The Facts about Judicial Watch

[MineralMan]

See this website for information on this right-wing group that is now attacking Hillary Clinton:

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/category/organizations/judicial-watch

[Vogon_Glory]

1. Bernie's fan-boys and fan-girls will ignore your advice

All too many of them think that Judicial Watch is as reliable and non-partisan as Common Cause.

[Wilms]

2. Other Facts

See these websites for information on these government offices that are also "attacking" Hillary Clinton:

https://oig.state.gov

https://www.fbi.gov

[frylock]

11. !

[randome]

3. But if they agree with my position, they can't be all bad, can they?

They are as right-wing as Drudge.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[geek tragedy]

4. Some Bernie fans cheer for Judicial Watch and actively hope superdelegates will Katherine Harris

will disenfranchise millions of black, Latino and women Democratic primary voters.

And then wag their fingers about how they're the true progressives.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

5. I think what really matters is -- how is our corporate stock portfolio performing?

Have we gutted enough regulations? Have we shipped enough jobs off to overseas to despotic regimes to exploit the nearly enslaved locals? Are taxes carrying enough loopholes so only those who have armies of lawyers and accountants can succeed? Are enough sub-prime mortgages being aggressively sold so the properties can be swept up at fire sale prices and resold for 4 times the price? Are the insurance companies getting enough taxpayer subsidies for policies nobody can afford to use?

And let's not forget defense stocks because the wars of choice are a-comin'!

That's what really matters.

Where are those links?

[morningfog]

6. Judicial Watch is vile. But that doesn't change anything about the federal judge's rulings

to permit depositions. Nor does it change the fact that the deponents' testimonies give us information.

And it certainly has no bearing on the FBI criminal investigation.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. They are vile but I remember people here on this very website

Being adoring fans of JW, way before you got here. They were at the time getting things like oh maps from the oilfields in Iraq produced by Chenney and crew. JW, love or hate 'em, like CREW before Brock bought them, after they started the early FOIA work regarding emails, truly try to put feet on fire.

You should look fully into that. Nor do I expect you to. But they were the greatest (TM) when they went after Chenney. Ah situational ethics strikes again.

[pinebox]

8. Judge in case is a Clinton apointee

Now that's some irony right there.

[MADem]

9. JW are a bunch of far right loons. They back those super religious freaks who

think their "rights" are being trod upon, like those bat shit chaplains who have been censured and tossed because they were not allowed to force a bunch of junior military personnel to "pray to the lord in Jesus name" -- that's really all you need to know about those intolerant asses.

Now, if someone WANTS to do that sort of thing, fine, more power--but FORCING people to do it, because it's what YOU believe? No, no and no.

And those are the types of people that JW backs. The Very Opposite of both Liberal and Democratic.

[speaktruthtopower]

10. Some kind of intelligence funded agitprop group if you ask me

[MohRokTah]

12. Judicial Watch got their START from attacking the Clintons

They would not exist other than the fact that the right needed an attack dog in 1993.

[Jim Lane]

13. Judicial Watch is mostly right-wing but has a contrarian streak.

Of course, it doesn't really matter what their orientation is. Their position on a particular question, such as disclosure of State Department documents, is right or wrong based on the merits, not on a shoot-the-messenger response.

With that noted, here are a couple things that Judicial Watch did when Shrub was in office (after it bedeviled Bill Clinton and before it took up harassing Obama):

Judicial Watch's consistent investigations against Democratic figures have led to accusations that the group's lawsuits are focused on being politically motivated to help Republicans rather than enforce the law.[9] However, in July 2003 Judicial Watch joined the environmental organization Sierra Club in suing the George W. Bush administration for access to minutes of Vice President Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force.[10] After several years of legal wrangling, in May, 2005 an appeals court permitted the Energy Task Force's records to remain secret.[11][12] Judicial Watch called the decision "a defeat for open government" and Chris Farrell of Judicial Watch said the ruling fit the trend of increasing secrecy in the Bush administration.[13] Judicial Watch was involved in a similar legal dispute with Vice President Dick Cheney in 2002 when the group filed a shareholder lawsuit against Halliburton. The lawsuit, which accused Halliburton of accounting fraud, alleged that "when Mr. Cheney was chief executive of Halliburton, he and other directors inflated revenue reports, boosting Halliburton's share price." [14] As reported by the Wall Street Journal the court filing claims the oil-field-services concern overstated revenue by a total of $445 million from 1999 through the end of 2001.[15]

In 2006 Judicial Watch sued the Secret Service to force the release of logs detailing convicted former lobbyist Jack Abramoff's visits to the White House. This resulted in the release of a number of documents.[16]

(from the Wikipedia article on Judicial Watch)

[DebDoo]

14. HILLARY is under investigation. Judicial watch didn't make that happen - HILLARY's actions did.

[eastwestdem]

15. I've seen many right wing sites being quote on DU lately...times are strange... nt