Hillary Clinton Answers Written Questions Under Penalty Of Perjury [VIDEOS]

Hillary Clinton Answers Written Questions Under Penalty Of Perjury [VIDEOS]

Hillary Clinton Answers Written Questions Under Penalty Of Perjury [VIDEOS]

In case anyone has been wondering what Hillary has been doing lately, the secret is out. Why?

Hillary Clinton submitted formal answers under penalty of perjury on Thursday about her use of a private email server, saying 20 times that she did not recall the requested information or related discussions, while also asserting that no one ever warned her that the practice could run afoul of laws on preserving federal records.

Well its about time she answered questions! Even though she STILL lied like a RUG 20 times at a minimum throughout the entire written response.

"My emails are squeaky-clean and lemon-scented after that cleaning!"
“My emails are squeaky-clean and lemon-scented after that cleaning!”

Yeah… Bullpucky. Before we go any further, I’ll point out that her entire written testimony can be found here from Judicial Watch and via Politico (yes the same Politico that, for a time had at least one reporter in the bag for Hillary.) Please, read it all. Back to unpacking her plethora of excuses.

1. Supposedly she was never informed that she couldn’t use anything other than State Department emails to conduct business. Hillary – you might want to check this out.

screen-shot-2016-09-02-at-3-32-54-pm

Yes, Hillary YOU signed it in 2009! Therefore unless the entire blasted State Department turned their heads and someone – Cheryl Mills perhaps? – signed the damned thing for you – YOU KNEW it was wrong!

2. Benghazi question? BAD

Does she live under a rock? Or does she really believe that no minion ever DARE question her? Probably some of both.

3. So she kind of lives under a rock. Hence this next contradictory statement

4. However, she did have the presence of mind to keep track of and email from at least FOUR different email addresses.

Hillary and team have LOTS of objections throughout the testimony. Remember her IT pal Bryan Pagliano? The one who is now in contempt of Congress because he ran from a Congressional Summons?

4. Yeah, she really didn’t want to answer anything regarding ANY communications she might’ve had with him. Hence the following concerning question number 25:

Response: Secretary Clinton objects to Interrogatory No. 25 on the ground that it requests information that is outside the scope of permitted discovery for the reasons set forth in General Objection No. 5. Secretary Clinton further objects to Interrogatory No. 25 on the ground that the word “management” is vague. Secretary Clinton further objects to Interrogatory No. 25 insofar as it requests information related to alternate or replacement servers used after Secretary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Secretary Clinton states that she does not recall having communications with Bryan Pagliano concerning or relating to the management, preservation, deletion, or destruction of any e-mails in her clintonemail.com email account.

Well…isn’t that convenient! Oh but that’s not all. Remember these four great Americans?

Benghazi Four

Remember her response under testimony?

The difference is ..HILLARY, you knew it was a terrorist attack and when you sat there and testified you KNEW you could’ve done better, but you didn’t and that’s on you.

5. Here’s question 24 posed to her under under oath.

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.

Invoking attorney client privilege is SO CONVENIENT. BTW, she was supposed to have these answered by September 30th. Today is October 14th and the answers were submitted when? October 13, 2016. I’d say that’s stretching the deadline a tad wouldn’t you?

'Seriously, What difference does it make??!!'
‘Seriously, What difference does it make??!!’

Here’s the deal folks. If Hillary has nothing to hide, then why all the objections and invocation of attorney client privilege? Why didn’t she submit to questioning verbally instead of getting 30+ days to craft her non-answers? Because you and I know she wouldn’t know the truth if it bit her on the butt.

Written by

2 Comments
  • GWB says:

    Hence this next contradictory statement

    Well, c’mon now! Knowing your are “subject to” FOIA requests doesn’t mean anyone will actually make a FOIA request! Those aren’t contradictory at all! (Because everyone knows a FOIA would just be ignored, and someone would experience Arkancide if they did push it.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead
Instagram