The Republicans in the Lower House of the US Congress are reported to be seeking a congressional hearing on the current status of the US Attorney John Huber investigation into the controversial charity foundation that sucked all humanitarian assistance to Haiti.
The Clinton Foundation has been accused by the leaders of that country for siphoning off $2 billions intended for the survivors of the earthquake in 2011.
There are countless of articles about the criminal activities of one Hillary Clinton on this website, and this should be a turning point for the Clintons, when the hearing and subsequent prosecution materialize.
Republicans in the US House of Representatives plan to hold a hearing on an investigation into the Clinton Foundation, which is rumored to have been entangled in “pay to play” corruption schemes during Hillary Clinton’s time as state secretary. The hearing will provide the House with the latest updates on the ongoing Department of Justice investigation into the Foundation and the FBI.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee on Government Operation, said in an interview that on December 5, Huber, an attorney appointed for the DOJ investigation, will testify on whether he looked into the controversial foundation.
“Mr. Huber with the Department of Justice and the FBI has been having an investigation — at least part of his task was to look at the Clinton Foundation and what may or may not have happened as it relates to improper activity with that charitable foundation; so we’ve set a hearing date for December the 5,” he said.
Prior to this development at the US congress, the Judicial Watch filed a case seeking testimony from Hillary Clinton on various issues.
– Judicial Watch announced today that a federal court ordered
a hearing for Friday, October 12, regarding a request
for testimony under oath from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Cheryl Mills and several other State Department officials about Clinton email searches in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit about the Benghazi terrorist attack. The hearing was set by U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth.
Hearing Date: Friday, October 12, 2018
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Location: Courtroom 15
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
333 Constitution Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
In his October 4, 2018, order setting the hearing date, Judge Lamberth said:
Two and a half years ago, the Court granted plaintiff’s request for limited discovery, mindful of parallel proceeding
before Judge Sullivan and the ongoing inquiries by the State Department’s Inspector General, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the House Select Committee on Benghazi. Since those proceeding have concluded, it is time to set a plan for further proceedings in this case.
The development comes in Judicial Watch’s July 2014 FOIA lawsuit
filed after the U.S. Department of State failed to respond to a May 13, 2014 FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State
(No. 1:14-cv-01242)). Judicial Watch seeks:
- Copies of any updates and/or talking points given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency concerning, regarding, or related to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
- Any and all records or communications concerning, regarding, or relating to talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack given to Ambassador Rice by the White House or any federal agency.
This is the lawsuit that forced the Clinton email system issue into the public eye in early 2015.
In 2014, a related Judicial Watch case brought to light the fact that the “Internet video
” talking points regarding the Benghazi attack were orchestrated in the Obama White House.
In March 2016, U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth granted “limited discovery
” to Judicial Watch, ruling that “where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA cases.” In May 2016, Judicial Watch filed an initial Proposed Order for Discovery
seeking additional information. The State Department opposed Judicial Watch’s proposal, and in December 2016 Judge Lamberth requested
both parties to file new proposed orders in light of information discovered in various venues since the previous May.
In its filing
Judicial Watch informed the court that despite repeated conferences with the State Department they had been “unable to reach agreement on a discovery proposal” and that “[the State Department] is unwilling to agree to any discovery at all in this action.” Judicial Watch’s discovery proposal focuses on two main areas:
- Evidence of wrongdoing or bad faith with respect to State Department’s response to Plaintiff’s FOIA request for records related to the talking points provided to U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice following the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attack; and
- Potential remedies that may ensure a sufficient search for responsive records is undertaken.
Judicial Watch seeks both documents and depositions. The documents requested include:
- All documents that concern or relate to the processing of any and all searches of the Office of the Secretary for emails relating to the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attack and its aftermath …
- 2. All communications that concern or relate to the processing of all searches referenced in Document Request No. 1 above, including directions or guidance about how and where to conduct the searches …
- All records that concern or relate to the State Department’s policies, practices, procedures and/or actions (or lack thereof) to secure, inventory, and/or account for all records…
- Plaintiff requests copies of the attached records [previously obtained by Judicial Watch] with the Exemption 5 redactions removed …
In addition to documents, Judicial Watch seeks depositions, including a deposition of Hillary Clinton that would include Mrs. Clinton’s testimony on:
[the] identification of individuals (whether State Department officials, other government officials, or third-parties, including but not limited to Sidney Blumenthal) with whom Secretary Clinton may have communicated by email.
“It is frankly unbelievable that the State Department is still protecting Hillary Clinton and her aides from being asked basic questions about her illicit email system,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The courts were misled and obstructed by Hillary Clinton’s email scheme and we hope to get some more answers about this scandal.”
Hillary Clinton’s confidence in evading accountability is borne from the fact that most people in DC are actually involved in high crimes.
The prosecution of the Clintons and other filth in the Deep Swamp is long overdue.