(PatriotWise.com)- Hillary Clinton is really, really mad about Special Counsel John Durham’s recent uncovering of a plot by Clinton campaign lawyers that saw tech experts monitoring communications coming from Trump Tower and the Trump White House.
In a federal court filing, Durham revealed how her campaign team in 2016 paid a contractor to monitor then-candidate Trump’s communications. The revelation confirmed what the former president has said for many years about Democrats spying on his campaign.
In response, Clinton said in a speech at the New York State Democratic Convention that Fox News and former President Donald Trump were coming “awfully close to actual malice in their attacks.”
The reference to “actual malice” is significant. When somebody is a public figure, a defamation lawsuit requires the plaintiff to prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice” when making claims that they believe are defamatory. Clinton’s comment appeared to be a legal threat to Fox News and Donald Trump…but not everybody is buying it.
And it’s obvious why, too. Durham isn’t making this up. His findings come from a years-long investigation that found more dirt on Hillary Clinton than the FBI’s investigation into Trump’s “Russian collusion” could ever find on Trump.
Bryon York, the chief political correspondent for the Washington examiner, spoke to Fox Business Tonight not long after Clinton made the comment and downplayed the likelihood that she will actually file a lawsuit.
“But one thing that was fascinating in the speech was when she was talking about her grievances against the quote ‘right-wing’, she used the phrase ‘actual malice’ to talk about the press which is a legal phrase,” he said. “It’s the legal standard for libel for someone who’s a public figure to sue a publication.”
He argued that it’s unlikely Clinton will sue any publication simply because of the discovery process. This is the part of a lawsuit where both sides are able to request information relating to the case. In a lawsuit about Clinton allegedly hiring tech experts to spy on former President Donald Trump, lawyers would gain access to a treasure trove of information that would likely show what Clinton was up to all along.
While it’s interesting Clinton used the phrase, York noted, it’s not likely she’ll actually do anything about it.
Why would Clinton want to go through discovery, a process that allows investigators to access her personal files and communications and then share them with the world in public court filings?
If Clinton doesn’t follow through on this threat, then presumably what Trump and Fox are saying…is true.