foia - Forum - Command Center2024-03-29T13:54:34Zhttps://patriotcommandcenter.org/forum/feed/tag/foiaKey Obamagate Doc Uncovered: Judicial Watch Lawsuit Forces Release of Infamous FBI Memo Used to Launch Obama Administration’s Spy Operation on President Trump’s 2016 Campaignhttps://patriotcommandcenter.org/forum/key-obamagate-doc-uncovered-judicial-watch-lawsuit-forces-release2020-05-24T15:10:37.000Z2020-05-24T15:10:37.000ZAdmin Melony B. DeFordhttps://patriotcommandcenter.org/members/AdminMelonyBDeFord<div><p><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}5303190052,RESIZE_584x{{/staticFileLink}}"><img class="align-center" src="{{#staticFileLink}}5303190052,RESIZE_584x{{/staticFileLink}}" width="500" alt="5303190052?profile=RESIZE_584x" /></a></p>
<p>In a major development, Judicial Watch forced the declassification and release of an FBI memo or “electronic communication” (EC) that officially launched the counterintelligence investigation, termed “Crossfire Hurricane,” of President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.</p>
<p>We obtained the document that disgraced FBI official Peter Strzok wrote in our FOIA <a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-sues-doj-for-electronic-communication-that-initiated-counterintelligence-investigation-of-president-trumps-2016-campaign/">suit</a> against the FBI and DOJ for: “The Electronic Communication that initiated the counterintelligence investigation of President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.” (<a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/jw-v-doj-electronic-comms-counterintel-complaint-02743/"><em>Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice</em></a> (No. 1:19-cv-02743)).</p>
<p>The redacted document details seemingly third hand information that the Russian government “had been seeking prominent members of the Donald Trump campaign in which to engage to prepare for potential post-election relations should Trump be elected U.S. President.” The document also alleges Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos claimed to an unnamed party that “they (the Russians) could assist the Trump campaign with the anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton.”</p>
<p>The document notes, “It was unclear whether he [Papadopoulos] or the Russians were referring to material acquired publicly of [sic] through other means. It was unclear how Mr. Trump’s team reacted to the offer. We note the Trump team’s reaction could, in the end, have little bearing of what Russia decides to do, with or without Mr. Trump’s cooperation.”</p>
<p>The document is dated July 31, 2016. Here is the text of <a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/jw-v-doj-reply-02743/">the “electronic communication”</a>:</p>
<p style="text-align:center;"><strong>FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION</strong><br /> Electronic Communication</p>
<p>Title: Crossfire Hurricane Date: 07/31/2016</p>
<p>Cc: [Redacted]<br /> Strzok Peter P II</p>
<p>From: COUNTERINTELLIGENCE<br /> [Redacted]<br /> Contact: Strzok Peter P II, [Redacted]</p>
<p>Approved by: Strzok Peter P II</p>
<p>Drafed by: Strzok Peter P II</p>
<p>Case ID #: [Redacted]</p>
<p style="text-align:right;">CROSSFIRE HURRICANE;<br /> FOREIGN AGENTS REGISTRATION ACT –<br /> RUSSIA;<br /> SENSITIVE INVESTIGATIVE MATTER</p>
<p style="text-align:center;">This document contains information that is restricted to case participants</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">Synopsis: (S/ / ) Opens and assigns investigation</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">Reason 1.4 (b)<br /> Derived from: FBI<br /> NSISC-20090615<br /> Declassify On: 20411231</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">[Redacted]</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">(S/) An investigation is being opened based on information received by Legat [Redacted] on 07/29/2016. The text of that email follows:</p>
<p style="text-align:center;padding-left:40px;">SECRET/<br /> [Redacted]</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">Title: (S/ / CC/NF) CROSSFIRE HURRICANE<br /> Re: [Redacted] 07/31/2016</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">BEGIN EMAIL</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">(U/ /) Legat [Redacted] information from [Redacted] Deputy Chief of Mission</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">Synopsis:<br /> (U/ /) Legat [Redacted] received information from the [Redacted] Deputy Chief of Mission related to the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s website/server.</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">Details:<br /> (S/ /[Redacted] On Wednesday, July 27, 2016, Legal Attaché (Legat) [Redacted] was summoned to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Mission (DCM) for the [Redacted] who will be leaving [Redacted] post Saturday July 30, 2016 and set to soon thereafter retire from government service, advised [Redacted] was called by [Redacted] about an urgent matter requiring an in person meeting with the U.S. Ambassador. [Note: [Redacted]. The [Redacted] was scheduled to be away from post until mid-August, therefore [Redacted] attended the meeting.</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">(S/ [Redacted]) [Redacted] advised that [Redacted] government had been seeking prominent members of the Donald Trump campaign in which to engage to prepare for potential post-election relations should Trump be elected U.S. President. One of the people identified was George Papadopolous (although public media sources provide a spelling of Papadopoulos), who was believed to be one of Donald Trump’s foreign policy advisers. Mr. Papdopoulos was located in [Redacted] so the [Redacted] met with him on several occasions, with [Redacted] attending at least one of the meetings.</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">(S/ [Redacted]) [Redacted] recalled [Redacted] of the meetings between Mr. Papdopolous and [Redacted] concerning statements Mr. Papadopolous made about suggestions from the Russians that they (the Russians) could assist the Trump campaign with the anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton. [Redacted] provided a copy of the reporting that was provided to [Redacted] from [Redacted] to Legal [Redacted]. The text is exactly as follows:</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">(Begin Text)</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">(S/ [Redacted]) 5. Mr. Papadopolous [Redacted] also suggested the Trump team had received some kind of suggestion from Russia that it could assist this process with the anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Mrs. Clinton (and President Obama). It was unclear whether he or the Russians were referring to material acquired publicly of through other means. It was also unclear how Mr. Trump’s team reacted to the offer. We note the Trump team’s reaction could, in the end, have little bearing of what Russia decides to do, with or without Mr. Trump’s cooperation.<br /> (End Text)</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">(s/ [Redacted]<br /> [Redacted]<br /> (s/ [Redacted] Legat requests that further action on this information should consider the sensitivity that this information was provided through informal diplomatic channels from [Redacted] to the U.S. Embassy’s DCM. It was clear from the conversation Legal [Redacted]<br /> had with DCM that [Redacted] knew follow-up by the U.S. government would be necessary, but extraordinary efforts should be made to protect the source of this information until such a time that a request from our organization can be made to [Redacted] to obtain this information through formal channels.</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">END EMAIL</p>
<p style="padding-left:40px;">(S/ / ) Based on the information provided by Legat [Redacted] this investigation is being opened to determine whether individual(s) associated with the Trump campaign are witting of and/or coordinating activities with the Government of Russia.</p>
<p>And so the document ends.</p>
<p>No wonder the DOJ and FBI resisted the public release of this infamous “electronic communication” that “opened” Crossfire Hurricane – it shows there was no serious basis for the Obama administration to launch an unprecedented spy operation on the Trump campaign. We now have more proof that Crossfire Hurricane was a scam, based on absurd gossip and innuendo. This document is Exhibit A to Obamagate, the worst corruption scandal in American history. This document shows how Attorney General Barr and U.S. Attorney Durham are right to question the predicate of this spy operation.</p>
<p><strong>read more here: <a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/tom-fittons-weekly-update/key-obamagate-doc-uncovered/">https://www.judicialwatch.org/tom-fittons-weekly-update/key-obamagate-doc-uncovered/</a><br /></strong></p></div>Hillary Clinton Resists Court Order to Produce After Action Memo on Search and Review Process that Lead to Deletion of Her Emails; Judicial Watch Files Motion to Compelhttps://patriotcommandcenter.org/forum/hillary-clinton-resists-court-order-to-produce-after-action-memo-2020-05-12T18:25:21.000Z2020-05-12T18:25:21.000ZAdmin Melony B. DeFordhttps://patriotcommandcenter.org/members/AdminMelonyBDeFord<div><p><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}4957969482,RESIZE_930x{{/staticFileLink}}"><img class="align-center" src="{{#staticFileLink}}4957969482,RESIZE_584x{{/staticFileLink}}" width="500" alt="4957969482?profile=RESIZE_584x" /></a></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormalCxSpMiddle"><strong><span>(Washington, DC)</span></strong><span> – </span><span>Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a</span><a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/jw-v-state-mtc-samuelson-memo-01242/" target="_blank"><span>motion</span></a> <span>in federal court to compel former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to produce the December 2014 after action memorandum created by her personal attorney Heather Samuelson that memorializes the search for and processing of Clinton emails in 2014. Samuelson reviewed Clinton’s State Department emails and about half of them were deleted (Hillary Clinton is also resisting, through an </span><a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/jw-v-state-hrc-depo-mandamus-01242/" target="_blank"><span>emergency appeal</span></a><span>, the court’s order that she testify to Judicial Watch about her emails.)</span></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormal">The filing comes in a Freedom of Information Act (<span>FOIA) </span><a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-announces-three-new-lawsuits-obama-administration-records-relating-benghazi-attack/" target="_blank"><span>lawsuit</span></a><span> that seeks records concerning “talking points or updates on the Benghazi attack” (</span><a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/09-09-14-JW-v-State-01242-Benghazi-Rice.pdf" target="_blank"><em><span>Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State</span></em></a><span> (No. 1:14-cv-01242)). Judicial Watch famously uncovered in 2014 that the “talking points,” which provided the basis for false statements by then-National Security Advisor Susan Rice, were </span><a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-benghazi-documents-point-white-house-misleading-talking-points/" target="_blank"><span>created by</span></a><span> the Obama White House. This FOIA lawsuit </span><a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-accuses-obama-administration-of-misleading-court-on-hillary-clinton-email-scandal/" target="_blank"><span>led directly</span></a><span> to the disclosure of the Clinton email system in 2015.</span></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormalCxSpMiddle">In December 2018, Judge Lamberth<a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/federal-judge-opens-discovery-into-clinton-email-usage/" target="_blank"> <span>ordered discovery</span></a> into whether Clinton’s use of a private email server was intended to stymie FOIA; whether the State Department’s intent to settle this case in late 2014 and early 2015 amounted to bad faith; and whether the State Department has adequately searched for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s request. The court also authorized discovery into whether the Benghazi controversy motivated the cover-up of Clinton’s email. The court <a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/federal-judge-opens-discovery-into-clinton-email-usage/" target="_blank"><span>ruled</span></a> that the Clinton email system was “one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency.”</p>
<p class="x_MsoNormalCxSpMiddle"><span>Clinton is </span><a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/jw-v-state-samuelson-mtc-reply-01242/" target="_blank"><span>resisting</span></a><span> producing even a portion of the “after-action” memo, despite an August 22, 2019, </span><a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-victory-court-grants-significant-new-discovery-in-clinton-email-case/" target="_blank"><span>ruling</span></a><span> by U.S. District Court Judge Royce C. Lamberth that Judicial Watch may ask for the memorandum in its discovery. Clinton refused to produce any part of the memo, alleging that it is fully exempt from disclosure under the “attorney work product doctrine.” In an earlier ruling on a similar issue in this litigation, the Court held that “any contemporaneous documents shedding light on the three narrow discovery topics – even documents evincing attorney impressions, conclusions, opinions, and theories – constitute fact work-product” and should be produced.</span></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormalCxSpMiddle"><span>Judicial Watch explains to the court: “After repeated attempts to resolve this dispute have proven unsuccessful, [Judicial Watch] respectfully requests an order from the Court to compel Secretary Clinton to produce the document … within short order.”</span></p>
<p class="x_MsoNormalCxSpMiddle"><span>read more here: <a href="https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/hrc-resists/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=press_release">https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/hrc-resists/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=press_release</a></span></p></div>It’s Time to Fire Christopher Wray…Nowhttps://patriotcommandcenter.org/forum/it-s-time-to-fire-christopher-wray-now2020-05-04T03:34:59.000Z2020-05-04T03:34:59.000ZAdmin Melony B. DeFordhttps://patriotcommandcenter.org/members/AdminMelonyBDeFord<div><p><a href="{{#staticFileLink}}4706064054,RESIZE_710x{{/staticFileLink}}"><img class="align-right" src="{{#staticFileLink}}4706064054,RESIZE_710x{{/staticFileLink}}" width="561" height="589" alt="4706064054?profile=RESIZE_710x" /></a></p>
<p>FBI Director Christopher Wray’s attempts to stonewall requests for agency records have become familiar.</p>
<p>Last summer, conservative political advocacy group <em>Citizens United</em> filed a FOIA request for documents that Kathleen Kavalec, who was serving as the State Department’s Deputy Assistant Secretary, sent to the FBI’s counter-intelligence team following a meeting with dossier author Christopher Steele in October of 2016. Kavalec had discovered a number of anomalies in Steele’s story and emailed the FBI two days later about her suspicions. The meeting took place ten days before the FBI submitted their first application to the FISA Court for a warrant to spy on Carter Page. After much pressure, <em>Citizens United</em> received the documents, but they were so highly redacted, they were almost useless.</p>
<div id="piano_article_inline_container" class="thm-piano-mop piano-placeholder-element"> </div>
<p>The group filed a new FOIA request for less-redacted copies of the documents. This time, Wray sent attorneys to court to block it, arguing that “the FBI can’t afford to jeopardize the fragile relationships that exist between the United States and certain foreign governments.” Ultimately, <em>Citizens United</em> received a less redacted copy.</p>
<p>Following the release of the Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Horowitz’ report last December, which as we all remember reflected poorly on the FBI, Wray told reporters, “I am ordering over 40 corrective actions to address all of those things in a way that’s robust and serious. We’re determined to learn the lessons from this report.”</p>
<p>In January, Wray elaborated on those actions. He had distributed a video to the entire workforce and would follow up with an all-employee email. Wray <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/repeated-messaging-fbi-chief-says-all-staff-video-and-email-part-of-plan-to-ensure-fisa-accuracy">said</a>,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>FBI leadership believes that the repeated messaging to its workforce of the absolute need for accuracy and completeness in all FISA applications and the implementation of corrective actions will result in a substantially renewed institutional focus on ensuring accuracy, transparency, and completeness in all FISA applications.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Wray had set a deadline of April 30 for “the completion of training, including testing to confirm that personnel understand the expectations and the materials.”</p>
<p>Decisive action? Strong leadership? Hardly.</p>
<p>Last week, there were several credible reports from sites such as <em>The Federalist</em> and <em>The Daily Caller</em> that Director Wray had tried to prevent the Flynn exculpatory evidence from being turned over to Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell. Wray was okay with an innocent man being wrongly prosecuted, but he didn’t want those records to be made public.</p>
<p>Washington attorney Joe DiGenova said that the FBI’s General Counsel Dana Boente also worked to stop the release of the records. Boente is the only official to have signed off on any of the FISA Court applications for the Page warrants who remains in government service.</p>
<p>read more here: <a href="https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/05/03/830311/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_term=830311&utm_content=0&utm_campaign=PostPromoterPro">https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2020/05/03/830311/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_term=830311&utm_content=0&utm_campaign=PostPromoterPro</a></p></div>