Confirmed: China Abuses US Diplomats

[INSIDE JW]

WILL BIDEN FURTHER POLITICIZE THE SUPREME COURT?

[[link removed]]
Justice Stephen Breyer’s surprise retirement from the Supreme
Court seems to have been the result of an unprecedented leftist
pressure campaign to force him out before this year’s election. You
can be sure these same radical leftists, who also want to pack the
Supreme Court, will require Biden to pick a judicial extremist to
replace Justice Breyer. Let me be clear: the Left will use this
opportunity to further undermine the integrity of the Supreme Court
and the rule of law.

Disturbingly, President Biden seems to have confirmed that he will
refuse to consider potential nominees simply because of their race and
sex. The Senate must not only reject Biden’s invidious
discrimination but must also ensure no nominee moves forward who wants
to further politicize the Supreme Court by legislating from the bench.

I encourage you to share your views on these issues with your Senators
[[link removed]]
every step of
the way over the next few months. You can reach them at 202-224-3121.

CONFIRMED: CHINESE ‘ANAL SWAB’ COVID TESTING OF U.S. PERSONNEL

China has reportedly
[[link removed]]
resumed its practice of using anal swabs to test for COVID just two
weeks before the Olympics begin.

We’ve been following this issue closely, and through two lawsuits
we’ve uncovered the details of our diplomats in China being
subjected to this intrusive procedure.

In the latest development, we received 11 pages
[[link removed]]
of records from the State Department revealing that U.S. diplomatic
officials in China objected to being asked to submit to anal swab
COVID testing by the Chinese government. The redacted documents show
that at least one U.S. employee was given an anal swab test for COVID
“at his apartment.”

We obtained the records in response to our FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
for
non-identifying records of U.S. diplomatic personnel being subjected
to invasive COVID-19 anal swab tests by the Chinese government
(_Judicial Watch v U.S. Dept of State_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:21-cv-02111)). We sued after the State Department failed to
respond to a June 18, 2021, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request
for:

All records about US diplomatic personnel in or seeking to enter China
being subjected to anal swab tests for the COVID-19 virus, including
all complaints and communications regarding such testing. This request
does not seek any personal identifying information of US diplomatic
personnel that may have been subjected to such testing.
Here’s what we learned.

On January 22, 2021, a redacted general services officer from the U.S.
Consulate General in Shenyang sent an email with the subject “New
Testing Method?”:

So, a colleague from [redacted] telling our group [redacted] that he
was given an anal COVID swab at his apartment. Just a heads up, as I
am sure it is going to blow up soon… if you aren’t already dealing
with it. Employee’s name is [redacted]. Just getting ahead before
the word of mouth starts spreading.
A redacted official responds:

In what city did this occur? And what number test? And did he say if
they gave any notice beforehand the test would be conducted in this
manner? And was he presented with options.
A redacted official responds:
-Beijing
-He is in his apartment as part of the +7 (from my understanding)
-No notice or options as I can tell
-He had to do both a nose and anal swab
Also on January 22, 2021, a management officer in the U.S.
Consulate in Shenyang, whose name is redacted, sent an email with the
subject “RE: No Anal swabs for diplomats.”

FAO [foreign area office] is telling the Embassy that it was a mistake
to ask for anal swabs and that it didn’t apply to diplomats. TBD how
[redacted] will play it, but for now we’ll have to tell people they
don’t have to do it. Reportedly you do it yourself in private so not
as bad as I envisioned.
In a January 26, 2021, email regarding the anal COVID tests, a
redacted U.S. official writes:

I hope the GSO [general services office] and VIP Beijing visits can do
something about this.
In a January 27, 2021, email labeled with the subject line “COVID
TEST 21ST DAY Hedeliza and Efren Balisi,” marked “Importance:
High,” a redacted U.S. official writes:

Team – FYI, [redacted] being asked for anal swab and environmental
test. Can Housing contact [redacted]. I’ll have VIP contact FAO
ASAP.
A redacted official writes on January 27, 2021:

I have asked [redacted] to contact [redacted] immediately regarding
the anal swab and environmental testing. He is calling them now.
A redacted official on January 27, 2021, responds:

Please contact the [redacted]. [Redacted] turned off the anal swab,
and indicated that we are fine with and oral or nasal swab. He also
turned off the inside the apartment environmental testing as I
protested both of those items.
On May 5, 2021, a redacted official writes to
[email protected] with the subject line “Beijing PCS
Arrival and Quarantine Questions:”

Hi. [Redacted] I'm planning to arrive in country in early August. What
do we need to be aware of for planning purposes? Are we able to fly
into Beijing directly? Someone mentioned that we have to fly into
another city. We currently have reservations for Beijing, so we wanted
to check before having the tickets issued.

We've been hearing a lot of horror stories about the quarantine in
China. Unfortunately, the monthly newcomers call [redacted] land the
calls aren't recorded, so we can't even hear the answers to others
questions via a recording of the calls. So I hope you don't mind us
asking our questions to you directly. We've had some conversations
with the CLO and their office referred us to you for more specifics.

We have been talking with a number of [redacted] in China or those
that recently left. We've heard a lot of horror stories about the
quarantine upon arrival. We've heard about older children being
separate from families during the quarantine, anal swab testing and
real violations of diplomatic norms. Others have reported they were
crammed in rooms with inadequate bedding- i.e. two twin beds for a
family of four- and sub-par conditions bordering on detention center
level living. It seems like diplomats and their families are not being
treated according to acceptable norms. The escalation of the PRC's
violations of diplomatic protections seems particularly concerning….
A redacted official responds:

Please note that Chinese travel, COVID testing, quarantine, and other
regulations are tightly controlled by the PRC and there is little
flexibility in the process. The U.S. Embassy Beijing and China Desk in
Washington have continually been engaged with our Chinese counterparts
in all facets of the process. The VIP and Travel teams here at the
embassy continually monitor the regulations and provide the best
guidance to our travelers possible while supporting a large volume of
diplomatic personnel and their families as they navigate the process.
I've attached our Beijing travel handbook for general reference.

The following talking points are designed to try to address your
questions below:

* We have successfully brought back 140 diplomatic staff and
families to Beijing on commercial air travel since October 2020 with
many more in the pipeline. Over 1,200 people returned to Mission China
after evacuation in 2020 amidst uncertain circumstances. I can't
directly respond to the "horror stories" you are referring to, but
would encourage you to take social media posts and information from
non-official channels with a grain of salt. We have had many families
successfully navigate the testing and quarantine procedures with safe
travel to Beijing….

***

* The quarantine hotel policies in China are strict and not
flexible: under the current regulations, unfortunately, children ages
14 and up will need to quarantine in a separate hotel room for the
initial14 days of quarantine in Shanghai. Upon final arrival in
Beijing, the goal is for the family to do the 3rd week of quarantine
together in your diplomatic residence. If you have medical concerns
about this process or have special family needs, I highly encourage
you to contact the Beijing Health Unit for guidance and consultation.
* For children under 14, each child can share a room with a parent
in likely a double or queen-sized bed at the [redacted] I am
unfamiliar with the twin bed concerns and we have not seen that with
the hotels in Shanghai or Beijing.

***

* While in quarantine, most travelers don't have a need to contact
the Embassy directly other than to schedule the onward travel from
Shanghai. That said, if there is a medical or other emergency, the
U.S. Consulate Shanghai is well aware of travelers in quarantine and
able to assist should a crisis arise.
* There are no means for U.S. government or any non-PRC CDC or
Customs personnel to have contact with you at the airport or hotel.
Until you have completed the testing and quarantine regimen,
regrettably there are no means for interpersonal interaction with USG
representatives. Both the airport and hotel have successfully brought
in thousands of expatriate personnel in the pandemic era and the
processes are well known by all parties and relatively smooth.
* Anal swabs and "environmental testing" inside USG residences are
not permitted for diplomatic staff. This acknowledgement of diplomatic
rights has been confirmed repeatedly by MFA and FAO. If there is an
attempt to conduct such a test, the traveler is fully within their
rights to refuse testing and contact the Embassy.

I understand some of these answers may not be what you were hoping
for, but I wanted to provide direct, honest guidance based on the PRC
policies and situation here. If you have continued concerns, I highly
recommend discussing with your gaining office management and/or
appropriate personnel in Washington.
Please note that the PRC travel, quarantine, hotel, and testing
policies can and do change regularly with no warning and immediate
effect. The guidance above is designed to give you an idea of the
current landscape, but this is always subject to change as we've seen
many times before. Please remain in contact with the Beijing VIP team
on the latest guidance and we look forward to welcoming you and your
family to Beijing in the future.
Here’s some more background:
In December 2021, we received records from the State Department
showing at as many as two people were either asked or required to take
an anal test for COVID by the Chinese government.

One unidentified general services officer wrote:

There’s no good way to ask this, but has any health authority asked
you or your spouse to conduct an anal swab test? The embassy obviously
does not authorize or permit this type of testing on diplomats, but
others have been asked so I need to verify everyone’s experience.
***
For the record, our agreement is for nasal and/or throat swabs only.
If you are asked to undergo either of the above or any other that
seems inappropriate, please refuse and contact us immediately. We will
escalate to [China’s] MFA/FAO [foreign area officer] and go from
there.
On January 27, a State Department official sends an email with the
subject line “COVID TEST 21ST DAY
[[link removed]

At this point, if they will insist [upon] the anal test, we would like
to just go back to the States.
Another comment in the email chain reads:

Team – FYI. [Redacted] being asked for anal swab and environmental
test. Can Housing contact [redacted]? I’ll have VIP contact FAO
ASAP.
These latest documents confirm the abuse of U.S. diplomatic
personnel by the Chinese government. The Biden administration
doesn’t seem to have done much about this abusive anal swab testing
and other abuses other than pretend it didn’t happen and cover it
up.

ANOTHER SECRET POSTAL SERVICE PROGRAM SPIES ON CITIZENS BY HACKING
CELL PHONES

Your postal “service” is out of control. Why on earth would this
agency, which, by the way, loses billions of dollars each year, be
hacking cell phones? This is a serious constitutional issue. Our
_Corruption Chronicles_ blog explains
[[link removed]].


Months after Judicial Watch sued
[[link removed]]
the U.S.
Postal Service (USPS) for information about a secret program that
tracks and collects Americans’ social media posts, more of the
agency’s controversial spy mechanisms are being exposed. The newly
uncovered tools are sophisticated hacking devices that can breach cell
phones and the USPS’s law enforcement arm, U.S. Postal Inspection
Service (USPIS), has utilized them hundreds of times in the last few
years, according to a news story
[[link removed]]
that cites USPIS data buried in a lengthy agency report
[[link removed]].
The questionable surveillance schemes appear to indicate that the
government is weaponizing the nation’s postal service to improperly
spy on the citizens who fund it.

The social media surveillance program was uncovered
[[link removed]]
early last year by an online news outlet that revealed the USPS has
been quietly tracking and collecting the social media posts of
Americans, including notes about planned protests. It is known as
Internet Covert Operations Program (ICOP). Analysts dig through social
media sites searching for “inflammatory” postings, which are
shared across government agencies. Civil liberties experts quoted in
the story questioned the legal authority of the USPS to monitor social
media activity and one asked a logical question: Why would the
government depend on the postal service to examine the internet for
security reasons? “If the individuals they’re monitoring are
carrying out or planning criminal activity that should be the purview
of the FBI,” said one civil liberties authority in the piece, adding
“if they’re simply engaging in lawfully protected speech, even if
it’s odious or objectionable, then monitoring them on that basis
raises serious constitutional concerns.”

Judicial Watch quickly launched an investigation, filing a Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) request with the USPS for information relating
to ICOP. As the government often does with FOIA requests, it failed to
meet the federally mandated deadline for providing the records and
Judicial Watch was forced to file a lawsuit in early July. Among the
things Judicial Watch asks for in the federal complaint
[[link removed]]
are all records from January 1, 2020, to the present identifying
criteria for flagging social media posts as “inflammatory” or
otherwise worthy of further scrutiny by other government agencies. It
also asks for records relating to ICOP’s database of social media
posts, communications between USPIS and FBI or Homeland Security
regarding the program and an analysis outlining the authority of the
USPIS to monitor, track and collect Americans’ social media posts.
Judicial Watch will provide updates as the case evolves.

In the meantime, Judicial Watch is filing a FOIA request with the USPS
for information on the devices used by the agency to hack cell phones.
The news agency that exposed the alarming operation this week
discovered its existence in the USPIS’s 2019 and 2020 annual
reports. “Altogether, the records suggest that the USPIS has cracked
hundreds of iPhones—generally thought to be one of the most secure
commercial phones on the market—as well as other devices,” the
article states. The hacking tools are known as Cellebrite and GrayKey
and they were used by the agency to extract previously unattainable
information from seized mobile devices. In fiscal year 2020, 331
devices were processed and 242 were unlocked and/or extracted,
according to information obtained from the USPIS reports. The 2020
document discloses an increase in phone cracking from the previous
year.

These clandestine operations within the nation’s postal service
should create concern, especially for a troubled agency that has
failed miserably to fulfill its mission. The USPS has long been a
bastion of mismanagement and frivolous spending that has fleeced
American taxpayers out of billions in the last few years alone. In
2021, the USPS reported a net loss of $4.9 billion
[[link removed]]
and in 2020 a net loss of $9.2 billion
[[link removed]].
One federal audit
[[link removed]]
slammed the USPS for blowing the opportunity to save nearly $22
million had it bothered to maintain its fleet of vehicles more
efficiently. A few years before that the USPS blew
[[link removed]]
hundreds of thousands of dollars on professional sports tickets, booze
and fancy meals while it claimed to be crippled by an $8.3 billion
deficit. The items were purchased by USPS managers and employees with
special charge cards issued to U.S. government agencies. The USPS’s
top executives have also been found to receive illegally high salary
and compensation packages that should outrage the public. Several
years ago, a federal audit found that at least three USPS officers
made more than the legal compensation limit for their respective work
category while the agency was billions in the red.

TIME TO END REVERSE DISCRIMINATION IN COLLEGE ADMISSIONS

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to hear challenges to race-based
admissions practices at Harvard
[[link removed]]
and the University of North Carolina
[[link removed]],
which we applaud.

It is time, once and for all, for the Supreme Court to put an end to
court-sanctioned racial discrimination in college admissions, both in
public and private schools. The Supreme Court should recognize that
its own past decisions legitimizing racial discrimination in school
admissions were wrongly decided and should reverse them.
Discrimination on the basis of race is becoming pandemic in all areas
of society and must be curtailed as the Constitution requires. The
Supreme Court needs to stop this pernicious and building racialism.

In April 2021, we and Allied Educational Foundation (AEF) filed an
amici curiae brief
[[link removed]]
in support of
Students for Fair Admissions’ petition for a writ of certiorari
[[link removed]]
to the U.S. Supreme Court, challenging a decision of the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the First Circuit upholding Harvard College’s race-based
affirmative action admissions program (_Students for Fair Admission v.
President & Fellows of Harvard College_
[[link removed]]
(No. 20-1199)).

Just last month, we filed an amici curiae brief
[[link removed]]
along with AEF in a companion case, in support of SFA’s petition for
a writ of certiorari
[[link removed]]
to the Supreme Court challenging a decision of the Court of Appeals
for the Fourth Circuit, which upheld the race-based admissions program
at the University of North Carolina (UNC) (Students for Fair
Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina, et al.
[[link removed]]
(No. 21-707)). The amici brief asked the court to no longer allow
“universities to defend race-based admissions programs by relying
upon schools’ purported educational needs for increased
diversity.”

The Supreme Court has now agreed to review both decisions.

Students for Fair Admissions argues that “the University’s
[UNC’s] use of race in its undergraduate admissions process violates
the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United
States Constitution and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”
SFA concludes that, “UNC’s admissions process incorporated
impermissible racial considerations violating the Equal Protection
Clause.”

We and AEF argue in our UNC amici brief that “race-based admissions
criteria are antithetical to the 14th Amendment and fundamentally at
odds with the Equal Protection Clause.” In general, our _amici
[[link removed]
brief argues, “Prior Equal Protection rulings upholding racial
classifications have not stood the test of time”:

Rulings by this Court allowing individuals to be treated differently
based on race under the Equal Protection Clause have been wrongfully
decided. Amici respectfully submit that three such cases account for
some of the most famous missteps in this Court’s jurisprudence.
These rulings show the troubling outcomes that spring from judicially
created exceptions to the Equal Protection Clause’s strict
prohibition against racial classifications.
To remedy this constitutional failing, we called on the court to
make a clean sweep of past decisions permitting racial discrimination
in college admission programs:

Race-based admissions programs for higher education have been the
subject of this Court’s attention in five major cases [and in 26
separate opinions] in the last 43 years … These rulings have
generated numerous opinions, pluralities, concurrences, and dissents,
many of which conflict in fundamental and significant ways. These
decisions achieved little consensus regarding whether race-based
admissions programs can be implemented without violating equal
protection principles and have not provided a workable construct for
the lower courts and school officials in reviewing and implementing
race-based admissions programs …
Consequently:

This Court should grant Petitioner’s writ of certiorari to
reconsider whether race-based admissions programs should ever be
permitted – and not simply to try (again) to adjust the strict
scrutiny standard in a way that permits such programs.
These cases could be a historic turning point in the decades-long
battle to stop illegal discrimination under the guise of
“affirmative action” or “diversity.”

I’ll keep you posted.

The Allied Educational Foundation is a charitable and educational
foundation that has partnered frequently with us to fight government
and judicial corruption and to promote a return to ethics and morality
in the nation’s public life.

‘INCREASED IMMIGRATION FLOWS’ CAUSE RECORD-BREAKING COURT BACKLOG

The Biden border crisis is breaking our legal system. Our Corruption
Chronicles blog has the details in this report
[[link removed]]
on the breakdown of the immigration court system.

The Biden administration’s controversial open border policies are
slamming the overwhelmed U.S. Immigration Court system, creating the
largest backlog of cases in history. A new report
[[link removed]]
issued by Syracuse
University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC)
reveals that the backlog is “growing faster than ever, burying
judges in an avalanche of cases.” At the end of December pending
cases reached a shocking 1,596,193, according to government figures
obtained by TRAC under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). To put
things in perspective, researchers point out that if every person with
a pending immigration case gathered, it would surpass the population
of Philadelphia, the nation’s sixth-largest city. Migrants with open
cases will wait nearly five years for a court decision determining
their status in the U.S.

While the system has seen backlogs under past administrations of both
political parties, it has never experienced anything this dire. In
fact, the TRAC report states that “a disturbing new trend has
emerged during the Biden administration that demands attention: since
the start of the Biden administration, the growth of the backlog has
been accelerating at a breakneck pace.” For instance, at the start
of the George W. Bush administration, the backlog stood at 149,338 and
it grew “substantially” under Barack Obama. The problem “only
accelerated” under Donald Trump but nothing compares to Biden. In
recent months the rate of backlogs in the nation’s Immigration Court
system has “exploded,” the TRAC report states, supporting the
assessment with government data. Between October and December 2021,
the quarterly growth in the number of pending Immigration Court cases
shattered records.

In that short period, the backlog increased by nearly 140,000 cases,
the government records obtained by TRAC show. “Even during the most
dramatic growth in pending cases during the Trump administration, the
largest 3-month increase in the backlog only once approached 100,000
in the June-August 2019 period,” the report says. The backlog
fluctuated up and down in the following year until it skyrocketed in
the last few months of 2021 under Biden. Researchers call it a
“dramatic acceleration in the growth of the backlog.” The alarming
government figures suggest that Immigration Courts “are entering a
worrying new era of even more crushing caseloads— all the more
concerning since no attempt at a solution has yet been able to reverse
the avalanche of cases that Immigration Judges now face,” the TRAC
report states.

The COVID-19 pandemic has played a role in the crisis because it
caused a partial court shutdown, but researchers found that the key
problem is the “recent deluge of new cases filed by the Department
of Homeland Security (DHS).” Immigration enforcement has been
limited dramatically under the Biden administration, which has also
issued a policy
[[link removed]]
to allow more new immigrants into the U.S., thus the unprecedented and
expanding backlog. The dramatic increase in court cases began around
June and will inevitably get worse if the administration does not make
changes. “If the current pace during the first quarter of FY 2022 of
newly arriving Notices to Appear (NTAs) continues, the Court will
receive 800,000 new cases – at least 300,000 more than the annual
total the Court has ever received during its existence,” TRAC
estimates.

The U.S. Immigration Court system operates under the Department of
Justice’s (DOJ) Executive Office for Immigration Review
[[link removed]]
(EOIR), which functions
under the attorney general. There are 60 immigration courts throughout
the nation and around 580 judges that conduct removal hearings or
determine if a migrant can remain in the U.S. In its 2022 budget
submission
[[link removed]]
to
Congress, the DOJ requests $891,190,000 for the EOIR. In the document,
the agency lists “increased immigration flows,” particularly
family units, unaccompanied alien children and putative asylum seekers
from Central America, among the EOIR’s biggest external challenges.
Until next week …



[Contribute]
[[link removed]]


<a
href="[link removed]"
target="_blank"><img alt="WU01"
src="[link removed]"
style="width:100%; height:auto;" /></a>

[32x32x1]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x2]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024

202.646.5172



© 2017 - 2022, All Rights Reserved
Manage Email Subscriptions
[[link removed]]
|
Unsubscribe
[[link removed]]

View in browser
[[link removed]]