Clinton Email Scandal – Cheryl Mills Deposition – Clinton Email Was Not Subject to FOIA Inquiry (Full pdf Transcript)…

Judicial Watch has just released the deposition transcript of Hillary Clinton’s Chief of Staff, Ms. Cheryl Mills:

“I don’t know that I could articulate that there was a specific discussion as opposed to her continuation of the practice she had been using when she was a Senator. … I don’t have a specific memory of the conversations that may or may not have occurred. I know that I understood she was going to be using her personal email and that’s what she did.” [page 45]

when she was a Senator“?  A “Senator“.  Oopsies.

cheryl mills

Cheryl Mills (left) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (right)

Cheryl Mills testimony covered Clinton’s use of emails; whether FOIA searches were done of Clinton emails, information about the set-up of the Clinton email server; Mills’ communication with Clinton email witness Bryan Pagliano; Mills’ involvement in prior Clinton email controversies; and the handling of politically sensitive FOIA responses.  Mills’ attorneys directed her not to answer many questions.

During one part of the deposition Cheryl Mills admits that none of the Clinton email was able to be captured by FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests, because the State Department did not have access.  Excerpt:

ATTORNEY: Okay. So the Executive Secretariat’s office who manage the records, let’s say with the FOIA requests that implicated the Secretary’s e-mail, how did they go about searching for the Secretary’s e-mails in response to a FOIA request —

MILLS: So I don’t know —

ATTORNEY: — for her e-mail?

MILLS: I don’t know what their process was for how they went about that. Yeah. I don’t.

ATTORNEY: Okay. Did they have access to the Secretary’s e-mail account so they could search her e-mails in response to the FOIA request?

MILLLS: To my knowledge, they did not have access to her e-mail account. To my knowledge, the information where her e-mail was — if there was a topic that would have been related, would have been in the communications that she would have either had on paper, communications that she would have had in other materials that she received, or in exchanges that she had with e-mail with individuals on their State account.

ATTORNEY: And what about if the subject matter contained communications between the Secretary and others outside of the State Department?

MILLS: So I don’t know what would have been their process for how they would have captured that. And I think that’s one of the things that is a challenge and one of the things that I think as the Secretary has spoken about, it would have been smarter for her to have had or better for her to have had an account. And if she had it to do over again, she would…

…ATTORNEY: Okay. So did it ever occur to you when — from 2009 to 2013, before you left, that communications between the Secretary and, let’s say, you, to your personal e-mail account, that related to State business, that those actually weren’t available to the government or to the State Department to respond to FOIA requests?

MILLS: I wish it had. But no is the answer. In the sense of I was an overwhelming user of the State Department system. And so most of my communications with her and everybody else was on the State system. And I don’t think I reflected on were there occasions where there might still be something with respect to a personal e-mail where someone had either e-mailed me or I had responded back or the system had been down and we ultimately needed to use it, that there was information that hadn’t been captured. And I wish it had.

And remember that prior deposition by Lewis Lukens regarding the set-up for the non-secure office space across the hall?  [NOTE *SCIF = Secure Compartmentalized Information Facility.]

MILLS: So the State Department had advised — their diplomatic security team had advised that she could not use and none of the staff could use a BlackBerry inside the SCIF. Whether or not it was State or not issued by State, you couldn’t use a BlackBerry inside the SCIF. And so in order to be able to check your BlackBerrys, you needed to leave the seventh floor area where all our offices were. And so if you walked outside in the hallway or if you went to the counsel’s office, in her instance that would be an area that was not inside a secure space, and you could check your BlackBerry, whether or not that was a State BlackBerry or — or not a State BlackBerry…

…Inside. Secretary Clinton’s office is 100 percent inside the SCIF.

ATTORNEY: Okay. So the discussions with respect to the office across the hall, that’s in a different office from — that’s outside the Secretary’s office. Correct?

MILLS: That’s outside the Secretary’s office.

ATTORNEY: Okay.

MILLS: It’s also outside of the SCIF. So anyone can check their State or non-State BlackBerrys inside that office space.

ATTORNEY: Okay. Was the office set up across the hall for Secretary Clinton to use?

MILLS: Yes.

That 7th floor location being described, also where all of Clinton’s “please print” requests were carried out, is where the mysterious Thanksgiving “flash fire” took place.

MILLS: So I’m not familiar with a practice where she would print and save her e-mails. I obviously have seen a lot of e-mails where she would say, Please print. But I don’t know that she had a practice of printing and saving her e-mails.

A FOIA requests for information related to the Secretary came in to the front office, which in that instance would be the Executive Secretariat and the supporting staff. I can’t speak to what processes or protocols they went to. And I don’t want to understate them or overstate them. I don’t know.

Is this “fire issue” making more sense now?

Mills is among seven depositions of former Clinton top aides and State Department officials that Judicial Watch has scheduled over the next four weeks.  The next witness is Stephen Mull, the former executive secretary under Clinton.  Mull is scheduled to be deposed this Friday, June 3.  Former State IT employee Bryan Pagliano is scheduled to testify on Monday, June 6.  A State Department official designated by the agency (30(b)(6)) will testify on June 9.  Huma Abedin is scheduled to testify on June 28 and top State Department official Patrick Kennedy on June 29  (link to judicial watch)

Hillary - orange is the new black

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Clinton(s), Conspiracy ?, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Election 2016, Judicial Watch, media bias, Notorious Liars, Secretary of State, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

300 Responses to Clinton Email Scandal – Cheryl Mills Deposition – Clinton Email Was Not Subject to FOIA Inquiry (Full pdf Transcript)…

  1. BigMamaTEA says:

    page 143, established that Hillz used a BB, that was not a State Dept. BB.

    By page 148, we have established that State Dept.(DiplomaticSecurity) had advised that Hillz could not use, nor could her staff use, a BB, whether State issued or not, in the SCIF, which was the Executive Suites of the Secretary and her staff.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. BigMamaTEA says:

    page 172-173, Question: Ms. Mills, why did Secy Clinton choose not to have a State.gov email account?

    A: “I think she’s (Hillz) spoken for herself and said that part of what she was seeking was obviously the convenience of being able to use a common device, and so that’s what she did”

    *****Hillz had only apparently used a BB. She supposedly never used a pc of any type. The phrase “common device” actually means a device that was common to Hillz.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. BigMamaTEA says:

    page 173-174 {strictly from my interpretation – Hillz will try to use this to her defense, there was email requesting (Exhit 9) that discussion were held about whether or not Hillz would or wouldn’t get a State.gov BB.

    (A State Dept. BB CAME WITH a State.gov email addy.!) {Intent?! who knows)

    page 173-74 “So, ultimately what the department indicated was that she couldn’t use a BB whether or not it was State or not, inside the SCIF. (Hillz Suites) And so she ultimately didn’t end up then getting a State BB.” This is WAY too vague. Definition of word is is. Hillz will try to use this as well, they wouldn’t give me a NSA approved BB so I had to use my own.Which does not explain her not using a StateDept issued BB.But of course, that would have come with a StateDept. email addy!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  4. BigMamaTEA says:

    page 176, Exihibit 10 – Email from Stephen Mull to Mills, Mull is writing to Mills withj respect to a request from Secy for a dept.issued BB, to replace her personal unit.

    Mills – “You’re characterizing this email as about her BB. This email was actually about her communications equipment and communications equipment when she’s away from the department.”
    “Q: Okay, the personal unit that’s referenced there in – on the second page of the email, the last paragraph, is that not a BB? Is that not a reference to a BB?

    A: (Mills) So the–this graph does have a reference to a BB.
    My-my engagement was with respect to the communications equipment.I would anticipate that might be why he’s saying separately, my engagement with respect to the fact aht a frequent challenge for the Secy was being able to make phone calls, and not have those phone calls be dropped and secure calls be able to be-go through. So, my engagement was with respect to a set of issues around her communications, and in particular her ability to communicate effectively.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. BigMamaTEA says:

    page 177-178 – Stephen Mull, last page second paragraph. Q: “Separately we are working to provide per her request a dept.-issued BB to replace her personal unit.

    page 178 – Q: Okay. Then do you see where he writes in the next sentence, :We will prepare two versions for her to use, one with operating State Dept. email Acct which would mask her identity but which would also be subject to FOIA requests. Q: Do you know why he wrote that with respect to the State Dept email account and why he would write the reference to it being subject to FOIA requests?

    A: I know I don’t recall this email exchange (pg 179)I recall that there were discussion that I would have had about the fact that her secure calls and nonsecure calls and the comms equipment that was with her was not working (?) and that was a persistent challenge throughout her tenure.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. BigMamaTEA says:

    page 188 , Mills was being asked about FOIA searches specifically.
    A: To my knowledge, they did not have access to her (Hillz) email acct.

    Q: And what about if the subject matter contained communications between Secy and others outside the State Dept.? A: So,. I don’t know what would have been their process for how they would have captured that. It would’ve been better for her to have had an account. And if she had it to do over again, she would.

    page 189-190: Q:My question is whether you or anybody within the Secy office informed the Exec Secretariat when they were doing their searches to respond to FOIA implicating the Secy’s emails, that the Sec’y;s account was not on the State.gov email system?
    A: I don’t recall having that conversation about her account not being on the State.gov system.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. BigMamaTEA says:

    pages 255.(They address retention of records. IRM=Records management)

    Q: Ms.Mills, are you aware of- was there a memo that was prepared by the IRM staff for the Sec’y office regarding communications equipment in the Sec’y RESIDENCE which identified her SERVER back in 2009?
    A: Not that I’m aware of.

    At this point the JW Attorney rests, and Mrs.Wilkinson (Beth) takes over kind of like in rebuttal.

    page 257-259 – (Attempts rebuttal.) State business and how HIllz communicated. Wilkinson actually uses the word “server”, but then corrects to Clintonemail.com and did Mills understand whether that was on a server that Hillz set up or a server that was set up by Slick Willy, and when Mills came to understand this.

    Then Wilkinson as this question in the form of a statement of Q: And are there – is there information on the Clinton website right now about how documents were reviewed and how the server was used that’s available to the public as well as the people here who asked you questions? ******Something about this question/statement troubles me.Spidey senses.***

    Liked by 1 person

  8. BigMamaTEA says:

    page 263 by Ms. Berman, another one of half-dozen attorneys with Mills.
    A: Do you have any reason to believe that Sec’y Clinton used clintonemail.com to conduct government business because she or anyone else at the State Dept. was seeking to avoid FOIA? A: Absolutely not. ****At this point JW Attny objects and takes over, and starts asking about who was responsible for FOIA.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. BigMamaTEA says:

    Starting with page 265……..Mills starts playing her

    And, essentially, we are done.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. BigMamaTEA says:

    BREAKING Clinton Tech Aide Bryan Pagliano Plans to Take the Fifth at Deposition

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/bryan-pagliano-fifth-amendment-223796

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s