Posted on 09/27/2016 6:01:34 AM PDT by thesligoduffyflynns
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-submits-email-questions-hillary-clinton-written-answers-oath-due-september-29/
[Hillary Clinton Written Answers Under Oath Due 9/29/2016 ]
Hmmmmm. I wonder if she is going to flee the country? /s
More likke written “WHO ME. Do that? Not ME!”
I thought I read that she got a 3-week or so extension on that, due to she had been “sick”. ??
only two more days to go
Taking the “Fifth” or drinking a “Fifth”, its all the same to her.
26. “Do you or any of your former staff members at the State Department know anything about the Bill of Rights aside from the 5th Amendment?”
I’m just waiting to find out . This will have a impact on the two forthcoming debates.
Here is a link about the extension. Sorry if the source is not the best, (very busy here), but seems to support the delay.
Her Heinous will continue to ignore and stall...
She cannot be prosecuted for not remembering. Most of her written answers will contain the words “do not recall”.
Wikileaks.....if ya got the smoking gun, now would be a great time to share.
Hillary perfected the tactic of ‘deniable ignorance” during her various appearances under oath in previous scandals such as Travelgate, Cattlegate, and Whitewater.
In essence this tactic requires the target of a question to respond with one of several excuses for a non-responsive answer. [eg, I don’t recall, I don’t have any specific recollection of that (insert document, email, conversation as necessary), I have no recollection of that.]
You will note that it is a tactic used by all of the Clinton Crime Syndicate including former attorney General Eric Holder during the Mark Rich congressional hearing and recently in the Fast&Furious hearings before Congress.
Under our system of government you can’t force someone to testify truthfully and using the ‘deniable ignorance’ tactic avoids using the 5th Amendment to protect prosecutable wrongdoing. The 5th has become a legal manouver that is familiar & recognized by even the Joe Six-Packs of the world as a way to dodge criminal liability.
In addition her lawyers will object to questions being too wordy, vague or requiring information not available or too burdensome to amass.
The chances of getting anything other than variations of those responses are less than 1 in a 100 in my opinion.
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.