As another school year is upon us Real Politik welcomes back former Florida State Trooper and school safety expert Wolfgang Halbig for an update on his outstanding Freedom of Information Act requests with the Newtown Connecticut Police Department, Public Schools, and First Selectman.

Sandy Hook Panorama
Halbig has been a tireless critic of the government-mandated version of the Sandy Hook massacre, raising necessary funds for legal representation and traveling to Newtown numerous times over the past year to demand that area officials present the necessary records that the shooting took place as it was presented by corporate news media.

Halbig filed his first FOI request with officials immediately involved in the Sandy Hook massacre back in February 2013 and they have yet to be satisfactorily addressed. Nevertheless, the Connecticut FOI Commission has seen fit to formally conclude that Mr. Halbig’s requests have been settled. Halibig’s next step is to appeal the unfulfilled FOI requests to Connecticut Superior Court.

In other developments Monte Frank, the bicycle-cruising gun control advocate and attorney for Newtown leaders, appears to have perjured himself by confirming before the FOI Commission the authenticity of a Newtown police dash cam video document purportedly taken on 12/14/12 that curiously lacks the customary date and geo-location stamp necessary for its forensic utility.

Most recently PayPal pulled the plug on Halbig’s fundraising account, apparently under pressure from Sandy Hook victims’ organizations. A similar effort was successfully waged against Halbig’s GoFundMe account in October 2014.

Wolfgang Halbig’s website is


Leave a Reply

23 thought on “Newtown Officials, CT FOI Commission Spurn Records Requests”
  1. I suppose we will see just how crooked the state of Connecticut is when and if their Supreme Court hears the case. this goes way beyond the state of Connecticut to include our federal government and the NFL. I am shocked that the NFL would get involved with their fake childrens choir appearance at the super bowl. I wonder how many players and coaches know they are part of the scam. can you imagine any of them having the guts to stand up to it by calling BS on it? there’s almost no chance of that. I would love to see Commissioner Roger Goodell put on the spot about his involvement in the scam. I wonder if anybody inside the NFL would have the guts to do the right thing and expose the scam about the children’s choir. my guess is there something in their records that shows this trip was planned a long time before the shootings. the travel planning documents would be the greatest wiki leak of the year.

  2. The steamboat, colorado public library blocks your website – james. it’s a real drag for me because my computer melted down the other day and the library is my only computer. there is a warning about malware. I complained about it to a deaf ear. James you must be a fairly dangerous man if the library is blocking you. perhaps that will become the new badge of honor.

    1. The site is likely run by Pozner and associates, which should give one a fairly good idea of its merit. With no venue, case number or paperwork provided (which would be very easy to do via a linked pdf) how can one verify that any such suit was heard and decision rendered?

      If such a case was brought it would indeed be a Quixotic waste of donor money as libel suits are notoriously difficult to prove in the US.

      1. I haven’t done any digging, but the blog post insinuates that the lawsuit was brought by Halbig in California. From what I could gather, Halbig complained that this blogger was calling him a fraud, and the blogger countersued…and won.

        Is this the way donors thought their money would be spent? To keep bloggers from haranguing him?

        I don’t know if Lenny is related to this or not…but I’d guess not.

        Time will tell.

      2. I think it’s CW Wade’s site. He’s definitely no friend to any of us, that’s for sure. I remember who he his, quite well. What I can’t remember, however, is if he’s linked to the Lenster.

        1. Yes. It is chucky wade’s blog. and yes he has close affiliation with POSner, and advocate of HONR network.

      3. That’s why I was asking the validity of it, being there is no documentation provided. and it’s something that should be discussed whether true or not. If true, it should be made known whether donator’s funds have been put towards that evdeavor or not. If false, it’s a rather slanderous piece and should be addressed publicly to put the rumor to rest.

    1. Anne, would you like to be his lawyer? It’s a rhetorical question.

      He should leave such requests to counsel. The editorial comments will neither strike fear into anyone’s heart nor cause them to produce.

      I’m glad he got to talk to them, however. It may help with his appeal. Of course it is better to simply ask for the documents by date, rather than using phrases like “at roll call”, etc., as it provides a perfect out if that isn’t what happened.

      If you get anything you get what you asked for. They will not give you what you “intended” to have. Frank is likely, correctly, to ask him if he is representing himself.

      I can’t tell who this was addressed to. I’m assuming it went to Frank and Kehoe. It will not result in evidence. It may result in an order for him to stop communicating directly with them.

      Of course I’m assuming he’s already filed his appeal. If he is going to continue this he should work with his lawyer, if he still has one.

      1. lophatt, I was wondering the same – does he still have a lawyer? As for your rhetorical question – absolutely not. I assume Mr. Halbig himself submits updates to Rense periodically.

      2. This exemplifies the problem some of us have had with Wolf all along. I can never not think of the illiteracy he displayed in the initial requests he made. And I always cringe when he talks, because he sounds like an idiot.

        I don’t know if he’s an honest player, but if he is, he’s a fool–and a fool bumbling around in a high-level conspiracy/coverup/ongoing social experiment is asking for trouble we only see in movies. Yet, he seems to blithely carry on.

        The whole thing is exceedingly strange.

        1. As for Matthew Streeter, the Connecticut FOI commission member, he currently also holds the position of town administrator in Granville, MA since April this year. For how long remains to be seen since he has a habit of getting fired. I have relatives in picturesque Granville, population 1,500. It’s a small world.

        2. Pat, we gotta have facts, hard facts, inklings of hunches and speculative gestures regarding Wolf are not going to bear any fruit for us. Is this analysis dependent on feel or hard fact? I just fail to see where your haranguing of Wolf as a fool and idiot carries any weight.
          “I don’t know if he’s honest, but IF he is…..” what kind of exposition is this, anyway? It’s like saying “I’m not a doctor but I think you should take 2 tablets of X at hourly intervals”. There’s probably some adjective that describes this attempt at analysis but it escapes me completely.

        3. Pat (et al): This has been my impression, too, since Wolf’s initial appearance.

          I can’t help but think of a scene in “Uncle Buck”, when next-door neighbor Marcy says to Buck (who clearly has no idea what he’s doing), “Oh my G*d, you don’t know what you’re doing…you need some ADULT supervision…”

          From the beginning, Halbig has inflated his experience and credentials beyond the pale. He certainly has bluster to go around.

          Maybe Halbig’s motives are pure…I certainly hope they are…but he’s not the guy I want to be the face of “Truthers” (or whatever it is people like us are).

        4. It’s tough, Gil. I have been very circumspect on this, from the beginning. Many around here made sport of the hapless Halbig. Not me.

          I truly don’t know which way to go in interpreting Wolf’s role in this matter. But I think literacy and speaking ability, not to mention courtroom decorum, are very important when going up against the corrupt system that gave us Sandy Hook.

          He looks like a moron, on so many levels. That’s not good.

          I don’t know if he’s a plant, or a genuine good citizen, out of his depth, trying to do the right thing. He SEEMS innocent enough. I’d like to trust him–but even if I do, his buffoonery and illiteracy do us harm. Do we want this blundering clown to be our representative?

          It’s not a matter of “inklings of hunches and speculative gestures”; it’s about competence. I’m not “haranguing” the guy, just pointing out that he can’t write proper English, and he can’t speak it, either. And he has no idea how to comport himself in a legal proceeding. I’m not wrong to consider these important considerations. In fact, they are vital, if we are to use the official channels as a means to cracking this case.

        5. Gil, since I commented to Anne’s post and mentioned my opinion, I feel the need to chime in here. I happen to have significant experience with this sort of thing. I’ve been involved in discovery in cases as well as in FOIA requests.

          I refrain from calling Wolfgang names, but its a temptation. I understand Patrick’s frustration. I have said, and still maintain, that nothing will come of this. Nonetheless, there might be some nugget of information that comes to light through this process that could be interesting.

          I agree with Patrick that, if he had begun this by saying “I didn’t finish high school and I have a very poor grasp of English…”, it might be more understandable. But, that isn’t what happened. He has stated that he was a vice principal.

          As corrupt as the court system is, it does have rules. When someone elects to be represented by an attorney, that person becomes the filer and recipient of correspondence related to the case.

          I am quite certain that his lawyer has tried to instruct him on this. He is not helping. I am equally sure that a lawyer did not write that request.

          There appear to be many who think that this is some sort of trial. He has asked for records. They have said that they have been responsive to his request. He is now, as I understand it, appealing that.

          All of the editorial comments, innuendo, conclusions drawn, etc., will have nothing to do with whether they agree with Wolf or Newtown. They will either give him more documents, if they exist, or they won’t.

          As luck would have it, I have something like this going right now. A guy I work with has the same opinion that I see expressed here from time to time. He knows that the subject of the FOIA request “just isn’t right” and he expects “justice” from the results.

          It doesn’t work that way. The judge in the appeal is not going to make judgements on the meaning of the documents. He or she will either agree with Halbig’s arguments or not. Those arguments will not have anything to do with anyone’s actions in the matter. It will only deal with whether or not they were responsive to his request for documents.

          If he finds his “smoking gun”, he will have to decide what to do with that information. No matter how whiny the protests about the documents becomes, it will not sway the judge. It will depend on what they asked for and whether it exists. They will not “fill in the blanks” if it doesn’t.

        6. Anne, interesting about Mathew Streeter. Pop. 1,500 huh? Makes on wonder if this career move was in planning a while or spur of the moment.

          It indeed is a small world. I spoke to someone the other day who claims that Robbie Parker is living in Seattle. I’m going to check that out.

        7. The guy is a friggin’ fool. Speaking out of order in hearings, calling people liars in hearings, just complete idiocy. That’s not how you fight the system, especially using the system’s rules. The whole thing is a fool’s game. He doesn’t seem to be getting any thinner during the ‘struggle’ either.

        8. And you, I suppose, are an ‘accent snob’ who has never heard a southern accent before ? I can assure you that anyone who can hold their own in a discussion with the likes of a Jim Fetzer or a James Tracy is no “idiot”….Sorry, I myself do not tend to be ‘the amiable type’, and that is all the more the case as towards people who throw ‘ad hominems’ such as ‘idiot’ about where they don’t apply.

Leave a Reply