U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth railed at the government during a hearing Friday in Washington, D.C. and accused career State Department employees of lying and signing ‘clearly false’ affidavits to stop a series of lawsuits concerning Hillary Clinton’s email server scandal and handling of the Benghazi terror attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya.
Lamberth said he was “shocked” and “dumbfounded” when he learned that FBI and Obama DOJ had granted immunity to former Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills during its investigation into the use of Clinton’s server, according to a court transcript.
“I had myself found that Cheryl Mills had committed perjury and lied under oath in a published opinion I had issued in a Judicial Watch case where I found her unworthy of belief, and I was quite shocked to find out she had been given immunity in — by the Justice Department in the Hillary Clinton email case,” Lamberth stated from the bench.
Fox News reported, “The Department of Justice’s Inspector General (IG), Michael Horowitz, noted in a bombshell report in June that it was “inconsistent with typical investigative strategy” for the FBI to allow Mills to sit in during the agency’s interview of Clinton during the email probe, given that classified information traveled through Mills’ personal email account. ‘[T]here are serious potential ramifications when one witness attends another witness’ interview,’ the IG wrote.”
Lamberth said he did not know Mills had been granted immunity until he “read the IG report and learned that and that she had accompanied [Clinton] to her interview.”
Judicial Watch initially sued the State Department in 2014, concerning the handling of the Benghazi attack, after the Obama machine ignored their Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Many people thank God that the watchdog group has filed a parallel lawsuits seeking the truth about issues like Clinton’s server, whose existence was discovered only by such legal action.
In fact, many people know that none of the illegal and traitorous actions taken by the previous administration would have come to light at all if it weren’t for the actions of Judicial Watch.
“The State Department had immediately moved to dismiss Judicial Watch’s first lawsuit on a motion for summary judgment, saying in an affidavit that it had conducted a search of all potentially relevant emails in its possession and provided them.”
But Lamberth said no, he would not dismiss the lawsuit at the time. On Friday, he said he was happy he acted that way. He blasted the State Department officials, claiming they had intentionally misled him.
“It was clear to me that at the time that I ruled initially, that false statements were made to me by career State Department officials, and it became more clear through discovery that the information that I was provided was clearly false regarding the adequacy of the search and this – what we now know turned out to be the Secretary’s email system,” Lamberth said.
He added, “I don’t know the details of what kind of IG inquiry there was into why these career officials at the State Department would have filed false affidavits with me. I don’t know the details of why the Justice Department lawyers did not know false affidavits were being filed with me, but I was very relieved that I did not accept them and that I allowed limited discovery into what had happened.”
Lamberth accused Justice Department lawyer Robert Prince of “doublespeak” and “playing the same word games [Clinton] played.”
That “was not true,” the judge said, referring to the State Department’s assurances in a sworn declaration that it had searched all relevant documents. “It was a lie.”
“It might be that our search could be found to be inadequate, but that declaration was absolutely true,” Prince responded.
“I understand if Your Honor thinks that the searches that were done up to the motion for summary judgment were inadequate, but being wrong about the search being adequate does not make it a false affidavit,” he added.
Lamberth did concede he may have “mis-remembered” some details, but that did not alter his fury.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, who was at the hearing, pushed the White House for answers.
“President Trump should ask why his State Department is still refusing to answer basic questions about the Clinton email scandal,” Fitton argued, adding, “Hillary Clinton’s and the State Department’s email cover up abused the FOIA, the courts, and the American people’s right to know.”
Judicial Watch is trying to force Clinton and other officials to testify.
Clinton has since blamed Republicans and groups like Judicial Watch for derailing her campaign in 2016.
“Take the Benghazi tragedy—you know, I have one of the top Republicans, Kevin McCarthy, admitting we’re going to take that tragedy—because, you know, we’ve lost people, unfortunately, going back to the Reagan administration, if you talk about recent times, in diplomatic attacks,” Clinton said on NBC’s “Today” in a 2017, interview. “But boy, it was turned into a political football. And it was aimed at undermining my credibility, my record, my accomplishments.”
The Clinton State Department was faulted for ignoring security concerns before the attack, which impacted the defense.
The independent government Accountability Review Board that examined the tragedy concluded there were “systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies at senior levels” at the department that “resulted in a Special Mission security posture that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place.”
“Then-national security adviser Susan Rice claimed on several talk shows that the attack was caused by a YouTube video, even as e-mails uncovered after the fact revealed that administration officials knew the incident was the result of terrorism.”