 |
|
| Email this article | Printer friendly page |
| For Immediate Release | |
| Apr 3, 2000 | Contact: Press Office 202-646-5172 |
|
A LIBERAL NEWSPAPER BACKS DEMOCRATS/CLINTON INSTEAD OF PRIVACY RIGHTS (Washington, D.C.) In a ridiculous editorial of today, The Washington Post sides with Democrats and the Clinton-Gore Administration in criticizing the Honorable Royce Lamberth for upholding the law which, ironically, liberal Democrats wrote in response to the Watergate era. The law, commonly known as the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. Section 552(a) et seq., states plainly on its face that it applies to the Executive Office of the President, among other government agencies. The Privacy Act simply provides that when the government keeps information on individuals in a record-keeping system, it must obtain the consent of these individuals before it can publicly release this information. The purpose behind this civil rights law, which is punishable with up to one year in prison, is to prevent the government from using its record-keeping system as a way to intimidate, threaten, coerce and/or blackmail its citizens. The editorial also effectively endorsed the Clinton-Gore White House's refusal to abide by the Privacy Act. Indeed, this is what the Clinton-Gore Administration, and most particularly Bill and Hillary Clinton, have been doing over the last seven years with FBI and other government files. The results of this "campaign of terror" were most clearly felt during the impeachment proceedings, where the House Managers were "outed" in an attempt to intimidate, threaten, coerce and blackmail them. This sent a coercive signal to Senators that similar treatment was in store for them if they convicted the President. Sure enough, the Senate "caved" and failed to convict. In Judicial Watch's $90-million class-action Filegate lawsuit, the Court has correctly held that a pattern of violating the privacy rights of American citizens by the Clinton-Gore White House will raise evidentiary inferences that the FBI files were also misused. In this context, Judge Lamberth found that the President and his collaborators (who include Mrs. Clinton, by the Clinton-Gore White House's own admission – see www.JudicialWatch.org) criminally violated the privacy rights of Kathleen Willey. Previous rulings involved Linda Tripp, and the Clinton-Gore Department of Defense. "The Washington Post, owned and operated by Katharine Graham (and the Graham family), who dined with the President shortly after it was revealed he had been procuring oral sex from a 23-year-old White House intern, and who has close ties with the Democratic Party, obviously unleashed her left-leaning editors to write the editorial of today criticizing Judge Lamberth for upholding the law. Coupled with threats against the Judge by Democrats, published by Paul Bedard in U.S. News and World Report (see other Judicial Watch press release of today), that any further appointment of Lamberth would be blocked, it is clear that Democrats are running scared because for once there may be one judge in this country who will uphold the rule of law against the most corrupt President, First Lady, and Administration in U.S. history," stated Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman. |
|
