more indication of how much trouble with independent support she has. What is her plan to surmount this?

Independents Are Souring on Hillary Clinton, May 4, 2016

.....

An April Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found that Mrs. Clinton’s favorability rating among independents had dropped 15 percentage points in the previous four months. That poll found that 20% of independents viewed Mrs. Clinton positively, compared with 62% who viewed her negatively. In January, that same poll found her with a positive rating of 35% and a negative rating of 54%.
In January 2015, four months before she launched her presidential campaign, that gap stood at just 4 percentage points—35% positive to 39% negative.

The poll also suggested the heated Democratic primary race took a toll on her standing among Democrats. Her positive rating among Democrats dropped to 63% last month from 71% in January, while her negative rating rose six points to 20%. Last April, when she first announced she was running for president, 76% of Democrats viewed her positively while just 8% viewed her negatively.

While declining favorability ratings are common for presidential candidates as voters learn more about them, the striking decline in independents’ view of Mrs. Clinton is indicative of the popularity of Mr. Sanders, who served in the Senate as an independent before running for president as a Democrat.

The Vermont senator is far more popular among independents and has ramped up his criticism of Mrs. Clinton in recent months, even as his path to winning the nomination looks increasingly narrow.

.....


From this graph, it is painfully obvious why she much prefers "closed" primaries that shut out Independents from voting. The problem lies in the "wins" she boasts among such a tiny slice of the general electorate, 30% who call themselves Democrats. How will the other 70% vote in November? She is locked in this box of her own making, and will never make it through November, not when the majority of the electorate is rebelling against Establishment candidates.





And, today, John Kasich is out of the presidential race, leaving Donald Trump plenty of time and opportunity now to go after Clinton's weaknesses. From what we've seen, he will have no obstacle.

For Hillary Clinton, the next few months are going to be brutal.


It must be getting acutely uncomfortable for the superdelegates right now, many of whom "declared loyalty" to Clinton even prior to Bernie Sanders entering the race.

These are devastating reasons for a candidate to try to whitewash as the public looks on in horror.


It is time for her to curb her singular ambition and to step aside for a popular and authentic candidate to take the helm against Donald Trump. Fifty-seven percent of Democrats are now saying it is important that Bernie Sanders stays in the race all the way to the convention.

It is the one thing from her that we as a country will be grateful.




Now folks, this is important. Delay is not an option. N/T Paper Roses May 2016 #1
what does tom delay have to do with this? niyad May 2016 #4
Wow. I think that actually caused me some brain damage. RiverNoord May 2016 #84
Ha ha...' niyad' made a funny laserhaas May 2016 #114
Not looking good for Her Majesty. BillZBubb May 2016 #2
Heard this one for years. beastie boy May 2016 #34
Judicial Watch----Yawn! maxrandb May 2016 #3
Judge Sullivan is a Bill Clinton nominee to the bench. alp227 May 2016 #5
Nope. Appointed by Reagan, promoted by Poppy Bush. COLGATE4 May 2016 #47
Appointed by Reagan, then Poppy Bush, then Clinton. Ford_Prefect May 2016 #73
Reagan/Bush RW judge threatens Hillary in Crazy Larry Klayman suit. COLGATE4 May 2016 #7
Emmett G. Sullivan is a Bill Clinton nominee to the bench nt alp227 May 2016 #14
United States District Judge for the District of Columbia atreides1 May 2016 #24
No. elleng May 2016 #29
Can't you read what you post? Your link says exactly the same thing. COLGATE4 May 2016 #46
"On June 16, 1994, Judge Sullivan was appointed by President Bill Clinton" arcane1 May 2016 #51
'On June 16, 1994, Judge Sullivan was appointed by President Bill Clinton elleng May 2016 #55
Same Wikipedia entry COLGATE4 May 2016 #60
Doesnt matter, they will use ANY source to attack Hillary. Actor May 2016 #78
It is really getting tiresome. Some days I don't know whether I'm on COLGATE4 May 2016 #104
Both of you are correct. LiberalArkie May 2016 #69
Repeating it doesn't make it true. COLGATE4 May 2016 #48
Who was promoted twice by RW Presidents. COLGATE4 May 2016 #63
Well, twice by Republicans, and once by a triangulating "Centrist". bvar22 May 2016 #89
Why are you telling lies about the judge? Disagree with him if you want, but why lie? arcane1 May 2016 #15
They lie because it's all that they have. RoccoR5955 May 2016 #42
What lies am I telling about him. He is a Reagan appointee, promoted COLGATE4 May 2016 #44
"Appointed by Bill Clinton" you conveniently ignore. arcane1 May 2016 #49
Kind of like the current nominee for Scalia's seat, Dustlawyer May 2016 #57
No idea why Bill first appointed him. But he certainly comes with COLGATE4 May 2016 #62
Truth matters - I read the link, what struck me was that he was appointed by Bill Clinton on merbex May 2016 #59
Then look at your link again COLGATE4 May 2016 #61
Do you have a problem understanding how Federal Judges are appointed? merbex May 2016 #68
Which tells you something about his political leanings. COLGATE4 May 2016 #70
When poor people break the law they are predators who need punishment. Jemmons May 2016 #77
OMFG. "Justice is crying in her cell." COLGATE4 May 2016 #79
Being eloquent does not save you from being wrong. Jemmons May 2016 #106
Yeah, I'll get right on that. nt COLGATE4 May 2016 #110
There is a prize to Starr that phrase into a short story. greiner3 May 2016 #111
Ouch. Just ouch. RiverNoord May 2016 #88
Everyone is correct LiberalArkie May 2016 #72
They hounded Bill Clinton over Whitewater for years WhiteTara May 2016 #9
Hills hid her Whitewater billing records for two years; lied to grand jury Divernan May 2016 #39
OMFG. Whitewater. Benghazi. Rose Law Firm. COLGATE4 May 2016 #52
It's what we trial lawyers call a pattern of behavior. Divernan May 2016 #65
Really? I don't think that's a pattern of behavior you'd COLGATE4 May 2016 #67
The scandals may have been imaginary elljay May 2016 #81
She's a peach isn't she? She is, without a doubt, one of the biggest control freaks in government merbex May 2016 #66
The records were exculpatory creeksneakers2 May 2016 #80
Miraculously found days after statute to sue HRC expired Divernan May 2016 #99
This is ridiculous. potone May 2016 #109
Some of Clinton's cronies were convicted in Whitewater. Akicita May 2016 #71
Mostly not cronies. creeksneakers2 May 2016 #82
The McDougals and Web Hubbel were definitely Clinton cronies. Akicita May 2016 #105
The developer got in trouble and went to jail. WhiteTara May 2016 #103
The judge may be a wing-nut, but he IS a federal judge Kelvin Mace May 2016 #18
I guess the important distinction is that you are not a federal judge. Bye now. nt thereismore May 2016 #43
U.S. District Court Judge does not work for tomm2thumbs May 2016 #6
Ask them how white water worked out for them leftofcool May 2016 #11
ask the current judge? tomm2thumbs May 2016 #12
Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow. frylock May 2016 #28
No, and no Federal judge ever let his political orientation COLGATE4 May 2016 #53
.... asuhornets May 2016 #8
judicial watch.............enough said! leftofcool May 2016 #10
Federal Judge.............enough said! frylock May 2016 #31
maybe she can ask for immunity in return for testifying tomm2thumbs May 2016 #13
Or move her fundraisers to the DC Circuit courthouse! Divernan May 2016 #102
Busted SusanLarson May 2016 #16
she seemed to indicate this in an ABC News story tomm2thumbs May 2016 #17
Where did you graduate Law School? COLGATE4 May 2016 #54
Hillary is immune from Section b. Akicita May 2016 #74
To evade public records disclosure? LOL! Prove it!!! Judicial watch and Klayman, nuff said. Laser102 May 2016 #19
Hence the inquiry, genius. nt thereismore May 2016 #40
Drip...Drip... SoapBox May 2016 #20
Yap...Yap... beastie boy May 2016 #41
Who the heck has ever said "She will never run"?! Old Crow May 2016 #87
Right wingers have been saying it years ago beastie boy May 2016 #90
Huh. You may be right. Old Crow May 2016 #91
her candidacy was a given to me too. She is just too ambitious to have passed it up, and she beastie boy May 2016 #92
Well, that's understandable. Old Crow May 2016 #93
"Accord is a lot more pleasant than discord." beastie boy May 2016 #94
Judicial Watch SusanLarson May 2016 #21
Or you beastie boy May 2016 #37
link to more info and the order magical thyme May 2016 #22
What's she going to do? Say yes? joshcryer May 2016 #23
'which are to be conducted over the next eight weeks' elleng May 2016 #25
my guess is... tomm2thumbs May 2016 #27
Could be, tomm, elleng May 2016 #33
That was the right wingers' hope, so they could damage the undamaged Bernie beastie boy May 2016 #45
cough gack sputter... frylock May 2016 #26
sounds familiar desmiller May 2016 #64
Piece. Of. Cake! fred v May 2016 #30
remember --------- this is not any part of the FBI investigation. grasswire May 2016 #32
"There have been at least three dozen civil lawsuits filed, including one by The Associated Press" Babel_17 May 2016 #35
Why delete any of the emails ? maindawg May 2016 #36
With such an authoritarian pronouncement I imagine you COLGATE4 May 2016 #56
A sworn deposition is just a signed piece of carefully legalistically crafted paper. Correct me if thereismore May 2016 #38
You're wrong. A sworn deposition is the transcribed record of one party's attorneys COLGATE4 May 2016 #58
Then they scramble and scour everything imaginable Gman May 2016 #50
Interesting precedent to set that a group other than Congress The Second Stone May 2016 #75
You are confusing two issues. BillZBubb May 2016 #95
I got that. If a FOIA plaintiff can question a cabinet secretary about The Second Stone May 2016 #96
Again you miss the point. They aren't going after top secret emails. BillZBubb May 2016 #97
No, I got that too. This opens up every department of the government where The Second Stone May 2016 #100
“Based on information learned during discovery, the deposition of Mrs. Clinton may be necessary,” seafan May 2016 #76
The operative word is "may." IOW, he kicked the decision-can down the road. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #83
And Trump may have to testify in the Trump University lawsuit left-of-center2012 May 2016 #85
Right now they're talking about a trial in the fall. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #86
So you're going with "our crook is better than your crook"? BillZBubb May 2016 #98
This is going to get REALLY Messy FreakinDJ May 2016 #101
It's only going to get "messy" maxrandb May 2016 #107
FUCK the Purity Testing FreakinDJ May 2016 #108
kick warrprayer May 2016 #112
Judicial Watch Progressive dog May 2016 #113
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»US Judge: Clinton may be ...»Reply #76