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%) *Alaska: Statewide (111%) Arizona: Santa Cruz County (107%); Apache County (106%) *Arkansas: Newton County (103%) Colorado: Statewide (102%); San Juan County (158%); Dolores County (127%); Jackson County (125%); Mineral County (119%); Ouray County (119%); Phillips County (116%); Douglas County (116%); Broomfield County (115%); Elbert County (113%); Custer County (112%); Gilpin County (111%); Park County (111%); Archuleta County (111%); Cheyenne County (111%); Clear Creek County (110%); Teller County (108%); Grand County (107%); La Plata County (106%); Summit County (106%); Baca County (106%); Pitkin County (106%); San Miguel County (106%); Routt County (106%); Hinsdale County (105%); Garfield County (105%); Gunnison County (105%); Sedgwick County (104%); Eagle County (104%); Larimer County (104%); Weld County (104%); Boulder County (103%); Costilla County (103%); Chaffee County (103%); Kiowa County (103%); Denver County (103%); Huerfano County (102%); Montezuma County (102%); Moffat County (102%); Arapahoe County (102%); Jefferson County (101%); Las Animas County (101%); Mesa County (100%. *Florida: St. Johns County (112%); Nassau County (109%); Walton County (108%); Santa Rosa County (108%); Flagler County (104%); Clay County (103%); Indian River County (101%); Osceola County (100%) *Georgia: Bryan County (118%); Forsyth County (114%); Dawson County (113%); Oconee County (111%); Fayette County (111%); Fulton County (109%); Cherokee County (109%); Jackson County (107%); Henry County (106%); Lee County (106%); Morgan County (105%); Clayton County (105%); DeKalb County (105%); Gwinnett County (104%); Greene County (104%); Cobb County (104%); Effingham County (103%); Walton County (102%); Rockdale County (102%); Barrow County (101%); Douglas County (101%); Newton County (100%); Hall County (100%) *Indiana: Hamilton County (113%); Boone County (112%); Clark County (105%); Floyd County (103%); Hancock County (103%); Ohio County (102%); Hendricks County (102%); Lake County (101%); Warrick County (100%); Dearborn County (100%) Iowa: Dallas County (115%); Johnson County (104%); Lyon County (103%); Dickinson County (103%); Scott County (102%); Madison County (101%); Warren County (100%) *Kansas: Johnson County (105%) Maine: Statewide (101%); Cumberland County (110%); Sagadahoc County (107%); Hancock County (105%); Lincoln County (104%); Waldo County (102%); York County (100%) Maryland: Statewide (102%); Montgomery County (113%); Howard County (111%); Frederick County (110%); Charles County (108%); Prince George’s County (106%); Queen Anne’s County (104%); Calvert County (104%); Harford County (104%); Worcester County (103%); Carroll County (103%); Anne Arundel County (102%); Talbot County (100%) *Massachusetts: Dukes County (120%); Nantucket County (115%); Barnstable County (103%) *Michigan: Statewide (105%); Leelanau County (119%); Otsego County (118%); Antrim County (116%); Kalkaska County (115%); Emmet County (114%); Berrien County (114%); Keweenaw County (114%); Benzie County (113%); Washtenaw County (113%); Mackinac County (112%); Dickinson County (112%); Roscommon County (112%); Charlevoix County (112%); Grand Traverse County (111%); Oakland County (110%); Iron County (110%); Monroe County (109%); Genesee County (109%); Ontonagon County (109%); Gogebic County (109%); Livingston County (109%); Alcona County (108%); Cass County (108%); Allegan County (108%); Oceana County (107%); Midland County (107%); Kent County (107%); Montmorency County (107%); Van Buren County (107%); Wayne County (107%); Schoolcraft County (107%); Mason County (107%); Oscoda County (107%); Iosco County (107%); Wexford County (106%); Presque Isle County (106%); Delta County (106%); Alpena County (106%); St Clair County (106%); Cheboygan County (105%); Newaygo County (105%); Barry County (105%); Gladwin County (105%); Menominee County (105%); Crawford County (105%); Muskegon County (105%); Kalamazoo County (104%); St. Joseph County (104%); Ottawa County (103%); Clinton County (103%); Saginaw County (103%); Manistee County (103%); Lapeer County (103%); Calhoun County (103%); Ogemaw County (103%); Macomb County (103%); Missaukee County (102%); Eaton County (102%); Shiawassee County (102%); Huron County (102%); Lenawee County (101%); Branch County (101%); Osceola County (101%); Clare County (100%); Arenac County (100%); Bay County (100%); Lake County (100%) *Missouri: St. Louis County (102%) *Montana: Petroleum County (113%); Gallatin County (103%); Park County (103%); Madison County (102%); Broadwater County (102%) *Nebraska: Arthur County (108%); Loup County (103%); Keya Paha County (102%); Banner County (100%); McPherson County (100%) Nevada: Storey County (108%); Douglas County (105%); Nye County (101%) *New Jersey: Statewide (102%); Somerset County (110%); Hunterdon County (108%); Morris County (107%); Essex County (106%); Monmouth County (104%); Bergen County (103%); Middlesex County (103%); Union County (103%); Camden County (102%); Warren County (102%); Atlantic County (102%); Sussex County (101%); Salem County (101%); Hudson County (100%); Gloucester County (100%) *New Mexico: Harding County (177%); Los Alamos County (110%) New York: Hamilton County (118%); Nassau County (109%); New York (103%); Rockland County (101%); Suffolk County (100%) *Oregon: Sherman County (107%); Crook County (107%); Deschutes County (105%); Wallowa County (103%); Hood River County (103%); Columbia County (102%); Linn County (101%); Polk County (100%); Tillamook County (100%) Rhode Island: Statewide (101%); Bristol County (104%); Washington County (103%); Providence County (101%) *South Carolina: Jasper County (103%) South Dakota: Hanson County (171%); Union County (120%); Jones County (116%); Sully County (115%); Lincoln County (113%); Custer County (110%); Fall River County (108%); Pennington County (106%); Harding County (105%); Minnehaha County (104%); Potter County (104%); Campbell County (103%); McPherson County (101%); Hamlin County (101%); Stanley County (101%); Lake County (100%); Perkins County (100%) Tennessee: Williamson County (110%); Moore County (101%); Polk County (101%) Texas: Loving County (187%); Presidio County (149%); McMullen County (147%); Brooks County (117%); Roberts County (116%); Sterling County (115%); Zapata County (115%); Maverick County (112%); Starr County (110%); King County (110%); Chambers County (109%); Irion County (108%); Jim Hogg County (107%); Polk County (107%); Comal County (106%); Oldham County (104%); Culberson County (104%); Kendall County (103%); Dimmit County (103%); Rockwall County (102%); Motley County (102%); Parker County (102%); Hudspeth County (101%); Travis County (101%); Fort Bend County (101%); Kent County (101%); Webb County (101%); Mason County (101%); Crockett County (101%); Waller County (100%); Gillespie County (100%); Duval County (100%); Brewster County (100%) Vermont: Statewide (100%)Virginia: Loudoun County (116%); Falls Church City (114%); Fairfax City (109%); Goochland County (108%); Arlington County (106%); Fairfax County (106%); Prince William County (105%); James City County (105%); Alexandria City (105%); Fauquier County (105%); Isle of Wight County (104%); Chesterfield County (104%); Surry County (103%); Hanover County (103%); New Kent County (103%); Clarke County (103%); King William County (102%); Spotsylvania County (102%); Rappahannock County (102%); Albemarle County (101%); Stafford County (101%); Northampton County (101%); Poquoson City (100%); Frederick County (100%) Washington: Garfield County (119%); Pend Oreille County (112%); Jefferson County (111%); San Juan County (108%); Wahkiakum County (108%); Stevens County (103%); Pacific County (103%); Clark County (102%); Island County (102%); Klickitat County (102%); Thurston County (102%); Lincoln County (101%); Whatcom County (100%); Asotin County (100%) *West Virginia: Mingo County (104%); Wyoming County (103%); McDowell County (102%); Brooke County (102%); Hancock County (100%) Judicial Watch is Joining The ObamaGate Movie as Executive ProducersDon’t expect to hear “Lights, camera, action!” in our Washington, DC hallways any time soon, but we are producing an important movie. It is another way to convey the details of the biggest political scandal in our nation’s history. We are partnering with the Unreported Story Society (Ann McElhinney and Phelim McAleer) as executive producers of The ObamaGate Movie, the new film starring Dean Cain ( Superman) and Kristy Swanson ( Buffy the Vampire Slayer), which is set to premiere on YouTube on October 20 at 9 pm ET and tells the story of the hoax that was the Trump/Russia investigation. According to the filmmakers, ObamaGate “exposes the Deep State plot to undermine the Trump candidacy and presidency,” and it reveals the lies behind the fake Russia collusion narrative. The ObamaGate Movie is a verbatim play that was filmed “Hamilton style” in Los Angeles on the Comedy Central stage at the Hudson Theater. Our investigative work that has brought to light some of the most critical aspects of the “Russia hoax” investigation and the ongoing corruption at the DOJ and the FBI. I am excited to see some of the government records uncovered by Judicial Watch turned into a film. We have been working for years to expose the rampant corruption that has plagued the DOJ and the FBI. It’s exciting to see these discoveries turned into an entertaining and educational film that is easy to watch and understand – so even more Americans can see the despicable and deceptive ObamaGate plot to undermine President Trump and our Republic. Phelim McAleer, co-writer of ObamaGate praised us for our work exposing government corruption. “Without Judicial Watch, the American people would still be largely in the dark about the ObamaGate abuse of President Trump and other innocent Americans,” McAleer said. “Since the film is entirely verbatim, it’s based off much of the investigative work uncovered by Judicial Watch and other investigators. We are so excited to work with Judicial Watch and help as many people as possible learn about this critical story.” ObamaGate is a verbatim play that examines the truth behind the “Russia collusion” hoax. The film’s dialogue is taken word-for-word from text messages, emails, and testimony of the key figures behind the hoaxes. Dean Cain ( Lois & Clark, Gosnell) and Kristy Swanson ( Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Psych) reprise their roles in ObamaGate as lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. The Strzok-Page texts have revealed the depth of the plot against the president. Cain and Swanson are joined by John James (Dynasty), who plays former FBI Director James Comey. The movie is being released following several books and movies portraying the FBI and DOJ operatives as heroic. Showtime has released the big budget, pro-Comey mini-series called “ The Comey Rule” and FBI lovebird Peter Strzok published his self-aggrandizing memoir, which has been accompanied by mostly softball media interviews and reviews from the mainstream media. The ObamaGate film will be directed by veteran director Kiff Scholl. The film is co-written by Phelim McAleer and Brian Godawa. Godawa is a veteran screenwriter with credits including “ To End All Wars” starring Keifer Sutherland. The film was created through crowdfunding, and so far the campaign has raised over $150,000 to make the film. More information and the crowdfunding campaign can be accessed at ObamagateMovie.com. The trailer for The ObamaGate Movie is available on YouTube now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtGGkZTT9do&feature=youtu.beBallot Update: We Clean Up Dirty Voter RollsAs we all recognize, the Left has big plans to “win” the election, no holds barred. We’re counter attacking with a grassroots effort to make sure voter rolls are clean. This is the foundation for trustworthy elections. As Micah Morrison describes in his Investigative Bulletin, this is a tedious, in the weeds effort, but we aren’t deterred. Back in January, Judicial Watch had some big news. Our investigation of voter rolls nationwide turned up 2.5 million extra names. Our analysis of data from the U.S Election Assistance Commission found 378 counties that had a combined 2.5 million more voter registrations than citizens old enough to vote. We warned five states—California, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Colorado, and Virginia—that we intended to sue unless they cleaned up their voter rolls.
Judicial Watch is the national leader in election integrity education and litigation. We’re cleaning up dirty voter rolls across the nation. Under the National Voter Registration Act, states are required to remove “inactive voters” from registration rolls if they do not respond to an address confirmation notice and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections. Many “inactive voters” in fact have died or moved to a new location.
It’s not news that ballot disputes are bitter partisan affairs, filled with wild attacks and misinformation. But Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton insists that voting abuse cases should not be a Right-Left death match. “If you’re a Leftist Democrat trying to take on an incumbent in a corrupt jurisdiction, voter fraud can keep you from gaining traction as well,” he says. Judicial Watch recently investigated such a case in New Jersey. In April, we sued Pennsylvania for failing to make reasonable efforts to remove ineligible voters from their rolls, as required by the NVRA. Earlier this month, Pennsylvania offered a limited capitulation: it admitted it had reported incorrect information to a federal agency on the removal of ineligible voters.
The Pennsylvania numbers were pathetic. The state initially claimed that in one county of 457,000 registrants, it had found only eight inactive names eligible for removal under the NVRA; in another county of 357,000 registrants, five such names had been removed; in a third county of 403,000 registrants, four such names removed. The state has since revised its numbers, but even the new numbers are too small. Pennsylvania now admits that in eighteen other counties—which together contain twenty-five percent of the entire state’s registered voters—it removed a grand total of fifteen inactive, ineligible voters.
Judicial Watch is keeping the pressure on Pennsylvania. “Pennsylvania’s voting rolls are such a mess that even Pennsylvania can’t tell a court the details of how dirty or clean they are,” Tom says. “The simple solution is to follow the federal law and take the necessary and simple steps to clean up their voter rolls.”
We’ve also gone to court in Colorado to clean up voter rolls. Authoritative studies in recent years show that a majority of Colorado counties have registration rates that exceed 100% of the voting-age population. (Read more about the studies in the Judicial Watch lawsuit, here.) In fact, Colorado leads the nation in percentages of counties with more than 100% of eligible voters registered to vote.
Our lawsuit charges “an ongoing, systemic problem with Colorado’s voter list maintenance obligations” and asks the court to order the state to “implement a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the registration of ineligible registrants” from voter rolls.
In April, we filed suit against North Carolina for the same reason—large numbers of ineligible voters on the state voter rolls. Our lawsuit argues that North Carolina has about one million inactive voters on its rolls. That’s about seventeen percent of the state’s total voter registration.
The state has a terrible voter registration record, one of the worst in the nation. In nineteen North Carolina counties, twenty percent of the registrations were inactive. In three other counties, twenty-five percent or more were inactive.
We told the court that North Carolina failed to clean up its voter rolls. In addition, we say, the state violated the National Voter Registration Act by not providing Judicial Watch with public records related to registration numbers.
Public records are something we know a lot about. Judicial Watch is famously at the forefront of freedom of information efforts around the nation. Less well known, but no less important, are our efforts in election integrity education and litigation. For more on that, take a look at this discussion between Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch Election Integrity Initiative Director Robert Popper on cleaning up dirty voter rolls. Federal Agency Under Fire for Promoting ‘White Lives Matter Ideology’Our federal bureaucracies are infested with Leftist political enthusiasts. These are on full display in your Department of Interior. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the details. A federal agency that celebrates everything from Hispanic to African American, Asian and LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer) culture is under fire for recently observing European Heritage because it supposedly promotes white nationalism. With 70,000 employees and a whopping $12.8 billion annual budget the Department of the Interior (DOI) prides itself on being inclusive and diverse. The agency manages the nation’s public lands and minerals, national parks, and wildlife refuges. It also upholds federal trust responsibilities to Indian tribes and Native Alaskans and is responsible for the conservation of endangered species and the environment. DOI regularly observes the country’s diverse cultures by publishing special edition magazines and holding festive events. Recent DOI publications have focused on LGBTQ and Asian Americans. In February it was National African American History Month. September was Hispanic Heritage Month and November will be Native American Heritage Month. So why the bruhaha over European Heritage, which was highlighted in the August edition of a DOI publication known as “Connections?” Some employees believe observing European Heritage is “insensitive” because it improperly endorses “ideals related to white pride,” according to a story published in a digital news site that covers government. DOI workers are “annoyed and angry” that the agency recognized Europeans because it promotes a “white lives matter ideology,” an employee says in the article. The DOI staffer says it is especially troubling “during a time of civil awakening.” Presumably this refers to the radical, leftist Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. Of interesting note is that the “offensive” 20-page European Heritage issue features a congratulatory message to the magazine staff from the DOI’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Administrative Services, a black woman named Jacqueline M. Jones, a veteran government executive who oversees five divisions at the agency. She shares a note from an administrative judge thanking the agency for its commitment to diversity in the workplace. Jones, whose photo appears next to the message, thanks the magazine staff for “connecting with us through these monthly celebrations of diversity, inclusion and equity. We truly are stronger together!” Below her signature is the publication’s table of contents, which includes sections on the Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island, Wales, Germany, the European Union, Russia, and Voices for Change. One section is dedicated to Martin Luther King and highlights his famous 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech. It includes the entire speech, a half-page illustration of King and a separate color photo of the civil rights leader waving to a massive crowd during the March on Washington.
The section dedicated to King evidently did not upset any DOI employees, but some found the portion titled “National Parks with European Connections” offensive because they feel it was insensitive to Native Americans. The magazine states that Native Americans were the largest indigenous group in Florida and Georgia at the time of European contact, occupying about 19,200 square miles with an estimated population of 200,000. According to the news article critical of the publication, a DOI employee viewed this as “suggesting it only served to highlight that those populations have been almost entirely wiped out.” Another agency worker said the entire edition celebrating European Heritage was “tone deaf,” even though it features a renowned civil rights icon and includes diverse cultural experiences of DOI veterans such as a National Park Service (NPS) employee in Florida who writes fondly about exposure to Cuban, Guatemalan, Mexican, British and Irish cultures in the Sunshine State.
In a desperate effort to justify criticism of DOI’s European Heritage magazine, the article states that the “Southern Poverty Law Center has flagged various organizations that celebrate European heritage as associated with white nationalism.” The reality is that the SPLC is a radical leftist nonprofit that lists conservative organizations that disagree with it on social issues on a catalog of “hate groups.” Its famous “hate map” helped a gunman commit an act of terrorism against a conservative nonprofit in 2012. The Virginia man, Floyd Lee Corkins, was sentenced to 25 years in prison though prosecutors recommended 45 because his crime was an act of terrorism. Even the Obama Department of Justice (DOJ) officially reprimanded the SPLC for its hateful attacks, according to documents obtained by Judicial Watch in 2017. The rebuke was a vindication for groups targeted by the SPLC’s witch hunts and was especially impactful because the Obama administration was tight with the SPLC and even hired the controversial nonprofit to conduct diversity training for the government. You have to wonder why a federal bureaucracy is spending our tax dollars on celebrating anything. Shouldn’t it be about its work? You’ll Want to Get the New Judicial Watch Book: A Republic Under AssaultIn this new book, subtitled “The Left’s Ongoing Attack on American Freedom,” I explain how the Radical Left and the Deep State are trying to destroy the Trump presidency. The book goes on sale October 20. My first two New York Times bestselling books, The Corruption Chronicles and Clean House, exposed the hypocrisy and corruption of Obama’s two terms. Now, I identify the four major forces posing a continued threat to American democracy. Deep State Efforts to Destroy the Trump Presidency: How the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign paid for the fraudulent anti-Trump “Steele Dossier,” and how it was used by the Obama FBI and DOJ to dupe the FISA Court to allow it to spy on the Trump presidential campaign AND President Trump. These and more dirty secrets of Obamagate and the impeachment coup attempt are exposed. Hillary Clinton Email Scandal: How the Clinton team and senior officials at the Obama State Department conspired to cover up Hillary Clinton’s secret email system—and shocking revelations that tie the Obama White House to the cover-up! Voter Fraud: How Soros-funded groups attack states that seek to protect clean elections by challenging voter ID laws, and how the Left is cynically peddling COVID-19 crisis electoral “reforms,” such as mail-in voting, which could increase voter fraud and election chaos. And shocking numbers about dirty voting rolls across the nation! Illegal Immigration: How deadly illegal “sanctuary” policies are exploding across America, and how our nation’s sovereignty has been under assault by radical open-border advocates. Subversive Deep State collaborators with ties to the Clinton and Obama machines not only launched countless—often illegal—operations to stop and then remove Trump, but, even more alarmingly, they are working to transform the United States into something truly unrecognizable to all who believe in liberty and the rule of law. Today one of their main targets is President Donald J. Trump. Tomorrow it could be you and anyone who believes in the US Constitution, believes the United States must have clearly defined and protected borders, believes in the need for a strong military, believes in the value of hard work and faith, and believes in the rule of law and American exceptionalism. Mark your calendar to join me for a virtual signing on October 20 at 3 pm ET. It will be broadcast on: YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/JudicialWatch, Facebook https://www.youtube.com/user/JudicialWatch and Twitter https://twitter.com/JudicialWatch. You can preorder a signed copy, as well as ask a question here: https://premierecollectibles.com/republicUntil next week …  | 
No comments:
Post a Comment