Posted on 06/28/2019 5:08:29 PM PDT by jazusamo
The Supreme Court Endorse Judicial Harassment of President Trump
Did The FBI Properly Vet Andrew McCabe’s Book?
Nicaragua Arrests ISIS Terrorists Planning to Enter the U.S.
What Does the CIA Know About The Mena Controversy?
Happy Independence Day!
The Supreme Court Endorse Judicial Harassment of President Trump
Through the years, we have been vigilant defenders of integrity in our elections and that has included exposing efforts to dilute the will of U.S. citizens at the polls. So of course, we are disappointed in the Supreme Court’s ruling that delays, perhaps permanently, the Trump administration’s plan to include a question on the 2020 census inquiring about a respondent’s citizenship status.
It is unfortunate that the Supreme Court has endorsed the continued judicial harassment of the Trump administration. It ought to be an obvious point that the U.S. Census should try to figure out how many Americans and non-Americans are present in the United States.
We strongly encourage the Trump administration to try to move this issue through the courts in time for the 2020 census.
In mid-February, we joined with the Allied Educational Foundation (AEF) in filing an amici curiae brief in the United States Supreme Court, urging it to overturn the ruling of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York blocking the Secretary of Commerce from adding a question about citizenship to the 2020 census. The brief argues that including a citizenship question would help us and the government make sure only eligible citizens are on the voting rolls:
But leftists hate the idea of the American people knowing more about the number of foreign nationals present in the United States, which is why they oppose a census question about citizenship. You can be sure that Judicial Watch will continue to monitor, and participate, when appropriate, in next round of court fights on this key question about the future of our nation.
Did The FBI Properly Vet Andrew McCabe’s Book?
The scandal involving former FBI Executive Andrew McCabe, his wife and Hillary Clinton henchman Terry McAuliffe was so transparent that only a DC “Swamp Creature” could overlook it.
We aren’t overlooking it and, as you know, we have several lawsuits in the works to throw light on this blatantly egregious behavior.
Here is our latest.
We have filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe related to his book, The Threat: How the FBI Protects America in the Age of Terror and Trump ( Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00976)).
We sued after the FBI failed to respond to our February 8, 2019, FOIA request seeking:
McCabe was fired from the FBI in March 2018 for leaking to the media and lacking “ candor .” Then-U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions in a statement said:
After an extensive and fair investigation and according to Department of Justice procedure, the Department’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) provided its report on allegations of misconduct by Andrew McCabe to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR).
The FBI’s OPR then reviewed the report and underlying documents and issued a disciplinary proposal recommending the dismissal of Mr. McCabe. Both the OIG and FBI OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor − including under oath − on multiple occasions.
***
Pursuant to Department Order 1202, and based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department’s senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately.”
A February 2018 DOJ inspector general report concluded:
As detailed in this report, the OIG [Office of the Inspector General] found that then-Deputy Director Andrew McCabe lacked candor, including under oath, on multiple occasions in connection with describing his role in connection with a disclosure to the WSJ [The Wall Street Journal], and that this conduct violated FBI Offense Codes 2.5 and 2.6. The OIG also concluded that McCabe’s disclosure of the existence of an ongoing investigation in the manner described in this report violated the FBI’s and the Department’s media policy and constituted misconduct.
McCabe played a central role in Spygate, the Deep State’s effort to spy upon and undermine President Trump. We aim to find out if McCabe’s book was properly vetted or simply rubberstamped by anti-Trump bureaucrats before being published.
And we are pursuing additional lawsuits regarding McCabe:
On February 14, 2019, we filed a FOIA lawsuit for all records of communication of McCabe, the Office of the Attorney General Jeff Sessions, or the Office of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein discussing the 25th Amendment or presidential fitness. Additionally, the lawsuit seeks all recordings made by any official in the Office of the Attorney General or Deputy Attorney General of meetings in the Executive Office of the President or Vice President.
In September 2017, we filed a FOIA lawsuit on behalf of Jeffrey A. Danik, a retired FBI supervisory special agent, against the U.S. Department of Justice for records concerning McCabe. Danik worked for the Federal Bureau of Investigation for almost 30 years. We later filed two additional lawsuits over the FBI’s failure to preserve text messages as federal records and for records of the audit of McCabe’s communications.
In another FOIA lawsuit we made public Justice Department records showing that McCabe did not recuse himself from the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s unsecure, non-government email server until Tuesday, November 1, 2016 , one week prior to the presidential election. McCabe had a serious potential conflict of interest in this investigation because Clinton-aligned political groups donated nearly $700,000 ( 40% of the campaign’s total funds) to McCabe’s wife for her political campaign.
This kind of activity was rampant during the Barack Obama Administration.
Nicaragua Arrests ISIS Terrorists Planning to Enter the U.S.
Off the Wall Ping!
Contact to be added.
The Court rejected the argument from New York concerning the conduct of the Census and the authority of the Secretary of Commerce to determine the inclusion of questions on the Census form. Justice Thomas point out that the Court ruled correctly on the main points and said that the matter ought to have ended there. But, the Chief Justice went beyond and addressed the process foul about whether the Commerce Department had full complied with the Administrative Process Act.
This is like getting a parking ticket while you are in court winning your lawsuit against the city for their illegal parking ticket practices.
This was a bone thrown to the liberals, although it makes no sense that the Chief Justice keeps bending over backwards to please the Left. This remaining issue can probably resolved by a reworded explanation from the Commerce Department. The District Judge cannot touch the substantive issues, they have already been decided. The judge will have little to do but grade the new paper. If he gives it an F and tries to retry the case, the Supreme Court will step in and reign him in. The question is, can the judge slow walk all of this. I think not, but we’ll find out.
Well said!
In my view CJ Roberts really split hairs with his opinion that Commerce has the authority but in essence has to give a better reason.
Like you say, it should be a simple thing but with the agendas of leftist judges you never know.
CJ ROberts has repeatedly demonstrated himself to be a leftist buttboy.
I haven’t tortured myself by reading the Administrative Law Act, but my concern is that there is a massive bureaucratic process involved (advertising the content and explanation, a series of public comments and hearings, official responses, re-advertising, more comments and hearing, ad nauseum), full of technicalities that the Lawfare scum can exploit. Otherwise, why didn’t the Commerce Department just explain the reasons in previous court challenges?
Since the Commerce folks seem incapable of forming a justification statement, here’s one: “In this time of high immigration of all types, an accurate count of citizens and non-citizen residents is necessary for forming effective public policy, seeking and making appropriations, assessing budgets, and administrating federal programs.” Someone’s going to argue that it isn’t?
Love Tom Fitton
Backwards? Not sure about that.
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.