Obama Regime Pays $342M To 10 Sanctuary Cities To Subvert Federal Requests For Illegal Aliens

File - In this Sept. 1, 2015 file photo, from left, Brad Steinle, Liz Sullivan and Jim Steinle, the brother, mother and father of Kate Steinle who was shot to death on a pier, listen to their attorneys speak during a news conference on the steps of City Hall in San Francisco. The parents of a woman killed on a San Francisco pier by a man in the country illegally is suing the city and two federal agencies that they say contributed to her death. Kate Steinle's parents filed the wrongful-death lawsuit Friday, May 27, 2016. It accuses the San Francisco Sheriff's Department of failing to notify federal immigration officials that it was releasing Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez from jail. (AP Photo/Eric Risberg, File)

President Obama's Justice Department has coughed up hundreds of millions of dollars to so-called "sanctuary cities" that refuse federal demands for criminal illegal immigrants sought for deportation, according to a new inspector general memo.

In just 10 of 155 jurisdictions reviewed, taxpayers handed over $342.1 million in Justice grants to the law-breaking cities and states that have policies barring jails and police from cooperating with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. The IG said that is 63 percent of the funds available to all American cities.

The memo is likely to stir up the issue of illegal immigration and sanctuary cities in the presidential campaign.

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton has voiced support for the sanctuary effort in which state and local officials in mostly urban areas choose to harbor illegals with criminal records rather than comply with ICE requests to turn them over or even identify their immigration status. Donald Trump has called for an end to the practice.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading.....

[VIDEO] CNN: Aide’s Fifth Amendment declaration sure makes the Hillary server fiasco look criminal, huh?

You think? CNN’s Elise Labott noted yesterday that Bryan Pagliano’s decision to plead the Fifth rather than testify before Congress — and even, as it turns out, cooperating with the FBI — makes it appear that the 2008 Hillary Clinton campaign aide that set up her secret server is afraid of criminal charges in the scandal.  Team Hillary says it urged everyone to cooperate with investigators and profess to be mystified as to why anyone would worry about an indictment, but that spin isn’t selling:

Michael Isikoff first reported on Pagliano’s refusal to cooperate with any part of the probe. It also sets up a potential indicator of just how serious this investigation will get. The one way around a Fifth Amendment claim is immunity, which would mean that “extremely serious” FBI investigators will have convinced Department of Justice prosecutors to get “extremely serious,” too:

The former aide to Hillary Clinton who helped set up and maintain her private email server has declined to talk to the FBI and the State Department inspector general’s office, as well as a congressional committee, invoking his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself, sources familiar with the investigation confirmed to Yahoo News.

The move by Bryan Pagliano, who served on Clinton’s 2008 campaign and later as a technology officer in the State Department, to decline to cooperate in two federal probes considerably raises the stakes in the Clinton email investigation, the sources said. It confronts the Justice Department with a decision about whether to grant him immunity in exchange for his testimony — a move that could be taken only were the department to escalate the probe into a full-scale criminal investigation, the sources said.

Former federal prosecutor Joseph DiGenova tells McClatchy that this may force the DoJ into empaneling a grand jury, a move with dire political and legal consequences for Hillary Clinton and her aides:

One former Republican U.S. attorney predicted Thursday that the development will compel the Justice Department to set aside the FBI’s limited inquiry into whether Clinton’s emails breached national security, empanel a federal grand jury and conduct a criminal investigation.

“Obviously, if he’s not going to cooperate, all of these people who were on her email are all going to get subpoenas now,” Joseph diGenova said. “It is fairly abundant that the setting up of the server – unencrypted, without State Department input – was done partially surreptitiously. And this gentleman who was part of that process could be criminally exposed for violating the espionage statutes, especially for the grossly negligent handling of classified information, which is a 10-year felony.” …

As U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia from 1983 to 1987, diGenova prosecuted Israeli spy Daniel Pollard. He said he still has a security clearance above top secret because he represents clients in national security cases.

“When people like this little guy start taking the fifth,” diGenova said, “it means that a lot of other people along the way are going to do the same thing. This happened because she wanted to have an unencrypted server to protect her privacy, and in the course of doing that, she compromised national security information for four years, whether she wants to admit it or not.”

Via: Hot Air

Continue Reading.... .

[OPINION] Obama pressed to reverse legal opinion on religious freedom

(Washington Jewish Week via JTA) — More than a dozen Jewish organizations signed on to a letter urging President Barack Obama to instruct the Justice Department to reverse a legal opinion that allows religious organizations to avoid religious nondiscrimination laws in hiring.

The Anti-Defamation League, the American Jewish Committee, Hadassah and B’nai B’rith International were among the 130 signatories of the letter sent Aug. 20 by civil rights, education and secular advocacy groups.

In the letter, the groups ask the president to instruct the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel to “review and reconsider” a 2007 memorandum that has been used to promote “taxpayer-funded discrimination plain and simple,” as the American Civil Liberties Union put it.

The memorandum concludes that under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, religious organizations seeking federal grants could not be compelled to follow religious nondiscrimination laws pertaining to hiring.

“The OLC Memo reaches the erroneous and dangerous conclusion that the religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA) provides a blanket override of a statutory non-discrimination provision,” the letter reads in its opening.

Under the RFRA, which was introduced in the House by now-Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and in the Senate by the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., the government cannot “substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion” except when the government can demonstrate that the burden is a “furtherance of a compelling governmental interest” and “is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest.”

The signatories contend that the Office of Legal Counsel memo has been applied without any regard for the “government’s compelling interest in prohibiting [hiring] discrimination.”

Other Jewish groups that signed the letter are Bend the Arc, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, Keshet, Jewish Women International, the National Council of Jewish Women, the Rabbinical Assembly, the Union for Reform Judaism, Women of Reform Judaism and Nehirim.

Reminding Obama that he had pledged to end federally funded hiring discrimination, the signers warned that leaving the opinion in place would tarnish his legacy.

Via: Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Continue Reading.....

Déjà Vu: When Bill Clinton Pardoned His Former CIA Director over Classified Documents on His Home Computer

Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton insists she did nothing wrong by running all of her government communications, including classified material, through her unsecured, home-brewed computer server. Perhaps she’s forgotten one of her husband’s final acts in the Oval Office: issuing a presidential pardon to former CIA director John Deutch. Deutch’s offense? Keeping classified material on unsecured home computers.

The pardon came just as Deutch was reportedly going to cop a plea with the Justice Department. Deutch headed the CIA from May 1995 to December 1996. Several days after he left the agency, classified material was discovered on a government-owned computer at his house in Bethesda, Md. Additionally, unsecured classified magnetic media were found in the study. According to the CIA inspector general’s report, the computer had been “designated for unclassified use only.

” Unlike the current administration’s six-month delay in obtaining Clinton’s computer, the feds moved almost immediately in the Deutch case. Within ten days of discovering the errant material, they retrieved the hard drive from Deutch’s computer. A formal security investigation was opened within a month. 

RELATED: The People v. Hillary Rodham Clinton Notice 

that the government didn’t let Deutch’s lawyer pick and choose which e-mail communications to turn over. Rather, a “technical exploitation team, consisting of personnel expert in data recovery, retrieved the data from Deutch’s unclassified magnetic media and computers.”

As the investigation progressed, the IG discovered that Deutch had “continuously processed classified information on government-owned desktop computers configured for unclassified use during his tenure as DCI [director, CIA] [and that] . . .  these unclassified computers were located in [his] Bethesda, Maryland and Belmont, Massachusetts residences, his offices in the Old Executive Office Building, and at CIA Headquarters.” 

Notice that the government didn’t let Deutch’s lawyer pick and choose which e-mail communications to turn over.

 The computers, as configured and used, were “vulnerable to attacks by unauthorized persons.” The report stressed that “all [computers] were connected to or contained modems that allowed external connectivity to computer networks such as the Internet.” The information the security team retrieved from these computers included “Top Secret communications intelligence” as well as information on the “National Reconnaissance Program.” 

The IG criticized senior CIA officials for not taking appropriate action against Deutch when they were apprised of the results of the security investigation. That was one of the reasons the IG “initiated an independent investigation.”

Via: National Review

Continue Reading.....

[VIDEO] Hillary Campaign Defends Against Emails: It’s Fine, Trust Us

Hillary Clinton’s press secretary Brian Fallon released a video Friday responding to Tweets regarding Hillary’s private email server, saying John Boehner is “dead wrong” in asserting that Clinton is under criminal investigation.

Thursday, U.S. District Court judge Emmet Sullivan stated in regards to Hillary Clinton, “We wouldn’t be here today if this employee had followed government policy.”

Brian Fallon: When John Boehner tells you that Hillary Clinton is under criminal investigation for mishandling of classified emails, he is dead wrong. Number one, the Justice Department, itself has said that this is a noncriminal inquiry. Number two, Hillary Clinton herself is not the target. Number three, in every case that has surfaced to date, the State Department has said that none of the information was classified at the time it was sent.

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading....

[VIDEO] High-level federal employees used work Internet systems to join Ashley Madison

WASHINGTON –  Hundreds of U.S. government employees -- including some with sensitive jobs in the White House, Congress and law enforcement agencies -- used Internet connections in their federal offices to access and pay membership fees to the cheating website Ashley Madison, The Associated Press has learned.

The AP traced many of the accounts exposed by hackers back to federal workers. They included at least two assistant U.S. attorneys; an information technology administrator in the Executive Office of the President; a division chief, an investigator and a trial attorney in the Justice Department; a government hacker at the Homeland Security Department and another DHS employee who indicated he worked on a U.S. counterterrorism response team.

Few actually paid for their services with their government email accounts. But AP traced their government Internet connections -- logged by the website over five years -- and reviewed their credit-card transactions to identify them. They included workers at more than two dozen Obama administration agencies, including the departments of State, Defense, Justice, Energy, Treasury, Transportation and Homeland Security. Others came from House or Senate computer networks.

The AP is not naming the government subscribers it found because they are not elected officials or accused of a crime.

Hackers this week released detailed records on millions of people registered with the website one month after the break-in at Ashley Madison's parent company, Toronto-based Avid Life Media Inc. The website -- whose slogan is, "Life is short. Have an affair" -- is marketed to facilitate extramarital affairs.

Many federal customers appeared to use non-government email addresses with handles such as "sexlessmarriage," "soontobesingle" or "latinlovers." Some Justice Department employees appeared to use pre-paid credit cards to help preserve their anonymity but connected to the service from their office computers.

"I was doing some things I shouldn't have been doing," a Justice Department investigator told the AP. Asked about the threat of blackmail, the investigator said if prompted he would reveal his actions to his family and employer to prevent it. "I've worked too hard all my life to be a victim of blackmail. That wouldn't happen," he said. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he was deeply embarrassed and not authorized by the government to speak to reporters using his name.

The AP's analysis also found hundreds of transactions associated with Department of Defense networks, either at the Pentagon or from armed services connections elsewhere.

Defense Secretary Ash Carter confirmed the Pentagon was looking into the list of people who used military email addresses. Adultery can be a criminal offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Via: Fox News

Continue Reading....

[VIDEO] Robinson: Clinton’s Claim to be Victim of Partisan Attack ‘Doesn’t Ring So True’

Ball: Email scandal causing tensions within her campaign

Sunday’s Meet the Press panel said Hillary Clinton’s claims of partisan attacks on her don’t “ring so true” and that the private email story that has dogged her since March is causing tensions within her presidential campaign.

Last Friday, Clinton joked about her private server at the State Department and said the investigation into her was petty politics as usual.

“It’s hard to claim this is all just a partisan witch hunt when the Justice Department under a Democratic administration is looking into the whole email mess,” Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson said. “So, that doesn’t ring so true.”

After months of refusing to turn over her private server, Clinton decided last week to give it to the Justice Department. The Clinton campaigned has struggled to move past the email story and responding to it politically has caused some disagreement between Clinton supporters, The Atlantic’s Molly Ball said.

“And the fact that this story has not gone away has really worried a lot of people in the inner circle. You do have this tension within the campaign,” Ball said. “And so, you know, then it turns into an organizational mess which is what bogged down her campaign in 2008.”

Via: WFB

Continue Reading.....

In plea to reverse detention ruling, Obama lawyers warn of wave of family border crossings Justice Department lawyers ask judge to reconsider her order

HIGHLIGHTS

Justice Department lawyers ask judge to reconsider her order

Claim family detention centers are now just processing centers

Argue migrants shouldn’t be released just because they can’t be processed in three days

WASHINGTON 

Federal officials have not given up yet on family detention. They warned a judge Friday that her ruling against detaining migrant mothers and children could lead to another surge of migrant families attempting to enter the country illegally if they believe their children are the key to avoiding detention.

U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee in Central California ruled last month that that the Obama administration’s family detention policy violates an 18-year-old court settlement regarding the detention of migrant children. She said the hundreds of detained parents and children should be released.

Department of Justice lawyers responded to the ruling Friday asking her to reconsider her decision. Benjamin Mizer, principal deputy assistant attorney general, wrote in a briefing that the judge’s order had significant policy consequences. The ruling could be understood to require Homeland Security officials to release “all families” into the United States even if they have no legitimate claims to remain just because it takes the government longer than the three to five days allotted to process and remove them, he said.

“The Court’s proposed remedy – to the extent that it eliminates the Government’s ability to use expedited removal or reinstated orders of removal for families under any circumstances – could cause another notable increase in the numbers of parents choosing to cross the border with their children.” Mizer wrote.

Judge Gee’s July 24 ruling delivered a significant blow to the Obama administration’s policy of detaining mothers and children who say they’re fleeing violence in their home countries. In a 25-page ruling, Gee said she found it “astonishing” that immigration authorities had adopted a policy requiring such an expensive infrastructure without more evidence that it would be compliant with the decades old agreement.

The administration detains about 1,700 parents and children at three family detention centers in Karnes City and Dilley, Texas and in Berks County, Pa.

The facilities have been the subject of intense public and media scrutiny. There have been allegations of poor conditions and sexual abuse. But Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officials say the detainees are well cared for. The facilities have playgrounds, playrooms and televisions.

The administration has responded to the scrutiny by reigning in the program, which Justice lawyers cited in their court documents.

This spring, federal officials promised to improve conditions for the detained mothers and children. In June, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson announced federal authorities would end long-term detentions of families. Last month, federal officials began releasing hundreds of detained mothers and children who had demonstrated they have reason to fear persecution if returned to their home countries.

Mitzer wrote that families are now staying at the center’s an average of only 20 days where federal officials conduct health screenings and determine whether family members are eligible to remain in the United States.

“Defendants are effectively transitioning the facilities into processing centers,” Mitzer wrote.

The judge noted the “reforms” in her July 24 order, but said voluntary compliance wouldn’t stop the federal government from reverting back to the violating practice later on.

Justice officials have requested that Judge Gee allow them to conduct oral arguments on Aug. 24 during a related hearing on a lawyer facing contempt charges for leaking settlement documents to McClatchy.

Email: fordonez@mcclatchydc.com; Twitter: @francoordonez.

Via: McClatchy

Continue Reading....

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article30400701.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article30400701.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article30400701.html#storylink=cpy

Federal Judge Threatens To Hold IRS Commissioner, DOJ Lawyers in Contempt of Court over Lerner

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced that U.S District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan today threatened to hold the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service and Justice Department attorneys in contempt of court after the IRS failed to produce status reports and newly recovered emails of Lois Lerner, former director of the Exempt Organizations Unit of the IRS, as he had ordered on July 1, 2015.

During the a status hearing today, Sullivan warned that the failure to follow his order was serious and the IRS and Justice Department’s excuses for not following his July 1 order were “indefensible, ridiculous, and absurd.”  He asked the IRS’ Justice Department lawyer Geoffrey Klimas, “Why didn’t the IRS comply” with his court order and “why shouldn’t the Court hold the Commissioner of the IRS in contempt.”  Judge Sullivan referenced his contempt findings against Justice Department prosecutors in the prosecution of late Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) and reminded the Justice Department attorney he had the ability to detain him for contempt.  Warning he would tolerate no further disregard of his orders, Judge Sullivan said, “I will haul into court the IRS Commissioner to hold him personally into contempt.”

After the hearing, Judge Sullivan issued the following “minute order”:

At the July 29, 2015 status hearing, the Government agreed that the Court’s July 1, 2015 oral order from the bench was clear and enforceable.  Nonetheless, the Government reasoned it inappropriate to file a motion for reconsideration until a written order was issued.  As expressed at the hearing, the Government’s reasoning is nonsensical.  Officers of the Court who fail to comply with Court orders will be held in contempt.  Also, in the event of non-compliance with future Court orders, the Commissioner of the IRS and others shall be directed to show cause as to why they should not be held in contempt of Court.  The Court’s July 1, 2015 ruling from the bench stands: (1) the Government shall produce relevant documents every Monday; (2) the Government’s document production shall be accompanied by a status report that indicates (a) whether TIGTA has turned over any new documents to the IRS, (b) if so, the number of documents, and (c) a timeframe for the IRSs production of those documents. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on July 29, 2015.

At a July 1, 2015, status conference, Sullivan ordered the IRS to begin producing, every week, the nearly 1,800 newly recovered Lerner emails responsive to Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.  Despite the court order, the IRS did not produce any Lerner emails until July 15.  The IRS also failed to provide Judicial Watch a status report of the Lerner email production issues, as also ordered by Sullivan.  Last week, Judge Sullivan ordered sua sponte the parties to appear for a status hearing today after Judicial Watch raised concerns about the IRS’ failure to comply with his orders to release the newly discovered Lerner emails and status updates on its production of previously “missing” documents.

The developments come in Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuit seeking documents about the Obama IRS’ targeting and harassment of Tea Party and conservative opponents of President Obama (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Internal Revenue Service (No. 1:13-cv-01559)).  Judicial Watch’s litigation forced the IRS first to admit that Lerner’s emails were supposedly missing and, then, that the emails were on IRS’ back-up systems.

Yesterday, Judicial Watch released the first batch believed to be newly recovered emails of Lerner. The new documents show that Lerner and other top officials in the IRS, including soon-to-be Acting IRS Commissioner Steve Miller, closely monitored and approved the controversial handling of tax-exempt applications by Tea Party organizations.  The documents also show that at least one group received an inquiry from the IRS in order to buy time and keep the organization from contacting Congress.

“In a dramatic court hearing today, Judge Sullivan made it clear he would personally hold accountable the IRS Commissioner Koskinen and Justice Department attorneys for any further contempt of his court orders in Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “The missing and-then-not missing Lois Lerner saga is a stark example of the Obama administration’s contempt for a federal court and the rule of law.  That Obama administration officials would risk jail rather than disclose these Lerner documents shows that the IRS scandal has just gotten a whole lot worse.”

Via: Judicial Watch

Continue Reading....

[COMMENTARY] Hillary Clinton’s Worst Fears Are Coming True

The national political press is fixated on the chaotic and contentious Republican presidential primary, and not without good reason. But in devoting so much focus to the race for the GOP nomination, the Democratic side of the aisle has been getting short shrift. Over the course of the summer, a left-wing revolt against and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has evolved into an insurgency, and her campaign is gradually imploding, albeit at a cosmically languid pace. But that tempo is set to accelerate. The tipping point may have been reached on Thursday when one of the presumptive Democratic nominee’s worst fears was realized. 

Hillary Clinton’s campaign team was surely reveling in the national media’s distracted focus on the messy Republican presidential primary late Thursday night when they got the news. Immediately, her campaign team sprang into action and began the familiar process of muddying the waters and misdirecting reporters with a magician’s mastery. The New York Times had revealed that two independent inspectors general requested that the Justice Department open a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton for possibly jeopardizing national security by handling classified information on her personal “homebrew” email server. By morning, however, the Times story had been edited several times. Struck from the account was the contention that Clinton had “mishandled sensitive government information” and in its place was the claim that “information was mishandled” by… someone. The lead reporter on that story confessed that the alterations were made at the Clinton campaign’s “reasonable” request. The Associated Press dutifully followed the Times lead and noted that the IG’s referrals do not suggest wrongdoing by Clinton personally – merely her subordinates at the State Department.

Several hours later, the Justice Department indicated that the referrals they received were not criminal, leading to pushback from New York Times reporters who claimed that their sources were solid. Meanwhile, a spokeswoman for the Inspector General’s office is standing by the contention that classified information that was classified as such was sent to Clinton’s private email address. Something bizarre is happening.

All that is clear at the moment is that a classic bit of Clintonian obfuscation skillfully executed by Hillary’s rapid response shop and her campaign’s press secretary, Nick Merrill, is afoot. Reporters and commentators immediately began litigating the story as reported in the Times and not the revelation that Clinton’s email practices are now a criminal matter. The story isn’t the story; the reporters who exposed the story are the story. It’s only a matter of time before Republicans “pounce” and probably “overplay their hand.”

VIA: Commentary Magazine

Continue Reading...

Obama Administration Restricts Investigative Powers Of Inspectors General

The Obama administration formally announced that inspectors general will have to get permission from their agency heads to gain access to grand jury, wiretap and fair credit information — an action that severely limits the watchdogs’ oversight capabilities, independence and power to uncover fraud.

An opinion, issued by the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, says the Inspector General Act of 1978 — which was written by Congress to create the government watchdogs in order to help maintain integrity within their agencies — does not have the authority to override nondisclosure provisions in other laws, most notably in regard to grand jury, wiretap or fair credit information.

“In reaching these conclusions, our Office’s role has not been to decide what access [inspectors general] should receive as a matter of policy. Rather, we have endeavored to determine as a matter of law, using established tools of statutory construction, how best to reconcile the strong privacy protections … with the interest in access reflected in … theIG Act,” states the legal counsel’s opinion, which was dated Monday and released Thursday.

“I strongly disagree with the OLC opinion,” Michael Horowitz, the Justice Department’s inspector general, said in a statement. “Congress meant what it said when it authorized Inspectors General to independently access ‘all’ documents necessary to conduct effective oversight. Without such access, our Office’s ability to conduct its work will be significantly impaired, and it will be more difficult for us to detect and deter waste, fraud, and abuse, and to protect taxpayer dollars.”

Mr. Horowitz has had to seek former Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr.’s permission, and now Loretta E. Lynch’s, to gain access to such material. The approval process in obtaining the materials delayed review of Operation Fast and Furious — the failed Mexican drug cartel sting that lost track of more than 1,000 government-issued guns, one of which later was used to kill a U.S. Border Patrol agent — and has delayed other reports the inspector general is set to publish.

At no point has the Justice Department denied any of Mr. Horowitz’s requests, but some in Congress have argued that requiring the inspector general to ask the attorney general for materials represents a direct conflict of interest and impairs the inspector general’s independence.

Via: Washington Times

Continue Reading....

Judicial Watch: Federal Judge Declares State Department Will “Answer For” Any Destruction of Clinton Emails

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a federal judge warned the State Department that it will “have to answer for” any destruction of Hillary Clinton email records.  U. S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras made the statement at a July 9, 2015 status conference concerning a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act lawsuit for records about the State Department vetting of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s potential conflicts of interest (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00688)).  The transcript of the July 9 court hearing is available here.

At the hearing, attorney Chris Fedeli pressed Judicial Watch’s concerns about the preservation of records, especially email records that were not part of the 55,000 pages of records turned over by Mrs. Clinton to the State Department late last year.

In response, Judge Contreras said he was also “concerned” about the preservation of these records:

If documents are destroyed between now and August 17, the government will have to answer for that, and, you know, if they don’t want to do anything out of the ordinary to preserve between now and then, they can make that choice. I will allow them to make that choice, but they will answer for it, if something happens.

After a Justice Department lawyer attempted to assure him that the administration was asking for government records from former State Department employees, Judge Contreras questioned the State Department’s position that it had no legal obligation to take additional steps to obtain other government records in the custody of Mrs. Clinton and other former officials who used her special email system:

[I]t is to state the obvious that this is not an ordinary case, and everyone should be working to make sure that whatever documents exist today remain in existence.

Judge Contreras also voiced concerns regarding the State Department’s refusal to provide any information about the Clinton email issue:

But I am a little bit mystified that the government is not more forthcoming in just answering questions that will help this case proceed on a systematic basis, and on a basis that will allow everyone to get the answers that will eventually help resolve these cases…

The Court also seemed to reject the Obama administration’s contention that responding to Judicial Watch’s lawsuit in a timely way would derail its compliance with Judge Contreras’s order in another lawsuit (Leopold v. U.S. Department of State, (15-00123)) requiring that the 55,000 pages of Clinton email records be searched and produced under FOIA by January, 2016:

My order in Leopold was based on numbers and percentages. To the extent that documents from that universe are produced in this case, they qualify for the numbers in Leopold, don’t they? So that they’re not mutually exclusive from a resource standpoint, are they?

The Court then said his “inclination is to have a search done of the Clinton e-mail database that’s digitized and searchable for this relatively narrow, in my view, relatively narrow request.”

Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request on March 17, 2015, and subsequently a lawsuit on May 6, 2015, seeking:

• Any and all records that identify the policies and/or procedures in place to ensure that former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s personal or charitable financial relationships with foreign leaders, foreign governments, and business entities posed no conflict of interest to her role as Secretary of State; and

• Any and all records concerning, regarding, or related to State Department review of donations to the Clinton Foundation for potential conflicts of interest with former Secretary Clinton’s role as Secretary of State.

  Judicial Watch has also announced that it has reached an agreement with the State Department regarding production of documents in another Clinton-related lawsuit (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00690)).
  Documents sought by the lawsuit include:

  Any and all records that identify the number and names of all current and former officials, officers, or employees of the U.S. Department of State from January 20, 2009 to the present who used email addresses other than their assigned “state.gov” email addresses to conduct official State Department business.

  In a joint status report filed June 29, 2015, Judicial Watch and the State Department reported to the Court that:

  The parties have met and conferred, and submit their joint proposed briefing schedule below:

  • Defendant will complete all searches and produce to Plaintiff all responsive, non-privileged, and non-exempt records within its possession, custody, or control no later than August 14, 2015.

  • The Parties will meet and confer and file a status report by August 28, 2015 indicating whether additional briefing is necessary.

  “This one court hearing shows that Hillary Clinton and her co-conspirators in the State Department will have to account for each and every email on Hillary Clinton’s notorious email system,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
  A separate and ongoing Judicial Watch lawsuit, one of nearly 20 active Judicial Watch lawsuits at which the Clinton email system is at issue, forced the disclosure last year of documents that provided a road map for over 200 conflict-of-interest rulings that led to $48 million for the Clinton Foundation and other Clinton-connected entities during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state. Previously disclosed documents in this lawsuit, for example, raise questions about funds Clinton accepted from entities linked to Saudi Arabia, China and Iran, among others.  Judicial Watch and The Washington Examiner partnered in thefirst story to break the Clinton conflicts scandal: “State Department approved 215 Bill Clinton speeches, controversial consulting deal, worth $48m; Hillary Clinton’s Chief of Staff copied on all decisions.”

Via: Judicial Watch

Continue Reading....

Rep. Jim Jordan: ‘Definitely’ Looking at Possibility of Impeaching IRS Commissioner

Rep. Jim Jordan (R., Ohio) said that the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is “definitely” looking at the possibility of impeaching IRS Commissioner John Koskinen in an interview with theWashington Free Beacon on Thursday.

“We are definitely looking at that,” Jordan said. “Definitely looking at that. I’ll say this, Mr. Koskinen has on more than one occasion come in front of the committee and conveyed information to the committee that later turned out not to be accurate.”

On June 25, 2015, the committee held a hearing on the 2013 IRS scandal and found that despite a subpoena and a preservation order, the IRS, under Koskinen’s control, had destroyed or degaussed422 tapes that might have contained emails from Lois Lerner, the former official at the center of the controversy. Around this time, a National Review article revealed that Republican leaders were considering possibilities to impeach Koskinen.

Jordan said that impeachment is a possibility for the IRS commissioner.

“When you have an individual who’s head of an agency with this kind of power the Internal Revenue Service has, who has stated things under oath that turned out later to be false, that’s a problem,” he said. “Couple that with the false information that was sent out to a lot of Obamacare enrollees that impacted their tax liability that was just false, and some of the data breaches that have taken place there too—so the main focus is, of course, the targeting scandal and his answers to questions in front of the committee under oath that I’ve said later turned out to be untrue.”

“But there’s also these other things, so that’s something that the committee is looking at but there’s a certain amount of homework you’ve got to do before you start down that path,” he said. “So we’re looking at it.”

Last year, Jordan introduced H. Res. 565 on May 2, 2014 that called on then-Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special counsel to investigate the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS.

Jordan confirmed that he will continue to push Attorney General Loretta Lynch on the same issue.

“Yes, it’s something we’re looking at again,” said Jordan. He mentioned that Lynch would be in front of the Judiciary committee sometime in September and that he plans to ask her about that issue then.

Jordan also expressed skepticism about the Justice Department’s handling of the IRS controversy.

“Everyone knows the fix is in at the Justice Department,” said Jordan. “The FBI announced a year and a half ago, according to the Wall Street Journal, that no one was going to be prosecuted. The President made his famous statement on Super Bowl Sunday a year and a half ago that there’s no corruption, not even a smidgen, and the lead attorney on the case is Barbara Bosserman who’s a maxed-out contributor to the President’s campaign.”

“So everyone knows the fix is in, and what really tells you that the fix is in with the Justice Department investigation is Lois Lerner was willing to sit down with Justice Department attorneys, Ms. Bosserman and her team, and answer their questions but she’s not willing to answer members of Congress’ questions,” said Jordan.

“Now remember I can’t put her in jail, the Justice Department can put her in jail,” said Jordan. “We’re just doing a congressional investigation; we’re just trying to get the facts for the American people. So she’s willing to talk to the people who could put her in jail but not willing to talk to people who can’t?”

“And the reason she won’t talk to people who can’t put her in jail is because she knows she’s not going to jail because the President’s already announced there’s no corruption and the FBI’s already leaked to the Wall Street Journal no one’s going to be prosecuted,” Jordan continued. “The fix is in, so of course we need a special counsel.”

Via: WFB:

Continue Reading....