Judicial Watch Battles Pelosi Congress for January 6 Videos!
How can there be any doubt that Nancy Pelosi’s January 6 committee is a McCarthy-esque political tool? Rather than seeking the truth, it tries to cover it up. Witness its attempts to block our inquiries.
Here’s the latest. We filed an opposition to the U.S. Capitol Police’s (USCP) effort to shut down our lawsuit for January 6 videos and emails. Through its police department, Congress argues that the videos and emails are not public records, there is no public interest in their release, and that “sovereign immunity” prevents citizens from suing for their release.
We filed a lawsuit under the common law right of access after the Capitol Police refused to provide any records in response to our January 21, 2021, request (Judicial Watch v. United States Capitol Police (No. 1:21-cv-00401)). We are asking for:
- Email communications between the U.S. Capitol Police Executive Team and the Capitol Police Board concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021 through January 10, 2021.
- Email communications of the Capitol Police Board with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021through January 10, 2021.
- All video footage from within the Capitol between 12 pm and 9 pm on January 6, 2021
Congress exempts itself from the Freedom of Information Act. So, we brought our lawsuit under the common law right of access to public records. In opposing the broad assertion of secrecy, we detail Supreme Court and other precedents that upholds the public’s right to know what “their government is up to:”
“In ‘the courts of this country’— including the federal courts—the common law bestows upon the public a right of access to public records and documents” … “the Supreme Court was unequivocal in stating that there is a federal common law right of access ‘to inspect and copy public records and documents.’” … “[T]he general rule is that all three branches of government, legislative, executive, and judicial, are subject to the common law right.” The right of access is “a precious common law right . . . that predates the Constitution itself.”
The Court of Appeals for this circuit has recognized that “openness in government has always been thought crucial to ensuring that the people remain in control of their government….” “Neither our elected nor our appointed representatives may abridge the free flow of information simply to protect their own activities from public scrutiny. An official policy of secrecy must be supported by some legitimate justification that serves the interest of the public office.”
In November 2021, we revealed multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records include a cell phone video of the shooting and audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Lt. Michael Byrd. In October, we released records, showing that multiple officers claimed they didn’t see a weapon in Babbitt’s hand before Byrd shot her and that Byrd was visibly distraught afterward. One officer attested that he didn’t hear any verbal commands before Byrd shot Babbitt.
Also in November, we filed a response in opposition to the Department of Justice’s effort to block our FOIA suit asking for records of communication between the FBI and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transaction records of people in DC, Maryland and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021. We argue that Justice Department should not be allowed to shield “improper activity.”
The Pelosi Congress and its police department are telling a federal court that they are immune from all transparency under law and are trying to hide every second of their January 6 videos and countless emails. The hypocrisy is rich, as this is the same Congress that is trying to jail witnesses who, citing privileges, object to providing documents to the committee.
It’s impossible to read of the Biden Justice Department’s newest brainstorm regarding our prisons and not think the world has gone mad. Our Corruption Chronicles blog describes the latest manifestation of wokeism:
The Biden administration has issued a Transgender Offender Manual directing federal prisons to give special accommodations and taxpayer-funded services to certain convicts serving sentences in jails throughout the nation. The Department of Justice (DOJ) issued the new guidelines a few weeks ago to ensure that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) “properly identifies, tracks, and provides services to the transgender population.” The BOP houses some 155,554 inmates at 122 facilities around the U.S. and the agency estimates that approximately 1,300 are transgender. The objective of the new manual is to provide guidance to staff in dealing with the “unique issues that arise when working with transgender inmates,” according to the recently issued 14-page rulebook. The administration also wants to make sure transgender inmates can access programs and services that meet their needs and that sufficient resources are allocated to deliver those special services.
To fulfill the task a Transgender Executive Council (TEC), consisting of senior staff members from the psychology, health services and other BOP divisions, has been created to serve as the official decision-making body on all issues affecting transgender inmates. It will meet once a month to offer advice and guidance on unique measures related to the treatment and management needs of transgender inmates. The panel will study factors such as an inmate’s security level, criminal behavior, current gender expression, vulnerability to sexual victimization and likelihood of perpetrating abuse. “The TEC will consider the wellbeing of all inmates while exploring appropriate options available to assist with mitigating risk to the inmate, to include but not limited to cell and/or unit assignments, application of management variables, programming missions of the facility, and security of the institution,” the manual states.
Under the new guidelines, BOP staff interacting with transgender inmates must use the authorized gender-neutral communication with inmates or the pronouns associated with the inmates identified gender. “Deliberately and repeatedly mis-gendering an inmate is not permitted,” the document warns. Housing and program assignments must seriously consider a transgender or intersex inmate’s own views and transgender inmates shall be given the opportunity to shower separately from other inmates. The initial screening codes to document a likely transgender identity are listed as “inmate should be screened for male to female transgender identification” and “inmate should be screened for female to male transgender identification.”
The federal prison system will also provide transgender convicts with gender-affirming hormone therapy and medical treatment as well as surgery for those in the final stage of the transition process. “In the event this treatment changes the inmate’s appearance to the extent a new identification card is needed, the inmate will not be charged for the identification card as is standard practice,” according to the new instructions.
Transgender inmates will also receive underwear to match their identified gender even if they are not housed with inmates of the identified gender. “Institutional laundry will have available institutional undergarments that fulfill the needs of transgender inmates,” the manual states. Special psychotherapy will be offered to help inmates live more comfortably within a gender identity and address other issues such as substance abuse, mood disorders and criminality. “Common concerns of transgender inmates, which can be addressed effectively in a group setting, include self-esteem issues and relationship issues,” the manual reveals.
For those unfamiliar with terms associated with transgenderism the government document offers some helpful definitions in the new rulebook. It defines gender as a construct used to classify a person as male, female, both, or neither. “Gender encompasses aspects of social identity, psychological identity, and human behavior,” according to the definition. Gender identity, on the other hand, is defined as a person’s sense of their own gender, which is communicated to others by their gender expression. Which brings us to gender expression, which includes mannerisms, clothing, hairstyle, and choice of activities. Gender nonconforming is a person whose appearance or manner does not conform to traditional societal gender expectations. Transgender is the state of one’s gender identity not matching one’s sex assigned at birth. Cisgender is defined as the state of one’s gender identity matching one’s sex assigned at birth. Gender Dysphoria (GD) is a strong and persistent cross-gender identification manifested by a stated desire to be the opposite sex and persistent discomfort with biologically assigned sex.
Until next week,