UPDATE-What is McConnell Hiding In His Military Records?

You’ll remember back in 3/31/2019, Yours Truly wrote a blog piece titled “What is McConnell hiding in his military records” that has elicited and continues to elicit a lot of reaction on Twitter and other social media platforms. There is no question that grassroots Democrats really want to know the real reason behind Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell’s military discharge in 1967.

In the blog piece, Yours Truly promised to dig into the real reason behind McConnell’s military discharge, an important election issue that mysteriously remains a mainstream media no-go-zone. Well, after months of pushing and prodding the Army for McConnell’s info via freedom of Information requests(FOIA), and being subjected to countless baits-and-switches by them, we have finally got some information.

FOIA On Mitch McConnell&#39… by Emolclause on Scribd

According to the FOIA response Yours Truly got from the Army on Jan 8 2020, Mitch McConnell served from March 21, 1967 to August 15, 1967(page 2). Virtually all of the personal information fields are populated by “N/A”, which I suspect is due to the Army’s privacy policy of requiring a signature before releasing such information. Specifically, the FOIA letter stipulates in part, “This record contains sensitive personal information which, if disclosed, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy to the veteran……..If additional information is needed, the Privacy Act of 1974 requires the written consent (signature) of the individual to whom the record pertains.”(see page 1 of attached document). In essence, one would need McConnell’s written consent before getting details about his salary, source of commission, military education etc, which is pretty understandable especially given the fact that Yours Truly is big on privacy.

The sticky point however is in regards to the “Transcript of Court-Martial Trial” field. As you can see from the FOIA response(page 2), it is not populated by “N/A” like the other fields. The field is instead populated by “Not on File”. This raises a whole host of questions because it does not address the dispositive question Yours Truly set out to address with the FOIA request–whether McConnell’s discharge was due to a Court Martial? Remember, allegations/rumors have been flying around for decades that McConnell’s discharge from the military had something to do with a sexual incident between him and another officer and that this incident was the subject of a court martial. To prove or disprove this rumor one has to ascertain whether McConnell was indeed the subject of a Court Martial. The FOIA response offers no answer whatsoever to this crucial question.

Yours Truly took up this burning question with the FOIA Public Liaison officer listed on page 3 of the document, one Kevin Pratt. Specifically, Yours Truly inquired as to whether the “Not on File” listed on the FOIA response meant a court martial was held but the information has been redacted, or whether there was none with respect to Mitch McConnell?

According to Army’s Kevin Pratt, a FOIA request cannot answer the question as to whether one was court-martialed or not. He instead directed me to file a request in writing to another Army office for such information. I then asked him whether the FOIA Ombudsman’s office listed on the FOIA response (page 3) would have information related to court martials to which he replied that they don’t. It’s not clear whether these complications are McConnell-specific or are the norm when it comes to FOIA requests regarding the military. Reasonable people will agree that it should not be this complicated for the military to either deny or confirm whether Mitch McConnell, one of the most powerful politicians in the country and who’s up for reelection, was ever the subject of a court martial. There can be reasonable disagreements however as to whether the details of such court martial proceedings should be kept private or be made available to the general public.

It cannot be left unsaid that the secrecy surrounding McConnell’s military record is patently unfair to his Democratic challenger Amy McGrath, also a veteran . McGrath’s military record unlike McConnell’s, is an open book which allows McConnell’s campaign to dig for campaign dirt while robbing her campaign of a similar opportunity. This glaring political bias should be enough cause for the Army to forego all the procedural technicalities surrounding information requests for veterans and release McConnell’s full military record in the interest of Kentucky voters.

Bottom line folks, no politician should ever be allowed to serve consecutive terms in the U.S. Congress while hiding crucial information from the public. The circumstances surrounding Mitch McConnell’s military discharge have been a valid campaign ever since he first ran for the U.S. Senate. There is absolutely no excuse why the mainstream media, which readily digs into the backgrounds of Democrats, continues to allow McConnell’s military discharge to be a non-story, even as he runs for his 7th consecutive term in the U.S. Senate.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out.

You may reach the author via email at author@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Barr’s DOJ Refuses To Release Notes Of Kushner’s Interview With Mueller

A federal judge recently granted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed by CNN and Buzzfeed and ordered the Justice Department to release documents currently in its possession related to the now concluded investigation into Russian election interference in 2016 (Mueller probe)

Among the documents media houses CNN and Buzzfeed are most interested in, are the notes from the various interviews Mueller conducted with witnesses–known in legal circles as “302 notes”. Needless to say, such notes can be very important in determining whether a particular witness lied to/misled/withheld material information from investigators.

Ever since the federal judge granted CNN and Buzzfeed’s FOIA request, Barr’s DOJ has largely complied and released several 302 notes. Conspiquously absent from the 302 notes however, are those related to Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner–a prime target of CNN and Buzzfeed’s FOIA request.

Equally troubling is the fact that Barr’s DOJ is yet to provide the legal justification for its refusal to comply with the federal judge’s order on 302 notes related to Jared Kushner. Is there something very bad in Kushner’s 302 notes that Barr’s DOJ is so intent on keeping away from the public even if that means violating a federal judge’s order?

Bottom line folks, it is now quite evident that AG Barr considers his position as one intended primarily to protect/defend President Trump and his family. Where, as here, his Justice Dept refuses to release 302 notes related to Trump’s son-in-law Kushner, and giving no legal justification for the refusal, a reasonable inference can be made that AG Barr is hiding from the public Kushner’s 302 notes because they contain information he thinks will cast Trump and his family in negative light. Congressional Democrats and the mainstream media must demand that DOJ comply with the federal judge’s order and release Kushner’s 302 notes.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out.

You may reach the author via email at author@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Senate Dems Ready To Sue For Kavanaugh Docs


Yours Truly recently did a post on how Senate Judiciary Republicans are trying to ram through Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh while hiding crucial documents about his tenure at the George W Bush White House. Specifically, Republicans are working hard to hide from Senate Democrats, documents that will prove Kavanaugh lied to congress during his confirmation hearings for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.


Well it appears Senate Democrats are now ready to fight for the documents in court. In a move that will surely thrill grassroots Democrats, Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer today said Dems are ready to sue the National Archives for Kavanaugh’s full record if the organization does not honor the Dem FOIA request.


Hopefully this is not just a threat to sue by Senate Dems because grassroots Dems expect an all out warfare on Kavanaugh–or as they say in Twitter circles–#KavaNO!!

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out