|
Judicial Watch Asks Court to Order Release of
CIA Communications with Clinton Lawyer
It’s an open secret here in Washington that the Central Intelligence
Agency strays beyond its foreign purview, inserting itself into domestic
political issues.
Judicial Watch’s legal team battled the CIA in a federal court hearing this
week regarding our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
seeking to compel the CIA to produce records about its contacts with former
Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who was unsuccessfully prosecuted
by Special Counsel John Durham for making false statement to a federal
agent.
We filed the February 2022 lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia after the CIA failed to reply to an October 2021 FOIA
request for records regarding meetings or telephonic conversations with
Sussmann (formerly an attorney with Perkins Coie) (Judicial Watch v.
Central Intelligence Agency (No. 1:22-cv-00412)).
During the hearing, we explained to
the court that the case was filed more than two years ago and that it took
the CIA more than a year, until July 1, 2023, to provide four responsive
records introduced into evidence at Sussman’s spring 2022
criminal trial.
Afterward, the CIA tried to have the case
shut down, arguing to the court that its production of exhibits
from Sussmann’s trial was sufficient and that it need not identify any
other records responsive to Judicial Watch’s request or even disclose the
number of such records in its files. The CIA also admitted that it had not
even searched for records responsive to the 2021 request. When Judicial
Watch demonstrated that the CIA’s arguments were meritless, the agency
declared to the court in November 2023, that it would finally search for
records. Most recently, it asked the court for an additional four months to
provide only an update.
In March 2024, Judicial Watch argued:
Plaintiff submits that, under the circumstances, the time for updates is
past and the case should move forward. The Agency should be required to
produce whatever additional records it intends to produce and a Vaughn
index, “no list/no numbers” or Glomar assertion by the July 10, 2024,
date, with Plaintiff reserving its rights to challenge the additional
searches and any withholdings.
The CIA is in cover-up mode about its communications with the lawyer
implicated in a shady spy operation against President Trump. What is the
CIA hiding about its role in this plot against President Trump?
Another hearing is set
for May 2024, and I will report as events warrant!
OUTRAGE: FBI Records Reveal Posthumous Criminal Investigation of Ashli
Babbitt
I was astonished when I learned the details of the 62 pages of
records Judicial Watch extracted from the Justice Department showing that
the FBI opened a criminal investigation of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt
after her killing and listed four “potential violations of federal
law,” including felony rioting and civil disorder.
It is beyond belief that the Biden FBI gave Babbitt’s killer a free pass
while engaging in a malicious months-long “criminal” investigation of
Babbitt herself.
The records were produced in our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against
the Justice Department and FBI for records related to the death of Ashli
Babbitt (Judicial Watch v. U.S.
Department of Justice (No. 1:21-cv-02462)).
These records may also be responsive to a recent FOIA suit for the
family for FBI files and potentially related to the $30
million wrongful death
lawsuit we brought on behalf of the Babbitt family.
The unarmed Babbitt was shot and
killed as she climbed into a broken interior window in the
United States Capitol. The identity of the shooter was kept secret by
Congress, the Justice Department, and DC police for eight months until
former U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd went public to
try to defend his killing of Babbitt.
The newly obtained records include a January 14, 2021, Electronic
Communication indicating that eight days after Babbitt’s death, under
“Case ID#: 176-SD-3367083 (U) Ashli Elizabeth Babbitt,” a posthumous
investigation was initiated from San Diego, California:
Details:
Captioned investigation is being initiated
based on photographic and video evidence that Ashli Elizabeth Babbitt
unlawfully entered the United States Capitol Building, a Restricted
Building, on 6 January 2021, in violation of federal laws to include
violations of 18 U.S.C. Section 1752 and 40 U.S.C. Section 5104.
CDC [Chief Division Counsel]
Approval
Field Office CDC has reviewed and concurred
with the opening of this investigation. The investigation will be reviewed
by the CDC at least semi-annually.
Summary of Predication:
***
Babbitt was fatally shot by police as she attempted to leap through the
broken window of a door inside the Capitol…
Potential Violations of Federal
Law:
Potential violations of federal criminal
statutes include:
- Title 18 U.S.C 231 Civil Disorder
- Title 18 U.S.C 1752(a) Unlawful
Entry - Restricted Building or Grounds
- Title 18 U.S.C 2101 - Riots
- Title 40 U.S.C 5104 - Injuries to property
(U) It is therefore requested that a [redacted] case be opened and
assigned to Special Agent [Redacted]
A January 7, 2021, Electronic
Communication regarding Babbitt following her shooting death the
previous day reports that during the protests two “subjects” were shot
at the Capitol that day:
Multiple officers were injured during the incident and two subjects were
shot, with one fatal injury…. Ashli Elizabeth Babbitt, a San Diego
resident, was present in D.C. on January 6, 2021, and entered the United
States Capitol building where she was fatally shot. Babbitt was an Air
Force veteran.
An FBI Interview Report
Form FD-302 dated April 23, 2021, indicates FBI agents
interviewed a witness by telephone on April 15 who provided background
information on Babbitt:
In 2008, Babbitt transitioned to the Air Force Reserve at Sheppard Air
Force Base but continued to serve on active duty orders. In 2009,
[Redacted] and Babbitt [redacted] where Babbitt continued to serve out the
remainder of her career in either the Reserves of Air National Guard at
Andrews Air Force Base. At one point Babbitt transitioned Military
Occupational Specialties to serve as a mechanic, but ultimately returned to
Security Forces. According to [Redacted] Babbitt was excellent at her job
and [redacted].
Babbitt deployed several times throughout
her service. In 2005, Babbitt deployed to Manas Air Base in Kyrgyzstan. In
2006, Babbitt was deployed to Camp Bucca in southern Iraq which served as a
Theater Internment facility. In approximately 2012-2014, Babbitt deployed
to the United Arab Emirates. Babbit did not suffer any physical or mental
injuries stemming from her deployments and [redacted]. While stationed in
Alaska, Babbitt did suffer from a torn meniscus [a common
knee injury] which had occurred
while she was previously stationed in Texas. While deployed to Camp Bucca,
Babbitt did fly to Camp Arifjan in Kuwait [redacted].
[Redacted] characterized Babbitt as very
outgoing, opinionated, loud, very intelligent, loyal, sweet, very loving
and caring. At times, Babbitt was not a fan of her chain of command and
made her views known. Babbitt was a leader rather than a follower and liked
being her own boss. Consequently, she was happy running her pool company in
California. Babbitt loved her family and loved her country.
***
[Redacted] judged that she likely did not know the risk of passing
through the window. Babbitt would never “go after someone physically”
according to [redacted].
[Redacted] was not aware of Babbitt’s
political views as she was not political [redacted]. [Redacted] did know
that Babbitt had voted for President Obama. [Redacted] did not know if
Babbitt belonged to any political groups or organizations. [Redacted] was
frustrated by media portrayals of Babbitt as being associated with white
nationalists, which was not accurate.
A January 19, 2021, entry into the file indicates that two people were
shot at the Capitol on January 6: “Multiple officers were injured during
the incident and two subjects were shot, with one fatal injury.”
A separate record dated
January 19 indicates that “information from a public tip” was submitted
to the FBI related to Babbitt that was submitted through the
fbi.gov/uscapitol online portal. The description of the information
submitted is redacted.
A January 20 record regarding a “public tip”
is titled “Upload of Digital Media Report,” however, the substance of
the report is redacted.
A report dated
January 21 indicates a tip had been submitted to the FBI’s web portal,
but the information is redacted.
A January 29 FBI witness interview
summary indicates that on January 23, 2021, two FBI agents
interviewed an acquaintance of Babbitt, however, the substance of what the
witness said is entirely redacted.
An Electronic Communication dated January 29 indicates that FBI agents from
the San Diego office interviewed another
acquaintance of Babbitt on January 18, but the substance of what
that person said is also entirely redacted.
We are extensively investigating the events of January 6.
We recently were pleading in court for the denial of
the U.S. Government’s request to transfer the Ashli Babbitt wrongful
death lawsuit from California to Washington, DC. Among other legal points,
we argue that it would prejudice the case and be unjust for Ashli’s
family if it were transferred to the hostile forum of District of
Columbia.
In January 2024, we filed a FOIA lawsuit on
behalf of Aaron Babbitt and the Ashli Babbitt Estate against the U.S.
Department of Justice for all FBI files on Ashli Babbitt.
In October 2023, we received the
court-ordered declaration of
James W. Joyce, senior counsel in the Office of the General Counsel for the
Capitol Police, in which he describes emails among senior officials of the
United States Capitol Police in January 2021 that show warnings of possible
January 6 protests that could lead to serious disruptions at the U.S.
Capitol.
In September 2023, we received records from
the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the
Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that detailed the extensive
apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute
January 6 protestors.
A previous review of
records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination
memorandum documenting the decision not to prosecute U.S.
Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
In January 2023, documents from
the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S.
Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at
Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli
Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, we released
multiple audio, visual and
photo records
from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of
Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records
included a cell phone
video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview
of the shooter, Byrd.
In October 2021, United States Park Police records related
to the January 6, 2021, demonstrations at the U.S. Capitol showed that on
the day before the January 6 rally featuring President Trump, U.S. Park
Police expected a “large portion” of the attendees to march to the U.S.
Capitol and that the FBI was monitoring the January 6 demonstrations,
including travel to the events by “subjects of interest.”
Judicial Watch will continue to work to ensure justice for Ashli Babbitt
and her family in the months ahead. This latest release detailing FBI abuse
of her memory only spurs us on!
Public University Makes Future Journalists Take Diversity Course
Arizona State University’s journalism school didn’t care much about
transparency when a request was made for information about its
“diversity” course for budding journalists. Our Corruption
Chronicles blog reports the
disturbing information the public university was trying to hide:
In an apparent effort to keep with the mainstream media’s leftwing
ideology, future journalists at a public university must endure a
curriculum that includes a course on identity politics, microaggressions,
cisgender privilege and the use of preferred pronouns. One assignment
requires students to develop a public relations plan for a nonbinary pop
star that uses “they/them” pronouns. Another argues that objecting to
men using women’s bathrooms is an example of discrimination against
transgender individuals. The mandatory course for students in three
journalism-related undergraduate programs at Arizona State University (ASU)
is called Diversity and Civility at
Cronkite and material—including course syllabi, assignments
and readings—obtained by a conservative Phoenix-based thinktank
“reveals a radical agenda that argues for the primacy of identity and
spends large portions of class time on trendy concepts in progressive
activism.
The nonprofit, Goldwater Institute, founded in the late 80s with the
blessing of U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater, describes itself as a free-market
public policy research and litigation organization dedicated to advancing
the principles of limited government, economic freedom, and individual
liberty. The group obtained detailed information about the ASU diversity
course after engaging in a “prolonged public records request process”
with the taxpayer-funded college. In the material one instructor writes
that “Diversity and Civility is an entry level course to bring
thoughtful, open minded discourse to issues of race, gender, sexual
orientation, ability, income, geography, and age.” Another instructor
similarly writes that the class is intended to bring thoughtful,
open-minded discourse to issues of race, gender, sexual orientation,
ability, income, geography, and other aspects of our identities.” One
syllabus tells students that the class is the first step in their
DEI—diversity, equity, and inclusion—practice as a journalist or
communications professional. The assigned readings and activities promote
the concept that race, gender identity, and sexuality are the most
important aspects of a person’s experience, according to the Goldwater
Institute’s analysis.
Journalism students are taught that statements such as “America is a
melting pot” are examples of offensive microaggressions. Other
statements, such as “I believe the most qualified person should get the
job” or “everyone can succeed in this society, if they work hard
enough,” are also problematic because they communicate that “people of
color are lazy and/or incompetent and need to work harder.” An entire
week is dedicated to a discussion of “sexuality and gender identity,”
with the goal of teaching future reporters to understand the difference
between sexuality and gender identity when it matters, recognize privileges
related to sexuality and gender identity and how to ask for a person’s
pronouns as well as the benefits of gender-neutral language. More than 400
students were required to take the course in fall 2023 alone at Arizona’s
largest taxpayer-funded university, the Goldwater Institute reveals, adding
that the undergraduates spent over 2,000 hours on class work during that
time.
Named after the infamous network television news anchor Walter Cronkite,
ASU’s journalism school is ranked nationally as is ASU in various college
ratings. The Broadcast Education Association has ranked it a top school and
it is widely recognized as one of the country’s premier journalism and
mass communications programs, according to its website.
“Rooted in the time-honored values that characterize its namesake —
accuracy, responsibility, objectivity, integrity — the school fosters
excellence and ethics among students as they master the professional skills
they need to succeed in the digital media world of today and tomorrow,”
the ASU journalism school website states. Researchers at the Goldwater
Institute point out in their report that “forcing students to divert time
and tuition dollars away from core academic pursuits—and expending
university resources on faculty teaching assignments in support of
mandatory classes such as DCC—undermines the institution’s ability to
prioritize academic rigor and affordability.” The records show that there
is a need for curricular reform at Arizona’s public universities, the
group says.
Mexican Drug Cartels Operate on Indian Reservations Near and Far
Our Indian reservations are being overrun by Mexican drug traffickers due
in large part to Biden’s willful refusal to secure our border. Our
Corruption Chronicles blog explains how this
illicit trade works.
Indian reservations near and far from the Mexican border are actively
targeted by drug cartels whose operations are facilitated by President
Biden’s open border policies to traffic massive amounts of illegal drugs
as well as people across the United States, according to alarming testimony
delivered this week in a congressional hearing. Mexican cartels regularly
use the porous 62-mile border between Mexico and Arizona’s Tohono
O’odham Nation tribe to traffic illicit drugs and migrants who then haul
their cargo north to rural Indian communities many miles away in Montana
and Wyoming. The situation is so out of control that a congressional
committee held a hearing this week to examine the impacts of international
cartels targeting Indian country.
The committee chairman, Arkansas congressman
Bruce Westerman, disclosed that cartels have established extensive
distribution networks in communities to traffic dangerous substances into
Indian communities, notably fentanyl and methamphetamine. “This has led
to an increase in violence, crime, and drug overdoses that are ravaging
communities across Indian country, particularly in Montana and Wyoming,”
the legislator writes in the hearing memo. The sophisticated criminal
enterprises, specifically the renowned Sinaloa and Jalisco Nueva
Generación cartels, target reservations in rural areas where profits are
better because drugs are sold at a higher price than in other parts of the
country and the area is often not patrolled by law enforcement. “The
impact of cartel activity is alarming among the Indian reservations in
Montana and Wyoming and felt by every person in those communities,” the
hearing memo states.
Many of the criminal treks go through the
Tohono O’odham reservation which sits in the south-central Arizona
Sonoran Desert and has about 34,000 members on both sides of the border.
The reservation is about 2.8 million acres or roughly the size of
Connecticut and terrain consists largely of mountains and desert making it
difficult to patrol. For years the land has appeared on the Drug
Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas
(HIDTA) list because it is a significant center of illegal drug production,
manufacturing, importation and distribution. The reservation is a primary
transshipment zone for methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, and marijuana
destined for the United States, according to the DEA. During the Trump
administration sources inside the U.S. Border Patrol and other law
enforcement agencies told Judicial Watch that the
tribe banned National Guard troops deployed by the then president to help
crack down on a crisis of drug smuggling and illegal crossings.
At this week’s hearing Tohono O’odham
Chairman Verlon Jose complained that his tribe
spends an average of $3 million of its own tribal funds on border security
and enforcement. He also told the congressional panel that in 2023 the
Tohono O’odham Police Department (TOPD) responded to over 100,000
incidents involving drug seizures, illegal immigration, and other
border-related criminal activity. Additionally, the tribe’s law
enforcement division has spent nearly $6 million on over 1,500 migrant
death investigations and recoveries without any federal financial
assistance. More money and police hours have been dedicated to
investigating the impacts of drug trafficking, including overdose probes
and other related training. “Criminal cartel activity has exacerbated the
negative effect of drug and migrant smuggling on the Nation,” Chairman
Jose said adding that “smugglers have held tribal families hostage,
damaged and stolen property, and recruited tribal youth to engage in
smuggling activity.” Before leaving, Jose told federal lawmakers that the
border wall is “particularly ineffective in remote geographic areas like
our homelands, where it can easily be circumvented by climbing over,
tunneling under, or sawing through it.”\
A councilman for the Assiniboine and Sioux
Tribes in Montana’s Fort Peck Reservation testified that there is no
doubt Mexican drug cartels are responsible for a drug crisis that has
infested every corner of the tribes’ community, including young and old
without regard for gender. “They have found their way to the Fort Peck
Indian Reservation and embedded themselves in our communities and our
families,” said the councilman, Bryce Kirk. He provided the panel with an
example, a former Mexican police officer, Ricardo Ramos Medina, who became
a Sinaloa cartel associate and was stopped on the Fort Peck Reservation,
which spans over 2 million acres. Medina was a key part of expanding the
cartel’s presence in Montana as he had a valid U.S. visa and was former
law enforcement, Kirk said.
Until next week,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024
|
|
202.646.5172 |
|
|
© 2017 - 2024, All Rights Reserved
Manage
Email Subscriptions |
Unsubscribe |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|