Skip to comments.Clinton Email Update: Judicial Watch Releases Clinton Email Deposition Testimony of Karin Lang,...
Posted on 06/09/2016 1:07:33 PM PDT by jazusamo
Full title: Clinton Email Update: Judicial Watch Releases Clinton Email Deposition Testimony of Karin Lang, Director, Executive Secretariat Staff
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch today released the deposition transcript of Karin Lang, director of executive secretariat staff and designated representative for the State Department. The Lang transcript is available here . Lang was designated by the State Department as its 30(b)(6) witness. A 30(b)(6) witness is assigned to provide the agencys testimony on the Clinton email issue.
Lang testified that key State Department federal recordkeeping officials did not know that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her top aide Huma Abedin were using non-state.gov email to conduct government business. She also testified that the State Department could not say whether Clinton or Abedin has turned over all emails in their possession that may be potentially responsive to Judicial Watchs Freedom of the Information Act (FOIA) request. Lang also said that it would not be reasonable to search all 70,000 State Department email accounts in order to retrieve Clintons emails. (Clinton has suggested that the State Department would have many of her emails because she sent most of them to State Department employees on their government accounts.)
Lang also signed, under the penalty of perjury, State Department answers to Judicial Watchs written interrogatories about the Clinton email system and FOIA. The State Department acknowledged in its answers that it has no method of identifying which State Department officials and employees had and/or used an account on clintonemail.com to conduct official government business.
Former State IT employee Bryan Pagliano had been scheduled to testify on June 6, but will be rescheduled pending further order of Judge Sullivan, who ruled Friday that Pagliano must provide to the court his reported immunity agreement and the legal basis for making Fifth Amendment claims.
Langs deposition is one among seven depositions of former Clinton top aides and State Department officials that Judicial Watch has scheduled.
Langs testimony and other discovery arises in a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit that seeks records about the controversial employment status of Abedin, former deputy chief of staff to Clinton during her tenure at the State Department. The lawsuit was reopened because of revelations about the clintonemail.com system. (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)). Judge Sullivan ordered that all deposition transcripts be made publicly available.
Abedin is scheduled to testify on June 28, and top State Department official Patrick Kennedy on June 29.
More information about this litigation is available here.
(I don’t recall )**100
Is Hellry scheduled to be disposed by JW?
The Judge said he may okay her deposition depending on these deps.
I don’t think the word perjury means anything to these people.
“Lang also said that it would not be reasonable to search all 70,000 State Department email accounts in order to retrieve Clintons emails.”
1. Why not - we have computers these days, it would take minutes
2. We have 70,000 state dept employees?!?!?
(I dont recall )**100
We call this the “Scooter Libby” defense.
Another one who is a Democrat ahead of being an American.
I guess we should make July 3rd National Democrat Day and that can be their holiday while us Americans will celebrate on the 4th.
My question was aimed more at JW and if they had the balls to dispose the witch.
They may not be able to dispose of her, but they certainly want to DEPOSE her providing the judge allows for her testimony.
> Lang also signed, under the penalty of perjury, State Department answers to Judicial Watchs written interrogatories about the Clinton email system and FOIA. The State Department acknowledged in its answers that it has no method of identifying which State Department officials and employees had and/or used an account on clintonemail.com to conduct official government business.
If that’s under penalty of perjury then it’s perjury, because there’s at least one very easy thing to try, which is scan the email archives at State for occurrences of “clintonemail.com”. This was done a decade ago to check for RNC business being conducted on government systems, no reason it can’t be done now.
You haven’t been following along.
“no reason it cant be done now”
They don’t want to do it now, so it won’t happen for a while.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.