Justin Nozuka ft. Zaho - Heartless (la promesse)

Candidate Barack Obama in 2007 on Warrantless Wiretapping

Excerpt from President Obama's speech at the Woodrow Wilson Center on August 1, 2007.

... This Administration also puts forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we demand. I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom.

That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient. That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works.

We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary.

This Administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not. There are no short-cuts to protecting America ... .

Read more : Illinois Senator Barack Obama, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, gave this August 2007 speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center.

Obama Video Taping Your Colonoscopy

From Salon :

"Now we know for sure: The Obama administration has presided over the most thorough expansion of the domestic surveillance state of any U.S. presidency. Even as the nation was still absorbing the news, broken by Glenn Greenwald at the Guardian on Wednesday night, that the National Security Agency has been routinely collecting phone call records for millions of Americans, the Washington Post and the Guardian published articles revealing even broader government snooping powers: Since 2007, the NSA and the FBI have had the power to watch nearly every aspect of our online life as well."

Is Gina Galaviz stalking members of GetEQUAL Texas ?

Remember this face and look out for her if you're ever in San Antonio. This is the woman who was caught taking photos of the license plates of the automobiles of GetEQUAL Texas members. When asked what she was doing, Gina replied, "If y'all are going to protest, then we have a right to know where you live."

Read more : David Medina's campaign tries to intimidate GetEqual protestors

VIDEO : Drone Like Device Flying Over Luxury Condo Conversion Of St. Vincent's Hospital

Is Bill Rudin using a #drone like device for security over the luxury condo conversion of St. Vincent's Hospital ? youtu.be/XXOU3C-YQNk

— Stop Christine Quinn (@stopchrisquinn) June 6, 2013

Is Rudin Management Company using a drone-like device to create a security checkpoint around the former site of St. Vincent's Hospital ? Has Rudin Management Company received clearance to operate a private security drone from NYPD ?

Quinn Betrays AIDS Activists In Exchange For Manufactured Koch Endorsement

In act of desperation, Quinn camp goes digging for endorsement from Ed Koch beyond the grave.

Christine Quinn has become so desperate for campaign endorsements that she is going to get one out of a dead man. Let's hope she doesn't try to get some votes the same way, too. She's already trying to fake her popularity with sock puppet Twitter accounts, mind you. But seriously, Ed Koch, whose endorsement she is seeking, was the beginning of the neoliberalism bent in Democratic policies. One needs to look no further than to the cruel betrayal in Mayor Koch's non-response to the AIDS crisis. Mayor Koch refused to take any meaningful action on HIV/AIDS out of fear that he would be outed as a gay man. What kind of a message is Speaker Quinn trying to send by reaching for this grave endorsement ? Mayor Koch's endorsement in encumbered with betrayal and closet politics. This one issue alone should be a clarion call for every New York City LGBT voter to question Speaker Quinn's judgement. How do AIDS activists feel about being thrown under the bus in exchange for an endorsement from the late Mayor Koch ? (Ed Koch’s Sister to Amplify His Support for Christine Quinn * NYTimes)

Will insensitive and revisionist statements like this, from the Quinn campaign, drive LGBT activists to demonstrate against Christine Quinn during Pride Month ?

“Ed Koch was an incredible leader for the city,” said Josh Isay, Ms. Quinn’s chief strategist.

Related : Ed Koch, 88, Dies : "How Am I Doing ?" AIDS Memorial Reality Check

Dalida / Jouez Bouzoukis

A great up-tempo song by the late and great Dalida.

Fake Twitter Accounts Reminiscent Of Fake Slush Fund Charity Accounts

Last week, in a sign of desperation, Christine Quinn's Twitter account jumped by 20,000 followers overnight. City & State reviewed the sock-puppet Twitter accounts, and this was their analysis before Quinn's campaign people were forced to get rid of these fake followers after the negative publicity.

Some of the fake Twitter accounts, which was pointed out by City & State, included "Mary DeBoos (@deecohunk0106), Sergio Andres (@deecohunk0105), Tiffany Stone (@deecohunk0104), Quy Sin (@deecohunk0102), Osmany Adrian (@deecohunk0100), Mukhtar Bako (@deecohunk0099), Nick Afriza (@deecohunk0098), et cetera, ad infinitum. Then there is the whole series of followers who coincidentally picked some permutation of @byhnoleda0080 as their user name like Rona Ghotra (@byhnoleda0078), Vija Kumar (@byhnoleda0074) and Kelly Batista (@byhnoleda0072)."

The 20,000 fake Twitter accounts is reminiscent of the umpteen fake charity accounts, which Speaker Quinn used to use, to divert her slush funds for years, until her shady practise was exposed.

At the time the slush fund scandal broke, The New York Post reported about the fake slush fund charity account names used by Speaker Quinn : "Among the dozens of fabricated groups that were slated to receive funds were the Immigration Improvement Project of New York ($300,000), the Coalition for a Strong Special Education ($400,000) and the American Association of Concerned Veterans ($422,763)."

Will Bill Thompson Betray Black Voters on Stop-And-Frisk ?

New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Bill Thompson’s restrained approach to ending stop-and-frisk policing has paid dividends with the endorsement from a coalition of city law-enforcement unions, the NYTimes writes. (via City & State First Read)

From the NYTimes :

Jumaane D. Williams, a city councilman from Brooklyn who has sponsored legislation against stop-and-frisk tactics, bluntly suggested that Mr. Thompson was taking the allegiance of black voters for granted.

“I think he believes that the color of his skin is what’s needed to get to communities of color, rather than standing on the correct substance of issues,” he said.

Obama Heckled About Drones, Guantanamo, Muslim Murder, War On Terror

From Yahoo! News :

Obama was heckled at length by Medea Benjamin, co-founder of the anti-war group Code Pink and a leading (and highly recognizable) critic of the so-called war on terrorism.

"Can you tell the Muslim people their lives are as precious as our lives?" she shouted as she was finally ushered from the hall. "Will you apologize to the thousands of Muslims that you have killed? Will you compensate the innocent family victims? That will make us safer!"

After trying and failing several times to get her to sit quietly, Obama went off script and enlisted her protest to reinforce his message about the need to close the Guantanamo facility.

"The voice of that woman is worth paying attention to," the president said, to applause. "Obviously, I do not agree with much of what she said. And obviously she wasn’t listening to me and much of what I said. But these are tough issues. And the suggestion that we can gloss over them is wrong."

Leading up to President Barack Obama's formal address on the drone war, it was revealed that President Obama has used drones to kill at least four Americans.

Ms. Benjamin, in her remarks made later to AOL/Huffington Post, said that the Obama administration has been playing prosecutor, judge, jury, and executioner.

One of the demands Ms. Benjamin made was to call for the removal of the controversial drone program from the secret operations of the Central Intelligence Agency.

2013-05-22 Eric Holder AG Congress Letter Drones by Connaissable

Anthony Weiner Enters Mayoral Race

Christine Quinn's History Of Using Hate Crimes For Political Gain

From The Village Voice :

"... the prospect of Quinn's active participation in the march provoked a sort of counter-protest by a small contingent of activists who are unimpressed with Quinn's record. As the main rally moved south on Greenwich Avenue, marchers passed a tiny contingent of activists holding up a sign on the island intersection at Seventh Avenue. 'We need a hospital, we don't need condos,' it read. The side-vigil raised the question of why Carson was taken to Beth Israel, on First Avenue, and whether he could have been saved if he was treated nearby. The handful of activists standing in the shadow of the building that used to be St. Vincent's Hospital, now being converted into 350 luxury condo units, criticized Quinn for signing off on the zoning change that made this development possible, even though the City Council speaker's brand had been stamped all over the larger march itself."

Did New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn cancel her planned political exploitation of Monday night's Mark Carson vigil, after The Village Voice and Michael Petrelis exposed these concerns ?

Speaker Quinn has a history of exploiting tragedy for political gain.

Earlier this year, after former mayor Ed Koch passed away, Speaker Quinn's campaign staff were trying to figure out how to exploit Mayor Koch's endorsement of Speaker Quinn's mayoral campaign, even after he had died -- and he was no longer around to approve of the campaign's messaging.

And in 1998, while she was in her first political campaign to be elected to the City Council, Ms. Quinn was using a spike in bias crimes against the LGBT community as an excuse to call for canceling that year's annual Greenwich Village Halloween Parade.

SIDEBAR : Please watch this video, which I just discovered this morning, which explains why it might be more accurate to describe the discrimination against the LGBTQ community as "heterosexual-supremacy" instead of using the term "homophobia."

Memorial & Vigil For Mark Carson At St. Vincent's Hospital

Memorial & Vigil For Mark Carson

Mark Carson was shot and killed in a hate crime over the weekend in New York City. He was pronounced dead at Beth Israel Medical Center, where he was taken by ambulance.

Since the closing of St. Vincent's Hospital in 2010, all of Lower Manhattan has been without a Level I Trauma Center.

Join us on Monday evening at 5:30 p.m. for a silent vigil for Mr. Carson, and for all the other patients in medical emergencies, who have nowhere nearby to go after the closing of St. Vincent's Hospital.

Date : Monday, May 20, 2013
Time : 5:30 - 6 pm
Place : In front of the old St. Vincent's Hospital, 7th Avenue South, between West 11th and West 12th Streets.

Please bring candles. RSVP on Facebook : Memorial & Vigil For Mark Carson At St. Vincent's

We Mourn the Senseless Death of Mark Carson by Connaissable

Related : Adam Feldman organized a midnight vigil for Mark Carson : Reflections by Dan Fishback

"Long-time activist and Stonewall vet Jim Fouratt pointed out something that SHOULD be obvious, but which hadn’t occurred to me — that there used to be a hospital TWO BLOCKS from that corner, but in the wake of St. Vincent’s closing, Mark had to be rushed to Beth Israel all the way across town. Perhaps, in the distance between these hospitals, Mark’s life could have been saved. In that sense, the politicians that allowed St. Vincents to be converted to a luxury condo high rise — politicians like lesbian mayoral candidate Christine Quinn — may have gay blood on their hands. Jim helped us understand how depriving a gay neighborhood of a hospital is inherently homophobic and violent."

"And while I’m sure individual NYPD officers were polite in the lead-up to this vigil, we cannot forget that the NYPD ritually harasses trans people and people of color in this city ! Trans women are arrested simply for walking down the street! So when we talk about how queer people need to be 'safe,' we have to ask ourselves what 'safety' really means — because the NYPD does not makes us safe ! It harasses and imprisons us ! We must reckon with these connections — that Mark Carson’s death is an extension of the violence that oppresses so many others, from the institutional violence of governments to the random violence of a crazy guy with a gun. …"

Dan Fishback, the author of this post, added : "I wish I had specifically named the Stop & Frisk policy that makes queers and people of color vulnerable to police harassment. I wish I had called out Christine Quinn for supporting this policy."

Link : Adam Feldman organized a midnight vigil for Mark Carson : Reflections by Dan Fishback

Could the life of Mark Carson been saved if St. Vincent's was still open ?

Marc Carson, 32, shot dead in anti-gay attack in Greenwich Village.on.dnainfo.com/13Dd94b twitter.com/DNAinfo/status…

— DNAinfo.com New York (@DNAinfo) May 18, 2013

Focus On Health : Anti-Gay Bias Killing : No St. Vincent's Hospital For Victim

The bias murder of Mark Carson is tragic and must rightly be condemned. But residents in all areas in New York City, including the Lower West Side of Manhattan, which were once served by the ten hospitals that have closed since 2006 -- when Christine Quinn became Speaker of the City Council -- deserve answers, too.

Could Mr. Carson's life had been saved, if, two blocks away from the scene of his violent attack, St. Vincent's Hospital was still open ?

How many lives have been lost, because of the collapse of so many full-service hospitals in New York City ?

How much worse has the Average Ambulance ER Turnaround Time become as a result of the closing of ten full-service hospitals in New York City ?

Why don't more politicians support a single-payer healthcare system, so that all hospitals could be funded to fully meet the healthcare needs of their patients ?

DOJ FOIA Request Update - Will Government Approve Expedited Processing ?

See Also New Advisory : FOIA Appeal Update Regarding the DOJ's ''vindictive prosecution'' of Lt. Daniel Choi (7 Dec 2013)

• VIDEO : Are Ronald Machen, Angela George, and Sanjay Sola helping President Obama politicize the US DOJ ? (Lt. Dan Choi FOIA Request Update)

The FOIA request I sent to the U.S. Department of Justice was received on 6 May 2013.

2013 05 06 Lt Daniel Choi DOJ FOIA Request Louis Flores Scan

When I called the Department of Justice on 14 May 2013, I was told that the FOIA request had not yet been logged into the DOJ's FOIA request tracking system. I will call them next week, to find out if the DOJ is going to approve expedited processing.

Here is the original request, as submitted :

2013-04-30 Lt Daniel Choi DOJ FOIA Request Louis Flores by Connaissable

My request is heavily patterned after a separate and unrelated request submitted by the ACLU. Let's see what we learn....

Here is the full text of the FOIA request :

30 April 2013

Department of Justice
EOUSA/FOIA/PA Staff
BICN Bldg.
600 E Street, N.W., Suite 7300
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001

Ladies and Gentlemen :

Re : REQUEST UNDER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT/
     Expedited Processing Requested

This letter constitutes a request (“Request”) pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”), 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq., the Department of Justice implementing regulations, 28 C.F.R. § 16.1 et seq., the President’s Memorandum of January 21, 2009, 74 Fed. Reg. 4683 (Jan. 26, 2009), and the Attorney General’s Memorandum of March 19, 2009, 74 Fed. Reg. 49,892 (Sept. 29, 2009). I submit this Request as a blogger.

This Request seeks records pertaining to the prosecution of Lt. Daniel Choi (“Lt. Choi”). Lt. Choi was arrested on Nov. 15, 2010 on a public sidewalk adjacent to the White House, during a protest against the military’s former policy known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” On March 27, 2013, I submitted a request for information in an e-mail addressed to Angela George of the U.S. Attorney’s Office (attached hereto as Exhibit A) (“Original Request”) requesting various information and records pertaining to the prosecution of Lt. Choi. Other officers with the Department of Justice were also copied on this e-mail. I specifically mentioned in my Original Request that I requested answers to my questions, or, if there was another process, which I had to follow to submit an “official” request for information, I alternatively requested that I be informed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office of such process. The U.S. Attorney’s Office was non-responsive to this e-mail, so I sent a follow-up e-mail on April 10, 2013 (attached hereto as Exhibit B). The U.S. Attorney’s Office was non-responsive to this e-mail, so I forwarded the e-mail chain of my requests for information and records on April 16, 2013 to a general e-mail inbox for the Department of Justice (attached hereto as Exhibit C), to which I finally received an acknowledgement and further instruction dated April 17, 2013 (attached hereto as Exhibit D), which gives rise to this Request.

This Request seeks information and records pertaining to the nature and purpose of the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s prosecution of Lt. Choi. Many activists question why the Department of Justice has sought to prioritise the prosecution of activists, such as the late Aaron Swartz and Lt. Choi. Are prosecutors being told to prosecute activists ? The nature of some of the prosecutions of activists have been portrayed in the press to be “rife with intimidation and prosecutorial overreach.” See, e.g., Noam Cohen, A Data Crusader, a Defendant and Now, a Cause, N.Y. Times, Jan. 14, 2003, at A1. Given this prosecutorial tone, has there been any intention to express disrespect to Lt. Choi during the proceedings of the prosecution ? What explains why the U.S. Attorney’s Office refused to address Lt. Choi by his official military rank ? How aggressive were prosecutors instructed to pursue Lt. Choi ? What have been the cumulative costs of the prosecution of Lt. Choi ?

In several press reports, the Department of Justice was portrayed to be engaged in a “vindictive prosecution” against Lt. Choi. See, e.g., Scott Wooledge, Updated: Judge Allows Lt Dan Choi’s “vindictive prosecution” Defense, Daily Kos, (Aug. 31, 2011), http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/31/1012290/-Updated-Judge-Allows-Lt-Dan-Choi-s-vindictive-prosecution-Defense#. And then, before the nature and purpose of the selective prosecution of Lt. Choi could become public information, prosecutors quashed the effort to expose the selective prosecution. See Lou Chibbaro Jr., Judge rules against Choi in ‘vindictive’ prosecution claim, Washington Blade (Oct. 17, 2011), http://www.washingtonblade.com/2011/10/17/judge-rules-against-choi-in-‘vindictive’-prosecution-claim/.

Further reports suggest prosecutorial overreach or vindictive prosecution is not limited to the late Mr. Swartz or to Lt. Choi. The scope of other prosecutions, namely, the prosecution of PFC Bradley Manning, could lead to treating all whistleblowers as traitors. This treatment has been described as “extraordinary prosecutorial overkill.” See Amy Goodman & Glenn Greenwald, Glenn Greenwald on Bradley Manning: Prosecutor Overreach Could Turn All Whistleblowing into Treason, Democracy Now (March 5, 2013), http://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/5/glenn_greenwald_on_bradley_manning_prosecutor.

Despite these publicized concerns, the Department of Justice remains silent about its intentions with respect of its prosecution of activists. Indeed, the U.S. Attorney’s Office was non-responsive to my Original Request. It is unclear why federal prosecutors are persecuting activists. The public has little information about the internal accountability mechanisms by which laws and rules govern the targeted prosecutions of activists. Nor does the public have any information about how the Department of Justice balances First Amendment rights, other Constitutional rights, civil liberties, and other civil rights of activists against the charges that the Department of Justice brings against activists. Without this information, the public is unable to make an informed judgment about the Department of Justice’s targeted prosecutions of activists. I make the following requests for information in hopes of filling that void.

I. Requested Records

     1. All records and information pertaining to the legal basis of prosecuting activists, who engage in protests, including, but not limited, to records and information regarding :

     A. what kind of activists may be targeted for prosecution, how many activists have been targeted for prosecution, what are the names of such activists, and which Department of Justice officials approved of such prosecution of activists ;

     B. whether the nature and purpose of prosecution of activists may be aggressive, selective, or involve overreach, and which Department of Justice officials approve of such nature and purpose of prosecution of activists ;

     C. limits, rules, procedures, or other guidelines that must or should be taken into consideration before, during, and after the prosecution of activists to mimimise the interference with First Amendment rights, other Constitutional rights, civil liberties, and other civil rights of activists ;

     D. consideration of other circumstances, conditions, and restrictions that form any part of the decision to target activists for prosecution ; and, if such considerations exist, under what circumstances, under what conditions, and subject to what restrictions ;

     E. any and all agency, executive, judicial, or congressional reports, memoranda, records, and information, which provide any description of the process for the determination as to whether activists can be targeted for prosecution ; and

     F. whether agencies other than the Department of Justice may target activists for prosecution, and, if so, under what circumstances, under what conditions, and subject to what restrictions ; and which agency officials approve of such prosecution of activists.

     2. All records and information created on or after Nov. 12, 2010, pertaining to the legal basis for the arrest and/or prosecution of Lt. Choi, including, but not limited to, records and information regarding :

     A. whether the prosecution of Lt. Choi was part of any Department of Justice’s process to target activists ; and

     B. the limits of the Department of Justice’s prosecution to mimimise the interference with First Amendment, other Constitutional rights, civil liberties, and other civil rights of Lt. Choi.

     3. All records and information created on or after Nov. 12, 2010, pertaining to the legal basis for the Department of Justice or U.S. Attorney’s Office to fail to refer to Lt. Choi by his military rank, in accordance with Army Regulation 670-1.

     4. The total cost of the prosecution of Lt. Choi, including, but not limited to :

     A. any and all records and information created on or after Nov. 12, 2010, pertaining to the cost of arresting and/or prosecuting Lt. Choi, including, but not limited to, records and information regarding :

     a. any and all agency, executive, judicial, or congressional reports, memoranda, records, and information, which indicate, calculate, or analyze the budged and actual cost of the prosecution of Lt. Choi ;

     b. any and all records of the cost of staff costs, staff benefits, travel, transcripts, accommodations, meals, non-attorney investigation costs, research costs, other investigation costs, and all other costs on the prosecution of Lt. Choi ;

     c. any and all records of the costs of fact and expert witnesses in connection with the prosecution of Lt. Choi ;

     d. any and all records of assistance provided by other law enforcement agencies in connection with the prosecution of Lt. Choi ; and

     e. any and all records of hours worked, paid or unpaid overtime hours, and other information about personnel hours worked in connection with the prosecution of Lt. Choi.

II. Application For Expedited Processing

I request expedited processing pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E) ; 22 C.F.R. § 171.12(b) ; 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(d) ; 32 C.F.R. § 286.4(d)(3) ; 32 C.F.R. § 1900.34(c). There is a “compelling need” for these records, because the information requested is urgently needed in order to be disseminated to inform the public about actual or alleged Federal Government activity. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v) ; see also 22 C.F.R. § 171.12(b)(2) ; 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(d)(1)(ii) ; 32 C.F.R. § 286.4(d)(3)(ii) ; 32 C.F.R. § 1900.34(c)(2).

In addition, the records sought relate to a “breaking news story of general public interest.” 22 C.F.R. § 171.12(b)(2)(i) ; 32 C.F.R. § 286.4(d)(3)(ii)(A) ; see also 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(d)(1)(iv) (providing for expedited processing in relation to a “matter of widespread and exceptional media interest in which there exist possible questions about the government’s integrity which affect public confidence”).

As a blogger, I am “primarily engaged in disseminating information” within the meaning of the statue and regulations. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(v)(II) ; 22 C.F.R. § 171.12(b)(2) ; 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(d)(1)(ii) ; 32 C.F.R. § 286.4(d)(3)(ii) ; 32 C.F.R. § 1900.34(c)(2). Dissemination of information to the public is a critical and substantial component of my mission and work. See, e.g., Jonathan Lemire, Christine Quinn detractors use social media in effort to quash her mayoral run, N.Y. Daily News (April 14, 2013), http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/online-effort-quash-christine-quinn-mayoral-aspirations-article-1.1316224 ; Jill Colvin, Christine Quinn Foes Prepare Campaign to Spoil Her Mayoral Hopes, DNAinfo (Jan. 9, 2013), http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20130109/new-york-city/christine-quinn-foes-prepare-campaign-spoil-her-mayoral-hopes. I publish several blogs, produce YouTube videos, and manage several Twitter feeds. Such material is widely available to everyone. This Request originated from questions posted to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, so that I could update this specific blog post : http://ny-popculture-politics.blogspot.com/2013/03/lt-dan-choi-dadt-trial-update.html.

The records and information sought directly relate to a breaking news story of general public interest that concerns actual or alleged Federal Government activist ; specifically, the records and information sought relate to the U.S. Government’s prosecution of activists. The records and information sought will help determine what is the government’s asserted legal basis for these targeted prosecutions, whether it conflicts with the First Amendment rights, other Constitutional rights, civil liberties, and other civil rights, how many activists have been prosecuted, and other matters that are essential in order for the public to make an informed judgment about the advisability of this tactic and the lawfulness of the government’s conduct. For these reasons, the records and information sought relate to a “matter of widespread and exceptional media interest in which there exist possible questions about the government’s integrity which affect public confidence.” 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(d)(1)(iv).

There have been news reports about the prosecution of activists that imposes restrictions, burdens, and interferences with First Amendment, other Constitutional rights, civil liberties, and other civil rights of activists. After HIV/AIDS activists were arrested during a peaceful protest in Washington, DC, the U.S. Attorney’s Office demanded the drug-testing of activists, who were charged with nonviolent crimes, such as civil disobedience. The U.S. Attorney’s Office demand for drug-testing of HIV/AIDS activists was fraught with complications, because the activists may have had a prescription for medical marijuana or may have had prescriptions for other medications, which perhaps would have resulted in a false positive. See Trenton Straube, U.S. Attorney Requires Drug Tests for AIDS Protesters, POZ (Feb. 2012), http://www.poz.com/articles/DC_HIV_Marijuana_401_21944.shtml ; Martin Austermuhle, AIDS Activist Faces Trial After Use of Medical Marijuana Sinks Hopes for Dismissal of Charges, dcist (Feb. 9, 2012), http://dcist.com/2012/02/aids_activist_faces_trial_after_usi.php.

These news stories and investigative reports have also suggested that the prosecution of activists was unfair. These HIV/AIDS activists chained themselves together inside the office of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) to protest, among other issues, cuts to HIV/AIDS programs. They were arrested on federal charges. On the same day as the HIV/AIDS activists were arrested, 41 D.C. voting rights activists, including Mayor Vincent Gray, were arrested on Capitol Hill. The voting rights activists were charged with misdemeanors by the D.C. attorney general. Most, including the mayor, paid a $50 fine. What explains why the U.S. Attorney’s Office was treating HIV/AIDS activists differently ? See Arin Greenwood, HIV/AIDS Activists Complain Of Unfair Treatment By U.S. Attorney's Office, Huffington Post (Feb. 8, 2012), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/08/aids-activists-protest_n_1263144.html ; Brianne Carter, D.C. mayor Vincent Gray, councilmembers arrested : Protesters plead not guilty, WJLA (May 5, 2011), http://www.wjla.com/articles/2011/05/d-c-mayor-vincent-gray-councilmembers-arrested-protesters-to-appear-in-court--60103.html ; Debbie Siegelbaum, AIDS activists allege discriminatory treatment following Capitol arrest, The Hill (Feb. 8, 2011), http://thehill.com/homenews/house/209485-aids-activists-allege-discriminatory-treatment-after-capitol-protest-arrest.

Further news reports have caused concern that the prosecution of activists is influenced with political overtones. During his tenure as a U.S. Attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald targeted 23 activists, who were widely described as critics of U.S. foreign policy. See Peter Wallsten, Activists cry foul over FBI probe, The Washington Post (June 13, 2011), http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-06-13/politics/35235946_1_activists-cry-stephanie-weiner-targets ; Kevin Gosztola, FBI Continues to Target Activists in Chicago and Minneapolis (VIDEO), Firedoglake (Dec. 9, 2010), http://my.firedoglake.com/kgosztola/2010/12/09/fbi-continues-to-target-activists-in-chicago-and-minneapolis/ ; Josh Gerstein, After 1 year, FBI returns property to Minnesota anti-war activists, Politico (Nov. 3, 2011), http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshgerstein/1111/FBI_returns_property_to_Minnesota_antiwar_activists.html.

The activist community and the public-at-large are unable to determine the nature and purpose of the prosecution of activists, because there is a lack of reliable information about the reasons the Department of Justice is prosecuting activists. Indeed, even Congress is left in the dark about the motivations behind the prosecution of activists. See, e.g., Kim Zetter, Congress Demands Justice Department Explain Aaron Swartz Prosecution, Wired (Jan. 29, 2013), http://www.wired.com/ threatlevel/2013/01/doj-briefing-on-aaron-swartz/ ; Marcy Wheeler, Aaron Swartz reveals the hypocrisy of our Justice Department, Salon (Jan. 15, 2013), http://www.salon.com/2013/01/16/aaron_swartz_reveals_the_hypocrisy_of_our_ justice_department/. And in respect of Lt. Choi, a magistrate judge had found that was indication that the Department of Justice was singling out Lt. Choi for “vindictively prosecution.” See John Aravosis, Judge finds prima facie evidence that US government may have “vindictively prosecuted” Dan Choi, AMERICAblog (Aug. 31, 2011), http://americablog.com/2011/08/judge-finds-prima-facie-evidence-that-us-government-may-have-vindictively-prosecuted-dan-choi.html ; Scott Wooledge, Updated: Judge Allows Lt Dan Choi’s “vindictive prosecution” Defense, Daily Kos (Aug. 31, 2011),http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/31/1012290/-Updated-Judge-Allows-Lt-Dan-Choi-s-vindictive-prosecution-Defense# ; and Chris Geidner, Government Files Motion to Stop "Vindictive Prosecution" Defense in Choi Trial, Metro Weekley (Sept. 16, 2011), http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2011/09/government-filed-motion-to-sto.html.

III. Application for Waiver or Limitation of Fees

I request a waiver of search, review, and duplication fees on the grounds that disclosure of the requested records is in the public interest, because it “is likely to contribute significantly to public understanding of operations or activities of the government and is not primarily in the commercial interest of the requester.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(iii) ; 22 C.F.R. 171.17(a) ; see also 28 C.F.R. § 16.11(k)(1) ; 32 C.F.R. § 286.28(d) ; 32 C.F.R. § 1900.13(b)(2).

As discussed above, numerous news accounts reflect the considerable public interest in the requested records and information. Given the ongoing and widespread media attention to this issue, the records and information sought in the instant Request will significantly contribute to public understanding of the operations and activities of the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Office with regard to the targeting of activists for prosecution. See 22 C.F.R. 171.17(a)(1) ; 28 C.F.R. § 16.11(k)(1)(i) ; 32 C.F.R. § 286.28(d) ; 32 C.F.R. § 1900.13(b)(2). Moreover, disclosure is not in the ACLU’s commercial interest. Any information disclosed by me as a result of this Request will be available to the public at no cost. Thus, a fee waiver would fulfill Congress’s legislative intent in amending FOIA. See Judicial Watch Inc. v. Rossitti, 326 F.3d 1309, 1312 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (“Congress amended FOIA to ensure that it be ‘liberally construed in favor of waivers for noncommercial requesters.’” (citation omitted)) ; OPEN Government Act of 2007, Pub. L. No. 110-175, 121 Stat. 2524, § 2 (Dec. 31, 2007) (finding that “disclosure, not secrecy, is the dominant objective of the Act,” but that “in practice, the Freedom of Information Act has not always lived up to the ideals of that Act”).

I also request a waiver of search and review fees on the grounds that I qualify as a “representative of the news media,” and the records and information are not sought for commercial use. 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii) ; 28 C.F.R. § 16.11(d). Accordingly, fees associated with the processing of the Request should be “limited to reasonable standard charges for document duplication.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii)(II) ; see also 32 C.F.R. § 286.28(e)(7) ; 32 C.F.R. § 1900.13(i)(2) ; 22 C.F.R. 171.15(c) ; 28 C.F.R. § 16.11(d) (search and review fees shall not be charged to “representatives of the news media”).

I meet the statutory and regulatory definitions of a “representative of the news media” because I function as an “entity that gathers information of potential interest to a segment of the public, uses its editorial skills to turn the raw materials into a distinct work, and distributes that work to an audience.” 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(A)(ii).

* * *

Pursuant to applicable statute and regulations, I expect determination regarding expediting processing within 10 calendar days. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(6)(E)(ii)(I) ; 22 C.F.R. 171.12(b) ; 28 C.F.R. § 16.5(d)(4) ; 32 C.F.R. § 286.4(d)(3) ; 32 C.F.R. § 1900.21(d).

If the Request is denied in whole or in part, I ask that you justify all deletions by reference to specific exemptions to FOIA. We expect the release of all segregable portions of otherwise exempt material. We reserve the right to appeal a decision to withhold any information or to deny a waiver of fees.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Please furnish all applicable records to :

Louis Flores
()
New York, NY 10011

I affirm that the information provided supporting the request for expedited processing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Sincerely,

---

Note that in the last few days, the media has been whipped into a frenzy over whether the DOJ is violating the First Amendment rights, other Constitutional rights, civil liberties, and other civil rights of journalists. The FOIA request I submitted asked for records pertaining to whether the DOJ violated these same rights and liberties of activists. Let's see what we find out.... Stay tuned.