Last week, the Hillary Clinton server soap opera continued after the discovery of a string of previously undisclosed emails.
The emails included an exchange between Clinton and General David Petraeus, then-head of CENTCOM, in January and February of 2009.
This wouldn’t be particularly compelling, given the more dramatic turns this story has taken, if Clinton hadn’t signed an affidavit on August 10, swearing “under penalty of perjury” that she had turned over all government related emails.
According to the Associated Press:
“The Petraeus emails, first discovered by the Defense Department and then passed to the State Department’s inspector general challenge…Clinton’s claim that she has handed over the entirety of her work emails from the account.”
Appearing on Fox News’ “The Kelly File,” Judge Andrew Napolitano predicted Clinton’s defense, saying:
“She’s going to argue–because she stated…that she’s not a technical person, and she didn’t pay attention to emails, and she doesn’t understand exactly how the entire email system works–I’m afraid that’s not an argument that the judge wants to hear, and will essentially fall on deaf ears.”
Speaking to potential legal action, Napolitano added:
“I think that the FBI will recommend to the Justice Department that she be indicted.”
IJ spoke to Tom Fitton, President of the conservative watchdog organization Judicial Watch, who said that while he couldn’t speak to the charges of perjury:
“There’s no doubt [Clinton’s] statement was not accurate.”
At some point, it will be up to the judge to decide if Clinton perjured herself, or if her alleged lack of knowledge precludes her from such a charge.
 |
| Click To Visit Newsletter |
