New York Times’ FOIA Lawsuit Rejected
The Politico reports U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Carter Jr. rejected arguments that President Donald Trump effectively confirmed the existence of a CIA program when he used his Twitter account last July to counter a Washington Post story.
A tweet from Trump disputing Washington Post news report about a CIA program to aid Syrian rebels neither declassified the program nor undermined the government’s legal authority to keep details about the program a secret, he ruled.
“The Washington Post fabricated the facts on my ending massive, dangerous, and wasteful payments to Syrian rebels fighting Assad,” Trump wrote, referring to Syrian President Bashar Assad.
A day after sending the tweet, Trump mentioned the Post story again.
“That was not something that I was involved in, other than they did come and they suggested,” the president said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. “It turns out it’s — a lot of al-Qaeda we’re giving these weapons to. You know, they didn’t write the truthful story, which they never do.”
Armed with Trump’s tweets, The New York Times filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request demanding details of the program, then sued when the CIA did not immediately respond.
Carter ruled that Trump’s statements were too vague to waive the government’s right to withhold the information. The judge also went further, stating that even public discussion of the specific program by government officials was insufficient to declassify it, or give a FOIA requester any additional legal leverage to obtain the information.
“Permitting courts to infer whether a President declassified information would transfer the President’s constitutional authority to declassify to the Judiciary, undermining the basic tenets of the separation of powers,” the judge wrote in his 20-page decision, dated Friday and released Monday. “Here, President Trump did not make an unequivocal statement, or any statement for that matter, indicating that he was declassifying information. This should end the inquiry.”
Trump’s tweets continue to drive the Lame Stream Media nuts, as they can’t spin and filter them for public consumption. The New York Times’ attorney plans to appeal, of course. Guess he didn’t get the message. A side note, the judge is an Obama appointee.
Well, it’s like this. I am for open gov’t but I do not need to know information that will help the enemies of my country. The fact that weapons were being shipped by the CIA to certain places by a circuitous and dangerous route that was all but guaranteeing that the weapons would be in enemy hands was something that occurred under the administration of the guy who liked to draw Red Lines.
Oh come on! TOWs are readily available at 7-11s in the Middle East, usually located next to the halal pork rinds.
It doesn’t matter what the facts are.
Even if that stuff were declassed, the media would/will alter the facts to suit themselves, as they have always done.
I’ve wondered for some time how come it was okay for whatshisname the former Occupant of the Oval Office to hobnob with Vlad Putin and try to make jokes with him, but it’s not okay for dTrump to do it.
Is it because they have no real grasp of foreign relations and/or foreign policy methods? Or is it because they hate dTrump and wanted shrillary?
Another legal win for Trump:
Breitbart News Link
Tired of winning?
Not yet, Yef. Not yet.
Next question?
The lamestream snooze media respond to President Trump’s tweets like kittens do to a laser pointer.
Nice one.
Wow, an Obama appointee that actually understands and follows the rule of law??? Hell, ow i’m gonna start believing in unicorns!
Ah, Ff, you have found the kernel of my post. It was either you or TOW, I was thinking. To paraphrase some other dude who posts here, “Ain’t ya a bit auld ta be belivin’ in unicorns, laddie?”
*grin*
Apply the “Unified Theory of Vision Impaired Sciuridae, and Their Geolocation of Seeds From Quercus alba.”
Even a blind chipmunk finds the occasional acorn.
The judge wasted no time in getting to the conclusion. The opening sentence reads, “This is a meritless case.” It was all bullshit. They knew they could not win and the judge knew that they knew. Their game was to try to obtain documents that could be used outside of the case for purposes of going after the president. Judges–no matter their persuasion–do not like being played for fools like that.
I disagree. Some judges will play the fool if it helps their own personal point of view and if it helps them legislate from the bench.
[…] Man Edition The Political Hat: When In The Course Of Human Events… This Ain’t Hell: NYT FOIA Lawsuit Rejected, also, A Brief Fourth Of July Message Victory Girls: Boycott The Fourth, But Don’t Crash My […]
There’s a quiet saying, usually uttered behind secret closed doors or in secret bars known only to a few of the guys who dabble in RJBTS (Real James Bond Type Stuff) (apologies for the spelling and grammar, I didn’t invent the acronym);
The 2 greatest agents the KGB (now SVR/RF, technically) ever ran were the US Congress and the NYT.
That little joke of a saying has plenty of truth behind it…