Sedition in the Obama Oval Office?
Barack
Obama, Joe Biden and their top intelligence officers huddled in the
Oval Office shortly before Donald Trump was inaugurated to discuss what
they would do about this new President they despised. Now we aim to find
out more about this conspiracy. We just filed a FOIA suit
against the Department of Justice, the FBI and the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) for all records related to the
January 5, 2017, meeting at the Obama Oval Office during which the
Steele Dossier and the investigation of General Flynn were discussed ( Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice and ODNI (No. 1:20-cv-01947)). The Oval Office meeting
reportedly included President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden,
National Security Adviser Susan Rice, Deputy Attorney General Sally
Yates, FBI Director James Comey, CIA Director John Brennan, Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper and other Obama administration
political and law enforcement officials. At least two records describing the meeting – a January 20, 2017, memo Rice sent to herself and a set of notes taken by FBI counterespionage chief Peter Strzok – have been declassified and made public. Sally Yates also detailed the meeting to Robert Mueller’s investigation. We sued after the DOJ, FBI, and ODNI failed to respond to identical May 20, 2020, FOIA requests for:
- All
records regarding the January 5, 2017, meeting at the White House
between former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, former Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan,
former Director James Comey, President Obama, and others. This request
includes all records created in preparation for, during, and/or pursuant
to the meeting, as well as any and all related records of communication
between any official or representative of the Department of Justice and
any other individual.
The meeting took place just two weeks prior to Trump’s inauguration. Last week we released emails
between Strzok and former FBI lawyer Lisa Page that included a frantic
exchange between top bureau officials in the days prior to and following
Trump’s inauguration discussing a White House counterintelligence
briefing that could “play into” the FBI’s “investigative strategy.” Obama’s
infamous January 5, 2017, Oval Office meeting is a key moment in the
corrupt effort to smear and spy on President Trump and target General
Flynn with a malicious prosecution. Rather than delay and stonewall, it
is urgent the FBI, DOJ, ODNI release all records about this malicious,
seditious conspiracy. Judicial Watch Sues On Illicit Foreign Funding of Our Colleges and UniversitiesWe have steadily revealed China’s connections to our universities and other institutions. Just last month we reported that the National Institutes of Health booted 54 scientists for their financial ties to China. We
want to know more, and so we have filed a FOIA suit against the U.S.
Department of Education for all records related to its investigations of
colleges and universities accepting foreign gifts and contracts ( Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Education (No. 1:20-cv-02010)). We sued after the department failed to respond to our May 4, 2020 FOIA request for:
All
information, documents, and communication(s) between the Department and
all schools currently under a Section 117 investigation regarding
acceptance or reporting of foreign gifts including, but not limited to,
gifts to affiliated foundations, all ancillary or foreign campuses, and
individual departments or professors between January 1, 2018 and
present; and
Any preliminary
findings or reports that cover all open and closed investigations of the
Department regarding false or misleading reporting of foreign gifts,
including all source documents and information relied upon to determine
findings or other report content.
According to our suit, Section 117 of the Higher Education Act,
20 U.S.C. § 1011f, “requires U.S. institutions of higher education
receiving federal funding to report any gifts from, or contracts with,
foreign sources with a value of $250,000 or more in a twelve-month
period. Section 117 also authorizes the Department of Education to open
an administrative investigation, and, if necessary, ask the Attorney
General to initiate a civil action to enforce the law.” On May 4,
2020, the ranking members of seven committees, including Rep. Jim
Jordan of the Committee on Oversight and Reform, Rep. Virginia Foxx of
the Committee on Education and Labor, Rep. Michael Rogers of the
Committee on Homeland Security, Rep. Frank Lucas of the Committee on
Science, Space and Technology, Rep. Devin Nunes of the Permanent Select
Committee on Intelligence, Rep. Mac Thornberry of the Armed Services
Committee, and Rep. Michael McCaul of the Foreign Affairs committee, wrote
to Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos outlining their concerns about
foreign influence in American institutes of higher education. In the
letter, they specifically highlight the Chinese Communist Party’s
attempts to silence academic research into the origins of COVID-19. It
is not publicly known if they have received these records or the
briefing. It was reported
on June 15, 2020, that “More than 70 U.S. universities that received
funding from the Chinese government did not disclose those donations to
the Department of Education, prompting concerns from lawmakers and
watchdogs about Beijing and the Communist Party's growing influence on
American college campuses.” On June 9, 2020, Dr. Charles Lieber,
former chair of Harvard’s department of chemistry and chemical biology,
“was indicted by a federal grand jury … on charges that he lied to U.S.
officials about his ties to a Chinese-run program aimed at furthering
the communist superpower’s scientific and technological development.” Since
May 2019, we have represented the Zachor Legal Institute in a Texas
Public Information Act lawsuit, seeking information about potential influence
by the Qatar government’s funding of certain Texas A&M University
programs and a Texas A&M campus in Education City, Al Rayyan, Qatar ( Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development v. Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General (No. D-1-GN-18-006240)). China
is a clear and present danger to the United States, and this lawsuit
aims to expose secret Chinese and other nefarious foreign funding of
America’s colleges and universities. Soros Funds St. Louis Prosecutor Charging Couple for Protecting HomeWe’ve
had our eye on billionaire George Soros for years as he pours money
into every leftist scheme imaginable. Now, little known to most people,
he’s helping to set up a cadre of prosecutors across America. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the latest.
A
controversial city prosecutor investigated for abusing her power to
pursue a bogus criminal case against a political nemesis and fined for
campaign finance violations just received a hefty reelection
contribution from leftwing billionaire George Soros. Her name is Kimberly Gardner
and in 2016 she made history for getting elected as St. Louis
Missouri’s first black chief prosecutor after serving in the state
legislature. Gardner ran on a platform of reforming the criminal justice
system, has wrongfully charged cops and conducted a two-year witch hunt
of former Missouri Governor Eric Greitens, who was exonerated of all
wrongdoing. In that case, Gardner was forced to withdraw her indictment
accusing the Republican governor of felony invasion of privacy for
supposedly taking a compromising photo of his mistress and using it to
keep her quiet about the extramarital affair.
Now
the Soros-backed prosecutor is targeting the St. Louis couple, Mark and
Patricia McCloskey, that defended their home last month when hundreds
of Black Lives Matters protestors trespassed onto their property on
their way to the St. Louis mayor’s house. The McCloskeys, both
attorneys, confronted protestors with guns and demanded they leave their
property. A local newspaper report
describes the incident like this: “Americans saw the story they wanted
to see. Some saw respected professionals fearing for their safety,
reasonably exercising their Second Amendment rights to defend their home
from violent trespassers. Others saw an overwrought, older affluent
couple, recklessly pointing their weapons and asserting their white
privilege.” The local prosecutor subscribes to the latter version. This
week Gardner, whose official title is St. Louis Circuit Attorney,
charged the McCloskeys with unlawful use of a weapon, a felony.
Shortly after the incident in late June, Gardner issued a public statement
indicating that she would criminally charge the couple for protecting
their property. “I am alarmed at the events that occurred over the
weekend, where peaceful protesters were met by guns and a violent
assault. We must protect the right to peacefully protest, and any
attempt to chill it through intimidation or threat of deadly force will
not be tolerated. My office is currently working with the public and
police to investigate these events. Make no mistake: we will not
tolerate the use of force against those exercising their First Amendment
rights, and will use the full power of Missouri law to hold people
accountable.” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, the state’s chief
law enforcement officer, has filed a court brief
seeking to get the case dismissed. “The right to use firearms to defend
one’s person, family, home, and property has deep roots in Missouri
law,” the court document states. “Self-defense is the central component
of the right to keep and bear arms, which receives the highest level of
protection from the Missouri Constitution. Missouri’s statutes
specifically authorize Missouri citizens to use firearms to deter
assailants and protect themselves, their families, and homes from
threatening or violent intruders. A highly publicized criminal
prosecution of Missouri citizens for exercising these fundamental
freedoms threatens to intimidate and deter law-abiding Missouri citizens
from exercising their constitutional right of self-defense.”
Almost half of St. Louis felony cases have been bungled by Gardner, according to news reports, and more than 65 attorneys have quit or been fired
from the prosecutor’s office during her tenure. Among them is Rachel
Smith, Gardner’s chief trial assistant, who resigned after 19 years in
office. She was the fourth prosecutor to fill the role of chief trial
assistant since Gardner took office in 2017. Last year Gardner was fined $63,009 for campaign finance violations after a Missouri Ethics Commission investigation
found her election committee violated multiple campaign finance laws.
The panel found that Gardner and her campaign failed to report around
100 contributions totaling over $305,000 and 255 expenditures totaling
about $90,000.
Nevertheless, Soros’ support has not wavered. A Soros-linked group called Missouri Justice Public Safety PAC, recently gave Gardner’s 2020 campaign $78,000, according to a news article that includes her most recent financial report. The leftwing billionaire also funded
Gardner’s 2016 campaign and has donated generously to leftist
candidates in local prosecutor elections nationwide, including Houston,
Chicago and Albuquerque. Judicial Watch has reported extensively on
Soros’ global campaigns to further advance the left’s radical agenda
abroad and domestically and published an investigative report
on the financial and staffing nexus between his deeply politicized Open
Society Foundations (OSF)and the U.S. government. OSF works to
destabilize legitimate governments, erase national borders, target
conservative politicians, finance civil unrest, subvert institutions of
higher education and orchestrate refugee crises for political gain. With
the help of American taxpayer dollars, Soros bolsters a radical
leftwing agenda that in the U.S. has included: promoting an open border
with Mexico and fighting immigration enforcement efforts; fomenting
racial disharmony by funding anti-capitalist racialist organizations;
financing the Black Lives Matter movement and other organizations
involved in the riots in Ferguson, Missouri; weakening the integrity of
our electoral systems; promoting taxpayer funded abortion-on-demand;
advocating a government-run health care system; opposing U.S.
counterterrorism efforts; promoting dubious transnational climate change
agreements that threaten American sovereignty and working to advance
gun control and erode Second Amendment protections.
State Department Pushed Leftist Revolution?The State Department has joined the Left’s war on language and other institutions, including the traditional family. Our Corruption Chronicles blog explains.
In
the latest move by a U.S. government agency to appease leftists, the
State Department is quietly overhauling language used in agency
materials that may be considered exclusionary or offensive. Judicial
Watch obtained a copy of a memo from a State Department source asking
the agency’s 69,000 employees to report “outdated and non-inclusive
language in Department of State policies, documents or webpages.” The
directive was issued this month by the State Department’s Office of
Civil Rights (S/OCR) and it provides an “outdated form submission” for
employees to note specific examples of what amounts to politically
incorrect language that is to be “updated.”
The
S/OCR offers several examples to guide employees through the process of
reporting policies, documents and web pages that do not use “inclusive”
language. This includes obsolete racial terms or language that implies
“preference for the traditional nuclear family structure and
stereotypical gender roles,” according to the document. Other examples
include using the outdated phrase “handicapping condition” rather than
the contemporary word “disability.” The widely distributed memo ends by
encouraging employees to participate in a process that can easily be
compared to Marxist language manipulation. “If you are aware of policies
or documents containing outdated language or instances where language
could be more inclusive S/OCR would welcome you completing the form at
the link below with the relevant outdated language information for our
office’s follow-up.”
Most major
federal government agencies—including the departments of Homeland
Security, Justice, Defense, Health and Labor—have civil rights offices
that handle discrimination and other related issues. All of them are
generously funded by American taxpayers and their mission statements are
quite similar, though they operate individually. Like many of its
counterparts, the S/OCR claims its mission
is to propagate fairness, equity and inclusion at the Department of
State. Furthermore, its business is conflict resolution, employee and
supervisor assistance and diversity management. “S/OCR manages the Equal
Employment Opportunity (EEO) administrative process for the Department
and works to prevent employment discrimination through outreach and
training,” according to the S/OCR’s mission statement.
The
State Department is hardly alone in caving into the increasingly
powerful leftist mob’s demands for political correctness. Just last week
Judicial Watch obtained outrageous, anti-bias training materials
from the Department of Defense that are used to train service members
on diversity topics. The material essentially indoctrinates troops with
anti-American and racially inflammatory training. It features chapters
on power and privilege in which cadets are taught that privilege is
linked to various forms of identity including sexual orientation and
religion. Students are also taught that there is “ sexual orientation privilege”
associated with the “marginalization of non-heterosexual lifestyles and
the view that heterosexuality is the normal sexual orientation.” The guide also notes that,
“Statistics show Whites are the majority in senior leadership positions
(i.e., flag officers, general officers, and Senior Executive Service)
and lend itself [sic] to the perpetuation of racism.” A section
addressing “ Cross-Cultural Communication”
states: “Gender includes the social construction of masculinity and
femininity within a culture and incorporates his or her biological,
psychological, and sociological characteristics. Sex refers to a
person’s biological or physical self. Although sex determines who will
bear children, gender accounts for our roles in life and how these life
roles affect our communication.”
The
nation’s premier federal law enforcement agency has also caved into
demands from the left. Several years ago, Judicial Watch uncovered records
showing that the terrorist front group Council on American-Islamic
Relations (CAIR) got the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to purge
anti-terrorism material determined to be offensive to Muslims. Judicial
Watch obtained hundreds of pages of FBI documents with details of the
shocking arrangement and subsequently published a special in-depth report on the subject. The same Islamic activists that strong-armed the FBI later demanded an overhaul in the way all law enforcement officers are trained in the United States.
Trump Effect: Big Bet on Virus Drug Still WinningA
frightening consequence of the pandemic is the politicization of health
information. The Left, which includes the legacy media, is destroying
lives as it demonizes anything President Trump proposes. As Yale
epidemiology professor Dr. Harvey Risch has said of hydroxychloroquine, "It's a political drug now, not a medical drug." It might save up to 100,000 lives, he said. That’s not what you hear in the media, as our chief investigative reporter Micah Morrison, reports in his Investigative Bulletin.
The
president’s pandemic policies are under fire, but in one area a big
Trumpian bet is still coming up a winner. Three new studies suggest that
the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine (HC) shows success in the
fight against the coronavirus.
In
Michigan, a study of more than 2,500 patients at six Detroit-area
hospitals found that HC, administered early, significantly cut the death
rate. “Our analysis shows that that using hydroxychloroquine helped
save lives,” said Steven Kalkanis, CEO of the Henry Ford Health System.
“It needs to be used early,” he added. “It needs to be used in a
hospital setting.”
In New York
City, researchers with the Mt. Sinai Health System studying more than
6000 patients with Covid-19 found they died at a lower rate when treated
with HC. In the study, after adjusting for other risk factors, the Mt.
Sinai researchers found that “hydroxychloroquine use was associated with
decreased in-hospital mortality.”
And
in India, a massive study of more than 300,000 people, including front
line medical personnel, found that HC provided prophylactic benefits.
“The task force of medical experts, including physicians and super
specialists, have recommend and backed the drive to administer HC in
cluster areas and high exposure cases,” a senior medical official told
the Indian Express. “The benefits seem to far outweigh the debate around
its risks and it has certainly helped in implementing the preventive
strategies.”
Read about the India experience here. Read the Mount Sinai study here and more on the Detroit study here.
Of
course, none of this was supposed to happen. Trump’s enthusiastic
embrace of the drug was widely ridiculed. A president with a medical
opinion! How dare he! Warnings about the drug
flowed from the media, political opponents, the Food and Drug
Administration, the World Health Organization, the American Medical
Association, and others. Trump not only stuck to his path, but brazenly
doubled down in May with the announcement that he himself was taking HC as a prophylactic.
Is HC a miracle drug in the fight against the virus? No. If it was, we’d know by now.
But
it does seem to help in certain cases, such as when administered early
to healthy patients with no underlying conditions, or as a prophylactic
for front line personnel. Serious people are giving HC a serious look.
Prescriptions for the drug in the U.S. jumped more than 150% earlier this year. International supply efforts surged. None of this would have happened without Trump.
All this suggests a kind of Trump Effect that may be with us long after Trump himself has departed the political scene. As we observed
back in April, when we first looked at the HC controversy, Trump
pounded the bully pulpit, preferred outside channels of information,
distrusted experts, hewed to deregulatory impulses, leaned on the levers
of government, and embraced conservative and social media to promote
the drug. This turned out to be not just a winning bet, but a winning
strategy. Others doubtless will take note.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment