DONATE

Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts

Saturday, June 30, 2018

Intro to JW’s ‘Exposing the Deep State’

Intro by John R. Houk
© June 30, 2018


I received an email from Judicial Watch wanting to take a look at their 3-minute video on the Deep State. The email says the video is four minutes long but really the actual time is 3:02. The email is dated 6/28/18. The most interesting part for me was the link attached to phrase, “Read more about the Deep State”. That link goes to a 64-page PDF called a JW special report entitled, “Exposing the Deep State”.

I encourage to read the Deep State report that includes an appendix of documents won by JW use of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Naturally, in the name of National Security many of those documents are redacted.

To inspire you to read the whole report I am cross posting the Executive Summary and Introduction. I am also including the Conclusion section. Here is the Table of Contents so that know which sections are missing in my cross post:

Table of Contents

Executive Summary-3

I.       Introduction and Background-5

II.  Four Case Studies-8

Case Study # 1: The Environmental Protection Agency-8

Case Study # 2: The Internal Revenue Service-13

Case Study # 3: Outside Organizations, Inside Operations-16

Case Study # 4: The Intelligence/Law-Enforcement Community-19

III. Conclusion-37

IV. Appendix-41

And here is the text of the email:

Announcing a compelling new short-form video:
On Issue – “Inside the Deep State!

Dear Editor/Broadcaster,

I am pleased to announce that Judicial Watch is now launching an exciting new educational, cutting edge video series I believe many in your audience will find captivating and informative...

And, the first, 4 minute edition is now available HERE!

 It’s called On Issue  – “Inside the Deep State”…

And it provides vital insights into a topic that grows increasingly salient with every passing day.

Fast-paced and fact-filled “Inside the Deep State,” features JW’s highly respected Director of Investigations, Chris Farrell, laying it all out – in his own captivating and highly informative style.

And he does it all in just under four minutes!

Click here now to watch Inside the Deep State…

And then please feel free to use it however you wish to keep your audience On Issue!

Sincerely,

Carter Clews


Posted by Judicial Watch
Published on Jun 25, 2018

The Deep State is comprised of legions of political appointees, career civil servants and powerful private contractors who run the government--no matter who sits in the Oval Office--no matter which political party controls Congress--and no matter what is the will of the American people.

No matter who’s in power, they exert control.


And now – the Deep State analysis.

*************************
Exposing the Deep State


September 2017

Judicial Watch Logo

Executive Summary

“They pride themselves on operating below the radar – and above the law”

We face a crisis of the Deep State – “Alt-government,” I sometimes call it. The actions of the Deep State constitute a direct challenge to our republican form of government. Working primarily through the intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, the Deep State is actively engaged in subversive measures designed to delegitimize Donald Trump, cause the American people to lose faith in their president, destroy the Trump presidency and eventually impeach him or put him in jail. -- Judicial Watch President, Tom Fitton

This Judicial Watch Special Report analyzes the Deep State, which comprises legions of political appointees, career civil servants and powerful private contractors who run the government no matter who sits in the Oval Office. No matter which political party controls Congress. And, no matter what is the will of the American people. No matter who’s in power, they exert control. Oftentimes, the liberal media effectively operates as the propaganda arm of the Deep State.

The shadowy world in which Deep State actors maneuver is characterized by three disturbing proclivities: Secrecy, surveillance and subterfuge.

The operatives manning and manipulating the Deep State demand an activist, interventionist government, both domestically and internationally. Importantly, their worldview often rejects the beliefs and values of a majority of patriotic Americans.

As time goes on, the disparity between the values and beliefs of the people and those of the Deep State becomes cumulative, and no matter whom the people elect to public office, the Deep State takes the nation in a direction that increasingly diverges from where the people desire to go.

Sometimes, as it has with the Trump presidency, the Deep State rises to the surface in rebellion, taking aggressive, seditious measures against a president whose election it opposed and who it perceives to be a threat to its own agenda and, perhaps, its very survival. As already is clear with the Trump presidency, the Deep State can turn on any president that threatens its interests and survival. And left unchecked, it may illegally destroy him.

This Special Report explores the workings of the Deep State through four case studies, in each of which Judicial Watch is involved in investigative action and litigation:

§  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), involving three JW Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits. One lawsuit focuses on the efforts by agency political officials and civil servants to hide their communications and circum-vent the Federal Records and Freedom of Information Acts. The second law-suit demands to see documents surrounding the EPA’s cost-benefit analysis of the Clean Power Plan, which Judicial Watch suspects to be “fake science” used to justify the Obama EPA’s health claims in the Clean Power Plan, a scheme to end coal energy under the guise of combatting alleged global warming. The third lawsuit is aimed at EPA’s efforts to propagandize the American People illegally to promote its power grab over a clean water rule it was attempting to promulgate at the time.

§  The Internal Revenue Service (IRS), involving four JW FOIA lawsuits focusing on the political targeting of President Barack Obama’s political enemies, including conservative non-profit organizations and individuals, and the unlawful collusion among the IRS and other agencies of government, such as the Justice Department, the FBI, the Department of Health and Human Services, to spy on innocent American citizens, propagandize them and bring criminal charges against political enemies of the Obama administration and/or the Deep State.

§  United States Agency for International Development (USAID)/Soros Open Society Foundations, involving two JW FOIA lawsuits focusing on the Soros Open Society Foundations’ use of U.S. taxpayer money channeled through USAID to destabilize and overthrow the democratically elected governments of Macedonia and Albania.

§  The Intelligence/Law-Enforcement Community, involving six JW FOIA law-suits, an additional FOIA request and an advisory/demand letter, all focused on the surveillance, unmasking and illegal targeting of President Trump and his associates during the government’s investigation of purported Russian involvement in the 2016 presidential election and alleged collusion with the Russians by Trump and his team. The Special Report examines the flood of leaks and innuendos coming out of the government surrounding Trump and his associates, including the Gen. Michael Flynn episode; the Obama administration’s misuse of the NSA database of surveillance intercepts to target and unmask the identities of Americans; the Trump Dossier and the FBI’s involvement in it; along with James Comey’s purloined memoranda and the appointment of a special counsel to investigate Trump and his associates, including unsubstantiated accusations of obstruction of justice by the president when he allegedly ask Comey to shut down the Flynn investigation. The Report assembles the evidence at hand and finds it supports the conclusion that the Deep State, working primarily through the intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, is actively engaged in subversive measures (a “soft coup”) designed to delegitimize Donald Trump, cause the American people to lose faith in their president, destroy the Trump presidency and eventually impeach him or put him in jail.

At the beginning of this Special Report, it is observed that the Deep State is not monolithic but it shares a common mindset and worldview, and it is characterized by three disturbing proclivities: Secrecy, surveillance and subterfuge. Secrecy catalyzes and enables surveillance and subterfuge. The only way to observe and evaluate the workings of the Deep State is to penetrate the veil of Deep State secrecy that shields the actions of political appointees, career civil servants, private contractors and their relationship with the media and outside agents of influence that comprise the Deep State.

This Special Report concludes that it is time to tear down the wall of secrecy surrounding the Deep State. President Trump should order federal agencies to stop the stalling and start obeying the nation’s open-records laws. Until they do, the dangerously malignant Deep State will continue to grow and undermine American democracy.

Exposing the Deep State

“They pride themselves on operating below the radar – and above the law”

We face a crisis of the Deep State – “Alt-government,” I sometimes call it. The actions of the Deep State constitute a direct challenge to our republican form of government. Working primarily through the intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, the Deep State is actively engaged in subversive measures designed to delegitimize Donald Trump, cause the American people to lose faith in their president, destroy the Trump presidency and eventually impeach him or put him in jail. – Judicial Watch President, Tom Fitton

I. Introduction and Background

There is a deeply embedded shadow government in the United States running the affairs of state – The Deep State or Alt Government, as Judicial Watch President, Tom Fitton describes it. This shadow government is not monolithic. But, it does not have to be. Its operatives share a common mindset and worldview. They travel in the same social circles. And, they walk the same corridors of power.

No matter who’s in power, they’re in control.

They pride themselves on operating below the radar – and above the law. And, the shadowy world in which they maneuver is characterized by three disturbing proclivities: Secrecy, surveillance and subterfuge.

In the words of Judicial Watch Director of Investigations Chris Farrell, the decidedly left-leaning Deep State is “quite comfortable exercising all of the levers of the organs of the state.” Farrell explains:

They come from a Franco-Germanic political philosophy that, historically, has always placed the state over the citizenry. They derive their power and exercise it vigorously through the state.

As time goes on, this disparity between the values and beliefs of the people and those of the Deep State becomes cumulative, and no matter whom the people elect to public office, the Deep State takes the nation in a direction that increasingly diverges from where the people desire to go.

Deep State operatives are ensconced in every agency of the government; they have their own agendas; and many of them think they don’t have to answer to an elected president, the rule of law or the American people. They also are enmeshed in and interface with outside networks of organizations, media companies, universities, think tanks and corporations that share their views, help shape their views and exert enormous influence on policy and its day-to-day implementation. The “military-industrial complex” President Dwight Eisenhower warned about is a reality but it is not the only complex providing the architecture of the Deep State; there are several of them: the intelligence/security-industrial complex, the environmental/academic-industrial complex, to name but two.

The American media complex effectively operates as the propaganda arm and transmission belt of the Deep State. In a 2013 article (updated in 2016), former State Department foreign service officer and congressional policy adviser and analyst, James George Jatras, explains:

American media increasingly have operated uncritically in conjunction with the bipartisan Washington political establishment…Among the key features of such cooperation…are:

§  Deficiency of geographic and historical knowledge as the American norm (the less people know the more likely they are to believe what they are told, with the least informed most persuaded of the need to “do something”);

§  Reliance on government sources, “ventriloquism,” and “information incest” (unknown to the public, much media “information” comes from government sources);

§  Centralized corporate ownership (official policy imperatives interface with ratings dollars for six giant corporate conglomerates);

§  “Para-journalism,” “infotainment,” and “atrocity porn” as a war trigger (atrocities appear seemingly on cue and then receive saturation coverage);

§  Demonization “Hitler” memes and “weaponization” of media (compromise and negotiation have no role in confronting absolute evil – war is the default option);

§  America and the “international community,” the “Free World,” and American “exceptionalism” and “leadership;” disregarding “alternative” media, Ameri-can samizdat (accurate information is available in “alternative” media, but the major[s] still decide if it exists or not);

§  “We never make mistakes,” “stay the course,” and “MoveOnism” (U.S. policy has no rearview mirror);

§  Authors of past blunders are not discredited, while those who said “tolya so” are ignored).

§  In turn, media themselves are an integral part of a multifaceted, hybrid public-private entity with broad range and depth. Variously known as the Establishment, the Oligarchy, or the Deep State, this entity includes elements within all three branches of the U.S. government (especially in the military, intelligence, and financial sectors), private business (the financial industry, government contractors, information technology), think tanks, NGOs, the “Dem intern,” both political parties and campaign operatives, and an army of lobbyists and PR professionals.

§  Looking into the future in light of 2016 anti-Establishment challenges from Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, the shortcomings of Barack Obama’s policies in Libya, Syria, and Ukraine on top of those of George W. Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan, shrinkage of the American Middle Class, and increasing public skepticism of the “MSM” in favor of digital “alternative media,” both the Washington-based oligarchy and its media component show signs of losing their grip.

§  The possibility exists for a peaceful evolution to a less warlike posture (impacting media as well) that would refocus on America’s domestic needs. Alter-natively, the existing order could risk a major war in a desperate bid to save its wealth, power, and privileges – with unforeseeable consequences for America and the world.

The operation of the Deep State is not a meticulously organized conspiracy, mastermind-ed and controlled by any central authority operating out of a fortified bunker. Nor does it need to be. The agendas of the politicians, bureaucrats and contractors that populate the Deep State are frequently the same, or complementary, and the huge sums of taxpayer money involved tie them together inextricably. And, they ineluctably travel in the same, invariably elitist circles. Rather, the Deep State is like a systemic disease of run-away cells, replicating and metastasizing to serve their own interests and survival. In short, a cancer.

The Deep State has a life of its own, independent of whoever is president or whichever political party controls the Congress. Though it prefers to operate through sleight of hand, with smoke and mirrors, at times it may rise to the surface and become the handmaiden of overzealous and overreaching presidents who serve its interests – as it did when Barack Obama weaponized the permanent bureaucracy inside the IRS, the FBI and other intelligence and regulatory agencies against the American people and his (and the Deep State’s) political opponents.

Most frequently, the Deep State recedes back into the shadows where its agents quietly advance their own agenda and obstruct troublesome elected officials (and the public that supports them) in a million different ways, large and small, deliberate and devious. Sometimes, of course, it rises to the surface in rebellion – as it has with President Donald Trump, taking aggressive, seditious measures against a president whose election it opposed and who it perceives to be a threat to its own agenda and, perhaps, its very survival.

The Deep State is more insidious than mere partisanship, and it is more dangerous because it is permanent. While presidents and Members of Congress come and go, the Deep State remains permanently, growing ever more powerful – and predatory. As already is clear with the Trump presidency, the Deep State can turn on any president that threatens its interests and survival. And left unchecked, it may destroy him.

III. Conclusion

Professor Patrick H. O’Neil of the University of Puget Sound, in a January 2015 article, “The Deep State: An Emerging Concept in Comparative Politics,” concisely elucidates the underlying foundation of the Deep State (p.4):

… as a foundational logic, the deep state justifies its existence through the necessity of tutelage over both state and society. The deep state views itself guardian of national values against internal and external foes. In short, the deep state does not necessarily trust the government, state (perhaps even military) or society to pre-serve the nation. Accordingly, actors within the deep state can justify an array of actions against the government, society, and state as necessary to defend against “traitors” to the nation and national ideology. The amorphousness of the deep state is accompanied by the belief that its members are the symbolic core of the nation. (Emphasis added.)

At the beginning of this Special Report, it was observed that the Deep State is not monolithic but it shares a common worldview and is characterized by three disturbing proclivities: Secrecy, surveillance and subterfuge. Secrecy catalyzes and enables surveillance and subterfuge. The only way to observe and evaluate the workings of the Deep State is to penetrate the veil of Deep State secrecy that shields the actions of political appointees, career civil servants, private contractors and their relationship with the media and outside agents of influence that comprise the Deep State.

That’s why Judicial Watch is in court day after day shining the light on the activities of the Deep State. It is time to put an end to the obsessive, oppressive and destructive secrecy in government. If the rule of law is to survive, if America’s constitutional protections are to endure, it is essential to roll back the sinister secrecy that allows, indeed encourages those operating in the Deep State to hold themselves above the law and beyond the Constitution.

There is a way to rein in the Deep State but it requires a commitment to extreme transparency by elected officials. It requires determined leadership from the White House and serious bi-partisan action on the part of a committed Congress to expose the goings on inside the permanent D.C. bureaucracy and the connections between the Deep Staters, the media and the outside agents of influence.


There is plenty of blame to go around for the transparency failures that foster the Deep State, most recently the Obama administration’s executive over reach and the veil of secrecy President Obama pulled over his administration to hide it. And now, unbelievably, those same secrecy policies seem to be on auto-pilot in the Trump administration. Thank-fully, though, when it comes to sunshine actions, the Trump White House has a solution at hand – if only it would use it – that is both elegantly simple and breathtakingly radical. The Freedom of Information Act allows for the executive branch to make “discretionary disclosures.”

As Judicial Watch Director of Investigations, Chris Farrell has noted:

“In plain English, that means President Trump and his cabinet secretaries can release whatever they want—whenever they wish to do so. They can exercise their discretion to release records that are of broad general and news media interest concerning important policy issues and/or the operation of the federal government. These discretionary disclosures take nothing more than the stroke of a pen.”

Beyond the “discretionary disclosures” provision of the Freedom of Information Act, Executive Order 13526, signed by President Obama in 2009, and the Supreme Court ruling in Department of the Navy v. Egan (484 U.S. 518 (1988)) confirm that under the Constitution, as chief executive, the president has the legal power to declassify information immediately, on his say so alone. As the Court stated in Egan:

The President, after all, is the “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.” U.S. Const., Art. II, 2. His authority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security…flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.

During the presidential campaign, Candidate Trump pledged to drain the swamp. There is no better way to drain the swamp than to impose extreme transparency on the Deep State where the swamp festers and putrefies. Regrettably, however, instead of applying the transparency remedy, as JW’s Chris Farrell reports, “The Department of Justice under Attorney General Sessions is currently making the exact same legal arguments as the Obama administration—and using all the double-talk and excuses from the Obama era, too.”

Freedom of Information Act officers in the executive branch are over-worked and under-appreciated, a situation that has severely restricted the effectiveness of the law. But it doesn’t take congressional action or a spending increase to change that. President Trump could trigger a FOIA revolution simply by ordering a new era of extreme transparency and discretionary disclosure.

Micha Morrison said it perfectly in Judicial Watch’s Investigative Bulletin:

“Extreme transparency could bring huge benefits. Swamp draining would get super-charged boosters. The president could seize the moral high ground in the Russia-connection case with the re-lease of his tax returns and all relevant White House documents. On the Judicial Watch docket, among the records that could be quickly produced are: the Comey memo; records related to former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and the “unmasking” controversy; re-cords related to the so-called “Russian dossier;” records relating to the controversial “tarmac meeting” in Arizona between former Pres-ident Bill Clinton and then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch; FBI and intelligence community files on the Hillary Clinton email investigation; never-revealed draft indictments of Mrs. Clinton in the Whitewater investigation; and notes and reports to then-Secretary of State Clinton in the Benghazi affair.”

Beyond the president’s imposing extreme transparency through discretionary disclosures, immediate action also is needed to pave the way for activist citizens and outside watchdogs, such as Judicial Watch, to investigate and expose corruption and malfeasance within the government.

§  President Trump not only should use the power of discretionary disclosures, he also should commit to a revolution of “extreme transparency” and set it in motion by issuing an executive order to break the logjam of FOIA requests he inherited from President Obama and which are now piling up under his own administration.

§  Congress should join the revolution by reforming the Freedom of Information Act and giving private citizens, the press and watchdog groups stronger and better tools to hold the government to account.

§  Congress and the president together should seize the opportunity when the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act comes up for reauthorization later this year and:

1.   Provide for greater public access to government records inside the intelligence and law-enforcement agencies, and especially the proceedings in and opinions of the FISA Court; and

2.   Place new limits on the NSAs authority to conduct warrantless searches and restrict other agencies’ authority to use NSA intercepts to conduct domestic surveillance on Americans.

It’s time to tear down the wall of secrecy surrounding the Deep State. President Trump should order federal agencies to stop the stalling and start obeying the nation’s open-re-cords laws. Until they do, the dangerously malignant Deep State will continue to grow and undermine American democracy.
______________________
Intro to JW’s ‘Exposing the Deep State’
Intro by John R. Houk
© June 30, 2018
_______________________
Exposing the Deep State

If you would like additional copies of the report please contact:

Judicial Watch 425 Third Street, SW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20024

Member Services: 1 (888) 593-8442 FAX: (202) 646-5199




Friday, February 12, 2016

Tony Newbill on Federal Land Grab Conspiracy



The standoff in Oregon between Ranchers (that came from all over the Western U.S.)  and Federal and Oregon State government for all intents and purposes has ended with the arrest of its Nevada leader Ammon Bundy and the murder of fellow leader LaVoy Finicum. And recently Ammon’s father - Cliven Bundy - was arrested for leading a dispute protest of ranchers with the Federal government over what should be free-range grazing.


Sadly the Bundys and the Hammonds (thrown in jail for letting a back-burn started on their property to stop the BLM burn from destroying the ranch) dispute with the Federal government is being painted as domestic terrorism by the Mainstream Media and as lawbreaking by even many pro-gun enthusiasts. What the media fails to inform YOU is the reason these Western USA state Ranchers and Farmers are upset enough to take on the resource of the Federal government. Tony Newbill takes on the project of disseminating info you probably won’t see on TV or read in your newspapers. The central theme is: the Federal government has acquired HUGE amounts of land from the Western states as a condition for statehood and now the Federal bureaucracy is telling Ranchers and Farmers what they can and can’t do including charging fee usage of what should be considered public land at the least for grazing and water issues.


JRH 2/12/16
***********************
Tony Newbill on Federal Land Grab Conspiracy


Sent: 2/2/2016 2:04 PM


At this point I trust our State National Guard to enforce state Constitutional authority over the Federal takeover of state rights more than the State Legislative branch and here why. This is the consolidator of states rights if it gets activated. And a coup by the states’ National Guard to restore the states rights against this, would be the only way back. So we need to bring this to the attention of the people and make it clear that this will THREATEN FOOD SUPPLIES with the ideology that will be implementing this Waters Rule:


Key Issues Top Farm Bureau’s 2016 Strategic Plan



By JOHN DAVIS
FEBRUARY 1, 2016
AgWired


Farm Bureau’s strategic action plan for 2016 includes several key issues for agriculture, including the government’s Waters of the United States (WOTUS) action, protecting farmers’ rights to use biotechnology and trade issue. This news release from the group says the policy issues are a result of deliberations by delegates to the AFBF’s 97th Annual Convention in Orlando.


“We will continue to work hard to protect the business of American agriculture on all fronts. This plan is an important roadmap to key issue areas that AFBF and our grassroots members will address in 2016,” AFBF President Zippy Duvall said.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s new Waters of the U.S. rule remains among the most pressing issues in agriculture. Although presented as a water issue, the measure in fact would unlawfully regulate land in violation of the Clean Water Act itself. The rule takes over local and state authority while threatening private property rights and normal farming activity nationwide.
“EPA’s blatant overreach is nothing short of a federal land grab,” Duvall said. “The administration has refused to listen to business owners, local governments and lawmakers. The courts have ordered this rule temporarily stopped. The Government Accountability Office found EPA’s actions illegal, and Congress–which originally gave EPA its authority under the Clean Water Act–called for an end to this rule. We won’t give up until it’s gone and farmers are free to care for their own land.”
AFBF’s action plan also supports agricultural biotechnology that promises great benefits for agriculture, consumers and the environment.
“Farmers and ranchers need better tools to be more productive and efficient. We will continue to defend farmers’ and ranchers’ access to biotechnology and protect their right to use other promising new technologies, from data services to drones,” Duvall said.
The AFBF board reaffirmed its commitment to the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.
“TPP promises to open up markets around the Pacific Rim. These are some of the fastest-growing markets in the world, and America’s farmers and ranchers are ready to expand business there,” Duvall said. “We’re ready to work with Congress to move this agreement forward for the overall good of U.S. agriculture.”


This is good:


WOTUS Part 6: Sixth Circuit Issues a Potentially Permanent Stay Preventing Implementation


BY PETER MOHR

October 09, 2015
JordanRamis.com


As recently discussed on this blog, last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit heard petitioners’ and respondents’ arguments from the four separate actions contesting implementation of the WOTUS rule.  Collectively, petitioners represent a total of 18 states.  In addition to the respondents, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, there are respondent-interveners consisting of environmental conservation groups and several states including, but not limited to, Oregon and Washington.
 
This morning, the Sixth Circuit granted petitioners’ motion for a stay preventing further implementation of the Rule.  The court found that petitioners had demonstrated a substantial possibility of success on the merits of two claims: (1) that “the Rule’s treatment of tributaries, “adjacent waters,” and waters having a “significant nexus” to navigable waters is at odds with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Rapanos,” and (2) that “the rulemaking process by which the distance limitations were adopted is facially suspect” under the federal Administrative Procedures Act.  Further, the court showed great concern for “the burden – potentially visited nationwide on governmental bodies, state and federal, as well as private parties – and the impact on the public in general, implicated by the Rule’s effective redrawing of jurisdictional lines over certain of the nation’s waters[,]” and that “the sheer breadth of the ripple effects caused by the Rule’s definitional changes counsels strongly in favor of maintaining the [prior version of the rule] for the time being.”  
 
Finally, while the stay may assume the legal effect of a preliminary injunction, to be clear, the court’s order does not necessarily assume the weight of a preliminary injunction.  While a preliminary injunction would remain in effect for the duration until such time that the court entered a final ruling on the merits of petitioners’ claims, this particular stay may possess a much more abbreviated shelf life.  This is because, while the Sixth Circuit may have granted petitioners’ request for a stay, it did so pending the court’s future determination of whether it even possesses jurisdiction to hear the arguments before it.  Should the Sixth Circuit determine it does not possess jurisdiction to hear these cases, it would appear the stay dissolves and it’s back to the drawing board for petitioners in federal district court.


Part 1   Part 2   Part 3   Part 4   Part 5


But it’s temporary while the process unfolds in appeals, and while that is going on they are still picking off the resource users of states One by One.




[Blog Editor: The above are several info posts related to the “water of the United States” or WOTUS Rule formulated according bureaucratic interpretation of the Clean Water Act (CWA). The website source is CFACT or Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow.]


+++++++++++
Sent: 2/11/16 11:47


*************ATTENTION****** OREGON STILL UNDER ATTACK ********


We are still Under ATTACK in Oregon by the Bolshevik Environmental Marxists. This IS MY IRRIGATION DISTRICT! This is the Next Civil War!!!!! TELL ME they are Not trying to breed Violence!!!!!!!!!!


LAWSUITS THREATEN CENTRAL OREGON COMMUNITIES

February 9, 2016
Deschutes Basin Board of Control


Madras, Oregon – A preliminary injunction filed today in federal court by two environmental groups seeks to disrupt the water supplies of thousands of families throughout Oregon’s Deschutes Basin, including families in the communities of Bend, Madras, Redmond, and Tumalo.  The two groups are asking the court to impose abrupt and severe restrictions on three reservoirs, which provide over 6,000 farms, ranches, and homes with water for crops, horses and other animals, gardens, schools, and parks.  Collaborative, science-based efforts to improve fish and wildlife habitat in the Deschutes River involving local, state and federal agencies, the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, and conservation groups may also be affected by the litigation.


On January, 20, 2016, the United States District Court for the District of Oregon (Eugene Division) consolidated two separate lawsuits filed by the Center for Biological Diversity, a Tucson, Arizona based group, and WaterWatch of Oregon, a Portland, Oregon based group.  The consolidated lawsuit, and today’s preliminary injunction, claims the operations of three reservoirs (Crescent, Crane Prairie, and Wickiup) are harming the Oregon spotted frog, a species listed as “threatened” by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2014.  Crescent Lake reservoir is owned and operated by Tumalo Irrigation District, while Crane Prairie and Wickiup reservoirs are owned by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and operated by Central Oregon and North Unit irrigation districts.  The environmental groups’ preliminary injunction demands that the court impose abrupt and severe restrictions on the use of the reservoirs, which may completely eliminate the ability to store water in them for irrigation purposes.


Mike Britton, President of the Deschutes Basin Board of Control, which represents eight irrigation districts (Districts), said in response to the environmental groups’ demands made to the court, “Collaboration is a better forum for helping the Oregon spotted frog than the courts.”  Britton added, “The Districts, agencies, tribes and others continue to make real progress together, and I would encourage the environmental groups to work with us rather than against us.”


Craig Horrell, General Manager of Central Oregon Irrigation District, said today, “All of the Districts, including COID, have implemented dozens of water conservation projects that have helped to restore over 80,000 acre-feet of water for fish and wildlife in the Deschutes River and its tributaries.”  Horrell added, “We’re capable of restoring even more water in the river, but people must work together.”


Ken Rieck, General Manager of Tumalo Irrigation District, said today, “Right now, Tumalo is piping a 3,400-foot section of canal that will increase instream flows in Tumalo Creek, Crescent Creek, and the Little Deschutes River.”  Rieck added, “These higher instream flows will improve habitat for Oregon spotted frog, and other fish and wildlife.”


WE need HELP organizing a Town Hall meeting so all 6000 farmers plus all the affected business owners and resource managers can come and share the reasons why this will KILL OFF CENTRAL OREGON!!!!!!!!!!!! HELP ,,, HELP!!!!!
 
+++++++++++++
Sent: 2/12/16 7:24 AM


John they are running us all off the Lands because they want the resources all to themselves to share with their Internationalist Elitist buddies. This is like True Bolshevism, Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 Style!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  
 
This is what it’s all about:




Knowledge & Courage: What the West Needs to Take Back Our Public Lands



DECEMBER 19, 2013
Cascade Business News


The federal government continues to control more than 50 percent of all lands in the western United States. Locked up in these federally controlled lands are more than $150 trillion in mineral values and more recoverable oil―in Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming alone―than in the rest of the world combined. Failed federal forest policies prevent harvesting timber, which would improve forest conditions and wildfire resilience, provide useful consumer products and renewable energy feedstock, and revitalize rural schools and communities. FBI criminal activity alerts now warn that terrorists [Blog Editor: Islamic terrorists that is, not ranchers labeled as terrorists by the Federal government] are encouraging the use of wildfire in fuel-laden federal forests as weapons for jihad.


There is no good reason for the federal government to retain control over these lands and resources in states like Oregon. We in the West have, in good faith, simply tolerated the federal government’s delay in honoring its more than 200-year-old obligation to transfer title to these lands for so long that now most people assume there must be some valid reason the federal government controls our lands and resources.
But there is none. At a recent Continuing Legal Education seminar to several dozen lawyers, a law professor (who is frequently quoted as saying it is “clearly unconstitutional” for states to take action to secure the transfer of title to their public lands) displayed an annual average precipitation map indicating that the federal government retains control of western lands because they are “arid.”
The second reason he gave was that the founders of the western states simply gave up their lands as a sort of ransom for the privilege of statehood, citing half a sentence in the statehood enabling acts: “… forever disclaim all right and title….” The funny thing is, this same half sentence is word-for-word the same in the statehood enabling acts of almost all states east of Colorado, where the federal government did dispose of their public lands.
In fact, for decades, as much as 90% of the lands in Illinois, Missouri, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida were kept under federal control. Then, one man had the knowledge and courage to rally citizens to compel Congress to transfer title to their public lands. His name was Thomas Hart Benton, a Democratic U.S. Senator from Missouri featured in President John F. Kennedy’s best-selling book Profiles in Courage.
The statehood enabling acts promising to transfer title to the public lands are the same for all states west and east of Colorado. It’s been done before―repeatedly and recently. And, returning these lands to state control is the only solution big enough to fund education; better care for our lands and forests; protect access; create jobs; and grow local, state, and national economies and tax base.
If we fail to stand up and take action to secure state and local control of our lands and abundant resources, it will not be because it is illegal, unconstitutional, or impossible. It will only be because we―and the local, state, and national leaders we “hire”―lack the knowledge and the courage to do what has been successfully done before.
Do your local, state, and national leaders know why there is a difference between the way the federal government has handled eastern and western lands? Have you inquired what specifically they are doing to compel Congress to honor the same statehood promise for our children and our future that Congress already kept with Hawaii and all states east of Colorado? Have you asked them what groups or influential individuals they will bring to the effort? Have you asked them what specifically you can do to help?
Now is the time to let our representatives know how transferring federally controlled lands back to the state can vastly benefit Oregon’s economy while preserving and using wisely our wealth of natural resources.


Federal Assets Above and Below Ground

January 17, 2013
Institute for Energy Research


The federal government owns a great deal of valuable assets both above and below ground. The above ground assets include buildings, lands, roads, railroad infrastructure, levees, dams, and hydroelectric generating facilities, to name just a few, many of which are underutilized. Below the ground, the federal government owns the rights to mineral and energy leases, from which they receive royalties, rents, and bonus payments.


Federal real property totals over 900,000 assets with a combined area of over 3 billion square feet and more than 41 million acres of land. Additionally, the federal government owns over 600 million acres of lands and minerals onshore, and owns or manages a total of approximately 755 million acres of onshore subsurface mineral estate.  Offshore, the federal government owns some 1.76 billion acres of lands and mineral estate, extending out 200 nautical miles from our shores.  The federal government’s total mineral estate holdings are therefore about 2.515 billion acres of lands.  Thus, the federal government’s mineral estate land holdings  surpass the total surface land area of the nation of Canada.   These holdings, as we will see, are vastly underutilized.


In fiscal year 2009, federal agencies reported 45,190 underutilized buildings, an increase of 1,830 underutilized buildings from the previous fiscal year. In fiscal year 2009, these underutilized buildings accounted for $1.66 billion in annual operating costs, according to the General Accounting Office (GAO). The …REST THE REST

Let me ask you if you would have been told that the USA would accumulate 18 trillion in debt and 200 trillion in unfunded liabilities because of the last 30 years of unfair trade policies which allowed a trade partner to manipulate its currency in a fashion that created that SOUND ROSS PEROT said we would hear that only de-industrialized the USA that led to these loses in durable wealth creation and the conversion of any debt to an equity position, would you have agreed to that kind of trade policy?
 


Key Points

THE PROMISES ARE THE SAME - IT'S BEEN DONE BEFORE - IT'S THE ONLY SOLUTION BIG ENOUGH


The promise of the federal government to “extinguish title” (transfer title) to the public lands is the same to all newly created states – both east and West of Colorado. The U.S. Supreme Court refers to these statehood contracts (Enabling Acts) as “trusts,” “solemn compacts,” and “bi-lateral agreements” to be performed “in a timely fashion. You can see the western states’ enabling acts compared to those of states east of Colorado on the page “What’s Happening in My State.”


IF ALL OF THE STATES WERE EQUAL AT THEIR CREATION …
WHY THE DIFFERENCE?


- It’s clear that the difference didn’t stem from when the states were created (e.g. OK-1907 and CA-1850, or ND-1889 and ID-1890).


- The difference didn’t stem from the terms of transfer in their Enabling Acts because those are materially the same. Further evidence of this can be found here.


SO, WHY THE DIFFERENCE?

For nearly 200 years, Congress recognized its duty to dispose of the public lands. It wasn’t until 1976 that Congress passed the Federal Land Policy Management Act (FLPMA) unilaterally declaring that it was their new “policy to retain these lands in federal ownership.”


However, in 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously declared that Congress doesn’t have the authority to unilaterally change “the uniquely sovereign character” of a state’s admission into the Union, particularly “where virtually all of a state’s public lands are a stake.” Hawaii v. OHA. There should not be a difference.


One of the common myths that are thrown out in regards to the Transfer of Public Lands is that nothing like this has been done before in the history of our country. This is simply untrue.


As much as 90% of all lands in Illinois and Missouri (and AL, LA, AR, IN, FL, etc.) were federally controlled for decades! With so much land under federal control, these States persistently argued they could not:


  • adequately fund education,


  • grow their economies, or


  • responsibly manage their abundant resources.


They banded together, refused to be silent or take “NO” for an answer, and compelled Congress to transfer title to their lands. In 1959, Congress granted directly to the State of Hawaii (the last and western-most State) “the United States’ title to all the public lands … within the boundaries of the State of Hawaii, title to which is held by the United States immediately prior to its admission into the Union.”


DOES THAT SOUND FAMILIAR?


Today, similar states with large amounts of federally controlled multiple-use lands  are methodically loosing [sic] access to those lands, the health of those lands is deteriorating at an astounding pace, and we are struggling to be productive and grow our economies.
Now we need to band together once again as united states, refuse to be silent or take “NO” for an answer, and … READ THE REST



Is there a Plan to use Land out West to Pay our Debt to China?
Freedom Outpost


…


… First, and foremost, is the fact that very little of what the government manages is done so in a judicious or fiscally responsible manner.  Take a look at the chart below.

A second undeniable truth is that we are deeply steeped in un-manageable, and un-payable debt.  As indicated by the link to the Debt Clock above, the United States has over 17 trillion in debt and over 120 trillion in unfunded liabilities.  I doesn't take someone with a math degree to figure out that it is impossible to repay all of this debt, or fund the liabilities that have been promised to many.  However, the criminals just keep printing; all the while driving us deeper and deeper into servitude.  Are they seemingly unaffected by this because they have a plan to wrap all of this debt up in a land deal with our debtors? I say that there is a good possibility of this happening, and one can even see the "writing on the wall" if the evidence is examined critically.


… But, do those in power have a bigger plan to use western lands as a way to satisfy our debt obligation?  Please indulge me while I explore that avenue.


…


Enter China


One of the biggest creditors to the United States debt is China, which is no secret.  However, a fact that may be less know is how much land China is buying in the United States. … READ ENTIRETY


________________
Edited by John R. Houk
Most of Newbill’s links have an excerpt.
All text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor


© Tony Newbill