> High Crimes and Misdemeanors at the Obama IRS
>
> Just so we are clear about what's gone down, the same crooked
> administration and the same corrupt federal agencies responsible for
> the IRS-Tea Party scandal now say no crimes were committed. In a
> letter<http://go2.
> addressed to the House Ways and Means Committee, Assistant Attorney
> General Peter J. Kadzik, explains why Department of Justice (DOJ)
> declined to press ahead.
>
> "Ineffective management is not a crime," he wrote. And so the Obama
> Justice Department dismissed reams evidence, mostly uncovered by
> Judicial Watch, of obstruction of justice, obstruction of Congress,
> civil rights violations, the illegal release of taxpayer information,
> the illegal use of taxpayer information, unlawful audits, and perjury.
>
> We responded immediately with a statement:
>
> President Obama's IRS was used against his opponents to help him win
> reelection. So the Obama Justice Department's decision to shut down its
> IRS abuse investigation with no prosecutions is as unsurprising as it
> is corrupt. Judicial Watch's independent litigation proved the Obama
> IRS obstructed justice and destroyed evidence. And we uncovered that
> the IRS and Lois Lerner conspired with the Justice Department and FBI
> on a plan to jail the very Americans the IRS was illegally suppressing.
> In fact, Justice Department lawyers recently admitted in federal court
> that the IRS watchdog is still digging through IRS backup tapes and has
> no idea when the search will be complete. This same Justice Department
> decides it can shut down an investigation before it has all the
> evidence? That might pass muster in Chicago, but America deserves
> better - the IRS is not above the law.
>
> Congress needs to get its act together and consider the impeachment and
> removal from office the officials, including Barack Obama, responsible
> for the worst abuse of the IRS in American history. Judicial Watch will
> continue its independent investigation and litigation that has made it
> the best source for the truth about the continuing IRS scandal. In the
> meantime, the Justice Department and FBI, which illegally obtained IRS
> files on Americans with the help of Lois Lerner and the Obama IRS,
> should finally be investigated for their role in Obama's misuse of
> federal law and tax agencies against innocent Americans.
>
> Many thousands of JW supporters have echoed the calls for impeachment
> over the last few months. George Will, one of most influential
> political columnists writing today, recently penned a column entitled
> "Time to impeach the IRS
> director<http://go2.
>
> After [IRS Commissioner John] Koskinen complained about the high cost
> in time and money involved in the search, employees at a West Virginia
> data center told a Treasury Department official that no one asked for
> backup tapes of Lerner's emails. Subpoenaed documents, including 422
> tapes potentially containing 24,000 Lerner emails, were destroyed.
>
> For four months, Koskinen kept from Congress information about Lerner's
> elusive emails. He testified under oath that he had "confirmed" that
> none of the tapes could be recovered.
>
> Lerner conducted government business using private email, and when she
> was told that the IRS's instant messaging system was not archived, she
> replied: "Perfect."
>
> Koskinen's obfuscating testimonies have impeded investigation of
> unsavory practices, including the IRS' sharing, potentially in
> violation of tax privacy laws, up to 1.25 million pages of confidential
> tax documents. Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, which has forced the IRS
> to disgorge documents, says some "prove that the agency used donor
> lists to audit supporters of organizations engaged in First
> Amendment-protected lawful political speech."
>
> Mr. Will evidently had some good sources on the Hill, as House
> Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) introduced a
> resolution<http://go2.
> this week to impeach the IRS commissioner for "high crimes and
> misdemeanors." The resolution focuses on the lies and obstruction of
> Obama's IRS henchman in lying to Congress about the Lois Lerner emails.
> According to Chaffetz, Koskinen violated the public trust in the
> following ways:
>
> • Failed to comply with a subpoena resulting in destruction of key
> evidence. Commissioner Koskinen failed to locate and preserve IRS
> records in accordance with a congressional subpoena and an internal
> preservation order. The IRS erased 422 backup tapes containing as many
> as 24,000 of Lois Lerner's emails - key pieces of evidence that were
> destroyed on Koskinen's watch.
>
> • Failed to testify truthfully and provided false and misleading
> information. Commissioner Koskinen testified the IRS turned over all
> emails relevant to the congressional investigation, including all of
> Ms. Lerner's emails. When the agency determined Ms. Lerner's emails
> were missing, Commissioner Koskinen testified the emails were
> unrecoverable. These statements were false.
>
> • Failed to notify Congress that key evidence was missing. The IRS knew
> Lois Lerner's emails were missing in February 2014. In fact, they were
> not missing; the IRS destroyed the emails on March 4, 2014. The IRS did
> not notify Congress the emails were missing until June 2014 - four
> months later, and well after the White House and the Treasury
> Department were notified.
>
> Kudos on this impeachment push on the Lerner email obstruction. It is
> imperfect justice, but a move needed toward accountability. Once again,
> it was Judicial Watch's hard work that resulted in this accountability.
>
> Our historic Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
> lawsuit<http://go2.
> seeks documents about the Obama IRS' targeting and harassment of Tea
> Party and conservative opponents of President Obama. 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<http://go2.
>
> What next? The House Judiciary Committee will have to move to consider
> and approve the proposed articles of impeachment in order to move them
> to consideration by the full House. If a majority of the House
> approves, the issue would move to the Senate for trial. Two-thirds of
> Senators present must then vote to convict and remove Obama's IRS
> commissioner from office.
>
> Interested citizens should focus on sharing their views with members of
> the House Judiciary
> Committee<http://go2.
> chaired Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA). Also, in the meantime, individual
> House members can choose to co-sponsor the impeachment resolution. You
> may also want to check in with your individual members to see if
> they're on board.
>
>
> Judicial Watch Uncovers Corrupt Obama CIA-Hollywood Connection
>
> Did you see the link on the Drudge Report and hear the news?!!
>
> We are now in possession of a previously classified December 2012
> Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
> report<http://go2.
> from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) strongly condemning the
> agency's handling of "briefings, interviews, visits, and other support"
> given to the entertainment industry. The report specifically criticizes
> the CIA's granting of "Secret level" access to the makers of the movie
> Zero Dark Thirty. The OIG report was
> declassified<http://go2.
> in response to a Judicial Watch
> request<http://go2.
> for a Mandatory Declassification review.
>
> The OIG "Report of Audit - CIA Processes for Engaging With the
> Entertainment Industry" is critical of both the agency's procedures and
> its recordkeeping:
>
> We found that the records maintained by the OPA [Office of Public
> Affairs] are not sufficient to document that entertainment industry
> requests to CIA for briefings, interviews, visits, and other support
> are handled in a consistent and fair manner and that engagement with
> the entertainment industry is effective in furthering CIA's goal for
> engagement ... OPA and other CIA employees have not always complied
> with Agency regulations intended to prevent the release of classified
> information during their interactions with entertainment industry
> representatives.
>
> The Washington Times took
> note<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> of what your JW has uncovered shortly after the information was
> released. Here is how it was reported:
>
> The CIA may have mishandled "briefings, interviews, visits and other
> support" given to the entertainment industry, says a previously
> classified report, now declassified and provided to Judicial Watch
> under a Freedom of Information Act request.
>
> The report specifically criticizes the CIA's granting of "secret level"
> access to the makers of the 2012 movie "Zero Dark Thirty," which
> dramatized the hunt for Osama bin Laden and the raid on his hideout in
> Pakistan.
>
> Our astute readers know how hard it is pry information loose from the
> agencies that are not tasked with espionage, intelligence gathering and
> covert operations. So just imagine how hard it is to shake information
> loose from the CIA.
>
> While the heavily redacted document carefully avoids the disclosure of
> the eight projects it reviewed dating back to January 6, 2006, it
> specifically cites problems involving the CIA's interactions with the
> Zero Dark Thirty filmmakers. According to the OIG report, "There was an
> instance in which CIA allowed an entertainment industry representative
> to attend a CIA event in which information classified at the SECRET
> level was discussed." The report then adds in a footnote:
>
> CIA officials told us that the filmmaker involved with Zero Dark Thirty
> was invited to the event so that he could absorb the emotion of the
> event and that he was told he could not use anything he heard at the
> event for his project. During our audit fieldwork, the then Director,
> CIA called for an internal examination of the decision to allow the
> entertainment industry representative to attend the event.
>
> The CIA Inspector General cites one project in particular that was
> given "significantly more support" than any of the others reviewed.
> Though the project is not identified, it is an apparent reference to
> Zero Dark Thirty:
>
> [W]e noted that the CIA provided significantly more support to one of
> the eight entertainment industry projects that we reviewed: [REDACTED].
> Entertainment industry representatives for this project met with
> [REDACTED] CIA officers (the majority of whom were under cover) ... on
> multiple occasions, including meeting with one officer 12 times.
>
> The newly-released OIG report also questioned the CIA's granting of
> access to foreign nationals who may not have received proper screening
> before their briefings, warning of possible "negative consequences" for
> the CIA:
>
> We also noted three entertainment projects [REDACTED] in which foreign
> nationals may have participated in briefings, interviews, and visits
> provided by the CIA. However, because of the lack of adequate records,
> we were unable to determine the extent of CIA's support to the eight
> projects, the extent to which foreign nationals participated in
> CIA-sponsored activities, and whether the Director, OPA approved of the
> activities and participation of foreign nationals.
>
> Failure on the part of CIA officers to adhere to regulatory
> requirements could result in unauthorized disclosures, inappropriate
> actions and negative consequences for CIA. [Emphasis added]
>
> The CIA IG also concluded that taxpayers were not compensated for the
> assistance CIA provided to Hollywood film projects:
>
> CIA Has Not Been Reimbursed for Costs Incurred in Supporting
> Entertainment Industry Projects ...
>
> The CIA needs to establish a written policy concerning under what
> conditions reimbursement of costs incurred in providing support to
> entertainment industry projects should be sought. In the absence of a
> formal policy, there is increased risk that costs incurred by CIA will
> not be handled in a consistent manner and that CIA funds may be used
> for questionable expenditures.
>
> On May 1, 2011, President Obama announced that American personnel had
> killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and
> buried his body at sea. President Obama ordered the withholding of
> photos and video of the deceased bin Laden and his burial at sea,
> claiming it would be unwise to "spike the football" over bin Laden's
> killing, as it might be offensive to al Qaeda and other terrorists.
>
> Judicial Watch immediately requested these photos from the Defense
> Department and CIA and then, when denied them, sued for their release
> in federal court. An appellate court
> upheld<http://go2.
> President Obama's decision to withhold the records from American
> citizens because the records might offend terrorists.
>
> Other Judicial Watch
> litigation<http://go2.
> forced the release of records showing a cover-up and the dangerous
> disclosure of classified information, as the Obama administration
> sought to promote the raid to aid Obama's reelection, while at the same
> time withholding basic information about the raid from the American
> people.
>
> In
> response<http://go2.
> to the Judicial Watch January 2012 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
> lawsuit concerning the unusual access given to Zero Dark Thirty
> filmmakers, CIA Information Review Officer Martha Lutz conceded:
>
> It is my understanding that when the meetings with the filmmakers took
> place at the CIA Headquarters, the guidance provided to the officers
> who were undercover or were otherwise in sensitive positions was that
> they should provide the filmmakers with their true first names only.
>
> Disclosures by Vice
> News<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> last month highlighted even more corruption at the Obama CIA as the
> agency tried to promote the pro-Obama film for the White House. Vice
> News reported that the CIA OIG found several potential violations of
> criminal law by then-CIA Director Leon Panetta, CIA officials, and the
> filmmakers.
>
> Has anyone been held accountable for these illegal leaks? Especially
> since the leaks put the heroes who killed Osama bin Laden at risk in
> order to help make this film.
>
> Given the IRS cover-up described above, you won't be surprised to learn
> that Vice News reported the Obama Justice Department refused to
> prosecute any of the alleged violations.
>
> The CIA responded to Judicial Watch's disclosure in a statement to
> Reuters<http://go2.
>
> CIA spokesman Ryan Trapani said the agency had "completely overhauled
> its procedures for interaction with the entertainment industry" since
> 2012. The agency set up new training procedures for officials who deal
> with Hollywood and strengthened protocols for guarding agency secrets
> and classified information, he said.
>
> Believe you me, we're following up on this.
>
> In the meantime, we know now the Obama administration put Hollywood
> before national security in order to help Barack Obama win reelection.
>
>
> Judicial Watch Sues Obama HHS for Records on Planned Parenthood Connection
>
> You may have seen undercover videos by investigators with the Center
> with Medical Progress (CMP)
> featuring<http://go2.
> Planned Parenthood's Dr. Deborah Nucatola discussing the sale of tissue
> from aborted human beings and how abortion techniques can be altered to
> preserve intact human organs and limbs for sale.
>
> Over a glass of wine and casual lunch conversation caught in the
> undercover video, Nucatola, senior director of medical services at
> Planned Parenthood, let slip how inhuman, cruel and soulless her
> organization is when it comes to human life. It was back on July 25,
> 2014, that Nucatola made comments to undercover investigators posing as
> representatives from a human biologics company looking to purchase
> human body parts. Nucatola also describes the gruesome process through
> which abortionists operate to preserve specific fetal body parts. An
> undercover video entitled: "Planned Parenthood Uses Partial-Birth
> Abortions to Sell Baby
> Parts<http://go2.
> has gone viral thanks to the Center for Medical Progress' good work.
>
> Following up on public interest in this truly disturbing scandal,
> Judicial Watch just filed a federal lawsuit here in DC for contracts
> between the Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Population
> Affairs and Nucatola for her paid
> work<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> on the 2014 government
> report<http://go2.
> "Providing Quality Family Planning Services" (Judicial Watch v. U.S.
> Department of Health & Human
> Services<http://go2.
> (No. 1:15-cv-01697)).
>
> The Left does not want you or other Americans to know the truth about
> the abortion industry's trafficking in the body parts of human beings
> killed by abortion. I encourage you to view
> all<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> the Planned Parenthood videos, but warn you that they are difficult to
> view and may upset you.
>
> Judicial Watch filed our lawsuit after HHS failed to comply with two
> simple August 10, 2015, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests
> seeking a set of records about the Planned Parenthood doctor:
>
> • Records related to contracts and/or consultancy agreement between the
> CDC and Dr. Deborah Nucatola regarding her work on the report
> "Providing Quality Family Planning Services," released April 25, 2014;
>
> • Records concerning contracts and/or consultancy agreement between the
> CDC and Dr. Deborah Nucatola regarding her work on the report "Sexually
> Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines," released June 5, 2015;
>
> • Records regarding contracts and/or consultancy agreement between the
> CDC and Dr. Deborah Nucatola regarding her work on the "U.S. Selected
> Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use," released in 2013.
>
> You'll see
> here<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> that the controversial 2014 so-called "Family Planning" report for the
> Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the Office of Population Affairs
> recommends that counselors provide abortion options and referrals to
> pregnant women and teenagers (without parental consent). The report
> also promotes providing "adolescents," without parental consent,
> contraception (which includes potentially abortion-inducing drugs).
> Planned Parenthood's fingerprints are all over the "abortions for
> teenaged girls without telling their parents" Obama administration
> advocacy document.
>
> That Nucatola is helping set government policy on sensitive
> life-and-death issues is concerning.
>
> According to
> CMP<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> its undercover investigators, posing as buyers for a company seeking
> fetal tissue, ask Nucatola:
>
> "How much of a difference can that actually make, if you know kind of
> what's expected, or what we need?"
>
> "It makes a huge difference," Nucatola replies. "I'd say a lot of
> people want liver. And for that reason, most providers will do this
> case under ultrasound guidance, so they'll know where they're putting
> their forceps. The kind of rate-limiting step of the procedure is
> calvarium. Calvarium-the head-is basically the biggest part."
>
> Nucatola explains, "We've been very good at getting heart, lung, liver,
> because we know that, so I'm not gonna crush that part, I'm gonna
> basically crush below, I'm gonna crush above, and I'm gonna see if I
> can get it all intact."
>
> "And with the calvarium, in general, some people will actually try to
> change the presentation so that it's not vertex," she continues. "So if
> you do it starting from the breech presentation, there's dilation that
> happens as the case goes on, and often, the last step, you can evacuate
> an intact calvarium at the end."
>
> The undercover videos raised questions about whether Planned Parenthood
> was illegally profiting from the sale of the fetal tissue and violating
> other laws, such as the federal ban on partial birth abortions.
>
> For the record, there is no doubt about the authenticity of the
> undercover videos. As the Daily
> Signal<http://go2.
> has reported, a forensic analysis of the videos has already been done
> that shows they are the real deal:
>
> The analysis was completed by Coalfire, a digital security and
> forensics firm that has worked on civil and criminal investigations.
> The firm had access to all audio and video investigative footage
> recorded by the Center for Medical Progress.
>
> "The Coalfire forensic analysis removes any doubt that the full length
> undercover videos released by Center for Medical Progress are authentic
> and have not been manipulated," said Casey Mattox, senior counsel at
> Alliance Defending Freedom. "Analysts scrutinized every second of video
> recorded during the investigation and released by CMP to date and found
> only bathroom breaks and other non-pertinent footage had been removed."
>
> The Obama administration is in cover-up mode on how it uses tax dollars
> to fund and promote Planned Parenthood's anti-human ideology.
>
> You should be outraged that the Obama HHS won't even respond to our
> simple Freedom of Information Act request for taxpayer-funded contracts
> with one of the nation's leading abortionists caught red-handed
> discussing how to preserve the body parts of human beings killed by
> abortions so that those parts can be sold for higher prices. The Obama
> gang would rather violate the federal transparency law in order to
> protect taxpayer funding for activists and groups that traffic in body
> parts. Does it get any worse in terms of government corruption?
>
>
> Until next week...
>
> [https://col131.mail.live.com/
> Tom Fitton
> President
>
>
> [Make a
> Contribution]<http://go2.
>
>
>
> [Visit
> JudicialWatch.org]<http://go2.
> 425 3rd St, SW Suite 800
> Washington, D.C. 20024
>
> Just so we are clear about what's gone down, the same crooked
> administration and the same corrupt federal agencies responsible for
> the IRS-Tea Party scandal now say no crimes were committed. In a
> letter<http://go2.
> addressed to the House Ways and Means Committee, Assistant Attorney
> General Peter J. Kadzik, explains why Department of Justice (DOJ)
> declined to press ahead.
>
> "Ineffective management is not a crime," he wrote. And so the Obama
> Justice Department dismissed reams evidence, mostly uncovered by
> Judicial Watch, of obstruction of justice, obstruction of Congress,
> civil rights violations, the illegal release of taxpayer information,
> the illegal use of taxpayer information, unlawful audits, and perjury.
>
> We responded immediately with a statement:
>
> President Obama's IRS was used against his opponents to help him win
> reelection. So the Obama Justice Department's decision to shut down its
> IRS abuse investigation with no prosecutions is as unsurprising as it
> is corrupt. Judicial Watch's independent litigation proved the Obama
> IRS obstructed justice and destroyed evidence. And we uncovered that
> the IRS and Lois Lerner conspired with the Justice Department and FBI
> on a plan to jail the very Americans the IRS was illegally suppressing.
> In fact, Justice Department lawyers recently admitted in federal court
> that the IRS watchdog is still digging through IRS backup tapes and has
> no idea when the search will be complete. This same Justice Department
> decides it can shut down an investigation before it has all the
> evidence? That might pass muster in Chicago, but America deserves
> better - the IRS is not above the law.
>
> Congress needs to get its act together and consider the impeachment and
> removal from office the officials, including Barack Obama, responsible
> for the worst abuse of the IRS in American history. Judicial Watch will
> continue its independent investigation and litigation that has made it
> the best source for the truth about the continuing IRS scandal. In the
> meantime, the Justice Department and FBI, which illegally obtained IRS
> files on Americans with the help of Lois Lerner and the Obama IRS,
> should finally be investigated for their role in Obama's misuse of
> federal law and tax agencies against innocent Americans.
>
> Many thousands of JW supporters have echoed the calls for impeachment
> over the last few months. George Will, one of most influential
> political columnists writing today, recently penned a column entitled
> "Time to impeach the IRS
> director<http://go2.
>
> After [IRS Commissioner John] Koskinen complained about the high cost
> in time and money involved in the search, employees at a West Virginia
> data center told a Treasury Department official that no one asked for
> backup tapes of Lerner's emails. Subpoenaed documents, including 422
> tapes potentially containing 24,000 Lerner emails, were destroyed.
>
> For four months, Koskinen kept from Congress information about Lerner's
> elusive emails. He testified under oath that he had "confirmed" that
> none of the tapes could be recovered.
>
> Lerner conducted government business using private email, and when she
> was told that the IRS's instant messaging system was not archived, she
> replied: "Perfect."
>
> Koskinen's obfuscating testimonies have impeded investigation of
> unsavory practices, including the IRS' sharing, potentially in
> violation of tax privacy laws, up to 1.25 million pages of confidential
> tax documents. Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, which has forced the IRS
> to disgorge documents, says some "prove that the agency used donor
> lists to audit supporters of organizations engaged in First
> Amendment-protected lawful political speech."
>
> Mr. Will evidently had some good sources on the Hill, as House
> Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) introduced a
> resolution<http://go2.
> this week to impeach the IRS commissioner for "high crimes and
> misdemeanors." The resolution focuses on the lies and obstruction of
> Obama's IRS henchman in lying to Congress about the Lois Lerner emails.
> According to Chaffetz, Koskinen violated the public trust in the
> following ways:
>
> • Failed to comply with a subpoena resulting in destruction of key
> evidence. Commissioner Koskinen failed to locate and preserve IRS
> records in accordance with a congressional subpoena and an internal
> preservation order. The IRS erased 422 backup tapes containing as many
> as 24,000 of Lois Lerner's emails - key pieces of evidence that were
> destroyed on Koskinen's watch.
>
> • Failed to testify truthfully and provided false and misleading
> information. Commissioner Koskinen testified the IRS turned over all
> emails relevant to the congressional investigation, including all of
> Ms. Lerner's emails. When the agency determined Ms. Lerner's emails
> were missing, Commissioner Koskinen testified the emails were
> unrecoverable. These statements were false.
>
> • Failed to notify Congress that key evidence was missing. The IRS knew
> Lois Lerner's emails were missing in February 2014. In fact, they were
> not missing; the IRS destroyed the emails on March 4, 2014. The IRS did
> not notify Congress the emails were missing until June 2014 - four
> months later, and well after the White House and the Treasury
> Department were notified.
>
> Kudos on this impeachment push on the Lerner email obstruction. It is
> imperfect justice, but a move needed toward accountability. Once again,
> it was Judicial Watch's hard work that resulted in this accountability.
>
> Our historic Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
> lawsuit<http://go2.
> seeks documents about the Obama IRS' targeting and harassment of Tea
> Party and conservative opponents of President Obama. 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<http://go2.
>
> What next? The House Judiciary Committee will have to move to consider
> and approve the proposed articles of impeachment in order to move them
> to consideration by the full House. If a majority of the House
> approves, the issue would move to the Senate for trial. Two-thirds of
> Senators present must then vote to convict and remove Obama's IRS
> commissioner from office.
>
> Interested citizens should focus on sharing their views with members of
> the House Judiciary
> Committee<http://go2.
> chaired Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA). Also, in the meantime, individual
> House members can choose to co-sponsor the impeachment resolution. You
> may also want to check in with your individual members to see if
> they're on board.
>
>
> Judicial Watch Uncovers Corrupt Obama CIA-Hollywood Connection
>
> Did you see the link on the Drudge Report and hear the news?!!
>
> We are now in possession of a previously classified December 2012
> Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
> report<http://go2.
> from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) strongly condemning the
> agency's handling of "briefings, interviews, visits, and other support"
> given to the entertainment industry. The report specifically criticizes
> the CIA's granting of "Secret level" access to the makers of the movie
> Zero Dark Thirty. The OIG report was
> declassified<http://go2.
> in response to a Judicial Watch
> request<http://go2.
> for a Mandatory Declassification review.
>
> The OIG "Report of Audit - CIA Processes for Engaging With the
> Entertainment Industry" is critical of both the agency's procedures and
> its recordkeeping:
>
> We found that the records maintained by the OPA [Office of Public
> Affairs] are not sufficient to document that entertainment industry
> requests to CIA for briefings, interviews, visits, and other support
> are handled in a consistent and fair manner and that engagement with
> the entertainment industry is effective in furthering CIA's goal for
> engagement ... OPA and other CIA employees have not always complied
> with Agency regulations intended to prevent the release of classified
> information during their interactions with entertainment industry
> representatives.
>
> The Washington Times took
> note<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> of what your JW has uncovered shortly after the information was
> released. Here is how it was reported:
>
> The CIA may have mishandled "briefings, interviews, visits and other
> support" given to the entertainment industry, says a previously
> classified report, now declassified and provided to Judicial Watch
> under a Freedom of Information Act request.
>
> The report specifically criticizes the CIA's granting of "secret level"
> access to the makers of the 2012 movie "Zero Dark Thirty," which
> dramatized the hunt for Osama bin Laden and the raid on his hideout in
> Pakistan.
>
> Our astute readers know how hard it is pry information loose from the
> agencies that are not tasked with espionage, intelligence gathering and
> covert operations. So just imagine how hard it is to shake information
> loose from the CIA.
>
> While the heavily redacted document carefully avoids the disclosure of
> the eight projects it reviewed dating back to January 6, 2006, it
> specifically cites problems involving the CIA's interactions with the
> Zero Dark Thirty filmmakers. According to the OIG report, "There was an
> instance in which CIA allowed an entertainment industry representative
> to attend a CIA event in which information classified at the SECRET
> level was discussed." The report then adds in a footnote:
>
> CIA officials told us that the filmmaker involved with Zero Dark Thirty
> was invited to the event so that he could absorb the emotion of the
> event and that he was told he could not use anything he heard at the
> event for his project. During our audit fieldwork, the then Director,
> CIA called for an internal examination of the decision to allow the
> entertainment industry representative to attend the event.
>
> The CIA Inspector General cites one project in particular that was
> given "significantly more support" than any of the others reviewed.
> Though the project is not identified, it is an apparent reference to
> Zero Dark Thirty:
>
> [W]e noted that the CIA provided significantly more support to one of
> the eight entertainment industry projects that we reviewed: [REDACTED].
> Entertainment industry representatives for this project met with
> [REDACTED] CIA officers (the majority of whom were under cover) ... on
> multiple occasions, including meeting with one officer 12 times.
>
> The newly-released OIG report also questioned the CIA's granting of
> access to foreign nationals who may not have received proper screening
> before their briefings, warning of possible "negative consequences" for
> the CIA:
>
> We also noted three entertainment projects [REDACTED] in which foreign
> nationals may have participated in briefings, interviews, and visits
> provided by the CIA. However, because of the lack of adequate records,
> we were unable to determine the extent of CIA's support to the eight
> projects, the extent to which foreign nationals participated in
> CIA-sponsored activities, and whether the Director, OPA approved of the
> activities and participation of foreign nationals.
>
> Failure on the part of CIA officers to adhere to regulatory
> requirements could result in unauthorized disclosures, inappropriate
> actions and negative consequences for CIA. [Emphasis added]
>
> The CIA IG also concluded that taxpayers were not compensated for the
> assistance CIA provided to Hollywood film projects:
>
> CIA Has Not Been Reimbursed for Costs Incurred in Supporting
> Entertainment Industry Projects ...
>
> The CIA needs to establish a written policy concerning under what
> conditions reimbursement of costs incurred in providing support to
> entertainment industry projects should be sought. In the absence of a
> formal policy, there is increased risk that costs incurred by CIA will
> not be handled in a consistent manner and that CIA funds may be used
> for questionable expenditures.
>
> On May 1, 2011, President Obama announced that American personnel had
> killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and
> buried his body at sea. President Obama ordered the withholding of
> photos and video of the deceased bin Laden and his burial at sea,
> claiming it would be unwise to "spike the football" over bin Laden's
> killing, as it might be offensive to al Qaeda and other terrorists.
>
> Judicial Watch immediately requested these photos from the Defense
> Department and CIA and then, when denied them, sued for their release
> in federal court. An appellate court
> upheld<http://go2.
> President Obama's decision to withhold the records from American
> citizens because the records might offend terrorists.
>
> Other Judicial Watch
> litigation<http://go2.
> forced the release of records showing a cover-up and the dangerous
> disclosure of classified information, as the Obama administration
> sought to promote the raid to aid Obama's reelection, while at the same
> time withholding basic information about the raid from the American
> people.
>
> In
> response<http://go2.
> to the Judicial Watch January 2012 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
> lawsuit concerning the unusual access given to Zero Dark Thirty
> filmmakers, CIA Information Review Officer Martha Lutz conceded:
>
> It is my understanding that when the meetings with the filmmakers took
> place at the CIA Headquarters, the guidance provided to the officers
> who were undercover or were otherwise in sensitive positions was that
> they should provide the filmmakers with their true first names only.
>
> Disclosures by Vice
> News<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> last month highlighted even more corruption at the Obama CIA as the
> agency tried to promote the pro-Obama film for the White House. Vice
> News reported that the CIA OIG found several potential violations of
> criminal law by then-CIA Director Leon Panetta, CIA officials, and the
> filmmakers.
>
> Has anyone been held accountable for these illegal leaks? Especially
> since the leaks put the heroes who killed Osama bin Laden at risk in
> order to help make this film.
>
> Given the IRS cover-up described above, you won't be surprised to learn
> that Vice News reported the Obama Justice Department refused to
> prosecute any of the alleged violations.
>
> The CIA responded to Judicial Watch's disclosure in a statement to
> Reuters<http://go2.
>
> CIA spokesman Ryan Trapani said the agency had "completely overhauled
> its procedures for interaction with the entertainment industry" since
> 2012. The agency set up new training procedures for officials who deal
> with Hollywood and strengthened protocols for guarding agency secrets
> and classified information, he said.
>
> Believe you me, we're following up on this.
>
> In the meantime, we know now the Obama administration put Hollywood
> before national security in order to help Barack Obama win reelection.
>
>
> Judicial Watch Sues Obama HHS for Records on Planned Parenthood Connection
>
> You may have seen undercover videos by investigators with the Center
> with Medical Progress (CMP)
> featuring<http://go2.
> Planned Parenthood's Dr. Deborah Nucatola discussing the sale of tissue
> from aborted human beings and how abortion techniques can be altered to
> preserve intact human organs and limbs for sale.
>
> Over a glass of wine and casual lunch conversation caught in the
> undercover video, Nucatola, senior director of medical services at
> Planned Parenthood, let slip how inhuman, cruel and soulless her
> organization is when it comes to human life. It was back on July 25,
> 2014, that Nucatola made comments to undercover investigators posing as
> representatives from a human biologics company looking to purchase
> human body parts. Nucatola also describes the gruesome process through
> which abortionists operate to preserve specific fetal body parts. An
> undercover video entitled: "Planned Parenthood Uses Partial-Birth
> Abortions to Sell Baby
> Parts<http://go2.
> has gone viral thanks to the Center for Medical Progress' good work.
>
> Following up on public interest in this truly disturbing scandal,
> Judicial Watch just filed a federal lawsuit here in DC for contracts
> between the Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Population
> Affairs and Nucatola for her paid
> work<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> on the 2014 government
> report<http://go2.
> "Providing Quality Family Planning Services" (Judicial Watch v. U.S.
> Department of Health & Human
> Services<http://go2.
> (No. 1:15-cv-01697)).
>
> The Left does not want you or other Americans to know the truth about
> the abortion industry's trafficking in the body parts of human beings
> killed by abortion. I encourage you to view
> all<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> the Planned Parenthood videos, but warn you that they are difficult to
> view and may upset you.
>
> Judicial Watch filed our lawsuit after HHS failed to comply with two
> simple August 10, 2015, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests
> seeking a set of records about the Planned Parenthood doctor:
>
> • Records related to contracts and/or consultancy agreement between the
> CDC and Dr. Deborah Nucatola regarding her work on the report
> "Providing Quality Family Planning Services," released April 25, 2014;
>
> • Records concerning contracts and/or consultancy agreement between the
> CDC and Dr. Deborah Nucatola regarding her work on the report "Sexually
> Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines," released June 5, 2015;
>
> • Records regarding contracts and/or consultancy agreement between the
> CDC and Dr. Deborah Nucatola regarding her work on the "U.S. Selected
> Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use," released in 2013.
>
> You'll see
> here<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> that the controversial 2014 so-called "Family Planning" report for the
> Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the Office of Population Affairs
> recommends that counselors provide abortion options and referrals to
> pregnant women and teenagers (without parental consent). The report
> also promotes providing "adolescents," without parental consent,
> contraception (which includes potentially abortion-inducing drugs).
> Planned Parenthood's fingerprints are all over the "abortions for
> teenaged girls without telling their parents" Obama administration
> advocacy document.
>
> That Nucatola is helping set government policy on sensitive
> life-and-death issues is concerning.
>
> According to
> CMP<http://go2.judicialwatch.
> its undercover investigators, posing as buyers for a company seeking
> fetal tissue, ask Nucatola:
>
> "How much of a difference can that actually make, if you know kind of
> what's expected, or what we need?"
>
> "It makes a huge difference," Nucatola replies. "I'd say a lot of
> people want liver. And for that reason, most providers will do this
> case under ultrasound guidance, so they'll know where they're putting
> their forceps. The kind of rate-limiting step of the procedure is
> calvarium. Calvarium-the head-is basically the biggest part."
>
> Nucatola explains, "We've been very good at getting heart, lung, liver,
> because we know that, so I'm not gonna crush that part, I'm gonna
> basically crush below, I'm gonna crush above, and I'm gonna see if I
> can get it all intact."
>
> "And with the calvarium, in general, some people will actually try to
> change the presentation so that it's not vertex," she continues. "So if
> you do it starting from the breech presentation, there's dilation that
> happens as the case goes on, and often, the last step, you can evacuate
> an intact calvarium at the end."
>
> The undercover videos raised questions about whether Planned Parenthood
> was illegally profiting from the sale of the fetal tissue and violating
> other laws, such as the federal ban on partial birth abortions.
>
> For the record, there is no doubt about the authenticity of the
> undercover videos. As the Daily
> Signal<http://go2.
> has reported, a forensic analysis of the videos has already been done
> that shows they are the real deal:
>
> The analysis was completed by Coalfire, a digital security and
> forensics firm that has worked on civil and criminal investigations.
> The firm had access to all audio and video investigative footage
> recorded by the Center for Medical Progress.
>
> "The Coalfire forensic analysis removes any doubt that the full length
> undercover videos released by Center for Medical Progress are authentic
> and have not been manipulated," said Casey Mattox, senior counsel at
> Alliance Defending Freedom. "Analysts scrutinized every second of video
> recorded during the investigation and released by CMP to date and found
> only bathroom breaks and other non-pertinent footage had been removed."
>
> The Obama administration is in cover-up mode on how it uses tax dollars
> to fund and promote Planned Parenthood's anti-human ideology.
>
> You should be outraged that the Obama HHS won't even respond to our
> simple Freedom of Information Act request for taxpayer-funded contracts
> with one of the nation's leading abortionists caught red-handed
> discussing how to preserve the body parts of human beings killed by
> abortions so that those parts can be sold for higher prices. The Obama
> gang would rather violate the federal transparency law in order to
> protect taxpayer funding for activists and groups that traffic in body
> parts. Does it get any worse in terms of government corruption?
>
>
> Until next week...
>
> [https://col131.mail.live.com/
> Tom Fitton
> President
>
>
> [Make a
> Contribution]<http://go2.
>
>
>
> [Visit
> JudicialWatch.org]<http://go2.
> 425 3rd St, SW Suite 800
> Washington, D.C. 20024
No comments:
Post a Comment