Judicial Watch • Are You a Right-Wing Extremist?

Are You a Right-Wing Extremist?

Are You a Right-Wing Extremist?

APRIL 17, 2009


April 17, 2009


From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

"Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy" Theories Alive and Well in Obama Administration

Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has been spending too much with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It appears Napolitano has developed her own version of Hillary’s bogus "vast right-wing conspiracy" theory, but has chosen to take it one dangerous step further.

This from the CBS News blog:

Conservatives are up in arms about a report from the Department Of Homeland Security entitled "Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic And Political Climate Fueling Resurgence In Radicalization And Recruitment."

The report is "one of the most embarrassingly shoddy pieces of propaganda I’d ever read out of DHS," writes Michelle Malkin, who deems it a "piece of crap report" that serves as "a sweeping indictment of conservatives…"

…The "Key Findings" section of the report opens with these words: "The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment."

You can read for yourself by clicking here.

Here are a couple of ludicrous and offensive conclusions from the highly politicized report, developed by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch of the Department of Homeland Security:

  • The Obama administration’s plans to restrict the ownership of firearms will motivate paranoid rightwing extremists to stockpile dangerous weapons in preparation for a violent attack
  • Unrealistic fears of communist regimes and "conspiracy theories" about the government’s plan to join a "One World Government" will lead to rightwing violence. (Note the reference to "conspiracy theories" in a document full of same.)
  • Military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan who face challenges "reintegrating" into society may become terrorists or "lone wolf extremists." (This gem came under the insulting headline "disgruntled military veterans.")
  • Rightwing extremists are capitalizing on the election of an African-American president to recruit racist members.
  • The economic downturn will turn rightwing extremists into domestic terrorists who attack government buildings, police officers, and other government officials.

The report notes no actual plans for violence and suggests repeatedly that veterans are ripe for recruitment by rightwing extremists. The "assessment" exhibits the typical leftist prejudice against our military and our veterans: that our military turns people into crazed killing machines. And the report assumes that belief in certain conservative values makes one more likely to be an anti-government terrorist. In fact, the report suggests that if you focus on one conservative public policy issue – such as immigration or opposing abortion – you are especially suspicious. Political scientists might call such citizens "single-issue voters," but the Obama administration thinks such activists are threats to our security.

This document is an attack on the First Amendment and will subject peaceful, conservative Americans to scrutiny by law enforcement at federal, state and local levels.

At least a few sane folks in DHS had some civil rights concerns about this document, but any concerns were evidently overruled by politician/DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. Isn’t it convenient that Napolitano is able to designate opponents of her and Obama’s weak immigration policies as terrorists-in-waiting!

I’m interested to know whether the DHS will assess connections between Obama the Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn. Ayers and Dohrn actually are domestic terrorists who did participate in violent attacks on innocents. Or maybe assess Hillary and the FALN terrorists for who she advocated pardons? Or assess Eric Holder, who worked to pardon terrorists in the Clinton years (and whose former law firm represented the Gitmo terrorists)?

To be sure, the government also produced a report on specific threats from leftwing extremist groups. The differences are stark. As you can see for yourself, unlike the rightwing version, this report is factually based and does not include any political rhetoric.

Judicial Watch already has begun an investigation of this outrage from DHS so be sure to watch your email for updates on what we find.

Obama Pentagon Retaliates Against Judicial Watch for "Air Pelosi" Investigation

So what’s the price for taking on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi these days? About $760. Check this out from Fox News:

A conservative watchdog group that published a critical report last month on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the government has retaliated by charging the group exorbitant fees for documents.

Judicial Watch published a report in March, based on e-mails and other documents obtained through a Freedom of Information request, showing Pelosi repeatedly requested military aircraft to shuttle her and her colleagues and family around the country.

Though Judicial Watch was not charged fees for those documents, the group got a different response when it filed a follow-up document request with a unit in the Air Force on March 16: That’ll be $760.

This is a rather naked attempt of retaliation by the Obama administration. Judicial Watch is the nation’s leading organization when it comes to filing Freedom of Information Act requests. We know the law inside and out. Over the years we have filed literally thousands of open records requests. And we are almost never charged a fee. This is petty payback for holding Nancy Pelosi to account over the Air Pelosi scandal.

Our lawyers are considering our next steps, but you can be sure we won’t be cowed from continuing our investigation of Pelosi’s abuse of her office and our military.

In the meantime, if you like to contribute to this and our other efforts to root out government abuse and corruption you can click here. At least you know that your contribution will help pay for expenses such as paying retaliatory government FOIA fees or filing lawsuits to oppose them. (I’m hoping to see lots of symbolic $760 contributions!)

Judicial Watch in the Middle of the Battle Over Sanctuary Cities in Texas

Judicial Watch continues to battle illegal alien sanctuary policies across the country. This week, Judicial Watch took the battle to the Texas State Senate. Judicial Watch Director of Litigation Paul Orfanedes provided expert testimony before the Senate Transportation and Homeland Security Committee meeting at the state capitol in Austin. The Committee was considering legislation (SB 358) to outlaw sanctuary policies for illegal aliens in Texas. Sanctuary policies in cities like Houston have led to police officers being murdered. Another piece of legislation (SB 357) relates to an effort to make it harder under Texas state law to employ illegal aliens.

Regarding sanctuary policies for illegal aliens, Judicial Watch advised the Texas Attorney General on this very matter last September, sending a detailed legal analysis regarding local enforcement of federal immigration laws. Our analysis was done in conjunction with the Immigration Reform Coalition of Texas and Texans for Immigration Reform. Here’s a brief excerpt from the letter:

Question

Does the Legislature have the authority to prohibit local governmental entities from serving as "sanctuaries" for undocumented persons?

Answer

Yes, the Legislature may prohibit local governmental entities from serving as "sanctuaries" for undocumented persons to the extent that a local government adopts any restriction or limitation on communication between local police or officials and federal immigration authorities regarding a person’s immigration status. Any such enactment by the Legislature would be entirely consistent with federal law and would help remove any doubt as to the authority of local governments to adopt such policies.

The Texas Attorney General agreed. On March 19th, Attorney General Abbott told the House Committee on Defense and Veterans Affairs: "The Texas Legislature is not prohibited from adopting some form of legislation to compel local governments to comply with any duties they may have under federal immigration laws, so long as such legislation is not inconsistent with federal law."

This Attorney General’s opinion opens the way for more and better cooperation between local authorities in Texas and federal immigration law enforcement.

All of this comes at a time when Congress and the Obama administration have launched an all-out attack on 287(g), the federal program that trains local law police officers in immigration enforcement techniques. Judicial Watch has been leading the charge to educate Americans about this program for one very good reason: 287(g) works. And this is why liberals and other illegal alien advocates are trying to impede the program.

We’re pleased that Texas may take big steps toward restoring the rule of law in that great state with respect to immigration matters. We have more activism planned for Texas soon, so keep watching this space for news.

Until next week…

Tom Fitton
President

Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Judicial Watch is dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation’s public life. To make a tax-deductible contribution in support of our efforts, click here.


Sign Up for Updates!