20 May 11:22 update -- At 9:33 am the DOJ viewed the picture below wherein it is proved that media lawyers and the Boston Herald consider me a journalist and member of the media on my own accord, by name. Honestly, the nonsense and abuse I have to go through just to be a responsible member of the Fourth Estate is mind-boggling. Stick around for tonight's movie about the ongoing Wells Fargo Sand Canyon issues I have been journalizing for well over a year now in the Jeanne Ingress cases, one such video being hosted on Real Estate News 247 open forum. Well just last week Wells Fargo's Motion to Dismiss was denied in a Federal Case because the Plaintiffs are free to argue the issue that Sand Canyon could not have assigned that which they did not have. Ms. Ingress and I have been saying the same exact thing for months. See the thumbnail read the case Drouin v. AMHSI/Wells Fargo/Option One 11-CV-596 and quit giving me a hard time or I'll sue and it's not going to be pretty.
20 May 11:22 update -- Attorney McLeod returned my phone call. She will reconsider after I submit more material. She is trying to put me into the freelancer status where my material is republished by other press but that is not my point. My point is that I am covered by the statute on my own merits. "What I do is no different than what I did as an editor or reporter for the Call & Post or Indianapolis Star 20 years ago even if it has more opinion in it... a luxury that I am not afforded by major press."
Lawsuit KingCast Mortgage Movies v. DOJ in FOIA 5 USC §552(a)(4)(A)(ii) Press Exemption
Dear Attorney McLeod: I am in receipt of your letter dated 16 May 2012 and politely decline to pay the requested fees for any and all documentation showing where NH U.S. Bankruptcy Trustee Lawrence Sumski has ever challenged a B10 Proof of Claim relative to foreclosure, as many U.S. Trustees have done. Instead you can check to see if that is your Final Answer, and if indeed it is you can prepare to come to Federal District Court in Boston to explain how and why you completely ignored the following facts, law and issues. I wish I could sue you individually but Pickens v. DOJ 2011 U.S. Dist Lexis 69829 has apparently disposed of that issue last year. Odd that it wasn't raised in Covington v. McLeod, 646 F Supp. 2d 66.
1. Original FOIA Request 11 March 2001.
2. FOIA Appeal 13 August 2011.
3. DOJ arbitrary and capricious denial (1) and (2).
4. Draft lawsuit with Exhibits.
1. The U.S. Department of Justice, by and through Attorney Janice Galli McLeod, on 16 May 2012 issued an arbitrary and capricious determination that Plaintiff was not a journalist within the meaning of FOIA/552(a)(4)(A)(ii), finding that the materials provided are largely commentary. In so doing Attorney McLeod willfully ignored every issue identified below in paras. 2 through 15, inclusive. See Plaintiff's Appeal and the 16 May letter at Exhibit 1.
2. There is no "commentary" exception involved in the language of 552(a)(4)(A)(ii) of title 5, United States Code as seen below. Nor is there any such restrictive language included in the case law of the forum state which governs these proceedings because the Federal Scheme may not afford less Constitutional protections than the particular State. Relevant excerpts are also seen below.
3. Prior to matriculation from Case Western Reserve School of Law Plaintiff earned a Bachelor's Degree in Communications with an emphasis on news writing and studies in 600 level Rhetoric courses.
4. In fall of 2010 NH U.S. District Magistrate Judge Landya B. McCafferty made an express finding of fact that "Plaintiff is an African-American journalist" in Case No. 2010-CV-501.
5. As to prior publication history, Plaintiff has edited a large statewide weekly newspaper, the Ohio Call & Post.
6. Plaintiff has written for the Indianapolis Star, note that the issue involved in that 1990 feature involved illegal wireless phone surveillance, the very same issue currently implicated in the FOIA lawsuit of Electronic Information Privacy Information Center (EPIC) who is being copied on this journal entry. Plaintiff's Lexis inquiry yields EPIC v. FBI, DC Dist. 2012-CV-667, which also denied media status. That is how the government operates when it wants to hide something but it is illegal.
7. Plaintiff has co-hosted a radio show in Boston, Massachusetts.
8. Plaintiff was recently subpoenaed as a journalist (Motion to Quash granted) by the Boston Herald as noted by the Parties in Joanna Marinova v. Boston Herald, Suffolk Superior 2010-CV-1316. The Herald's Attorney even stated "nice blog."
9. Plaintiff has been published in local media, include WBZ-TV and Revere Journal.
10. Plaintiff was chosen to co-chair a forum at New England News and Press Association's Annual Convention and Trade Show on the subject of contemporary journalism and he holds a Mayoral Commendation from Nashua, NH Mayor Bernard Streeter for activities in support of public information.
11. Plaintiff has posted actual courtroom footage and dozens, if not hundreds of emerging legal cases in his online "Mortgage Movies" journal along with legal analysis and the "commentary" to which Attorney McLeod alluded.
12. Plaintiff has approximately seventy-nine (79) Mortgage Movies videos that have approximately 53,162 views, also with the option of public comment. Some related videos on this very matter noting that Trustee Lawrence Susmki called Plaintiff "Debtor's Internet co-hort" while Plaintiff stood behind him in open court have drawn 2,679 views not counting the video of this Complaint warning that will be posted today, 20 May 2012.
13. The commentary to which Attorney Janice Galli McLeod alluded is commentary from a former Assistant State Attorney who has managed a Title Company and with managerial zoning experience which is directly related experience in these matters.
14. The NH Court has ruled in favor with a similar Party who provides online commentary and analysis yet Attorney McLeod failed to address that portion of Plaintiff's appeal.
15. To analyse the specific link Plaintiff forwarded that was downrated for “commentary” yields the following result: http://mortgagemovies.blogspot.com/2011/08/kingcast-downgrages-nh-senator-kelly.html
There is a published letter from U.S.Senator Menendez to FED Chairman Bernanke. There are two videos documenting an attempt to interview Phelan Hallinan & Schmieg lawyers on the issue of standing and robo-signing, including footage of the police being called and a veteran office asking them "what the fucking problem is?" There is a video of a visit to the Washington, DC Office of Senator Kelly Ayotte noting her failure on the mortgage-related FRM Ponzi scam and asking where she stands on the CFPB, which is interesting because Plaintiff worked with Richard Cordray at the Ohio Attorney General's Office. There is a request to the Senator's office for a copy of any and all consumer/constituent complaints filed against Phelan Hallinan & Schmieg since 2005 that has been ignored now for nine (9) months.
Given that backdrop it is difficult -- actually impossible -- to comprehend how Attorney Galli McLeod could not possibly see that this is activity consonant with that of responsible journalism within the purview of the Law. That is why she disingenuously avoided any substantive analysis of the journal entry and completely failed to address the video content. That is what journalists do, they approach statespeople and ask questions. All of this is so simple. The journal entry is attached (Exhibit 2).
Implode operates a website, www.ml-implode.com, that ranks various businesses in the mortgage industry on a ranking device that it calls “The Mortgage Lender Implode-O-Meter.” On its website, Implode identifies allegedly “at risk” companies and classifies them as either “Imploded Lenders” or “Ailing/Watch List Lenders.” The website allows visitors who register on the site and create usernames to post publicly viewable comments about lenders.That is thematically identical to what Plaintiff does, as he has operated a general news journal for seven (7) years and an industry-specific journal for the past eighteen (18) months. It has 32,000 page views, so Plaintiff is a journalist in and of his own accord irrespective of whether major press publishes his material. The whole point is that as a qualified professional Plaintiff has HIS OWN LEGITIMATE MEDIA whether or not the DOJ approves of it. In point of fact it is particularly important that this Court protect journalists who criticize the government because that is the entire point of the Fourth Estate in the first place.
The NH Supreme Court held:
Freedom of the press is a fundamental personal right which is not confined to newspapers and periodicals. . . . The press in its historic connotation comprehends every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion. The informative function asserted by representatives of the organized press . . . is also performed by lecturers, political pollsters, novelists, academic researchers, and dramatists. Almost any author may quite accurately assert that he is contributing to the flow of information to the public, that he relies on confidential sources of information, and that these sources will be silenced if he is forced to make disclosures.That Opinion is directly at odds with the 16 May, 2012 letter from Attorney McLeod, rendering such letter to be the product of arbitrary and capricious decision-making.
As Plaintiff has previously stated online:
- `In making a determination of a representative of the news media under subclause (II), an agency may not deny that status solely on the basis of the absence of institutional associations of the requester, but shall consider the prior publication history of the requester. Prior publication history shall include books, magazine and newspaper articles, newsletters, television and radio broadcasts, and Internet publications. If the requestor has no prior publication history or current affiliation, the agency shall consider the requestor's stated intent at the time the request is made to distribute information to a reasonably broad audience.'
- In this clause, the term “a representative of the news media” means any person or 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. In this clause, the term “news” means information that is about current events or that would be of current interest to the public. Examples of news-media entities are television or radio stations broadcasting to the public at large and publishers of periodicals (but only if such entities qualify as disseminators of “news”) who make their products available for purchase by or subscription by or free distribution to the general public. These examples are not all-inclusive. Moreover, as methods of news delivery evolve (for example, the adoption of the electronic dissemination of newspapers through telecommunications services), such alternative media shall be considered to be news-media entities.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
1. That the Defendant provide the sought information at no cost to Plaintiff.
2. That Defendant reimburse Plaintiff for the costs and fees associated with this Complaint.
3. Further, the Declaratory Judgment that Plaintiff is a covered journalist in and of his own right and with respect to being a freelance journalist under the ACT.
4. Injunctive Relief to issue accordingly.
in Foreclosure Practices.