Justice Department Is Fighting Fired FBI Agent’s Use of Whistleblower Defense
Sep. 28 2016, 2:17 p.m.
JOHN PARKINSON, AN Iraq War veteran who led a special operations unit in FBI’s Sacramento field office, first filed whistleblower complaints almost a decade ago when he became concerned with his coworkers’ behavior. He identified a colleague as having “a career-long pattern of soliciting prostitutes,” who used an FBI’s surveillance plane to travel to Reno to pay for sex. He alleged another colleague had a porn habit, even viewing explicit material at work. At one point, Parkinson removed furniture from an FBI office to keep it from getting soiled by the colleague, according to court documents.
After filing his complaint, Parkinson found himself the subject of what he says was a retaliatory investigation, and was eventually fired. He has been fighting that decision for the past four years through a Kafkaesque maze of courts and internal appeals.
On Monday, his attorneys filed a brief to the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals arguing for his right to raise a whistleblower retaliation defense.
Parkinson’s ordeal began eight years ago when he decided to lodge a whistleblower complaint about his colleagues’ alleged sexual misconduct. What followed was a little noticed whirlwind of professional reprisals, investigations, and legal battles.
After his complaint was filed, Parkinson’s boss removed him from his leadership position and gave him poor performance reviews, sending him to a different field office — actions he interpreted as retaliation. He reported those concerns in a letter to Rep. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who forwarded it to the Department of Justice’s inspector general.
When the DOJ inspector general interviewed Parkinson in 2009, he thought it was about his whistleblower complaint; instead they questioned him about his own conduct, without mentioning he was the target of an investigation. The colleagues he reported for abuse had, in turn, claimed Parkinson misused funds on a construction project during his time in Sacramento, according to his attorney.
The FBI later claimed he obstructed the investigation into the alleged misuse of funds by communicating with witnesses, and that he “lacked candor” in his responses concerning those allegations.
In 2012, he was fired for those offenses.
The Narco News Bulletin-
In fact, according to the Wall Street Journal, Trump met with FBI agents in the early 1980s to discuss his plans to enter the casino business in Atlantic City, in part, ...
A St. Clair County investigator testified last year that the FBI determined Pruitt ... and that he told an FBI agent that he provided links to encrypted information on ...
By John Steckroth - Digital news editor
Posted: 11:50 AM, September 28, 2016Updated: 11:50 AM, September 28, 2016
First, her husband, a former FBI special agent, retired earlier this year, which prompted her to consider retirement. Second, she had been at NJHA for 16 years, ..
Nominees are former FBI agent Gary Davis, R-Cassville, and Barry County Deputy Justin "Dave" Ruark, D-Cassville. The debate, sponsored by The Monett ...
Chadds Ford Live-
On Tuesday, Oct. 11, FBI agent Charles Dayoub will address the audience regarding he FBI's role in providing assistance to local communities as well as ..
Right Wing Watch-
Disgraced FBI agent turned anti-Muslim activist John Guandolo joined VCY America's “Crosstalk” program last week, where he warned that Muslim Americans ...
The Daily Telegram-
An FBI agent was reprimanded for asking an employee in the Detroit office to run a search on his brother after the brother was detained at an airport.
Liberty News Now-
When Comey, the director of the FBI decided not to charge Hillary Clinton, it looks ... The lead agent on the case resigned in the middle of the investigation and ...
In the wake of this incident, Rahami's own father warned the FBI that his son was ... The FBI's special agent in charge noted that “injuries included lacerations to ...
Link Du jour
May 8, 2017
FBI struggled with “messaging challenges” surrounding its controversial counterterror program for teens
In internal emails Bureau decried “self-proclaimed activists who are providing incorrect information to the media” regarding CVE
Written by Waqas Mirza
Edited by JPat Brown
FBI officials fretted over critical press coverage of their interactive website and online game on violent extremism aimed at high school students and attempted to assuage concerns raised by civil liberties and Muslim organizations, according to documents released through a FOIA request by Michael Best.
The FBI’s Don’t Be a Puppet website is intended to raise awareness of violent extremism and the risk of radicalization to vulnerable students. It relies on flawed theories of radicalization which erroneously assumes that there are “indicators” or “risk factors” of violent extremism.
The website and the online game were immediately met with criticism and ridicule. A letter signed by 19 organizations, including the American Federation of Teachers, the National Immigration and Law Center, and others, accused the FBI website of promoting “bigotry and hatred” and doubling down on “the problematic law-enforcement strategy of profiling.”
The FBI held a meeting with representatives of many organizations which had criticized the website. According to Abed A. Ayoub, the legal and policy director for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, the meeting was “very tense” and FBI officials received “blowback from everybody.”
The documents released by the FBI are heavily redacted and exclude nearly every substantial discussion of the website, including meeting presentations and notes, changes proposed by groups, input by students and teachers, and media briefings.
What the documents do show, however, is the clear frustration of many FBI officials due to critical coverage of the website and pushback from civil liberties and community organizations.
One e-mail laments the “unfortunate press” in the New York Times and the Washington Post “as a result of criticisms by several groups” whose “characterizations of the website” it claimed were “very inaccurate.” The e-mail also claimed that such a response was not representative since FBI focus groups with “nearly 50 groups and 200 individuals” yielded an “almost universally positive” response.
Such critical press coverage was foreseen by at least one shrewd FBI official, who, in a response to queries by the New York Times reporter Laurie Goodstein, remarked to colleagues that “NYT should certainly be discouraged from writing a story as they have little to nothing to go on.”
There documents included notes on one meeting with the Muslim Leaders’ Council, perhaps to showcase the “almost universally positive” response to the website, which also derided “self-proclaimed activists who are providing incorrect information to the media.”
It is unclear exactly what the Muslim Leaders’ Council is. The notes refer to “our” Muslim Leaders’ Council and one of its members as one of “our” members, which seem to suggest that it has close connections to the FBI and would also explain the effusive response of the group to the FBI website.
Nonetheless, such an “almost universally positive” response by individuals and groups FBI held focus groups with did not solve the Bureau’s “messaging challenges,” for which it ultimately reached out to a woman who worked on the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) initiative in Montgomery County, MD.
The woman whose name is redacted is likely someone who works for the World Organization for Resource Development and Education (WORDE), which runs a CVE initiative that relies on a flawed theory of radicalization, stigmatizes Muslim Americans, and has the potential to curtail civil rights and political expression and organizing.
The Bureau attempted to confront its “messaging challenges” by replacing at least one “Islamic angle” with a focus on animal rights activists.
Nonetheless, the Bureau ran into an easily avoidable logistical difficulty when it attempted to meet with religious leaders to further its messaging efforts.
One individual invited to a briefing with the Bureau hoped the FBI’s CVE initiative would not brand bearded Muslims as terrorists.
To which an FBI official helpfully responded by stating that “facial hair” would not be a part of the discussion.
While the FBI boasts of holding focus groups and seeking inputs from students, teachers, community leaders, and members of religious organizations, the actual input is curiously not made available to the public. Previously, the Department of Education had rejected a FOIA request for the feedback that it provided to the FBI on its website. The documents released by the FBI also redact all input received from the public but include the consent forms signed by parents of students.
May 8, 2017
The Government Is Not Done Messing with Barrett Brown
A recent lawsuit against the FBI is shedding light on the complex game the Bureau is playing to silence investigators of the cyber-industrial complex.
The lawsuit concerns the subpoenaing of anonymous donor information to the legal defense fund for formerly incarcerated journalist Barrett Brown. Brown had investigated data from private intelligence corporations that was leaked by the hacker collective Anonymous. He created a wiki, ProjectPM, to crowdsource the work of sifting through the data — which found interesting bits of information, like an effort to discredit WikiLeaks and the journalist Glenn Greenwald through fake documents and propaganda.
The FBI did not like this snooping. Agents arrested Brown in September 2012 after a raid on his apartment and his mother’s house. They initially indicted him on the now infamous “linking” charge — because he linked the already leaked data from one chatroom to another — but that was dropped in favor of lesser charges: threatening an FBI agent on a Youtube video, interfering with a search warrant’s execution by hiding his laptop, and accessory after the fact. Brown was in prison for four years, before being released to a halfway house in November 2016. He is now on parole.
Kevin Gallagher, an advocate for privacy who followed Brown’s work and arrest, created the website FreeBarrettBrown.org and used the donation platform WePay.com to collect anonymous donations for a legal defense fund during his incarceration. Suspecting that these anonymous donors may have had ties to hackers, or were hackers themselves, the FBI subpoenaed WePay for its information — demanding “any and all records” regarding the donations to Brown’s defense fund. Gallagher and an anonymous donor decided to officially retaliate, signing on as plaintiffs to the lawsuit.
Is the subpoena legal? Gallagher’s lawyers say no. The lawsuit claims that the FBI violated the First Amendment, the Stored Communications Act, and the privacy rights in the California Constitution (Gallagher and some of the donors are from California, according to the lawsuit). Whatever the charges against Brown were, the lawsuit claims that “the identities of, and the amounts donated by, the journalist’s supporters are completely irrelevant to the charges levied against the journalist.”
The gravity of the problem is right in the lawsuit: “the WePay subpoena was part of a larger scheme… to unlawfully surveil the donors in violation of the First Amendment.” We know the intelligence community has an unseemly knack for crushing dissent, the most high profile example being Edward Snowden; but the incarceration of Brown and the subpoenaing of anonymous donor information shows the lengths to which they will go. Snowden can at least be cast as a villain by the government because he leaked classified information, but Brown was deemed a criminal because he looked at information that was already leaked. And now donors, who have nothing to do with what Brown did, are on the FBI’s list.
Why would the FBI jail a journalist, whose worst crime was a mildly threatening Youtube video because he was angry about the FBI raiding his mom’s house, for four years? It was simply part of a long play to intimidate journalists, and to find more information on hackers. Once the defense fund was set up, the FBI saw an opportunity for more information and they subpoenaed it. Maybe some of those donors have hacker ties, or are hackers themselves, or maybe not. But an innocent man was jailed for those names.
Brown is now out on parole in Texas, but the ire of the FBI is not over. He was re-arrested on April 27 for speaking to the press about his plight, only to be released on May 1. According to Brown himself in a column for D Magazine, the Texas Bureau of Prisons (BOP) had begun demanding Brown and his interviewers sign forms prior to interviews, which Brown rejected on claim that there is no relevant rule, either in the Bureau of Prisons Program Statement on News Media Contacts or in the Constitution, which constrains his dealings with the press. The BOP retaliated by ordering him on the morning of April 27 to appear at the Volunteers of America halfway house that day, where he has biweekly meetings with his case manager.
Brown could tell something was amiss, so he called journalists and Dallas City Councilman Philip Kingston to tell them what was going on. At 10 am, Brown was taken into custody. He was never given an official explanation of why he had been re-arrested, and waited for four days while a lawyer retained by D Magazine, David Siegal of Haynes and Boone, made a series of calls to the BOP describing “what they’d gotten themselves into.” On May 1, the jail’s counselor summoned Brown into his office and told him “You won. Get your stuff ready. You’re leaving.”
But did he win? Brown was taken back to the halfway house and pressured, yet again, to sign forms that had nothing to do with his situation. The forms can be seen here and here; these are forms for the press gaining access to speak to a prison inmate, not for someone out on parole.
Brown wrote a detailed description of his last meeting:
“Woody Hossler, the aforementioned halfway house staffer, had to pick me up in his car and take me back to Hutchins, where I was given a breathalyzer and drug test before being cajoled into meeting with Wells, who this time had some other fellow in his office with him whom he identified vaguely as his new ‘program director.’ After commenting that I ‘look mad,’ Wells said that the BOP wanted me to sign two forms. I asked him what would happen if I didn’t. He replied that in that case we would ‘be back where we started’ and that he would have to call the BOP. I asked who at the BOP had told him all this; he said that Lujan was absent that day and someone else was acting in her role. I spent about two minutes trying to get him to admit that I was being threatened with yet another unlawful arrest if I failed to sign these two inappropriate forms, an idea that he attempted to depict as wholly silly. I asked, for instance, if I
... sponsored by the Arizona Police Association - includes a class, Understanding and Investigating Jihadi Networks, taught by former FBI agent John Guandolo.
Whistleblower Says USA Went Easy on Dumping in Gulf of Mexico
whistleblower who told authorities three oil drilling companies dumped chemicals in the Gulf of Mexico claims a federal prosecutor ignored his evidence, costing the United States $28 million in fines.
Evan Howington sued the United States on May 4 in Federal Court.
The Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships encourages whistleblowers to speak out, but they need the cooperation of federal prosecutors to collect any reward.
Whistleblowers can be paid up to 50 percent of penalties the government gets from a polluting ship operator under the law, which Congress passed in 1980.
Howington’s lawsuit turns on how that law defines a ship.
He says that Jon Maestri, an assistant U.S. attorney in New Orleans, came to the “patently incorrect” conclusion that an oil drilling support vessel from which Howington saw chemicals dumped into the Gulf is not “capable of being used as a means of transportation” so it does not meet the definition of a ship under the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships.
A fired, white Dallas-area police officer who inexplicably shot and killed an unarmed black teenager with a rifle as he was leaving a party in a car was arrested late Friday on a murder charge and sued in federal court for wrongful death.
Tickled by CIA’s Tweets, Anthropologist Files Suit
BOSTON (CN) – The CIA’s tongue-in-cheek Twitter posts inspired a federal complaint from an anthropologist specializing in social media, hoping to get records on the spy agency’s funny bone.
Set to get her doctorate this year from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Amanda Johnson brought her May 4 complaint in Boston after waiting years on an answer by the CIA to her request under the Freedom of Information Act.
“It is rare for a federal agency – especially an agency whose duties are so serious – to employ a humorous tone when communicating with the public,” the 11-page complaint states. “This makes the CIA’s decision to do so a matter of both public and academic interest, especially for scholars in the humanities.”
Johnson notes that a sarcastic tone has been evident in the CIA’s Twitter communications from the get-go.
Kenneth Grey, a retired FBI special agent and lecturer at the University of New Haven, said he is not surprised by the hacking attack. “It certainly does seem to be ...
Repeat Felon Is Hero Alt-Right Deserves
Ex-con has cracked heads at Berkeley street demonstrations
Kyle Chapman, 41, is a thrice-convicted felon who has spent ten years behind bars for his various crimes. He now seeks to destroy "neo-Marxists."
MAY 8--The latest hero of the alt-right, a California man who has beaten and maced anti-Trump protesters on the streets of Berkeley, is a thrice-convicted felon who has served three separate prison terms, jumped bail, twice violated parole, used cocaine, LSD, and meth, and was described by his own lawyer as having “severe psychological problems,” court records show.
Kyle Chapman, a 41-year-old rough boy committed to destroying the “neo-Marxist scourge,” was arrested March 4 following a melee at a rally organized by Trump supporters. While marchers purportedly were there in support of free speech, Chapman--who has spent a combined 10 years behind bars--came dressed for a fight.
Chapman, a Bay Area resident, was one of ten combatants
No, It Is Not A Crime For A 57-Year-Old Guy To Carry A Rifle While Only Wearing Light Blue Thong Underwear
In this HOT MAIL we cover:
* Fake News = DIS-information = bullshit = we will tell you who;
* Hitler in Argentina and guys like Roger Clark;
* Swastika Ring;
* Hitler and Abel Basti;
* The three kinds of people associated with Hitler's fate;
* Comments about the term "Nazi" by an Army veteran;
* Italian submarines;
* Submarines in the Thai Navy;
* Super quiet USN Boomers;
* Membership Contest - win BIG!
* Three new books on the horizon;
* Huge reaction to Forum Borealis - even though we spelled the name wrong;
* On the radio regular monthly shows;
* FREE BOOK! Yep - you can have a FREE BOOK!
* Why so many American Presidents near the estate where Hitler lived until 1955?
There is more. Open the attached, even with our misspelled Forum Borealis (apologies for that) to see it all. Naturally, the entire stories have been sent to Members.
unsubscribe - to be removed from our roster, simply reply to this email and say - remove
The World's ONLY International Source of U-Boat History
Remote Viewing August 2017
Link du jour
Cambridge, MA PD Citizen Complaints
Alexander Cartwright and Jennifer Dirmeyer filed this request with the Cambridge Police Department of Cambridge, MA.Submitted July 18, 2017STATUSCompletedMuckRock From: Alexander Cartwright07/18/2017Subject: Public Records Law Request: Cambridge, MA PD Citizen ComplaintsTo Whom It May Concern:Pursuant to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c.66, §10, I hereby request the following records:1. What is the total number of citizen complaints made against your department’s officers annually for the last 10 years?Please include the type of complaint (i.e., use of force, abuse language, unwarranted search) and the result of complaint (i.e., sustained, exonerated).2. What is the total number of complaints police officers made against their peer officers in department annually for the last 10 years?Please include the type of complaint (i.e., use of force, abuse language, unwarranted search) and the result of complaint (i.e., sustained, exonerated).3. What is the total number of calls for service your department received annually for the past 10 years?4. What is the number of officers involved in shootings in your department for the past 10 years?Please include the number of officer-involved shootings resulting in discipline.5. Which of the above data are published publicly? Please provide a link to any and all publicly available reports containing the data above.I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as we believe this request is in the public interest, as suggested but not stipulated by the recommendations of the Massachusetts Supervisor of Public Records. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.I expect the request to be filled in an accessible format, including for screen readers, which provide text-to-speech for persons unable to read print. Files that are not accessible to screen readers include, for example, .pdf image files as well as physical documents.In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 10 business days, as the statute requires.Sincerely,Alexander CartwrightFrom: Warnick,Jeremy07/26/2017Subject: RE: Public Records Law Request: Cambridge, MA PD Citizen ComplaintsMr. Cartwright,Please note that we are currently processing this request. Due to the large volume of requested information, a cost estimate may be required in order to fulfill the request.Sincerely,Jeremy WarnickDirector of CommunicationsCambridge Police DepartmentFrom: Warnick,Jeremy08/01/2017Subject: Re: Public Records Law Request: Cambridge, MA PD Citizen ComplaintsMr. Cartwright,In response to your request, please find the below and attached information that will address the information you are seeking.Jeremy WarnickDirector of CommunicationsCambridge Police Department
Use of Force Report 2016 View Embed Download
Use of Force Review 2011 View Embed Download
Use of Force Review 2010 View Embed Download
Use of Force Review 2014 View Embed Download
Use of Force Review 2013 View Embed Download
25-year Complaint History View Embed Download
Use of Force Report AU2015 View Embed Download
Use of Force Review 2012 View Embed Download
The mother of a man who was shot and killed in March during an encounter with Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies has sued the county and the Sheriff’s Department, saying that deputies lacked proper training and used unnecessary force against her son, who suffered from a mental illness.
The civil rights lawsuit was filed Monday in U.S. District Court. It follows another federal lawsuit filed by the children of Dennis “Todd” Rogers, 41, who was shot by deputies the night of March 7 outside a 24 Hour Fitness gym in Ladera Heights.
Peter Morris, an attorney representing Rogers’ mother, said that Rogers had been asked to leave the gym, where he was a member. Rogers complied, but returned a few hours later and was shot and killed by one or more deputies, Morris said.
The lawsuit alleges that deputies attempted to shock Rogers with stun guns, and that Rogers was “unarmed and made no offensive moves towards the deputies when they killed him.”
“The sheriff’s deputies did not handle this situation in the proper way and as a result Todd is dead,” Morris said.
Rogers graduated from the University of Houston with a degree in accounting and finance, and he moved to Los Angeles from Houston around November 2015 to pursue a career in acting.
Janet Williams, Rogers’ mother, told reporters at a news conference outside the federal courthouse downtown that Rogers had called her every day, telling her about his auditions. Williams recalled that after she saw an audition video in which he played the role of a villain, she told him, “You’re not going to make it — you’re smiling too much.”
Rogers had bipolar disorder, which he managed with medication, his mother had previously told The Times.
She said Monday that at the time of the incident Rogers was off his medication.
“He was harmless,” she said. “
We Are Suing for Roger Ailes' FBI File
This morning, Gizmodo filed a lawsuit against the FBI seeking access to any files it holds on Roger Ailes, the one-time chief executive of Fox News.
Gizmodo sought access to the records under the Freedom of Information Act on May 18, the day Ailes was found dead in his Palm Beach home due to a traumatic brain injury aggravated by his hemophilia. As one the most influential and controversial political figures of his era, we believe these files are likely to exist. The FBI failed to provide or formally deny access to the records within the time period allowed under the federal statute. Needless to say, we’d really like to read them.
Depending on whom you ask, Ailes either cultivated or destroyed American conservative politics. After humble beginnings in an abusive blue-collar home in Warren, Ohio, he grew to become a fixture in the White House by lending his media expertise to presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George H. W. Bush. For more than a decade, he reigned over what became the most-watched network in cable news history, serving to more than 2 million Americans daily his own brand of divisive, vitriolic and often racially-charged commentary.
As the story goes, President Obama once addressed him as “the most powerful man in the world.” Ailes replied back coolly: “Don’t believe what you read, Mr. President. I started those rumors myself.”
But his achievements will forever be overshadowed by the accusations of sexual harassment, coercion, psychological torture, blackmail, and surveillance of his employees that ultimately led to his downfall. Given the seriousness of the allegations raised by more than a half dozen women, he naturally found a home on the presidential campaign of Donald Trump, whom he’d gifted years before with a weekly segment on the Fox and Friends morning show.
Suspect dead, 2 Los Banos officers shot after gunfire erupts during a struggle
Ohio Prohibited BooksShareAlec Shea filed this request with the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction of Ohio.Submitted July 31, 2017STATUSCompletedMuckRock users can file, duplicate, track, and share public records requests like this one. Learn more. File a Request2 Communications 1 File Collapse AllFrom: Alec Shea07/31/2017Subject: Open Records Request: Ohio Prohibited BooksTo Whom It May Concern:Pursuant to the Ohio Open Records Law, I hereby request the following records:All lists of books and periodicals prohibited in Ohio prisonsThe requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I would request your response within ten (10) business days.Sincerely,Alec SheaFrom: firstname.lastname@example.org/01/2017Subject: FW: Open Records Request: Ohio Prohibited BooksAttached is the current list of books and printed materials screened and excluded in the past four years. Per ODRC retention policy, items drop off the list after four years.Stephen A. YoungLegal CounselDept. of Rehabilitation & Correction770 West Broad St.Columbus, OH 43222(614) 752-1784 phone(614) 752-1034 faxPlease note that this message and/or any attachments may contain confidential attorney work product and/or may otherwise be privileged or confidential and/or protected from disclosure by applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error. Any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender by reply or by telephone at 614-752-1784 and immediately delete this message and any attachments.
Currently excluded books and printed materials 7-31-17 View Embed Download
Republican Congressman Calls for Resignation of Robert Mueller
By Steve Neavlingticklethewire.com
An Arizona congressman is calling for the resignation of special counsel Robert Mueller, suggesting he had two conflicts of interest.
U.S. Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., joined President Trump’s claims that Mueller should be disqualified to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election because at least four people on the special counsel’s staff donated to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Subject: Public Records Law Request: FIO PoliciesTo Whom It May Concern:Pursuant to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c.66, §10, I hereby request the following records:The current departmental policies and procedures for field interrogation, observation, frisk and/or search practices. I also request policies and procedures related to bias-free policing.I also request that, if appropriate, fees be waived as we believe this request is in the public interest, as suggested but not stipulated by the recommendations of the Massachusetts Supervisor of Public Records. The requested documents will be made available to the general public free of charge as part of the public information service at MuckRock.com, processed by a representative of the news media/press and is made in the process of news gathering and not for commercial usage.I expect the request to be filled in an accessible format, including for screen readers, which provide text-to-speech for persons unable to read print. Files that are not accessible to screen readers include, for example, .pdf image files as well as physical documents.In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 10 business days, as the statute requires.Sincerely,Grace RaihFrom: Media Relations07/19/2017Subject: Re: Public Records Law Request: FIO PoliciesDear Ms Raih,Please contact my office directly as we need clarification to fill thisrequest. Thank youLt detective Michael McCarthy617-343-5412From: Media Relations08/01/2017Subject: Re: Public Records Law Request: FIO PoliciesAugust 1, 2017via email onlyDear Ms Raih,This email is being sent in response to your July 18, 2017 request forrecords that may be in custody or control of the Boston Department.Specifically you requested: The current departmental policies andprocedures for field interrogation, observation, frisk and/or searchpractices. I also request policies and procedures related to bias-freepolicing.Please find attached Boston Police Rule 323 Field Interaction / Observation/ Encounter Report and Boston Police rule 113A Biased Free Policing. Bothof these documents as well as all BPD rules and procedures are avail bygoing to http://bpdnews.com/rules-and-procedures/If you have been denied records by the Boston Police Department you havethe right to appeal this decision with the Supervisor of Public Records atthe Public Records Division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth.Sincerely,Lieutenant Detective Michael McCarthyDirector, Media Relations
rule323 View Embed Download
rule113A View Embed Download
August 1, 2017
Persistent FBI surveillance put no damper on I.F. Stone’s incisive penThousands of pages track the free speech principles of one of the agency’s earliest and longest agitatorsWritten by Beryl LiptonEdited by JPat BrownIsidor Feinstein Stone - popularly known as I.F. Stone and to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by a variety of alternate spellings - had one of the longest journalistic careers as a critic of federal operations, and, accordingly, his FBI file is thousands of pages long. Born before the First World War, by the time WWII was eminent, Mr. Stone was already an editor at The Nation and his writing career carried through the engagement, the early Cold War years, and much of the Vietnam era before his health required retirement.
In his November 9, 1959 edition of I.F. Stone’s Weekly, Mr. Stone highlighted the agency and its collusion with the House Un-American Activities in identifying communist sympathizers. By that point, they had already been following him for nearly two decades - he had piqued their interest during the discussion over the Smith Act - and as recently as four days prior, they had been in attendance at a rally of a reported three hundred-ish people gathered under the curious cause - almost certainly a Communist cabal in the Bureau’s consideration - of “First Amendment Defendents.”
The collection of honored attendees was something of a lightning rod for federal attention at the time, comprised of educators, authors, labor organizers, and others who had already been called before or proved of interest to the HUAC.
Among them was Lloyd Barenblatt, whose case before the Supreme Court had been decided against him at the beginning of the summer, finding that he had been in contempt of Congress when he refused to answer its questions about his political and religious leanings.
Mr. Stone took the opportunity to direct attention to the G-Men who might be in the audience, calling out their alliance with tyranny …
and their camaraderie with a particular noted Biblical backstabber …
The event is but one in the long-standing saga between Mr. Stone’s staunch First Amendment advocacy and the Feds’ Soviet suspicions.
Would you like to know more? Continue browsing the file via the request page. You can also access more of I.F. Stone’s Weekly, as well as other writings and speeches on the website of I.F. Stone.
The first section of the file is embedded below:
Tampa Bay Doomed by Rising Water
Bronx DA’s office overrun with sex, booze and fights, crime analyst says
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Monday, February 26, 2018, 5:37 PM
Australian police official quits over racist, obscene posts
Monday, February 26, 2018, 9:14 PM
City settles Las Cruces police brutality case for $1.4 million
3:40 p.m. MT Feb. 25, 2018
LAS CRUCES - The city of Las Cruces decided last year not to appeal a $1.6 million jury award given to a former Las Cruces couple who successfully sued two police officers over allegations of brutality and civil rights violations.
Instead, the city decided to enter into a settlement with the couple, Jillian and Andrew Beck, agreeing to pay them a total of $1.4 million, according to the Las Cruces law firm that represented the couple.
The Becks' lawsuit centered on allegations that two Las Cruces police officers — Isaiah Baker and Joseph Campa — violated the couple's civil rights when they responded to a dispute involving the Becks and a neighbor.
The incident occurred the evening of Jan. 5, 2013, according to the lawsuit.
Jillian Beck, then 26, had been "upset with a neighbor who was throwing rocks and blowing an air horn in the middle of the night at another neighbor's dog," the lawsuit states. After explaining her complaint to Baker, Beck turned to walk away, according to the lawsuit. But then Baker "unexpectedly grabbed her arm, twisted it behind her back, and slammed her to the ground," the lawsuit states.
During the trial last February, it was revealed that Beck had tried to lift her head off the ground to call out to a neighbor. But as she lifted her head, Baker slammed her face onto rocks, her attorneys said. An image of Beck's bloodied face was presented as evidence during the trial. Her nose and wrist were broken and fractured.
When her husband then attempted to help her, he was detained by Campa. He testified that he believed his wife was "choking on her own blood," according to his attorneys.
During the trial, a police audio recording of the incident was played for the jury. In the recording, Baker can be heard saying "she got thrown" and she got a "face full of rocks," Strickland said. A female officer then said "cool" in response.
Ex-state treasurer to help in Albuquerque police reform
February 26, 2018
Forty years ago, the CIA was prohibited from engaging in assassinations - again
Memos in CREST offer a look at the Agency reaction to President Carter’s E.O. 12036
Written by Beryl Lipton
Edited by JPat Brown
Forty years ago - in the aftermath of a very public American reckoning with the nation’s Intelligence Community that featured the Watergate scandal, the Churchand Pike Committees, and the Rockefeller Commission - President Jimmy Carter signed Executive Order 12036 on January 24th, 1978, placing additional restrictions on the Central Intelligence Agency’s ability to operate in the United States …
and further prohibiting the Agency from committing assassinations …
which had also been a part of President Gerald Ford’s E.O. 11905 two years earlier.
The order set up the National Foreign Intelligence Board, which still exists …
as well as the National Intelligence Tasking Center.
CIA’s CREST archive contains a collection of notes and memorandums related to CIA’s negotiations with the Executive prior to the Order, in addition to materials related to the implementation of its details.
On Russia, Americans trust special counsel Mueller more than Trump, USA TODAY poll shows
Susan Page and Marilyn Icsman, USA TODAYPublished 12:22 p.m. ET Feb. 26, 2018 | Updated 3:46 p.m. ET Feb. 26, 2018
13 Shocking Facts About Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller
By Washington's Blog
Global Research, November 03, 2017
Washington's Blog 1 November 2017
Theme: Intelligence, Law and Justice, Media Disinformation
9/11 Cover Up
TIME Magazine would probably have not called my own disclosures a “bombshell memo” to the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry in May 2002 if it had not been for Mueller’s having so misled everyone after 9/11.
In addition, Rowley says that the FBI sent Soviet-style “minders” to her interviews with the Joint Intelligence Committee investigation of 9/11, to make sure that she didn’t say anything the FBI didn’t like. The chairs of both the 9/11 Commission and the Official Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 confirmed that government “minders” obstructed the investigation into 9/11 by intimidating witnesses (and see this).
Mueller’s FBI also obstructed the 9/11 investigation in many other ways. For example, an FBI informant hosted and rented a room to two hijackers in 2000. Specifically, investigators for the Congressional Joint Inquiry discovered that an FBI informant had hosted and even rented a room to two hijackers in 2000 and that, when the Inquiry sought to interview the informant, the FBI refused outright, and then hid him in an unknown location. See this and this.
Bob Graham, the former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told me recently that Robert Mueller, then the FBI director (and now the special counsel investigating connections between Russia and the Trump campaign) made “the strongest objections” to Jacobson and his colleagues visiting San Diego.
Graham and his team defied Mueller’s efforts, and Jacobson flew west. There he discovered that his hunch was correct. The FBI files in California were replete with extraordinary and damning details …
Nevertheless, Mueller adamantly refused their demands to interview him, even when backed by a congressional subpoena, and removed Shaikh to an undisclosed location ‘for his own safety.’
Graham also wrote that the FBI also “insisted that we could not, even in the most sanitized manner, tell the American people that an FBI informant had a relationship with two of the hijackers.”
And Kristen Breitweiser – one of the four 9/11widows instrumental in forcing the government to form the 9/11 Commission to investigate the 2001 attacks – points out:
Mueller and other FBI officials had purposely tried to keep any incriminating information specifically surrounding the Saudis out of the Inquiry’s investigative hands. To repeat, there was a concerted effort by the FBI and the Bush Administration to keep incriminating Saudi evidence out of the Inquiry’s investigation. And for the exception of the 29 full pages, they succeeded in their effort.
When you had the lead-up to the Iraq War … Mueller and, of course, the CIA and all the other directors, saluted smartly and went along with what Bush wanted, which was to gin up the intelligence to make a pretext for the Iraq War. For instance, in the case of the FBI, they actually had a receipt, and other documentary proof, that one of the hijackers, Mohamed Atta, had not been in Prague, as Dick Cheney was alleging. And yet those directors more or less kept quiet. That included … CIA, FBI, Mueller, and it included also the deputy attorney general at the time, James Comey.
Rowley also points out:
Mueller was even okay with the CIA conducting torture programs after his own agents warned against participation. Agents were simply instructed not to document such torture, and any “war crimes files” were made to disappear. Not only did “collect it all” surveillance and torture programs continue, but Mueller’s (and then Comey’s) FBI later worked to prosecute NSA and CIA whistleblowers who revealed these illegalities.
Mueller also presided over the incredibly flawed anthrax investigation.
The U.S. Government Accountability Office says the FBI’s investigation was “flawed and inaccurate”. The investigation was so bogus that a senator called for an “independent review and assessment of how the FBI handled its investigation in the anthrax case.”
The head of the FBI’s anthrax investigation says the whole thing was a sham. He says that the FBI higher-ups “greatly obstructed and impeded the investigation”, that there were “politically motivated communication embargoes from FBI Headquarters”.
The FBI’s anthrax investigation head said that the FBI framed scientist Bruce Ivins. On July 6, 2006, he filed a whistleblower report of mismanagement to the FBI’s Deputy Director pursuant to Title 5, United States Code, Section 2303, which noted:
(j) the FBI’s fingering of Bruce Ivins as the anthrax mailer; and, (k) the FBI’s subsequent efforts to railroad the prosecution of Ivins in the face of daunting exculpatory evidence.
Following the announcement of its circumstantial case against Ivins, Defendants DOJ andFBI crafted an elaborate perception management campaign to bolster their assertion of Ivins’ guilt. These efforts included press conferences and highly selective evidentiary presentations which were replete with material omissions.
In other words, Mueller presided over the attempt to frame an innocent man (and see this).
Unsure If Government Can Assassinate U.S. Citizens Living On U.S. Soil
Rather than saying “of course not!”, Mueller said that he wasn’t sure whether Obama had the right to assassinate Americans living on American soil.
Constitutional expert Jonathan Turley commented at the time:
One would hope that the FBI Director would have a handle on a few details guiding his responsibilities, including whether he can kill citizens without a charge or court order.
He appeared unclear whether he had the power under the Obama Kill Doctrine or, in the very least, was unwilling to discuss that power. For civil libertarians, the answer should be easy: “Of course, I do not have that power under the Constitution.”
Crippled Investigations of Financial Fraud … Helping to Allow the Great Recession
In a 2013 piece entitled “Mueller: I Crippled FBI Effort v. White-Collar Crime“, the country’s top white collar crime expert, William Black – who put over 1,000 top S&L executives in jail for fraud, and is a professor of law and economics at the University of Missouri – wrote:
The FBI never developed “an intelligence operation” “to analyze threats” of even epidemic fraud.
White-collar crime investigations and prosecutions are massive money makers that reduce the deficit, but Mueller, Holder, and Obama refuse to make these points and refuse to prosecute the elite bank fraudsters. On substantive and political grounds their actions are either inexplicable or all too explicable and support my readers’ belief that the FBI leadership no longer wants to investigate and prosecute the elite bank frauds.
This is important because:
§ Fraud CAUSED the Great Depression and the 2008 financial crisis
§ Numerous Nobel prize winning economists say that we need to prosecute fraud, or else the economy will never truly stabilize
§ After the Great Depression, the government cracked down on Wall Street fraud. But Mueller and other Bush and Obama administration officials let it slide
(There are a lot of people more responsible for the Great Recession – and for lack of reform afterwards – than Mueller. For example, Mueller’s boss (the FBI is a part of the Department of Justice) made it more or less official policy not to prosecute financial fraud. But this is another example of Mueller dropping the ball.
Spying on Americans
Mueller participated in one of the greatest expansions of mass surveillance in human history.
As we noted in 2013:
NBC News reports:
NBC News has learned that under the post-9/11 Patriot Act, the government has been collecting records on every phone call made in the U.S.
On March 2011, FBI Director Robert Mueller told the Senate Judiciary Committee:
We have put in place technological improvements relating to the capabilities of a database to pull together past emails and future ones as they come in so that it does not require an individualized search.
Remember, the FBI – unlike the CIA – deals with internal matters within the borders of the United States.
On May 1st of this year, former FBI agent Tim Clemente told CNN’s Erin Burnett that all present and past phone calls were recorded:
BURNETT: Tim, is there any way, obviously, there is a voice mail they can try to get the phone fcompanies to give that up at this point. It’s not a voice mail. It’s just a conversation. There’s no way they actually can find out what happened, right, unless she tells them?
CLEMENTE: “No, there is a way. We certainly have ways in national security investigations to find out exactly what was said in that conversation. It’s not necessarily something that the FBI is going to want to present in court, but it may help lead the ainvestigation and/or lead to questioning of her. We certainly can find that out.
BURNETT: “So they can actually get that? People are saying, look, that is incredible.
CLEMENTE: “No, welcome to America. All of that stuff is being captured as we speak whether we know it or like it or not.”
The next day, Clemente again appeared on CNN, this time with host Carol Costello, and she asked him about those remarks. He reiterated what he said the night before but added expressly that “all digital communications in the past” are recorded and stored:
NSA whistleblowers say that this means that the NSA collects “word for word” all of our communications.
Colleen Rowley writes:
Mueller’s FBI was also severely criticized by Department of Justice Inspector Generals finding the FBI overstepped the law improperly serving hundreds of thousands of “national security letters” to obtain private (and irrelevant) metadata on citizens, and for infiltrating nonviolent anti-war groups under the guise of investigating “terrorism.”
Covering Up for Turkish Terrorists
Sibel Edmonds, a former FBI translator who has been deemed credible by the Department of Justice’s Inspector General, several senators (free subscription required), and a coalition of prominent conservative and liberal groups, who the ACLU described as “The most gagged person in the history of the United States of America”, and who famed Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg says possesses information “far more explosive than the Pentagon Papers”, says that Mueller covered up a Turkish terror network.
Edmonds also said that Mueller gagged her and other whistleblowers.
Rather than being “above the fray”, Mueller is an authoritarian and water-carrier for the status quo and the powers-that-be.
As Coleen Rowley puts it:
Mueller was chosen as Special Counsel not because he has integrity but because he will do what the powerful want him to do.
Mueller didn’t speak the truth about a war he knew to be unjustified. He didn’t speak out against torture. He didn’t speak out against unconstitutional surveillance. And he didn’t tell the truth about 9/11. He is just “their man.”
It’s sad that political partisanship is so blinding and that so few people remember the actual sordid history.
Supported videos include:
Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.