More Illegal Deep State Spying on Trump Team?

Lawsuit Raises New Biden Questions

Secret Service Destroyed Records of Alleged Biden Altercation with Agent

There are a number of stories about Joe Biden and women, and Judicial Watch may have uncovered confirmation concerning one of these allegations.

That’s why Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for records that the Secret Service claims to have destroyed related to a reported physical altercation between a Secret Service Agent and Joe Biden at a photo op in 2009 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:20-cv-02457)).

We sued after the Secret Service failed to respond to a July 14, 2020, administrative appeal challenging its claim that all files related to the 2009 altercation, “ha[d] been destroyed,” due to “retention standards.”

On March 29, 2020, the Gateway Pundit republished a 2017 report alleging that an unidentified Secret Service agent was suspended for a week in 2009 for “shoving Biden after he cupped his girlfriend’s breast while the couple was taking a photo with him.” “The situation got so heated … that others had to step in to prevent the agent from hitting the then-Vice President,” according to the report.

We followed up with a May 2020 FOIA request for:

All records related to a reported incident in 2009 in which a United States Secret Service Agent reportedly was involved in an altercation with, or attempted to strike, then Vice President Joe Biden” during a photo opportunity.

The records sought shall include, but not be limited to, witness statements, the Agent’s statement, victim’s statement, alleged perpetrator’s statement, incident reports, investigative reports, communications among USSS personnel regarding the incident, and disciplinary records related to the incident for the Agent in question.

In a July 13, 2020 response to our request, the Secret Service appeared to confirm that a file on the alleged incident existed at some point, asserting, “[T]here are no responsive records or documents pertaining to your request in our files,” because “the above mentioned file(s) has been destroyed” due to “retention standards.” The Secret Service added that, “[n]o additional information is available.” It did not deny that the incident had occurred. In our lawsuit, we intend to test the Secret Service’s assertion that it destroyed all records about the incident.

So, was there a “groping” incident involving Biden that almost led to fisticuffs with a Secret Service agent?

We had not been able to confirm whether the report about the alleged altercation might be true until the Secret Service itself suggested it destroyed records about the incident. Stay tuned to this space – as I’ll report to you as further developments warrant!

State Dept Records Show US Embassy in Ukraine Monitored Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Donald Trump Jr., Rudy Giuliani, Journalists and other U.S. Citizens in Potential Violation of Federal Law

You may remember Marie Yovanovitch. She was the ambassador to Ukraine, first appointed by President Obama and then recalled by President Trump, who attacked Trump in the impeachment proceedings last year and for Joe Biden in the Democratic convention this year.

She was also the center of a lawsuit we filed In November 2019 seeking documents related to a reported “untouchables list” Yovanovitch gave in late 2016 to Ukraine Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko. Lutsenko told The New York Times that Yovanovitch “pressed him not to prosecute anti-corruption activists.”

Lutsenko reportedly said earlier the do-not-prosecute list included a founder of the Ukraine group Anti-Corruption Action Centre (AntAC), which was funded by Soros foundations and the U.S. federal government, and two members of the Ukrainian Parliament who vocally supported the Soros group’s agenda.

Is it any surprise that her embassy was busy monitoring the social media doings of Trump supporters and journalists -- with her knowledge?

We just received 372 pages of records from the State Department confirming our prior, exclusive reporting that the Ukraine Embassy under Yovanovitch monitored, in potential violation of law, Donald Trump, Jr. Rudy Giuliani, and major journalists on Twitter on their commentary on Ukraine, “Biden-Burisma 2020”, and George Soros.

The documents list the targeted persons as Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Rudy Giuliani, Dan Bongino, Sebastian Gorka, John Solomon, Jack Posobiec, Ryan Saavedra, Sara A Carter, Donald Trump Jr., Michael McFaul, Lou Dobbs and Pamela Gellar. The search terms that were flagged to be monitored by State Department officials on social media included Yovanovitch, Ukraine Ambassador, Ukrainian Ambassador, Ukraine Soros, Clinton campaign, and Biden-Burisma.

The emails show that Yovanovitch was aware of the social media monitoring program.

Moreover, a State Department contractor warned his colleagues that their monitoring of private citizens was potentially in violation of the Privacy Act of 1974.

These documents confirm that Deep State officials at the Ukraine Embassy seemed to set up an enemies list to help illicitly monitor and report on the social media postings of President Trump’s family and lawyer, as well as journalists. The State Department hid these smoking gun documents for months.

We received the records in the January 2020 FOIA lawsuit we filed after the State Department failed to respond to an October 2019 FOIA request for records tied to the alleged monitoring of President Trump’s family, lawyer, and journalists, as ordered by US Ambassador to the Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch. (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:20-cv-00124). In October 2019, we began an investigation into the alleged monitoring, via CrowdTangle and other means, of journalists and persons linked to President Trump. Ambassador Marie Yovanovitch is alleged to have ordered State Department entities to conduct the monitoring:

“This is not an obscure rule. Everyone in public diplomacy or public affairs knows they can’t make lists and monitor U.S. citizens unless there is a major national security reason,” according to a senior State Department official. If the illicit operation occurred, it seems to indicate a clear political bias against the president and his supporters. Yovanovitch, a career diplomat who has also led American embassies in Kyrgyzstan and Armenia, was appointed ambassador to Ukraine by Obama in 2016.

An email exchange on March 27, 2019, titled “monitoring developing U.S. social media narratives on Ukraine” concerns the monitoring of major conservative social media and TV commentators on their commentary on Ukraine, as well as Marie Yovanovitch and George Soros’ involvement in Ukraine and the Clinton Campaign. The persons involved in the discussion include then-Ambassador Yovanovitch; former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs George P. Kent; a digital media associate EUR/PD from the Kenjya-Trusant Group, the public diplomacy desk officer for Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus; and other redacted State Department officials.

In the discussion, a State Department official, whose name was redacted, writes:

Thanks very much for your notes. He English-language Twitter search phrases we’re currently using for this issue are:

Yovanovitch

Yovanovich (common misspelling)

Ukrainian Ambassador

We are also monitoring the tweets of roughly 10 high-profile U.S.-based social media users (verified accounts with large numbers of followers) who have already commented on this particular issue before, either on social media or television, to see if they have posted something new relevant to this issue that does not directly align with our search terms.

Happy to pass along that list of Twitter users if DC wishes, but even just keeping an eye on the search terms above during DC afternoon business hours would be a huge help so that Kyiv/Washington team members don’t miss out on new online narratives that are likely to generate new media inquiries.

I’m going to send around one more evening batch of social media content to Desk and Post colleagues in a few minutes on this topic.

Kent writes: “key thing is to get up to ramming speed from the get go.”

Other actual or proposed search terms include “Clinton campaign” and “Biden Burisma.” A redacted State Department Official writes on March 29:

We appreciate the crowd Tangle reports you have sent us. Can you confirm this tool in tracking content from the full list of influential social media users that [redacted] flagged (which included George’s suggestions as well)? Does this also track their posts if it does not include out key work “Ukraine?” We have seen some of these people comment obliquely without using the key words.

We appreciate the RSS suggestion, but we already have an effective automated search tool

On March 29, 2019, an email to Kent summarizing the monitoring activity shows that reports were set up at least twice a day. A redacted official writes to Kent: “I will have it set to recap at noon and 5pm. Will also try to have a separate report for you to provide info from the past 12 hours.

On May 15, 2019, a redacted Digital Media Associate for EUR/PD Keniya-Trusant Group warns the State Department of legal issues of monitoring private citizens:

Going to chime in here – so regarding the influencers, there are some legal implications of making a list of Facebook influencers of Twitter influencers since they are technically private citizens (even though they’re publicly on the internet) and we cannot compile them into a list and monitor what they are saying using a third-party application without their knowledge. To see what they’re saying, you unfortunately need to use the old school way and manually go to their feeds and view that way. Cumbersome but it’s in compliance with the Privacy Act of 1974.

Regarding automated emails, I’m not sure if you can set up feedback reports, I’ll look into that for you.

And on Instagram, shouldn’t be a problem to add the IG account. We would just need to create it as a separate list, which can then be added into the display.

I can take care of that for you if you’d like! On hashtags and influencers, I don’t believe CT has that capability unfortunately.

An email dated May 15, 2019, related to the use of CrowdTangle to monitor social media in Bosnia and Herzegovina indicates that the prohibition on monitoring US persons was understood:

[Redacted] – thank you so much. And now [sic] worries, I thought I have heard somewhere that that doesn’t apply to non-U.S. citizens, but wasn’t 100% sure, so thank you again for checking that for us.

I just went to our live display page and I don’t have any possibility of changing anything on it. The only option it’s giving me is to switch to Dark Interface <smile emoji>

Is there a way for someone to guide me through the process of adding the IG to our live display, and also, how to create the list adding the influencers we already know, which are not U.S. citizens?

Later in the day, the redacted official in this chain writes: “Also, I’d like to correct something I said previously. Turns out I was incorrect on the influencers list. You can create lists of them so long as they are not U.S. Citizens. Happy to assist with that if you need and my apologies for giving you incorrect information.”

On March 27, 2019, at 3:50 pm a redacted public diplomacy desk officer writes:

Both [redacted] and I have talked with our fantastic social media team in our PD shop and they are familiarizing the team with our existing tools that will give them the reports they want and set this all up for them.

I’m happy to discuss more about these tools at our next meeting too.

This should greatly improve their ability to track and monitor stories/tweet, etc as it’s all automated these days.

At 9:11 pm, a digital media associate from the Kenjya-Trusant Group writes:

Great! Thanks so much. So I set up a Hootsuite Dashboard (which I can share with the team) and will have CrowdTangle searches set up that I can have sent to your inbox if you’d like.

At 2:26 pm an email with the sender and recipients’ names reacted includes a list of individuals whose Twitter accounts were to be monitored, including the president’s s son and his personal attorney:

Thank you! Below are some of the Twitter users with large followings whom we’ve seen tweeting on (and/or discussing on TV) Ukraine related issues over the past several days. They all have verified Twitter accounts that should be pretty easy to spot.

John Solomon (of the Hill)

Thanks again very much,

At 8:08 pm on March 27 a Kenjya-Trusant Group member asks: “Would you be able to add those high-profile usernames with us too? Would be good to have as I set things up.”

On March 28, 2019, a redacted State Department official states, “P.s. Here is a sample of the monitoring report for U.S. social media (scroll down for specific tweets and photos). Make sure to click the link at the top to show photos”

A redacted State Department official emails a group of officials including Kent saying:

First I want to assure everyone that we understand the strain Embassy Kyiv and Ambassador for Yovanovitch are under. We definitely want to support Post and the EUR Front Office’s needs at this time. Full stop.”

The new records include an email written on March 28, 2019, with the subject line “Ukraine Twitter Report” features a “Rolling Two-Hour Twitter Digest” with the search “Most Recent Tweets in Yovanovitch, Yovanovich, Ukraine Ambassador, Ukranian Ambassador, Ukraine Soros (Saved Search)” The report includes tweets by numerous U.S. persons, including Donald Trump Jr., Dan Bongino, Laura Ingraham, John Solomon, Sara Carter, Sean Hannity, Rudy Giuliani, and others. Many of the tweets have nothing to do with Ukraine and pertain to U.S. politics.

On March 29, 2019, Kent clarifies that the monitoring should focus on negative attacks on the work of the Department or Embassy and adds specific individuals who should be monitored:

I would suggest the direct recipient social media audience here includes [redacted] and me in the front office, for starters, as well as the desk. The attaboy (or attagirl) tweets in support of what we are doing are less of an issue to track, frankly, than the attacks…

The list of tweeters has many of the heavy hitting amplifiers we need to be aware of; Sara Carter should be added, since she often acts as an amplifying vanguard for issues that then get picked up on Hannity. Giuliani too.”

A redacted person responds to Kent: “Happy to add more people once we get the feed set up correctly. We will add Sara Carter and Guiliani to the list for monitoring.”

While leaving out the use of CrowdTangle, an April 1, 2019, email with all addressees names redacted has the subject line “Ukraine Twitter Report” and says, “Thank you so very much for alerting everyone to this issue. We appreciate you shutting down the automated report. [Redacted] We do not have, and have not had, any separate automated monitoring tools tracking specific individuals. We will continue to follow Ukraine-related news and commentary via simple internet searches.”

Included in the new documents are a CrowdTangle virtual training manual and a guide from CrowdTangle as to what “social listening” is.

On September 18, 2019, CrowdTangle, which had recently been acquired by Facebook, removed access to the platform “all Department users” effective October 2019.

On October 10, 2019, Congressman Devin Nunes told Sean Hannity on his program that, “What I’ve heard is that there were strange requests, irregular requests to monitor not just one journalist, but multiple journalists…” Hannity followed this statement by adding, multiple sources also told him that they “believe there is evidence that government resources were used to monitor communications” of U.S. journalists and that Yovanovitch may have been involved. Yovanovitch was questioned on the issue during the impeachment proceeding in the House and seemed to deny any illegal monitoring took place.

The Justice Department should follow Judicial Watch’s lead and investigate this issue further.

Until next week …