As more of Hillary Clinton’s e-mails come to light, the evidence of her corruption and deliberate criminal activity continues to mount. Newly released e-mails — this time from Judicial Watch — show that Clinton likely lied under oath when she testified that she had not communicated with Bryan Pagliano prior to the deletion of e-mails and having the server wiped before obeying a subpoena to turn everything over to investigators.
Judicial Watch reported Wednesday that Clinton had testified under oath last week that she “does not recall having communications” with Pagliano — who installed and maintained Clinton’s private e-mail server — about her e-mail server or account in the period just prior to her deletion of 30,000 e-mails and having the server wiped with the open-source program known as BleachBit. But e-mails obtained by Judicial Watch from the Department of State through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request show a series of communications between Clinton and Pagliano which deal directly with that e-mail system.
Judicial Watch reports:
On October 13, 2016, Judicial Watch released Clinton’s responses given under oath to 25 questions posed by Judicial Watch as ordered by U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan in separate litigation. The final question reads:
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.
Clinton’s 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. [Emphasis added.]
Clinton also claimed she “does not recall” 20 times in her responses given under oath.
{modulepos inner_text_ad}
When Judicial Watch deposed Bryan Pagliano in June 2016, he invoked his protection under the Fifth Amendment “more than 125 times.” But even without Pagliano answering questions which would have either put him in the position of perjuring himself under oath or contradicting Clinton’s sworn testimony, Judicial Watch President Tom Filton was able to say that “Hillary Clinton was less than forthright and misled the public when she wrote, under oath, that she ‘couldn’t recall’ communicating with Bryan Pagliano about her email scheme.” That statement is based on some of the nearly 15,000 e-mails recovered by the FBI during its investigation of Clinton’s misuse of classified information. One such e-mail thread shows — beyond doubt — that Clinton was in contact with Pagliano about the e-mail just before the deletion of the 30,000 e-mails and the wiping of the server:
From: H
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 8:45 AM
To: Justin Cooper, Bryan Pagliano [Cooper was a senior advisor to Bill Clinton]
Cc: Oscar Floras [manager of Clinton’s New York home]
Subject: Help!
Once again, I’m having BB trouble. I am not receiving emails although people are getting ones I send but I get their replies on my IP. I’ve taken out the battery and done what I know to do but with no luck yet any ideas?
***
From: H
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 8:54 AM
To: Justin Cooper
Cc: Bryan M. Pagliano, Oscar Flores
Subject: Re: Help!
Thanks, Justin. How does that happen. do I need to do anything?
***
From: Bryan Pagliano
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 10:32 AM
To: H
Cc: Justin Cooper, Oscar Flores
Subject: Re: Help!
Let me take a look at the server to see if it offers any insight. iPhone is not much different from iPad, however in both cases the security landscape is different from the blackberry.
-Bryan
***
From: H
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2012 11:44 AM
To: Justin Cooper
Cc: Bryan M. Pagliano, Oscar Flores
Subject: Re:
Thanks again. I’m back in business.
Now, remember that Clinton testified — under oath — 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.” Any reasonable, honest person would realize that the e-mail thread above is about “the management … of… e-mails in her clintonemail.com email account.” But Hillary Clinton appears neither reasonable nor honest.
Because, in the midst of this technical problem, Pagliano did what any IT guy worth his weight in silicon would do: He looked “at the server to see if it offers any insight,” as he said in his e-mail to Clinton.
Perhaps Clinton deserves the benefit of the doubt. It is possible that she suffers from memory loss where important events are concerned and just couldn’t remember sending and receiving a whole string of e-mails about her BlackBerry not getting e-mail. Of course, that lack of memory about important matters during times of stress would not make her a good pick for the office for which she is currently running, but that would cause this writer to reflect again on her lack of reasonableness. It is also possible that — at least for Clinton — it all depends on what the meaning of the word “communications” is. Or what the meaning of the word “management” is. Or what the meaning of what the word “server” is.
It is also possible — even probable — that Clinton was following a Clinton family tradition and simply lied under oath. Because the simplest answer is usually the correct answer. After all, these 15,000 e-mails (including this thread) were e-mails Clinton deleted, saying they were all personal e-mails which were either between her and Bill, about her yoga schedule, or about Chelsea’s wedding plans. Her history of being shown to lie — whether under oath or not — does not encourage one to go out on a limb to believe her.
She would have been better to follow Pagliano’s lead and plead the Fifth.
