Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

JW [and Sierra Club] VICTORY: COURT RULES CHENEY ENERGY TASK FORCE MUST TURN OVER INFORMATION
Judicial Watch ^ | 23 May 2002 | Judicial Watch

Posted on 05/23/2002 3:40:35 PM PDT by Amelia

JW VICTORY: COURT RULES CHENEY ENERGY TASK FORCE MUST TURN OVER INFORMATION

COURT: JUDICIAL WATCH LAWSUIT CAN PROCEED CONCERNING ENERGY TASK FORCE MEETINGS

BUSH ADMINISTRATION LOSES COURT EFFORT TO DISMISS LAWSUIT

(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced that a federal court judge ruled today, over the objections of the Bush Administration, that Judicial Watch’s lawsuit against Vice President Cheney and his Energy Task Force can proceed to discovery. The Bush Administration had asked the court to dismiss Judicial Watch’s case and allow no discovery. The ruling, by The Honorable Emmet G. Sullivan, was thus a “devastating defeat” for the Bush Administration. Judicial Watch began its quest to obtain information about the Energy Task Force over one year ago and was force to file a lawsuit under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (open meetings law) when it was rebuffed in its requests for information by Vice President Cheney. Several months later, the Energy Task Force was sued by the Sierra Club, which is now a co-plaintiff in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit.

Judge Sullivan ruled today that the case will proceed and that he will order Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club to propose a discovery plan for the Cheney Energy Task Force.

“The court’s ruling lifts the veil of secrecy from Vice President Cheney’s Energy Task Force. Judicial Watch will now proceed to discovery about the Task Force’s composition and operations, and we intend to question individuals under oath,” stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cheney; energy; judicialwatch; sierraclub
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last
To: FreeTheHostages; Southflanknorthpawsis;Amelia
The judge declared illegal the Navy's use of Farallon de Medinilla, near Saipan, as a test range (our only one in the Pacific)because they didn't get a permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Just following the law no doubt. No political agenda in siding with one freaking bird watcher who brought the suit and against the U.S. Navy.
41 posted on 05/23/2002 4:39:42 PM PDT by LarryLied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: FreeTheHostages
Can you imagine if this thing goes to the Supreme Court ... Ted Olsen vs. Larry Klayman. Godzilla vs. Tokyo.
42 posted on 05/23/2002 4:41:54 PM PDT by ArneFufkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I've never heard it called a VICTORY, have you? The firms I worked with all just said, "Whew." LOL. Exactly. When I worked for a court and we got those horrible pro se prisoners appeals they would bend over backwards out of a sense of fairness to find some kernel to let the thing go forward. Then they shot it down on the merits. Hehehe.
43 posted on 05/23/2002 4:42:48 PM PDT by Bahbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: truebeliever9
FYI. How are you?
44 posted on 05/23/2002 4:43:39 PM PDT by RedBloodedAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
Where does Judicial Watch get its money?
45 posted on 05/23/2002 4:44:24 PM PDT by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
Where does Judicial Watch get its money?

LOL !! I'm guessing that a gazillion mail solicitations a year bring in plenty of dough from the sucker crowd.

46 posted on 05/23/2002 4:57:37 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia
Where does Judicial Watch get its money?

That's what the IRS would like to know!

47 posted on 05/23/2002 5:04:14 PM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
Audit bump
48 posted on 05/23/2002 5:07:14 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: thinktwice
Meetings with energy executives are critical to national security? Wow, you've bought the administration's propaganda hook, line and sinker. (I suppose all "executive level" activity should be kept secret, right?)
49 posted on 05/23/2002 5:37:46 PM PDT by billybudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin
Ted Olsen vs. Larry Klayman. Godzilla vs. Tokyo.

ROFLOL !!!!!! I'm glad I read back over this thread and saw this.

50 posted on 05/23/2002 5:39:20 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Right_in_Virginia; deport
Seriously, I think most of JW's money supposedly comes from direct mail solicitations, but also got a ~$500,000 grant from one of the Scaiffe foundations a couple of years ago as well I believe.
51 posted on 05/23/2002 5:40:09 PM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
The better question is if all he collects and spends is accounted for.
52 posted on 05/23/2002 5:43:58 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
The inside poop bandied around a thread several weeks ago was that a mystery donor - a megalomaniac jug eared midget Presidential candidate mystery donor named Ross - was a large underwriter of Klayman's $26 million revenue number last year.

Perot and his hatred for the Bushs. Nah, couldn't be, could it?

53 posted on 05/23/2002 5:53:30 PM PDT by ArneFufkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
deport says:

Fish gotta fry. Go audit go!

54 posted on 05/23/2002 5:54:54 PM PDT by ArneFufkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin
I always listen carefully to deport. : )
55 posted on 05/23/2002 5:58:33 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin
Perot and his hatred for the Bushs. Nah, couldn't be, could it?

Perot's spokesman in 1996, Russ Verney, is running the Judicial Watch office in Dallas.

You may have swerved into the truth.

56 posted on 05/23/2002 6:04:39 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; ArneFufkin
Perot's spokesman in 1996, Russ Verney, is running the Judicial Watch office in Dallas.

Now that is interesting!

57 posted on 05/23/2002 6:15:03 PM PDT by Amelia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
You may have swerved into the truth

That's exactly why I swerve around aimlessly.

58 posted on 05/23/2002 6:53:47 PM PDT by ArneFufkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Amelia
The ruling, by The Honorable Emmet G. Sullivan, was thus a ?devastating defeat? for the Bush Administration.

I believe that this turkey is close to the record for having his "decisions" overturned by the federal appeals courts.

59 posted on 05/23/2002 7:00:52 PM PDT by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ArneFufkin
To paraphrase Henry Hill in GOOD FELLAS:

You're one funny guy.

60 posted on 05/23/2002 7:01:24 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-102 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson