Judicial Watch Submits 25 Questions To Hillary Clinton About Personal Email Use – Responses Due September 29th…

Judicial Watch was one of the first organizations to discover the hidden use of Hillary Clinton’s private email account to keep activity hidden from public review.

As a consequence of a long standing Judicial Watch FIOA court battle over State Department documents relating to the private email and private server, Judicial Watch requested to depose Secretary Clinton to answer questions.

clinton emailsHillary clinton meh

The request for direct deposition was denied by the court, choosing instead to first order questions be asked/answered in writing.  Whereby: on August 19, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan granted Judicial Watch further discovery on the Clinton email matter and ordered Secretary Hillary Clinton to answer the questions “by no later than thirty days thereafter….”

Under federal court rules, Judicial Watch was limited to twenty-five questions.  Today Judicial Watch submitted the questions, starting the 30 day clock for responses.


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

112 Responses to Judicial Watch Submits 25 Questions To Hillary Clinton About Personal Email Use – Responses Due September 29th…

  1. fromawaysite says:

    Reblogged this on Today,s Thought.


  2. ZurichMike says:

    Due just the first debate, so it may be a topic for questioning at the debate, right? [slapping my own face] Who am I kidding.

    Liked by 11 people

    • ctdar says:



    • Concerned says:

      i know. If this were Trump it would consume 75% of the debate, and there would be prepared graphics. But it’s Hillary so of course it won’t come up. (smh)


      • Bob says:

        Hopefully this is the noose tightening, not just more real evidence that will be swept under the rug.
        The Clinton rugs must be pretty lumpy by now with all the criminal activities that have gone on without
        any of them being prosecuted.

        Can you imagine the amount of money and the number of agents that she has working for her. Not only here in the USA, but overseas, in big business and high places of government.

        It will be interesting to read or hear the answers that she will present. Probably, won’t make sense as usual…..but we can hope.

        If the questions don’t come up in the debates…then we should start thinking there’s something fishy in the Republican camp, that will throw this election.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Victor Lazslo says:

      Since the questions were submitted today, they are due 30 days later. That puts it past the first debate. That’s my reading anyway.


    • Rita Witzel says:

      First debate is September 26th…she has until the 29th to submit her answers…which do you think she will choose ???


  3. Ellie says:

    At this point, what difference does it make????

    Hmmmm???? Hillary? Please answer the questions!


    • Political Reviewer says:

      Q1: Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational.
      A1: (Hillary) I don’t remember.
      Q2: Describe the creation of your clintonemail.com email account, including who decided to create it, when it was created, why it was created, and, if you did not set up the account yourself, who set it up for you.
      A2: (Hillary) I don’t know.
      A3 through A25: (Hillary) Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

      Liked by 3 people

  4. LBH says:

    Rock, meet hard place.
    Q21: After you left office, did you believe you could alter, destroy, disclose, or use email you sent or received concerning official State Department business as you saw fit? If not, why not?

    Liked by 4 people

    • quintrillion says:

      Very Best direct question, LBH

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sentient says:

      That’s arguably 5 separate questions. At least that’s the position that – I predict – Hillary will take. Unless the court specifically OK’d all of these “questions” (which I don’t think it has), I doubt she’ll fully comply. #25 is hardly even a question. It’s a command. To argue Hillary’s side of it, Judicial Watch can’t just format a whole bunch of questions and commands into 25 separate paragraphs and claim that they’ve limited their questions to 25.


      • LBB says:

        Well, it will be interesting to see which ones she avoids if they stick to only 25 answers.


        • redlegleader68 says:

          Perhaps JW knows this, is expecting this, and will reformat each into a very direct question.

          Liked by 1 person

          • JW is no wet behind the ears kid.

            These people know what they are doing.

            They probably already know or at least can make a good guess as to how Hilary will try and weasel out of answering these questions.

            They are well prepared for the next round of her old, tired tricks.

            No wonder Hilary is looking older, sicker and more tired every day and shows up to parties in her housecoat.

            Ours is definitely the winning team. Trump/Pence 2016

            Liked by 2 people

        • andi lee says:

          Are they (additional questions a subset of original question) not considered rebuttal questions enlight of Judge denying the in-person deposition?


      • Trumpedinillinos says:

        Exactly. I’ve seen such objections many times. What will happen is they will probably either seek the court’s guidance which will take additional time or they will simply answer the first 25 actual questions and object to the rest. This again will delay.


  5. ctdar says:

    How about just askin her to define the word Treason ?

    Liked by 1 person

  6. I wonder how long it will take the Clinton’s to claim that the “compound” nature of the Judicial Watch questions makes this demand exceed the 25 question limit set by the court?


    • John Galt says:

      Objections will be served on the last day for response. Meet & confer, motion to compel, court order on motion to compel: Team Clinton has essentially already succeeded in running out the clock.

      Rule 33. Interrogatories to Parties
      (a) In General.

      (1) Number. Unless otherwise stipulated or ordered by the court, a party may serve on any other party no more than 25 written interrogatories, including all discrete subparts.

      (2) Time to Respond. The responding party must serve its answers and any objections within 30 days after being served with the interrogatories. A shorter or longer time may be stipulated to under Rule 29 or be ordered by the court.

      (3) Answering Each Interrogatory. Each interrogatory must, to the extent it is not objected to, be answered separately and fully in writing under oath.

      (4) Objections. The grounds for objecting to an interrogatory must be stated with specificity. Any ground not stated in a timely objection is waived unless the court, for good cause, excuses the failure.


  7. The propped up corpse formerly known as politician WAR CRIMINAL Hillary Clinton, walking in a parade. Probably the most accurate photo of her current state I’ve ever seen.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Stonewall Hillary has managed to “do it HER way” so far/
    NO WAY will she answer these questions before election day.

    Liked by 3 people

  9. bverwey says:

    This is just another nail in her coffin that will be stalled till after the election, if ever,


  10. ZZZ says:

    Question 26. Did you really think you could get away with treason and is so, what possible backroom deals did you make to facilitate this crime?

    Liked by 1 person

  11. scott says:

    Judicial Watch: Doing the job Congress refuses to do.

    Liked by 9 people

  12. Concerned says:

    How many times did Obama promise that during his Presidency there would be transparency? There’s such a lack of it that even the New York Times was compelled to write about it back in 2014.

    When President Obama took office in 2009, he promised an “unprecedented level of openness in government.” In a memo issued the day after his inauguration, he wrote, “The government should not keep information confidential merely because public officials might be embarrassed by disclosure, because errors and failures might be revealed, or because of speculative or abstract fears.” http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/08/opinion/what-happened-to-transparency.html?_r=0

    I hope there is a special place in hell, particularly toasty, for political miscreants who abuse the citizens’ trust. Obama is worse than Bernie Madoff.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Yeah, I remember him setting up his little “Whistleblower” scam, too. How well did THAT work out for anyone?

      It was more of a “Sucker Trap” than anything else…

      Liked by 1 person

    • DS says:

      Obamao never had any intention of doing whatever lies came out of his mouth, other than fundamentally transforming America with illegal aliens and muslim “refugees”. Bernie, on the other hand, only made off with millions. Well, I guess Hiliary did also, and I’m sure president zero has a slush fund somewhere, too.


    • VegasGuy says:

      “How many times did Obama promise that during his Presidency there would be transparency?”

      Actually he did not lie…..We have all seen through the intent & results of his agendas time & time again.

      IMO, he could not have been more transparent…….


  13. quintrillion says:

    Get ready for ‘I don’t recall’ 25 times.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Doug says:

      Honestly, she probably doesnt. the clintons are engaged in so much illegal crap its hard for them to even remember when they are breaking the law. Ir your gonna break the law, break it Bigly!!!


  14. Craig W. Gordon says:

    Scathing questions. No way around any of them. Loving it, but she will slip out of suffering from the law of bad decisions leading to bad consequences somehow.

    BTW, most of us could answer most of these questions for her from what we already know. Only things we can’t answer are her ‘intentions’. Those we can only surmise based on her stupid actions.


  15. Tom W says:

    JW is great. They run circles around the Congress in getting responses …low hurdle, I know…but you get my point.

    As for “Crooked Hillary ” ….Blowing off mandated deadlines is what she lives for
    ….two legal systems; hers and ours !
    Let’s hope she’ll be bettered by the good folks at JW this go round..

    Liked by 1 person

  16. benzy says:

    These questions (IF ever answered at all) could have some value if Mrs. Clinton were actually required to be the one answering them. That would have been the case in a face to face deposition. With these written questions and written answers, she can have her team of lawyers pour over the questions, carefully construct an answer (where they even deem that they will answer) which takes three pages to say nothing at all… all in the best legalese the Clinton Foundation money can buy. That is assuming they don’t delay, delay, delay… using every possible legal maneuver available to totally avoid answering or at least avoid making the answers public and available PRIOR to the election.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Travis McGee says:

      Exactly my thought too. Her lawyers have probably already answered them. I not waiting with baited breath for the answers.


    • John Galt says:

      Sick Hillary, frequently napping and often confused, will very likely have no present recollection of any incriminating information.


  17. rashamon says:

    Why does it take JW to bring ?s and answers to light? What are we paying Congress to do?

    I don’t know exactly who underwrites JW, but they have answered more of my questions than any other entity that says citizens are supporting their work. Contribute to JW. In fact, start a petition to have them replace Congress. “Probably do a better job of taking care of us.


    • “What are we paying Congress to do?”

      Strike the final blows to an already incredibly weakened nation for their globalist psychopath puppet masters. Oh, hello “speaker” ryan. Knew you were near… but… make a little noise next time, aight?

      #WAR and we aren’t even fighting…


  18. tommylotto says:

    Those 25 questions look to be compound, in violation of the order limiting the questions to 25, and thus subject to objections. If Clinton objects (and I would if I were her lawyers), the meet and confer process may very well drag out past the election.


  19. moe2004 says:

    I expect nothing from this, if they get answers they will be completely lawyer speak, the results baked in. A crying shame the Judge ruled they had to do this in writing.


  20. Sentient says:

    I’m glad JW is doing this, but from a political perspective, Benghazi and Hillary using her own private server are issues that are played out. Everyone who would choose Trump over Clinton because of those issues has already done so. During the debates, she’s likely to bring up Crimea as evidence of Putin’s perfidy. I hope Trump presses her on whether she wants to fight Russia over Crimea.


  21. jmclever says:

    Considering Judicial Watch knows that Hillary will not answer those questions with anything other than “the fifth,” My guess is that those questions are published as a means of review for We the People. As was said, most of us could answer those questions for her.

    Liked by 2 people

    • My thought also jmclever.

      Judicial Watch knows these are compound questions and appear to be many more than the allowed 25.

      JW also know Hilary’s very good a not answering questions even under oath.

      There must be a reason JW has submitted the questions this way, one beyond the obvious one of wanting Hilary Clinton to actually answer them within the 30 day time frame.

      If we are patient and wait, their strategy might become apparent.


  22. thetrain2016 says:

    My prediction, Hillary is not going to answer any questions. Clinton’s lawyers will tell the judge, her busy schedule won’t permit any time to respond questions already asked several times.


    • Raffaella says:

      They will wait 29 days and then submit their objections (multiple questions in each one of 25 questions), will not answer any of them and drag it out past election.

      She will be in deep trouble if Trump wins. They should have indicted her so Obama could pardon her.


    • BobW462 says:

      On counsel’s advice, I invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment not to answer, on the…

      This will surely be her response to any question, in any deposition that she ever participates in, for the rest of her life.


  23. If she isn’t already sick, these questions should send her into spasms, or another fall that will put her out of commission past the 30 day mark.


  24. lisaginnz says:

    Surely noone expects Hillary or Bill to ever be honest about anything. Ever. Seriously.


  25. Bull Durham says:

    The Clintons have corrupted the Justice System. What they have not done to destroy the Rule of Law, Obama and his appointees, judges and justices have been corrupt and have done the rest.

    Comey had a great duty that he failed to fulfill. He is a man upon whose shoulders fell the fate of the nation. He crumbled like a coward on sentry duty. He let the enemy inside the perimeter as he cowered in his moment of destiny. He didn’t fire a shot that would have stopped the enemy and alerted the troops.

    He is more than a malfeasant. He is more than a traitor to his oath of office. He is a coward. He is not even a man. A man of some redemptive tissue would have resigned. How he can face his children and family is beyond me.

    He will go down in American History as one of the most cowardly curs Americans have had to suffer. His own personal honor, much less the holy grail of Rule of Law by which he supposedly led his life, all trashed and abandoned by a miserably weak moment of truth. He can see his sins, mortal sins against the Constitution and the entirety of America, yet he continues in shameless perpetuation.

    Comey is a repulsive icon of corruption. Hell awaits him.

    Liked by 2 people

    • majorstar says:

      Comey is a total schmuck.


    • Raffaella says:

      “Comey is a repulsive icon of corruption. Hell awaits him”

      Agreed. The more I learn about this email scandal the more I hate Comey. His career is over if Trump wins.


    • bofh says:

      Well said.

      Some people bring out the best in others. The Clintons bring out the worst.

      Liked by 2 people

    • AmyB says:

      When I read the comments here, I don’t usually notice who is posting before I start reading. If I find the comment interesting, I will scroll back up to take note of who made it.

      Bull, I don’t even need to scroll back up to know that a particular comment is yours. You are a great writer, who manages to cause an emotional reaction in your reader. Reminds me of a line in the movie, National Treasure; “People don’t talk like that anymore”. I say, but they should. Committed to an ideal and having, in this world, the temerity to voice it is sorely needed. Sundance, Bull Durham, Bluto and of course, Mr. Trump. God, I love you guys (men).

      Liked by 1 person

    • comey’s record shows that he is and has always been a klinton lackey. He purposely “failed his duty”, with a slight caveat in hopes of a little cya just in case… she goes down.


    • Comey did more to DAMAGE this nation then any enemy ever has.


  26. majorstar says:

    Interrogatories, as they’re called, are fairly useless save for pinning down the opponent on a position or identifying other witnesses and the location of documents and other evidence. The questions are always answered by opposing counsel not the “witness” and are reviewed so as not to provide legal pitfalls. Don’t get your hopes up about these questions; they will not lead to anything.

    Liked by 1 person

    • janc1955 says:

      I think it’s safe to assume no one here has his/her hopes up. Personally, if these questions – or more likely, the mere IDEA that someone would pose them to Her Rotten Highness – gives HRC some heartburn and a headache, it’s all good. And despite her reptilian nature, I do think the accumulation of this type of thing is definitely causing her stress. Which is also all good with me.

      Liked by 1 person

      • majorstar says:

        Yes, the aggravation value is worth something too. She will have to pay for the work to be done and, depending on how they play it, the little dance can last for a long time.


  27. andi lee says:

    Maybe some of you haven’t come to the realization, yet, the fight to bring HRC to HEEL also includes OUR government.

    My EX, also my FRIEND, pointed out today the government has designated patriots, christians, and Constitutional loving citizens as terrorists. It finally hit me. Hard. We are the Enemy of the State.


  28. Indy in a Deep Blue Sea says:

    Confirm the authenticity of this photo taken recently inside your campaign medi-van:


  29. andi lee says:

    To add insult to injury, HRC has not been required or even FORCED to testify under oath. The first Benghazi hearing, I’ll have to go back and watch to verify if she was sworn in. I think, in the 2nd Benghazi hearings the statement made was that she was sworn in PRIOR. Struck me odd. Behind closed doors, away from camera view. Now this.

    Thank God for Judicial Watch.


  30. JustTea says:

    Jonah Goldberg on Fox said that something they didn’t find was any yoga emails. HA!

    Liked by 1 person

  31. alliwantissometruth says:

    CNN is countering & demanding they be allowed to have their own questions answered. Here’s a partial list…

    #1: How did you get so awesome?
    #2: When you awake in the morning & prepare for your day, how exactly do you decide which color pantsuit to wear?
    #3: Do you believe like we do that you should be up for sainthood even though you’re not a religious person?
    #4: How did you get so great?
    #5: Hillary, the American people are dying to know, thin crust or pan?
    #6: Does it bother you, being such an honest & honorable person, when you’re called names & lied about?
    #7: Name your favorite late night snack
    #8: No really, what’s it like to be so awesome?

    Liked by 2 people

    • janc1955 says:

      LOL! CNN should be ashamed. Sadly, shame has gone the way of honestly and personal integrity in today’s media and political circles.


  32. eubykdisop says:

    Did you ever have any internet communications with Anthony Weiner under his real name or a pseudonym?
    Die you ever have internet relations with that woman, Huma Abedin?

    Liked by 1 person

  33. eubykdisop says:

    #31: Did you ever have any internet communications with Anthony Weiner under his real name or a pseudonym?
    #32: Did you ever have internet relations with that woman, Huma Abedin?


  34. drdeb says:

    Fellow Treepers,
    This is Big news! Judicial Watch does the job journalists are hired to do. My 1st degree was in journalism and I am appalled by their lack of reporting the facts! As a retiree, my income is limited. Yet Judicial Watch is one cause to which I contribute.
    God Bless You!

    Liked by 2 people

  35. georgiafl says:

    Photo of Hillary today – sure does look like something is strapped on under her clothing.


    Liked by 1 person

  36. Dave Baccaro says:

    I hope Judicial Watch didn’t email the questions to her. Or her lawyers for that matter.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. Did you see Comey’s snarky little comment today at a meeting where he said that he “hoped he wouldn’t be asked any questions about emails”. J. Edgar Hoover is spinning in his grave about the corrupted, compromised FBI.


  38. Truth fears no inquiry Hillary fights all inquiries….


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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s