WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War!
Dynamite Affidavit Exposes Vast Clinton Administration
Cover-Up
NewsMax.com
Thursday, July 13, 2000
An explosive sworn statement written by a former Commerce
Department
officer and obtained by NewsMax.com threatens to expose top
Clinton
administration officials to serious criminal charges.
In an affidavit sworn by former Freedom of Information Act
division head Sonya
Stewart and filed with Federal District Court Judge Royce C.
Lamberth by
Judicial Watch, Stewart details the efforts of the
administration to withhold
secret documents demanded under the FOIA by Judicial Watch and
Congress.
In her affidavit Stewart voiced fears of retribution for coming
forward with her
explosive charges.
"I come forward to present my declaration to this Court with
great trepidation
and grave concern about retribution and retaliation which may be
directed at
me, both professionally and personally, as a result of this
affidavit," she wrote.
"Nevertheless, I present this declaration out of my obligation
to uphold the
interests of justice as I swore to do upon my installation as a
federal employee.
I hope, believe, and expect that the Court will protect me."
Stewart described her long career with the government - one she
fears is now
at risk.
"Since 1975, I have served solely as a career civil servant at
the Commerce
Department. I am now the Chief Financial Officer and Chief
Administrative
Officer of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
("NOAA")
where I oversee a staff of approximately 1,100, manage a $3
billion budget,
and hold the rank of Senior Executive Service Level 5 (SES-5).
"From approximately 1991 until March 2000, I was the Commerce
Department's Director for Executive Budgeting and Assistance
Management
in the Office of the Secretary. Additionally, I served as Acting
Deputy Assistant
Secretary for Administration for Commerce in the Office of the
Secretary from
November 1998 to September 1999."
In her affidavit she pointed the finger at a number of
administration officials,
provided extensive details about the sale of seats on overseas
delegations led
by the Commerce Department, and gave full recollections of the
administration's attempts to keep subpoenaed documents from being
delivered to those legally entitled to have them.
As head of the FOIA offices Stewart said she was aware of the
political
manipulations involved in the administration's attempts to hide
documents
subject to the act.
Among those named by Stewart as having been involved in the
cover-up was
former White House Deputy Counsel to the President Cheryl Mills,
one of the
lawyers representing Clinton in his Senate impeachment trial.
Mills, who was all but beatified by the media during her
appearance before the
Senate, played a prominent role in the cover-up, Stewart
charged.
"I am aware of Commerce officials' contacts with Cheryl Mills,
then Deputy
Counsel to the President, concerning whether to release or
withhold certain
documents," Stewart wrote.
"I know that Ms. Mills, in her position as Deputy Counsel to the
President,
advised Commerce officials to withhold certain documents. In my
many years
working for the federal government on FOIA and other matters,
and in my
experience gathering and responding to FOIA and Congressional
requests for
information, I have never known or heard of a federal agency
collaborating or
discussing releasing or withholding documents with White House
officials.
"The Commerce Department's collaboration with White House Deputy
Counsel Mills on these matters was, in my experience, highly
irregular and at
variance with normal procedures. During the time period at
issue, many of the
same documents were being sought by several entities, including
Judicial
Watch, Inc., congressional committees, grand juries, and others.
It is my belief
and recollection based on my knowledge and experience that these
interactions with Ms. Mills, as well as other practices, delayed
and corrupted
the Commerce Department's response to Judicial Watch's FOIA
requests."
Also mentioned in the affidavit was Bruce Lindsey, Clinton's
closest friend and
White House aide, and William M. Daley, then Commerce Department
secretary and now the top campaign official for Vice President
Al Gore.
Stewart said a December 1998 order by Judge Lamberth directing
the
Commerce Department to review its compliance with Judicial Watch
FOIA
requests was simply ignored despite being brought directly to
Daley's
attention.
"In my role as Commerce FOIA Director, I have reviewed Commerce
Department documents showing that Commerce Department officials
offered
to contact White House official Bruce Lindsey concerning the
vetting of
participants, such as James Riady of the Lippo Group, in trade
mission events
led by late [Commerce] Secretary [Ron] Brown," Stewart states.
"I have also reviewed Commerce Department documents which show
that
Commerce officials did coordinate with White House official
Doris Matsui
concerning potential participants in trade mission activities,
and that
Commerce Department officials considered support for the
President and
Democratic Party during their review."
Stewart's full affidavit follows:
DECLARATION OF SONYA STEWART
I, Sonya Stewart, hereby state, under oath, as follows:
1. Since 1975, I have served solely as a career civil servant at
the Commerce
Department. I am now the Chief Financial Officer and Chief
Administrative
Officer of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
("NOAA")
where I oversee a staff of approximately 1,100, manage a $3
billion budget,
and hold the rank of Senior Executive Service Level 5 (SES-5).
From
approximately 1991 until March 2000, I was the Commerce
Department's
Director for Executive Budgeting and Assistance Management in
the Office of
the Secretary. Additionally, I served as Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary for
Administration for Commerce in the Office of the Secretary from
November
1998 to September 1999. During my twenty-five and one-half years
of solely
career federal service, I have received the top merit awards for
career civil
servants, including the Department of Commerce Gold Medal, which
is the
highest award and honor presented at the Commerce Department. I
have also
received the Silver and Bronze Medals, the second and third
highest awards,
respectively, for my work at the Commerce Department. In
December 1999, I
received the second highest award for civil servants throughout
federal
government, the Presidential Rank Meritorious Award.
2. I come forward to present my declaration to this Court with
great trepidation
and grave concern about retribution and retaliation which may be
directed at
me, both professionally and personally, as a result of this
affidavit.
Nevertheless, I present this declaration out of my obligation to
uphold the
interests of justice as I swore to do upon my installation as a
federal employee.
I hope, believe, and expect that the Court will protect me.
3. As the Commerce Department's Director for Executive Budgeting
and
Assistance Management in the Office of the Secretary, I had
supervisory
authority over all Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") matters
department-wide. I oversaw approximately sixty employees,
including staff
charged with responding to requests for documents under the
Freedom of
Information Act. The Commerce Department's FOIA Officer, Brenda
Dolan,
and Commerce's FOIA Officer for the Office of the Secretary,
Bobbie Parsons,
worked under my supervision and reported to me. These career
FOIA officers
tried to perform their duties admirably and honorably, often
working under
circumstances that were extraordinarily adverse and challenging.
They always
did their best to manage properly the search for and gathering
of documents
responsive to various FOIA requests submitted by Judicial Watch,
Inc. These
document requests included requests for information on the
reported sale of
seats on Commerce trade missions and other matters. My FOIA
staff also
handled document requests from many other entities including the
United
States Congress.
4. However, my staff's efforts and the FOIA process were
thwarted and
obstructed by Commerce Department officials. Melissa Moss,
former Director
of the Office of Business Liaison ("OBL"), refused to cooperate
in producing
documents responsive to Judicial Watch's FOIA requests. Lesia
Thornton's
notes to file, attached as Exhibit 1, evidence such obstruction.
(Ms. Thornton
was formerly Office of the Secretary FOIA Officer.) The actions
of the
Commerce Office of General Counsel ("OGC") staff, including
career civil
servants Barbara Fredericks, Assistant General Counsel for
Administration,
and Judith Means of her staff, as well as political appointee
Sue Esserman,
former Acting Commerce General Counsel under former Commerce
Secretary
Mickey Kantor and currently Deputy U.S. Trade Representative,
also
contributed to obstructing the FOIA process. When documents
properly
responsive and releasable to Judicial Watch's FOIA requests were
gathered
by my FOIA staff, they were sent to the Office of General
Counsel, where Ms.
Fredericks is responsible for the legality of day-to-day
administrative
operations, including all legal issues related to FOIA.
5. Ms. Fredericks and her OGC staff improperly assumed and
exercised the
final authority to approve or disapprove the release of
documents responsive
to FOIA requests submitted by Judicial Watch. This practice was
and is
inconsistent with the Commerce Department's written, prescribed
rules for
responding to FOIA requests and, thus, contributed to the flaws
inherent in the
first and second Judicial Watch searches. Commerce's
Administrative Order
on FOIA calls for the first-tier FOIA determination whether to
release or
withhold documents to be made by the appropriate Commerce FOIA
Officer.
That FOIA Officer determination is to be made and executed,
after which the
requester may appeal that determination to the Commerce OGC. The
OGC,
specifically, Ms. Fredericks and her staff, are to decide FOIA
appeals
according to the Department's FOIA rules. In essence, when the
OGC
assumed authority to make the final release/withhold
determinations on the
initial Judicial Watch FOIA requests, this eliminated the
possibility for a fair and
objective review of those determinations on appeal. When OGC
makes the
first-tier determination to release/withhold, the requester does
not receive an
objective, independent appeal review since the same OGC staff
which makes
the initial release/withhold determination also rules on OGC's
own
determination on appeal. This practice violates the Department's
written rules
and flaws the process.
6. During the first Judicial Watch search, Departmental FOIA
staff, other
officials, and I often experienced frustration and concern as a
result of the
requirement to send all FOIA-responsive documents to the OGC. At
times,
sending FOIA-releasable documents to Ms. Fredericks and her
staff was like
sending these documents down a black hole because Ms. Fredericks
and her
staff would delay and/or withhold release of FOIA-requested
documents from
Judicial Watch and this Court, inconsistent with prescribed FOIA
rules. For
instance, this Court has remarked upon the improper withholding
of the
"Minority Donors List" by the OGC. Prior to Judicial Watch's
discovery of this
document during a deposition, I recall a meeting during which
all in attendance,
including Judith Means, were made aware of the existence of the
"Minority
Donors List." At that time, we determined that this list was
responsive to a
number of pending requests on which we were working, including
the Judicial
Watch FOIA request. The FOIA staff turned the document over to
Judith Means
and the OGC for release, yet we later learned, through Mr.
Whatley's
deposition and the Court's December, 1998 rulings, that the
document had not
been released by OGC and that Ms. Means had denied knowledge of
the
document. Subsequently, we also learned that Ms. Means admitted
that the
"Minority Donors List" was turned over to her and OGC by
appropriate FOIA
staff, but that the document was never released to Judicial
Watch. Concerning
any other documents which may not have been released to Judicial
Watch,
assuming they still exist, I believe they would likely remain in
the custody and
control of Ms. Fredericks and her OGC staff since the procedure
for handling
Judicial Watch FOIA requests required that FOIA officers submit
all documents
to Ms. Fredericks' office for final disposition.
7. I am aware of Commerce officials' contacts with Cheryl Mills,
then Deputy
Counsel to the President, concerning whether to release or
withhold certain
documents. I know that Ms. Mills, in her position as Deputy
Counsel to the
President, advised Commerce officials to withhold certain
documents. In my
many years working for the federal government on FOIA and other
matters, and
in my experience gathering and responding to FOIA and
Congressional
requests for information, I have never known or heard of a
federal agency
collaborating or discussing releasing or withholding documents
with White
House officials. The Commerce Department's collaboration with
White House
Deputy Counsel Mills on these matters was, in my experience,
highly irregular
and at variance with normal procedures. During the time period
at issue, many
of the same documents were being sought by several entities,
including
Judicial Watch, Inc., congressional committees, grand juries,
and others. It is
my belief and recollection based on my knowledge and experience
that these
interactions with Ms. Mills, as well as other practices, delayed
and corrupted
the Commerce Department's response to Judicial Watch's FOIA
requests.
8. Barbara Fredericks was and remains very influential within
the Commerce
Department. As Assistant General Counsel for Administration, Ms.
Fredericks'
responsibilities include serving as the Chief Ethics Officer for
the Commerce
Department. In carrying out this role, she worked closely with
the late
Commerce Secretary Ron Brown and other top officials on their
financial
disclosure forms. As such, I believe Secretary Brown and other
high-level
Commerce officials trusted Ms. Fredericks. I have heard top
Commerce
officials describe her as "our lawyer." After Secretary Brown
and other
Commerce officials died in 1996, Ms. Fredericks quickly filled
the resulting
power vacuum, in close collaboration with then-Commerce
Department
Inspector General, Frank DeGeorge, who recently pled guilty to a
federal
criminal conflict-of-interest charge. Ms. Fredericks and Mr.
DeGeorge actually
usurped the management of the Commerce Department in many
respects. The
power-sharing alliance formed between these two high-level
officials resulted
in no accountability for wrongdoing by favored Commerce
Department
officials. Certainly, Mr. DeGeorge, despite being Commerce's
Inspector
General, never sought to hold Ms. Fredericks, Ms. Means, or
other OGC
lawyers accountable for their irregular and improper conduct in
the Judicial
Watch FOIA lawsuits. Concomitantly, this Court noted in its
December 1998
decision in this case the "amazing fact" that no investigation
or action was
taken by the Commerce Department Inspector General with regard
to improper
activities uncovered by Judicial Watch. Based on my knowledge and
experience, any investigation this Court ordered or suggested to
the corrupt
Inspector General DeGeorge's office was either "fixed" or never
even
undertaken. In return, Ms. Fredericks and the OGC would ignore
and cover up
Mr. DeGeorge's outrageous misconduct and misbehavior, and stall
disciplinary
actions and other investigations into Mr. DeGeorge's atrocious
conduct, which
was very often improper, unethical and dishonest.
9. When this Court issued its December, 1998 decision in the
Judicial Watch
FOIA case excoriating the conduct of OGC staff including Judith
Means, I read
and studied the decision with great concern. I believed that the
OGC, to protect
Ms. Fredericks, Ms. Means, and others, would attempt to ensure
that the
Court's actual decision would not be shared with Commerce
Department
Secretary William Daley and other top-level officials who should
have been
informed of the Court's actual decision, order and opinion.
Inasmuch as I was
still responsible for the Department's FOIA activities, and
given the Court's
angry admonishments to departmental officials for their conduct
during the first
search, I believed it important that certain officials,
including the Secretary, be
made aware of the Court's decision. I knew that I would need
top-level support
to ensure that the second search would be conducted in a proper
manner in
keeping with the Court's orders. I also wanted to ensure that
the second search
was conducted in a manner which would not further harm the
Department's
reputation, and in a way which was mindful of the Court's views
concerning the
improper behavior exhibited by certain officials during the
first search. Thus, in
January 1999, I personally alerted my immediate supervisor, then
Chief
Financial Officer (CFO) and Assistant Secretary for
Administration, W. Scott
Gould, to this Court's decision and provided him with a copy of
it. I shared and
discussed my concerns about the Court's decision with
CFO/Assistant
Secretary Gould so that he could alert his superiors, the Deputy
Secretary
and/or the Secretary, as he deemed appropriate. Indeed,
CFO/Assistant
Secretary Gould later informed me that Deputy Secretary Robert
L. Mallett and
Secretary William M. Daley had not seen this Court's actual
decision until
Assistant Secretary Gould provided them with a copy of the
decision (which I
had annotated) and discussed the decision with them.
*COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107,
any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use
without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational
purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ]
Want to be on our lists? Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists!
******************************************************************************
*******************
A vote for Bush or Gore is a vote to continue Clinton policies!
A vote for Buchanan is a vote to continue America!
Therefore a vote for Gore or Bush is a wasted vote for America!
Don't waste your vote! Vote for Patrick Buchanan!
Today, candor compels us to admit that our vaunted two-party system is a
snare and a delusion, a fraud upon the nation. Our two parties have become
nothing but two wings of the same bird of prey...
Patrick Buchanan
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
