Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Tom Fitton’

WashPost: Trump Told Lawyers No to Making Deal on Docs


By Eric Mack    |   Thursday, 15 June 2023 12:01 PM EDT

Read more at https://www.newsmax.com/politics/donald-trump-fbi-indictment/2023/06/15/id/1123684/

Former President Donald Trump was unwilling to negotiate with Justice Department investigators last fall, firm in his belief his documents were protected under the Presidential Records Act (PRA), according to The Washington Post. Christopher Kise, one of Trump’s new attorneys, reportedly sought to approach the investigators before special counsel Jack Smith was appointed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, seeking to “take the temperature down” and make a deal that would avoid a federal indictment. But Trump reportedly rejected that route, preferring to take a legal stance that was ruled on in the “Clinton socks case” against Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton.

Trump has been taking advice from Fitton — at times against the advice of his own hired legal counsel — about the Clinton socks case, the PRA precedent, and his legal right to retain items he did not want to surrender to the National Archives, according to the Post. Kise, a former Florida solicitor general, declined to comment to The Washington Post.

“President Trump has consistently been in full compliance with the Presidential Records Act, which is the only law that applies to Presidents and their records,” a Trump spokesman wrote in a statement to Newsmax. 

“In the course of negotiations over the return of the documents, President Trump told the lead DOJ official, ‘anything you need from us, just let us know.’ Sadly, the weaponized DOJ rejected this offer of cooperation and conducted an unnecessary and unconstitutional raid on the President’s home in order to inflict maximum political damage on the leading presidential candidate. 

“The Biden regime’s despicable efforts are failing. President Trump maintains a commanding lead in the polls and is poised to reclaim the White House for the American people and make our country great again.”

The National Archives has long rejected Trump’s claims.

“The PRA requires that all records created by presidents (and vice presidents) be turned over to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) at the end of their administrations,” it wrote in a June 9 statement as Smith unsealed the 37-count indictment against Trump.

“The PRA treats the records of the president and those of the vice president in almost the same manner such that, in most cases below, president and vice president can be used interchangeably.”

Instead of using the PRA as the basis for the indictment, Smith’s charges reference the Espionage Act of 1917.

Fitton has made the case that the charges against Trump allege no crime and “won’t survive scrutiny.”

“I testified before the grand jury for four hours, and there were a few questions, I guess, they needed to check off in terms of potential criminal activity related to classified information and such, but most of the time was spent arguing with obviously partisan lawyers about policy debates,” Fitton said on Newsmax’s “Eric Bolling The Balance” on Monday before Trump’s arrest and arraignment. “And after four hours, I thought, ‘Why am I being questioned on this First Amendment activity?’

“I saw firsthand that this was a politicized process.

“They set it up so they could concoct and manufacture obstruction when, in fact, there was no obstruction. They left out the fact that [Trump] cooperated and told the senior Justice Department official in his home, ‘You can have whatever you want.’ And he directed his attorneys, right in front of him, ‘Give them anything they want.’ That didn’t make it into the indictment. This indictment is evidence of corruption by the Justice Department.”

Fitton told the Post that he dined with Trump on Monday, telling the paper he was giving Trump advice but declined to elaborate.

“I think what is lacking is the lawyers saying, ‘I took this to be obstruction,'” Fitton told the Post. “Where is the conspiracy? I don’t understand any of it. I think this is a trap. They had no business asking for the records … and they’ve manufactured an obstruction charge out of that. There are core constitutional issues that the indictment avoids, and the obstruction charge seems weak to me.”

Smith’s grand jury heard from a number of witnesses who were asked about Fitton’s role in advising Trump, according to the Post. Fitton has been publicly active in seeking to get Biden’s Senate records made public, which could include documents related to Tara Reade’s allegations of sexual misconduct when Biden was a senator.

Reade, fearing for her life, fled to Russia seeking asylum. Reade, who worked as a staff assistant in 1992-1993 for then-Sen. Biden, D-Del., has alleged Biden sexually assaulted her and had filed a Senate personnel complaint, which alleged Biden actively withheld from being released from the University of Delaware.

The Clinton socks case Trump has repeatedly mentioned as precedent for the retention of records was originally related to Fitton’s Judicial Watch in 2012, which former President Barack Obama-appointed Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled NARA could not force former President Bill Clinton to turn over audio tapes he kept in his sock drawer. Jackson has been frequently used by the Justice Department against Trump-related officials, lending credence to House Republican arguments there is a weaponization of justice and the government against Trump and conservatives.

Fitton told the Post he remains convinced Trump lawyers “should have been more aggressive in fighting the subpoenas and fighting for Trump.”

Related Stories:

© 2023 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Lawsuit Forces Los Angeles County To Remove 1.2 Million Ineligible Voters From Rolls


BY: VICTORIA MARSHALL | FEBRUARY 27, 2023

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2023/02/27/lawsuit-forces-los-angeles-county-to-remove-1-2-million-ineligible-voters-from-rolls/

voter sticker

Los Angeles County, California confirmed it had removed 1.2 million ineligible voters from its rolls thanks to a settlement with the conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch, the group announced Friday. Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in 2017 on behalf of itself and four registered voters in Los Angeles County. Election Integrity Project California, Inc., another public interest group, was also a part of the lawsuit.

Under the agreement, Los Angeles had to send 1.6 million address confirmation notices to voters listed “inactive” on its voter rolls. According to the National Voter Registration Act — which requires states to maintain accurate voter rolls — states and counties must remove from their voting rolls voters who do not respond to such mailers and do not vote in the next two federal elections.

In its most recent progress report for complying with the settlement, Los Angeles told Judicial Watch it had removed a total of 1.2 million ineligible voters from its rolls. Last year, the county revealed that 634,000 of its inactive voters hadn’t voted in the past 10 years.

Back in 2017 when Judicial Watch first filed its lawsuit, it argued Los Angeles County had more registered voters than residents eligible to register and the “highest number of inactive registrations of any single county in the country.” According to data from the U.S. Election Assistance Commission at that time, voter registration for the county was 112 percent of its adult citizen population.

“This long overdue voter roll clean-up of 1.2 million registrations in Los Angeles County is a historic victory and means California elections are less at risk for fraud,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement. “Building on this success, Judicial Watch will continue its lawsuits and activism to clean up voter rolls and to promote and protect cleaner elections.”

This isn’t the first lawsuit of its kind by Judicial Watch. New York City recently removed 441,083 ineligible voters from its voter rolls after reaching a settlement with the conservative advocacy group. North Carolina also removed more than 430,000 ineligible registrants from its rolls due to a similar lawsuit, and Kentucky agreed to do the same in response to a lawsuit.

The Public Interest Legal Foundation is another good government group that has filed lawsuits to compel states including Michigan and Pennsylvania to clean their voter rolls to guard against potential election fraud.


Victoria Marshall is a staff writer at The Federalist. Her writing has been featured in the New York Post, National Review, and Townhall. She graduated from Hillsdale College in May 2021 with a major in politics and a minor in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @vemrshll.

Author Victoria Marshall profile

VICTORIA MARSHALL

VISIT ON TWITTER@VEMRSHLL

MORE ARTICLES

Hillary Clinton email case reopened by federal judge


– The Washington Times – Sunday, May 10, 2015

URL of the Original Posting Site: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/may/10/federal-judge-reopens-hillary-clinton-email-case/

A federal judge has reopened an open-records case trying to pry loose some of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton's emails as Judge Reggie B. Walton agreed to a joint request by the State Department and Judicial Watch. (Associated Press)
A federal judge has reopened an open-records case trying to pry loose some of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails as Judge Reggie B. Walton agreed to a joint request by the State Department and Judicial Watch. (Associated … more >

Clinton Democrat PartyA federal judge has reopened an open-records case trying to pry loose some of former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s emails, marking the first time a court has taken action on the email scandal. Judge Reggie B. Walton agreed Friday to a joint request by the State Department and Judicial Watch, which sued in 2012 to get a look at some of Mrs. Clinton’s documents concerning a public relations push. Both sides agreed that the revelation that Mrs. Clinton had kept her own email server separate from the government, and exclusively used her own email account created on that server, meant that she had shielded her messages from valid open-records requests.

Now that she has belatedly turned some emails over, the government offered — and Judge Walton confirmed in his ruling — that the agency should search them all to see whether any should have been released to Judicial Watch. “This is the first case that’s been reopened,” Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said Friday. “It’s a significant development. It points to the fraud by this administration and Mrs. Clinton.”

Judicial Watch has filed a series of open-records requests seeking State Department emails and, when the administration failed to comply, has gone to court to force them. Just last week Judicial Watch filed a new batch of eight lawsuits trying to shake loose some of the secret emails, and said that was just the first round.

The State Department said it doesn’t comment on open-records lawsuits.Party of Deciet and lies

Publicly, the department has struggled to handle the inquiries over Mrs. Clinton’s emails. Officials didn’t acknowledge that there were missing emails until prodded by the House committee investigating the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya. After that prod, the department asked Mrs. Clinton to turn over emails that contained government business. She provided about 30,000 emails, but said she discarded another 32,000 she deemed weren’t government business, and then wiped the server. She has refused requests by the Benghazi inquiry chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy, South Carolina Republican, to turn the server over to a neutral third party.

On Friday, Mr. Gowdy released an interim report detailing his first year of investigation, citing “obstacles and frustrations” in dealing with the administration. He said they have talked with new witnesses who hadn’t been interviewed by any other Benghazi probe, and had unearthed documents that haven’t been part of other investigations. But he said Mrs. Clinton’s emails remain a large question mark, and the State Department still hasn’t turned over emails from her senior staff.

“The State Department has told the committee that it cannot certify that it has turned over all documents responsive to the committee’s request regarding the former secretary’s emails,” Mr. Gowdy said in his report.

Mr. Gowdy also hinted that Congress’s investigative powers may be limited when it comes to trying to force a president and his team to come clean.

“The legislative branch’s constitutional toolbox seems inadequate to uphold our task in seeking the truth,” Mr. Gowdy said, pointing to the administration’s unwillingness to serve subpoenas on itself, neutering much of Congress’s investigative power.

Mr. Fitton said that’s why his group’s lawsuits are so critical, saying Congress’s hands are tied and the Justice Department hasn’t committed to conduct an investigation of another part of the Obama administration.freedom

“It’s going to be independent actions by JW at this point,” Mr. Fitton said. “This is how anything is going to break loose.”

OARLogo Picture6

Tag Cloud