The e-mail controversy Hillary Clinton got through during the presidential campaign of 2016 It could well be that the competition prevailed in 2020 after a federal judge ruled on additional polls about whether Clinton's private e-mail systems were a deliberate effort to prevent the Freedom of Information Act
In a crushing statement  On Thursday, the judge of the US District Court Roy Lambert said that despite FBI, Inspector General and Congressional investigations, Clinton's use of a private account for all her email traffic during her four-year tenure as Secretary General of the US District Court was Secretary of State, the conservative group Judicial Watch "should be allowed to require documents and additional testimony about the practice.
The story continues
Lamberth, who collided with Clinton and her assistants in cases attributed to her husband's government, was relentless in his assessment of the actions of the former secretary. He suggested Clinton's e-mail practices as "one of the most serious modern offenses for government transparency."
Lamberth reiterated concerns that Justice Department and State Department lawyers had misled the court when they tried to close the case in late 2014 Judicial Watch's FOIA lawsuit relates to Benghazi's points of view, although some officials have been months Previously, Clinton knew that tens of thousands of e-mails were in a private system and had agreed to hand over many of them to State upon request.
"State played this card close to the chest," the judge complained. "At best, attempts by the state to make its poorer search legally appropriate during the settlement negotiations were negligence that resulted from incompetence. At worst, the ministers of state and justice ministries worked together to undermine Clinton's public scrutiny, the FOIA, and the distraction of that court.
Lamberth, a representative appointed by Ronald Reagan, also accused the Trump government of not clarifying the mess and seeing nothing with it instead.
"The current Ministry of Justice has made things worse," the judge said, referring to a hearing in October 1945 in which he bluntly accused the attorneys to lie, and then withdrew a little.
In the eleven-page ruling issued on Thursday, Lamberth revealed the alleged dishonesty, but he came closer.
"The lawyer's answers weigh on creditworthiness," he wrote. "To maintain the integrity of the ministry and to reassure the American people, their government remains committed to transparency and the rule of law, and this suspicion must not be flouted."
The judge suggested that some members of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Justice are friends. Clinton may have tried to keep the e-mails out of the public eye. He pointed out that the releases released by the State Department to Clinton to her daughter Chelsea showed that the attack in Benghazi, Libya, was a terrorist attack, although the Obama administration long claimed that this was not the case.
Attorneys at the Department of Justice have argued that they had no legal obligation to search for files that were not owned by the US State Department when a FOIA application was filed, and that attorneys before Lamberth worked on the lawsuit, did not have as much information about what had turned Clinton over as more senior officials.
Lamberth, however, disagreed with the state's narrow assessment of its legal obligations.
"Legally, it's wrong," he wrote, citing precedents (one of them being his own) stating that records illegally removed from a public agency must be searched wherever they are. Mitch McConnell's "data-size =" promo_xsmall_rectangle "/>
Justice Department lawyers argued that another discovery of the Clinton private server, given the extensive investigation and information provided by the FBI, was the Judicial Watch's judicial discovery in another case As a result, Clinton had written questions and some of her top assistants were forced to comment on Justice Watch in another trial before the 2016 elections.
But Lamberth was He said there was still little clarity on private e-mail accounts used by more than one of Clinton's executives, and he said the public records are not clear on why State has tried to disrupt the FOIA. Case in the discussions in late 2014 and early 2015, although at least some officials knew that a r This collection of Clinton's e-mails had not been searched.
The judge did not approve any specific rulings or subpoenas on Thursday. Instead, he ordered both sides to adopt a discovery plan and report back to him within 10 days.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Justice rejected an immediate statement on the verdict. An attorney for Clinton did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said he hopes the Lamberths ruling would prompt the Attorney Donald Trump's attorneys in the Department of Justice to change the lawsuit and file a more cooperative approach.
"The historic court ruling raises concerns over Hillary Clinton's email scandal and government corruption, which millions of Americans are sharing," Fitton said in a statement. "Judicial Watch looks forward to carefully finding Clinton's email question, and we hope that the Justice Department and the State Department will acknowledge the criticism and help of Judge Lamberth instead of obstructing this court-ordered discovery."