Judicial Watch, the watchdog organization responsible for the bulk of the information we now know about Hillary Clinton’s private email server, has released a new court document that further details just how little regard she and her team have for the law. The group submitted 25 questions for her to answer regarding her email and… she didn’t really answer much.

Judicial Watch today released received responses under oath from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton concerning her email practices.  Judicial Watch submitted twenty-five questions on August 30 to Clinton as ordered by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.

The new Clinton responses  in the Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit before Judge Sullivan was first filed in September 2013 seeking records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, former deputy chief of staff to Clinton.  The lawsuit was reopened because of revelations about the clintonemail.com system (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).

Judicial Watch has already taken the deposition testimony of seven Clinton aides and State Department officials.

[…]

“We’re pleased that we now have a little bit more information about Hillary Clinton’s email practices,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Our lawyers will be reviewing the responses closely. Mrs. Clinton’s refusal to answer many of the questions in a clear and straightforward manner further reflects disdain for the rule of law.”

The questions, which can be viewed in full here, ask her to detail when the idea to use the server was hatched, how it was created, who created, and other, similar questions. Many of the questions begin with this wonderful phrase: “Secretary Clinton objects…” to whatever the question, definition, etc. may be. Her answer… isn’t really that out of character for her, but it’s also pretty obviously dismissive of the severity of the offense (you know, the offense the FBI refused to recommend charges on for partisan reasons).