Many of us are tired of hearing the slogan “Lock Her Up,” because it seems as if Hillary Clinton will never face justice.

That may be true, however, there’s a federal judge out of the U.S. District court who has had enough of the stonewalling in the Judicial Watch email case, and is opening the flood gates against Hillary Clinton.

Seriously, this man is absolutely furious. 

Snopes Scandal: Court Docs: Snopes Founder Embezzled Nearly $100K in Company Money to Pay for Prostitutes

Judge Royce C. Lamberth is blasting the State Department for essentially “covering up” for Clinton, and not only urged conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch to “shake this tree,” he granted them the power to do it.

When do you think the country should re-open and get back to work?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

In addition, the judge also stated that the State Department has handled this case so poorly that Judicial Watch may be entitled to collect attorney fees from it.

Judge Lamberth went on to say that he was not looking to punish the government, but was rooting out government misconduct.


Shock Poll: 73 Percent of Republican Students Hide Political Beliefs Fearing Teacher Backlash 

This man could be the bold hero we’ve been waiting for!

During a court hearing last month regarding the State Department’s proven attempts to cover up former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email scandal, a federal judge reportedly excoriated department lawyers for “bureaucratic incompetence” and political posturing.

The case was brought by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group that’s been attempting for years to obtain the full records on Clinton’s infamous email scandal. Likewise, the State Department has for years been stonewalling at every opportunity.

Now fast-forward to Aug. 22, when U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth blasted State Department lawyers over their stonewalling and, more importantly, “granted significant new discovery to Judicial Watch on the Clinton email issue,” according to the watchdog group.

The judge’s angry rant began with him dropping a truth bomb on the attorneys. Their argument had been that discovery in the case should remain closed. But …

“All right, first let me clarify the Government’s misunderstanding: We’re not reopening discovery here. Discovery never closed,” he said.

Lamberth continued by blaming the whole situation on the lawyers themselves.

“Remember what got us started down this path in the first place,” he said. “In late 2014 and early 2015, at least some State Department officials knew Secretary Clinton’s emails were missing; they knew Judicial Watch didn’t know that; they knew the Court didn’t know that, but the Department pressed forward trying to settle this case. So I authorized discovery into whether these settlement efforts amounted to bad faith.”

The situation exists because the State Department had been lying from day one. Admittedly, this a complaint Lamberth has issued before, including during another hearing last year.

“The State Department told me it had produced all the records. That was not true at the time. It was not true. It was a lie,” he said at the time.

That particular hearing had been about Clinton’s Benghazi-related emails.

“Now the Government seeks to duck behind an unpublished D.C. Circuit opinion from 2018 holding the Government has already taken every reasonable action under the Federal Records Act to retrieve Clinton’s 30,000 missing emails and no imaginable enforcement action could recover any more,” Lamberth continued during last-month’s hearing.

But that too now appears to be a lie.

Just a week prior to the hearing, the Senate Finance and Homeland Security Committees released documents “revealing Clinton IT aide Paul Combetta copied all but four of the missing emails to a Gmail account that does not appear to have ever been reconstructed and searched.”

And then came the judicial slap heard around the world:

The Court thinks Judicial Watch ought to shake this tree. And the Court agrees with Judicial Watch that it should talk to three never-before-deposed State officials who raised concerns about Clinton’s private email use all the way back to 2009. There is no FOIA exemption for political expedience, nor is there one for bureaucratic incompetence.

But there’s more. The judge also stated that the State Department has handled this case so poorly that Judicial Watch may be entitled to collect attorney fees from it.

Lamberth concluded by stating that his decision isn’t about being harsh on the government but rather about rooting out government misconduct and doing the right thing. []


Attn: Wayne Dupree is a free speech champion who works tirelessly to bring you news that the mainstream media ignores. But he needs your support in order to keep delivering quality, independent journalism. You can make a huge impact in the war against fake news by pledging as little as $5 per month. Please click here to help Wayne battle the fake news media.