The investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server just got hotter.
Now one judge issued a major ruling in the case.
And it was not what anyone expected.
Judicial Watch – which obtained thousands of Hillary’s emails through Freedom of Information Act requests – filed a request seeking documents surrounding the State Department’s handling of the investigation into Hillary’s private server.
They believed the documents would have shed light on the cover-up of Hillary’s illegal private email server.
But a judge denied their request.
“A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that a conservative group cannot get State Department records about Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server during her tenure as Secretary of State because those documents don’t show evidence of government “malfeasance.”
“The Court… concludes that Judicial Watch has not provided a sufficient basis to believe that the information withheld by the State Department would shed light on any government misconduct,” U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg wrote after privately reviewing the 30 records in dispute.
Details about the government’s internal deliberative process are typically exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, but Judicial Watch said the records were part of an illicit effort to cover up Clinton’s violation of record-keeping laws and policies.
“A document sheds light on misconduct when it ‘reflects any governmental impropriety,’ but not when it merely reflects a ‘part of the legitimate government process intended to be protected by Exemption 5,’” Boasberg wrote.
The judge’s decision concludes that none of the redacted emails contained “hints of nefarious government action or motive in responding to that conduct.”
But is this the end of the line?
Judicial Watch has promised to consider all option.
And Politico also reports that with the Trump administration in office that the Justice Department will reconsider their request:
“Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said the organization is happy the court took the step to review the requested documents. He also said the group is “evaluating the opinion and considering” moving on with an appeal.
“We remain curious about the documents,” Fitton said. “The PR effort remains troubling and something that we think is in the public’s interest to know.”
Fitton assured the watchdog organization will want the Department of Justice under President Donald Trump to take a second look at their request.
“We expect the Trump administration to be more transparent on this issue, since the last administration was completely lawless on this issue,” Fitton added.”
The Obama administration was known to be hostile to Freedom of Information Act requests.
Time reports that the Obama administration denied more FOIA requests on national security grounds than any other administration in history:
“Part of the increase in the federal government’s refusals to release information may be due to an uptick last year in requests for information; in 2013, citizens asked the White House to release secret information 704,394 times, an 8% rise from the year before. Under the Freedom of Information Act, known commonly as “FOIA,” any citizen is supposed to be able to request and receive any piece of information from the federal government at little or no cost, unless the release of that information would harm national security or violate the privacy of a person or business. The Obama White House cited such exceptions in denying FOIA requests more times that ever before in 2013: 546,574.”
An Associated Press study found the Obama administration censored documents and delayed the release of others at a greater rate than ever before.
Time also reports:
“According to the Associated Press analysis, which covers 99 federal agencies over six years, the Obama administration censored more documents and delayed or denied access to more government files than ever before. In 2013, the administration cited national security concerns a record 8,496 times as an excuse for withholding information from the public. That’s a 57% increase over the year before and more than double the number in Obama’s first year in office.”
So it’s no surprise Judicial Watch had to fight tooth-and-nail for the release of documents that pertain to the Hillary Clinton’s private email server.
And this Judge’s ruling will – for now – continue the cover up of her conduct and the investigation surrounding her actions.
But will the new administration bring more transparency to the process?
Many are hoping the answer is “yes.”