Donald J. Trump for President

STATEMENT ON HILLARY CLINTON’S FBI INTERVIEW RECORDS

“Hillary Clinton is applying for a job that begins each day with a Top Secret intelligence briefing, and the notes from her FBI interview reinforce her tremendously bad judgment and dishonesty. Clinton’s secret email server was an end run around government transparency laws that wound up jeopardizing our national security and sensitive diplomatic efforts. On more than 2,000 occasions classified material was exposed on her private server, including highly sensitive Top Secret information and intelligence. All of this was done to conceal what we are once again seeing in the latest email productions from the State Department: rampant conflicts of interest and a pay-to-play culture that rewarded Clinton Foundation donors with access and favors. Clinton’s reckless conduct and dishonest attempts to avoid accountability show she cannot be trusted with the presidency and its chief obligation as commander-in-chief of the U.S. armed forces.” - Jason Miller, Senior Communications Advisor

---

DONALD J. TRUMP STATEMENT ON FBI RELEASING CLINTON INTERVIEW NOTES

“Hillary Clinton’s answers to the FBI about her private email server defy belief. I was absolutely shocked to see that her answers to the FBI stood in direct contradiction to what she told the American people. After reading these documents, I really don’t understand how she was able to get away from prosecution.” – Donald J. Trump

SEVEN MORE DISCOVERIES FROM THE FBI REPORT ON CLINTON’S EMAILS

Seven Additional Discoveries You May Have Missed In The FBI Report On Hillary Clinton’s Email Practices 

“From deleting emails right after her private server was discovered, to claiming to not even understand the classification system, the release of Hillary Clinton’s FBI interview notes shows that she lacks the competence to become commander-in-chief.” – David Bossie, Deputy Campaign Manager 

DISCOVERY ELEVEN: Clinton Was The Subject Of A Number Of Phishing Attacks, Even Opening One Email That “Contained A Potentially Malicious Link.” “The FBI notes indicate that they found phishing emails sent to Clinton's private account on multiple occurrences. At one point, she opened an email that ‘contained a potentially malicious link’ and she replied to the email asking if ‘is this really from you? I was worried about opening it!’” (Leigh Ann Caldwell And Tom Winter, “FBI Releases Notes From Interview With Hillary Clinton Over Emails,” NBC News, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY TWELVE: “Clinton Never Sought Approval To Conduct State Business On Her Own Private Email Server Despite ‘An Obligation To Do So.’” (Chris Cillizza, “12 Things I Learned From The FBI Report On Hillary Clinton’s Private Email Server,” The Washington Post, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY THIRTEEN: “A Personal Laptop Computer Used To Archive Hillary Clinton’s E-Mails When She Was Secretary Of State Went Missing After Being Put In The Mail…” “A personal laptop computer used to archive Hillary Clinton’s e-mails when she was secretary of state went missing after being put in the mail, according to the FBI’s report on its investigation into her use of a private e-mail system.” (Ben Brody And Chris Strohm, “FBI Says a Laptop That Held Clinton’s E-Mails Has Gone Missing,” Bloomberg, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY FOURTEEN: Clinton Could Not Recall When She First Received Her Security Clearance And If She Had Reciprocity From Her Time In The Senate. “In addition, the (FBI) notes say: ‘Clinton could not recall when she first received her security clearance and if she carried it with her to state via reciprocity from her time in the Senate.’” (David Smith, “Clinton Email Investigation: FBI Notes Reveal Laptop And Thumb Drive Are Missing,” The Guardian, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY FIFTEEN: Clinton Told FBI Investigators She Did Not Have A Personal Computer In The Secure Area Of Her House, But Witnesses Claimed Otherwise. “Hillary Clinton told FBI investigators last month that she did not have a personal computer inside the area within her home designed for viewing classified information known as a SCIF. But three different witnesses told the FBI Clinton did indeed use personal computers inside the SCIFs at her Washington, D.C., and Chappaqua, N.Y., homes.” (Sarah Westwood, “Clinton, Aides Told FBI Conflicting Stories About Email Use,”Washington Examiner, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY SIXTEEN: Clinton Told FBI Investigators That The She Believes The “Classification Level Of Future Drone Strikes Depend On The Context.” “Clinton believed the classification level of future drone strikes depended on the context.” (Federal Bureau Of Investigation, Federal Bureau Of Investigation, Page 14 - 15, 8/31/16)

DISCOVERY SEVENTEEN: Despite Being Personally Aware Of The Risk For Cybersecurity Threats When Abroad, Clinton Emailed President Obama While In Foreign Countries. “Clinton and her immediate staff were notified of foreign travel risks and were warned that digital threats began immediately upon landing in a foreign country, since connection of a mobile device to a local network provides opportunities for foreign adversaries to intercept voice and e-mail transmissions. … On REDACTED occasions while OCONUS [outside the continental United States], Clinton had direct e-mail contact with an e-mail address for President Barack Obama” (“Clinton E-Mail Investigation,” Federal Bureau Of Investigation, Page 14 - 15, 8/31/16) 

THE PREVIOUS TEN DISCOVERIES

DISCOVERY ONE: Clinton Deleted Her Private Email Archive “A Few Weeks After The New York TimesDisclosed” The Private Server. Viser Tweet: “A few weeks after the NYT disclosed that Hillary Clinton had a private email account, her archive inbox was deleted.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY TWO: Clinton Did Not Know The (C) Mark Meant Classified And Did Not “Pay Attention To Diff Classification Levels.” Seitz-Wald Tweet: “Clinton said she didn't know what (c) mark meant, didn't pay attn to diff classification levels, treated all srsly.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY THREE: “There Were 17,448 Work-Related Emails That Clinton Didn't Turn Over To The State Inspector General.”(Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY FOUR: As Secretary Of State Clinton “Had 13 Mobile Devices And 5 iPads” With Her Private Email.Viser Tweet: “Hillary Clinton, who said she had her private email for convenience, had 13 mobile devices and 5 iPads, according to FBI.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY FIVE: Clinton’s Lawyers Could Not Locate The Mobile Devices With Her Email Address.. Viser Tweet: ‘FBI found 13 total mobile devices associated with Clinton’s 2 phone numbers. Her lawyers couldn’t locate the devices” (Twitter.com,9/2/16)

DISCOVERY SIX: “The FBI Determined That Clinton Brought Her Blackberry Into A Secure Area At State, Which Is Prohibited.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY SEVEN: Clinton’s Email Archive Was Transferred Onto A Personal Gmail Address To Help Archive The Records.Zapotosky Tweet: “In 2014, in an effort to transfer an archive of Clinton emails from a laptop onto a server, someone used a personal Gmail address to help” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY EIGHT: Clinton Deleted Her Emails Because She Thought “She Didn't Need Them Anymore.”Cilizza Tweet: ‘Clinton told the FBI she deleted her emails because she didn't need them anymore not to avoid FOIA”(Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY NINE: Someone Tried To Hack Into Clinton’s iCloud Account. Viser Tweet: “The FBI found that someone was trying to hack into Hillary Clinton’s iCloud account. They were unsuccessful.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

DISCOVERY TEN: “Hillary Clinton Sent Out An Email To All State Employees Warning Them Against Using Personal Email Addresses.” (Twitter.com, 9/2/16)

---

Judicial Watch
August 30, 2016

Judicial Watch Submits Email Questions to Hillary Clinton - Written Answers, Under Oath, Due September 29

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced it submitted questions to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton concerning her email practices.  Clinton’s answers, under oath, are due on September 29.  On August 19, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan granted Judicial Watch further discovery on the Clinton email matter and ordered Clinton to answer the questions “by no later than thirty days thereafter….”  Under federal court rules, Judicial Watch is limited to twenty-five questions.

The questions are:

1. Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational.

2. Describe the creation of your clintonemail.com email account, including who decided to create it, when it was created, why it was created, and, if you did not set up the account yourself, who set it up for you.

3. When did you decide to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and whom did you consult in making this decision?

4. Identify all communications in which you participated concerning or relating to your decision to use a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business and, for each communication, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the communication.

5. 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?

6. Were you ever advised, cautioned, or warned, was it ever suggested, or did you ever participate in any communication, conversation, or meeting in which it was discussed that your use of a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business conflicted with or violated federal recordkeeping laws. For each instance in which you were so advised, cautioned or warned, in which such a suggestion was made, or in which such a discussion took place, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the advice, caution, warning, suggestion, or discussion.

7. Your campaign website states, “When Clinton got to the Department, she opted to use her personal email account as a matter of convenience.” What factors other than convenience did you consider in deciding to use a personal email account to conduct official State Department business? Include in your answer whether you considered federal records management and preservation requirements and how email you used to conduct official State Department business would be searched in response to FOIA requests.

8. After President Obama nominated you to be Secretary of State and during your tenure as secretary, did you expect the State Department to receive FOIA requests for or concerning your email?

9. During your tenure as Secretary of State, did you understand that email you sent or received in the course of conducting official State Department business was subject to FOIA?

10. During your tenure as Secretary of State, how did you manage and preserve emails in your clintonemail.com email account sent or received in the course of conducting official State Department business, and what, if anything, did you do to make those emails available to the Department for conducting searches in response to FOIA requests?

11. During your tenure as Secretary of State, what, if any, effort did you make to inform the State Department’s records management personnel (e.g., Clarence Finney or the Executive Secretariat’s Office of Correspondence and Records) about your use of a clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business?

12. During your tenure as Secretary of State, did State Department personnel ever request access to your clintonemail.com email account to search for email responsive to a FOIA request? If so, identify the date access to your account was requested, the person or persons requesting access, and whether access was granted or denied.

13. At the time you decided to use your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business, or at any time thereafter during your tenure as Secretary of State, did you consider how emails you sent to or received from persons who did not have State Department email accounts (i.e., “state.gov” accounts) would be maintained and preserved by the Department or searched by the Department in response to FOIA requests? If so, what was your understanding about how such emails would be maintained, preserved, or searched by the Department in response to FOIA requests?

14. On March 6, 2009, Assistant Secretary of State for Diplomatic Security Eric J. Boswell wrote in an Information Memo to your Chief of Staff, Cheryl Mills, that he “cannot stress too strongly, however, that any unclassified BlackBerry is highly vulnerable in any setting to remotely and covertly monitoring conversations, retrieving email, and exploiting calendars.” A March 11, 2009 email states that, in a management meeting with the assistant secretaries, you approached Assistant Secretary Boswell and mentioned that you had read the “IM” and that you “get it.” Did you review the March 6, 2009 Information Memo, and, if so, why did you continue using an unclassified BlackBerry to access your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business? Copies of the March 6, 2009 Information Memo and March 11, 2009 email are attached as Exhibit A for your review.

15. In a November 13, 2010 email exchange with Huma Abedin about problems with your clintonemail.com email account, you wrote to Ms. Abedin, in response to her suggestion that you use a State Department email account or release your email address to the Department, “Let’s get a separate address or device.” Why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business after agreeing on November 13, 2010 to “get a separate address or device?” Include in your answer whether by “address” you meant an official State Department email account (i.e., a “state.gov” account) and by “device” you meant a State Department-issued BlackBerry. A copy of the November 13, 2010 email exchange with Ms. Abedin is attached as Exhibit B for your review.

16. Email exchanges among your top aides and assistants in August 30, 2011 discuss providing you with a State Department-issued BlackBerry or State Department email address. In the course of these discussions, State Department Executive Secretary Stephen Mull wrote, “[W]e are working to provide the Secretary per her request a Department issued BlackBerry to replace her personal unit which is malfunctioning (possibly because of her personal email server is down). We will prepare two versions for her to use – one with an operating State Department email account (which would mask her identity, but which would also be subject to FOIA requests).” Similarly, John Bentel, the Director of Information and Records Management in the Executive Secretariat, wrote, “You should be aware that any email would go through the Department’s infrastructure and [be] subject to FOIA searches.” Did you request a State Department issued Blackberry or a State Department email account in or around August 2011, and, if so, why did you continue using your personal device and clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business instead of replacing your device and account with a State Department-issued BlackBerry or a State Department email account? Include in your answer whether the fact that a State Department-issued BlackBerry or a State Department email address would be subject to FOIA affected your decision. Copies of the email exchanges are attached as Exhibit C for your review.

17. In February 2011, Assistant Secretary Boswell sent you an Information Memo noting “a dramatic increase since January 2011 in attempts . . . to compromise the private home email accounts of senior Department officials.” Assistant Secretary Boswell “urge[d] Department users to minimize the use of personal web-email for business.” Did you review Assistant Secretary Boswell’s Information Memo in or after February 2011, and, if so, why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business? Include in your answer any steps you took to minimize use of your clintonemail.com email account after reviewing the memo. A copy of Assistant Secretary Boswell’s February 2011 Information Memo is attached as Exhibit D for your review.

18. On June 28, 2011, you sent a message to all State Department personnel about securing personal email accounts. In the message, you noted “recent targeting of personal email accounts by online adversaries” and directed all personnel to “[a]void conducting official Department business from your personal email accounts.” Why did you continue using your clintonemail.com email account to conduct official State Department business after June 28, 2011, when you were advising all State Department Personnel to avoid doing so? A copy of the June 28, 2011 message is attached as Exhibit E for your review.

19. Were you ever advised, cautioned, or warned about hacking or attempted hacking of your clintonemail.com email account or the server that hosted your clintonemail.com account and, if so, what did you do in response to the advice, caution, or warning?

20. When you were preparing to leave office, did you consider allowing the State Department access to your clintonemail.com email account to manage and preserve the official emails in your account and to search those emails in response to FOIA requests? If you considered allowing access to your email account, why did you decide against it? If you did not consider allowing access to your email account, why not?

21. After you left office, did you believe you could alter, destroy, disclose, or use email you sent or received concerning official State Department business as you saw fit? If not, why not?

22. In late 2014, the State Department asked that you make available to the Department copies of any federal records of which you were aware, “such as an email sent or received on a personal email account while serving as Secretary of State.” After you left office but before your attorneys reviewed the email in your clintonemail.com email account in response to the State Department’s request, did you alter, destroy, disclose, or use any of the email in the account or authorize or instruct that any email in the account be altered, destroyed, disclosed, or used? If so, describe any email that was altered, destroyed, disclosed, or used, when the alteration, destruction, disclosure, or use took place, and the circumstances under which the email was altered, destroyed, disclosed, or used? A copy of a November 12, 2014 letter from Under Secretary of State for Management Patrick F. Kennedy regarding the State Department’s request is attached as Exhibit F for your review.

23. After your lawyers completed their review of the emails in your clintonemail.com email account in late 2014, were the electronic versions of your emails preserved, deleted, or destroyed? If they were deleted or destroyed, what tool or software was used to delete or destroy them, who deleted or destroyed them, and was the deletion or destruction done at your direction?

24. During your October 22, 2015 appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi, you testified that 90 to 95 percent of your emails “were in the State’s system” and “if they wanted to see them, they would certainly have been able to do so.” Identify the basis for this statement, including all facts on which you relied in support of the statement, how and when you became aware of these facts, and, if you were made aware of these facts by or through another person, identify the person who made you aware of these facts.

25. Identify all communications between you and Brian Pagliano concerning or relating to the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of any emails in your clintonemail.com email account, including any instruction or direction to Mr. Pagliano about the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of emails in your account when transferring the clintonemail.com email system to any alternate or replacement server. For each communication, identify the time, date, place, manner (e.g., in person, in writing, by telephone, or by electronic or other means), persons present or participating, and content of the communication.

“These are simple questions about her email system that we hope will finally result in straight-forward answers, under oath, from Hillary Clinton,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

In his opinion ordering Clinton to answer written questions under oath Judge Sullivan wrote:

The Court is persuaded that Secretary Clinton’s testimony is necessary to enable her to explain on the record the purpose for the creation and operation of the clintonemail.com system for State Department business.

In its July 2016 request to depose Hillary Clinton, Judicial Watch argued:

Secretary Clinton’s deposition is necessary to complete the record. Although certain information has become available through investigations by the Benghazi Select Committee, the FBI, and the State Department Inspector General, as well as through Plaintiff’s narrowly tailored discovery to date, significant gaps in the evidence remain. Only Secretary Clinton can fill these gaps, and she does not argue otherwise.

***

To [Judicial Watch’s] knowledge, Secretary Clinton has never testified under oath why she created and used the clintonemail.com system to conduct official government business. Her only public statements on the issue are unsworn.

Judge Sullivan also ordered that Judicial Watch may depose the former Director of Information Resource Management of the Executive Secretariat (“S/ES-IRM”) John Bentel by October 31.

The questions and deposition arise in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit before Judge Sullivan first filed in September 2013 seeking records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former Deputy Chief of Staff to Clinton.  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)).

Judicial Watch has already taken the deposition testimony of seven Clinton aides and State Department officials.

For further information on this case, click here.

###

---

Judicial Watch
August 22, 2016

Crown Prince of Bahrain Forced to Go Through Foundation to See Clinton, after Pledging $32 Million to Clinton Global Initiative

Hollywood Executive Casey Wasserman, Slimfast Mogul Daniel Abraham, Controversial Appointee Rajiv Fernando also among Clinton Foundation Donors Granted Special Favors from Clinton State Department

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today released 725 pages of new State Department documents, including previously unreleased email exchanges in which former Hillary Clinton’s top aide Huma Abedin provided influential Clinton Foundation donors special, expedited access to the secretary of state. In many instances, the preferential treatment provided to donors was at the specific request of Clinton Foundation executive Douglas Band.

The new documents included 20 Hillary Clinton email exchanges not previously turned over to the State Department, bringing the known total to date to 191 of new Clinton emails (not part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over to the State Department).  These records further appear to contradict statements by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails were turned over to the State Department.

The Abedin emails reveal that the longtime Clinton aide apparently served as a conduit between Clinton Foundation donors and Hillary Clinton while Clinton served as secretary of state. In more than a dozen email exchanges, Abedin provided expedited, direct access to Clinton for donors who had contributed from $25,000 to $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. In many instances, Clinton Foundation top executive Doug Band, who worked with the Foundation throughout Hillary Clinton’s tenure at State, coordinated closely with Abedin. In Abedin’s June deposition to Judicial Watch, she conceded that part of her job at the State Department was taking care of “Clinton family matters.”

Included among the Abedin-Band emails is an exchange revealing that when Crown Prince Salman of Bahrain requested a meeting with Secretary of State Clinton, he was forced to go through the Clinton Foundation for an appointment. Abedin advised Band that when she went through “normal channels” at State, Clinton declined to meet. After Band intervened, however, the meeting was set up within forty-eight hours. According to the Clinton Foundation website, in 2005, Salman committed to establishing the Crown Prince’s International Scholarship Program (CPISP) for the Clinton Global Initiative. And by 2010, it had contributed $32 million to CGI. The Kingdom of Bahrain reportedly gave between $50,000 and $100,000 to the Clinton Foundation. And Bahrain Petroleum also gave an additional $25,000 to $50,000.


Also included among the Abedin-Band emails is an exchange in which Band urged Abedin to get the Clinton State Department to intervene in order to obtain a visa for members of the Wolverhampton (UK) Football Club, one of whose members was apparently having difficulty because of a “criminal charge.” Band was acting at the behest of Casey Wasserman, a millionaire Hollywood sports entertainment executive and President of the Wasserman Foundation. Wasserman has donated between $5 million and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation through the Wasserman Foundation.


The Abedin emails also reveal that Slimfast tycoon S. Daniel Abraham was granted almost immediate access to then-Secretary of State Clinton, with Abedin serving as the facilitator. According to the Clinton Foundation website, Abraham, like the Wasserman Foundation, has given between $5 million and $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. The emails indicate that Abraham was granted almost immediate access to Clinton upon request:


Additional Abedin emails in which the top Clinton aide intervenes with the State Department on behalf of Clinton Foundation donors include the following:

1. On Friday, June 26, 2009, Clinton confidant Kevin O’Keefe wrote to Clinton saying that “Kevin Conlon is trying to set up a meeting with you and a major client.” Clinton wrote to Abedin, “Can you help deliver these for Kevin?” Abedin responded, “I’ll look into it asap” Kevin O’Keefe donated between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation. Kevin Conlon is a Clinton presidential campaign “Hillblazer” who has raised more than $100,000 for the candidate.
2. On Tuesday, June 16, 2009, Ben Ringel wrote to Abedin, “I’m on shuttle w Avigdor Liberman. I called u back yesterday. I want to stop by to see hrc tonite for 10 mins.” Ringel donated between $10,000 and $25,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
3. On Monday, July 6, 2009, Maureen White wrote to Abedin, “I am going to be in DC on Thursday. Would she have any time to spare?” Abedin responded, “Yes I’ll make it work.” White donated $75,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
4. In June 2009, prominent St. Louis political power broker Joyce Aboussie exchanged a series of insistent emails with Abedin concerning Aboussie’s efforts to set up a meeting between Clinton and Peabody Energy VP Cartan Sumner. Aboussie wrote, “Huma, I need your help now to intervene please. We need this meeting with Secretary Clinton, who has been there now for nearly six months. This is, by the way, my first request. I really would appreciate your help on this. It should go without saying that the Peabody folks came to Dick [Gephardt] and I because of our relationship with the Clinton’s.” After further notes from Aboussie, Abedin responded, “We are working on it and I hope we can make something work… we have to work through the beauracracy [sic] here.” Aboussie donated between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation.
5. On Saturday, May 16, 2009, mobile communications executive and political activist Jill Iscol wrote to Clinton, “Please advise to whom I should forward Jacqueline Novogratz’s request [for a meeting with the secretary of state]. I know you know her, but honestly, she is so far ahead of the curve and brilliant I believe she could be enormously helpful to your work.” Clinton subsequently sent an email to Abedin saying, “Pls print.” Jill and husband Ken Iscol donated between $500,000 and $1 million to the Clinton Foundation. Clinton subsequently appointed Novogratz to the State Department’s Foreign Affairs Policy Board.

The newly obtained Abedin emails also contain a memorandum sent to Cheryl Mills from State Department White House liaison Laura Pena revealing that Rajiv Fernando was proposed for his controversial appointment to the sensitive International Security Advisory Board as early as June 2009. Fernando was not actually appointed until 2011, and his appointment raised a firestorm because, according to an ABC News report, “he had no obvious experience in the field.” Fernando donated $1 million to the Clinton Foundation.

The Abedin emails reveal that even U2’s Bono got into the act when former Bill Clinton aide Ben Schwerin, who helped set up the Clinton Foundation, urged Abedin to help the aging rock star broadcast from the international space station. In a May 27, 2009, email with the subject line “Bono/NASA,” Schwerin wrote, “Bono wants to do linkup with the international space station on every show during the tour this year.… Any ideas? Thks.” Bono has been a donor to the Clinton Global Initiative. And in 2011, he gathered top entertainers for “A Decade of Difference: A Concert Celebrating 10 Years of the William J. Clinton Foundation.” According to USA Today, “Some tickets were sold to the public for $50 to $550, and premium seats went for $1,000 to $5,000 on the Foundation website.”

“These new emails confirm that Hillary Clinton abused her office by selling favors to Clinton Foundation donors,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “There needs to be a serious, independent investigation to determine whether Clinton and others broke the law.”

This is the tenth set of records produced for Judicial Watch by the State Department from the non-state.gov email accounts of Huma Abedin.  The documents were produced under a court order in a May 5, 2015, Freedom of Information (FOIA) lawsuit against the State Department (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00684)) requiring the agency to produce “all emails of official State Department business received or sent by former Deputy Chief of Staff Huma Abedin from January 1, 2009 through February 1, 2013, using a ‘non-state’.gov email address.”

In June, Judicial Watch uncovered two batches (here and here) of new Clinton email records through court-ordered discovery.  Twice in May, Judicial Watch uncovered new Clinton emails, including emails that show Clinton knew about the security risk of her BlackBerry (see here and here).

Recently, Judicial Watch released other State Department emails (one batch of 103 pages, the second of 138 pages), with newly discovered Clinton emails also going back as far as January 2009.

In March, Judicial Watch released Clinton State Department emails dating from February 2009 that also call into question her statements about her emails. Those emails contained more evidence of the battle between security officials in the State Department, National Security Agency, Clinton and her staff over attempts to obtain secure BlackBerrys.

On August 9, Judicial Watch produced a 2009 email in which Band directed Abedin and Mills to put Lebanese-Nigerian billionaire and Clinton Foundation donor Gilbert Chagoury in touch with the State Department’s “substance person” on Lebanon. Band noted that Chagoury is “key guy there [Lebanon] and to us.” Chagoury has donated between $1 million to $5 million to the Foundation, according to foundation documents. He also pledged $1 billion to the Clinton Global Initiative.

Hillary Clinton has repeatedly stated that she believes that the 55,000 pages of documents she turned over to the State Department in December 2014 included all of her work-related emails.  In response to a court order in other Judicial Watch litigation, she declared under penalty of perjury that she had “directed that all my emails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or are potentially federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done.” This new email find is also at odds with her official campaign statement suggesting all “work or potentially work-related emails” were provided to the State Department.

---

National Republican Congressional Committee
Date: August 22, 2016
Subject: NOW will Hillary hold a press conference? (Spoiler: Probably not)

During Jim Comey’s damning statement on the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email server, the FBI director revealed that the Bureau discovered “several thousand work-related emails” that Clinton did not disclose to the Department of State. Today, we are getting our first glimpse at the extent to which Hillary Clinton attempted to hide her work-related communications from voters.

The Washington Post reports that nearly 15,000 documents were discovered during the FBI’s investigation that Clinton had not previously disclosed, and a federal judge today ordered the Department of State to speed up its release of these emails to the public.
 
House Democrats have defended Hillary Clinton throughout the investigation, claiming that she never intentionally broke the law with her email server. Now that we know that Clinton lied when she told us she turned over all work-related emails from her time at the State Department, will House Democrats finally demand that Hillary hold a press conference to answer questions and tell the whole truth? Or will they continue to stand silently as Hillary Clinton misleads the American people.
 
NRCC Comment: “These 15,000 new emails prove, once again, that Hillary Clinton lied to the American people about her emails, as House Democrats vocally defended her. House Democrats should join Republicans in demanding that Hillary Clinton hold a press conference to answer outstanding questions about her email server instead of standing silently as she continues to mislead the American people.” – NRCC Spokesman Bob Salera
 
Bob Salera
Rapid Response Director
National Republican Congressional Committee

---

Judicial Watch
August 19, 2016

Clinton to Answer Questions under Oath in Email Scandal

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan’s decision granting Judicial Watch permission to submit interrogatories to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and to depose the former Director of Information Resource Management of the Executive Secretariat (“S/ES-IRM”) John Bentel:


The court order reads:


In his opinion Judge Sullivan writes:


On July 8 Judicial Watch submitted a request for permission to depose Clinton; the Director of Office of Correspondence and Records of the Executive Secretariat (“S/ES-CRM”) Clarence Finney; and Bentel.  The request arises in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit before Judge Sullivan that seeks records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former Deputy Chief of Staff to Clinton.  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)).

---

Republican National Committee
August 10, 2016