Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Constitutional Issues Big brother is watching

The good news here is that all threads are voluntary.

I received a letter, dated July 7, 2008,from US DOJ Office of Information and Privacy Associate Director Janice Galli McLeod regarding a previously dismissed appeal to my Nov. 20, 2007 FOIA/PA Request to the Jacksonville FBI Field Office. McLeod resurrected my dismissed appeals and remanded my FOIA/PA Requests for processing to FBI HQ and the FBI Jacksonville Field Office. I expected to hear from the DOJ after the Senate passed The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 (spy devices on utility poles have satellite uplinks), but not quite this soon. As detailed above, I filed two complaints with the FBI charging illegal surveillance. The first one was with the Jacksonville FBI Field Office and a second more detailed one, which included a videotape and other evidence, with FBI Director Mueller. When the FBI refused to reply to my complaints, I filed a number of FOIA’s in order to get an acknowledgment of my charges by the FBI. However, the FBI denied having any records related to me or my charges, even though I mailed my complaints EXPRESS MAIL and FBI personnel signed for them. The Jacksonville Field Office even denied receiving my FOIA/PA Request.

I appealed the FBI’s "no record" responses. Deputy Chief Work of the Administrative Appeals Staff dismissed my appeals as "moot" and closed my appeal files, because both FBI HQ and the Jacksonville Field Offices denied having any records (I filed a FOIA/PA Request for these closed files). She even dismissed an appeal that I hadn’t filed yet. I called FBI HQ Logistics (mailroom) and tracked down the unit and room where my letter and evidence to Director Mueller was delivered. Around this same time, I received a letter from Civil Rights CID Chief Peeples. He returned my complaint and evidence addressed to Director Mueller and wrote: "The allegations that you have brought to our attention do not warrant any action by the FBI." I filed two separate complaints, one under the Patriot Act, with the DOJ OIG charging FBI employees with misconduct. When the IG didn’t acknowledge my charges, I filed a FOIA/PA request with the DOJ OIG seeking records related to my filed charges against named FBI employees. I received a " no records" response to my FOIA. The IG denied receiving my complaints. Realize that the DOJ OIG’s function is to insure the integrity and honesty of FBI employees.

The scope of The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 won’t be limited to surveillance of Americans’ international telephone and email communications, or granting immunity to phone companies, and will be expanded to include the ever-evolving definition of "terrorist." Just as the Patriot Act legalized what the government had been doing all along, so does this new legislation with the added benefit of making immunity for the telecoms legal. And, there are no genuinely effective safeguards to protect Americans’ rights. The IG’s roles are perfunctory at best, and, in most cases, to cover-up abuse and scandal. For the sake of argument, even if the IG’s wanted to investigate abuse, they couldn’t because the FISA Amendments Act allows the FISC to review only general procedures and not individual warrants, so they wouldn’t have any specific evidence- or paper trail- to investigate. If you think that I’m having a frustrating time getting my charges investigated, then wait until you try to get your charges investigated- never mind proving- under this new legislation. The FISA Amendments Act of 2008 renders the Fourth Amendment "moot" for all practical purposes.

Joe

edited to conform to guidelines

Carmen L. Mallon, Chief of Staff, replied in a letter, dated 7-29-08, on behalf of the DOJ's Office of Information and Privacy (OIP) to my 4-22-08 FOIA/PA request, which sought copies of all my closed appeal files. If you remember from my previous posts, the FBI denied having any records related to me; consequently, the respective appeal officers ruled my appeals are "moot" and dismissed them. Mallon wrote that a search in OIP located 36 documents responsive to my request and determined that 14 are appropriate for release without excision. However, none of these "appropriate" documents contained my FOI/PA requests, which I attached to my original appeals. Mallon enclosed one document deemed appropriate for release, but with an excision made pursuant to Exemption 6 of the FOIA, 5 USC, Sec. 552(b)(6). Mallon also withheld 5 documents pursuant to Exemption 5, 5 USC, Sec. 552(b)(5), pertaining to inter-and intra-agency communications. Mallon referred the remaining 16 documents back to Hardy at the FBI for processing and direct response to me. I still haven't heard from the FBI regarding these documents.

In an earlier letter, dated 7-7-08 (responding to another appeal), Janice Galli McLeod. OIP Associate Director, wrote:
After carefully considering your appeal, and as a result of discussions between FBI personnel and a member of my staff, the FBI conducted a further search and located records responsive to your request. Accordingly, I am remanding your request for processing of the responsive records.
The FBI lied in their responses to my earlier FOI/PA requests and still haven't supplied these responsive records. McLeod wrote that I can sue them (per 5 USC, Sec. 552(a)(4)(B))if I'm unhappy with her action on my appeal.

In response to earlier FOI/PA requests to the DOJ'S OIG requesting files pertaining to two complaints (one under the Patriot Act) charging FBI employees with official misconduct, the DOJ replied that they don't have any copies of my complaints. Since the FBI denied receiving EXPRESS MAIL, which FBI personnel signed to receive, I faxed one of my complaints and filed the other via email. The DOJ OIG has excellent internal controls to keep track of their faxes and emails. Realize that the DOJ's Office of Inspector General is responsible for the ethics and integrity of DOJ employees.

Joe

I received a letter, dated 8-11-08, yesterday from Glenn G. Powell, Special Agent in Charge, DOJ OIG Special Operations, Investigation Division. The text of his letter follows:
Dear Mr. Keegan:
The purpose of this letter is to acknowledge receipt of your correspondence dated March 17, 2008. The matters that you raised are more appropriate for review by another office or Agency. Therefore, your complaint has been forwarded to:
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Inspection Division
935 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20535
Any further correspondence regarding this matter should be directed to that office. I hope this answers any questions you have relative to this matter.
Sincerely,
Glenn G. Powell
Special Agent in Charge

I had filed two complaints against DOJ (FBI) employees with the DOJ OIG. When the DOJ OIG didn't respond, I filed a FOI/PA request to obtain copies of my complaints. The DOJ OIP replied with a no-records response, i.e. they lied and said that there are no records. The DOJ also returned previous FOI Appeals to the FBI for processing of my original FOI/PA requests- the FBI lied and said that there were no records. The FBI had denied receiving my EXPRESS MAIL charging the FDLE and others with criminal misconduct. I still haven't received a reply to those Appeals returned to them by the DOJ from the FBI. This is the standard tactic that any law enforcement agency uses to cover-up misconduct by another agency; professional courtesy, if you will. They cover-up for each other. In the case of the Florida Governor's OIG, they returned my complaints to the FDLE, which refused to investigate itself. So much for checks and balances.

Special Agent in Charge Powell's letter is an example of things to come when the DOJ's new proposal to ease police spy rules reported in the Washington Post takes effect. Actually, if you've read any of my posts in this thread, you'll see that they have been in effect for quite some time. The DOJ's proposal would make it easier for cops to collect "intelligence" on Americans and share it with federal agencies. You should be concerned. Just as the White House's, DOJ's, and state and local spokesmen will assure you that these "new" spy measures won't be abused and that there are checks and balances, I can assure you that they will be abused and there are no checks and balances. Adios, 4th Amendment!

Joe

So, is the U.S. Constitution an adequate protection against tyranny?
____________

You catch on fast, numan. Next thing you know, you'll be quoting the Chief Executive who declared "It's just a G0AM piece of paper!"

What would you replace it with to keep us safe from tyranny?

This would be a multi-step process of course.

1) eliminate corporate personhood and return to the days when it was a felony for a corporation to contribute to political campaigns.

2) implement 100% public financing of elections

3) Admend the constitution to eliminate the power of the executive branch and substitute it with a "figurehead" type of leadership position that essentially has no power (similar to the royal family in England) but who serves as a US representative for world affairs

4) eliminate the electoral college

5) implement mandatory term limits

6) Admend the constitution to change to a parliamentary government with proportional representation and instant runoff voting.

7) Create and implement "citizen" review boards who have broad oversight powers including supoena power and the right to dismiss any elected official or employee of all governmental regulatory agencies.

8) Tranform from a global capitalist economy to one that adheres to the 100 mile rule for the use of resources and creates local sustainable permaculture communities who govern themselves outside of federal mandates as long as they are constitutional.

9) Overhaul and eliminate much of the framework of the prison industrial complex and release all political prisoners and then switch to community and national service hours as punishment for all non-violent crimes.

10) Overhaul the justice system to insure that everyone has the same level of legal representation regardless of ability to pay.

11) Make all of the necessities of life (health care, energy, water, food) publicly controlled and decentralized.


We could then keep much of the framework of the original constitution and bill of rights minus the above admendments.

It would certainly be worthwhile moving in the direction you propose, Roger.

But the rich and powerful vampires who rule America would without hesitation tear this country apart, if need be, in order to prevent the reforms you propose.
_____________