Interesting that Fitton noted that a Special Counsel may actually be unconstitutional because it has no oversight, no authority to go beyond the specifically stated contractual reason for convening, and is not duly authorized by congress or public vote to acquire unlimited access to records or have unlimited authority. Yet apparently This special counsel is usurping the lawful authority rights of congressional access when someone appeared before the Oversight committee and used the excuse that they could not reply until they consulted with the Special Counsel such as happened last week.
Fitton also makes reference to the illegality of any removal of Comey’s memos, scribblings, diaries, etc. from government records. This should also have been applied in the case of Hillary Clinton.
Many cases over the years have pointed to ANY generated information either by hand or on computer as the property of a business and evidence in court cases. Even inventors who work at home on things which are directly or indirectly related (including ideas for objects that might make something work better at the office) to their job at a company are considered lawfully part of the company. Their petitions have generally been denied because of that understanding. For instance, remember back in the late 1970’s or early 1980’s the savings and loan case where an employee’s notations on a calendar constituted documented evidence in a labor board court proceeding? Most big companies today still remove old calendars and replace them with new ones every year if they still use physical calendars.
Another worrisome topic is that despite the change in government and the replacement of several top people, “someone” in each of the agencies is still not following through on FOIA requests and impeding inquiries to the extent that those requesting are still having to file court cases in order to acquire what should be reasonably available to the general public.
Except for certain specific information, why have the library and the management of the records not provided “special access” for approved groups if they need to track who is viewing them so that the agencies do not have to fool with many FOIA requests? Are they worried access to those documents would also provide a backdoor access to other more sensitive documents?
Why are the agencies still not responding to FOIA requests in a timely manner? Is it manpower or is it a play by some to keep hidden things that would point fingers at criminal activities? They already know that FOIA requests are going to accelerate so shouldn’t they be providing better methods of access?
Toward the end of his monologue is a very interesting topic.
At one time, I wondered why we didn’t have more divisions of “races” when census was taken. In his comments is not only an answer but a warning.
For a long time, we acknowledged specific genetic characteristics as divisions, ie color I am guessing. We also have constantly reiterated that Muslim is NOT a race. But what would happen if the Muslims who are pushing hard to become a specific “race” on census were able to get that pushed through?
For one thing it would validate their premise and force our laws to kick in giving them rights actually over and above those of regular citizens.
The ramifications would be extremely worrisome given the current push by Islamic fundamentalists to overwhelm the world and become the dominate governing body. Muslims occupy at their base many countries in the Middle East some of whom are different according to characteristics currently used in our census.
For another, a “religion” would then become a race–think on that one. They as a religious movement have spread around the world so then all countries could in essence if practicing Islam become a “race”.