Support Free Republic Folks, Donate Today!
Posted on 07/03/2020 11:17:42 AM PDT by jazusamo
Judicial Watch Sues to Expose Full Truth Behind Obama Unmasking/Spy Abuses
Judicial Watch Files First Amendment Lawsuit Against DC – Because No One Is Above the Law!
Supreme Court Allows the Abortion Industry to Set Abortion Policy
Happy Independence Day!
Judicial Watch Sues to Expose Full Truth Behind Obama Unmasking/Spy Abuses
The term “unmasking” refers to the practice of political appointees obtaining the identities of American citizens referenced in intelligence surveillance of foreign nationals.
Unmasking has a legitimate purpose, but in the final months of the Obama administration his lieutenants were abusing the process as they frantically looked for dirt on the Trump campaign.
Reportedly, one of the worst abusers was Obama’s U.N. Ambassador, Samantha Power. In 2017, it was reported that Power unmasked over 260 persons in her last year as Ambassador in an attempt to uncover associates of President Trump. She “was ‘unmasking’ at such a rapid pace in the final months of the Obama administration that she averaged more than one request for every working day in 2016,” even seeking “information in the days leading up to President Trump’s inauguration.”
We have now filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the State Department over requests by Power to unmask the identities of U.S. citizens whose names appear in intelligence reports concerning Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election ( Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:20-cv-01729)).
We sued after the Justice Department failed to respond to a May 29, 2019, FOIA request for:
Our FOIA request and this lawsuit were filed after a similar 2018 lawsuit filed in 2018 ( Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 18-0300) ), which derived from an October 31, 2017 FOIA request, was closed on March 3, 2019. The court upheld the Department of State’s response that it need not disclose whether or not responsive records existed for national security reasons. This new lawsuit argues that the State Department’s earlier Glomarresponse (that it could neither confirm nor deny whether records existed) was no longer sustainable:
On May 13, 2020, the Director of National Intelligence released a newly declassified memorandum and accompanying list identifying officials who submitted requests to the National Security Agency (“NSA”) to “unmask” the identity of former National Security Advisor Michael T. Flynn in NSA foreign intelligence reports. The list demonstrates that, between November 30, 2016 and January 11, 2017, Ambassador Power submitted seven requests to “unmask” Flynn’s identity in such NSA foreign intelligence reports and that all seven requests were approved.
The entire world now knows the Obama administration went on an unprecedented fishing expedition that involved unmasking General Flynn but almost certainly others tied to the Trump campaign, including the President and his family. For almost three years, the State Department has been stonewalling our request for information for this basic Obamagate information. We hope the court tears down this stonewall around the worst corruption scandal in American history.
We argue that at least some of Ambassador Power’s unmasking requests likely concerned intelligence reports about Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and therefore relate to the subject matter of our May 29, 2019, FOIA request.
There is a long history related to Samantha Power’s and “unmasking” activities that lend credence to this argument.
On October 13, 2017, Power testified behind closed doors about this matter to the House Intelligence Committee. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, who also sits on the Intelligence Committee, stated that , “Her testimony is they [the unmasking requests] may be under my name, but I did not make those requests.”
In 2019, Power’s political bias came into question because of her harsh comments about President Trump found in her official government emails.
Then in May of this year, Power’s name appears on the unmasking list for General Flynn seven times , even though she testified under oath before Congress that she had “ no recollection ” of ever making such a request.
Our intelligence agencies have vast powers, and Obama used them illegally to spy on political opponents. This can’t be allowed to stand. And we aim to uncover the truth about this terrible corruption.
Judicial Watch Files First Amendment Lawsuit Against DC – Because No One Is Above the Law!
As you may know, we asked District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser and other officials for permission to paint our motto – “Because No One Is Above the Law!” – on a DC street. They of course have played games and have yet to grant us our request.
So, we just filed a civil rights lawsuit for First Amendment violations over their refusal. ( Judicial Watch. v. Muriel Bowser, et al . (No. 1:20-cv-01789)).
Here’s the background. On June 5, 2020, after days of protests and riots in Washington, DC, led by the Black Lives Matter organization, Mayor Bowser authorized the painting of “Black Lives Matter” on 16th Street NW, and later authorized or allowed “Defund the Police” to be painted alongside it.
On June 10, 2020, we sent a letter requesting permission to paint “Because No One is Above the Law!” in the identical size and coloring of the “Black Lives Matter” painting on another DC street near its headquarters near Capitol Hill. We offered to pay for the cost of the painting and, citing the timely nature of the issue, asked for a response in three days.
Instead, after three weeks of emails with the Mayor’s office, we have yet to receive a substantive response to its street painting request.
Our lawsuit argues that DC officials denied timely, access to Judicial Watch to paint its own expressive message and violated federal civil rights law in:
(a) allowing District streets to be used for the painting of expressive messages, which constitutes protected, First Amendment activity, but denying Plaintiff (Judicial Watch) the timely opportunity to paint its expressive message on a District street for reasons that are not narrowly drawn to achieve a compelling government interest; (b) failing to provide a reasonable basis for denying Plaintiff the timely opportunity to paint is expressive message on a District street; (c) favoring the expressive messages painted on 16th Street NW and/or creating the appearance of endorsing those messages to the exclusion of Plaintiff’s message on a related subject matter; and/or (d) failing to provide reasonable, non-arbitrary processes and procedures for timely consideration of Plaintiff’s request to paint an expressive message on District streets.
Mayor Bowser gave us the runaround rather than access, as the First Amendment requires, to a DC street to paint our timely message and motto. Our message is especially relevant today because it applies equally to law enforcement and public officials, as well as to protesters, looters, and rioters.
Meanwhile in New York …
On Tuesday, June 30, in response New York Mayor de Blasio’s announcement that “Black Lives Matter” is to be painted on prominent streets in all five boroughs, we formally asked the mayor for permission to paint “Because No One Is Above the Law” on a street, preferably Fifth Avenue between 81st and 83rd Streets.
Here is our letter to Mayor de Blasio:
Re: Request to Paint Message Along Fifth Avenue Between 81st and 83rd Streets
Dear Mayor de Blasio:
On June 9, 2020, the City’s press office issued a press release stating that your administration will work with community activists to paint five streets, one in each borough, to commemorate the Black Lives Matter movement. During a press conference 10 days later, you announced the five locations to include Center Street, in Manhattan; Richmond Terrace, in Staten Island; Joralemon Street, in Brooklyn; 153rd Street in Queens; and Morris Avenue in the Bronx. On June 26th, you also confirmed that “Black Lives Matter” would be painted along Fifth Avenue between 56th and 57th Streets. These paintings are expressive activity.
Judicial Watch, Inc. is a Washington, DC-based, non-profit organization. For more than twenty-five years, Judicial Watch, Inc. has promoted transparency, accountability and integrity in government and fidelity to the rule of law. Our motto is “Because No One Is Above the Law!” – a message that is particularly relevant today because it applies equally to law enforcement and public officials as well as to protesters, looters, and rioters.
Because City streets are now being used as public fora for expressive activity, we would like to have our motto painted along a street, preferably Fifth Avenue between 81st and 83rd Streets. The lettering would be identical in size and color to the lettering used to paint “Black Lives Matter” in the six above-referenced locations. We would pay the cost of the painting, but we would likely need the assistance of the City to aid in traffic diversion and parking restrictions while the painting is completed. Of course, the painting could be completed in the same manner as the other locations.
As the timeliness of our message is important, please respond within 3 working days. If our desired location is not possible, we are open to considering alternative locations.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Tom Fitton
President, Judicial Watch
The Left claims public thoroughfares as its rightful place for protesting, marching, rioting and painting. We have a right to equal expression and we’re in court to vindicate our rights and the Constitution!
Supreme Court Allows the Abortion Industry to Set Abortion Policy
Meanwhile Flynn is still in legal limbo because of this the rat Judge.
Off the Wall Ping!
Contact to be added.
need to file one in calofornia too - newsom banned singing in churches
I agree, the jerk has gone off the deep end.
Of course, Durham and Barr can’t be bothered by any of this stuff I guess?
No lawful law enforcement in DC; virtually none created therein either.
Support Free Republic Folks, Donate Today!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.