webodec3ARCHIVEPreview
Open in TheBrain

Am Oversight

PRIMARY 7 26 # AMD IMPORT

GINNI CLARENCE?!

FAKE ELECTORS

see activist suppression

VOTER SUPPRESS

VOUGHT MILLER TRUMP

SEE TRANSPARENCY RULE OF LAW?

-=-=

an 7 26

A jurist appointed by President Donald Trump to protect him, Florida’s Judge Aileen Cannon, has been described as a “partisan hack” and blasted by House Democrats. Now she is facing a new challenge: Calls to release a report by former special counsel Jack Smith that she has worked to suppress.

“A public advocacy group is urging a federal court of appeals to use any means available and necessary to unseal the second volume of former special counsel Jack Smith's final report on his criminal investigations into President Donald Trump,” wrote Law and Crime's Colin Kalmbacher on Tuesday. “Late last year, U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who was appointed by Trump during his first term, issued two orders related to the long-running dispute over the second volume.”

Kalmbacher added, “In the first order, Cannon denied efforts to intervene by the Knight First Amendment Institute and transparency-focused nonprofit American Oversight. In her second order, Cannon acknowledged ‘any former or current party’ may move ‘for leave to intervene.’”

While Trump has previously praised Cannon for doing everything in her power to keep Smith’s report from coming to light, the American Oversight and the Knight First Amendment Institute argue that there is a public interest in knowing their contents. They are citing the Freedom of Information Act as proof that Cannon must disclose the report’s contents.

"Appellees urge this Court to bar American Oversight's intervention in the district court based on a fundamental misunderstanding of American Oversight's interest as a prospective intervenor," their brief argued. "Because it had no other recourse to vindicate its rights under FOIA, Appellant sought intervention in the below proceedings—which were governed by federal criminal statutes."

It added, “American Oversight's statutory rights do not govern the underlying criminal proceedings, nor has it asserted any interest related to ‘the prosecution or nonprosecution’ of the former defendants. American Oversight's interest is more akin to that of media organizations that seek and are granted intervention in criminal cases for access to judicial records… FOIA does not govern the underlying criminal proceedings but provides American Oversight with a federal right, implicated by the district court's order barring the release of Volume II, to seek non-exempt public records from the federal government.”

The Trump administration has taken a special interest in keeping Smith’s report under wraps. In May they went after Carmen Mercedes Lineberger, the former managing assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District, for allegedly trying to email the documents to her personal account.

“The defendant concealed her actions by saving electronic copies of the government records in question under the misleading files names ‘chocolate cake recipe’ and ‘bundt cake recipe’ before electronically transmitting those records to her personal email accounts,” Trump’s Justice Department alleged in May. “As to the DOJ report, the indictment further alleges the defendant acted knowing that her transmission of the record outside DOJ directly violated the court order and impaired the proper administration of the underlying criminal prosecution.

-=-=

gmail 3 26 LI

SHARE

The Trump administration has recently filed motions to strike, or requests that a judge delete sections of lawsuits, in four of American Oversight’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits. This is an unusual tactic, and seems to be part of an effort to delay cases and avoid admitting damaging facts in court.

What are Trump administration lawyers doing?

If the government does not respond to a FOIA request, we often take them to court to get the information we are looking for. Often, our lawsuits begin with a section that includes key background facts about the records we are requesting, to explain why it is important for the public to have access to them.

In four of our recent cases — lawsuits that are seeking records related to the $400 million jetQatar gifted to Donald Trump, the whistleblower allegations that a top official defied court orders to deport a planeful of people to a prison in El Salvador, the FBIreview of Jeffrey Epstein files, and interviews with Trump in the Epstein investigation — the government’s attorneys have asked judges to delete the background facts in our lawsuits. In these cases, they claim this information is “irrelevant” and “scandalous” — even though the information we include is often from government sources.

Here’s a sampling of the information that the administration has attempted to strike:

Why is this so unusual?

Motions to strike are rarely used and judges typically don’t like them.

According to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f), a judge can remove “an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter” in a lawsuit. But even the Trump administration admits in its legal briefings that “motions to strike are generally disfavored.”

Typically, it’s more important for the lawyers and judge to focus on whether the government has violated the law in not releasing requested records. A motion to strike is considered a delay tactic that interferes with that work.

Motions to strike are also considered extreme because they address a relatively minor issue with a “drastic remedy:” permanently deleting entire portions of a lawsuit.

The administration’s arguments for removing text are weak.

The administration’s lawyers have claimed that our complaints include “incendiary” allegations, but the language the administration has attempted to strike includes direct quotes from administration officials and reporting from reputable outlets.

We include this background information in our complaints because it is relevant to the case. This information can help us demonstrate why we need the documents as fast as possible, if the government’s search for records was sufficient, why the government’s justification for withholding documents is wrong, and why the government should have to pay our attorney fees.

So far, two federal judges already agree with us. In our lawsuit for records related to the FBI’s review of the Epstein files, Judge James Boasberg found that we “largely quote[d] administration officials” and that is “hardly scandalous or prejudicial.” Judge Boasberg ruled that it was best to keep the case moving by not requiring us to delete anything from our lawsuit. In our lawsuit for any interviews conducted with Trump as part of the Epstein investigation, Judge Timothy Kelly denied the motion to strike. We mostly “simply allege[d] that administration officials made certain publicly reported statements or took certain publicly reported actions,” he wrote. “And the allegations themselves are hardly scandalous or prejudicial.”

Why are government lawyers using this tactic?

The motions to strike are an attempt to avoid admitting damaging facts in court.

As part of a court case, defense lawyers are required to say whether the allegations in a lawsuit are true. That can include confirming or denying the information we include in our complaint.

In other words, a government attorney could be asked to confirm or deny reports about what’s going on in the Trump administration. Doing either of those things can put an attorney in a difficult situation. If the lawyers deny information that is accurate, they could face sanctions or even disbarment. If they confirm or correct facts they’re also at risk, especially if those facts could be embarrassing to the administration. For example, in a hearing regarding the wrongful removal of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, DOJ attorney Erez Reuveni confirmed that Abrego Garcia’s removal was an error. Later that night, the DOJ ordered Reuveni to file a brief that distorted that the removal was a mistake. After he declined, he was placed on administrative leave.

Asking the judge to strike these factual statements from our court cases could help government attorneys sidestep the issue.

Motions to strike also allow the Trump administration to delay responding to the substance of our lawsuits.

Our lawsuits argue that the government broke the law — specifically the Freedom of Information Act. The government has to respond to our lawsuit and argue that it didn’t do anything illegal — or, as is most often the case when we sue, the government must admit that it didviolate FOIA.

DOJ attorneys have their hands full defending a wide range of illegal Trump administration actions, such as deadly use of force by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents and the National Guard’s unlawful deployment to suppress peaceful protests. In some cases, a motion to strike might be a cheat code that gives the attorneys more time.

Instead of writing a detailed response straightforwardly addressing the allegations in our complaint, the DOJ attorneys can move to strike the sections included for context. That stops the case from moving forward until the judge makes a decision. Even if the judge eventually rejects their motion to strike — as Judge Boasberg and Judge Kelly did — the Trump administration attorneys bought themselves more time to write their briefs.

Luckily, the Trump administration’s attorneys have yet to be successful with this ploy. We will continue to fight against these delay tactics and push for the release of public records that could help hold the administration accountable.

Read more about the Trump administration’s use of motions to strike in Salon.

---

an 2 26

spox most transparent admin in hist while denying info access?

Before concluding his work as special counsel for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Jack Smith submitted a two-volume report on his federal prosecutions of Donald Trump — the first volume on his election interference case (which was assigned to Judge Tanya Chutkan), the second volume on his Mar-a-Lago documents case (which was assigned to Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee).

Volume 1 was released in January 2025, although Chutkan dismissed the election interference case without prejudice at Smith's request. After Trump defeated Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in the 2024 election, Smith cited DOJ's policy against prosecuting a sitting president when he made his request to Chutkan.

Volume 2, however, remains unreleased, and two groups — American Oversight and Columbia University's Knight First Amendment Institute — are urging the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to order Cannon to make it public in redacted form.

Law & Crime reporter Matt Naham, in an article published on February 10, explains, "The latter volume has never seen the outside of Cannon's chambers. Cannon, the Trump-appointed judge who threw out Trump's Espionage Act prosecution and ruled that Smith was unlawfully appointed as special counsel, has, for a calendar year, kept Volume 2 of Smith's report out of public view. At first, the rationale behind the injunction was preventing 'prejudice' to valet Waltine Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira Mar-a-Lago property manager, former Trump co-defendants who had active appeals. But those appeals went away when the Trump Administration dropped the cases, following Trump's inauguration, and so did the prospect that Nauta and de Oliveira will face charges in the future, according to the Knight Institute."

In a legal brief filed on February 9, the Knight First Amendment Institute and American Oversight told the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, "There is also no risk that a future administration will revive the charges, because the five-year statute of limitations that applies to the charges will expire in 2028, before President Trump leaves office. It is thus disingenuous for Nauta and De Oliveira to represent that they remain in 'jeopardy' and that as a result 'their due process rights remain a serious concern that strongly outweighs any interest that the Government or the public might have in the release of the Special Counsel's Report.'"

Cannon's injunction against the release of Volume 2 expires on February 24, and American Oversight is arguing that her reason for the injunction "no longer exists."

"Before the expiration date," Naham notes, "Trump and his former co-defendants have each supported Cannon issuing an order which would 'permanently' block the DOJ from releasing 'so-called Special Counsel' Smith's 'unlawfully prepared' report and destroy it."

Trump was facing four criminal indictments when he won the 2024 GOP presidential nomination: Smith's two federal cases, Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney Fani Willis' election interference/RICO case, and then-Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg Jr.'s hush money case. Trump was convicted on 34 criminal counts in Bragg's case, but all four cases were doomed when he won the 2024 election.In an official statement, American Oversight Executive Director Chioma Chukwu said the group "will not allow the president and his guard dogs to bury information that belongs to the American people."

Chukwu stated, "For more than a year, Judge Cannon has kept the Special Counsel's final report under seal, long after any legitimate claims by Trump's co-conspirators expired. By blocking our effort to challenge her gag order, the court handed President Trump a roadmap for burying the report through delay and procedural gamesmanship."

---

kath gorka ~

an 10 22

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has arguably become the second most prominent figure in the far-right MAGA movement — second only to former President Donald Trump. If Trump doesn’t run for president in the 2024 election, countless pundits have observed, DeSantis would have a very good shot at winning the Republican nomination. And DeSantis has become so prominent in his party that according tonewly obtained e-mails, he had lunch with a U.S. Supreme Court Justice in 2021: Clarence Thomas.

The e-mails were obtained by American Oversight under Florida’s open-records law and show DeSantis’ assistant coordinating thelunch, which was held at the U.S. Supreme Court on June 23, 2021. Four of Thomas’ clerks, according to the e-mails, attended.

In a May 20, 2021 e-mail, Thomas assistant Shean Kelly Makel wrote, “Justice Thomas will attend the June 23rd luncheon with Governor DeSantis and the Justice's four law clerks. Do you think that the Governor would mind coming to the Supreme Court for lunch? Technically we are still closed to the public but the clerks can order lunch from a local restaurant. Or they can dine at Capital Grille. Please let me know."

READ MORE: Ron DeSantis’ lack of 'bipartisan success' is the key to his popularity with MAGA voters: columnist

In a separate e-mail, dated June 1, 2021, Makel wrote, “The Justice and his law clerks will dine in the Natalie Rehnquist Dining Room from 12:00 -2:00 p.m. Would the Governor arrive with his security detail? If so, I would need his contact info for the security team here at the Court. I will let them handle the logistics on arriving to the Court, parking and, etc. Does the Governor have any food allergies? Or a restricted diet?"

Thomas is now the longest-serving justice on the U.S. Supreme Court. The Republican justice was nominated by the late President George H.W. Bush in 1991 after Justice Thurgood Marshall announced his retirement. Marshall, nominated by Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1967, was the first Black justice on the High Court — and Bush 41 nominated an African-American justice to replace an African-American justice. But while Marshall, who died in 1993, was a liberal, Thomas is a far-right social conservative known for embracing an ultra-strict version of Catholicism and for his staunch opposition to abortion and gay rights.

DeSantis, also known for being a far-right social conservative, served in the U.S. House of Representatives before narrowly defeating Democrat Andrew Gillum, a former Tallahassee mayor, in Florida’s 2018 gubernatorial race. While that race was quite close, the 2022 reelection is, according to polls, shaping up to be a much larger win for DeSantis. Some polls released in late October have shown DeSantis with double-digit leads over his Democratic challenger, Charlie Crist.

READ MORE: CREW demands 'immediate investigation' of Clarence and Ginni Thomas for possible 'conflicts of interest’

https://www.americanoversight.org/investigation/the-january-6-attack-on-the-u-s-capitol

On the afternoon of Jan. 6, 2021, as Congress was meeting to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election, a violent and :{heavily armed mob:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: of supporters of outgoing President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol. While lawmakers and staff were shepherded to secure locations or barricaded behind doors, the rioters pushed past severely outnumbered Capitol Police officers, breaking windows and vandalizing offices, many with disturbingly violent intentions toward members of Congress and Vice President Mike Pence for their having refused to succumb to Trump’s attempts to overturn the election in his favor. Five people were killed, including one Capitol Police officer who was beaten by rioters.

The :{attempted coup:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: :{was not:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: a spontaneous act. “The invasion of the U.S. Capitol … was stoked in plain sight,” *:{ProPublica :(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:*:{reported:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, with Trump supporters having for weeks discussed openly their plans for a violent overthrow. Their goal of stopping the election certification, based on unfounded conspiracy theories of widespread voter fraud, was :{encouraged by elected officials:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: like Rep. Mo Brooks, Rep. Paul Gosar, Sen. Josh Hawley, and Sen. Ted Cruz. The biggest instigator, of course, was the former president himself, who for months had fanned the flames of conspiracy and earlier that day :{urged the crowd:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: to march to the Capitol and “fight.”

But beyond the important issue of who was complicit in inciting the seditious and violent attack, questions remain about how the mob was able to so easily breach Capitol security and why it took so long to secure the building. Just 1,400 Capitol Police officers were on duty at the time, and National Guardsmen didn’t arrive until hours after the invasion began. As Americans watched the rioters storm through the building, news reports circulated that :{the Pentagon:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: — which has authority over the D.C. National Guard — :{and the president:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: had :{initially denied:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: :{requests for the deployment:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: :{of Guardsmen:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:. 

The delay in National Guard deployment has been at the center of ongoing unresolved questions about what was happening behind the scenes, including regarding the timeline of the deployment authorization. A Pentagon inspector general report said that the D.C. National Guard was informed of the authorization at 4:35 p.m. on Jan. 6, but the :{Guard maintained:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: it was not told until 5:08. (:{Documents we obtained:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: in early 2022 show that acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen sent an email at 4:27 p.m. saying that he had heard from Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy that the troops were on their way to the Capitol.) In court filings made in April 2022, the House select committee investigating the attack :{said that it was “clear”:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: that Trump had “never telephoned his Secretary of Defense that day to order deployment of National Guard, and never contacted any federal law enforcement agency to order security assistance to the Capitol Police.”

:{Public reporting:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: has revealed that, during the attack’s first three hours, Trump watched the violence play out on TV, ignoring calls from allies and others to call off the mob. Trump’s daughter and adviser, Ivanka Trump, reportedly pleaded with her father to act and was :{later called to testify:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: before the select committee.

In the days following the attack, federal law enforcement did not brief the public. Information about the events was shared largely through media reports and interviews, in which various :{officials pointed fingers:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:. :{Capitol Police:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: — an agency with a budget larger than that of most major-city police forces — are part of the legislative branch, thus :{not subject:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: to the Freedom of Information Act, and have been heavily criticized in the past for not releasing information to the public.

Since the attack, American Oversight has obtained several important public records that shed more light on the events of Jan. 6 and the surrounding days. :{Justice Department call logs:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: show a number of calls between top department officials and the White House on the afternoon and evening of the attack, and timelines from the Secret Service detail agency activities that day, including those undertaken by agents who were part of Vice President Mike Pence’s detail. We also obtained a :{Jan. 5 Secret Service briefing:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: on planned demonstrations around D.C., as well as a note about a :{Jan. 3 call:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: with top officials from the Departments of Defense, the Army, Justice, the Interior, and Homeland Security.

In March 2021, American Oversight obtained copies of the fake electoral slates from Trump supporters in seven states in support of Trump after the November 2020 election. The documents, part of the former president’s desperate bid to cling to power in his final months in office, drew significant scrutiny in :{the House’s investigation:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: of the efforts to disrupt the congressional certification of Joe Biden’s win.

By the spring of 2022, the select committee had spoken to :{more than 650 witnesses:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: and issued nearly 100 subpoenas for testimony. In March 2022, the *Washington Post* and CBS News reported that records turned over to the committee from the White House showed a gap of more than seven hours in Trump’s phone records from that day, including during times that the president made and received calls that had since been :{publicly reported:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:. 

In April, the select committee obtained more than 100 emails from Trump lawyer John Eastman, after a federal judge ruled against Eastman’s assertion of attorney-client privilege. In his ruling, the judge wrote that Trump had “more likely than not” committed felony obstruction in his efforts to overturn his loss. But numerous questions still remain about the planning of and response to the riot.

As the public demands answers, American Oversight has filed dozens of FOIA requests and six federal lawsuits against multiple agencies to learn more about how the federal government — including the Defense Department, the White House, and federal law enforcement agencies — responded to the attack. We’ve requested related communications and directives, and are also seeking any assessments about the threat of militia violence that were prepared in advance of the attack by the FBI, the Pentagon, or the Department of Homeland Security. We are also seeking the communications of top Defense and Army officials with Trump or Vice President Pence, as well as :{officials’ communications with Fox News hosts:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: and Trump campaign associates.

am oversight docs

https://www.americanoversight.org/document/nara-records-regarding-invalid-elector-slates

https://www.americanoversight.org/news-roundup-the-wild-creative-fake-electors-scheme

:{Fake Electors and the Jan. 6 Investigation

}:“Kind of wild/creative” — that’s how a Trump-allied lawyer, in an early December 2020 email, characterized the scheme to submit fake electoral certificates as a way to prevent the certification of Joe Biden’s victory.

According to the Times, Wilenchik had helped coordinate the fake certificate from Trump supporters in Arizona. Many of the same Trump associates who appear in the emails reviewed by the Times also figure into subpoenas issued last month to Arizona Senate President Karen Fann and state Sen. Kelly Townsend.

The subpoenas to Fann and Townsend, reported the Post, “show the breadth of the criminal investigation by the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington,” which :{Attorney General Merrick Garland said:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: was “the most wide-ranging” in the history of the Justice Department.

Meanwhile, the House Jan. 6 committee, which is considering issuing a subpoena :{to Ginni Thomas:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, is also expanding its investigation :{into Trump’s cabinet:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, having already interviewed :{Steve Mnuchin:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:. It is also in discussion :{with Mike Pompeo:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: for his testimony. Here are more headlines related to the investigation:

:{‘Absolutely No Evidence of Fraud’

}:During a Thursday hearing in one of American Oversight’s lawsuits seeking public records from the partisan investigation ofWisconsin’s 2020 election, Judge Valerie Bailey-Rihn said that the our litigation revealed the inquiry has shown :{“absolutely no evidence of election fraud.”:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:

Lies about voter fraud have maintained a strong hold on conservatives in Wisconsin, where the wider effort to undermine faith in democracy is, as the *:{New Yorker:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:*:{’s Dan Kaufman wrote:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: this week, “part of a national Republican strategy to take control of election administration and to make it harder to vote.”

Of course, voter-suppression efforts aren’t limited to Wisconsin. Here are headlines related to voting rights in other states:

==

https://www.americanoversight.org/entity/indiana-attorney-general/page/2

RECORDS REQUEST TO THE INDIANA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR COMMUNICATIONS WITH AMERICA FIRST LEGAL...RECORDS REQUEST TO THE INDIANA OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SEEKING COMMUNICATIONS OF ATTORNEY GENERAL TODD ROKITA AND SOLICITOR GENERAL THOMAS FISHER WITH AMERICA FIRST LEGAL.

May 5, 2022

Records request to the Indiana Office of the Attorney General seeking communications of Attorney General Todd Rokita with associates of America First Legal.

Read more

RECORDS REQUEST TO INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR COMMUNICATIONS WITH SELECT HERITAGE FOUNDATION STAFF AND MEMBERS OF THE ELECTION LAW WORKING GROUP

March 7, 2022

Records request to Indiana Attorney General Rokita seeking communications with Heritage Foundation staffer Alexander Phipps and prominent members of the Election Law Working Group.

Read more

RECORDS REQUEST TO OFFICE OF THE INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL SEEKING AG ROKITA’S COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING PROMINENT RAGA FUNDERS

June 16, 2021

Records request to the Office of the Indiana Attorney General seeking Attorney General Todd Rokita's communications with and about prominent funders of the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA). Rokita was recently elected to serve on RAGA's Executive Committee.

Read more

RECORDS REQUEST TO THE OFFICE OF THE INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL SEEKING EMAILS WITH HERITAGE FOUNDATION AND ITS ELECTION LAW WORKING GROUP

June 4, 2021

Records request to the Office of the Indiana Attorney General seeking Attorney General Todd Rokita's email communications with the Heritage Foundation and its Election Law Working Group.

Read more

RECORDS REQUEST TO INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING STATE INVESTIGATION INTO BIG TECH

April 14, 2021

Records request to the Office of the Indiana Attorney General seeking communications with other state attorneys general and select external groups concerning a state investigation launched in April 2021 into the business practices of big tech companies.

Read more

RECORDS REQUEST TO INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR COMMUNICATIONS WITH ATTORNEYS WHO FORMULATED TEXAS’ ELECTION LAWSUIT PLAN

March 18, 2021

Request to the Indiana Attorney General seeking communications with the Trump campaign-affiliated attorneys who formulated the plan for Texas to sue states in an attempt to nullify their impending electoral votes. This request also seeks external communications concerning Texas' lawsuit.

Read more

RECORDS REQUEST TO INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR LEGAL ANALYSIS OF TEXAS LAWSUIT SEEKING TO OVERTURN 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION RESULTS

February 16, 2021

Records request to the Indiana Attorney General seeking any legal analyses of the lawsuit Texas v. Pennsylvania, which sought to overturn the 2020 presidential election results in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Indiana signed on to a joint brief supporting TexasÕ position.

Read more

REQUEST TO THE INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL SEEKING COMMUNICATIONS WITH DOJ AND STATE AGS WHO BACKED TEXAS EFFORT TO OVERTURN ELECTION RESULTS, AND RELATED MEETING RECORDS

February 8, 2021

Request to the Indiana Attorney General seeking communications with the U.S. Department of Justice and state attorneys general who backed Texas' effort to overturn the presidential election results in various states. We're also seeking any related meeting or call records.

Read more

RECORDS REQUEST TO IDAHO ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE FOR RECORDS RELATED TO RLDF’S INVOLVEMENT WITH JAN. 6 RALLY OR INSURRECTION

January 1, 2021

Request request to the Idaho Attorney General's Office seeking any investigative details and findings concerning the Rule of Law Defense Fund's involvement with the Jan. 6, 2021, pro-Trump rally or the ensuing Capitol riot.

PRR TO THE INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE REPUBLICAN ATTORNEYS GENERAL ASSOCIATION OR THE RULE OF LAW DEFENSE FUND

April 21, 2020

Public records request to the Indiana Attorney General seeking communications between select senior officials and any representative of the Republican Attorneys General Association or the Rule of Law Defense Fund.

https://www.americanoversight.org/investigation/state-proposals-to-restrict-protests

In the wake of Black Lives Matter protests against police brutality that swept the nation in recent years, multiple state legislatures have considered — or have already enacted — efforts aimed at curtailing protest rights.

This push has only ramped up since 2020, and some conservative leaders have even used the violence carried out by Trump supporters and far-right extremists — including the storming of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 — to justify legislation that would crack down on civil disobedience.

Proponents of these laws often conflate peaceful demonstrations with violent riots that only rarely emerge after protests. Proposals have included increasing penalties on common protest tactics, such as the toppling of monuments to the Confederacy, and essentially criminalizing demonstrations that bother bystanders.

Many also provide legal protections for police — or even private citizens — who respond to protests with violence, such as civil and criminal liability shields for those who hit protesters with their cars.

Vehicular attacks on protesters are an increasingly common tactic for those seeking to disrupt anti-racist protests. In some cases, these attacks have been deadly. Heather Heyer was murdered in 2017 while protesting against a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Va., and Summer Taylor was run over on a closed Seattle highway in the summer of 2020.

American Oversight is investigating several of these anti-protest efforts, including a Florida law signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis on April 19, 2021. The law carries harsher penalties for crimes carried out in relation to protests. It also bans demonstrators from blocking roadways, while shielding drivers from criminal liability if they hit protesters. Another driver liability shield was signed into law in Oklahoma on April 21.

We’re also investigating legislation in Missouri, Iowa, and other states. The Missouri bill, which has passed both chambers of the state legislature, would similarly protect drivers who hit demonstrators. We’ve requested communications about the proposal from its legislative sponsors, Missouri state Sen. Rick Brattin and Rep. Adam Schnelting.

In Iowa, we’re requesting communications from Gov. Kim Reynolds’ office about a law enforcement package she backs that includes anti-protest provisions and a liability shield for drivers who hit demonstrators. The legislation has also passed both chambers of the Iowa legislature.

New Records About Trump Administration’s Response to Summer 2020 Racial Justice Protests

June 17, 2021

The documents include a Secret Service timeline referencing the deployment of tear gas against peaceful protesters on June 1, as well as communications about the federal response to protests in Portland, Ore.

:{Investigations Update: Florida Vaccine Distribution, Anti-Protest Measures, and Trump’s Efforts to Overturn Georgia’s Election Results:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

February 9, 2021

See the latest in our investigations into the coronavirus pandemic response and into officials’ attempts to interfere with democracy.

---

May 19, 2021

**Records Request to the Iowa Governor’s Office for Communications Related to Anti-Protest Bills**

Iowa Office of the Governor

FOIA REQUEST

May 10, 2021

:{Request to:{ Oklahoma Governor:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}: for Communications Related to Anti-Protest Bills and Communications with Bills’ Sponsors:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Oklahoma Office of the Governor

FOIA REQUEST

May 10, 2021

:{FOIA to:{ Space Force:(style="background-color:#ffff66;"):}: Seeking Records Regarding Incidents of White Supremacist or Pro-Nazi Activity Among Military Personnel:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Department of Defense, DOD - United States Space Force

FOIA REQUEST

May 3, 2021

:{Records Request to Iowa Governor’s Office for Communications Related to Anti-Protest Bills:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Iowa Office of the Governor

FOIA REQUEST

March 19, 2021

:{Missouri Rep. Schnelting’s Communications Concerning Bill Protecting Drivers who Hit Protestors from Liability:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Missouri House of Representatives

AGENCY RECORD

March 3, 2021

:{Missouri Sen. Brattin Communications Concerning Bill Protecting Drivers who Hit Protestors from Liability:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Missouri Senate

AGENCY RECORD

February 23, 2021

:{Florida House of Representatives Records Regarding Bill to Shield Drivers from Liability if They Hit Protestors:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder;background-color:#ffff66;"):}:

Florida House of Representatives

AGENCY RECORD

February 23, 2021

:{Records Request to Missouri Rep. Schnelting for Communications Concerning Bill Protecting Drivers Who Hit Protesters from Liability:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Missouri House of Representatives

FOIA REQUEST

February 23, 2021

:{Records Request to Missouri Sen. Brattin for Communications Concerning Bill Protecting Drivers Who Hit Protesters from Liability:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Missouri Senate

FOIA REQUEST

February 22, 2021

:{Florida Senate Records Regarding Bill to Protect Drivers from Liability if they Hit Protesters:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Florida Senate

AGENCY RECORD

February 8, 2021

:{Records Request to Florida House of Representatives Regarding Bill to Shield Drivers from Liability If They Hit Protesters:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Florida House of Representatives

FOIA REQUEST

February 8, 2021

:{Records Request to Florida Senate Regarding Bill to Shield Drivers from Liability If They Hit Protesters:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;font-weight:bolder"):}:

Florida Senate

FOIA REQUEST

February 8, 2021

**Records Request to Florida Governor’s Office Regarding Bill to Shield Drivers from Liability If They Hit Protesters**

Florida Office of the Governor      FOIA REQUEST

===

https://www.americanoversight.org/ginni-thomas-republican-connections-raise-ethics-concerns-for-scotus

The activism of prominent conservative Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, has for years raised questions about partisan influence on the judicial system and ethics in the Supreme Court. American Oversight is actively investigating Ginni Thomas’ connections and influence in right-wing networks and their potential impact on Justice Thomas’ ethics decisions. Records we have obtained through public records requests reveal Ginni Thomas’ ties to the Trump administration as well as evidence of Justice Thomas’ contact with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

As detailed in a recent :{update:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, emails between Ginni Thomas and DeSantis, obtained by American Oversight and reported on by *Politico*, suggest that Justice Thomas may have been in :{regular contact:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: with the Republican governor. On June 10, 2021, Ginni Thomas :{reached out:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: to DeSantis’ scheduling office to invite him to speak to a “coalition” of “conservative patriots.” Thomas :{explained:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: that the governor would know her because her “husband has been in contact with him … on various things of late.”

Ginni Thomas said the “cone of silence coalition” of “about 83 national leaders” was formerly known asGroundswelland included former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows among its attendees. The group, now called the :{Third Century Group:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear;background-color:#ffff66;"):}: (TC Group), was focused on “the greatest threats and opportunities to constitutional governance,” Thomas :{wrote:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: in her email, “and admittedly we are weary about the GOP divisions, lack of courage and lack of leadership.” Thomas also wrote that the group met “through the help of [conservative organization] Judicial Watch.”

DeSantis was eventually :{scheduled:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: to present during the group’s July 21 virtual meeting. According to an :{email:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: from a vice president at the Heritage Foundation who was planning to introduce the governor at the meeting, DeSantis was invited to speak “about whatever is on his mind in terms of national politics” and the attendees were “very concerned about [critical race theory], election integrity and immigration.”

:{The Coalition Formerly Known as Groundswell

}:Formerly known as Groundswell, TC Group is a secretive right-wing strategy group led by Ginni Thomas and others, which has been bringing together conservative activists for :{nearly a decade:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:. Members have :{included:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: former Trump chief strategist Stephen Bannon and former Trump National Security Adviser John Bolton, among others. The network was :{well-connected to the Trump administration:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: — in 2019, Thomas and others :{compiled lists:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: of anti-Trump officials in executive agencies for the administration to dismiss and replace with Trump allies.

Public records obtained by American Oversight show the degree of access Thomas and her coalition had in the Trump administration. A calendar entry from :{March 5, 2020:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, shows Russ Vought, then the deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, was scheduled to have “Breakfast with Ginni Thomas.”

On :{Dec. 10, 2018:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, Thomas, on behalf of her lobbying firm Liberty Consulting, invited a Department of Health and Human Services official — likely :{Steven Wagner:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, the director of the Administration for Children and Families — to a “Conversation and Strategic Discussion” with conservative commentatorJordan Peterson. The invitation noted that the event would be “closed to press and off the record” and that “a primary goal of this meeting is to determine specific action steps/solutions for winning back the next generation.” The reception was hosted by Thomas along with conservative Christian activist Bill Dallas and the Heritage Foundation’s Bridgett Wagner. The :{list of participants:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: included prominent conservatives.

On :{Aug. 22, 2018:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, Neomi Rao, then the administrator of OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, was scheduled to have a “Groundswell Mtg.” It is not confirmed whether this is Ginni Thomas’ Groundswell. Early in her career, Rao served as a law clerk for Justice Thomas on the Supreme Court, and in 2019, she was appointed by Trump to serve as federal judge in Washington, D.C. 

:{Thomas’ Activism Raises Judicial Ethics Questions

}:Ginni Thomas’ career as a prominent conservative activist, more heavily involved in politics :{than any other spouse:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: of a Supreme Court justice in history, has for years raised concerns among :{legal experts:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: who note that justices typically avoid even being seen as partisan. Through her activism, Ginni Thomas has taken stances on issues that have come before the Supreme Court, such as on abortion, gun rights, and the :{Affordable Care Act:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, and recently took on major role in challenging Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election. Justice Thomas’ repeated :{failure to recuse himself:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: on multiple matters relevant to his wife’s advocacy, especially as the court hears increasingly politically polarized cases, has been the subject of scrutiny. 

Recently, Ginni Thomas was among the conservatives who :{signed a letter:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: criticizing the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. A month later, Justice Thomas was the only Supreme Court justice to support Trump’s request to block that committee from accessing White House records. 

Ginni Thomas also played a role in challenging the 2020 election results as a leader of the conservative Council for National Policy (CNP), according to the *New York Times*. Following the November 2020 election, CNP directed its members to :{spread misinformation about the election:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: and pressured Republican lawmakers in Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania to challenge the election results by awarding their states’ electoral votes to Trump. In a newsletter, CNP’s political advocacy arm :{advised:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}:, “There is historical, legal precedent for Congress to count a slate of electors different from that certified by the Governor of the state.” :{Fake electoral certificates:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: submitted by Trump allies in swing states to Congress to dispute Biden’s victory were obtained by American Oversight last year.

American Oversight continues to investigate Ginni Thomas’ connections and influence. We have filed records requests seeking communications between Thomas and federal agencies during the Trump administration, and in January 2022, we submitted public records requests to attorneys generals and governors across the country for communications with both Ginni Thomas and Justice Thomas.

 ===

https://www.americanoversight.org/investigation/rick-perrys-energy-industry-connections-in-the-u-s-and-abroad

Before being selected to head the Department of Energy in President Donald Trump’s administration, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry ran for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, where he benefited from millions of dollars in campaign spending by the energy industry. One donor was Dallas billionaire Kelcy Warren, the CEO of Energy Transfer Partners,who gave a pro-Perry PAC $6 million. 

Another longtime Perry backer was Michael Bleyzer, whom :{Perry recommended:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: in May 2019 for the board of Ukraine’s state-owned natural gas company, Naftogaz. A little more than a month later, :{Ukraine awarded an oil and gas exploration deal:(style="box-sizing:inherit;transition-duration:0.2s;transition-property:background-color, border-color, box-shadow, color, opacity, text-shadow, transform;transition-timing-function:linear"):}: to Bleyzer and his partner.

The energy industry connections went further than that, though. Prior to his confirmation, Perry also resigned from the boards of Sunoco Logistics Partners and Energy Transfer Partners, both developers of the Dakota Access Pipeline. One of Perry’s former top advisers, Jeff Miller, raised money for President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign and ran a lobbying shop that counted Energy Transfer Partners among its clients.

As secretary, Perry attended energy and commerce events in Kentucky with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a vocal opponent of stronger energy regulations. And Perry’s energy connections weren’t just professional — his son, Griffin Perry, helps lead oil and gas investment firm Grey Rock Energy Partners, a company that former Sec. Perry was an investor in before joining the administration.

Perry’s business and industry ties weren’t limited to energy, either. In 2016, Perry joined the board of Celltex Therapeutics, a stem cell company through which he had previously undergone “experimental back surgery.” The company was founded by David G. Eller, a Perry donor, and had moved its operations to Mexico in 2013. But a 2017 Texas law could open the door for the company to again provide treatment in the U.S. After resigning from the Celltex board and recusing himself from matters related to the company, Perry’s wife joined the board.

In November 2019, Perry resigned to be replaced by his deputy, Dan Brouillette, who had been involved in many of the administration’s more controversial energy policies. But even with Perry out, American Oversight continued to investigate the role special or private interests may have played in the administration’s energy policy.

==

https://crooksandliars.com/2021/09/newly-released-documents-show-az-fraudit

it is not like we didn’t already know that the so-called audit is a fraudit. But the American Oversight group has recently obtained thousands of pages of records related to the “audit” as the result of a public records lawsuit.

American Oversight is still reviewing the records. VICE News notes that the trove includes communications that suggest Donald Trump wanted to fund it and that his allies were involved from the start.

one prominent Trump ally who turns up in the documents is Trump’s former chief of staff and former RNC chair Reince Priebus. American Oversight found that audit spokesman Randy Pullen texted Priebus in December, before Pullen was officially involved in the audit.

That month, Pullen texted Priebus to tell him about the potential for a “Forensic audit,” and in March asked Priebus for “suggestions on election audit firms.” (Priebus said he would check.) Another text from Pullen to [AZ Republican Committee’s Bruce] Ash, sent on March 8, appears to reference Priebus: “I texted Reince and ask if he would like to help out on the audit,” Pullen said, then followed up to say they were speaking later that morning.

Trump lawyers also show up in the documents. They communicated with with OAN “reporter” Christina Bobb, who helped launch the fraudit, helped fund it and was given special access to its proceedings. More from American Oversight:

In December, according to records previously obtained by American Oversight, One America News reporter Christina Bobb — who later began raising money for the “audit” — provided Fann [Arizona's Senate president] with purported “evidence” of voter fraud, writing that Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani had “asked me to send you these declarations.” The newly released records include a group text from March 31 involving Fann and Bobb, with Giuliani also included, in which Fann passes along a document with a title that began “Pres. Fann audit hiring.”

Another Trump lawyer, Cleta Mitchell, was also looped in on a number of communications, including an Aug. 2 email chain started by Scott Sigman, a Pennsylvania attorney who appears to be handling the issuing of checks related to the “audit.” Sigman emailed Mitchell, Logan, Pullen, and Thomas Datwyler (the treasurer of a group called the American Voting Rights Foundation) seeking signatures for payments.

Then there is Shiva Ayyadurai, aka “Dr. Shiva,” an anti-vaxxer, pro-Trumper who dubiously claims he invented email and has falsely accused Dr. Anthony Fauci of being hellbent on forced and mandatory vaccines. American Oversight reported that its newly-obtained documents include a signed contract between Cyber Ninjas, the unqualified firm conducting the audit, and Ayyadurai.

Priebus plans to bring Dr. Shiva to Wisconsin for its "investigation":

Last month, Priebus reportedly said during an interview that the Wisconsin investigation would be bringing in “Dr. Shiva.” https://t.co/232ivCy3ol

— American Oversight (@weareoversight) September 1, 2021

Some of the frauditors made some darned good money, too!

Some of the positions paid up to $125/hour. pic.twitter.com/RPY7XYpymB

— TRAPEZOID OF DISCOVERY (@get_innocuous) September 1, 2021

There’s still plenty left to be discovered. VICE notes that 2,500 of the Arizona Senate’s most sensitive documents, including almost all direct communications with Cyber Ninjas and CEO Doug Logan, have been withheld as privileged. Meanwhile, you can dive into the documents already released here.

https://www.americanoversight.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/DOJ-19-0160-1.pdf

Charles Smiroldo

FOIA Coordinator

Law and Policy Section

Environment and Natural Resources Division

PO Box 7415

Ben Franklin Station

Washington, DC 20044-7415

FOIARouting.ENRD@usdoj.gov

Re: Freedom of Information Act Request

Dear Mr. Smiroldo:

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, and the implementing

regulations of the Department of Justice (DOJ), 28 C.F.R. Part 16, American Oversight makes the

following request for records.

In October 2018, Jeffrey Bossert Clark—critic of climate change policy and former British

Petroleum attorney—was confirmed to serve as Assistant Attorney General of the Department of

Justice’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD).

1

He replaced Jeffrey Wood, a

former coal lobbyist who had run the ENRD as Acting Assistant Attorney General since January

2017,

2

and who now serves as Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General.

American Oversight seeks to shed light on any outside influence exerted on ENRD as well as

DOJ’s efforts to mitigate potential conflicts of interest posed by former employers and clients.

Requested Records

American Oversight requests that DOJ produce the following within twenty business days:

1) All email communications (including email messages, attachments, calendar entries, or

calendar invitations) between (1) Jeffrey Bossert Clark and anyone acting on his behalf—

1

Marianne Lavelle, Senate Confirms BP Oil Spill Lawyer, Climate Policy Foe as Government’s

Top Environmental Attorney, INSIDE CLIMATE NEWS, Oct. 11, 2018,

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/11102018/oil-spill-lawyer-jeffrey-bossert-clark-confirmed-topenvironment-attorney-climate-change-policy-chamber-commerce. 2

Lee Fang, Donald Trump Puts Coal Lobbyist in Charge of Prosecuting Environmental Crimes,

THE INTERCEPT, Jan. 27, 2017, https://theintercept.com/2017/01/27/coal-doj-trump/.

DOJ-19-0160 2

such as a Chief of Staff, Executive Assistant, Administrative Assistant, or Scheduler—and

(2) any person representing the entities below:

a. Kirkland & Ellis LLP (@kirkland.com)

b. The Federalist Society (@fedsoc.org)

c. Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (@ahrinet.org)

d. Allstate Insurance Company (@allstate.com)

e. Axiall Corporation (@axiall.com, @westlake.com)

f. BHP Billiton Ltd (@bhp.com)

g. BP America (@bp.com)

h. Caesars Entertainment Operating Company (@caesars.com)

i. Consumers Research (@consumersresearch.org)

j. Dow Chemical Company (@dow.com)

k. Exelon Corporation (@exeloncorp.com)

l. Gavin Power LLC (@gavinpowerccr.com)

m. General Motors (@gm.com)

n. Health Care Service Corporation (@hcsc.com)

o. Hitachi Ltd (@hitachi.us)

p. Mitsubishi Motors Corporation (@mitsubishi-motors.com, @mitsubishicars.com)

q. Syngenta Corporation (@syngenta.com)

r. Blackstone Group (@blackstone.com)

s. Volkswagen Group of America (@volkswagengroupofamerica.com, @vw.com)

t. American Enterprise Institute (@aei.org)

u. Americans for Prosperity (@americansforprosperity.org)

v. American Legislative Exchange Council (@alec.org)

w. Beacon Hill Institute (@beaconhill.org)

x. British Petroleum (@bp.com)

y. Caelus Energy (@caelusenergy.com)

z. Cato Institute (@cato.org)

aa. Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (@cfact.org)

bb. Koch Industries (@kochind.com)

cc. Competitive Enterprise Institute (@cei.org)

dd. Energy and Environmental Legal Institute (@eelegal.org)

ee. The Heartland Institute (@heartland.org)

ff. Heritage Foundation (@heritage.org)

gg. Institute for Energy Research (@instituteforenergyresearch.org)

hh. Manhattan Institute for Policy Research (@manhattan-institute.org)

2) All email communications (including email messages, attachments, calendar entries, or

calendar invitations) between (1) Jeffrey Wood and anyone acting on his behalf—such as a

Chief of Staff, Executive Assistant, Administrative Assistant, or Scheduler—and (2) any

person representing the entities below:

a. Balch & Bingham LLP (@balch.com)

b. Southern Company Services, Inc. (@southerncompany.com)

c. Alabama Power Company (@alabamapower.com)

d. AGL Resources Inc. (@aglresources.com)

DOJ-19-0160 3

e. Georgia Power Company (@georgiapower.com)

f. Gulf Power Company (@gulfpower.com)

g. Ingram Barge Company (@ingrambarge.com)

h. Ingram Industries Inc. (@ingrambarge.com)

i. Ingram Marine Group (@ingrambarge.com)

j. Luminant (@luminant.com)

k. Mississippi Power Company (@mississippipower.com)

l. Nuclear Energy Institute (@nei.org)

m. Pine Bluff Materials Co., LLC (@pbmat.com)

n. Pine Bluff Sand & Gravel Company (@pbsgc.com)

o. Regions Bank (@regions.com)

p. Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (@southerncompany.com)

q. Southern Communications Services (@southerncompany.com)

r. Southern Company (@southerncompany.com)

s. Southern Company Holdings, Inc. (@southerncompany.com)

t. Southern Electric Generating Company (@southerncompany.com)

u. Southern Power Company (@southerncompany.com)

v. TXU Energy (@txu.com)

w. Vistra Energy Corp (@vistraenergy.com)

x. American Enterprise Institute (@aei.org)

y. Americans for Prosperity (@americansforprosperity.org)

z. American Legislative Exchange Council (@alec.org)

aa. Beacon Hill Institute (@beaconhill.org)

bb. British Petroleum (@bp.com)

cc. Caelus Energy (@caelusenergy.com)

dd. Cato Institute (@cato.org)

ee. Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (@cfact.org)

ff. Koch Industries (@kochind.com)

gg. Competitive Enterprise Institute (@cei.org)

hh. Energy and Environmental Legal Institute (@eelegal.org)

ii. The Heartland Institute (@heartland.org)

jj. Heritage Foundation (@heritage.org)

kk. Institute for Energy Research (@instituteforenergyresearch.org)

ll. Manhattan Institute for Policy Research (@manhattan-institute.org)

3) All email communications (including email messages, attachments, calendar entries, or

calendar invitations) between (1) Jeffrey Wood or anyone acting on his behalf—such as a

Chief of Staff, Executive Assistant, Administrative Assistant, or Scheduler—and (2) any of

the following terms:

a. Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint

b. Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa

c. “Section 105 Clean Air Act”

d. “Southern Company”

e. “Edmund Pettus”

f. “Migratory Bird Treaty Act”

g. “Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act”

DOJ-19-0160 4

h. “Clean Power Plan”

i. CPP

j. “Mercury and Air Toxics Standards”

k. MATS

l. “Cross-State Air Pollution Rule”

m. CSPAR

n. “Birmingham Northern Beltline Project”

o. CERCLA

p. “Nuclear Waste Policy Act”

q. Backfit

r. “Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria”

s. ITAAC

t. “advanced nuclear reactors”

u. Luminant

v. Ameren

4) Any conflicts or ethics waivers or authorizations for Jeffrey Bossert Clark and Jeffrey

Wood, including authorizations pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 2635.502, as well as records

reflecting any recusal determination made or issued for the individual.

but the emails oct surprise dirty tricks

https://www.alternet.org/2020/10/pompeo/

uS. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is at the helm of an investigation and the Office of Special Counsel will determine if he illegally used his position to bolster politics on behalf of President Donald Trump.

The investigation into Pompeo was sparked from a Fox News interview conducted in early October where he teased about the release of emails connected to former secretary and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton "before the election," per Politico.

"We've got the emails, we're getting them out. We're going to get all this information out so the American people can see it," Pompeo told Fox News's Dana Perino during the interview. "We're doing it as fast as we can. I certainly think there'll be more to see before the election."

During that interview, Pompeo responded to pressure and criticism from Trump who had also discussed the Clinton emails that same day when he said: "They're in the State Department, but Mike Pompeo has been unable to get them out, which is very sad, actually. I'm not happy about him for that reason. He was unable to get them out. I don't know why. You're running the State Department, you get them out."

Pompeo insisted the release will come before the election, raising questions about whether or not he could be violating the Hatch Act, which "limits certain political activities of federal employees, as well as some state, D.C., and local government employees who work in connection with federally funded programs," according to the Office of Special Counsel's website.

"The law's purposes are to ensure that federal programs are administered in a nonpartisan fashion, to protect federal employees from political coercion in the workplace, and to ensure that federal employees are advanced based on merit and not based on political affiliation."

In a letter dated Friday, October 16, the watchdog group American Oversight expressed concern about Pompeo's remarks with Election Day just two weeks away. According to the group, Pompeo's remark "warrants an investigation of whether Secretary Pompeo has given directives or orders to State employees in violation of the Hatch Act."

Now, Pompeo is denying any possibility that he would illegally politicize his office. When asked whether he would release Clinton-related emails so close to the upcoming election date, he said: "Releasing emails for the sake of transparency can't possibly be a violation of the Hatch Act. That's a ridiculous question."

https://www.alternet.org/2020/10/trump-takes-one-more-step-toward-becoming-an-autocrat-and-it-hardly-makes-a-ripple

https://www.alternet.org/2019/11/new-trove-of-ukraine-docs-exposes-clear-paper-trail-from-rudy-giuliani-to-the-oval-office-to-secretary-pompeo

no lnx

New trove of Ukraine docs exposes ‘clear paper trail from Rudy Giuliani to the Oval Office to Secretary Pompeo’

Written by Jake Johnson / Common Dreams November 24, 2019

A trove of State Department documents obtained late Friday by watchdog group American Oversight provided new details on Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s involvement in the White House effort to pressure Ukraine to investigate President Donald Trump’s political rivals.

The documents, which the State Department turned over in compliance with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, showed that Pompeo spoke to Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani by phone at least twice earlier this year as Giuliani was pressing Ukraine to probe former Vice President Joe Biden. At least one of the calls was arranged by Trump assistant Madeleine Westerhout, the documents showed.

Giuliani in March was also orchestrating a smear campaign against former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who Trump removed from her post in May.

In April, following his calls with Giuliani, Pompeo also called Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), who has been implicated in the effort to dig up dirt on Biden.

American Oversight

@weareoversight

Replying to @weareoversight

This was just the first production of documents from our first lawsuit seeking the public release of Trump administration Ukraine records. There will be more.

We also have active lawsuits for records from Perry, Mulvaney, Sondland, DOD, and more. https://www.americanoversight.org/investigation/the-trump-administrations-contacts-with-ukraine …

The Trump Administration’s Contacts with Ukraine - American Oversight

American Oversight is investigating the extent of the administration’s troubling efforts to coerce a foreign government into helping to attack the president’s perceived political enemies.

americanoversight.org

American Oversight

?

@weareoversight

We can see why Secretary Pompeo refused to release these documents to Congress: the paper trail connects him to Giuliani, showing a March 2019 call right before a call to Rep. Nunes. https://www.americanoversight.org/state-department-releases-ukraine-documents-to-american-oversight …

View image on Twitter

Pompeo, who admitted last month that he was on the July 25 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, has refused to cooperate with the House impeachment inquiry into Trump.

Austin Evers, executive director of American Oversight, said the newly released documents shed light on the reasons behind Pompeo’s reluctance to testify or hand over information requested by impeachment investigators.

“We can see why Mike Pompeo has refused to release this information to Congress,” Evers said in a statement. “It reveals a clear paper trail from Rudy Giuliani to the Oval Office to Secretary Pompeo to facilitate Giuliani’s smear campaign against a U.S. ambassador.”

“The evidence is only going to get worse for the administration as its stonewall strategy collapses in the face of court orders,” added Evers. “That American Oversight could obtain these documents establishes that there is no legal basis for the administration to withhold them from Congress. That conclusively shows that the administration is engaged in obstruction of justice.”

In an interview with the New York Times last month, Giuliani acknowledged that he spoke with Pompeo about Ukraine in late March.

As the Times reported late Saturday:

In connection with one such conversation, Mr. Giuliani said he provided Mr. Pompeo a timeline listing what he considered to be key events implicating targets of Mr. Trump, including the Bidens, Ms. Yovanovitch and Ukrainians whom Mr. Giuliani said had disseminated damaging information about Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.

Shortly after, Mr. Pompeo “called and said, ‘Do you have any backup?'” Mr. Giuliani said in the interview.

In response, Mr. Giuliani said, he had someone hand-deliver to Mr. Pompeo’s office an envelope containing a series of memos detailing claims made by a pair of Ukrainian prosecutors in interviews conducted by Mr. Giuliani and his associates in January.

The State Department documents come just days after U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland testified before the House Intelligence Committee that “everyone was in the loop” on Trump’s effort to press Ukraine for an investigation into Biden.

In an interview on MSNBC Saturday, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee, said the American Oversight documents confirm Sondland’s testimony.

“These documents show that Giuliani was not freelancing, that he was essentially talking to Secretary Pompeo,” said Lieu. “Everybody was on the same page.”

PoliticusUSA

@politicususa

Rep. @tedlieu says newly released State Department documents show that "everybody was on the same page" regarding Trump's extortion scheme. #ctl #p2

Embedded video