Hillary Clinton used variations of 'I don't recall' 21 out of 25 times when answering questions about private email server in court filing

[superbeets]

[h=1]Hillary Clinton used variations of 'I don't recall' 21 out of 25 times when answering questions about private email server in court filing[/h]

• She was asked questions under oath about her destruction of emails
• Clinton is accused of permanently erasing 33,000 emails from her server
• Written answers show she dodged most of 'interrogatories' posed to her
• She claims no one ever told her deleting emails could break the law
• Also said she did not 'recall' if she had a 'specific expectation that the State Department would receive FOIA requests for or concerning her email'
• Ex-First Lady also insists she wasn't warned of security threats it may pose
• Clinton signed the answers on Monday under 'penalty of perjury'

By GARETH DAVIES FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 04:15, 14 October 2016 | UPDATED: 16:52, 14 October 2016

 

[superbeets]

Hillary Clinton used variations of 'I don't recall' 21 times when asked 25 questions under oath about how she deleted 33,000 State Department emails.
Sworn written testimony obtained by Judicial Watch show the Democratic presidential candidate dodged virtually all of the questions about the correspondences she removed from her private server while she was Secretary of State.
A federal judge ordered Clinton's legal team to turn over written responses to questions concerning the so-called 'homebrew' server.
Clinton signed the document containing the answers, written by her lawyers on her behalf, on Monday under 'penalty of perjury'.
The former First Lady sidestepped most of the questions, and insisted that she did not 'recall' if anyone told her she could be breaking the law by deleting the emails.
She also said she could not remember ever being warned about hacking threats to her private account or server.
But her campaign has insisted the answers are consistent with what she has said before.

+3


Hillary Clinton used variations of 'I don't recall' 21 times when she was asked 25 questions under oath about her destruction of State Department emails. She is pictured speaking at a fundraiser at the Civic Center Auditorium in San Francisco on Thursday

 

[superbeets]

The questions addressed a number of issues. She was asked why she used the private server,
'Secretary Clinton states that she does not recall being advised, cautioned, or warned, she does not recall that it was ever suggested to her, and she does not recall participating in any communication, conversation, or meeting in which it was discussed that her use of a clintonemail.com e-mail account to conduct official State Department business conflicted with or violated federal recordkeeping laws,' her lawyers wrote for one answer.
Most of the responses to questions begin with the phrase: 'Secretary Clinton objects to the Interrogatories.'
Clinton's answers provided no new information beyond what she told FBI agents during the recently closed investigation into whether she and her staff mishandled classified information.
But it does suggest she has contradicted sworn statements she has made in the past.
According to the court documents filed this week, Clinton was asked when she decided to use her private email account to conduct government business and whom she consulted in making that decision.
Clinton said she recalled making the decision in early 2009, but she 'does not recall any specific consultations regarding the decision.'

+3


The former First Lady (pictured in Pueblo, Colorado, on Wednsesday, refused to answer most of the questions, and even insisted that no one told her she could be breaking the law by deleting the emails

 

[superbeets]

One of the questions posed to her reads: 'In a 60 Minutes interview aired on July 24, 2016, you stated that it was 'recommended' you use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business. What recommendations were you given about using or not using a personal email account to conduct official State Department business, who made any such recommendations, and when were any such recommendations made?
He response: 'Secretary Clinton objects to Interrogatory No. 5 insofar as it misstates her comments in the interview that aired on July 24, 2016.



'In that interview, she stated that 'it was recommended that [using personal e-mail] would be convenient.' Subject to that objection, Secretary Clinton states that former Secretary of State Colin Powell advised her in 2009 about his use of a personal e-mail account to conduct official State Department business.'
Republicans have consistently claimed that Clinton used the private set-up in order to evade Freedom of Information Act requests.
But the Democratic presidential nominee and former secretary of state said she doesn't recall that issue ever coming up.
Her lawyers wrote: 'Secretary Clinton does not recall whether she had a specific expectation that the State Department would receive FOIA requests for or concerning her e-mail. She understood that, because her practice was to e-mail State Department staff on their state.gov accounts, her email was being captured in the State Department's recordkeeping systems....Secretary Clinton understood that e-mail she sent or received in the course of conducting official State Department business was subject to FOIA.'
The 23rd question asked whether she gave the order for her emails to be deleted and whether any copies of the messages had been kept.



Secretary Clinton does not recall whether she had a specific expectation that the State Department would receive FOIA requests for or concerning her e-mail
Written response to question in sworn testimony

 

[superbeets]

Her lawyers wrote: 'Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Secretary Clinton states that it was her expectation that all of her work-related and potentially work-related e-mail then in her custody would be provided to the State Department in response to its request.
'Secretary Clinton believes that her attorneys retained copies of the e-mails provided to the State Department in December 2014, but she does not have any personal knowledge about the details of that process.
'Secretary Clinton decided that, once her work-related and potentially work-related e-mails were provided to the State Department, she had no reason to keep her personal e-mails, which did not relate to official State Department business.
'She believes that her personal e-mails were not kept, and she does not have any personal knowledge about the details of that process.'
Judicial Watch had sought to depose Clinton in person about the creation of the private server located in the basement of her New York home.
In August U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan instead ordered the Democratic presidential nominee to respond to the group's questions in writing.
In addition to her inability to recall the requested information, Clinton entered various legal objections to the formation or wording of 18 of the 25 questions.
She also filed eight separate general objections to the process under which the questions were being asked.

• SHARE PICTURE

​

+3


According to the court documents filed this week, Clinton was asked when she decided to use her private email account to conduct government business and whom she consulted in making that decision

 

[superbeets]

Judicial Watch had sought to depose Clinton in person about the creation of the private server located in the basement of her New York home.
In August U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan instead ordered the Democratic presidential nominee to respond to the group's questions in writing.
In addition to her inability to recall the requested information, Clinton entered various legal objections to the formation or wording of 18 of the 25 questions.
She also filed eight separate general objections to the process under which the questions were being asked.



Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said the group's lawyers will closely review Clinton's responses.
'Mrs Clinton's refusal to answer many of the questions in a clear and straightforward manner further reflects disdain for the rule of law,' Fitton said.
Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman protested the process in a statement Thursday night.
He said Sullivan's denial of Freedom Watch's requests for an oral deposition 'cleverly allowed Hillary Clinton ... to stonewall giving responsive and meaningful answers'.
Klayman continued, 'Now, even if motions to compel complete and responsive answers are filed, they will not be decided for some time, and Judge Sullivan will have run out the clock — paving the way for Hillary Clinton ... to easily win the presidency.'
Campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said Clinton has answered these same questions in multiple settings for over a year, and her answers Thursday 'are entirely consistent with what she has said many times before.'
'Judicial Watch is a right-wing organization that has been attacking the Clintons since the 1990s, and this frivolous lawsuit is just its latest failed attempt to hurt her campaign for the presidency,' Fallon said.

Read more:

• Clinton 'does not recall' ordering destruction of emails from personal server in testimony | Fox News
• Judicial Watch Releases New Hillary Clinton Email Answers Given under Oath - Judicial Watch

 

[superbeets]

Hillzheimers Disease.