Support Free Republic Folks, Donate Today!
Posted on 10/17/2020 9:11:48 AM PDT by jazusamo
Judicial Watch Asks for Full Court Review on Clinton Testimony
Voter Registration in 353 Counties in 29 States Exceeds 100%
Judicial Watch is Joining The ObamaGate Movie as Executive Producers
Ballot Update: We Clean Up Dirty Voter Rolls
Federal Agency Under Fire for Promoting ‘White Lives Matter Ideology’
You’ll Want to Get the New Judicial Watch Book: A Republic Under Assault
Judicial Watch Asks for Full Court Review on Clinton Testimony
We still intend to interview Hillary Clinton.
We have filed a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia concerning the deposition of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit relevant to her government emails ( In re Hillary Rodham Clinton and Cheryl Mills (No. 20-5056)).
We filed the petition after an August 31, 2020, opinion by the Court of Appeals granted Clinton’s petition for mandamus relief, allowing her to avoid giving sworn testimony in our lawsuit seeking records about the Obama administration’s public statements regarding the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. The lawsuit led directly to the disclosure of Clinton’s email use ( Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:14-cv-01242)).
We argue that the appeals panel granted Clinton extraordinary relief that was specifically denied to General Flynn by the full appeals court. The full appeals court, in denying General Flynn mandamus relief, ruled that he could pursue alternative remedies for relief, such as an appeal of any adverse decision by the lower court at the end of his criminal case. The panel treated Clinton differently:
The panel’s failure to consider Clinton’s available remedies when it labeled her a party-litigant has, in effect, extended more rights to Clinton than to ordinary parties, including Plaintiff, the Government, and most recently Flynn. Rehearing and rehearing en banc is necessary for this additional reason.
***
It also is at odds with this Court’s recent en banc decision denying mandamus to U.S. Army Lieutenant General Michael T. Flynn because an “adequate alternative remedy exists.” Rehearing and rehearing en banc is necessary “to secure and maintain uniformity of the court’s decisions.”
We further argue that the ruling undermines FOIA by ignoring Supreme Court and other precedent:
A district court may order limited discovery in FOIA cases where there is evidence that an agency acted in bad faith. A district court also has “broad discretion to manage the scope of discovery” in FOIA cases. The panel nonetheless found that discovery in FOIA is limited to “the actions of the individuals who conducted the search” for records responsive to a request. The panel’s finding is a radical departure from what Congress intended, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of FOIA, and this Court’s precedent. In effect, it eliminates any discovery into the actions of agency officials or employees other than FOIA officers, walling off from any inquiry officials or employees who may be less than honest with FOIA officers or who might seek to conceal agency records from FOIA officers to prevent their disclosure to the public, among other matters plainly relevant to an agency’s good faith in responding to FOIA requests.
We highlight the urgency of the issue by pointing to renewed efforts by the State Department and Justice Department to use the appellate court’s decision to try to shut down all other discovery into Clinton’s email use.
The decision to give Hillary Clinton special protection from having to testify about her emails undermines the rule of law and would eviscerate FOIA. The court should explain to the American people why it would protect Hillary Clinton while denying similar relief to General Flynn.
Here’s the background.
On December 6, 2018, U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth ordered that former United States Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice and senior Obama State Department officials, lawyers and Clinton aides be deposed or answer written questions under oath in the lawsuit. Judge Lamberth called Clinton’s email system “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”
In May 2019, Rice admitted under oath that she emailed Clinton on Clinton’s personal email account and “in rare instances” received emails related to U.S. government business on her own personal email account. Rice claimed she “took steps” to ensure that official emails were “also on her government email account” but did not identify those steps. Rice’s 2019 sworn answers are available here .
On March 2, 2020, Judge Lamberth ordered Judicial Watch us depose Clinton and Mills, under oath, regarding Clinton’s email system and the existence of records about the Benghazi attack. Clinton and Mills filed an emergency mandamus appeal to avoid testifying.
We’re not giving up on this.
Voter Registration in 353 Counties in 29 States Exceeds 100%
In 2018 the Supreme Court upheld a voter-roll cleanup program that resulted from our settlement of a federal lawsuit with Ohio . California settled a NVRA lawsuit with us and last year began the process of removing up to 1.6 million inactive names from Los Angeles County’s voter rolls. Kentucky also began a cleanup of hundreds of thousands of old registrations last year after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit. In September 2020, we sued Illinois for refusing to disclose voter roll data in violation of Federal law.
So we’ve been busy and effective. Unfortunately, the problem persists.
Our newly released study reveals that 353 U.S. counties had 1.8 million more registered voters than eligible voting-age citizens. In other words, the registration rates of those counties exceeded 100% of eligible voters. The study finds eight states showing statewide registration rates exceeding 100%: Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
The September 2020 study collected the most recent registration data posted online by the states themselves. This data was then compared to the Census Bureau’s most recent five-year population estimates, gathered by the American Community Survey (ACS) from 2014 through 2018. ACS surveys are sent to 3.5 million addresses each month, and its five-year estimates are considered to be the most reliable estimates outside of the decennial census.
Our latest study is necessarily limited to 37 states that post regular updates to their registration data. Certain state voter registration lists may also be even larger than reported, because they may have excluded “inactive voters” from their data. Inactive voters, who may have moved elsewhere, are still registered voters and may show up and vote on election day and/or request mail-in ballots.
We rely on our voter registration studies to warn states that they are failing to comply with the requirements of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which requires states to make reasonable efforts to clean their voter rolls. We can and have sued to enforce compliance with federal law.
Earlier this month, we sued Colorado over its failure to comply with the National Voter Registration Act. In our new study, 42 Colorado counties—or two thirds of the state’s counties—had registration rates exceeding 100%. Particular data from the state confirms this general picture. As the complaint explains, a month-by-month comparison of the ACS’s five-year survey period with Colorado’s own registration numbers for the exact same months shows that large proportions of Colorado’s counties have registration rates exceeding 100%. Earlier this year, we sued Pennsylvania and North Carolina for failing to make reasonable efforts to remove ineligible voters from their rolls as required by federal law. The lawsuits allege that the two states have nearly 2 million inactive names on their voter registration rolls. We also sued Illinois for refusing to disclose voter roll data in violation of Federal law.
Our study updates the results of a similar study from last year. In August 2019 we analyzed registration data that states reported to the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC) in response to a survey conducted every two years on how states maintain their voter rolls. That registration data was compared to the then-most-recent ACS five-year survey from 2013 through 2017. The study showed that 378 U.S. counties had registration rates exceeding 100%.
The new study shows 1.8 million excess, or ‘ghost’ voters in 353 counties across 29 states. The data highlights the recklessness of mailing blindly ballots and ballot applications to voter registration lists. Dirty voting rolls can mean dirty elections.
STATES AND COUNTIES WITH REGISTRATION RATES EXCEEDING 100%
(* means no separate reporting of inactive registrations)
Alabama: Lowndes County (130%); Macon County (114%); Wilcox (113%); Perry County (111%); Madison County (109%); Hale County (108%); Marengo County (108%); Baldwin (108%); Greene County (107%); Washington County (106%); Dallas County (106%); Choctaw County (105%); Conecuh County (105%); Randolph County (104%); Shelby County (104%); Lamar County (103%); Autauga County (103%); Clarke County (103%); Henry County (103%); Monroe County (102%); Colbert County (101%); Jefferson County (101%); Lee County (100%); Houston County (100%); Crenshaw County (100%)
Off the Wall Ping!
Contact to be added.
Wanna stop this crap? Expose the guilty County officials. Maybe they won’t be re-elected next time.
Any precinct that tries to submit more that 100% should have the entire precinct disqualified, I hope the Trump lawyers are ready to force every district to comply with the laws on the books, period!
109% for Cherokee county GA.
Anytime it’s above 100% the roles should be cleaned up until it’s below.
Any precinct that submits over 80 percent should be investigated!!!
In other words, the registration rates of those counties exceeded 100% of eligible voters. The study finds eight states showing statewide registration rates exceeding 100%: Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
Lucky for democrat cheaters the FBI leadership is too stupid/corrupt to see voter fraud is happening... Hope the 'agents' succeed in finding some 20 year old they can identify as a 'lone wolf' to justify the billions of dollars we waste on them...
This explains Hitlery’s popular vote NOT in 2016! JW found 1.5 million in just LA County that had to be wiped off the voter rolls. CA DMV accounted for another 1 million illegal votes.
Hitlery NEVER EVER got the popular vote.
Amen to that.
Support Free Republic Folks, Donate Today!
l8r
Any precinct that tries to submit more that 100% should have the entire precinct disqualified...
Or have a law enforcement group look into what's happening. Too bad we can't have the FBI investigate...they've already announced voter fraud doesn't exist...
“Our newly released study reveals that 353 U.S. counties had 1.8 million more registered voters than eligible voting-age citizens. In other words, the registration rates of those counties exceeded 100% of eligible voters. The study finds eight states showing statewide registration rates exceeding 100%: Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont.”
Yikes! Surprised that Wisconsin wasn’t on the list, what with our Socialist Democrat Governor - though Governor Walker left us is good shape - not that that matters to the current crop of losers currently running things back into the ground.
What IS IT with Socialist Democrats wrecking the economy and All Good Things in our states?
Oh, Never mind. I can answer that myself! ;)
I know for a fact dead people are registered in my area—one of them got an application for an absentee ballot at my address!
(Hope the guy’s ghost does not show up... :-) )
My Dad died in May of this year. He has NEVER voted for a Democrat aside from JFK in his entire life.
The amount of junk mail from Biden, addressed to my Dad has been unreal - but I’m glad to see them wasting their money!
I sent back his mail-in ballot request with a copy of his death certificate.
Of course, they’ll just claim, ‘Oops! One hand must not have been talking to the other!’
Cheaters!
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.