Hillary’s Newest Legal Machinery at Work on Depositions

Posted on July 18, 2016July 18, 2016 by Denise Simon

Lawyers from several government agencies have rallied to Hillary’s defense, including those from the State Department and from the Justice Department. Likely, lawyers from the White House have also been consulted while Hillary herself has a team of lawyers. So, if she does prevail in the general election, does that mean she will provide a very late deposition and even pardon herself?

Clinton preserves option to stall deposition

Politico: Hillary Clinton’s lawyers are expected to appear before a federal judge Monday morning in a bid to keep her from being forced into videotaped, sworn testimony about her email system, but they’re keeping their options open if things don’t go their way.

In a little-noticed passage in a court filing last week, Clinton’s legal team laid the groundwork for a potential appeal that could allow the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee to delay any deposition for weeks or months, perhaps even until after the November election.

“For the sake of preserving any and all rights, counsel to Secretary Clinton respectfully submit that discovery is unwarranted in this case as a general matter,” longtime Clinton lawyer David Kendall and colleagues wrote in a filing submitted to U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan.

Legal experts say the language is aimed at keeping the door open for Clinton to try to block a deposition at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit if Sullivan decides to order one.

Kendall “is preserving that position for ultimately raising it on appeal, if necessary….It’s safe lawyering,” said Dan Metcalfe, former co-director of the Justice Department’s Office of Information and Privacy, now with American University’s law school. “It’s a wise thing to do, but one could infer from that that he’s not 100 percent confident that the argument….would prevail.”

It’s difficult to predict whether Sullivan will grant the request he’s set to take up Monday from the conservative group Judicial Watch, which is demanding to put Clinton under oath in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit exploring aspects of her private email set-up.

The judge—an appointee of President Bill Clinton—has been sharply critical of the former secretary of state for her handling of her emails. At a hearing last August, Sullivan said Clinton’s “violation of government policy” was responsible for the email imbroglio. And in May, the judge approved depositions for several of Clinton’s aides and issued an order explicitly leaving open the possibility Clinton herself might be required to testify.

But Sullivan has also seemed concerned about the litigation becoming a football in the presidential campaign. In May, he not only acceded to a request from a close Clinton aide to put videos of the depositions off limits to the public, he expanded the court-ordered restriction to the videos of all depositions conducted in the case.

If Sullivan approves a deposition for Clinton and the Clinton camp goes to the D.C. Circuit to try to block such testimony, Clinton appears to have a decent chance of succeeding at least in winning a delay, in part because that court has been very deferential to cabinet members in similar circumstances.

In 2014, the D.C. Circuit blocked a court-ordered deposition of Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack in a defamation lawsuit former Agriculture employee Shirley Sherrod brought against late conservative blogger Andrew Breitbart over a video he published. The appeals court said it was “well-established” that c members should not be deposed in civil suits absent “extraordinary circumstances.”

Clinton is a former cabinet official, not a sitting one. However, her court filings last week mention that her status as a former cabinet official more than half a dozen times.

The D.C. Circuit may be more politically fertile territory for Clinton than it was a few years ago. The court is now split between Democratic and Republican appointees, 7-4. Four of the court’s Democratic appointees have joined the court since 2013.

Another reason Clinton’s legal team got directly involved in the case for the first time last week: while State is opposing a deposition for Clinton, the agency and its lawyers at the Justice Department might not try to appeal to block Clinton’s deposition if it is ordered.

In May, when Sullivan ordered depositions of about half a dozen former State officials—including a couple of close aides to Clinton—State did not try to seek relief from the D.C. Circuit, even though State argued against allowing the depositions in the first place.

The hearing Monday before Sullivan is likely to focus on whether Clinton’s use of a private email server could bring Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit within an exception to a 1980 Supreme Court case involving the papers of another former secretary of state, Henry Kissinger. The high court ruled that Kissinger’s papers were not obtainable under FOIA because they were not in the State Department’s control at the time of the request, but in a footnote the court suggested its ruling might be different if an employee intentionally placed outside an agency’s possession.

“We need not decide whether this standard might be displaced in the event that it was shown that an agency official purposefully routed a document out of agency possession in order to circumvent a FOIA request. No such issue is presented here. We also express no opinion as to whether an agency withholds documents which have been wrongfully removed by an individual after a request is filed,” Justice William Rehnquist wrote for the court’s majority.

In filings last week, Clinton’s lawyers argued that because the Judicial Watch request involved in the suit came after Clinton left office in February 2013, the Kissinger case controls and State has no obligation to provide records that Clinton possessed at that time.

“Kissinger squarely covers this case,” Kendall wrote, noting that Judicial Watch’s request for records about Clinton aide Huma Abedin’s employment arrangement came several months after Clinton left State.

Clinton’s lawyers went even further, arguing that “a general intent to ‘thwart’ FOIA” isn’t enough to upend the general rule that records outside an agency’s possession are lost to FOIA requesters.

In a statement last week, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called it “both significant and disturbing” that Clinton was asserting her private email account was her private property, just as Kissinger asserted about the records he took and deposited in a restricted collection at the Library of Congress.

Sullivan might choose to shut down or delay the request for Clinton testimony given that it’s unclear what the court could do at this point to recover more of Clinton’s emails. She already turned over about 30,000 messages her lawyers deemed work-related. Those records have been searched by State, processed under FOIA, and released with the exception of a few messages deemed to contain “Top Secret” information.

The FBI currently has possession of several servers used by Clinton, as well as some messages recovered from other sources. After FBI Director James Comey announced he wasn’t recommending criminal charges against Clinton or others over the emails, the law enforcement agency said it plans to provide emails that might qualify as official records to the State Department.

Clinton has said she has no emails from that period in her possession at this point, beyond the equipment transferred to the FBI. However, it remains unclear how long it will take for State to obtain those records and just who will decide which of Clinton’s emails might qualify as official State records.

In addition, some of the records and equipment in the FBI’s possession might still be Clinton’s property, leaving open some prospect of Judicial Watch winning some court-supervised process to examine that material for government records.

On the other hand, it’s also possible Sullivan might decide the lawsuit under discussion Monday isn’t the right vehicle to pursue questions about Clinton’s handling of her email. There are dozens of other FOIA suits pending against State, including some relating to requests filed before Clinton stepped down as secretary.

Those other cases might be stronger ones to press the issue, but it’s unclear whether judges in those case would demand Clinton submit to deposition, how quickly they would do so, and whether a higher court would intervene over an order for such testimony issued in the months or weeks before Clinton is expected to face presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump in the November election.

Russia Makes Olympic Athletes with Proven Doping Program

Posted on July 18, 2016July 18, 2016 by Denise Simon

Wada Report is here.

WADA Calls For Russian Ban From Rio Olympics After Report Confirms ‘Unprecedented’ Doping Scheme

***

Russia ‘Directed’ Athlete Doping For Years

A report says that Russia’s government and secret service directed systematic cheating in sports since 2011.

SkyNews: Russia has systematically covered up doping in “all sporting disciplines” since 2011, an official report has found.

The sports ministry and secret service “directed and oversaw” the manipulation of urine samples, the World Anti-Doping Agency said.

It resulted in at least 312 falsified results up until at least last year’s world swimming championships, WADA said.

The state-sponsored cheating happened after an “abysmal” medal count at the Vancouver Winter Olympics in 2010, according to the report.

The cheating involved clean urine being frozen and switched for doped urine, often passed through secret holes in laboratories.

As well as the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014, Russia’s cheating also included the 2013 track world championships in Moscow.

The doping continued in the 2015 swimming world championships in Kazan, chief investigator Richard McLaren said.

Russia’s track and field athletes are already banned from the Olympic Games in Rio, beginning this summer.

The independent findings will increase pressure for all Russians – not just those in track and field events – to be banned from the games.

The report was commissioned following claims made by a Russian whistleblower, former director of anti-doping Dr Grigory Rodchenkov.

He claimed that dozens of athletes, including at least 15 medalists in Sochi, were part of an extensive state-run doping programme.

Reuters:

An independent commission report, led by Canadian law professor and sports lawyer Richard McLaren, published on Monday revealed evidence of widespread state-sponsored doping by Russian athletes at the 2014 Sochi Olympics.

McLaren, who was a member of WADA’s independent commission which last year exposed widespread doping and corruption in Russian athletics, said the Russian Ministry of Sport oversaw the manipulation of athletes’ analytical results and sample swapping.

Here are some reactions from the world of sport:

TRAVIS TYGART (CEO of USADA)

“The McLaren Report has concluded, beyond a reasonable doubt, a mind-blowing level of corruption within both Russian sport and government that goes right to the field of play… and most importantly, our hearts go out to athletes from all over the world who were robbed of their Olympic dreams.

“Looking forward, we must come together as an international community — comprised of those who truly believe in the spirit of Olympism — to ensure this unprecedented level of criminality never again threatens the sports we cherish.”

IOC PRESIDENT THOMAS BACH

“The findings of the report show a shocking and unprecedented attack on the integrity of sport and on the Olympic Games. Therefore, the IOC will not hesitate to take the toughest sanctions available against any individual or organization implicated.”

PHILIP CRAVEN, PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL PARALYMPIC COMMITTEE (IPC)

“We are truly shocked, appalled and deeply saddened at the extent of the state sponsored doping program implemented in Russia ahead of Sochi 2014. The findings of the McLaren report mark a very dark day for sport.

“Once we have the further details we have requested from both parties, the IPC Governing Board will convene for a telephone conference. The Board will discuss the findings of the report and decide what relevant action needs to be taken to protect clean athletes competing in Paralympic sport.

“This may include provisional measures and sanctions with regards to the Rio 2016 Paralympic Games.”

SCOTT BLACKMAN, UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE CEO

“The McClaren Report confirms what we have stated previously: the current anti-doping system is broken and urgently requires the attention of everyone interested in protecting clean athletes.

“We look forward to working with the IOC, WADA and the entire Olympic family to address the flaws in the current system so that a uniform approach to anti-doping can be implemented and enforced around the world.

“In the meantime, we are focused on preparing Team USA to compete at the upcoming Rio Games and will rely on the IOC, WADA and the international federations to impose sanctions that are appropriate in relation to the magnitude of these offenses, and that give clean athletes some measure of comfort that they will be competing on a level playing field in Rio.”

NICOLE SAPSTEAD, CEO OF UK ANTI-DOPING

“Now is the time for the entire sporting community to come together to find a way forward and ensure that the right processes, legislation and safeguards are in place to protect the rights of all athletes to clean, fair and honest competition.”

Remembering the Cover-Up of TWA 800

Posted on July 18, 2016July 18, 2016 by Denise Simon

Audio of radio interview with Jack Cashill, author of the book TWA800

TWA 800: Twenty Years and Counting [Video]

From NoisyRoom and AIM:

By: Roger Aronoff | Accuracy in Media

Accuracy in Media (AIM) recently held a press conference highlighting Jack Cashill’s latest book, TWA 800: The Crash, the Cover-Up, and the Conspiracy. The July 7th press conference received virtually no news media coverage, a continuation of the complicit media’s role in covering up the truth behind this tragic plane crash in 1996.

Cashill has broken new ground in this outstanding, recently released book. He cites the role of Jamie Gorelick, a former deputy attorney general appointed in 1994 by then-President Bill Clinton, who was the author of “the wall” that former CIA Director George Tenet described in 2004 to the 9/11 commission. That “wall” kept the CIA and FBI from sharing information in the run-up to September 11. Cashill wrote that “a newly unearthed treasure trove of CIA documents proves beyond argument, under Gorelick’s watchful gaze the CIA and FBI worked hand in glove to subvert the TWA 800 investigation.”

I also recently wrote about the TWA 800 crash for the American Thinker, detailing how Accuracy in Media’s investigation helped to expose the government cover-up, and how an AIM documentary demonstrated that the plane could not have simply exploded. We long ago concluded that the plane had to have been brought down by a missile or missiles.

Cashill, an outstanding investigative journalist, credits AIM for opening doors for him that he “could not have opened” himself, and for freely sharing its research. He also argues that TWA Flight 800 did not crash due to mechanical error, but instead due to missiles launched by nearby naval assets. Cashill noted at the press conference that “the FBI finally admitted that there were three submarines and a cruiser in the immediate—[those are] FBI words—in the immediate vicinity of the crash site.”

Although the 20th anniversary of the TWA 800 plane crash is this weekend, July 17th, even the few media organizations that have reported on Cashill’s book have chosen to obscure some key facts and cast him as a conspiracy theorist.

“While Cashill rehashes old conspiracy theories—a US Navy ship, which was in fact in the area, conducted a wartime exercise gone awry, or a terrorist on the ground used a shoulder-mounted surface-to-air missile, or a small plane collided with the 747, or a terrorist smuggled a bomb on board—it’s telling that, 20 years later, these theories still find traction,” writes Maureen Callahan for The New York Post. Similarly, the UK Daily Mailreports that Cashill’s book “takes a look at some of the alternate theories” and relegates the terrorist and naval exercise theories to “conspiracy theorists” and calls these “claims … declared untrue by the FBI a little over a year after the crash.” But at least these two articles reported on the various theories and some of the supporting evidence.

“The phrase ‘conspiracy theorist’ today is the word that we used to use for reporter a generation ago,” said Cashill at the press conference. “But right now they can just dismiss me as a conspiracy theorist, a nut job, a loose cannon. And that affects also the respectable conservative media: Weekly Standard, National Review. They don’t want to talk about this.”

Cashill was joined by other interested parties including John Clarke, the attorney for the key legal case proving a government cover-up; Mike Wire, an eyewitness to the explosion whoseaccount was said to be the basis for the CIA-produced animation of the event; and former NTSB member Vernon Grose, who talked about how his mind was changed when presented at an AIM press conference with evidence that the government had withheld from the public. Here are some of our findings, in the words of each of the speakers. [We broke the press conference up into four video segments.]

Roger Aronoff:

“So when I arrived at Accuracy in Media in 1997, we were just starting to get into this story. And what happened is there were two people who came to us wanting to investigate this story, and wanted AIM’s help. And [they] believed that AIM is the group that would do it, that was willing to buck the media and the government. And if the evidence was there, that’s what drove us—always has, and always will.”

“And so this case, when these two people came to us. One was Commander Bill Donaldson, former Navy pilot and crash investigator, and he believed that…what happened that night was actually the result of a terrorist missile.”

“The other was the Naval exercise gone wrong theory. There was an area, Whiskey 105, where they were doing Naval exercises, testing missiles and things. Jim Sanders, a retired cop and investigator, came forward believing that this was what happened that day.”

Jack Cashill:

“And the one bit of information they had that I had not seen and did not even know about, and I felt stupid for not knowing because I had presumed there was just a handful of eye witnesses and they all had conflicting reports, were the 750 FBI witness statements, 258 of which were from individuals who had seen an object ascend up off the horizon and attack the airplane.”

“According to the CIA, within two weeks of the disaster FBI agents had interviewed 144 ‘excellent’ eye witnesses—FBI word—to a likely missile strike and found the evidence for such a strike ‘overwhelming,’ FBI word. The CIA analyst then boasted of discouraging the FBI from releasing its missile report.”

“Of the 258 eyewitnesses do you know how many The New York Times interviewed? Zero. None.”

John Clarke:

“Now, if the [TWA] Flight 800 was taken down by missile fire, it wouldn’t be one or two stray pieces of evidence, it would be all the evidence tells us that. And that’s exactly what all the evidence tells us.”

“But I think that the most shocking, the most probative evidence in the case is the CIA zoom climb animation. I mean, they put [this on] national television and told the families that really, essentially, the front third of the aircraft was blown out, was blown off—and, as Jack said, the rear two thirds of the aircraft, a weight and balance of two thirds of the aircraft, shot up the better part of a mile. I mean, it is absolutely ridiculous. It is just absurd. It’s called the zoom climb cartoon, the CIA cartoon.”

“I spoke with all of those [six] witnesses, and not one reporter called one of the witnesses. It’s just amazing.”

Mike Wire:

“But the firework went up from behind the roof line of a house and went out to sea. It wavered in its travel up and down, went out at like a forty-degree angle. And after a while it arced over, disappeared, and out of that [within] a couple seconds an explosion erupted which grew into a huge fireball. And a couple parts blew out of the fireball, but the main fuselage came out of the fireball. It was on fire in the front of the fuselage and it left like a tube of fire going from the fireball as the plane descended behind house number two, which I couldn’t see it hit the water but it went down behind the house.”

“It’s time for people to come out and say what they saw, and for other people to confess what they’ve done.”

Vernon Grose:

“So, I was predisposed, I would say, to the idea that there could have been a wiring arc tracking into the tank, the center wing tank on TWA 800.”

“…at that symposium by Accuracy in Media they had photographs…clearly that the left side of the fuselage had imploded. Now, aircraft do not implode—they explode. … At that moment, after two years of many interviews, I changed my mind, and I knew that it had to be a missile.”

Make Obama Zip the Body Bags of the Dead Officers

Posted on July 17, 2016July 17, 2016 by Denise Simon

Update: CBS reports the dead shooter in Baton Rouge is from Kansas City, former Marine, black male and well…today is/was his birthday.

Sadly, we wake on Sunday morning to the news on Baton Rouge of an ambush, 3 dead police officers (video) and 4 in the hospital. Not to be missed, another officer was ambushed in his squad car in Minneapolis and further there was a hostage situation at Burger King in Baltimore.

This is Barack Obama’s war on law enforcement across the country. Here we are working diligently trying to ‘Defend our Defenders’ and not being able to claim victory to save law enforcement.

#BlackLivesMatter activist: We need a military coup if Trump wins POTUS

Photo from LinkedIn

“If Donald Trump becomes President, you are fooling yourself if you think we’re far from having a coup our own selves,” King tweeted. “I’m dead serious.”

More here from RedAlertPolitics

End of Watch, Officer Down Memorial Page

Ladies and gentlemen, the terror attack on law enforcement in Baton Rouge was pre-meditated. Why?

NBC News: Deceased suspect was wearing black fatigues, law enforcement still trying to determine if he was wearing body armor. Other calls into 911 from a gas station reported shooting and the man was dressed as a ninja.

So, when it comes to Black Lives Matter and the New Black Panthers, the threat does not end there, nor does it end in Baton Rouge.

So, when the FBI sends out bulletins to law enforcement across the country to beware….what do we have? ANARCHY in the streets.

And how is the White House responding?

How about a timeline?

15:06

Some had urged the governor to tighten gun rules at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland after three police officers were killed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Five police officers were killed a week earlier in Dallas, Texas.

The law in Ohio is that people can openly carry a gun if they have a permit.

Thousands of police officers will be providing security for the Republican National Convention this week.

#Obama on #BatonRougeShooting: “I want to be clear: there is no justification for violence against law enforcement. None”.

Mediaite: In addition to the three officers killed, several others were wounded. Reuters news agency reports that one is in a critical condition while another is in a fair condition at Our Lady of the Lake Hospital in Baton Rouge. A third officer is being treated at Baton Rouge General Hospital. His injuries are not said to be life-threatening. Go here for more from the BBC.

The head of a Cleveland police union reacted to the shooting of multiple officers in Baton Rouge by going off on President Obama and a media culture that helps boost anti-cop narratives.

Detective Steve Loomis said that the shootings of police officers, from Dallas to now, started with what he deemed as a completely false narrative concerning the death of Alton Sterling.

He said that Obama has “validated the false narrative and the nonsense that Black Lives Matter and the media are pressing out there,” and he said the president has “blood on his hands” that he won’t be able to wash off.

Deadliest attacks on police in the last 100 years

USAToday: Amid a month of racial conflict and gun violence, at least three police officers were killed in Baton Rouge Sunday, adding to the tally of law enforcement officials slain in the line of duty in 2016.

Before Sunday’s shooting, 60 line-of-duty deaths had occurred in the USA this year, according to the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund. 28 of the fatalities were firearm related, a 56% increase from firearm-related fatalities at this point in 2015.

Just ten days before Baton Rouge, five Dallas police officers were killed in what was the greatest loss of life for law enforcers since 9/11.

Although rare, these attacks are not the first time police officers have been targeted. Here is a look at some of the deadliest attacks on law enforcement officers in the last 100 years:

July 17, 2016

At least three police officers were killed and two more injured in Baton Rouge on Sunday. The shootings came just weeks after the killing of Alton Sterling, 37, a black man from Baton Rouge whose death was shared with the nation after multiple videos captured two police officers holding Sterling down as they shot him.

July 7, 2016

A sniper opened fire on Dallas police during what had been a peaceful Black Lives Matter protest in the wake of the shootings of Sterling and Philando Castile by police. Five officers were killed, seven more injured and two civilians wounded.

November 29, 2009

Four police officers in Lakewood, Wash., were killed sitting in a coffee shop after a gunman ambushed them. The suspect, who was killed by police a few days after the shooting, had been found guilty of multiple felonies years before the massacre and was released from prison after his sentence was reduced.

March 21, 2009

In two separate incidents, a gunman killed four Oakland police officers in the same day. After killing two motorcycle officers, the gunman opened fire and killed two SWAT officers who were responding to an anonymous tip about the shooter’s location just blocks from the original incident. One other officer was injured, but killed the gunman.

September 11, 2001

Seventy-two officers were killed responding to the worst terrorist attacks on U.S. soil, marking the deadliest day for law enforcement in U.S. history. Officers from various law enforcement agencies died in New York City at the scene of the World Trade Center, while one officer died in the crash of United Flight 93 in Pennsylvania. Years after the attacks, countless first responders have died from illness related to toxins they were exposed to at the scene.

April 19, 1995

Eight federal law enforcement officers were among 168 people killed in a terrorist attack when a truck bomb was detonated outside a federal building in Oklahoma City.

February 28, 1993

Four officers from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms were killed at the Branch Davidson compound in Waco, Texas, after trying to execute a search warrant. The compound was occupied by a cult that eventually committed a murder-mass suicide, leaving 80 dead.

December 31, 1972 to January 7, 1973

A sniper who was a member of the Black Panthers shot and killed five officers over the course of eight days. The shootings took place at different locations, the final one a hotel where the gunman died in a shootout on the roof of a hotel with police using a Marine helicopter.

April 6, 1970

After a gun battle with two heavily armed suspects, four California Highway Patrol officers were left dead near a service station. Two of the officers were killed in the initial gun fight while two others providing backup were killed shortly after.

October 30, 1950

In Puerto Rico, eight officers were killed in a political revolt led by the Nationalist Party, which sought independence from the U.S. The group called for attacks on all police stations and military bases on the island, widespread arrests the day before reduced the number of insurgents involved in the attack.

January 2, 1932

Attempting to arrest two people wanted for murder, six Missouri police officers were killed in a shootout at the suspects’ family farm. The officers were fired upon initially, and some attempted to enter the house but were killed in the shootout.

November 24, 1917

After a bomb went off in a Milwaukee police station, nine officers were killed in what is still the second deadliest day for law enforcement officials in the U.S. The bomb came in a suspicious package that had been discovered in a church nearby. A boy brought the package to the police, and as officers inspected it, the explosion occurred.

House Intel Cmte has Declassified/Released the 28 Pages

Posted on July 15, 2016March 25, 2018 by Denise Simon

The 28 Pages Omitted from the 9/Commission Report are officially declassified and have been release by the House Intelligence Committee. They are here in full text with redactions.

Saudi Arabia’s leaders have long supported the release of the section, commonly known as the 28 pages. They insist their government played no role in the 9/11 attacks.

Fifteen of the 19 hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001, were Saudi nationals.

28 pages