Judicial Watch: Recent Episodes
None
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for the contents of Anthony Fauci’s government-issued cell phones. The phones were provided to former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Fauci and later reportedly recovered by the FBI (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:26-cv-02812)).
The lawsuit was filed after the FBI failed to comply with a June 2025 FOIA request for:
All contents obtained from the government-issued cell phones of former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci, which were reportedly recovered by the FBI, as disclosed to podcaster Joe Rogan by FBI Director Kash Patel in the following interview: https://x.com/KyleSeraphin/status/1931056010313322693
The FBI claimed in October 2025 that the requested records were located in an investigative file exempt from disclosure under FOIA law enforcement exemption 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A).
Patel publicly disclosed that the FBI had recovered phones and other devices that Fauci used during the first Trump administration.
“We just had a great breakthrough this week on Fauci,” Patel told Joe Rogan during a June 2025 episode of “The Joe Rogan Experience.” Patel said investigators had been looking for phones and devices Fauci used during the first Trump administration and that “nobody had found it until two days ago.”
Patel cautioned that the devices might not contain everything investigators were seeking, saying, “Maybe it’s deleted, maybe it’s not,” but added that the FBI had found the devices and that the search was “of public importance.”
The FBI’s refusal to release the records comes as congressional scrutiny of Fauci and the federal government’s handling of the Covid-19 pandemic intensifies.
On July 29, 2026, Fauci appeared before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee under subpoena. During the hearing, chaired by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment 111 times.
On August 6, 2026, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) transferred a copy of Fauci’s government-issued iPhone to the Senate Homeland Security Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, which is chaired by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI).
Also on August 6, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee voted 8-5 to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress over his refusal to answer questions about his handling of the Covid-19 pandemic and his past testimony to Congress regarding U.S.-funded “gain-of-function” research. The resolution directs Vice President JD Vance, in his capacity as president of the Senate, to certify the contempt report to U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro for potential prosecution.
“Americans have a right to know what the FBI recovered from Anthony Fauci’s government-issued phones and what those records reveal about his official activities during the Covid pandemic,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuits and investigations have uncovered much of what the public knows about many Covid-19 controversies:
In May 2026, Judicial Watch filed a post-hearing brief in a FOIA lawsuit on behalf of Open the Books, urging a federal court to compel the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to release unredacted records showing royalty-related payments to government scientists, including Fauci.
In April 2026, Judicial Watch sued the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) for records and communications of its employees with other government officials regarding coronaviruses, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), and related Covid-19 research.
In March 2026, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department of Defense (War Department) for records on funding proposals submitted to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Biological Technologies Office prior to the Covid-19 outbreak. The Biological Technologies Office was launched in 2014.
In June 2025, Judicial Watch sued the Defense Department for all records regarding U.S. military personnel possibly contracting Covid-19 in October 2019 during the World Military Games in Wuhan, China. The lawsuit cited a December 2022 report issued by the Pentagon titled “Report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives: 2019 World Military Games” which states that seven “service members who attended the games exhibited Covid-19-like signs and/or symptoms” during the time surrounding their attendance at the games.
In May 2025, Judicial Watch received records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that revealed its plans to mandate Covid-19 vaccinations for 17 million health care employees and that only one of 4,682 claims for injuries and deaths due to Covid-19 “countermeasures” at the time was compensated.
Records uncovered in 2024 from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) through a FOIA request showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to a National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it.
Records from the Health and Human Services included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
Health and Human Services records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
Records from Health and Human Services regarding data Moderna submitted to the Food and Drug Administration on its mRNA Covid-19 vaccine indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
Food and Drug Administration records detailed pressure for Covid-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
National Institutes of Health records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
Health and Human Services records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the National Institutes of Health’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
Health and Human Services records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international councils as high level commitment from China.”
Health and Human Services records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appeared to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
Health and Human Services records showed the State Department and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding Covid-19 data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
Health and Human Services records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the Covid-19 vaccines showed a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) revealed safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
Health and Human Services records included emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, about hydroxychloroquine and Covid-19.
Health and Human Services records showed that National Institutes of Health officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” Covid-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
Fauci emails included his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
The post Judicial Watch Sues FBI for Fauci Cell Phone Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Seeks Evidence of Biden Justice Department’s Lawfare
Illegal Immigration Doubled Under Kamala’s Costly Project to Stop It
Judicial Watch Seeks Evidence of Biden Justice Department’s Lawfare
We joined Victoria Toensing, a former attorney for President Donald J. Trump, in filing a motion to unseal materials related to three search warrants targeting Toensing’s iCloud account, Gmail account, and cell phone (In re Search Warrants Executed on April 28, 2021 (No. 21-mc-00425 (JPO))).
We filed the motion before U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking materials related to:
- A November 4, 2019, warrant authorizing the government to seize and search all records contained in Toensing’s iCloud account;
- A December 13, 2019, warrant authorizing the government to seize and search Toensing’s Gmail account; and
- An April 28, 2021, warrant authorizing the government to search the contents of the cell phone federal agents seized from Toensing at her Maryland residence.
On April 22, 2021, shortly after President Biden took office, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued a warrant authorizing federal agents to search Toensing’s Maryland home, including all locked and closed containers within it, to find and seize her cell phone and iPad. The warrant also authorized agents to compel Toensing to unlock the devices using her fingerprints and/or facial recognition.
Agents seized her cell phone, which was then transported to the Southern District of New York, where the government obtained a warrant to search its entire contents. The seizure occurred on the same day the FBI raided the home and office of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. The warrants, applications, affidavits, and related materials remain under seal to this day, and Toensing has never been told the reasons for the searches.
Toensing is a lawyer and legal commentator, a former federal prosecutor and Deputy Assistant Attorney General, and former Chief Counsel of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. To her knowledge, she has never been the target of an investigation. She has never been charged with any crime.
In their motion, Toensing and Judicial Watch state:
Here, Judicial Watch is investigating the potential politicization of numerous federal law enforcement agencies and whether they abused their powers to attack associates of a political opponent.
Here, the presumption of public access clearly outweighs any countervailing factors. The records are being sought to enhance the public’s understanding of the United States’ targeting of President Trump’s attorney by the Biden administration. The public has a real interest in knowing the evidence underlying the search warrant application and whether the warrant was sought for legitimate law enforcement purposes rather than to target a political opponent’s ally. These questions cannot be examined while the materials remain sealed.
In addition, the investigation appears to have concluded, and Toensing was never charged. There is no ongoing prosecution that disclosure could jeopardize, no witness whose safety is at risk, and no trial whose fairness could be compromised.
Toensing and Judicial Watch also have a motion pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland to unseal the materials related to the April 22, 2021, warrant used to search her home (No. 21-mj-01202-GLS).
“The Biden Administration targeted Rudy Giuliani and me as retaliation for exposing Biden family corruption in Ukraine. In doing so, the Biden DOJ and FBI created a pretextual criminal investigation of us,” Toensing said. “Justice requires that we learn the false statements used to punish us for speaking the truth.”
The American people have a right to know why the Biden Justice Department secretly targeted President Trump’s attorney Victoria Toensing. These ‘lawfare’ search warrant records have remained hidden for years, even though Toensing was never charged with a crime.
We have taken a leading role in exposing the politicization and weaponization of federal law enforcement. We recently moved to unseal the search warrant materials related to a November 18, 2024, warrant that authorized the federal government to seize the entire Google account of Michael Caputo, a longtime ally and policy advisor to President Donald J. Trump.
We also previously moved to unseal the search warrant materials used in the FBI’s August 2022 raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home and to publish the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court transcripts relating to the surveillance of former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.
In addition, we are currently pursuing multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits for records about the investigations of other Trump allies.
In April 2026, we sued the Justice Department for records on the Biden FBI’s search warrants used in the April 2021 raid on former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s residence and office (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice(No. 1:26-cv-01158)). Giuliani served as a personal attorney and informal advisor to Trump.
In November 2025, we sued the Justice Department for records concerning investigations of Mike Lindell (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 25-cv-03850)).
In March 2025, we sued the Justice Department and U.S. Department of Homeland Security for records regarding Christina Bobb, a former lawyer for Trump (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:25-cv-00588)).
Ethan Leonard and Neal Brickman of the Brickman Law Group in New York, New York are representing Judicial Watch and Toensing in this matter.
Illegal Immigration Doubled Under Kamala’s Costly Project to Stop It
With talk of Kamala Harris considering another run for the presidency, we should look at one of the leftist disasters that has her name on it. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports on the ludicrous plan to slow immigration from Central America.
The costly failures of the Biden administration’s senseless plan to curb “irregular migration” from Central America by sending the region enormous amounts of taxpayer dollars have been well documented, but recently published figures show the problem was much worse than reported with a bigger increase in illegal aliens from those countries than previously imagined. As the American cash flowed south in an ill-fated effort to deter migration by making life better at home the number of illegal aliens from the targeted region doubled from 2.05 million in 2019 to 4.3 million by the time Biden left the White House, according to government figures cited in a new probe. The audit was conducted by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), which claims to be nonpartisan but is funded by leftists such as George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF), the Gates Foundation and other liberal entities like Maine Equal Justice.
Thanks to Biden’s open border policies the illegal immigration population in the United States reached a new peak of 15.8 million as of mid-2024 after holding steady at around 11 million throughout the 2010s, the MPI writes in its report. “This increase was driven largely by record border arrivals and expanded Biden-era humanitarian parole programs,” the MPI writes. The Washington D.C.-based group describes itself as a leading, evidence-based institution in the field of migration policy and a source of authoritative research. In this case, the nonprofit used the most recently available data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS). “As the size of the unauthorized immigrant population has increased since 2019, the share of immigrants who are from Central and South America has surged while the Mexican share has shrunk significantly,” the MPI states, adding that the Central American share of the unauthorized immigrant population increased to 27 % under Biden up from 15% in 2010 as Mexico for the first time fell below 50%.
The big increases in illegal immigrants were also driven by policies implemented under the Biden administration that allowed most migrants who reached American soil to remain inside the country pending the outcome of removal proceedings in the nation’s severely backlogged immigration courts. “Growth was further driven by the creation of new humanitarian parole programs that allowed legal entry and temporary stay for migrants from Afghanistan, Ukraine, Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, as well as those from all around the world who reached northern Mexico and made appointments via the CBP One app to be screened for entry,” the report states. Additionally, the MPI found that “sizable numbers of Europeans and others” overstayed their temporary visa yet remained in the U.S. like most of the 9/11 terrorists. It was an immigration free for all that shattered records and infested communities throughout the U.S. with criminal aliens that the Trump administration is rounding up in federal operations across the country.
Many came from Central America even as the Biden administration kept sending the region money to curb the flow under a special program run by Vice President Kamala Harris. It was known as “Root Causes Strategy” and the administration committed a whopping $4 billion to fund it. The ludicrous idea behind the initiative was that it would improve life enough to deter citizens in the impoverished nations known as the northern triangle— El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—from coming to the U.S. illegally. The Biden administration laughably claimed the strategy was successful and that it had far-reaching impacts throughout the region by creating jobs, supporting education, enhancing food security and combatting human smuggling. Figures released by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) however, have consistently revealed that the former vice president’s Central American experiment did not deter migrants from the three countries. The MPI report not only confirms this but also exposes that the multi-billion-dollar program was an even bigger failure than previously imagined. In the period examined, 2019 to 2024, the illegal Honduran population expanded from 506,000 to 1,349,000 while the Guatemalan population went from 698,000 to 1,525,000 and the Salvadoran population went from 733,000 to 920,000.
Until next week,
The post Judicial Watch Seeks Biden DOJ Lawfare Evidence appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it and Victoria Toensing, a former attorney for President Donald J. Trump, filed a motion asking the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to unseal the search warrant materials related to three search warrants targeting Toensing’s iCloud account, Gmail account, and cell phone (In re Search Warrants Executed on April 28, 2021 (No. 21-mc-00425 (JPO))). The motion, filed before U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken, seeks materials related to:
• A November 4, 2019, warrant authorizing the government to seize and search all records contained in Toensing’s iCloud account;
• A December 13, 2019, warrant authorizing the government to seize and search Toensing’s Gmail account; and
• An April 28, 2021, warrant authorizing the government to search the contents of the cell phone federal agents seized from Toensing at her Maryland residence.
On April 22, 2021, shortly after President Biden took office, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued a warrant authorizing federal agents to search Toensing’s Maryland home, including all locked and closed containers within it, to find and seize her cell phone and iPad. The warrant also authorized agents to compel Toensing to unlock the devices using her fingerprints and/or facial recognition. Agents seized her cell phone, which was then transported to the Southern District of New York, where the government obtained a warrant to search its entire contents. The seizure occurred on the same day the FBI raided the home and office of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. The warrants, applications, affidavits, and related materials remain under seal to this day, and Toensing has never been told the reasons for the searches.
Toensing is a lawyer and legal commentator, a former federal prosecutor and deputy assistant attorney general, and former chief counsel of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. To her knowledge, she has never been the target of an investigation. She has never been charged with any crime.
In their motion, Toensing and Judicial Watch state:
Here, Judicial Watch is investigating the potential politicization of numerous federal law enforcement agencies and whether they abused their powers to attack associates of a political opponent.
Here, the presumption of public access clearly outweighs any countervailing factors. The records are being sought to enhance the public’s understanding of the United States’ targeting of President Trump’s attorney by the Biden administration. The public has a real interest in knowing the evidence underlying the search warrant application and whether the warrant was sought for legitimate law enforcement purposes rather than to target a political opponent’s ally. These questions cannot be examined while the materials remain sealed.
In addition, the investigation appears to have concluded, and Toensing was never charged. There is no ongoing prosecution that disclosure could jeopardize, no witness whose safety is at risk, and no trial whose fairness could be compromised.
Toensing and Judicial Watch also have a motion pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland to unseal the materials related to the April 22, 2021, warrant used to search her home (No. 21-mj-01202-GLS).
“The Biden administration targeted Rudy Giuliani and me as retaliation for exposing Biden family corruption in Ukraine. In doing so, the Biden Justice Department and FBI created a pretextual criminal investigation of us,” said Toensing. “Justice requires that we learn the false statements used to punish us for speaking the truth.”
“The American people have a right to know why the Biden Justice Department secretly targeted President Trump’s attorney Victoria Toensing. These ‘lawfare’ search warrant records have remained hidden for years, even though Toensing was never charged with a crime,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch has taken a leading role in exposing the politicization and weaponization of federal law enforcement. The organization recently moved to unseal the search warrant materials related to a November 18, 2024, warrant that authorized the federal government to seize the entire Google account of Michael Caputo, a longtime ally and policy advisor to President Donald J. Trump.
The organization also previously moved to unseal the search warrant materials used in the FBI’s August 2022 raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home and to publish the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court transcripts relating to the surveillance of former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page.
In addition, Judicial Watch is currently pursuing multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits for records about the investigations of other Trump allies.
In April 2026, Judicial Watch sued the Justice Department for records on the Biden FBI’s search warrants used in the April 2021 raid on former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s residence and office (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice(No. 1:26-cv-01158)). Giuliani served as a personal attorney and informal advisor to Trump.
In November 2025, Judicial Watch sued the Justice Department for records concerning investigations of Mike Lindell (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 25-cv-03850)).
In March 2025, Judicial Watch sued the Justice Department and U.S. Department of Homeland Security for records regarding Christina Bobb, a former lawyer for Trump (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice(No. 1:25-cv-00588)).
Ethan Leonard and Neal Brickman of the Brickman Law Group in New York, New York, are representing Judicial Watch and Toensing in this matter.
The post Judicial Watch Moves to Unseal the Biden Justice Department’s Warrant Records of Search and Seizure ... appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The costly failures of the Biden administration’s senseless plan to curb “irregular migration” from Central America by sending the region enormous amounts of taxpayer dollars have been well documented but recently published figures show the problem was much worse than reported with a bigger increase in illegal aliens from those countries than previously imagined. As the American cash flowed south in an ill-fated effort to deter migration by making life better at home the number of illegal aliens from the targeted region doubled from 2.05 million in 2019 to 4.3 million by the time Biden left the White House, according to government figures cited in a new probe. The audit was conducted by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), which claims to be nonpartisan but is funded by leftists such as George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF), the Gates Foundation and other liberal entities like Maine Equal Justice.
Thanks to Biden’s open border policies the illegal immigration population in the United States reached a new peak of 15.8 million as of mid-2024 after holding steady at around 11 million throughout the 2010s, the MPI writes in its report. “This increase was driven largely by record border arrivals and expanded Biden-era humanitarian parole programs,” the MPI writes. The Washington D.C.-based group describes itself as a leading, evidence-based institution in the field of migration policy and a source of authoritative research. In this case, the nonprofit used the most recently available data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (ACS). “As the size of the unauthorized immigrant population has increased since 2019, the share of immigrants who are from Central and South America has surged while the Mexican share has shrunk significantly,” the MPI states, adding that the Central American share of the unauthorized immigrant population increased to 27 % under Biden up from 15% in 2010 as Mexico for the first time fell below 50%.
The big increases in illegal immigrants were also driven by policies implemented under the Biden administration that allowed most migrants who reached American soil to remain inside the country pending the outcome of removal proceedings in the nation’s severely backlogged immigration courts. “Growth was further driven by the creation of new humanitarian parole programs that allowed legal entry and temporary stay for migrants from Afghanistan, Ukraine, Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, as well as those from all around the world who reached northern Mexico and made appointments via the CBP One app to be screened for entry,” the report states. Additionally, the MPI found that “sizable numbers of Europeans and others” overstayed their temporary visa yet remined in the U.S. like most of the 9/11 terrorists. It was an immigration free for all that shattered records and infested communities throughout the U.S. with criminal aliens that the Trump administration is rounding up in federal operations across the country.
Many came from Central America even as the Biden administration kept sending the region money to curb the flow under a special program run by Vice President Kamala Harris. It was known as “Root Causes Strategy” and the administration committed a whopping $4 billion to fund it. The ludicrous idea behind the initiative was that it would improve life enough to deter citizens in the impoverished nations known as the northern triangle— El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—from coming to the U.S. illegally. The Biden administration laughably claimed the strategy was successful and that it had far-reaching impacts throughout the region by creating jobs, supporting education, enhancing food security and combatting human smuggling. Figures released by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) however, have consistently revealed that the former vice president’s Central American experiment did not deter migrants from the three countries. The MPI report not only confirms this but also exposes that the multi-billion-dollar program was an even bigger failure than previously imagined. In the period examined, 2019 to 2024, the illegal Honduran population expanded from 506,000 to 1,349,000 while the Guatemalan population went from 698,000 to 1,525,000 and the Salvadoran population went from 733,000 to 920,000.
The post Illegal Immigration from Central America Doubled Under Kamala’s Costly Project to Stop It appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Signal:
Virginia removed 6,531 noncitizens from its voter registration rolls over the last two years, according to public records obtained by Judicial Watch.
The Virginia Department of Elections classified each as a “declared noncitizen” removed from the state’s voter registration lists between June 2024 and June 2026. The state produced no record of whether the noncitizens voted, according to Judicial Watch. As the list only includes registered voters who declared themselves noncitizens, the actual number of registered noncitizens potentially could be higher.
The findings come as the administration of President Donald Trump has emphasized the need for states to maintain their voter rolls.
“It is disturbing beyond belief that as many as 6,531 noncitizens were registered to vote in Virginia. Judicial Watch is demanding more details and so should federal law enforcement, especially as Virginia is set to stop removing declared noncitizens from the rolls in the run-up to the November election,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a public statement.
“These Virginia numbers show that the New Jersey noncitizen voter scandal is just the tip of the iceberg and is a national crisis,” Fitton added.
Read more here…
The post Virginia Removed 6,531 Declared Noncitizens From Voter Rolls Over 2 Years appeared first on Judicial Watch.
FBI Says It Will Take 158 Years to Process “Hidden Room” Records
Virginia Removes 6,531 Declared Noncitizen Registrations from Voter Rolls
Judicial Watch Sues FBI for 30 Million Transferred January 6 Phone Records
Judicial Watch Sues for Robert Mueller Records
SPLC’s Radical Curriculum Used to Train Educators Across U.S.
FBI Says It Will Take 158 Years to Process “Hidden Room” Records
This is simply amazing. The FBI has told a federal court that, at a rate of 500 pages a month, processing records from the “hidden room” at FBI Headquarters would take approximately 158 years.
The room — now dubbed the “burn bag room” — holds over 2 million pages of records, according to the FBI’s own filing. Then-Deputy Director Bongino said in May 2025 that some of the records were found stashed “in bags.”
The figures came in a Joint Status Report filed July 30, 2026, in our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:25-cv-04047)).
In the filing, we asked the court to allow it to question the FBI, through a limited deposition, about its handling of the records — including who discovered the room and when, who had access to it, its security classification, how records ended up stored in file cabinets, safes, boxes, and burn bags, what the FBI has done to bring them under standard records management, and whether the records were ever searched in response to other FOIA requests.
The FBI reports that it has yet to access a safe believed to contain records. The agency also alleges that “it will take approximately 158 years to process at a rate of 500 pages a month.”
The FBI opposes the request for discovery. A status conference is scheduled before U.S. District Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on August 3, 2026 in Washington, DC.
Our 2025 complaint sought all records in the room, which it described as “[a]ll documents referenced by Deputy Director Dan Bongino” concerning a room at FBI Headquarters, as well as internal FBI communications among officials in the offices of Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Bongino about the discovery of the documents, and any directives issued on how the records should be handled. The FBI currently says it has no records responsive to the Patel/Bongino communications and directives categories. The plaintiff is challenging the government’s search for these records as well.
In a Fox News interview on May 29, 2025, then-FBI Deputy Director Bongino disclosed the room’s existence, stating:
“There was a room [in FBI Headquarters], and we found stuff. A lot of stuff … hidden from us at least and not mentioned to us. And then found stuff in there. A lot is from the Comey era. We are working … right now to declassify. And just so you know, because I get the public—I totally understand people saying ‘well do it now.’ The process is: not all of the information is ours to declassify. Some is other intelligence agencies’…. We literally can’t do it. Once that gets done … and you read some of the stuff we found—that, by the way, was not processed through the normal procedure, digitizing and putting in FBI records. We found it in bags, hiding under Jim Comey’s FBI. You’re going to be stunned.”
We previously uncovered that the room is a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) containing several safes—now identified as twenty file cabinets—holding between roughly 950,000 and 1,900,000 pages of records, split into two categories: “legacy files,” older records mostly tied to two closed historical investigations and more recent files tied to active investigations and prior Special Counsel records, reportedly including material connected to Special Counsel Jack Smith.
American citizens should be outraged that the FBI just told a federal court judge that its stonewalling means it will take 158 years to release the 2 million weaponization and lawfare records in its secret ‘burn bag’ room. The American people need to know today how the FBI was used as a political weapon against Donald Trump and other innocents.
This is the latest in a series of Judicial Watch investigations targeting shady FBI weaponization and abuse of power.
In August 2019, we uncovered “302” report material from FBI interviews with Bruce Ohr, who was removed from his position as U.S. Associate Deputy Attorney General in December 2017.
In March 2019, we received heavily redacted records from the Justice Department that reveal that Ohr remained in regular contact with former British spy and Fusion GPS contractor Christopher Steele after Steele was terminated by the FBI in November 2016 for revealing to the media his position as an FBI confidential informant.
In December 2018, we uncovered U.S. State Department documents showing classified information was researched and disseminated to multiple U.S. Senators by the Obama administration immediately prior to Trump’s inauguration. The documents reveal that among those receiving the classified documents were Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), and Sen. Robert Corker (R-TN). We obtained the documents through a FOIA lawsuit for records of the Obama State Department’s last-minute efforts to share classified information about Russia election interference issues with Cardin.
In August 2018, we announced that in response to a our FOIA lawsuit, the Justice Department admitted in a court filingthat the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court held no hearings on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) spy warrant applications targeting Carter Page, a former Trump campaign part-time advisor who was the subject of four controversial FISA warrants.
Also in August, we forced the release of heavily redacted records about Christopher Steele, the former British spy, hired with Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee funds, who authored the infamous dossier targeting Trump during last year’s presidential campaign. The documents show that Steele was cut off as a “Confidential Human Source” (CHS) after he disclosed his relationship with the FBI to a third party. The documents also show at least 11 FBI payments to Steele in 2016 and document that he was admonished for unknown reasons in February 2016.
In July 2018, we released documents about FISA warrants targeting Carter Page, who had been a Trump campaign adviser.
Virginia Removes 6,531 Declared Noncitizen Registrations from Voter Rolls
Records from the Virginia Department of Elections show the commonwealth cancelled 6,531 “declared noncitizen” voter registrations between June 2024 and June 2026 after we launched an inquiry.
The Virginia Department of Elections produced records in response to the below June 2026 Judicial Watch request:
Pursuant to Section 8(i) of the National Voter Registration Act (“NVRA”), Judicial Watch, Inc. respectfully requests from your office all pertinent records in the past two years concerning “the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency” of the Virginia official list of eligible voters. Specifically, Judicial Watch requests the following:
- All records concerning the names and addresses of registrants removed from the official list of eligible voters pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-427(B)(iii) and Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-427.
- All records concerning all voter registrations that may not to be United States citizens by reason of reports from the Department of Motor Vehicles or from the Department of Elections based on information received from the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements Program (SAVE Program).
- All ERIC reports, data, match lists, or other records received from or related to the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) system concerning potential voter deaths, change-of-address notifications, or other eligibility issues (including any associated processing, verification, or removal actions taken by the Department of Elections in response to such ERIC reports).
No voting histories were produced for the cancelled declared noncitizen registrations.
According to an April 2026, Virginia Attorney General letter:
DMV [Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles] creates a list of “all persons who have indicated a noncitizen status” when applying for or renewing a license, or identification document. In practice, DMV compiles a list of any individual who checks “no” in response to the question “Are you a citizen?” in an online portal. There are reports that this method has resulted in flagging eligible citizens due to inadvertent user error. DMV furnishes this list of self-attested noncitizens to ELECT daily. ELECT then electronically matches the DMV list against the voter registration list, and transmits, for each match, information from the DMV list to the appropriate registrar. After independently confirming that the individual flagged by DMV matches a voter registration record, registrars must send a notice of intent to cancel, allowing the person 14 days to submit a sworn statement confirming citizenship. If the person does not respond and confirm their citizenship, the registrar must cancel their registration. For clarity, in this opinion, this second program is called “Self-Attestation Removals.”
Also in April 2026, Virginia entered into a settlement with leftist groups in which Virginia agreed to pause the program to remove declared noncitizens from voting rolls for the 90-day period before federal elections. (The Attorney General letter cited above confirms this new policy.)
A federal law –18 U.S.C. § 1015(f) — makes it a crime to knowingly make a false claim of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote or vote in any federal, state, or local election. 18 U.S.C. § 611 — is the direct prohibition on aliens voting in any election for federal office
It is disturbing beyond belief that as many as 6,531 noncitizens were registered to vote in Virginia. We are demanding more details and so should federal law enforcement, especially as Virginia is set to stop removing declared noncitizens from the rolls in the run-up to the November election. These Virginia numbers show that the New Jersey noncitizen voter scandal is just the tip of the iceberg and is a national crisis.
We are a national leader in election integrity and voting rights litigation, with a record of successful lawsuits enforcing constitutional redistricting standards and cleaning voter rolls nationwide.
Our lawsuits and legal actions have caused the removal of six million ineligible names from voter lists nationwide, including from Oregon, Colorado, Kentucky and New York City. Judicial Watch legal pressure also resulted in voter roll clean-ups in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Ohio.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice has announced its intention to file a motion to intervene in our federal lawsuit filed on behalf of a California political candidate and a state political party against the State of California due to its failure to maintain accurate voter rolls as required by the NVRA.
A federal court in Illinois ruled that our lawsuit to force the cleaning of voter rolls may proceed in that state.
In January 2026, in a historic case we filed, the Supreme Court decided 7-2 in favor of Congressman Mike Bost and two presidential electors who were before the court to vindicate their standing to challenge an Illinois law allowing the counting of ballots received up to 14 days after Election Day.
Judicial Watch Sues FBI for 30 Million Transferred January 6 Phone Records
The infamous House January 6 Select Committee didn’t target just President Donald Trump. Republican senators were also dragged into scandal.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records concerning the committee’s transfer of approximately 30 million lines of telephone toll data to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (Judicial Watch, Inc., v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:26-cv-02557)).
We sued after the FBI failed to comply with an October 2025 FOIA request for:
- Communications of former Reps. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) and Denver Riggleman (R-VA) with FBI officials regarding the reported acquisition or offer to provide the telephone toll data.
- All FBI records and internal communications regarding the reported acquisition or offer to provide the telephone toll data collected by the House January 6 Committee.
In February 2022, the FBI opened “Arctic Frost,” an investigation into alleged efforts by Trump campaign associates to obstruct Congress’s certification of the 2020 election. The probe aggressively targeted dozens of GOP officials and organizations before closing in January 2025.
A December 2023 FBI FD-302 interview summary reveals that Kinzinger proactively offered the January 6 Committee’s massive database to the FBI. The summary states:
Kinzinger stated the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol (the “Select Committee”) collected and linked a substantial amount of telephone data, and noted the FBI may already possess such data. While former Congressman Denver Riggleman worked with the Select Committee, he (Riggleman) had a contact and was able to obtain toll information, including for White House “root” or switchboard numbers via congressional subpoena. Kinzinger noted that he (Kinzinger) did not conduct the analysis himself, but that Riggleman had identified certain telephonic connections between numbers identified as being associated with the White House and certain individuals….
Kinzinger indicated that Riggleman may have never received direction on what to do with the toll data, which included approximately 30 million lines of data. Kinzinger believed it was in an electronic format, but did not know if it was the original [redacted] returns.
In October 2025, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary reported that “the FBI targeted eight Republican senators’ personal cell phones for ‘tolling data’ as part of its Arctic Frost investigation. One Republican member of the House of Representatives was also impacted. The Arctic Frost investigation formed the basis of [Special Counsel] Jack Smith’s elector case against President Donald Trump.”
The FBI must stop concealing the truth. Thirty million lines of Americans’ phone records weaponized by a partisan committee and federal investigators against President Trump and his supporters represents one of the most brazen abuses of power in modern history. The American people deserve every record — no more stonewalling.
We have conducted a massive, independent investigation into the events of January 6.
On July 6, 2026, the Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police Department released to us over 1,000 hours of body-worn camera footage in 1,627 videos from the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol event. The videos were released because of an April 2026 court ruling in a DC FOIA lawsuit. The videos are available via the Judicial Watch website here.
In August 2025, we announced that the U.S. Air Force would finally provide full military funeral honors to Ashli Babbitt, the Air Force veteran who was shot and killed inside the U.S. Capitol by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021. Babbitt was the only official January 6 homicide victim. The Biden administration had previously denied Babbitt and her family these honors in retaliation for being at the U.S. Capitol that day. This decision came on the heels of a massive, nearly $5 million Trump administration settlement to her family for wrongful death and other claims against the U.S. Government.
In July 2025, we sued the Justice Department for records on accelerated January 6 prosecutions after Trump was elected president in November 2024. The Biden administration, anticipating President-elect Donald Trump’s promise to issue pardons for January 6, 2021, defendants, is believed to have accelerated prosecutions in the final months of Biden’s term.
In March 2024, we received Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) records from the Justice Department in a FOIA lawsuit that showed the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) deployed personnel to Washington, DC, on January 6, 2021.
In October 2023, we received the declaration of James W. Joyce, senior counsel in the Office of the General Counsel for the Capitol Police, in which he describes emails among senior officials of the United States Capitol Police (USCP) in January 2021 that show warnings of possible January 6 protests that could lead to serious disruptions at the U.S. Capitol.
Judicial Watch Sues for Robert Mueller Records
The American people deserve a full accounting of Robert Mueller’s record—from the FBI’s dramatic expansion of surveillance powers after September 11 to the abusive special counsel investigation targeting President Trump. The Justice Department should immediately release every record concerning Mueller so Americans can judge his work for themselves.
Accordingly, we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records regarding the late FBI Director and Special Counsel Robert Mueller (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:26-cv-02566)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Justice Department’s Office of Information Policy (OIP) failed to respond to a March 24, 2026, FOIA request seeking:
All records in any form related to the former FBI Director, Robert Swan Mueller, III, born on August 7, 1944, in New York City, NY, who died on March 20, 2026.
Mueller served as FBI director from September 2001 to September 2013. During his tenure, the FBI significantly expanded its domestic surveillance authorities. Among other powers, the bureau made extensive use of expanded authorities under the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, including National Security Letters, which allowed the FBI to compel the production of financial, telecommunications and internet records without prior judicial approval while often prohibiting recipients from disclosing the requests.
Three years after Mueller left the FBI, the bureau launched “Crossfire Hurricane,” also known as “Russiagate,” into allegations of links between Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and Russia. Then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel in May 2017 to continue the investigation. Mueller served in that role until March 2019.
Mueller’s investigation concluded that it “did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
In May 2023, Special Counsel John Durham concluded that the FBI failed to uphold its mission of “strict fidelity to the law” when pursuing Crossfire Hurricane and found that the bureau lacked sufficiently corroborated information to justify opening a full investigation.
In March 2025, President Trump issued a memorandum, calling for the immediate declassification of materials “related to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation.”
We have pursued dozens of FOIA lawsuits in connection with the illicit targeting and other abuses of President Trump and his associates.
In October 2020, we uncovered emails between former FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok, who joined the Mueller team in 2017, and former FBI attorney Lisa Page showing that Microsoft Outlook’s Exchange server had to recreate multiple meetings that were “missing” from Page’s initial calendar entries. These missing meetings included the subjects “Going Dark Strategy Meeting,” “Twitter” and “702 Reauthorization Strategy Coordination Bi-Weekly” (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00154)).
In September 2020, we received Justice Department records showing that senior members of Mueller’s Special Counsel’s Office repeatedly and “accidentally” wiped phones assigned to them (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice(No. 1:19-cv-02693)).
Also in September 2020, we uncovered Justice Department records that included a May 2017 email documenting that Mueller informed the attorney general’s office he was withdrawing from consideration for FBI director. The email raised questions about Mueller’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee in July 2019, when he said a May 2017 interview with Trump was “not about me applying for the job” as FBI director (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00481)).
In July 2020, we uncovered emails showing that Strzok, Page and other top FBI officials in the days before and after Trump’s 2017 inauguration discussed a White House counterintelligence briefing that could “play into” the FBI’s “investigative strategy” (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00154)).
In May 2020, we received the electronic communication (EC) that officially launched Crossfire Hurricane. The document was written by Strzok (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-02743)).
In February 2020, we made public Strzok-Page emails showing direct involvement in the opening of Crossfire Hurricane. The records also showed additional “confirmed classified emails” were found on Clinton’s unsecured non-state.gov email server “beyond the number presented” in then-FBI Director James Comey’s statements; Strzok and Page questioned the access the Justice Department was granting Clinton’s lawyers; and Page revealed that the Justice Department was making edits to FBI FD-302 reports related to the Clinton Midyear Exam investigation. The emails also detail a discussion about “squashing” an issue related to the Seth Rich controversy (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00154)).
In February 2020, we uncovered Rosenstein’s communications with former Obama officials, such as Eric Holder, as well as information sharing with the media in the days immediately surrounding the inception of the Mueller investigation (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00481)).
In October 2019, we released Rosenstein’s communications that included a one-line email to Mueller stating, “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions,” and “off the record” emails with major media outlets around the date of Mueller’s appointment. In May 2017, Rosenstein had written a memo to President Trump recommending that FBI Director James Comey be fired. That day, Trump fired Comey. Three days later, on May 12, Rosenstein sent the email assuring Mueller that Trump and his staff were not included in their “discussions” (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00481)).
In May 2019, we released Justice Department records containing text messages and calendar entries of Mueller special counsel prosecutor Andrew Weissmann showing he led the hiring effort for the special counsel team. Weissmann was formerly the Obama-era chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-01356)).
In July 2018, we received FBI records concerning the assignment of Strzok to Mueller’s operation, showing that Strzok insisted on retaining his FBI security clearance, declassification and other authorities before moving to the Mueller team (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Federal Bureau of Investigation (No. 1:17-cv-02682)). Strzok was removed from the Mueller investigative team in July 2017, with the move becoming public in August. He was reassigned to a human resources position.
SPLC’s Radical Curriculum Used to Train Educators Across U.S.
Do you know what they’re teaching your children? Do you know what they’re teaching your children’s future teachers? Our Corruption Chronicles blog has a disturbing report.
The leftwing ideology deeply embedded in the American public education system is being fortified with the incorporation of a radical “Learning for Justice” curriculum—often funded with taxpayer dollars—in colleges across the country that are training future teachers, assuring that the indoctrination continues for generations to come. A new report published by an education nonprofit reveals that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a controversial leftist group that slanders conservative organizations in an interactive “Hate Map”, created the program lessons, resources and Social Justice Standards (SJS) in the educator training classes at Colleges of Education (COE) across the country. In some cases, federal grants pay for the biased teacher training that blends social justice standards into virtually all lessons.
The outrageous Learning for Justice curriculum is used to train future educators in 38 states plus the District of Columbia and at least 100 COEs nationwide utilize it, according to the probe conducted by the nonprofit Defending Education. The Virginia-based group confirms that the COEs that have adopted the SPLC’s material are responsible for preparing K-12 classroom teachers as well as the continuing education of present teachers and administrators, which means they play a major role in what content, materials, best practices and perspectives shape the educators. “This report also examines academic journal articles, doctoral dissertations, and master’s theses to provide additional insight into how SPLC materials and Social Justice Standards are incorporated into Colleges of Education, teacher preparation programs, and K-12 classrooms,” reads the report published by the charity that aims for the reestablishment of a quality, non-political education for all students. “Importantly, few COEs outwardly acknowledge their use of SPLC materials; instead, many COEs hide their usage and promotion behind faculty login pages.”
Among the cases outlined in the report is a $275,000 National Science Foundation (NSF) grant for a venture between Northern Arizona University and the Flagstaff Unified School District that incorporates Learning for Justice’s SJS into its computer science curriculum. In another example, the Department of Education gave a California graduate program $3.3 million to “develop and cultivate educators-in-training” with “social justice teaching ideas and practices,” including “Social Justice Standards from Teaching Tolerance.” The University of Maryland College of Education’s master’s for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) teachers features a key theme of “Equity, Access, and Anti-bias Education” that integrates social justice standards and critical practices from the SPLC’s Learning for Justice into its programs. The entire Maryland State Department of Education also incorporates Social Justice Standards into its regulations governing new teacher induction programming run by school districts. The University of Michigan’s education program is centered on a “more just and equitable elementary science teaching” that draws from Learning for Justice and Kutztown University in Pennsylvania forces future educators to complete a special “teaching tolerance module” to fulfill a requirement of developing an understanding of diversity.
The list of examples goes on and on, with colleges in California, Oregon, Washington State, Massachusetts and Virginia using the discriminatory SPLC material. Even top public universities in Republican states have adopted it and mandate it in educator training courses. The University of Florida’s College of Education has a required course called “Equity Pedagogy Foundations” that aims to define educational equity by exploring the foundational concepts of race, class, ability and sexuality as they impact children in schools. Florida Atlantic University trains future teachers with courses such as “Introduction to Diversity for Educators, Equity Issues in Multicultural Education and Education in Multicultural Society.” The University of North Texas makes future educators take an advanced teaching course that features required readings from Learning for Justice’s Social Justice Standards. The University of Kansas incorporates the SPLC’s “importance of multicultural education” in all teacher programs and Western Kentucky University mandates a diversity in the classroom course that requires students to read a book called “There’s a Boy in the Girl’s Bathroom.”
This latest report on the SPLC’s enormous influence in training the nation’s educators comes on the heels of an equally disturbing investigation that revealed the leftwing group has received millions of taxpayer dollars to spread its hateful message and materials across the United States, including in public schools. The money came from states, cities, counties, universities, school districts, and other public entities to help fulfill the SPLC’s stated mission of “dismantling white supremacy” and “creating a world where Black and Brown communities are represented and respected by our democracy.”
Until next week,
The post FBI Projects 158-Year Wait for “Hidden Room” Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the FBI has told a federal court that, at a rate of 500 pages a month, processing records from the “hidden room” at FBI Headquarters would take approximately 158 years. The room — now dubbed the “burn bag room” — holds over 2 million pages of records, according to the FBI’s own filing. Then-Deputy Director Bongino said in May 2025 that some of the records were found stashed “in bags.” The figures came in a Joint Status Report filed July 30, 2026, in Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:25-cv-04047)).
In the filing, Judicial Watch asked the court to allow it to question the FBI, through a limited deposition, about its handling of the records — including who discovered the room and when, who had access to it, its security classification, how records ended up stored in file cabinets, safes, boxes, and burn bags, what the FBI has done to bring them under standard records management, and whether the records were ever searched in response to other FOIA requests. (The FBI reports that it has yet to access a safe believed to contain records.) The agency also alleges that “it will take approximately 158 years to process at a rate of 500 pages a month.”
The FBI opposes the request for discovery. A status conference is scheduled before U.S. District Judge Dabney L. Friedrich on August 3, 2026 in Washington, DC.
Judicial Watch’s 2025 complaint sought all records in the room, which it described as “[a]ll documents referenced by Deputy Director Dan Bongino” concerning a room at FBI Headquarters, as well as internal FBI communications among officials in the offices of Director Kash Patel and Deputy Director Bongino about the discovery of the documents, and any directives issued on how the records should be handled. The FBI currently says it has no records responsive to the Patel/Bongino communications and directives categories. The plaintiff is challenging the government’s search for these records as well.
In a Fox News interview on May 29, 2025, then-FBI Deputy Director Bongino disclosed the room’s existence, stating:
“There was a room [in FBI Headquarters], and we found stuff. A lot of stuff … hidden from us at least and not mentioned to us. And then found stuff in there. A lot is from the Comey era. We are working … right now to declassify. And just so you know, because I get the public—I totally understand people saying ‘well do it now.’ The process is: not all of the information is ours to declassify. Some is other intelligence agencies’…. We literally can’t do it. Once that gets done … and you read some of the stuff we found—that, by the way, was not processed through the normal procedure, digitizing and putting in FBI records. We found it in bags, hiding under Jim Comey’s FBI. You’re going to be stunned.”
Judicial Watch previously uncovered that the room is a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) containing several safes—now identified as twenty file cabinets—holding between roughly 950,000 and 1,900,000 pages of records, split into two categories: “legacy files,” older records mostly tied to two closed historical investigations and more recent files tied to active investigations and prior Special Counsel records, reportedly including material connected to Special Counsel Jack Smith.
“American citizens should be outraged the FBI just told a federal court judge that its stonewalling means it will take 158 years to release the 2 million weaponization and lawfare records in its secret ‘burn bag’ room,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The American people need to know today how the FBI was used as a political weapon against Donald Trump and other innocents.”
This is the latest in a series of Judicial Watch investigations targeting shady FBI weaponization and abuse of power.
In August 2019, Judicial Watch uncovered “302” report material from FBI interviews with Bruce Ohr, who was removed from his position as U.S. Associate Deputy Attorney General in December 2017.
In March 2019, Judicial Watch received heavily redacted records from the Justice Department that reveal that Ohr remained in regular contact with former British spy and Fusion GPS contractor Christopher Steele after Steele was terminated by the FBI in November 2016 for revealing to the media his position as an FBI confidential informant.
In December 2018, Judicial Watch uncovered U.S. State Department documents showing classified information was researched and disseminated to multiple U.S. Senators by the Obama administration immediately prior to Trump’s inauguration. The documents reveal that among those receiving the classified documents were Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD), and Sen. Robert Corker (R-TN). Judicial Watch obtained the documents through a FOIA lawsuit for records of the Obama State Department’s last-minute efforts to share classified information about Russia election interference issues with Cardin.
In August 2018, Judicial Watch announced that in response to a its FOIA lawsuit, the Justice Department admitted in a court filing that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court held no hearings on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) spy warrant applications targeting Carter Page, a former Trump campaign part-time advisor who was the subject of four controversial FISA warrants.
Also in August, Judicial Watch forced the release of heavily redacted records about Christopher Steele, the former British spy, hired with Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee funds, who authored the infamous dossier targeting Trump during last year’s presidential campaign. The documents show that Steele was cut off as a “Confidential Human Source” (CHS) after he disclosed his relationship with the FBI to a third party. The documents also show at least 11 FBI payments to Steele in 2016 and document that he was admonished for unknown reasons in February 2016.
In July 2018, Judicial Watch released documents about FISA warrants targeting Carter Page, who had been a Trump campaign adviser.
The post Judicial Watch: FBI Says It Will Take 158 Years to Process ‘Hidden Room’ Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that records from the Virginia Department of Elections show the commonwealth cancelled 6,531 “declared noncitizen” voter registrations between June 2024 and June 2026.
The Virginia Department of Elections produced records in response to the below June 2026 Judicial Watch request:
Pursuant to Section 8(i) of the National Voter Registration Act (“NVRA”), Judicial Watch, Inc. respectfully requests from your office all pertinent records in the past two years concerning “the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency” of the Virginia official list of eligible voters. Specifically, Judicial Watch requests the following:
-
All records concerning the names and addresses of registrants removed from the official list of eligible voters pursuant to Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-427(B)(iii) and Va. Code Ann. § 24.2-427.
-
All records concerning all voter registrations that may not to be United States citizens by reason of reports from the Department of Motor Vehicles or from the Department of Elections based on information received from the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements Program (SAVE Program).
-
All ERIC reports, data, match lists, or other records received from or related to the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) system concerning potential voter deaths, change-of-address notifications, or other eligibility issues (including any associated processing, verification, or removal actions taken by the Department of Elections in response to such ERIC reports).
No voting histories were produced for the cancelled declared noncitizen registrations.
According to an April 2026, Virginia Attorney General letter:
DMV [Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles] creates a list of “all persons who have indicated a noncitizen status” when applying for or renewing a license, or identification document. In practice, DMV compiles a list of any individual who checks “no” in response to the question “Are you a citizen?” in an online portal. There are reports that this method has resulted in flagging eligible citizens due to inadvertent user error. DMV furnishes this list of self-attested noncitizens to ELECT daily. ELECT then electronically matches the DMV list against the voter registration list, and transmits, for each match, information from the DMV list to the appropriate registrar. After independently confirming that the individual flagged by DMV matches a voter registration record, registrars must send a notice of intent to cancel, allowing the person 14 days to submit a sworn statement confirming citizenship. If the person does not respond and confirm their citizenship, the registrar must cancel their registration. For clarity, in this opinion, this second program is called “Self-Attestation Removals.”
Also in April 2026, Virginia entered into a settlement with leftist groups in which Virginia agreed to pause the program to remove declared noncitizens from voting rolls for the 90-day period before federal elections. (The Attorney General letter cited above confirms this new policy.)
18 U.S.C. § 1015(f) — makes it a crime to knowingly make a false claim of U.S. citizenship in order to register to vote or vote in any federal, state, or local election. 18 U.S.C. § 611 — is the direct prohibition on aliens voting in any election for federal office
“It is disturbing beyond belief that as many as 6,531 noncitizens were registered to vote in Virginia. Judicial Watch is demanding more details and so should federal law enforcement, especially as Virginia is set to stop removing declared noncitizens from the rolls in the run-up to the November election,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “These Virginia numbers show that the New Jersey noncitizen voter scandal is just the tip of the iceberg and is a national crisis.”
Judicial Watch is a national leader in election integrity and voting rights litigation, with a record of successful lawsuits enforcing constitutional redistricting standards and cleaning voter rolls nationwide.
Judicial Watch’s lawsuits and legal actions have caused the removal of six million ineligible names from voter lists nationwide, including from Oregon, Colorado, Kentucky and New York City. Judicial Watch legal pressure also resulted in voter roll clean-ups in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Ohio.
Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice has announced its intention to file a motion to intervene in Judicial Watch’s federal lawsuit filed on behalf of a California political candidate and a state political party against the State of California due to its failure to maintain accurate voter rolls as required by the NVRA.
A federal court in Illinois ruled that Judicial Watch’s lawsuit to force the cleaning of voter rolls may proceed in that state.
In January 2026, in a historic case filed by Judicial Watch, the Supreme Court decided 7-2 in favor of Congressman Mike Bost and two presidential electors who were before the court to vindicate their standing to challenge an Illinois law allowing the counting of ballots received up to 14 days after Election Day.
The post Judicial Watch: Virginia Removes 6,531 Declared Noncitizen Registrations from Voter Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records concerning the House January 6 Select Committee’s transfer of approximately 30 million lines of telephone toll data to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (Judicial Watch, Inc., v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:26-cv-02557)).
The lawsuit was filed after the FBI failed to comply with an October 2025 FOIA request for:
- Communications of former Reps. Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) and Denver Riggleman (R-VA) with FBI officials regarding the reported acquisition or offer to provide the telephone toll data.
- All FBI records and internal communications regarding the reported acquisition or offer to provide the telephone toll data collected by the House January 6 Committee.
In February 2022, the FBI opened “Arctic Frost,” an investigation into alleged efforts by Trump campaign associates to obstruct Congress’s certification of the 2020 election. The probe aggressively targeted dozens of GOP officials and organizations before closing in January 2025.
A December 2023 FBI FD-302 interview summary reveals that Kinzinger proactively offered the January 6 Committee’s massive database to the FBI. The summary states:
Kinzinger stated the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol (the “Select Committee”) collected and linked a substantial amount of telephone data, and noted the FBI may already possess such data. While former Congressman Denver Riggleman worked with the Select Committee, he (Riggleman) had a contact and was able to obtain toll information, including for White House “root” or switchboard numbers via congressional subpoena. Kinzinger noted that he (Kinzinger) did not conduct the analysis himself, but that Riggleman had identified certain telephonic connections between numbers identified as being associated with the White House and certain individuals….
Kinzinger indicated that Riggleman may have never received direction on what to do with the toll data, which included approximately 30 million lines of data. Kinzinger believed it was in an electronic format, but did not know if it was the original [redacted] returns.
In October 2025, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary reported that “the FBI targeted eight Republican senators’ personal cell phones for ‘tolling data’ as part of its Arctic Frost investigation. One Republican member of the House of Representatives was also impacted. The Arctic Frost investigation formed the basis of [Special Counsel] Jack Smith’s elector case against President Donald Trump.”
“The FBI must stop concealing the truth. Thirty million lines of Americans’ phone records weaponized by a partisan committee and federal investigators against President Trump and his supporters represents one of the most brazen abuses of power in modern history,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The American people deserve every record — no more stonewalling.”
Judicial Watch has conducted a massive, independent investigation into the events of January 6.
On July 6, 2026, the Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police Department released to Judicial Watch over 1,000 hours of body-worn camera footage in 1,627 videos from the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol event. The videos were released because of an April 2026 court ruling in a DC FOIA lawsuit. The videos are available via the Judicial Watch website here.
In August 2025, Judicial Watch announced that the U.S. Air Force would finally provide full military funeral honors to Ashli Babbitt, the Air Force veteran who was shot and killed inside the U.S. Capitol by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021. Babbitt was the only official January 6 homicide victim. The Biden administration had previously denied Babbitt and her family these honors in retaliation for being at the U.S. Capitol that day. This decision came on the heels of a massive, nearly $5 million Trump administration settlement to her family for wrongful death and other claims against the U.S. Government.
In July 2025, Judicial Watch sued the Justice Department for records on accelerated January 6 prosecutions after Trump was elected president in November 2024. The Biden administration, anticipating President-elect Donald Trump’s promise to issue pardons for January 6, 2021, defendants, is believed to have accelerated prosecutions in the final months of Biden’s term.
In March 2024, Judicial Watch received Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) records from the Justice Department in a FOIA lawsuit that showed the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) deployed personnel to Washington, DC, on January 6, 2021.
In October 2023, Judicial Watch received the declaration of James W. Joyce, senior counsel in the Office of the General Counsel for the Capitol Police, in which he describes emails among senior officials of the United States Capitol Police (USCP) in January 2021 that show warnings of possible January 6 protests that could lead to serious disruptions at the U.S. Capitol.
The post Judicial Watch Sues FBI for Records on January 6 Committee’s Transfer of 30 Million Phone Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The leftwing ideology deeply embedded in the American public education system is being fortified with the incorporation of a radical “Learning for Justice” curriculum—often funded with taxpayer dollars—in colleges across the country that are training future teachers, assuring that the indoctrination continues for generations to come. A new report published by an education nonprofit reveals that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a controversial leftist group that slanders conservative organizations in an interactive “Hate Map”, created the program lessons, resources and Social Justice Standards (SJS) in the educator training classes at Colleges of Education (COE) across the country. In some cases, federal grants pay for the biased teacher training that blends social justice standards into virtually all lessons.
The outrageous Learning for Justice curriculum is used to train future educators in 38 states plus the District of Columbia and at least 100 COEs nationwide utilize it, according to the probe conducted by the nonprofit Defending Education. The Virginia-based group confirms that the COEs that have adopted the SPLC’s material are responsible for preparing K-12 classroom teachers as well as the continuing education of present teachers and administrators, which means they play a major role in what content, materials, best practices and perspectives shape the educators. “This report also examines academic journal articles, doctoral dissertations, and master’s theses to provide additional insight into how SPLC materials and Social Justice Standards are incorporated into Colleges of Education, teacher preparation programs, and K-12 classrooms,” reads the report published by the charity that aims for the reestablishment of a quality, non-political education for all students. “Importantly, few COEs outwardly acknowledge their use of SPLC materials; instead, many COEs hide their usage and promotion behind faculty login pages.”
Among the cases outlined in the report is a $275,000 National Science Foundation (NSF) grant for a venture between Northern Arizona University and the Flagstaff Unified School District that incorporates Learning for Justice’s SJS into its computer science curriculum. In another example, the Department of Education gave a California graduate program $3.3 million to “develop and cultivate educators-in-training” with “social justice teaching ideas and practices,” including “Social Justice Standards from Teaching Tolerance.” The University of Maryland College of Education’s master’s for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) teachers features a key theme of “Equity, Access, and Anti-bias Education” that integrates social justice standards and critical practices from the SPLC’s Learning for Justice into its programs. The entire Maryland State Department of Education also incorporates Social Justice Standards into its regulations governing new teacher induction programming run by school districts. The University of Michigan’s education program is centered on a “more just and equitable elementary science teaching” that draws from Learning for Justice and Kutztown University in Pennsylvania forces future educators to complete a special “teaching tolerance module” to fulfill a requirement of developing an understanding of diversity.
The list of examples goes on and on, with colleges in California, Oregon, Washington State, Massachusetts and Virginia using the discriminatory SPLC material. Even top public universities in Republican states have adopted it and mandate it in educator training courses. The University of Florida’s College of Education has a required course called “Equity Pedagogy Foundations” that aims to define educational equity by exploring the foundational concepts of race, class, ability and sexuality as they impact children in schools. Florida Atlantic University trains future teachers with courses such as “Introduction to Diversity for Educators, Equity Issues in Multicultural Education and Education in Multicultural Society.” The University of North Texas makes future educators take an advanced teaching course that features required readings form Learning for Justice’s Social Justice Standards. The University of Kansas incorporates the SPLC’s “importance of multicultural education” in all teacher programs and Western Kentucky University mandates a diversity in the classroom course that requires students to read a book called “There’s a Boy in the Girl’s Bathroom.”
This latest report on the SPLC’s enormous influence in training the nation’s educators comes on the heels of an equally disturbing investigation that revealed the leftwing group has received millions of taxpayer dollars to spread its hateful message and materials across the United States, including in public schools. The money came from states, cities, counties, universities, school districts, and other public entities to help fulfill the SPLC’s stated mission of “dismantling white supremacy” and “creating a world where Black and Brown communities are represented and respected by our democracy.”
The post SPLC’s Radical “Learning for Justice” Curriculum Used to Train Educators Across U.S. appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Historic Illinois Election Integrity Case
Judicial Watch Sues ODNI for Records on Voting Machine Vulnerabilities
Judicial Watch Sues DC for Records on Alleged Crime Data Manipulation
Oklahoma Nabs 125 Illegal Alien Truckers with Commercial Licenses
Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Historic Illinois Election Integrity Case
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in the historic case we filed on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two presidential electors.
We were before the court to vindicate their standing to challenge an Illinois law allowing the counting of ballots received up to 14 days after the Election Day as set by federal law (Rep. Michael J. Bost, Laura Pollastrini, and Susan Sweeney v. The Illinois State Board of Elections and Bernadette Matthews (No. 1:22-cv-02754, 23-2644, 24-568)).
We initially filed the lawsuit on May 25, 2022. A lower court dismissed the claim for lack of standing, which was upheld by a split 2-1 panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
This is the most important Supreme Court election law case in a generation. Too many courts have denied candidates their right to challenge unlawful election rules such as the outrageous act of counting ballots that arrive AFTER Election Day. We will keep you informed of all the developments in this case.
Our September brief to the High Court states:
Illinois counts mail-in ballots received up to two weeks after Election Day. Petitioners, candidates for federal office, claim that under controlling federal law that is two weeks too long. As a result, Illinois is counting unlawful ballots and producing inaccurate vote tallies, while simultaneously hurting petitioners’ prospects at the ballot box and injuring their pocketbooks.
We submit that the Seventh Circuit’s decision is wrong and dangerous:
It is wrong because candidates have standing to challenge the rules that govern their elections, especially when their merits theory (which must be credited for standing purposes) is that the challenged rule produces an inaccurate final tally. At a minimum, the candidate has standing when (as here) he plausibly alleges that the challenged rule will harm his electoral prospects and reduce his bank balance because he needs to pay campaign staff an extra two weeks. And the decision is dangerous because it forces judges to play political prognosticators, skews standing rules to favor certain kinds of candidates, and funnels election disputes to the worst possible context—namely, after the election where judges are asked to declare political winners. This Court should reverse.
We state that Bost has standing to challenge the Illinois law:
At the very least, Congressman Bost has standing to challenge the Illinois ballot-receipt deadline here, as a host of diverse amici confirm. Congressman Bost plausibly alleged a substantial risk that counting mail-in ballots received after Election Day will harm his electoral prospects both by risking electoral defeat and reducing his margin of victory. The plausibility of those allegations was amply reinforced by the Illinois Democratic Party’s attempted intervention and voting and litigation patterns nationwide. And he has also plausibly alleged a classic pocketbook injury because he expended additional campaign funds as a direct result of the state’s extended deadline for receiving mail-in ballots. Here too, the notion that an election artificially extended a fortnight costs more than one that ends on Election Day hardly strains credulity. The state’s contrary arguments lack merit.
In our previous Supreme Court brief, we stated:
Federal law sets the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November as the federal Election Day.
Candidates have an obvious interest in the lawfulness and fairness of the rules that govern the elections into which they pour their time and resources. They also have an obvious interest “in ensuring that the final vote tally accurately reflects the legally valid votes cast.”
Candidates pour enormous resources into running for election and have an obvious interest in the rules that dictate how long their races will last and how the ballots will be counted. They also have a distinct interest “in ensuring that the final vote tally accurately reflects the legally valid votes cast.”
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of our work, we have assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads our election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
Paul Clement, who has argued more than 100 cases before the Supreme Court, is representing Congressman Bost and the electors with us before the Supreme Court. Clement is former solicitor general under President George W. Bush from 2005-2008 and is widely regarded as among the top Supreme Court litigators in the country.
Russell Nobile, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, is part of Judicial Watch’s voting integrity efforts and focuses on campaign and voting issues, civil rights issues, constitutional law, official misconduct by public institutions and officials, and other issues.
Eric Lee is an attorney at Judicial Watch, where he focuses on enforcing federal and state laws that promote transparency and integrity in the electoral process. Eric graduated with his B.A. from St. Mary’s College of Maryland and received his J.D. from the University of Maryland School of Law. He is licensed to practice in California, Maryland, the District of Columbia, and in federal courts in Illinois and Colorado.
We recently filed a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi, opposing the State of Mississippi’s attempt to overturn the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s decision, which struck down a law allowing ballots received after Election Day to be counted.
Federal courts in Oregon, California and Illinois recently ruled that our lawsuits against those states may proceed to force them to clean their voter rolls.
We announced in May that our work led to the removal of more than five million ineligible names from voter rolls nationwide.
Judicial Watch Sues ODNI for Records on Voting Machine Vulnerabilities
The Trump administration knows electronic voting machines are vulnerable, and we think the American people deserve transparency on this critically important matter.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for records on which Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard based a discussion of the vulnerabilities of electronic voting machines in an April White House cabinet meeting (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Office of the Director of National Intelligence (No. 1:25-cv-03526)).
In March 2025, President Trump issued an executive order that included a directive to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to review the security of electronic voting systems. In an April 2025 White House Cabinet meeting Gabbard indicated that voting machines are susceptible to hacking and capable of changing votes.
We sued after the Office of the Director for National Intelligence failed to respond to an April 11, 2025, FOIA request for:
Any records about statements made by Director Gabbard during a cabinet meeting with President Trump in which she stated that: “We have evidence of how these electronic voting systems have been vulnerable to hackers for a very long time and vulnerable to exploitation to manipulate the results of the votes being cast…”
All reports, evidence, assessments, memoranda, and/or briefings prepared by, for, or presented to the ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] (including the National Intelligence Council or any Intelligence Community component) that evaluate the security, integrity, or vulnerabilities of electronic voting systems in the United States, particularly any documents referenced or relied upon by Director Gabbard in making her statements as described above.
Communications of Director Gabbard and ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] personnel or between Director Gabbard (or her designated representative) and the Executive Office of the President, the Department of Homeland Security, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, Department of Defense relating to the content or preparation of Director Gabbard’s statements.
We continue to fight for American voters and their right to know how elections are being carried out, which includes evidence of vulnerabilities in electronic voting systems.
Judicial Watch Sues DC for Records on Alleged Crime Data Manipulation
How bad is crime in your nation’s capital? We’re not entirely sure.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the District of Columbia for records related to allegations of crime data manipulation by the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) (Judicial Watch Inc. v. District of Columbia(No. 2025-CAB-006701)).
It was recently reported that DC police officers are cooperating with the U.S. Department of Justice in an investigation into whistleblower reports of manipulated crime data.
The lawsuit follows DC’s failure to respond to an August 14, 2025, FOIA request for:
- Complaints or communications from the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), Chairman Greggory Pemberton, or union representatives alleging MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] supervisors falsified or downgraded crime data (e.g., classifying shootings as “felony assaults” or carjackings as lesser offenses).
- Internal audits, reviews, or quality control assessments of crime reporting practices in the 3rd District or department-wide, including comparisons of raw incident reports to finalized Uniform Crime Reporting data.
- Records of past allegations from 2019-2020, including whistleblower complaints about misclassifying violent crimes (e.g., the August 2019 face-slashing or December 2019 knife-to-neck incidents reported as “simple assault”).
- Policies, guidelines, training materials, or directives on crime classification and reporting, including updates since 2019 on violent crime definitions (e.g., distinguishing “assault with a dangerous weapon” from “simple assault”).
- Communications among MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] personnel (e.g., supervisors, commanders, or data analysts) discussing adjustments to crime statistics to reflect lower violent crime rates
In August, President Trump issued an executive order, “Restoring Law and Order in the District of Columbia,” which refers to the “epidemic of crime in our Nation’s capital” and authorized the Secretary of Defense to mobilize the DC National Guard.
The House Oversight Committee announced in August that it was launching an investigation into allegations of manipulated and inaccurate crime statistics by DC Metropolitan Police Department leadership. Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) stated.
[I]n May, MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] placed 3rd District Commander Michael Pulliam on administrative leave following allegations that he altered crime reports. Unfortunately, this practice does not appear to be isolated, nor is it a recent development. MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] recently entered into a settlement agreement related to allegations that senior MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] officials were engaged in falsifying crime statistics to artificially lower reported crime rates.
People who live in, work in, and visit Washington, DC, have the right to real transparency about crime in the nation’s capital.
Oklahoma Nabs 125 Illegal Alien Truckers with Commercial Licenses
The Trump administration is cleaning up highway safety after the careless Biden years, helping to restore law and order on our roadways. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports on one state that is helping.
Weeks after a criminal illegal alien with a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) killed three people while recklessly driving a big rig on a Florida highway, officials in Oklahoma have apprehended over 125 illegal immigrants with a CDL they did not qualify for, including one listing “No Name Given” on the card. This is a widespread problem caused by state driver licensing agencies that fail to ensure truckers have proper training or legal status in the United States before issuing the special commercial licenses. Adding to the problem, many Mexican truck drivers that consistently deliver loads north of the border do not speak English and cannot read American highway signs, endangering public safety across the country. Nearly 6 million trucks crossed from Mexico into the U.S. last year, according to government figures, and though federal regulations require drivers to sufficiently read and speak English and understand highway traffic signs the Obama administration relaxed the English proficiency rules in 2016 and directed inspectors not to penalize truckers.
Sanctuary states have contributed significantly to the crisis by allowing illegal immigrants to obtain licenses to operate commercial vehicles. The illegal alien from India who killed three people with his 18-wheeler in mid-August had a valid commercial driver’s license from California, a renowned sanctuary state. His name is Harjinder Singh, and he tried to make an illegal U-turn on a busy southeastern Florida highway in his enormous tractor trailer, suddenly blocking all oncoming lanes and causing a brutal accident that instantly killed three innocent people. Federal authorities say video from inside the truck shows the exact moment Singh decided to break U.S. highway laws as he turned his big rig into traffic. “His face shows no shock or remorse for his actions or the lives he destroyed,” a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) statement says. The illegal immigrant, who is 28 years old, was charged with three counts of vehicular homicide and recently entered a not guilty plea, according to a local news report that also says Singh first got his commercial driver’s license in Washington state before California.
There could be untold numbers of truckers like Singh driving big rigs on highways across America. In Oklahoma alone more than 125 illegal immigrants were recently apprehended in a targeted initiative known as Operation Guardian along Interstate 40 in the western part of the state. The licenses were issued by states like California and Washington that offer illegal immigrants’ sanctuary. The illegal alien drivers arrested in Oklahoma are from a variety of countries, including India, Uzbekistan, China, Russia, Georgia, Turkey, Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Mauritania. The commercial license that listed “No Name Given” was issued by the state of New York. All the individuals posed a public safety risk by operating 80,000-pound commercial vehicles without proper verification, Oklahoma authorities say. “If New York wants to hand out CDLs to illegal immigrants with ‘No Name Given,’ that’s on them,” said Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt. “The moment they cross into Oklahoma, they answer to our laws.” He added that Operation Guardian, a partnership with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), was launched to help keep his state safe.
The Trump administration is working to crack down on the problem by strengthening federal oversight of how states issue commercial learner’s permits and licenses after the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) found systemic non-compliance nationwide, including in California, Colorado, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and Washington. As a result, ineligible drivers and those with expiration dates extending beyond their legal stay in the U.S. were issued commercial licenses. Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy also reversed the dangerous Obama-era policy that dismissed longstanding Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) English-language proficiency standards by placing noncompliant drivers out of service. “Americans are a lot safer on roads alongside truckers who can understand and interpret our traffic signs,” Duffy said when he issued the order. “This common-sense change ensures the penalty for failure to comply is more than a slap on the wrist.”
Until next week,
The post Election Integrity Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Federalist:
Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh admonished the Democrat-led state of Illinois for seemingly flip-flopping on arguments it made in a high-stakes case before the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
The moment occurred during oral arguments for Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections, which centers around a 2022 challenge brought by Rep. Mike Bost, R-Ill., and other Republicans against a state law allowing ballots to be counted up to two weeks after Election Day. Dismissed by the lower courts over alleged “lack of standing,” the plaintiffs have asked the justices to address the “sole question” of whether they, “as federal candidates, have pleaded sufficient factual allegations to show Article III standing to challenge state time, place, and manner regulations concerning their federal elections.”
Read more here…
The post Kavanaugh Blasts Illinois For Flip-Flopping On Candidate Standing In Election Litigation appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the District of Columbia for records related to allegations of crime data manipulation by the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) (Judicial Watch Inc. v. District of Columbia (No. 2025-CAB-006701)).
It was recently reported that DC police officers are cooperating with the U.S. Department of Justice in an investigation into whistleblower reports of manipulated crime data.
The lawsuit follows the DC’s failure to respond to an August 14, 2025, FOIA request for:
- Complaints or communications from the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), Chairman Greggory Pemberton, or union representatives alleging MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] supervisors falsified or downgraded crime data (e.g., classifying shootings as “felony assaults” or carjackings as lesser offenses).
- Internal audits, reviews, or quality control assessments of crime reporting practices in the 3rd District or department-wide, including comparisons of raw incident reports to finalized Uniform Crime Reporting data.
- Records of past allegations from 2019-2020, including whistleblower complaints about misclassifying violent crimes (e.g., the August 2019 face-slashing or December 2019 knife-to-neck incidents reported as “simple assault”).
- Policies, guidelines, training materials, or directives on crime classification and reporting, including updates since 2019 on violent crime definitions (e.g., distinguishing “assault with a dangerous weapon” from “simple assault”).
- Communications among MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] personnel (e.g., supervisors, commanders, or data analysts) discussing adjustments to crime statistics to reflect lower violent crime rates.
In August, President Trump issued an executive order, “Restoring Law and Order in the District of Columbia,” which refers to the “epidemic of crime in our Nation’s capital” and authorized the Secretary of Defense to mobilize the DC National Guard.
The House Oversight Committee announced in August that it was launching an investigation into allegations of manipulated and inaccurate crime statistics by DC Metropolitan Police Department leadership. Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) stated:
[I]n May, MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] placed 3rd District Commander Michael Pulliam on administrative leave following allegations that he altered crime reports. Unfortunately, this practice does not appear to be isolated, nor is it a recent development. MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] recently entered into a settlement agreement related to allegations that senior MPD [Metropolitan Police Department] officials were engaged in falsifying crime statistics to artificially lower reported crime rates.
“People who live in, work in, and visit Washington, DC, have the right to real transparency about crime in the nation’s capital,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The post Judicial Watch Sues DC for Records on Alleged Crime Data Manipulation appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Epoch Times:
The Supreme Court seemed receptive on Oct. 8 to a Republican congressman’s argument that he should be allowed to challenge an Illinois law that allows the counting of ballots for two weeks after Election Day.Arguments in the case focused on the question of legal standing, as opposed to the merits of the lawsuit contesting the Illinois statute.Standing refers to the right of someone to sue in court. A party must show a strong enough connection to the claim to justify participating in a lawsuit.Read more here…
The post Supreme Court Seems Receptive to Challenge to Post-Election Ballot Counting appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times:
The Supreme Court seemed poised Wednesday to embrace new rules that would give candidates for federal office the chance to challenge election rules in court well before votes are cast, a move that could give Republicans more room to confront Democratic states’ mail-in ballot laws.
The justices heard oral arguments on a case from Rep. Mike Bost, a Republican who was denied the chance to challenge Illinois’ law allowing mail-in ballots to be counted up to two weeks after Election Day. Lower courts ruled he didn’t have legal standing to sue because he couldn’t show he was particularly injured by the law.
Most of the justices seemed dismayed by that argument. They said giving candidates at least some chance to sue seemed reasonable.
Read more here…
The post Justices eye letting candidates challenge states that change voting rules appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Chicago Tribune:
Bost first challenged the law in May 2022, assisted by the conservative legal organization Judicial Watch, contending ballots should be counted on Election Day and that post-election counting threatened to dilute his margin of victory and required him to spend money on ballot watchers for the extended time period, causing him reputational and financial injury.
Attorney Paul Clement, a former U.S. solicitor general during the George W. Bush administration, represented Bost and Judicial Watch. Clement argued that “candidates have a unique, concrete and particularized interest in the rules of the electoral road, especially those that address which ballots are going to be counted and when.
Read more here…
The post US Supreme Court hears arguments in GOP Illinois congressman’s mail-in ballots suit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
Chief Justice John Roberts expressed concern during oral arguments on Wednesday that Illinois wants the high court to limit candidates’ ability to sue over election laws to the “most fraught” time of the campaign, questioning the state’s argument that candidates must wait for evidence that a state law has harmed or will harm their election before filing a lawsuit.
Oral arguments before the Supreme Court in Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections grappled with when a political candidate has shown harm by a law sufficient to file a lawsuit. Justices expressed concerns over both sides’ arguments, ranging from the prospect that candidates with no chance of winning will be able to sue over any election law, to the concern of courts’ need to determine whether a candidate has a chance of winning before assessing whether they have standing.
Read more here…
The post Justice Roberts raises concerns about limiting candidate lawsuits to ‘fraught’ election time appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From New York Post:
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court appeared poised Wednesday to greenlight a slew of challenges to election laws by political candidates — which could lead to massive impacts on the next presidential vote in 2028.
A majority of the high court seemed to side with Rep. Mike Bost (R-Ill.), who petitioned the court to allow his lawsuit challenging an Illinois law allowing mail-in ballots postmarked before Election Day to be counted up to two weeks after polls close to move forward.
Bost’s case had been rejected by the lower courts, including the Chicago-based US Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, which determined the lawmaker — who represents a deep-red district in Southern Illinois — lacked standing on the grounds that his lawsuit was speculative and showed no evidence of harm.
“What you’re sketching out for us is a potential disaster,” Chief Justice John Roberts told an attorney for Illinois who questioned whether candidates likely to win could challenge election laws they found unjust..
Read more here…
The post Supreme Court likely to favor GOP challenge to Illinois mail-in ballot rules in case with major election implications appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Office of the Director of National Intelligence for records from an April White House cabinet meeting in which Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard discussed the vulnerabilities of electronic voting machines (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Office of the Director of National Intelligence (No. 1:25-cv-03526)).
In March 2025, President Trump issued an executive order that included a directive to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to review the security of electronic voting systems. In an April 2025 White House Cabinet meeting Gabbard indicated that voting machines are susceptible to hacking and capable of changing votes.
Judicial Watch sued after the Office of the Director for National Intelligence failed to respond to an April 11, 2025, FOIA request for:
Any records about statements made by Director Gabbard during a cabinet meeting with President Trump in which she stated that: “We have evidence of how these electronic voting systems have been vulnerable to hackers for a very long time and vulnerable to exploitation to manipulate the results of the votes being cast…”
All reports, evidence, assessments, memoranda, and/or briefings prepared by, for, or presented to the ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] (including the National Intelligence Council or any Intelligence Community component) that evaluate the security, integrity, or vulnerabilities of electronic voting systems in the United States, particularly any documents referenced or relied upon by Director Gabbard in making her statements as described above.
Communications of Director Gabbard and ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] personnel or between Director Gabbard (or her designated representative) and the Executive Office of the President, the Department of Homeland Security, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Federal Bureau of Investigation, Central Intelligence Agency, Department of Defense relating to the content or preparation of Director Gabbard’s statements.
“Judicial Watch continues to fight for American voters and their right to know how elections are being carried out, which includes evidence of vulnerabilities in electronic voting systems,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced election law attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Judicial Watch recently presented oral arguments to the Supreme Court of the United States in a historic case filed on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two presidential electors, who were before the court to vindicate their standing to challenge an Illinois law extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.
Judicial Watch in August 2025 filed a brief to the Supreme Court on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi, opposing the State of Mississippi’s attempt to overturn the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s decision, which struck down a law allowing ballots received after Election Day to be counted.
Federal courts for Oregon, California and Illinois have ruled that Judicial Watch’s lawsuits may proceed against those states to force them to clean their voter rolls.
Judicial Watch announced in May that its work led to the removal of more than five million ineligible names from voter rolls nationwide.
The post Judicial Watch Sues ODNI for Records on Electronic Voting Machine Vulnerabilities appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear oral arguments for a Judicial Watch case regarding Illinois’ law that allows mail-in ballots to be accepted for two weeks after Election Day, in which the justices will determine whether the congressman bringing the lawsuit has standing.
Judicial Watch, on behalf of Rep. Mike Bost, R-Ill., filed a lawsuit in May 2022 over Illinois’ law that lets ballots postmarked by Election Day be received up to 14 days after the election.
Read more here…
The post Supreme Court takes case on post-Election Day ballots to determine who can sue over elections appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a hearing is ordered by U.S. District Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan for June 18 at 11 a.m. ET in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for “Twitter Files” records concerning Hunter Biden’s laptop and other censorship. The only issue remaining in the lawsuit is the FBI’s continued hiding of records documenting two meetings between Twitter and the Biden FBI.
Judicial Watch filed the April 2023 lawsuit against the Justice Department, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence after the FBI failed to respond to a December 2022 FOIA request for the records of any FBI official and key Twitter employees between June 2020 and December 2022 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice(No. 1:23-cv-01163)).
The lawsuit references Yoel Roth, Vijaya Gadde, and Jim Baker, who were prominent in internal discussions at Twitter about censoring the New York Post’s Hunter Biden laptop story, as journalist Matt Taibbi revealed in the December 2022 release of the “Twitter Files.”
“It is frustrating beyond belief for Judicial Watch to have to go to federal court for basic information on Biden’s abuse of the FBI, using Twitter to censor and monitor Americans,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Earlier this year, FBI Director Kash Patel committed the FBI to a “new era” of transparency:
The FBI is entering a new era—one that will be defined by integrity, accountability, and the unwavering pursuit of justice. There will be no cover-ups, no missing documents, and no stone left unturned — and anyone from the prior or current Bureau who undermines this will be swiftly pursued. If there are gaps, we will find them. If records have been hidden, we will uncover them. And we will bring everything we find to the DOJ to be fully assessed and transparently disseminated to the American people as it should be. The oath we take is to the Constitution, and under my leadership, that promise will be upheld without compromise.
Through FOIA and other direct litigation, Judicial Watch continues to investigate and litigate the broad range of censorship that had been imposed upon tens millions of Americans.
In November 2024, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) revealing an extensive effort by government and non-government entities to monitor and censor social media posts on fraud during the 2020 election.
In June 2024, heavily redacted Homeland Security records from a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit showed state election officials in the days before and after the 2020 election flagging online content deemed “misinformation” and sending it to the Center for Internet Security (CIS), a DHS-funded nonprofit, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which is a division of DHS, the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to flag online election content for censorship and suppression, and others.
In December 2023, Homeland Security records from the same lawsuit showed a close collaboration between its Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and the leftist Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) to engage in “real-time narrative tracking” on all major social media platforms in the days leading up to the 2020 election.
In November 2023, Judicial Watch uncovered Homeland Security records that showed the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) communicating during the 2020 election campaign with the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP). The CISA records showed government involvement in the EIP pressure on Google, Twitter, Facebook, TikTok, Pinterest, Reddit and other platforms to censor “disinformation.”
In September 2022, Judicial Watch suedthe Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video. In March 2025, Judicial Watch asked the Supreme Court of the United States to review the case.
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the Covid narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising was given to the CDC by social media companies.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In April 2021, records from the Office of the Secretary of State of California revealed how state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election. Included in these records were “misinformation briefings” emails that were compiled by communications firm SKDK, which lists Biden for President as their top client of 2020. The records show how the state agency successfully pressured YouTube to censor a Judicial Watch video concerning mail-in voting and a Judicial Watch lawsuit settlement about California voter roll clean up.
The post Judicial Watch: FBI Hiding Biden Twitter Censorship Records – Federal Court Hearing Set appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In yet another case that demonstrates the deep-rooted corruption at the dismantled United States Agency for International Development (USAID) a contracting officer at the scandal-plagued State Department offshoot has pleaded guilty to bribery of a public official for running a decade-long scheme involving over half a billion dollars in contracts. The criminal operation was facilitated by a government program that helps socially and economically disadvantaged business by giving them lucrative federal contracting opportunities through “set-asides and solo-source” contracts exclusively available to minorities and women without a competitive bidding process. All the parties involved in this criminal enterprise, including the veteran USAID employee, are minorities.
It is important to note that the mainstream media, which collectively expressed outrage when President Trump dismantled USAID, has failed to report on the pervasive fraud that has long gripped the foreign aid agency and still ignores cases like this that support the administration’s move. Only a few local Maryland news outlets covered this huge bribery operation because the perpetrators were from the Baltimore area. The corrupt USAID contracting officer, Roderick Watson, is from Woodstock, which is just west of Baltimore. Federal prosecutors say he received over a million dollars in bribes in exchange for using his position as a trusted overseer of taxpayer money to direct 14 prime federal contracts to his three buddies, Walter Barnes, a certified Small Business Administration (SBA) minority business owner, Darryl Britt another minority business owner and Paul Young, a subcontractor of the men’s companies. Barnes has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bribery of a public official and securities fraud. Britt has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bribery of a public official and Young has pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bribery of a public official.
“The defendants sought to enrich themselves at the expense of American taxpayers through bribery and fraud,” said Matthew R. Galeotti, head of the Department of Justice (DOJ) criminal division. “Their scheme violated the public trust by corrupting the federal government’s procurement process. Anybody who cares about good and effective government should be concerned about the waste, fraud, and abuse in government agencies, including USAID.” Galeotti added that those who engage in bribery schemes to exploit the U.S. Small Business Administration’s vital economic programs for small businesses— whether individuals or corporations acting through them—will be held to account. The U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland, where the case is being tried, emphasized that Watson was entrusted to serve the interests of the American people and his criminal actions for his own personal gain undermine the integrity of public institutions. “Public trust is the hallmark of our nation’s values, so corruption within a federal government agency is intolerable” the U.S. Attorney, Kelly O. Hayes, said.
The elaborate scheme began in 2013 when Watson, while a USAID contracting officer, made a deal with Britt to steer government contracts his way in exchange for bribes. Britt’s company, Apprio, benefitted from the special minority exception and therefore did not receive much scrutiny but when it graduated from the program and was no longer eligible to be a prime business for new contracts with USAID under the initiative, they brought Barnes onboard. His minority-owned company, Vistant, shifted to the prime contractor that cashed in thanks to Watson’s influence between 2018 and 2022. Britt and Barnes concealed the bribes—cash, computers, cellular phones, jobs for relatives, downpayments on two residential mortgages—by passing them through Young, the president of another subcontractor to the men’s businesses. Watson helped his accomplices by manipulating the procurement process at USAID by, among other things, recommending their companies to other agency decisionmakers for noncompetitive contracts, disclosing sensitive procurement information, providing positive performance evaluations, and approving increased funding and security clearances. “Watson exploited his position at USAID to line his pockets with bribes in exchange for more than $550 million in contracts,” according to Guy Ficco, chief of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI). “While he helped three company owners and presidents bypass the fair bidding process, he was showered with cash and lavish gifts.”
Judicial Watch has for years exposed inherent fraud, waste, and corruption at USAID. Most recently, we sued the agency for records involving $27 million in Gaza grants that went to “Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees.” The Biden administration claimed the recipients could not be disclosed because the agency’s workers could be put at risk by Israel. The involvement of employees of the U.S.-backed United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNWRA) in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel underscores the importance of transparency in who receives American taxpayer dollars and how the money is spent.
The post Bribed USAID Official Helps Minority Businesses Get $550 Mil in Contracts in Decade-Long Scheme appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Justice Department Files Statement of Interest in Judicial Watch’s Lawsuit to Compel Oregon to Clean Voter Rolls
Judicial Watch Sues Pentagon on Reported Covid Infections at Wuhan Games
FBI’s Patel and Bongino: Hostages of the Deep State?
L.A. Rioters Fight to Keep Rapists, Murderers, Gangbangers on City Streets
Justice Department Files Statement of Interest in Judicial Watch’s Lawsuit to Compel Oregon to Clean Voter Rolls
The U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in our lawsuit that calls on Oregon’s secretary of state to make “a reasonable effort to remove” the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls as required by federal law (Judicial Watch, et al. v. The State of Oregon et al. (No. 6:24-cv-01783)). U.S. District Court Judge Michael J. McShane set a hearing in the case for June 18 at 10:00 a.m.
We applaud the Trump Justice Department’s decision to join our effort to expose dirty voter rolls in Oregon. Judicial Watch, for years, has done the heavy lifting alone.
The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the official voter rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. The law requires registrations to be cancelled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections. Judicial Watch’s lawsuit alleges Oregon’s voting rolls are among the worst maintained in the nation.
In a Justice Department press release Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Harmeet Dhillon said: “Accurate voter registration rolls are critical to ensure that elections in Oregon are conducted fairly, accurately, and without fraud…. States have specific obligations under the list maintenance provisions of the NVRA, and the Department of Justice will vigorously enforce those requirements.”
Our lawsuit pointed out that the federal “NVRA supersedes and preempts any Oregon law or practice” that claimed to limit or delegate the state’s obligations under federal law. The Justice Department’s statement of interest explains, “This case presents important questions regarding enforcement of the National Voter Registration Act,” adding, “Congress has vested the Attorney General with authority to enforce the NVRA on behalf of the United States.” The statement takes the same position as Judicial Watch when it argues that “[b]y its plain terms, the NVRA identifies one entity, the state, that is required to carry out obligations for voter registration administration[.]” The Justice Department focuses on the state’s obligation to make voter registration lists available to Judicial Watch and the public, as federal law requires.
We filed the lawsuit in October 2024 to enforce basic voter list maintenance provisions under Section 8 of the NVRA after uncovering a broad failure to clean up voter rolls in dozens of Oregon counties.
In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory.
Judicial Watch’s lawsuit argues that Oregon’s voter rolls contain large numbers of old, inactive registrations; and that 29 of Oregon’s 36 counties removed few or no registrations as required by federal election law. Judicial Watch asserts that Oregon and 35 of its counties had overall registration rates exceeding 100%; and that Oregon has the highest known inactive registration rate of any state in the nation. In combination, all of these facts show that Oregon is failing to remove inactive registrations pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) of the NVRA. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oregon, Eugene Division, to compel the defendants to comply with their voter list maintenance obligations under Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).
In April 2025, we announced that our analysis and use of voter registration lists has led to lawsuits and legal actions under the NVRA that have resulted in the removal of five million names from voter rolls in nearly a dozen states and localities over the last several years.
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights.
In March 2025, we sent a notice letter to Lt. Governor Deidre M. Henderson, notifying her that Utah is currently in violation of the NVRA’s public disclosure requirements. The notice letter warns of a lawsuit after 90 days if the issues are not resolved
In May 2024, we sued California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, similarly asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort” to remove ineligible registrants from the rolls as required by federal law.
In July 2024, we asked a federal court to reject the State of Illinois’ motion to dismiss Judicial Watch’s lawsuit to compel the state to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, on behalf of Judicial Watch, the nonprofit organizations Illinois Family Action and Breakthrough Ideas, and Carol J. Davis, a lawfully registered Illinois voter.
Judicial Watch Sues Pentagon on Reported Covid Infections at Wuhan Games
We’re still uncovering the truth about Wuhan and Covid.
We filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for all records regarding U.S. military personnel possibly contracting Covid-19 in October 2019 during the World Military Games in Wuhan, China (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:25-cv-01807)).
Our lawsuit cites a December 2022 report issued by the Pentagon titled “Report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives: 2019 World Military Games” which states that seven “service members who attended the games exhibited COVID-19-like signs and/or symptoms” during the time surrounding their attendance at the games.
The report was not made public until April 2025, after former Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI) asked the Defense Department for a full investigation. While the report had been provided to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees in December 2022, the Biden administration apparently suppressed it.
We sued the Defense Department after it failed to respond to an April 28, 2025, FOIA request for:
All reports, studies, memoranda, and/or analyses produced by or sent to the Joint Chiefs, Secretary of Defense, and/or Deputy Secretary of Defense related to US military personnel contracting a SARS-like or Covid-19-like virus at the Wuhan Games in October 2019.
In the 2021 documentary “What Really Happened in Wuhan,” Sky News Australia reported that a month after evidence emerged that the virus leaked from the Wuan Institute of Virology, the city of Wuhan hosted the Military Games, with more than 9,000 athletes from around the world in attendance. “The opening ceremony was held on October 18, 2019, and two weeks later, athletes begun returning home to more than 100 countries.”
The National Institutes of Health’s National Library of Medicine published a January 2021 article, “The impact of the World Military Games on the COVID-19 pandemic,” which cites a study published on January 19, 2021 that “examined the hypothesis that the large gathering in a pandemic epicenter was a factor in the spread of COVID-19 disease.”
Let’s cut to the chase: the Pentagon should release each and every document about military personnel possibly being infected by Covid in 2019 in Wuhan, China – months before the public learned of Covid. The time for FOIA games is over.
We are the national leader in exposing key information about fraud, abuse, and government secrets concerning Covid-19. In the book “Rights and Freedoms in Peril: An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America” Tom Fitton examines the impact of Covid-19 related policies on electoral processes, and expresses concerns about the potential for increased voter fraud and chaos.
In May 2025, we received records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that reveal its plans to mandate Covid-19 vaccinations for 17 million healthcare employees and that only one of 4,682 claims for injuries and deaths due to Covid-19 “countermeasures” at the time was compensated.
Records uncovered in 2024 from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) through a FOIA request showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it.
Records from the Health and Human Services included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
Health and Human Services records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
Records from Health and Human Services regarding data Moderna submitted to the Food and Drug Administration on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
Food and Drug Administration records detailed pressure for Covid-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appeared to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding Covid data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the Covid-19 vaccines showed a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) revealed safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
HHS records included emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and Covid-19.
HHS records showed that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” Covid-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
Fauci emails included his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
Our four-part documentary regarding the coordinated effort by the government and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates is available here.
FBI’s Patel and Bongino: Hostages of the Deep State?
As many Americans do, we look at President Trump’s FBI and wonder what’s going on. Too many questions arise about the performance of its leaders. Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, takes a look in Investigative Bulletin.
Kash Patel and Dan Bongino have been stalwart allies of the conservative movement—and good friends of Judicial Watch—for many years. Judicial Watch applauded their appointments as director and deputy director of the FBI. Expectations were high. In a statement following Patel’s confirmation as FBI director, JW President Tom Fitton noted that Patel has “his work set out for him.” He called on Patel to “bring transparency and accountability back to an agency that became irredeemably corrupt and the tip of the spear in unfettered lawfare against any American seen as a threat to the ruling class. From sitting on Hunter Biden’s laptop in order to influence the 2020 election, the raid of President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, and the censorship of Americans, to the targeting of traditional Catholics, the FBI has shown itself as a tainted domestic and intelligence service.”
Veteran Washington reformers like Fitton understand that Patel’s time for true change is limited. The Deep State, the forces of inertia, and the political calendar are all working against him. These days, as well, conservative insiders are alarmed by mounting signs that Patel and Bongino have been taken hostage by the Deep State consensus and are failing to bring meaningful change to the FBI.
An early warning sign came in April when Patel plucked Steven Jensen from exile in Columbia, South Carolina, and appointed him head of the FBI’s powerful Washington Field Office. Conservatives were aghast. As chief of the Domestic Terrorism Section at FBI headquarters in 2020 and 2021, Jensen led a highly damaging law-enforcement campaign against the January 6 protestors, raising the specter of domestic terrorism.
Jensen was “a true believer in Joe Biden’s domestic terrorism narrative,” retired FBI supervisor George Hill told Miranda Devine of the New York Post, “…that every Trump supporter in and around Capitol Hill [on January 6] was an insurrectionist, a white supremacist and probably violent.”
Jensen “set up the infrastructure for that [domestic terrorism narrative],” Hill told Devine. “He made the decisions, set up the mechanisms whereby all the cases would be opened around the country to give the picture that this was a nationwide problem. Previously it would have been opened up [as one case with multiple suspects] in Washington — but by opening it that way, you allowed [then-FBI Director] Chris Wray to sit in Congress and say domestic terrorism was a nationwide problem.”
Patel and Bongino vigorously defended Jensen. Appearing on Fox News, they urged patience. “Just wait,” Bongino said, “and you’ll see. Nothing we’re doing—nothing—is by accident.”
Two months later, we’re still waiting.
Meanwhile, more concerns have surfaced. Media reports about Patel’s jet-setting lifestyle and love of sporting events can largely be dismissed as sour grapes from the opposition press. But the disquiet about the FBI’s lack of transparency and failure to mount significant investigations is not easily ignored.
Exhibit A is the uproar over the Jeffrey Epstein files. In February, following a much-ballyhooed campaign promising new disclosures, Attorney General Pam Bondi released an underwhelming batch of documents, most of which turned out to be already in the public domain or heavily redacted. Bondi pinned the blame on the FBI and promised more documents to come as soon as the next day. No documents were forthcoming. Judicial Watch repeatedly asked the FBI to turn over the Epstein files under the Freedom of Information Act. The FBI did not respond to the JW requests and in April, Judicial Watch sued for the records. “The Justice Department needs to respond to public demands for transparency under law and release the Epstein files under FOIA,” said JW’s Fitton.
The Epstein case is not the only instance of a troubling lack of transparency at the Justice Department and the FBI. Officials have been stonewalling Judicial Watch—the national leader in FOIA actions related to government corruption—in some cases for years.
Seven years ago, for example, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit for text messages between FBI agents involved in the bogus “Russia Collusion” investigation of Donald Trump. The FBI has refused to turn over many of the texts and related documents—or even disclose what they are withholding.
JW sued the Justice Department—twice, in 2023 and 2024—for communications surrounding the controversial Hunter Biden laptop story. And in October 2024, JW sued the Justice Department for communications among top officials about anti-Trump social media posts by a senior agent involved in an investigation of a Florida assassination attempt against Trump.
The Justice Department and FBI response to these requests? Stonewalls, silence, and foot-dragging.
Installation in key positions of Deep State actors like Jensen and lack of transparency are not the only strikes against Bondi, Patel, and Bongino. Perhaps most disturbing is their failure to act decisively to reduce the vast powers of the Justice Department and the FBI.
“President Trump was almost jailed by his own Justice Department in his first term,” Steve Bannon recently reminded viewers in a War Room interview with Fitton. It’s a segment worth viewing in its entirety.
“There’s no evidence the FBI thinks it is subject to the rule of law,” Fitton said. “Kash Patel and Pam Bondi need to take a much more aggressive [approach] and have an expansive understanding as to what their opportunities and roles are.”
“It’s a systemic problem,” Bannon said. “It’s not just a personnel problem. [The FBI] has to be taken apart brick by brick.”
The outlines of an aggressive inquiry that would set the stage for reducing the power of the Justice Department and FBI are obvious: get to the bottom of the targeting of Trump and his allies in the Russiagate scandal; look at the FBI role in the Hunter Biden laptop case and the limiting of the story’s media circulation at a critical moment in the 2020 election; expose the roots of the 2022 Mar-a-Lago raid; connect the dots of FBI targeting of conservative Catholics, parents attending school board meetings, and pro-life groups.
Doubtless Bondi, Patel, and Bongino have their hands full managing the day-to-day affairs of their giant bureaucracies. Conservatives still wish them well, but time is running out. And the president who promised to “demolish the Deep State” is watching from the White House. They will not be forgiven for bungling a historic opportunity.
L.A. Rioters Fight to Keep Rapists, Murderers, Gangbangers on City Streets
We’ve reported for years on the dangerous criminals among those who have illegally crossed our southern border. Now, those on the Left are pretending they don’t exist. Our Corruption Chronicles blog sets the record straight.
Rioters in Los Angeles are fighting to keep rapists, murderers, gangbangers and other violent criminals loose on city streets, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) confirms this week contradicting open border groups, media outlets and California Democrats who claim only hard-working, law-abiding immigrants were cruelly arrested in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICEO) sweeps that ignited pandemonium in the City of Angels. Federal agents and local police officers have been violently attacked, cars set on fire, businesses looted and roads blocked. Elected officials in the Golden State condemn the ICE operations as an attack on immigrant families and mainstream media outlets downplay the riots as protests and civil unrest. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi dismissed rioters burning cars and breaking windows as being caught up in “the exuberance of the moment.” The mainstream media coverage has also focused on the family men arrested by ICE and the spouses and children suffering over their sudden absence. A local newspaper story features an arrested migrant’s wife who joined a peaceful protest held by families of other detained men to make a public plea for help and due process.
DHS is setting the record straight by releasing detailed criminal information about the illegal immigrants—all men—recently arrested in the L.A. sweep, which started about a week ago. California sanctuary politicians and rioters are defending heinous illegal alien criminals including child pedophiles and other violent offenders at the expense of Americans’ safety, the agency created after 9/11 to safeguard the nation writes in a statement issued this week. Instead of rioting, Californians should be thanking ICE officers who make our communities safe, DHS further points out, questioning why California Governor Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass care more about violent criminal illegal aliens than they do about protecting their own citizens? While federal agents were getting assaulted in Bass’s city, she sided with lawlessness over law enforcement, according to ICE Director Todd Lyons, who reveals the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) took over two hours to respond when his agents, vastly outnumbered by over 1,000 rioters, were surrounded and attacked. “The brave men and women of ICE were in Los Angeles arresting criminal illegal aliens including gang members, drug traffickers and those with a history of assault, cruelty to children, domestic violence, robbery, and smuggling,” Lyons said.
DHS assures that ICE will continue to “arrest vicious illegal alien criminals” even as rioters disrupt law enforcement. Fortunately, President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard and Marines to maintain order. Bass, L.A.’s leftist mayor, finally implemented a curfew after several nights of extensive looting and vandalism. She insists most of the rioters are peacefully demonstrating and called the curfew an effort to “curb bad actors who do not support the immigrant community.” She also demands that the immigration raids stop along with nearly two dozen other elected officials in the region. “When you raid Home Depots and workplaces, when you tear parents and children apart, and when you deploy troops to our streets, you’re not trying to keep anyone safe – you’re trying to cause fear and panic,” said Bass, who was on a trip to Africa while her city burned earlier this year. She accused Trump of triggering a “chaotic escalation” by sending federalized troops and initially described the rioting as “reports of unrest.”
Here are some of the illegal immigrants arrested in the recent L.A. operation, which the feds say is ongoing. The DHS announcement includes photos of the perpetrators as well. They include Cuong Chanh Phan, who committed a notorious gang-affiliated murder of two teenagers at a graduation party; Eswin Uriel Castro, previously deported with criminal convictions for child molestation and being armed with a dangerous weapon. He has also been arrested for robbery and domestic violence; Anastacio Enrique Solis-Salinas, a Nicaragua convict, has convictions for domestic violence and hit and run and has been arrested for willful cruelty to a child; Rafael Gamez-Sanchez has been convicted of vehicular manslaughter; Miguel Angel Palafox-Montes, previously returned to Mexico twice, has been convicted of grand theft, narcotics violations and identity theft and has been arrested for battery and burglary; Dzhakhar Aslambekov, a Russian illegal immigrant, was recently arrested for fraud related to government assistance programs. The list of criminal offenders goes on and on, the “worst of the worst illegal alien criminals in Los Angeles,” DHS assures.
U.S. Subsidizes Illegal Immigrant Money Transfers Via Federal Reserve
Your Federal Reserve (a creature of the federal government) is helping illegal aliens in our country send billions back to their countries of origin. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
As Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum denounces the proposed remittance tax and calls for protests in this country, she conveniently fails to mention that the United States government has for two decades subsidized the money transfers through a Federal Reserve program called “Directo a Mexico.” Remittances are the largest single source of foreign income for Mexico and last year migrants in the U.S. sent a historic $62.5 billion to family back home. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, recently passed by the House and pending Senate approval, remittances from noncitizens in the U.S. will be taxed 3.5%, igniting fury among Mexican government officials, especially Sheinbaum who threatened to “mobilize” a fight against the tax. Mexico’s president has publicly called on fellow Mexicans in the United States to send senators letters, electronic mail and social media posts expressing their disagreement with the additional assessment.
The U.S. is the top source of remittances worldwide and the money sent by migrants to help support family back home has long provided Latin America—especially Mexico—a critical economic lifeline. President Trump recently proposed a 5% tax on remittances and House Republicans reduced it to 3.5%. Omitted from mainstream media coverage, mostly critical of the proposed tax, is the “Directo a Mexico” program run by the Federal Reserve, the government agency that serves as the nation’s central bank. It was launched 20 years ago and uses government resources to subsidize and help illegal immigrants transfer cash to Mexico. Back in 2006 Judicial Watch obtained Federal Reserve marketing materials created for the program, which was designed to facilitate the transfer of funds from immigrant workers in the U.S.—regardless of legal status—to relatives in Mexico. The marketing materials, from the Retail Payments Office of the Federal Reserve in Atlanta, Georgia, were prepared by the government for presentations to financial institutions in California in November 2006.
The “Directo a Mexico” marketing materials were targeted to banks, credit unions and other financial institutions in the U.S. and include information on payment channels and benefits to Mexican recipients. The marketing materials also detail the number of Mexican migrants in the United States—at the time 9,328,405—with no distinction between those here illegally. A separate list identifies Mexican banks receiving “Directo a Mexico” transfers by branches (8,578) and total bank accounts (41,313,157). After viewing all the records, Judicial Watch determined that the taxpayer-subsidized program seems designed to facilitate the transfer of wealth by illegal immigrants outside the United States, undermining our nation’s immigration laws and creating a potential national security nightmare. At the very least Judicial Watch called on the Federal Reserve to limit the program to legal residents and American citizens, which has not occurred.
In its first year, 2005, remittances sent through “Directo a Mexico” topped $20 billion and the Federal Reserve reported “double-digit percentage growth” in the next several years. Over a decade later Judicial Watch reported that most of the $33.48 billion in remittances to Mexico at the time flowed through “Directo a Mexico” amid a growing immigration crisis in the U.S. Remittances are transferred through the Federal Reserve’s own automated clearinghouse linked directly to Mexico’s central bank (Banco de Mexico). When the program was created Federal Reserve officials acknowledged that most of the Mexican nationals who send money back home are illegal immigrants, so a Mexican-issued identification is the only requirement to use the government banking service. In fact, the government’s colorful brochure promoting “Directo a Mexico” has a frequently asked question section that says: “If I return to Mexico or am deported, will I lose the money in my bank account?” The answer is “No. The money still belongs to you and can easily be accessed at an ATM in Mexico using your debit card.” Decorated with American and Mexican flags, the Federal Reserve’s two-page brochure also offers to help immigrants who do not have bank accounts open one and assures the best foreign exchange rate and low transfer fees. It is not clear if the proposed remittance tax will impact money transfers sent via “Directo a Mexico.”
Until next week,
The post DOJ Supportive of Judicial Watch in Election Lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the U.S. Department of Justice filed a statement of interest in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit that calls on Oregon’s secretary of state to make “a reasonable effort to remove” the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls as required by federal law (Judicial Watch, et al. v. The State of Oregon et al. (No. 6:24-cv-01783)). U.S. District Court Judge Michael J. McShane set a hearing in the case for June 18 at 10:00 a.m.
The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the official voter rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. The law requires registrations to be cancelled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections. Judicial Watch’s lawsuit alleges Oregon’s voting rolls are among the worst maintained in the nation.
In a Justice Department press release Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Harmeet Dhillon said: “Accurate voter registration rolls are critical to ensure that elections in Oregon are conducted fairly, accurately, and without fraud…. States have specific obligations under the list maintenance provisions of the NVRA, and the Department of Justice will vigorously enforce those requirements.”
Judicial Watch’s lawsuit pointed out that the federal “NVRA supersedes and preempts any Oregon law or practice” that claimed to limit or delegate the state’s obligations under federal law. The Justice Department’s statement of interest explains, “This case presents important questions regarding enforcement of the National Voter Registration Act,” adding, “Congress has vested the Attorney General with authority to enforce the NVRA on behalf of the United States.” The statement takes the same position as Judicial Watch when it argues that “[b]y its plain terms, the NVRA identifies one entity, the state, that is required to carry out obligations for voter registration administration[.]” The Justice Department focuses on the state’s obligation to make voter registration lists available to Judicial Watch and the public, as federal law requires.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in October 2024 to enforce basic voter list maintenance provisions under Section 8 of the NVRA after uncovering a broad failure to clean up voter rolls in dozens of Oregon counties.
In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory.
In its complaint, Judicial Watch argues that Oregon’s voter rolls contain large numbers of old, inactive registrations; and that 29 of Oregon’s 36 counties removed few or no registrations as required by federal election law. Judicial Watch asserts that Oregon and 35 of its counties had overall registration rates exceeding 100%; and that Oregon has the highest known inactive registration rate of any state in the nation. In combination, all of these facts show that Oregon is failing to remove inactive registrations pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) of the NVRA. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Oregon, Eugene Division, to compel the defendants to comply with their voter list maintenance obligations under Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).
In April 2025, Judicial Watch announced that its analysis and use of voter registration lists has led to lawsuits and legal actions under the NVRA that have resulted in the removal of five million names from voter rolls in nearly a dozen states and localities over the last several years.
“We applaud the Trump Justice Department’s decision to join our effort to expose dirty voter rolls in Oregon. Judicial Watch, for years, has done the heavy lifting alone!” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls across the country, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In March 2025, Judicial Watch sent a notice letter to Lt. Governor Deidre M. Henderson, notifying her that Utah is currently in violation of the NVRA’s public disclosure requirements. The notice letter warns of a lawsuit after 90 days if the issues are not resolved.
In May 2024, Judicial Watch sued California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, similarly asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort” to remove ineligible registrants from the rolls as required by federal law.
In July 2024, Judicial Watch asked a federal court to reject the State of Illinois’ motion to dismiss Judicial Watch’s lawsuit to compel the state to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, on behalf of Judicial Watch, the nonprofit organizations Illinois Family Action and Breakthrough Ideas, and Carol J. Davis, a lawfully registered Illinois voter.
Judicial Watch is being assisted by Stephen Joncus of Joncus Law PC in Happy Valley, Oregon.
The post Justice Department Files Statement of Interest in Judicial Watch’s Lawsuit to Compel Oregon to Clean Voter Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for all records regarding U.S. military personnel possibly contracting Covid-19 in October 2019 during the World Military Games in Wuhan, China (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense(No. 1:25-cv-01807)).
The lawsuit cites a December 2022 report issued by the Pentagon titled “Report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives: 2019 World Military Games” which states that seven “service members who attended the games exhibited COVID-19-like signs and/or symptoms” during the time surrounding their attendance at the games.
The report was not made public until April 2025, after former Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI) asked the Defense Department for a full investigation. While the report had been provided to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees in December 2022, the Biden administration apparently suppressed it.
Judicial Watch sued the Defense Department after it failed to respond to an April 28, 2025, FOIA request for:
All reports, studies, memoranda, and/or analyses produced by or sent to the Joint Chiefs, Secretary of Defense, and/or Deputy Secretary of Defense related to US military personnel contracting a SARS-like or Covid-19-like virus at the Wuhan Games in October 2019.
In the 2021 documentary “What Really Happened in Wuhan,” Sky News Australia reported that a month after evidence emerged that the virus leaked from the Wuan Institute of Virology, the city of Wuhan hosted the Military Games, with more than 9,000 athletes from around the world in attendance. “The opening ceremony was held on October 18, 2019, and two weeks later, athletes begun returning home to more than 100 countries.”
The National Institutes of Health’s National Library of Medicine published a January 2021 article, “The impact of the World Military Games on the COVID-19 pandemic,” which cites a study published on January 19, 2021 that “examined the hypothesis that the large gathering in a pandemic epicenter was a factor in the spread of COVID-19 disease.”
“Let’s cut to the chase: the Pentagon should release each and every document about military personnel possibly being infected by Covid in 2019 in Wuhan, China – months before the public learned of Covid,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The time for FOIA games is over.”
Judicial Watch is the national leader in exposing key information about fraud, abuse, and government secrets about Covid-19. In the book “Rights and Freedoms in Peril: An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America” Tom Fitton examines the impact of Covid-19 related policies on electoral processes, and expresses concerns about the potential for increased voter fraud and chaos.
- In May 2025, Judicial Watch received records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that reveal its plans to mandate Covid-19 vaccinations for 17 million health care employees and that only one of 4,682 claims for injuries and deaths due to Covid-19 “countermeasures” at the time was compensated.
- Records uncovered in 2024 from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) through a FOIA request showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
- Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it.
- Records from the Health and Human Services included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
- Health and Human Services records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
- Records from Health and Human Services regarding data Moderna submitted to the Food and Drug Administration on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Food and Drug Administration records detailed pressure for Covid-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
- NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appeared to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
- HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding Covid data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
- University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the Covid-19 vaccines showed a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) revealed safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
- HHS records included emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and Covid-19.
- HHS records showed that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” Covid-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
- Fauci emails included his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
- Judicial Watch’s four-part documentary regarding the coordinated effort by the government and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates is available here.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Pentagon for Records on Reported Covid-19 Infections at 2019 Wuhan Games appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Rioters in Los Angeles are fighting to keep rapists, murderers, gangbangers and other violent criminals loose on city streets, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) confirms this week contradicting open border groups, media outlets and California Democrats who claim only hard-working, law-abiding immigrants were cruelly arrested in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICEO) sweeps that ignited pandemonium in the City of Angels. Federal agents and local police officers have been violently attacked, cars set on fire, businesses looted and roads blocked. Elected officials in the Golden State condemn the ICE operations as an attack on immigrant families and mainstream media outlets downplay the riots as protests and civil unrest. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi dismissed rioters burning cars and breaking windows as being caught up in “the exuberance of the moment.” The mainstream media coverage has also focused on the family men arrested by ICE and the spouses and children suffering over their sudden absence. A local newspaper story features an arrested migrant’s wife who joined a peaceful protest held by families of other detained men to make a public plea for help and due process.
DHS is setting the record straight by releasing detailed criminal information about the illegal immigrants—all men—recently arrested in the L.A. sweep, which started about a week ago. California sanctuary politicians and rioters are defending heinous illegal alien criminals including child pedophiles and other violent offenders at the expense of Americans’ safety, the agency created after 9/11 to safeguard the nation writes in a statement issued this week. Instead of rioting, Californians should be thanking ICE officers who make our communities safe, DHS further points out, questioning why California Governor Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass care more about violent criminal illegal aliens than they do about protecting their own citizens? While federal agents were getting assaulted in Bass’s city, she sided with lawlessness over law enforcement, according to ICE Director Todd Lyons, who reveals the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) took over two hours to respond when his agents, vastly outnumbered by over 1,000 rioters, were surrounded and attacked. “The brave men and women of ICE were in Los Angeles arresting criminal illegal aliens including gang members, drug traffickers and those with a history of assault, cruelty to children, domestic violence, robbery, and smuggling,” Lyons said.
DHS assures that ICE will continue to “arrest vicious illegal alien criminals” even as rioters disrupt law enforcement. Fortunately, President Donald Trump deployed the National Guard and Marines to maintain order. Bass, L.A.’s leftist mayor, finally implemented a curfew after several nights of extensive looting and vandalism. She insists most of the rioters are peacefully demonstrating and called the curfew an effort to “curb bad actors who do not support the immigrant community.” She also demands that the immigration raids stop along with nearly two dozen other elected officials in the region. “When you raid Home Depots and workplaces, when you tear parents and children apart, and when you deploy troops to our streets, you’re not trying to keep anyone safe – you’re trying to cause fear and panic,” said Bass, who was on a trip to Africa while her city burned earlier this year. She accused Trump of triggering a “chaotic escalation” by sending federalized troops and initially described the rioting as “reports of unrest.”
Here are some of the illegal immigrants arrested in the recent L.A. operation, which the feds say is ongoing. The DHS announcement includes photos of the perpetrators as well. They include Cuong Chanh Phan, who committed a notorious gang-affiliated murder of two teenagers at a graduation party; Eswin Uriel Castro, previously deported with criminal convictions for child molestation and being armed with a dangerous weapon. He has also been arrested for robbery and domestic violence; Anastacio Enrique Solis-Salinas, a Nicaragua convict, has convictions for domestic violence and hit and run and has been arrested for willful cruelty to a child; Rafael Gamez-Sanchez has been convicted of vehicular manslaughter; Miguel Angel Palafox-Montes, previously returned to Mexico twice, has been convicted of grand theft, narcotics violations and identity theft and has been arrested for battery and burglary; Dzhakhar Aslambekov, a Russian illegal immigrant, was recently arrested for fraud related to government assistance programs. The list of criminal offenders goes on and on, the “worst of the worst illegal alien criminals in Los Angeles,” DHS assures.
The post L.A. Rioters Fight to Keep Rapists, Murderers, Gangbangers on City Streets, DHS Confirms appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From the Times of San Diego:
Issa’s lawyers with conservative group Judicial Watch — as well as state attorneys — want to see how the Bost case plays out.
“Given the similarity of the issues in this case and in Bost, the outcome of the jurisdictional issues in Bost may inform the jurisdictional issues presented in this case,” wrote Issa lawyer Russ Nobile along with state Deputy Attorney General Jennifer Rosenberg and others.
“No one could have been certain of the grant of certiorari, and the herein relief was requested at the first opportunity,” they added.
Read more here.
The post Rep. Issa asks federal judge to freeze his mail-ballot case, pending SCOTUS verdict appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Kash Patel and Dan Bongino have been stalwart allies of the conservative movement—and good friends of Judicial Watch—for many years. Judicial Watch applauded their appointments as director and deputy director of the FBI. Expectations were high. In a statement following Patel’s confirmation as FBI director, JW President Tom Fitton noted that Patel has “his work set out for him.” He called on Patel to “bring transparency and accountability back to an agency that became irredeemably corrupt and the tip of the spear in unfettered lawfare against any American seen as a threat to the ruling class. From sitting on Hunter Biden’s laptop in order to influence the 2020 election, the raid of President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, and the censorship of Americans, to the targeting of traditional Catholics, the FBI has shown itself as a tainted domestic and intelligence service.”
Veteran Washington reformers like Fitton understand that Patel’s time for true change is limited. The Deep State, the forces of inertia, and the political calendar are all working against him. These days, as well, conservative insiders are alarmed by mounting signs that Patel and Bongino have been taken hostage by the Deep State consensus and are failing to bring meaningful change to the FBI.
An early warning sign came in April when Patel plucked Steven Jensen from exile in Columbia, South Carolina, and appointed him head of the FBI’s powerful Washington Field Office. Conservatives were aghast. As chief of the Domestic Terrorism Section at FBI headquarters in 2020 and 2021, Jensen led a highly damaging law-enforcement campaign against the January 6 protestors, raising the specter of domestic terrorism.
Jensen was “a true believer in Joe Biden’s domestic terrorism narrative,” retired FBI supervisor George Hill told Miranda Devine of the New York Post, “…that every Trump supporter in and around Capitol Hill [on January 6] was an insurrectionist, a white supremacist and probably violent.”
Jensen “set up the infrastructure for that [domestic terrorism narrative],” Hill told Devine. “He made the decisions, set up the mechanisms whereby all the cases would be opened around the country to give the picture that this was a nationwide problem. Previously it would have been opened up [as one case with multiple suspects] in Washington — but by opening it that way, you allowed [then-FBI Director] Chris Wray to sit in Congress and say domestic terrorism was a nationwide problem.”
Patel and Bongino vigorously defended Jensen. Appearing on Fox News, they urged patience. “Just wait,” Bongino said, “and you’ll see. Nothing we’re doing—nothing—is by accident.”
Two months later, we’re still waiting.
Meanwhile, more concerns have surfaced. Media reports about Patel’s jet-setting lifestyle and love of sporting events can largely be dismissed as sour grapes from the opposition press. But the disquiet about the FBI’s lack of transparency and failure to mount significant investigations is not easily ignored.
Exhibit A is the uproar over the Jeffrey Epstein files. In February, following a much-ballyhooed campaign promising new disclosures, Attorney General Pam Bondi released an underwhelming batch of documents, most of which turned out to be already in the public domain or heavily redacted. Bondi pinned the blame on the FBI and promised more documents to come as soon as the next day. No documents were forthcoming. Judicial Watch repeatedly asked the FBI to turn over the Epstein files under the Freedom of Information Act. The FBI did not respond to the JW requests and in April, Judicial Watch sued for the records. “The Justice Department needs to respond to public demands for transparency under law and release the Epstein files under FOIA,” said JW’s Fitton.
The Epstein case is not the only instance of a troubling lack of transparency at the Justice Department and the FBI. Officials have been stonewalling Judicial Watch—the national leader in FOIA actions related to government corruption—in some cases for years.
Seven years ago, for example, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit for text messages between FBI agents involved in the bogus “Russia Collusion” investigation of Donald Trump. The FBI has refused to turn over many of the texts and related documents—or even disclose what they are withholding.
JW sued the Justice Department—twice, in 2023 and 2024—for communications surrounding the controversial Hunter Biden laptop story. And in October 2024, JW sued the Justice Department for communications among top officials about anti-Trump social media posts by a senior agent involved in an investigation of a Florida assassination attempt against Trump.
The Justice Department and FBI response to these requests? Stonewalls, silence, and foot-dragging.
Installation in key positions of Deep State actors like Jensen and lack of transparency are not the only strikes against Bondi, Patel, and Bongino. Perhaps most disturbing is their failure to act decisively to reduce the vast powers of the Justice Department and the FBI.
“President Trump was almost jailed by his own Justice Department in his first term,” Steve Bannon recently reminded viewers in a War Room interview with Fitton. It’s a segment worth viewing in its entirety.
“There’s no evidence the FBI thinks it is subject to the rule of law,” Fitton said. “Kash Patel and Pam Bondi need to take a much more aggressive [approach] and have an expansive understanding as to what their opportunities and roles are.”
“It’s a systemic problem,” Bannon said. “It’s not just a personnel problem. [The FBI] has to be taken apart brick by brick.”
The outlines of an aggressive inquiry that would set the stage for reducing the power of the Justice Department and FBI are obvious: get to the bottom of the targeting of Trump and his allies in the Russiagate scandal; look at the FBI role in the Hunter Biden laptop case and the limiting of the story’s media circulation at a critical moment in the 2020 election; expose the roots of the 2022 Mar-a-Lago raid; connect the dots of FBI targeting of conservative Catholics, parents attending school board meetings, and pro-life groups.
Doubtless Bondi, Patel, and Bongino have their hands full managing the day-to-day affairs of their giant bureaucracies. Conservatives still wish them well, but time is running out. And the president who promised to “demolish the Deep State” is watching from the White House. They will not be forgiven for bungling a historic opportunity.
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post FBI’s Patel and Bongino: Hostages of the Deep State? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
As Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum denounces the proposed remittance tax and calls for protests in this country, she conveniently fails to mention that the United States government has for two decades subsidized the money transfers through a Federal Reserve program called “Directo a Mexico.” Remittances are the largest single source of foreign income for Mexico and last year migrants in the U.S. sent a historic $62.5 billion to family back home. Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, recently passed by the House and pending Senate approval, remittances from noncitizens in the U.S. will be taxed 3.5%, igniting fury among Mexican government officials, especially Sheinbaum who threatened to “mobilize” a fight against the tax. Mexico’s president has publicly called on fellow Mexicans in the United States to send senators letters, electronic mail and social media posts expressing their disagreement with the additional assessment.
The U.S. is the top source of remittances worldwide and the money sent by migrants to help support family back home has long provided Latin America—especially Mexico—a critical economic lifeline. President Trump recently proposed a 5% tax on remittances and House Republicans reduced it to 3.5%. Omitted from mainstream media coverage, mostly critical of the proposed tax, is the “Directo a Mexico” program run by the Federal Reserve, the government agency that serves as the nation’s central bank. It was launched 20 years ago and uses government resources to subsidize and help illegal immigrants transfer cash to Mexico. Back in 2006 Judicial Watch obtained Federal Reserve marketing materials created for the program, which was designed to facilitate the transfer of funds from immigrant workers in the U.S.—regardless of legal status—to relatives in Mexico. The marketing materials, from the Retail Payments Office of the Federal Reserve in Atlanta, Georgia, were prepared by the government for presentations to financial institutions in California in November 2006.
The “Directo a Mexico” marketing materials were targeted to banks, credit unions and other financial institutions in the U.S. and include information on payment channels and benefits to Mexican recipients. The marketing materials also detail the number of Mexican migrants in the United States—at the time 9,328,405—with no distinction between those here illegally. A separate list identifies Mexican banks receiving “Directo a Mexico” transfers by branches (8,578) and total bank accounts (41,313,157). After viewing all the records, Judicial Watch determined that the taxpayer-subsidized program seems designed to facilitate the transfer of wealth by illegal immigrants outside the United States, undermining our nation’s immigration laws and creating a potential national security nightmare. At the very least Judicial Watch called on the Federal Reserve to limit the program to legal residents and American citizens, which has not occurred.
In its first year, 2005, remittances sent through “Directo a Mexico” topped $20 billion and the Federal Reserve reported “double-digit percentage growth” in the next several years. Over a decade later Judicial Watch reported that most of the $33.48 billion in remittances to Mexico at the time flowed through “Directo a Mexico” amid a growing immigration crisis in the U.S. Remittances are transferred through the Federal Reserve’s own automated clearinghouse linked directly to Mexico’s central bank (Banco de Mexico). When the program was created Federal Reserve officials acknowledged that most of the Mexican nationals who send money back home are illegal immigrants so a Mexican-issued identification is the only requirement to use the government banking service. In fact, the government’s colorful brochure promoting “Directo a Mexico” has a frequently asked question section that says: “If I return to Mexico or am deported, will I lose the money in my bank account?” The answer is “No. The money still belongs to you and can easily be accessed at an ATM in Mexico using your debit card.” Decorated with American and Mexican flags, the Federal Reserve’s two-page brochure also offers to help immigrants who do not have bank accounts open one and assures the best foreign exchange rate and low transfer fees. It is not clear if the proposed remittance tax will impact money transfers sent via “Directo a Mexico.”
The post U.S. Subsidizes Illegal Immigrant Money Transfers Via Federal Reserve’s “Directo a Mexico” appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Supreme Court Will Hear Judicial Watch Case on Election Law Challenge
BREAKING: $4.975 Million Settlement of Ashli Babbitt Wrongful Death Lawsuit
Operation Take Back America: Thousands of Illegals Charged Since March
Bribed USDA Employee Helps Run Huge Food Stamp Fraud
Supreme Court Will Hear Judicial Watch Case on Election Law Challenge
We’re going to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court just agreed to hear Judicial Watch’s appeal of the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in a case filed on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two presidential electors challenging an Illinois law extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law (Rep. Michael J. Bost, Laura Pollastrini, and Susan Sweeney v. The Illinois State Board of Elections and Bernadette Matthews (No. 1:22-cv-02754, 23-2644, 24-568)).
The lower courts had denied that Bost had standing to challenge Illinois’ practice of counting ballots received after Election Day. (The Election Day lawsuit was initially filed on May 25, 2022.)
It is an injustice that the courts would deny a federal candidate the ability to challenge an election provision that could lead to illegal votes being cast and counted for two weeks AFTER Election Day. The Supreme Court’s decision to hear this case is a critical opportunity to uphold federal law, protect voter rights, and ensure election integrity. Illinois’ 14-day extension of Election Day thwarts federal law, violates the civil rights of voters, and invites fraud.
Federal law defines Election Day as the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year. Our complaint states: “Despite Congress’ clear statement regarding a single national Election Day, Illinois has expanded Election Day by extending by 14 days the date for receipt and counting of vote-by-mail ballots.” The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently ruled in another Judicial Watch lawsuit, filed on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi, that counting ballots received after Election Day is unlawful.
Illinois’ election law allows vote-by-mail ballots received up to 14 days after the polls close on Election Day to be counted as if they were cast and received on or before Election Day. The lawsuit notes that “[e]ven vote-by-mail ballots without postmarks shall be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.” A Seventh Circuit panel found that Congressman Bost had no standing to challenge the provision, despite the increased costs and injuries to his federal candidacy caused by the two-week counting of ballots arriving after Election Day.
In our petition to the U.S. Supreme Court, we stated:
For over 130 years, this Court has heard claims brought by federal candidates challenging state time, place, or manner regulations affecting their federal elections. Until recently, it was axiomatic that candidates had standing to challenge these regulations. Indeed, “it’s hard to imagine anyone who has a more particularized injury than the candidate has.” … That is because a candidate who “pours money and sweat into a campaign, who spends time away from her job and family to traverse the campaign trail, and who puts her name on a ballot has an undeniably different— and more particularized—interest in the lawfulness of the election” than “some random voter.”
Petitioners are a sitting multi-term Congressman and two federal electors. They challenged an Illinois law … that allows absentee ballots to be received and counted after the day specified in federal statutes for holding federal elections … They contend that Illinois’ Receipt Deadline is preempted by the federal Election Day statutes.
This petition presents an opportunity for the Court to provide lower courts and litigants much needed guidance on candidate standing, outside of the high-stakes, emergency, post-election litigation where these issues commonly arise.
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of our work, we assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads the election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In April 2025, we announced that our analysis and use of voter registration lists has led to lawsuits and legal actions under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) that have resulted in the removal of five million names from voter rolls in nearly a dozen states and localities over the last several years.
In March 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit declined to rehear its previous ruling in which it agreed with us that it was unlawful for Mississippi to count ballots that arrived after Election Day.
In March 2025 we filed a federal lawsuit against California on behalf of U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for seven days beyond the date established by federal law. California counts ballots received up to seven days after Election Day.
In October 2024, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of the Constitution Party of Oregon and two lawfully registered voters of Umatilla County and Marion County, Oregon, against Lavonne Griffin-Valade in her official capacity as Oregon Secretary of State and the State of Oregon, to make “a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters” from the voter rolls as required by the NVRA.
In May 2024, we sued California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, similarly asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort” to remove ineligible registrants from the rolls as required by federal law.
BREAKING: $4.975 Million Settlement of Ashli Babbitt Wrongful Death Lawsuit
At long last, the U.S. government agreed to a $4.975 million settlement in our wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of the family of Ashli Babbitt, the U.S. Air Force veteran who was shot and killed inside the U.S. Capitol by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021. Ashli Babbitt was the only January 6 homicide victim.
This fair settlement is a historic and necessary step for justice for Ashli Babbitt’s family. Ashli should never have been killed, and this settlement destroys the evil, partisan narrative that justified her outrageous killing and protected her killer.
Our team spent years investigating, litigating, and exposing the truth about Ashli’s homicide. And credit goes to the hundreds of thousands of Judicial Watch members who supported this cause! President Trump was an absolute rock in supporting Ashli’s family and advocating for justice.
Babbitt, 35, owned and operated a successful pool business with her husband Aaron. Ashli traveled alone from San Diego to Washington, DC, to attend the Women for America First (aka Save America) rally on January 6, 2021, at the Ellipse near the White House.
The wrongful death lawsuit was filed in San Diego, California, Ashli’s home venue, on January 5, 2024, against the U.S. Government on behalf of the family of Ashli Babbitt and transferred to the District of Columbia over objection (Estate of Ashli Babbitt and Aaron Babbitt, et al. v. United States of America (No. 1:24-cv-01701 (formerly 3:24-cv-00033)). In settling the lawsuit, the parties signed a “Stipulation for Compromise Settlement and Release:”
to settle and compromise each and every claim of any kind, whether known or unknown, including claims for wrongful death, arising directly or indirectly from the acts or omissions that gave rise to the above-captioned action under the terms and conditions set forth in this Stipulation.
This Stipulation is not and should not be construed as an admission of liability or fault on the part of the United States, its agents, servants, or employees, and it is specifically denied that they are liable to Plaintiffs. This settlement is entered into by all parties for the purpose of compromising disputed claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act and avoiding the expenses and risks of further litigation.
In consideration for the Plaintiffs’ agreement to accept the terms and conditions of this settlement, the United States agrees to pay Plaintiffs the amount of Four Million, Nine Hundred and Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($4,975,000.00)…
The lawsuit included claims against the U.S. government for wrongful death, assault and battery, and various negligence claims.
As the Babbitt family alleged in its lawsuit:
The shooting occurred at the east entrance to the Speaker’s Lobby. After demonstrators filled the hallway outside the lobby, two individuals in the crowded, tightly packed hallway struck and dislodged the glass panels in the lobby doors and the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd, who is a United States Capitol Police commander and was the incident commander for the House on January 6, 2021, shot Ashli on sight as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashli before seeing her hands or assessing her intentions or even identifying her as female. Ashli was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty, and in plain view of Lt. Byrd and other officers in the lobby.
The facts speak truth. Ashli was ambushed when she was shot by Lt. Byrd. Multiple witnesses at the scene yelled, “you just murdered her.”
Lt. Byrd was never charged or otherwise punished or disciplined for Ashli’s homicide.
The lawsuit also alleged:
Lt. Byrd, who is a (U.S. Capitol Police) commander and was the incident commander for the House on January 6, 2021, shot Ashli as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight.… Not one member of Congress was in the lobby, which was guarded by multiple armed police officers. Additional armed police officers were in the hallway outside the lobby and/or on the adjoining stairway. Ashli could not have seen Lt. Byrd, who was positioned far to Ashli’s left and on the opposite side of the doors, near an opening to the Retiring Room, a distance of approximately 15 feet and an angle of approximately 160 degrees. Sgt. Timothy Lively, one of the armed officers guarding the lobby doors from the hallway, later told officials investigating the shooting, “I saw him . . . there was no way that woman would’ve seen that.” Lt. Byrd, who was not in uniform, did not identify himself as a police officer or otherwise make his presence known to Ashli. Lt. Byrd did not give Ashli any warnings or commands before shooting her dead.
The lawsuit had been set for trial in 2026.
We have been pursuing five lawsuits to secure transparency regarding Babbit’s death and other government activities on January 6.
In January 2023, documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, we released multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Byrd.
In October 2021, we uncovered records from the DC Metropolitan Police about the shooting death of Babbitt. The new records include the January 6, 2021, Metro PD Death Report for Babbitt (identified as Ashli Elizabeth McEntee-Babbitt Pamatian). The investigators note that the possible Manner of Death was “Homicide [Police Involved Shooting].”
Federal Police Departments Keep Biden-era Equity, Inclusion Strategies
The DEI is embedded in two important police departments that protect the US Capitol and the US Supreme Court. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
Though President Trump issued an executive order banning governmentwide diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs on the day of his inauguration, two federal law enforcement agencies that operate near the White House continue to implement, celebrate, and promote controversial DEI initiatives launched under the Biden administration. The Capitol Police, which is charged with protecting Congress, still has an Office of Equity and Inclusion (OEI)—committed to fully imbedding DEI into the agency’s culture and purpose—that is carrying out a three-year Equity & Inclusion Strategic Plan launched in 2023. At a recent Senate appropriations hearing, Capitol Police Chief J. Thomas Manger requested a million dollars to keep his OEI office with a staff of nine open. Across the street Supreme Court of the United States Police, charged with protecting justices and employees, publicly celebrates DEI by bragging that 31% of its workforce is minority and 24% female. “The Supreme Court Police believe that diversity and inclusion are essential to the department’s success,” according to the agency’s website.
It appears that both federal law enforcement agencies are openly flouting the commander-in-chief’s January 20 order titled “Ending Radical And Wasteful Government DEI Programs And Preferencing.” The president was quick to issue it because the “Biden administration forced illegal and immoral discrimination programs” into virtually all aspects of the federal government, in areas ranging from airline safety to the military. The order calls for the termination of all discriminatory programs including illegal DEI mandates, policies, preferences, and activities in the federal government. This specifically includes “Chief Diversity Officer” positions as well as special “equity action plans” and other initiatives that consider DEI rather than individual initiative, skills, performance, and hard work to reward employees. A few months later, President Trump issued another order banning DEI from the Foreign Service by, among other things, replacing DEI as a core precept from foreign service tenure and promotion criteria with individual dignity, hard work and excellence.
The Capitol and Supreme Court police departments are disregarding the governmentwide DEI ban, publicly celebrating their initiatives and continuing with their discriminatory programs. The Capitol Police, which has over 2,300 officers and civilian employees and an annual budget of approximately $460 million, maintains that DEI is “essential to law enforcement operations and effectiveness” and is moving forward—and asking American taxpayers to fund—a three-year Equity & Inclusion Strategic Plan launched in 2023 by Chief Diversity Officer Vilma Alejandro. “With our internal and external partners OEI –Office of Equity & Inclusion (OEI)—will actively engage in healing those who are hurting, fighting discrimination, creating opportunities, focusing on inclusion, and building awareness of systemic change needed to end disparities,” Alejandro writes in the strategic plan. “I want to reiterate, USCP is fully committed to integrating DEI into our operations and mission work. The diversity chief adds that she is laying down the foundation for this work to continue for years to come. Chief Manger writes in the equity and inclusion plan that “DEI isn’t about black versus white, or taking from some to give to others,” but rather about “comprehensive fairness.” A few weeks ago, he struggled to explain the importance of DEI when asking Congress to fund his initiative and nine-person office.
The Supreme Court Police has less than 200 officers, so its DEI program may not seem as impactful though it goes against the president’s order and sets a bad example for a federal agency. The department’s primary goal is to ensure the integrity of the Constitutional Mission of the Supreme Court by protecting justices, employees, guests, and visitors. Under Biden the federal law enforcement agency put a lot of focus on DEI and still likes to highlight that a substantial chunk of its 198 officers are minorities and women. A key concern of DEI quotas in law enforcement is the lowering of standards so minority applicants can qualify. The Biden administration filed civil rights lawsuits against jurisdictions nationwide for using standard aptitude tests to screen police officer and firefighter candidates, claiming that they discriminated against minorities. Earlier this year Attorney General Pam Bondi directed the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division to dismiss all the lawsuits.
Bribed USDA Employee Helps Run Huge Food Stamp Fraud
Our Corruption Chronicles blog reveals a truly astonishing but not surprising story about the scandal-plagued food stamp program.
Long plagued by waste and corruption, the nation’s massive food stamp program has reached a new low with a multi-million-dollar fraud and bribery scheme abetted by an insider at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the agency that administers the scandal-plagued welfare program. It gets better. The longtime USDA employee worked in a special division responsible for identifying fraud—which is rampant—within the food stamp program, which was renamed Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by the Obama administration to eliminate the stigma of receiving public assistance. Her name is Arlasa Davis and federal prosecutors recently charged her and five of her accomplices for operating “one of the largest food stamp frauds in U.S. history.”
For more than five years Davis and her conspirators ran a “sprawling fraud and bribery scheme that generated over $66 million” in unauthorized food stamp transactions, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ). The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) found that Davis abused her position and privileged access to confidential government databases to help the others in the ring embezzle food stamp benefits by driving tens of millions of dollars in fraudulent transactions. Federal authorities say the disgraced federal employee sold hundreds of Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) numbers that enabled tens of millions of dollars in fraudulent food stamp redemptions at unauthorized stores. EBT is the electronic system that allows a food stamp participant to pay for food using the taxpayer-funded benefit. With her personal cellphone, Davis photographed handwritten lists of license numbers intended for qualifying stores and transmitted them to an intermediary who sold them to the others criminally charged in this case.
The co-defendants—Michael Kehoe, Mohamad Nawafleh, Omar Alrawashdeh, Gamal Obaid and Emad Alrawashdeh—used the license numbers to fraudulently obtain EBT terminals for stores that were not authorized by the USDA to process food stamp transactions. Davis received substantial bribes from the ring disguised in communications obtained by the feds as birthday gifts and flowers. The illicit operation began in 2019 when Kehoe created a network that supplied about 160 unauthorized EBT terminals in stores across New York, including in smoke shops and other ineligible businesses, to illegally process millions of dollars in EBT transactions, federal prosecutors say. The six defendants are charged with conspiracy to steal government funds and misappropriate USDA benefits and Davis is additionally charged with bribery and honest services fraud. They all face 10 to 20 years in prison. “This fraud was made possible when USDA employee Arlasa Davis betrayed the public trust by selling confidential government information to the very criminals she was supposed to catch, said Perry Carbone, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who assures those who exploit anti-poverty programs for personal gain will be held accountable.
The case marks the latest of many scandals to rock the nation’s bloated food stamp program, which has grown immensely in the last few years, serving a record 42.1 million participants in 2023 at a cost of $112.8 billion, according to USDA figures. The number went down to $100.3 billion in 2024, and the Trump administration is working to cut it further. Food stamp fraud is so pervasive that the USDA launched a special system to facilitate the replacement of the welfare benefit when recipients claim it stolen. In the program’s first two years the government doled out a hefty $61.5 million to replace pilfered food stamps in 127,290 cases. That figure has since skyrocketed to a whopping $102,425,077 to replace 226,196 of the 691,604 benefits reported stolen, according to the latest figures published in the SNAP Replacement of Stolen Benefits Dashboard. Recipients in practically every state have submitted claims with New York leading the pack at 33,468, followed by California (32,258), Alabama (26,919) and Oklahoma (21,553).
Until next week,
The post Judicial Watch Going to Supreme Court on Election Integrity! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues for Records on Rebranding of West Point’s DEI Office
Judicial Watch Sues over $27M Grants for Use in Gaza
NIH Gives University $5 Mil to Study if its Racial Equity Institute Works
Judicial Watch Sues for Records on Rebranding of West Point’s DEI Office
It seems games are afoot at West Point to disguise its radical diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) agenda.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for information regarding the rebranding of West Point’s DEI office to “Office of Engagement and Retention” (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense(No. 1:24-cv-02941)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the United States Military Academy at West Point failed to respond to an August 28, 2024, FOIA request for:
-
All documents related to the renaming of and/or elimination of West Point’s “Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Equal Opportunity” (ODIEO).
-
All documents related to the creation of West Point’s “Office of Engagement and Retention.”
-
All emails related to the matters addressed in Bullets 1 and 2 sent to and from the following USMA officials: Superintendent LTG Steve Gilland, Dean BG Shane Reeves, Commandant BG R.J. Garcia, and Chief Diversity Officer Lisa Benitez.
Reporting in August 2024 detailed the name change:
The West Point Office of “Diversity, Inclusion and Equal Opportunity” is now called the “Office of Engagement and Retention”…. On the West Point page, there’s not much change beyond the title …
We recently sued on behalf of Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. (STARRS) against the U.S. Department of Defense for records regarding the U.S. Air Force Academy’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) plans.
In June 2024, we sued the Defense Department for records regarding the deletion of the words “Duty, Honor, Country” from the United States Military Academy at West Point’s mission statement.
In March 2023, records we obtained from the Department of Defense showed the Air Force Academy has made race and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.
In July 2023, we exposed records from the United States Air Force Academy that included instructional materials and emails that address topics such as Critical Race Theory, “white privilege,” and Black Lives Matter.
In July 2022, we sued the Department of Defense for records related to the United States Naval Academy (USNA) implementing Critical Race Theory (CRT) in the training of naval recruits.
In June 2022, we received records revealing Critical Race Theory instruction at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point One training slide contains a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” [Emphasis in original].
Judicial Watch Sues over $27M Grants for Use in Gaza
There’s something fishy in aid to the Middle East.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) for records about $27 million in U.S. grants awarded to “Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees” that have been designated for use in Gaza (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Agency for International Development (No. 1:24-cv-02159)).
On April 2, 2024, we filed a FOIA request with the USAID for:
-
All records identifying the recipients of USAID funding under the $7,000,000 grant allocation awarded on or about November 15, 2023, and associated with Federal Award Identification Number 720BHA24GR00005.
-
All proposals, applications, scope of work documents, or similar records related to any grant award or sub-award associated with Federal Award Identification Number 720BHA24GR00005.
Recently USAID produced records in this case but is refusing to disclose what organizations received the money. We are challenging that withholding. USAID reports that over $282 million was obligated to the West Bank and Gaza in fiscal year 2023.
On October 7, 2023, Hamas—a U.S.-designated terrorist organization—invaded southwest Israel, killing over a thousand people and kidnapping hundreds of others.
On November 15, 2023, the Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance, a component of the USAID, issued a $7 million grantfor “multisectoral response in Gaza.” The grant was awarded to “Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees.” The same day a “continuation” grant of $20 million was also issued for “multisectoral response.”
The involvement of employees of a U.S.-backed multinational organization in the October 7 attack on Israel underscores the importance of transparency in who receives U.S. taxpayer dollars and how they are spent. This is critical to protecting the national security of the U.S. and Israel.
NIH Gives University $5 Mil to Study if its Racial Equity Institute Works
Using your tax dollars, diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) researchers at a public university will be scanning people’s brains to see if the center it launched in 2021 to address systemic racism has been effective. Our Corruption Chroniclesblog takes a closer look:
A public university in Pennsylvania is getting $5 million from American taxpayers to research the effectiveness of a special center it launched in 2021 to address systemic racism. It is called the Racial Equity Consciousness Institute (RECI) and its founders at the University of Pittsburgh claim it is essential because “systemic racism is an endemic public health crisis in the United States that has a profoundly negative impact on the mental and physical health of millions of people—focally, people of color.” Furthermore, according to RECI.
Since it was launched by Ron Idoko, who previously worked at the school’s Office for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, RECI has worked to eradicate systemic racism by developing a critical understanding of the complex and pervasive ways it operates and establishing strategies to foster racial equity. The institute claims to teach individuals about the racial equity consciousness framework by using narrative guides, videos, articles, open discussion and collaborative activities. To develop racial equity consciousness the institute teaches how to recognize racial oppression and advance racial liberation, examine racial identities and address racial biases, embrace racial diversity and grow racial literacy, build racial empathy and enhance racial stamina, acknowledge racial traumas and foster racial healing, gauge racial inequities and champion racial justice. This helps recognize histories and impacts of racial inequity, embraces the inclusion of all racial identity groups, builds compassionate connections across racial differences, and acknowledges emotional, mental, and physical impacts of racial oppression, among other things.
The institute uses “structured cognitive behavioral training” (SCBT) to address and determine thoughts, feelings and behaviors toward racial equity and justice. This is described as an instructional, process-oriented derivative of cognitive behavioral therapy that provides an empowering tool and approach to consciously address and assert one’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors toward racial equity and justice. The program is designed to help individuals and communities actively develop and embody distinct cognitive behavioral traits toward racial equity through structured learning and practice. “Learners” are encouraged to reflect on and address systemic factors that contribute to racial disparities and develop systemic processes toward racial equity. “Through this approach, we can understand how to take the transformation within ourselves and bring it into a world of structures and systems, transforming them in the process,” according to the RECI website. “Thus, every person committed to antiracism becomes a source of positive change that radiates out into the world.”
Sounds fantastic but there is no concrete evidence that it is working. The research funded by the NIH will focus on identifying the effectiveness of RECI training as well as other bias drills on diversity and attitudes that perpetuate systemic racism in healthcare outcomes, especially among marginalized communities. Outcomes of the intervention will be measured through questionnaires and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) that looks for structural brain changes before and after the program. The randomized trial will involve participants from over two dozen schools. One of the University of Pittsburgh researchers says she is excited about the possibility of generating evidence of the effectiveness of RECI because so far, the center relies on people claiming it has changed their life. The institute’s founder claims he has received overwhelmingly positive feedback from hundreds of participants and has also seen behavioral changes firsthand, but again, no material evidence.
So, Uncle Sam will dole out millions to see if the institute actually helps combat the public health crisis of systemic racism. “These inequities are perpetuated through normative, and often unconscious, biases and behaviors,” the Pittsburgh researchers write in their NIH grant document. “In recent years, academic institutions have devised new policies and initiatives to promote inclusive excellence, and in doing so have put a greater burden on underrepresented (UR) faculty to lead these efforts. Yet, many UR faculty are continuing to disproportionately leave the academy, indicating that academic institutions have not succeeded in their goal of dismantling systemic inequities and making academia more inclusive.”
Until next week,
The post West Point DEI Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
The story of how Harris pocketed record sums while failing to gain support from voters will be studied by campaigns for decades to come. Democrats who successfully pressured octogenarian President Joe Biden to pass the torch to the former California senator are now conducting an internal autopsy of the 2024 race, in which Trump raised and spent hundreds of millions of dollars less than Harris.
“A billion dollars paled in comparison to the increased prices Americans were seeing across the country,” Tom Fitton, president of the conservative group Judicial Watch and a longtime Trump ally, told the Washington Examiner. “Voters weren’t fooled.”
Read more here…
The post How Kamala Harris plowed through $1 billion appeared first on Judicial Watch.
President-elect Donald Trump’s creation of a new Department of Government Efficiency to, among other things, cut wasteful expenditures is a welcome addition for American taxpayers who have seen record amounts of public funds go to all sorts of outrageous projects during the Biden administration. The much-needed office will be headed by billionaire Elon Musk, the head of electric car company Tesla, rocket company SpaceX and social media platform X and Vivek Ramaswamy, a pharmaceutical entrepreneur and Yale Law School graduate. Besides cutting wasteful spending the new department will be tasked with dismantling government bureaucracy, slashing excess regulations, and restructuring federal agencies. It will send shockwaves through the system, and anyone involved in government waste, according to Musk.
For decades Judicial Watch has exposed enormous amounts of government waste, and the problem has skyrocketed under the Biden administration. In 2024 alone, the Corruption Chronicles has reported on well over a billion dollars in reckless spending, which is just a snippet of a widespread issue because the entire of list of wasteful government-funded initiatives is far too long. Of course, this does not include mandatory spending such as Social Security and Medicare, which have reached $1.46 trillion and $874 billion respectively in fiscal year 2024, according to figures published by the U.S. Treasury. This year the government has spent $6.75 trillion, which is more than it collected, resulting in a deficit. The spending includes critical areas such as military and homeland security, but there is a category listed as “other” in which the government doled out $238 billion this fiscal year.
Here are a few examples uncovered by Judicial Watch in a 10-month period that would likely be on the radar of a Department of Government Efficiency. Just a few weeks into the new year, Uncle Sam gave Bangladesh, an Islamic nation that hates America and serves as a recruiting ground for terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda Indian Subcontinent (AQIS) and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), $15 million to fight climate change. Bangladesh is also notorious for violating human rights, which the U.S. often cites as a deal breaker involving aid to foreign governments. A few weeks after giving the South-Asian Islamic country millions to combat climate change, the Department of Justice (DOJ) awarded a public university nearly $1 million, as part of Biden’s fictitious crisis to control information and censor Americans, for a project that tracks the spread of “mis-, dis-, and mal-information (MDM)” by internet users in real time.
As spring approached, the administration doled out over half a million dollars so researchers at a public university could apply controversial critical race theory in the treatment of opioid use disorder, which the government says disproportionately impacts minorities. Haiti continued to receive millions from the U.S. even after billions in aid perished, armed gangs took over the impoverished island and violence and lawlessness gripped the country. Money also kept flowing into Vice President Kamala Harris’s failed initiative to curb illegal immigration, with a $170 million spring infusion to a laughable experiment promoted as a magical tool that will improve life enough in three central American countries to deter citizens from coming to the U.S. illegally by creating jobs, supporting education and enhancing food security. The president claims the project tackles the “root causes” or drivers of irregular migration and he dedicated an astounding $4 billion to it even as illegal immigration from the three nations—El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—shattered records.
The list of outrageous government-funded programs kept growing and as summer approached the administration dedicated half a million dollars to a project that reportedly combats misinformation in Africa and $4 million to reduce barriers that impede access to education and decent work for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex (LGBTQI+) youth in Latin America and the Caribbean. When summer rolled around the government allotted $2 million to combat corruption in Mexican sports betting and a whopping half a billion dollars to build electric vehicle chargers in mostly underserved communities. The questionable spending extended into fall with a $46 million allocation from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to tackle nutrition insecurity in underserved communities with a chunk of the money going to strengthen the food system for “Queer & Trans (QT) and Black, Indigenous People of Color (BIPOC),” provide illegal immigrants from Latin America with “culturally responsible fresh food” and the black immigrant community with a special “African food access” project. The list will undoubtedly grow as the Biden presidency comes to an end, illustrating the need to make government more efficient.
The post Evidence Abounds of Need for Dept. of Government Efficiency to Rein in Wasteful Spending appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From New York Post:
“Elias is part of Kamala Harris’ campaign’s legal apparatus,” said Tom Fitton, president of the nonprofit advocacy group Judicial Watch. “One of the big lies of the left is that they support democracy, but what they support is using the law to obtain and retain power for themselves and that’s what Marc Elias is about.”
McCormick spokeswoman Elizabeth Gregory called Elias a “grifter” who was pursuing “frivolous legal challenges with zero merit.”
Read more here…
The post Shady Dem lawyer behind Steele Dossier looking to overturn Pennsylvania Senate results appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
West Point’s move to rename and “disguise” its controversial diversity program was hit with a lawsuit Wednesday. The military’s larger DEI campaign is coming under fire now that President-elect Donald Trump has nominated a Defense secretary who wants to end the efforts.
Continuing a long campaign to call out and halt so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in the military, Judicial Watch sued for details about West Point’s shift.
The Army officers college in New York this summer rebranded its Diversity, Inclusion and Equal Opportunity office to “Office of Engagement and Retention.”
When compared, there is little other change in the programs other than the shift to a less transparent name, according to Judicial Watch.
“It seems games are afoot at West Point to disguise its radical DEI agenda,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
Read more here…
The post West Point effort to hide DEI campaign called out appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) for records about to the $27 million in U.S. grants awarded to “Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees” that have been designated for use in Gaza (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Agency for International Development (No. 1:24-cv-02159)).
On April 2, 2024, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA request with the USAID for:
- All records identifying the recipients of USAID funding under the $7,000,000 grant allocation awarded on or about November 15, 2023, and associated with Federal Award Identification Number 720BHA24GR00005.
-
- All proposals, applications, scope of work documents, or similar records related to any grant award or sub-award associated with Federal Award Identification Number 720BHA24GR00005.
Recently USAID produced records in this case but is refusing to disclose what organizations received the money. Judicial Watch is challenging that withholding.
On October 7, 2023, Hamas—a U.S.-designated terrorist organization—invaded southwest Israel, killing over a thousand people and kidnapping hundreds of others.
On November 15, 2023, the Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance, a component of the USAID, issued a $7 million grant for “multisectoral response in Gaza.” The grant was awarded to “Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees.” The same day a “continuation” grant of $20 million was also issued for “multisectoral response.”
“The involvement of employees of a U.S. backed multinational organization in the October 7 attack on Israel underscores the importance of transparency in who receives U.S. taxpayer dollars and how they are spent,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This is critical to protecting the national security of the U.S. and Israel.”
USAID reports that over $282 million was obligated to the West Bank and Gaza in fiscal year 2023.
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Records on $27M Grants to ‘Miscellaneous Foreign Awardees’ for Use in Gaza appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for information regarding the rebranding of West Point’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) office to “Office of Engagement and Retention” (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:24-cv-02941)).
The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the United States Military Academy at West Point (a component of the Defense Department) failed to respond to an August 28, 2024, FOIA request for:
- All documents related to the renaming of and/or elimination of West Point’s “Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Equal Opportunity” (ODIEO).
- All documents related to the creation of West Point’s “Office of Engagement and Retention.”
- All emails related to the matters addressed in Bullets 1 and 2 sent to and from the following USMA officials: Superintendent LTG Steve Gilland, Dean BG Shane Reeves, Commandant BG R.J. Garcia, and Chief Diversity Officer Lisa Benitez.
Reporting in August 2024 detailed the name change:
The West Point Office of “Diversity, Inclusion and Equal Opportunity” is now called the “Office of Engagement and Retention”…. On the West Point page, there’s not much change beyond the title …
“It seems games are afoot at West Point to disguise its radical DEI agenda,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Recently, Judicial Watch sued on behalf of Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. (STARRS) against the U.S. Department of Defense for records regarding the U.S. Air Force Academy’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) plans.
In June 2024, Judicial Watch sued the Defense Department for records regarding the deletion of the words “Duty, Honor, Country” from the United States Military Academy at West Point’s mission statement.
In March 2023, records obtained by Judicial Watch from the Department of Defense showed the Air Force Academy has made race and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.
In July 2023, Judicial Watch exposed records from the United States Air Force Academy that included instructional materials and emails that address topics such as Critical Race Theory, “white privilege,” and Black Lives Matter.
In July 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Defense for records related to the United States Naval Academy (USNA) implementing Critical Race Theory (CRT) in the training of naval recruits.
In June 2022, Judicial Watch received records revealing Critical Race Theory instruction at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point One training slide contains a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” [Emphasis in original].
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Records on Rebranding of West Point’s DEI Office appeared first on Judicial Watch.
A public university in Pennsylvania is getting $5 million from American taxpayers to research the effectiveness of a special center it launched in 2021 to address systemic racism. It is called the Racial Equity Consciousness Institute (RECI) and its founders at the University of Pittsburgh claim it is essential because “systemic racism is an endemic public health crisis in the United States that has a profoundly negative impact on the mental and physical health of millions of people—focally, people of color.” Furthermore, racism is a “social virus” that metastasizes through a web of systems that sustains a reinforcing preponderance of racial inequities across multiple sectors of society, according to RECI.
Since it was launched by Ron Idoko, who previously worked at the school’s Office for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion, RECI has worked to eradicate systemic racism by developing a critical understanding of the complex and pervasive ways it operates and establishing strategies to foster racial equity. The institute claims to teach individuals about the racial equity consciousness framework by using narrative guides, videos, articles, open discussion and collaborative activities. To develop racial equity consciousness the institute teaches how to recognize racial oppression and advance racial liberation, examine racial identities and address racial biases, embrace racial diversity, and grow racial literacy, build racial empathy, and enhance racial stamina, acknowledge racial trauma, and foster racial healing, and gauge racial inequities and champion racial justice. This helps recognize histories and impacts of racial inequity, embraces the inclusion of all racial identity groups, builds compassionate connections across racial differences, and acknowledges emotional, mental, and physical impacts of racial oppression, among other things.
The institute uses “structured cognitive behavioral training” (SCBT) to address and determine thoughts, feelings and behaviors toward racial equity and justice. This is described as an instructional, process-oriented derivative of cognitive behavioral therapy that provides an empowering tool and approach to consciously address and assert one’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviors toward racial equity and justice. The program is designed to help individuals and communities actively develop and embody distinct cognitive behavioral traits toward racial equity through structured learning and practice. “Learners” are encouraged to reflect on and address systemic factors that contribute to racial disparities and develop systemic processes toward racial equity. “Through this approach, we can understand how to take the transformation within ourselves and bring it into a world of structures and systems, transforming them in the process,” according to the RECI website. “Thus, every person committed to antiracism becomes a source of positive change that radiates out into the world.”
Sounds fantastic but there is no concrete evidence that it is working. The research funded by the NIH will focus on identifying the effectiveness of RECI training as well as other bias drills on diversity and attitudes that perpetuate systemic racism in healthcare outcomes, especially among marginalized communities. Outcomes of the intervention will be measured through questionnaires and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) that looks for structural brain changes before and after the program. The randomized trial will involve participants from over two dozen schools. One of the University of Pittsburgh researchers says she is excited about the possibility of generating evidence of the effectiveness of RECI because so far, the center relies on people claiming it has changed their life. The institute’s founder claims he has received overwhelmingly positive feedback from hundreds of participants and has also seen behavioral changes firsthand, but again, no material evidence.
So, Uncle Sam will dole out millions to see if the institute actually helps combat the public health crisis of systemic racism. “These inequities are perpetuated through normative, and often unconscious, biases and behaviors,” the Pittsburgh researchers write in their NIH grant document. “In recent years, academic institutions have devised new policies and initiatives to promote inclusive excellence, and in doing so have put a greater burden on underrepresented (UR) faculty to lead these efforts. Yet, many UR faculty are continuing to disproportionately leave the academy, indicating that academic institutions have not succeeded in their goal of dismantling systemic inequities and making academia more inclusive.”
The post NIH Gives Public University $5 Mil to Study if its Racial Equity Consciousness Institute Works appeared first on Judicial Watch.
HISTORIC ELECTION: President Trump Needs to Clean House
Judicial Watch Sues Garland Justice Department Over Election Robocall Controversy
Obama Judge Says Military Must Cover Gender Transition Surgery
Happy Veterans Day!
HISTORIC ELECTION: President Trump Needs to Clean House
Judicial Watch congratulates President Trump on his remarkable election as 47th president of the United States. The voters broadly and directly repudiated the lawfare targeting Trump, as well as the dangerous government abuses and contempt for the rule of law endemic here in Washington, DC.
President Trump had to overcome unprecedented abuse by corrupt and partisan prosecutors, politicians and judges – all of whom tried to rig the election by smearing, raiding, investigating, prosecuting, trying, convicting, and gagging President Trump.
In short, President Trump needs to clean house. The FBI and Justice Department are irredeemably corrupt. And the government abusers who targeted Trump and other innocent Americans should be subjected to criminal investigation. And, as sunlight is the best disinfectant, President Trump should open wide the Deep State files on politicized Deep State lies and corruption – especially its war on the rule of law, constitutional government, our First Amendment and other civil rights.
We are ready, willing and able to help (and sue) for government accountability as we continue our mission to uncover what the government is up to and enforce the rule of law for election integrity, immigration, and against woke discrimination and racism.
In my new book Rights and Freedoms in Peril I detail a long chain of abuses officials and politicians have made against the American people and call readers to battle for “the soul and survival of America.” The book details how the progressive movement threatens America’s most venerable institutions, undermining the core principles that make this country a beacon of hope to the world.
Through open records laws, we frequently request records from the government and sue when it refuses to release them. For example:
- Recently, we uncovered records from the Department of Homeland Security which show, contrary to what it told the media, that least one U.S. Secret Service agent broke in to a hair salon and taped over the salon’s security camera in Pittsfield, MA, during a July 27, 2024, campaign fundraising visit by Vice President Kamala Harris.
- In October, we sued on behalf of Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. (STARRS) against the U.S. Department of Defense for records regarding the U.S. Air Force Academy’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) plans.
- In August, we received records from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA – a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)) revealing that CISA is trolling on social media and reporting on alleged “domestic violent extremism” (DVE).
- In May, we reported on a phone message left by an FBI special agent for someone at the Secret Service in the context of the raid on President Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago, Florida.
- The U.S. Department of Justice is asking a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that has been targeting President Donald Trump and other Americans.
Let’s hope we enter a pro-transparency and anti-corruption era under the new Trump administration. You can be sure that Judicial Watch will remain front and center in these battles either way!
Judicial Watch Sues Garland Justice Department Over Election Robocall Controversy
I don’t trust the Justice Department.
Judicial Watch just had to file a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice for records regarding the Justice Department’s involvement in the League of Women Voters’ National Voting Rights Act lawsuit concerning fake Biden robocalls conducted during New Hampshire primary (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-03109)).
We sued after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a September 24, 2024, FOIA request for:
Records of the Office of Legal Counsel, including emails, text messages, voicemail messages, video conferences, briefings, notes, or other form of record regarding the Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. § 10307(b)); robocalls; Steve Kramer; Lingo Telecom, LLC; Voice Broadcasting Corporation; or Life Corporation.
In February, during this year’s presidential primary season in New Hampshire, an elections consultant, Steve Kramer, commissioned a fake robocall using artificial intelligence (AI) to impersonate Joe Biden’s voice to urge New Hampshire voters not to participate in the state’s January 23 primary. New Hampshire’s attorney general charged Kramer with 13 felony counts of voter suppression and 13 misdemeanor counts of impersonation of a candidate.
Subsequently, the League of Women Voters filed a lawsuit against Kramer and other firms involved in the fake call.
The Biden Justice Department clearly has something to hide. Was there selective prosecution and collusion with allied leftist groups as a favor to the Biden-Harris campaign? You can expect many more lawsuits and investigations to uncover the full truth about this thoroughly corrupt Justice Department.
Obama Judge Says Military Must Cover Gender Transition Surgery
Can you imagine what General George Washington’s response would be to what is going on in our military today? Our Corruption Chronicles blog looks at the gender madness “encouraged” by an Obama judicial appointee.
The U.S. military’s health insurance plan is discriminatory and violates Equal Protection rights under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution by failing to cover costly gender transition surgeries, an Obama-appointed federal judge ruled days ago. Two transgender women sued the Department of Defense (DOD), the U.S. Defense Health Agency, Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and the agency’s Tricare Health Plan over a provision that bans surgical coverage of procedures that improve physical appearance without a significant restoration of functions, including “sex gender changes.” The biological males, who want to be female, claim in their lawsuit that denying coverage of medically necessary gender transition surgeries violates their Constitutional Equal Protection rights, a guarantee that requires the government “to treat alike all persons similarly situated.”
In court documents the plaintiffs are identified as Jane Doe and Susan Roe and they receive health insurance through Tricare as dependents of former service members. The health plan covers more than 9.6 million active-duty servicemembers, retirees, and their families providing services at military hospitals and clinics around the world as well as a civilian network of providers. Tricare offers transgender patients services that include hormone therapy and psychological counseling for gender dysphoria, which is identified as “psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity.” However, it does not cover surgery for the treatment of gender dysphoria, the insurance plan’s website states, adding that active-duty service members may request a waiver for “medically necessary gender affirming surgery.”
The transgender plaintiffs in this case have both received at least one surgery to treat gender dysphoria and say they will need more surgeries in the future. One has been enrolled in Tricare since 2002 and the other since 2023 and both “were assigned male at birth and have female gender identities,” according to the recently issued ruling. Neither procedure was paid for by Tricare, but the men took legal action to get the military insurance to cover future surgeries by claiming its policy discriminates based on sex and transgender status. An Obama-appointed federal judge in Maine, Nancy Torresen, agreed, writing in her decision that the exclusion violates the Constitution’s Equal Protection clause because it “expressly excludes sex gender changes from Tricare coverage.” Furthermore, Judge Torresen writes that gender transition surgery is not “cosmetic,” but rather “medically necessary” because the goal is to effectively treat a serious medical condition not enhance beauty or appearance. “In other words, surgery treats gender dysphoria by addressing the incongruence between a transgender person’s anatomy and their immutable brain-based gender identity,” according to the judge.
The 28-page ruling provides detailed information about gender identity and dysphoria and cites standards of care issued by an international nonprofit, World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), considered to be an authority on the issue. The misalignment between gender identity and birth sex, known as “gender incongruence,” means a transgender person feels “wrongly embodied” due to their anatomy, the ruling explains, adding that it may be medically necessary for the health and wellbeing of some transgender people to take steps to live consistently with their gender identity. “If untreated, gender incongruence may lead to gender dysphoria, which can be a serious medical condition,” Torresen’s ruling states. The judge also writes that WPATH considers medically necessary treatment for people with gender dysphoria to range from hormone therapies to surgical procedures that include chest reconstruction, facial feminization, and genital reconstruction. Torresen points out that the same procedures also treat conditions other than gender dysphoria. “For example, mastectomies, hysterectomies, salpingo-oophorectomies, and orchiectomies can treat cancer, and genital reconstruction may be performed after removing a patient’s genitalia due to cancer, injury, or infection,” she writes.
Happy Veterans Day!
We would not have the great nation we have without the men and women who sacrificed to defend it, and so it is fitting that every year on November 11 we honor them.
That date was set in November 1919, when President Wilson proclaimed November 11 as the first commemoration of Armistice Day with the following words:
“To us in America, the reflections of Armistice Day will be filled with solemn pride in the heroism of those who died in the country’s service and with gratitude for the victory, both because of the thing from which it has freed us and because of the opportunity it has given America to show her sympathy with peace and justice in the councils of the nations…”
We join all Americans in saluting our veterans – especially our many veterans on staff here at Judicial Watch! God bless them and God bless America!
Until next week,
The post HISTORIC ELECTION: President Trump Needs to Clean House appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records regarding the Justice Department’s involvement in the League of Women Voters’ National Voting Rights Act lawsuit concerning fake Biden robocalls conducted during New Hampshire primary (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-03109)).
Judicial Watch sued after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a September 24, 2024, Judicial Watch FOIA request for:
- Records of the Office of Legal Counsel, including emails, text messages, voicemail messages, video conferences, briefings, notes, or other form of record regarding the Voting Rights Act (52 U.S.C. § 10307(b)); robocalls; Steve Kramer; Lingo Telecom, LLC; Voice Broadcasting Corporation; or Life Corporation.
In February, during this year’s presidential primary season in New Hampshire, an elections consultant, Steve Kramer, commissioned a fake robocall using artificial intelligence (AI) to impersonate Joe Biden’s voice to urge New Hampshire voters not to participate in the state’s January 23 primary. New Hampshire’s attorney general charged Kramer with 13 felony counts of voter suppression and 13 misdemeanor counts of impersonation of a candidate.
Subsequently, the League of Women Voters filed a lawsuit against Kramer and other firms involved in the fake call.
“The Biden Justice Department clearly has something to hide. Was there selective prosecution and collusion with allied leftist groups as a favor to the Biden-Harris campaign?” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In October, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion reversing a lower court ruling on Mississippi’s election law that permitted absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day. Earlier this year, Judicial Watch filed the civil rights lawsuit challenging the Mississippi election law on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi. (Judicial Watch filed the first challenge to require all ballots be received by Election Day in 2022 against Illinois.)
In a similar lawsuit, in 2022, Judicial Watch, on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered voters, sued Illinois for allowing vote-by-mail ballots (even those without postmarks) to be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.
In May 2024, Judicial Watch sued California under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) to force it to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law.
In March 2024, Judicial Watch, Breakthrough Ideas, Illinois Family Action, and Carol J. Davis sued Illinois officials under the NVRA to force them to clean the State’s voter rolls.
In December 2023, a notice letter was sent to election officials in the District of Columbia notifying them of evident violations of the NVRA, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The letter pointed out that D.C. publicly reported removing few or no ineligible voter registrations under a key provision of the NVRA. The letter threatened a federal lawsuit unless the violations were corrected in a timely fashion. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, DC, officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.”
In July 2023 Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decisionof the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
Judicial Watch in July 2023 also settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with Judicial Watch and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from Judicial Watch. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle a Judicial Watch NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
Judicial Watch settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Justice Department on Records on AI Robocall Controversy appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement on President Donald Trump’s election victory:
Judicial Watch congratulates President Trump on his remarkable election as 47th president of the United States. The voters broadly and directly repudiated the lawfare targeting Trump, as well as the dangerous government abuses and contempt for the rule of law endemic here in Washington, DC.
President Trump had to overcome unprecedented abuse by corrupt and partisan prosecutors, politicians and judges – all of whom tried to rig the election by smearing, raiding, investigating, prosecuting, trying, convicting, and gagging President Trump.
In short, President Trump needs to clean house. The FBI and Justice Department are irredeemably corrupt. And the government abusers who targeted Trump and other innocent Americans should be subject to criminal investigation. And, as sunlight is the best disinfectant, President Trump should open wide the Deep State files on politicized Deep State lies and corruption – especially its war on the rule of law, constitutional government, our First Amendment and other civil rights.
Judicial Watch is ready, willing and able to help (and sue) for government accountability as we continue our mission to uncover what the government is up to and enforce the rule of law for election integrity, immigration, and against woke discrimination and racism.
In his new book Rights and Freedoms in Peril Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton details a long chain of abuses officials and politicians have made against the American people and calls readers to battle for “the soul and survival of America.” The book details how the progressive movement threatens America’s most venerable institutions, undermining the core principles that make this country a beacon of hope to the world.
Judicial Watch, through open records laws, frequently requests records from the government and sues when it refused to release them, for example:
- Recently, Judicial Watch it uncovered records from the Department of Homeland Security which show, contrary to what it told media, that least one U.S. Secret Service agent broke in to a hair salon and taped over the salon’s security camera in Pittsfield, MA, during a July 27, 2024, campaign fundraising visit by Vice President Kamala Harris.
- In October, Judicial Watch sued on behalf of Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. (STARRS) against the U.S. Department of Defense for records regarding the U.S. Air Force Academy’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) plans.
- In August, Judicial Watch received records from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA – a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)) revealing that CISA is trolling on social media and reporting on alleged “domestic violent extremism” (DVE).
- In May, Judicial Watch reported on a phone message left by an FBI special agent for someone at the Secret Service in the context of the raid on President Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago, Florida.
- The U.S. Department of Justice is asking a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that has been targeting President Donald Trump and other Americans.
The post Judicial Watch Statement on President Trump’s Election Victory appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The U.S. military’s health insurance plan is discriminatory and violates Equal Protection rights under the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution by failing to cover costly gender transition surgeries, an Obama-appointed federal judge ruled days ago. Two transgender women sued the Department of Defense (DOD), the U.S. Defense Health Agency, Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and the agency’s Tricare Health Plan over a provision that bans surgical coverage of procedures that improve physical appearance without a significant restoration of functions, including “sex gender changes.” The biological males, who want to be female, claim in their lawsuit that denying coverage of medically necessary gender transition surgeries violates their Constitutional Equal Protection rights, a guarantee that requires the government “to treat alike all persons similarly situated.”
In court documents the plaintiffs are identified as Jane Doe and Susan Roe and they receive health insurance through Tricare as dependents of former servicemembers. The health plan covers more than 9.6 million active-duty servicemembers, retirees, and their families providing services at military hospitals and clinics around the world as well as a civilian network of providers. Tricare offers transgender patients services that include hormone therapy and psychological counseling for gender dysphoria, which is identified as “psychological distress that results from an incongruence between one’s sex assigned at birth and one’s gender identity.” However, it does not cover surgery for the treatment of gender dysphoria, the insurance plan’s website states, adding that active-duty service members may request a waiver for “medically necessary gender affirming surgery.”
The transgender plaintiffs in this case have both received at least one surgery to treat gender dysphoria and say they will need more surgeries in the future. One has been enrolled in Tricare since 2002 and the other since 2023 and both “were assigned male at birth and have female gender identities,” according to the recently issued ruling. Neither procedure was paid for by Tricare, but the men took legal action to get the military insurance to cover future surgeries by claiming its policy discriminates based on sex and transgender status. An Obama-appointed federal judge in Maine, Nancy Torresen, agreed, writing in her decision that the exclusion violates the Constitution’s Equal Protection clause because it “expressly excludes sex gender changes from Tricare coverage.” Furthermore, Judge Torresen writes that gender transition surgery is not “cosmetic,” but rather “medically necessary” because the goal is to effectively treat a serious medical condition not enhance beauty or appearance. “In other words, surgery treats gender dysphoria by addressing the incongruence between a transgender person’s anatomy and their immutable brain-based gender identity,” according to the judge.
The 28-page ruling provides detailed information about gender identity and dysphoria and cites standards of care issued by an international nonprofit, World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), considered to be an authority on the issue. The misalignment between gender identity and birth sex, known as “gender incongruence,” means a transgender person feels “wrongly embodied” due to their anatomy, the ruling explains, adding that it may be medically necessary for the health and wellbeing of some transgender people to take steps to live consistently with their gender identity. “If untreated, gender incongruence may lead to gender dysphoria, which can be a serious medical condition,” Torresen’s ruling states. The judge also writes that WPATH considers medically necessary treatment for people with gender dysphoria to range from hormone therapies to surgical procedures that include chest reconstruction, facial feminization, and genital reconstruction. Torresen points out that the same procedures also treat conditions other than gender dysphoria. “For example, mastectomies, hysterectomies, salpingo-oophorectomies, and orchiectomies can treat cancer, and genital reconstruction may be performed after removing a patient’s genitalia due to cancer, injury, or infection,” she writes.
The post U.S. Military’s Refusal to Cover Gender Transition Surgery Violates Constitution, Obama Judge Rules appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Historic Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Appeals Court Rules Against Counting of Ballots Received after Election Day
Records Confirm Agent on Harris Secret Service Detail Broke into Massachusetts Hair Salon, Taped over Security Camera
Judicial Watch Sends Election Monitors to Wisconsin, Launches National Voter Fraud Hotline
Mass Migration Ignites U.S. Tuberculosis Resurgence, Foreigners Account for 76% of Last Year’s Cases
Historic Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Appeals Court Rules Against Counting of Ballots Received after Election Day
In a huge victory for election integrity, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion reversing a lower court ruling on Mississippi’s election law that permitted absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day.
Earlier this year, your Judicial Watch filed a civil rights lawsuit challenging the Mississippi election law on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi (Libertarian Party of Mississippi v Wetzel et al. (No. 1:24-cv-00037)). The court consolidated the case we filed with one filed by the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and other complainants.
(Judicial Watch filed the first challenge to require all ballots be received by Election Day in 2022 against Illinois.)
The Fifth Circuit opinion states in part:
Congress statutorily designated a singular “day for the election” of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors. Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this “day for the election” is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Because Mississippi’s statute allows ballot receipt up to five days after the federal election day, it is preempted by federal law. We reverse the district court’s contrary judgment and remand for further proceedings.
We argued that holding voting open for five days past Election Day violates the constitutional rights of voters and candidates:
Counting untimely, illegal, and invalid votes, such as those received in violation of federal law, substantially increases the pool of total votes cast and dilutes the weight of votes cast by Plaintiff’s members and others in support of Plaintiff’s federal nominees.
The complaint details that as many as 1.7% of votes cast in Mississippi in 2020 were received after Election Day.
In our appeal filings, we explained that the Mississippi law extending Election Day is obviously at odds with federal law. The Fifth Circuit hearing can be found here. This is a historic victory for election integrity and voter rights and confidence. This is a precedent that ensures that only ballots that arrive by Election Day can be counted under federal law. We hope this begins a national movement to increase voter confidence, comply with federal law, and limit voter fraud by counting ballots that arrive only by Election Day.
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In a similar lawsuit, in 2022,we, on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered voters, sued Illinois for allowing vote-by-mail ballots (even those without postmarks) to be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.
In May 2024, we sued California under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) to force it to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law (Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber et al. (No. 2:24-cv-3750)).
In March 2024, we, Breakthrough Ideas, Illinois Family Action, and Carol J. Davis sued Illinois officials under the NVRA to force them to clean the State’s voter rolls. (Judicial Watch Inc., et al., v. Illinois State Board of Elections, et al. (No. 1:24-cv-01867).
In December 2023, a notice letter was sent to election officials in the District of Columbia notifying them of evident violations of the NVRA, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The letter pointed out that D.C. publicly reported removing few or no ineligible voter registrations under a key provision of the NVRA. The letter threatened a federal lawsuit unless the violations were corrected in a timely fashion. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, DC, officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.”
In July 2023 we filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
Judicial Watch in July 2023 also settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with us and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from us. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle our NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide us with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit we filed in 2017.
We settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
This case and other pending cases are far from over. The legal battles to ensure election integrity will continue with Judicial Watch in the lead as long as the need remains …
Records Confirm Agent on Harris Secret Service Detail Broke into Massachusetts Hair Salon, Taped over Security Camera
We just uncovered 62 pages of records from the Department of Homeland Security thanks to a FOIA lawsuit that shows, contrary to what it told the media, at least one U.S. Secret Service agent broke into a hair salon and taped over the salon’s security camera in Pittsfield, MA, during a July 27, 2024, campaign fundraising visit by Vice President Kamala Harris
The records also show one agent telling colleagues that by covering the hair salon’s external security camera with tape, the Secret Service was laughably pretending to be “mitigating threats.”
We filed the lawsuit here in Washington DC after the Secret Service failed to respond to an August 2024 FOIA request for records regarding the break-in by vice presidential protective detail (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No,1:24-cv–02750)).
The New York Post reported on August 11: “The Secret Service apologized to a salon owner in Massachusetts who alleged that individuals broke into her business to use the bathroom during the agency’s security work for a nearby Veep Kamala Harris fundraiser…. [A] Secret Service officer covered a camera outside her salon with tape.”
A Secret Service agent in the New York Field Office states in a July 28, 2024, email to an official on Harris’s detail whose name is redacted:
The owner [redacted] called the NYC Duty Desk stating she has pictures of agents going into the house, covering up cameras and using the bathroom. The address in question is 54 Wendell Ave., Pittsfield, MA 01201. She just wanted to know who had given permission to go inside and use the space.
The Harris detail official forwards the email to an official in the “TSD,” Technical Security Division.
A Technical Security Division official whose name is redacted reports:
The building in question is [redacted]. It was a multi-story building with a salon on the ground floor, and residences above. I entered the day prior during working hours to ask one of the employees about [redacted]. I have no knowledge of any of the teams assigned to TSD entering the building at any time. [Redacted]
At least one of the residents were on the property and I saw them out on the balcony multiple times. I have no idea if they might have given someone permission to enter to use the bathroom. SA [special agent] [redacted] advised that [redacted].
I don’t know the extent of the issues the owner has, just what you see in his forwarded thread. If any further information is necessary, please let me know.
The message is forwarded to another official in the vice president’s detail and the sender states:
See below from TSI [technical security investigators] [redacted] the TSD lead for the visit.
Also I was informed after the visit by the Arrival Departure agent (SA) [redacted] that local PD [police department] were utilizing the bathroom within the building. VPD [vice presidential division] did not give permission to use this facility. However, local PD did seem to have a relationship with facility owner and stated they have worked together before! I was made aware that potentially one Agent may have used the facility as well which was the site 2 PI [protective intelligence] agent (SA) [redacted] which was paired with his local PD counterpart.
CSP [critical systems protection] Agent [redacted] informed us of camera vulnerabilities located on the hair salon facing the A/D [area/departure] area. I was informed that attempts were made to contact owners but unsuccessful. Day of the visit SA [redacted] mitigated threats due to covering the exterior camera.
The email thread works its way up to Brian Lambert, assistant director, Office of Investigations, who then writes to Michael Ball of the Investigations Division, asking, “Can you please check work [sic] BOS [Secret Service Boston Field Office] to see if that SA used the bathroom?” Ball replies, “Copy.”
In a July 30, 2024, email exchange a Boston Secret Service official asks a Pittsfield official whose name is redacted: “Sir, Please take a look. See if you know anyone in the video. I only know the woman who put the tape on the camera.”
The redacted individual responds: “Doesn’t look like anyone of your people! Other than the female with the tape.”
In an August 5, 2024, email exchange between an assistant special agent in charge of the Secret Service Boston Field Office and a local police chief, the police chief confirms that at least one agent was in the hair salon, along with local officials. The Boston agent writes, “Hi Chief, Hope all is going well in Pittsfield. I am about to hit the road for Philadelphia for a week or so. Quick question for you. Regarding the video from the salon … were the individuals who went inside ever identified?” The police chief responds, “After I reviewed it, it appears 2 females were EMS County ambulance, 1 USSS [Secret Service] agent and 1 state police CERT [Community Emergency Response Team] member. Hope all is well!”
In an August 6, 2024, email from Business Insider reporter Jacob Shamsian to the Secret Service Media Inquiry Department:
I spoke to [redacted] the owner of the Four One Three Salon in Pittsfield. She told me that on the day of Harris’s visit, on July 27, she closed down her salon, which is located just behind the Colonial Theatre where Harris held a fundraiser.
She said that a Secret Service agent taped over the exterior security camera of her salon. And then a couple of hours later, her lock was picked and several people – including one person wearing a Secret Service uniform – entered the salon to use the bathroom. They left the door unlocked when they left.
Security footage that [redacted] shared with me backs up her version of events.
[The owner] told me that she later spoke to an EMT [Emergency Medical Technician], who told her that the ‘person in charge’ of the Secret Service that day told people to use her bathroom’s salon [sic]. She said she spoke to someone at a Secret Service field office (it wasn’t clear to me if it was the Massachusetts or New York field office – Pittsfield is in Massachusetts just across the border from New York), who blamed the local police.
The reporter, Shamsian, poses a series of questions that the Secret Service answers in the email chain.
When asked if a Secret Service officer picked the lock of the salon, Secret Service replies, “No one from the USSS picked the lock of the Salon door.”
When asked if the Secret Service sought permission from a person whose name is redacted or the property owner to “use the facility for the bathroom or any other reason,” the Boston Secret Service replies, “USSS personnel did not ask for permission to enter the Salon nor did any of our personnel enter the business. We reviewed the videos provided to us and observed that none of the individuals who entered the Salon were USSS personnel. The Pittsfield Police Chief confirmed those individuals were state or local police, fire or EMS.”
When asked if the Secret Service agent in charge – or any other officer – told others to use the bathroom, the Secret Service replied, “No one from the USSS directed any state or local personnel to enter the Salon or use the restrooms.”
On August 6, 2024, the Special Agent-in-Charge of the Boston Field Office, Andrew Murphy, sends an email to a colleague in the Office of Protective Services (OPS) whose name is redacted, ordering him to, “Please send me the names of every BOS personnel working the [redacted] visit to Pittsfield. This information is time sensitive.”
The reply from the official is redacted. Murphy then responds, “Thank you. Can you please provide me with the names of the duty agents from the 27th of July through today.”
In an August 7, 2024, email with the subject line “Draft PreDecisional Statement” includes news articles sent by Vincent Tutoni, assistant director for Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs, to Communications Director Anthony Guglielmi and others:” So DHS front office is interested in this unfortunate incident. Received a call last night at 8:45pm. We will have to confer with them this AM.”
Guglielmi replies, “Got it. Let us know. [Redacted] asked reporter for some time 11am. Salon owner had a previously scheduled interview today also with the local paper.
On August 12, Acting Director Ronald Rowe receives an email from a person whose name is redacted asking, “Will the Agent who broke into the salon in Mass be disciplined? Will the Agent in charge be disciplined for breaking into the salon?”
The Biden-Harris Secret Service is unprofessional, dishonest, and corrupt. The Secret Service not only broke into a business to use its bathroom but then lied about it, placing the blame on local law enforcement.
We have extensively sued and investigated the Secret Service on transparency and corruption issues.
My new book, Rights and Freedoms in Peril, details some of our numerous lawsuits and disclosures about Secret Service controversies.
Recently, we sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for records on a 2022 car accident involving Vice President Kamala Harris’s Secret Service motorcade. The New York Post reported in October 2022 that “Vice President Kamala Harris was involved in a minor car accident Monday, one that was initially — and falsely — dismissed as ‘mechanical failure.’” The driver of her SUV struck a curb hard enough “that the tire needed to be replaced, bringing the VP’s motorcade to a standstill.” NBC reported that the vehicle had been partially airborne.
In September, following up on reports that the Biden Secret Service denied President Trump’s requests for additional Secret Service protection, we sued the Department of Homeland Security for all Secret Service and other records regarding potential increased protective services to former President Trump’s security detail prior to the attempt on his life at his July 13 campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.
In August we released records showing that the Secret Service has made it a top priority that “diversity and inclusion is not just ‘talked about’ – but demonstrated by all employees through ‘Every Action, Every Day.’” [Emphasis in original] The records show the Secret Service demands that 12 percent of its workforce be composed of “persons with disabilities,” and that it is the policy of the Secret Service to provide equal employment opportunity without regard to such non-merit factors as “disability (physical or mental).”
Judicial Watch Sends Election Monitors to Wisconsin, Launches National Voter Fraud Hotline
Every day brings new reports of outright election fraud in states and cities across the country. We have always been out front in uncovering election abuses, and we’re active this season. Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, provides an important update in Judicial Watch’s Investigative Bulletin.
With the race for the presidency hurtling to the finish line, Judicial Watch will dispatch an election integrity team to Wisconsin to help ensure free and fair elections. Wisconsin is a critical swing state with a history of tumultuous electoral contests. “Judicial Watch’s teams will monitor the election in Wisconsin to expose and deter any fraud,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Improper or illegal election activities are also the focus of Judicial Watch’s new Election Integrity Hotline. Voters who witness fraud or intimidation, or suspicious activities at polling places or with voting machines, can send details to JW election experts at ElectionLaw@JudicialWatch.org.
Judicial Watch has long been a national leader in ensuring election integrity and voting rights. Judicial Watch’s election integrity team is led by Robert Popper, the former deputy chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and a veteran poll observer.
“Voter fraud in one form or another is a feature of every election,” Popper says. “It can be impersonation fraud, absentee ballot fraud, registration fraud, double voting, noncitizen voting, or voting by those ineligible under state law. It’s hard to detect and prove, especially where the law requires a showing of specific intent, but we know it is there. And sometimes fraud can swing a close election. Clean elections are a critical component of an effectively functioning democracy. Dirty elections undermine confidence in the democratic system.”
A key weapon in the fight to keep elections free and fair is the National Voter Registration Act, which mandates that states make “a reasonable effort” to remove from voting rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have been disqualified from voting due to death or change of residence. States often dodge this responsibility, creating opportunities for election fraud.
Legal pressure from Judicial Watch under the NVRA has led to the removal from voter rolls of more than four million ineligible voters nationwide. JW has spearheaded major voter roll cleanups in California, New York, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Kentucky, Colorado, and elsewhere. Cleaner voter rolls mean cleaner elections. You can learn more about JW’s voter roll cleanups here.
Judicial Watch fights on other legal fronts as well. In 2022, we defeated a highly partisan Maryland redistricting plan initiated by Democrats in the state legislature. Last year, we compelled Illinois to provide more transparency in its state-wide centralized list of registered voters. Earlier this month, we won a major victory when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed a lower court ruling allowing absentee ballots to be received up to five days after Election Day in Mississippi.
“Congress statutorily designated a singular ‘day for the election’ of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors,” the Fifth Circuit noted in its ruling. “Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this ‘day for the election’ is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials.”
Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton hailed the ruling. “This is a historic victory for election integrity and voter rights and confidence,” Tom said. “This is a precedent that ensures that only ballots that arrive by Election Day can be counted under federal law. We hope this begins a national movement to increase voter confidence, comply with federal law, and limit voter fraud by counting ballots that arrive only by Election Day.”
Mass Migration Ignites U.S. Tuberculosis Resurgence, Foreigners Account for 76% of Last Year’s Cases
The Biden-Harris border invasion is a public health crisis. Our Corruption Chronicles blog exposes the truth:
Besides compromising the safety of Americans by releasing over half a million illegal immigrants with criminal records in communities throughout the United States, the Biden administration has ignited yet another crisis by failing to properly screen migrants for contagious diseases. Judicial Watch has long reported on the serious health threat presented by illegal aliens and a decade ago exposed that tens of thousands of illegal immigrant minors (Unaccompanied Alien Children—UAC) under Obama fueled a deadly respiratory virus epidemic that struck American kids across the country and killed at least nine. Months earlier a U.S. Congressman, who is also a medical doctor, had confirmed that UAC were bringing in serious diseases including swine flu, dengue fever, tuberculosis, and Ebola virus. In a letter to the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Georgia lawmaker, Phil Gingrey, warned of a “severe and dangerous” crisis because the young migrants were importing infectious diseases from Central America that are considered to be largely eradicated in the U.S.
That was over a decade ago under Obama’s weak border policies and, predictably, the problem has worsened significantly during the unprecedented illegal immigration crisis that has gripped the nation under Biden and his laughable border czar, Kamala Harris. Besides the detrimental impact on national security, civilian safety, and taxpayer-funded programs (among others), mass migration is compromising health. Specifically, tuberculosis (TB), a deadly infectious disease that attacks the lungs and was once considered to be eradicated in the U.S., is on the rise. A report published by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a nonprofit dedicated to researching immigration issues, reveals that after decades of decline TB is resurfacing in the United States. “One key factor of the resurgence of TB in the U.S. is open borders and mass immigration,” FAIR researchers found. “The massive, unregulated influx of migrants from countries with higher TB rates than the United States has helped spread the disease. Even legal immigrants and refugees—who are required to undergo medical screenings before arriving in the United States—may have latent TB which then progresses to active TB and becomes transmissible once inside the United States.”
TB cases in the U.S. increased by 34% between 2020 and 2023 and the number of TB cases is now higher than pre-pandemic levels in 2019, according to figures in the report. Nationally, 76% of TB cases in 2023 occurred in foreign-born patients and counties, states as well as metropolitan areas with high foreign-born populations have larger rates of TB than those with lower foreign-born populations. “Some countries of origin for both legal and illegal aliens have TB rates as high as 60 times the U.S. rate,” the FAIR report states, adding that “the government’s health screening for TB in potential immigrants is deficient” and that some categories of illegal immigrants do not undergo any type of health screening. Besides, latent TB is not grounds for inadmissibility even though some U.S. border regions have “TB rates exceeding rates in high-risk countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon,” researchers found. It is important to note that the cost of treating each case of TB is more than $20,000 and can reach over $500,000 if it is drug-resistant, FAIR points out.
“Data clearly indicate that the prevalence of tuberculosis is, in part, a function of immigration,” FAIR researchers write. “Medical experts have long acknowledged this connection.” For example, in 1990 the CDC wrote that many TB cases in the U.S. occur among foreign-born people with asymptomatic infection when they entered the United States. More recently, research published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) determined that for countries with low TB rates, “immigration is an important factor in TB epidemiology, where migrants may originate from countries with substantially higher TB burden.” Incredibly, screening procedures for illegal immigrants entering the U.S. do not adequately guard against the spread of TB even though federal law states that aliens with communicable diseases “of public significance” are inadmissible. “However, the vast majority of aliens granted visas or who otherwise enter the U.S. are never medically screened,” FAIR researchers found. “Even for those who are medically screened, the standard for admission is lax, as it only excludes active TB and allows individuals with latent TB to enter the country, resulting in the importation of latent TB into the U.S.
Until next week,
The post HUGE Election Lawsuit Victory appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it uncovered 62 pages of records from the Department of Homeland Security thanks to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit which show, contrary to what it told media, at least one U.S. Secret Service agent broke in to a hair salon and taped over the salon’s security camera in Pittsfield, MA, during a July 27, 2024, campaign fundraising visit by Vice President Kamala Harris.
The records also show one agent telling colleagues that by covering the hair salon’s external security camera with tape, the Secret Service was “mitigating threats.”
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia after the Secret Service failed to respond to an August 2024 FOIA request for records regarding the break-in by vice presidential protective detail (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No,1:24-cv–02750)).
The New York Post reported on August 11: “The Secret Service apologized to a salon owner in Massachusetts who alleged that individuals broke into her business to use the bathroom during the agency’s security work for a nearby Veep Kamala Harris fundraiser…. [A] Secret Service officer covered a camera outside her salon with tape.”
A Secret Service agent in the New York Field Office states in a July 28, 2024, email to an official on Harris’s detail whose name is redacted:
The owner [redacted] called the NYC Duty Desk stating she has pictures of agents going into the house, covering up cameras and using the bathroom. The address in question is 54 Wendell Ave., Pittsfield, MA 01201. She just wanted to know who had given permission to go inside and use the space.
The Harris detail official forwards the email to an official in the “TSD,” Technical Security Division.
A Technical Security Division official whose name is redacted reports:
The building in question is [redacted]. It was a multi-story building with a salon on the ground floor, and residences above. I entered the day prior during working hours to ask one of the employees about [redacted]. I have no knowledge of any of the teams assigned to TSD entering the building at any time. [Redacted]
At least one of the residents were on the property and I saw them out on the balcony multiple times. I have no idea if they might have given someone permission to enter to use the bathroom. SA [special agent] [redacted] advised that [redacted].
I don’t know the extent of the issues the owner has, just what you see in his forwarded thread. If any further information is necessary, please let me know.
The message is forwarded to another official in the vice president’s detail and the sender states:
See below from TSI [technical security investigators] [redacted] the TSD lead for the visit.
Also I was informed after the visit by the Arrival Departure agent (SA) [redacted] that local PD [police department] were utilizing the bathroom within the building. VPD [vice presidential division] did not give permission to use this facility. However, local PD did seem to have a relationship with facility owner and stated they have worked together before! I was made aware that potentially one Agent may have used the facility as well which was the site 2 PI [protective intelligence] agent (SA) [redacted] which was paired with his local PD counterpart.
CSP [critical systems protection] Agent [redacted] informed us of camera vulnerabilities located on the hair salon facing the A/D [area/departure] area. I was informed that attempts were made to contact owners but unsuccessful. Day of the visit SA [redacted] mitigated threats due to covering the exterior camera.
The email thread works its way up to Brian Lambert, assistant director, Office of Investigations, who then writes to Michael Ball of the Investigations Division, asking, “Can you please check work [sic] BOS [Secret Service Boston Field Office] to see if that SA used the bathroom?” Ball replies, “Copy.”
In a July 30, 2024, email exchange a Boston Secret Service official asks a Pittsfield official whose name is redacted: “Sir, Please take a look. See if you know anyone in the video. I only know the woman who put the tape on the camera.”
The redacted individual responds: “Doesn’t look like anyone of your people! Other than the female with the tape.”
In an August 5, 2024, email exchange between an assistant special agent in charge of the Secret Service Boston Field Office and a local police chief, the police chief confirms that at least one agent was in the hair salon, along with local officials. The Boston agent writes, “Hi Chief, Hope all is going well in Pittsfield. I am about to hit the road for Philadelphia for a week or so. Quick question for you. Regarding the video from the salon … were the individuals who went inside ever identified?” The police chief responds, “After I reviewed it, it appears 2 females were EMS County ambulance, 1 USSS [Secret Service] agent and 1 state police CERT [Community Emergency Response Team] member. Hope all is well!”
In an August 6, 2024, email from Business Insider reporter Jacob Shamsian to the Secret Service Media Inquiry Department:
I spoke to [redacted] the owner of the Four One Three Salon in Pittsfield. She told me that on the day of Harris’s visit, on July 27, she closed down her salon, which is located just behind the Colonial Theatre where Harris held a fundraiser.
She said that a Secret Service agent taped over the exterior security camera of her salon. And then a couple of hours later, her lock was picked and several people – including one person wearing a Secret Service uniform – entered the salon to use the bathroom. They left the door unlocked when they left.
Security footage that [redacted] shared with me backs up her version of events.
[The owner] told me that she later spoke to an EMT [Emergency Medical Technician], who told her that the ‘person in charge’ of the Secret Service that day told people to use her bathroom’s salon [sic]. She said she spoke to someone at a Secret Service field office (it wasn’t clear to me if it was the Massachusetts or New York field office – Pittsfield is in Massachusetts just across the border from New York), who blamed the local police.
The reporter, Shamsian, poses a series of questions that the Secret Service answers in the email chain.
When asked if a Secret Service officer picked the lock of the salon, Secret Service replies, “No one from the USSS picked the lock of the Salon door.”
When asked if the Secret Service sought permission from a person whose name is redacted or the property owner to “use the facility for the bathroom or any other reason,” the Boston Secret Service replies, “USSS personnel did not ask for permission to enter the Salon nor did any of our personnel enter the business. We reviewed the videos provided to us and observed that none of the individuals who entered the Salon were USSS personnel. The Pittsfield Police Chief confirmed those individuals were state or local police, fire or EMS.”
When asked if the Secret Service agent in charge – or any other officer – told others to use the bathroom, the Secret Service replied, “No one from the USSS directed any state or local personnel to enter the Salon or use the restrooms.”
On August 6, 2024, the Special Agent-in-Charge of the Boston Field Office, Andrew Murphy, sends an email to a colleague in the Office of Protective Services (OPS) whose name is redacted, ordering him to, “Please send me the names of every BOS personnel working the [redacted] visit to Pittsfield. This information is time sensitive.”
The reply from the official is redacted. Murphy then responds, “Thank you. Can you please provide me with the names of the duty agents from the 27th of July through today.”
In an August 7, 2024, email with the subject line “Draft PreDecisional Statement” includes news articles sent by Vincent Tutoni, assistant director for Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs, to Communications Director Anthony Guglielmi and others:” So DHS front office is interested in this unfortunate incident. Received a call last night at 8:45pm. We will have to confer with them this AM.”
Guglielmi replies, “Got it. Let us know. [Redacted] asked reporter for some time 11am. Salon owner had a previously scheduled interview today also with the local paper.
On August 12, Acting Director Ronald Rowe receives an email from a person whose name is redacted asking, “Will the Agent who broke into the salon in Mass be disciplined? Will the Agent in charge be disciplined for breaking into the salon?”
“The Biden-Harris Secret Service is unprofessional, dishonest, and corrupt,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Secret Service not only broke into a business to use its bathroom but then lied about it, placing the blame on local law enforcement.”
Judicial Watch has extensively sued and investigated the Secret Service.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton’s new book, Rights and Freedoms in Peril**, details some of Judicial Watch’s numerous lawsuits and disclosures about Secret Service controversies.
Recently, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for records on a 2022 car accident involving Vice President Kamala Harris’s Secret Service motorcade. The New York Post reported in October 2022 that “Vice President Kamala Harris was involved in a minor car accident Monday, one that was initially — and falsely — dismissed as ‘mechanical failure.’” The driver of her SUV struck a curb hard enough “that the tire needed to be replaced, bringing the VP’s motorcade to a standstill.” NBC reported that the vehicle had been partially airborne.
In September, following up on reports that the Biden Secret Service denied President Trump’s requests for additional Secret Service protection, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Homeland Security for all Secret Service and other records regarding potential increased protective services to former President Trump’s security detail prior to the attempt on his life at his July 13 campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.
In August Judicial Watch released records showing that the Secret Service has made it a top priority that “diversity and inclusion is not just ‘talked about’ – but demonstrated by all employees through ‘Every Action, Every Day.’” [Emphasis in original] The records show the Secret Service, demands that 12 percent of its workforce be composed of “persons with disabilities,” and that it is the policy of the Secret Service to provide equal employment opportunity without regard to such non-merit factors as “disability (physical or mental).”
In August 2024, Judicial Watch received records from the district attorney’s office in Butler County, PA, detailing the extensive preparation of local police for the rally at which former President Trump was shot. The preparation included sniper teams, counter assault teams and a quick response force.
In August 2024, Judicial Watch announced that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) withheld information on a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for information about its coordination with the U.S. Secret Service regarding the July 13 Butler, PA, rally at which former President Trump was shot. In denying Judicial Watch’s FOIA request, the FBI cites FOIA exemption 7(A), which applies to information that “could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings”
On August 9, in response to a separate open records request, Judicial Watch obtained bodycam footage of the July 13 assassination events from the Butler Township Police Department.
The post Judicial Watch: Records Confirm Agent on Harris Secret Service Detail Broke into Massachusetts Hair Salon, Taped over Security Camera appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Besides compromising the safety of Americans by releasing over half a million illegal immigrants with criminal records in communities throughout the United States, the Biden administration has ignited yet another crisis by failing to properly screen migrants for contagious diseases. Judicial Watch has long reported on the serious health threat presented by illegal aliens and a decade ago exposed that tens of thousands of illegal immigrant minors (Unaccompanied Alien Children—UAC) under Obama fueled a deadly respiratory virus epidemic that struck American kids across the country and killed at least nine. Months earlier a U.S. Congressman, who is also a medical doctor, had confirmed that UAC were bringing in serious diseases including swine flu, dengue fever, tuberculosis, and Ebola virus. In a letter to the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Georgia lawmaker, Phil Gingrey, warned of a “severe and dangerous” crisis because the young migrants were importing infectious diseases from Central America that are considered to be largely eradicated in the U.S.
That was over a decade ago under Obama’s weak border policies and, predictably, the problem has worsened significantly during the unprecedented illegal immigration crisis that has gripped the nation under Biden and his laughable border czar, Kamala Harris. Besides the detrimental impact on national security, civilian safety, and taxpayer-funded programs (among others), mass migration is compromising health. Specifically, tuberculosis (TB), a deadly infectious disease that attacks the lungs and was once considered to be eradicated in the U.S., is on the rise. A report published by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a nonprofit dedicated to researching immigration issues, reveals that after decades of decline TB is resurfacing in the United States. “One key factor of the resurgence of TB in the U.S. is open borders and mass immigration,” FAIR researchers found. “The massive, unregulated influx of migrants from countries with higher TB rates than the United States has helped spread the disease. Even legal immigrants and refugees—who are required to undergo medical screenings before arriving in the United States—may have latent TB which then progresses to active TB and becomes transmissible once inside the United States.”
TB cases in the U.S. increased by 34% between 2020 and 2023 and the number of TB cases is now higher than pre-pandemic levels in 2019, according to figures in the report. Nationally, 76% of TB cases in 2023 occurred in foreign-born patients and counties, states as well as metropolitan areas with high foreign-born populations have larger rates of TB than those with lower foreign-born populations. “Some countries of origin for both legal and illegal aliens have TB rates as high as 60 times the U.S. rate,” the FAIR report states, adding that “the government’s health screening for TB in potential immigrants is deficient” and that some categories of illegal immigrants do not undergo any type of health screening. Besides, latent TB is not grounds for inadmissibility even though some U.S. border regions have “TB rates exceeding rates in high-risk countries such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon,” researchers found. It is important to note that the cost of treating each case of TB is more than $20,000 and can reach over $500,000 if it is drug-resistant, FAIR points out.
“Data clearly indicate that the prevalence of tuberculosis is, in part, a function of immigration,” FAIR researchers write. “Medical experts have long acknowledged this connection.” For example, in 1990 the CDC wrote that many TB cases in the U.S. occur among foreign-born people with asymptomatic infection when they entered the United States. More recently, research published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) determined that for countries with low TB rates, “immigration is an important factor in TB epidemiology, where migrants may originate from countries with substantially higher TB burden.” Incredibly, screening procedures for illegal immigrants entering the U.S. do not adequately guard against the spread of TB even though federal law states that aliens with communicable diseases “of public significance” are inadmissible. “However, the vast majority of aliens granted visas or who otherwise enter the U.S. are never medically screened,” FAIR researchers found. “Even for those who are medically screened, the standard for admission is lax, as it only excludes active TB and allows individuals with latent TB to enter the country, resulting in the importation of latent TB into the U.S.”
The post Mass Migration Ignites U.S. Tuberculosis Resurgence, Foreigners Account for 76% of Last Year’s Cases appeared first on Judicial Watch.
With the race for the presidency hurtling to the finish line, Judicial Watch will dispatch an election integrity team to Wisconsin to help ensure free and fair elections. Wisconsin is a critical swing state with a history of tumultuous electoral contests. “Judicial Watch’s teams will monitor the election in Wisconsin to expose and deter any fraud,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Improper or illegal election activities are also the focus of Judicial Watch’s new Election Integrity Hotline. Voters who witness fraud or intimidation, or suspicious activities at polling places or with voting machines, can send details to JW election experts at ElectionLaw@JudicialWatch.org.
Judicial Watch has long been a national leader in ensuring election integrity and voting rights. Judicial Watch’s election integrity team is led by Robert Popper, the former deputy chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice and a veteran poll observer.
“Voter fraud in one form or another is a feature of very election,” Popper says. “It can be impersonation fraud, absentee ballot fraud, registration fraud, double voting, noncitizen voting, or voting by those ineligible under state law. It’s hard to detect and prove, especially where the law requires a showing of specific intent, but we know it is there. And sometimes fraud can swing a close election. Clean elections are a critical component of an effectively functioning democracy. Dirty elections undermine confidence in the democratic system.”
A key weapon in the fight to keep elections free and fair is the National Voter Registration Act, which mandates that states to make “a reasonable effort” to remove from voting rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have been disqualified from voting due to death or change of residence. States often dodge this responsibility, creating opportunities for election fraud.
Legal pressure from Judicial Watch under the NVRA has led to the removal from voter rolls of more than four million ineligible voters nationwide. JW has spearheaded major voter roll cleanups in California, New York, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Kentucky, Colorado, and elsewhere. Cleaner voter rolls mean cleaner elections. You can learn more about JW’s voter roll cleanups here.
Judicial Watch fights on other legal fronts as well. In 2022, we defeated a highly partisan Maryland redistricting plan initiated by Democrats in the state legislature. Last year, we compelled Illinois to provide more transparency in its state-wide centralized list of registered voters. And earlier his month, we won a major victory when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed a lower court ruling allowing absentee ballots to be received up to five days after Election Day in Mississippi.
“Congress statutorily designated a singular ‘day for the election’ of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors,” the Fifth Circuit noted in its ruling. “Text, precedent, and historical practice confirm this ‘day for the election’ is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials.”
Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton hailed the ruling. “This is a historic victory for election integrity and voter rights and confidence,” Tom said. “This is a precedent that ensures that only ballots that arrive by Election Day can be counted under federal law. We hope this begins a national movement to increase voter confidence, comply with federal law, and limit voter fraud by counting ballots that arrive only by Election Day.”
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post Judicial Watch Sends Election Monitors to Wisconsin, Launches National Voter Fraud Hotline appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In an example of how publicly funded entities are wasting taxpayer dollars to accommodate the transgender population, a public school district is paying over half a million dollars in damages as well as legal fees to settle a case involving a teacher it fired for refusing to use a student’s preferred pronouns. The high school French teacher, Peter Vlaming, worked in Virginia’s West Point Public Schools for about seven years and was fired back in 2018 because he would not use masculine pronouns when referring to a biological girl who identified as a boy. The teacher did, however, try to accommodate the student by using the new proper male name she chose for her “transition” to a boy but that was not enough to spare his job.
Administrators in the tiny school district with 813 students and just two campuses—an elementary school and a middle/high school—told the teacher that not using the student’s masculine pronouns violated the district’s nondiscrimination policy and issued a warning before terminating him. In 2019 a conservative nonprofit filed a lawsuit against the school board on Vlaming’s behalf arguing that school and district officials violated Virginia’s constitution and state law by firing the veteran teacher for exercising his rights to free speech and exercise. The case is not just about pronouns, the complaint stated. “It is about whether the government may force Mr. Vlaming to express ideas about human nature, unrelated to the school’s curriculum, that he believes are false. If he were to comply with Defendants’ demands, he would be forced to communicate that gender identity, rather than biological reality, fundamentally shapes and defines who we truly are as humans, that our sex can change, and that a woman who identifies as a man really is a man.”
The female student was in Vlaming’s Exploratory French Class during the 2016-17 school year and in his French I class in 2017-18. She began identifying as a male towards then end of her second year in his class, according to the complaint. Vlaming met with the girl’s mother and accommodated her by agreeing to use her new masculine proper name, though it was not legally changed. The teacher got in trouble for using the wrong pronouns when the student was not present. The administration gave Vlaming documents published by transgender political advocacy groups and told him that he was potentially violating federal law and school board policy by not using the student’s preferred pronouns. The school’s assistant principal ordered the teacher to use male pronouns, or his job could be at risk. Vlaming refused saying it was against his religious beliefs to use male pronouns to refer to a female. After a few more meetings he was terminated and slapped with a letter of reprimand formally charging him with non-conformity with school board policy for not using male pronouns when referring to the girl. The school board subsequently voted, unanimously, to terminate his employment for violating its policies against discrimination and harassment based on gender identity.
A judge in King William County Circuit Court dismissed Vlaming’s lawsuit and he appealed to the Virginia Supreme Court, which reinstated the case and led to a settlement. In its opinion the appellate court wrote that Virginia’s Constitution contains robust free speech and free exercise protections for public employees. “Absent a truly compelling reason for doing so, no government committed to these principles can lawfully coerce its citizens into pledging verbal allegiance to ideological views that violate their sincerely held religious beliefs,” the opinion, issued in December 2023, states. Jolted into seeing the writing on the wall, the West Point School Board recently agreed to pay Vlaming $575,000 in damages as well as attorneys’ fees. The school board also cleared the French teacher’s firing from his record and agreed to conform with state education policies that respect fundamental free speech. “I loved teaching French and gracefully tried to accommodate every student in my class, but I couldn’t say something that directly violated my conscience,” Vlaming said in a statement issued by his legal team.
The post Tiny Public School District Pays Big Settlement for Firing Teacher over Trans Student’s Preferred Pronouns appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the United States Department of Justice seeking access to the documents related to invoking the 25th Amendment against President Joe Biden (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-02764)).
On August 7, 2024, Judicial Watch submitted a FOIA request to the Justice Department for:
Records and communications of the below listed Department of Justice employees, including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, calendar invites, calendar meetings, correspondence, briefings, letters, memoranda, reports, notes, opinions, regarding invoking the 25th Amendment against President Joseph Biden.
- Merrick Garland, Attorney General
- Lisa O. Monaco, Deputy Attorney General
- Benjamin C. Mizer, Associate Attorney General
- Acting Associate Attorney General
- Christopher Fonzone, Assistant Attorney General
- Robert Hur, Special Counsel
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
On February 8, 2024, Congresswoman Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.) sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland where she stated:
After concluding that President Biden knowingly and willfully removed, mishandled, and disclosed classified documents repeatedly over a period of decades, Mr. Hur nevertheless recommended that charges not be brought against him.
Special Counsel’s reasoning was alarming. He recited numerous instances in which President Biden exhibited dramatically compromised mental faculties and concluded that a jury would be likely to perceive President Biden as a sympathetic and forgetful old man.
It is incumbent upon you to explore proceedings to remove the President pursuant to the 25th Amendment to the United States Constitution. President Biden needs to be charged, or he needs to be removed. There is no middle ground.
“If President Biden is as mentally sound as he and the people around him maintain, why did he decide not to seek reelection? If he is an ‘elderly man with a poor memory,’ as Special Counsel Hur (for AG Garland) found, why has he not been removed under the 25th Amendment? And why is the Justice Department unlawfully hiding documents about this serious national security issue?” asked Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Justice Department for Documents about Invoking 25th Amendment against President Biden appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller:
Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit Wednesday alongside Advancing American Freedom (AAF), which was founded by former Vice President Mike Pence, against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over records surrounding the abortion pill known as Mifepristone.
The lawsuit was filed after HHS and the FDA failed to respond to FOIA requests filed in May for relevant documents and communications surrounding the approval of the abortion pill, according to a press release. The FDA was previously found to have “failed to address several important concerns” when it relaxed restrictions on the abortion drug, which has a “significant morbidity and mortality” rate, according to the National Institute of Health.
“The FDA has repeatedly refused to acknowledge their role in approving the dangerous abortion drug, mifepristone, and have refused to disclose communications regarding their approval of it,” AAF general counsel Marc Wheat said in the press release.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch Joins Forces With Mike Pence Group, Sues FDA And HHS Over Abortion Pill Docs appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit on behalf of Advancing American Freedom Foundation against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for FDA records concerning approval of the abortion drug Mifeprex (Mifepristone, formerly known as RU-486) and meetings between senior FDA officials, White House counsel, and foreign actors (Advancing American Freedom Foundation v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services(No. 1:24-cv-02803)).
Advancing American Freedom Foundation develops innovative policy solutions, strategies, coalitions, and messaging that expand freedom for all Americans.
The lawsuit was filed after HHS and the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), which is a component of HHS, failed to respond to identical May 31, 2024, FOIA requests. Among the requested records are:
- Communications between the FDA and the House Committee on Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations (“Subcommittee”) concerning letters from the Subcommittee dated June 27, 1996; July 1, 1996; and September 17, 1996.
- All records requested in the September 17, 1996, letter from Subcommittee Chairman Joe Barton to FDA Commissioner David A. Kessler.
- All records of communications: between any FDA personnel and the Office of White House Counsel between November 1, 1992, and January 31, 2001, regarding the approval of “mifepristone” (which includes, but is not limited to, such terms as Mifeprex, Mifegyne, Korlym, abortion pill, RU-486, RU-38486, ZK-98296, and/or the mifepristone … including communications with Associate White House Counsel Elena Kagan.
- All records of communications between any FDA personnel and any person or entity between November 1, 1992, and January 31, 2001, regarding FDA Commissioner David Kessler’s overseas trip or trips to meet with individuals from Roussel Uclaf on an unknown date, but on information or belief took place in April or May 1994…. including communications mentioning the Population Council (“PC”).
- Any other records which, though not specifically requested, would have a reasonable relationship to the subject matter of this request, including any record or document.
In response to pressure from pro-abortion activists, the Clinton Food and Drug Administration accelerated approval of the abortion pill in September 2000. (Similarly, the Obama and Biden administrations took steps to make the controversial abortion pill more widely available in a way that undermined its “safe” use.)
“The FDA has repeatedly refused to acknowledge its role in approving the dangerous abortion drug, mifepristone and has refused to disclose communications regarding its approval,” said AAF General Counsel J. Marc Wheat. “Advancing American Freedom Foundation has worked tirelessly to disclose the truth behind the FDA’s negligence and to bring justice for the women hurt or killed by this drug. The American people deserve to know the facts of how the FDA shirked protocols in order to expand abortions, even at the cost of the health of the women using the drug. We are grateful to Judicial Watch for picking up AAF’s case.”
“From the get-go, the abortion pill has been promoted by a corrupted and politicized FDA, contrary to health of both pregnant mothers and their unborn children,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “That the Biden-Harris FDA is covering up key facts about the approval of the abortion pill while simultaneously promoting its wide usage is a scandal.”
Judicial Watch has been instrumental to bringing the controversies surrounding the abortion drug to the public’s attention.
In March of this year, Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in the U.S. Supreme Court in which it argued “the FDA violated its own unambiguous regulation and relied on pretext…. The FDA’s actions in 2016 and 2021 were arbitrary and capricious and violated the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”).” And, in 2021, using the Covid-19 pandemic as a tool, abortion proponents “sued the FDA to dispense with the REMS [risk evaluation and mitigation strategy] in-person medical visits as a prerequisite for obtaining Mifeprex and permit the drug to be mailed.”
Through a FOIA lawsuit Judicial Watch in 2023 uncovered at least six Mifeprex-related deaths between 2000 to 2002 that were detailed in Health and Human Services records.
Records produced to Judicial Watch in September 2023 included an “Annual Report for Mifepristone,” covering the period September 28, 2000, to September 27, 2001, produced by the Population Council/Danco Laboratories, LLC. The summary indicated that during the testing period 32 “adverse events were reported to Danco and reported by Danco to FDA in periodic reports.” (The existence of adverse event reports does not necessarily establish causation.)
Of the 32 reported adverse events, two were 15-day reports (the others were not serious and/or not unexpected). One of the 15-day reports was reported as “hemorrhage due to a ruptured ectopic pregnancy and death.” [Emphasis added] The other was reported as “post-abortal parametritis/endometritis, adult respiratory distress syndrome and bilateral pneumonia.” This latter 15-day report and one case where fever was reported represent the total reports on the marketed drug suggesting infection. In addition, one infection was reported in the Population Council’s 200 mifepristone study and one death [Emphasis added] due to clostridium sordelli infection was reported in the Canadian study.
The post Judicial Watch Sues FDA on Behalf of Advancing American Freedom Foundation for Records on Abortion Pill Mifepristone appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In the latest of countless scandals involving illegal immigration, the Biden administration has released over half a million undocumented aliens with criminal histories inside the United States, 435,719 with convictions and another 226,847 with pending charges. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), created after 9/11 to protect the country from another terrorist attack, has released the foreign criminals in cities around the U.S., according to the Deputy Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the DHS agency charged with “enforcing immigration laws to preserve national security and public safety.” In figures reluctantly provided to Congress ICE’s second in command, Patrick Lechleitner, reveals that as of July 21, 2024 662,566 noncitizens with criminal histories are on the agency’s “non-detained docket” and therefore roaming freely throughout the country. The data is “beyond disturbing,” said the Texas congressman, Republican Tony Gonzales, who forced DHS to provide the records.
Nearly 15,000 of the freed illegal aliens have been convicted of or charged with murder, more than 20,000 with sexual assault, 60,268 with burglary, larceny, or robbery, 105,146 with assault, 16,820 with weapon offenses, 3,971 with commercialized sex crimes and 3,372 with kidnapping. Over 126,000 have committed traffic offenses, more than 70,000 are in the system for drug crimes, 21,106 for fraudulent activities and 12,000 for obstruction of justice. “Under President Biden and his ‘border czar,’ Vice President Harris, DHS law enforcement has been directed to mass-release illegal aliens whom they know have criminal convictions or are facing charges for serious crimes—and these dangerous, destructive individuals are making their way into every city and state in this country,” said Tennessee Congressman Mark E. Green, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security that recently exposed the alarming DHS stats. “How many more Americans need to die or be victimized before this administration is forced to abide by the laws they swore to uphold? This is madness. It is something no civilized, well-functioning society should tolerate.”
Lechleitner explains to federal lawmakers that his agency uses a few guidelines to determine detentions and notes that “most noncitizens who are convicted of homicide are typically not eligible for release from ICE custody” under a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act. When that measure does not apply, ICE officers may use their discretion in making custody determinations and release noncitizens with conditions, the Deputy Director says, adding that custody determinations are made on a case-by-case basis and take into account individual circumstances, risk of flight, national security threat and threat to public safety. “ICE takes other factors into consideration as well, including when a noncitizen has a serious medical condition, is the primary caregiver of minor children, or other humanitarian considerations,” Lechleitner writes in the letter with the latest criminal alien statistics. He also blasts local sanctuary districts that refuse to honor ICE detainer requests, even for illegal aliens convicted of serious felonies who pose an ongoing threat to public safety.
While detrimental to immigration enforcement, local sanctuary measures alone cannot be blamed for the release of hundreds of thousands of criminal aliens into unsuspecting American communities. It is simply part of the Biden administration’s expansive open border policies, which have welcomed a record-breaking number—over 7 million and counting—of illegal immigrants into the country. Just a few weeks ago, the House Homeland Security Committee released an eye-popping report documenting the Biden-Harris administration’s unprecedented border crisis, which has allowed droves of violent gang members, Islamic terrorists, tens of thousands of Chinese nationals and a myriad of criminals into the country. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is on pace to record more than 11.6 million illegal immigrant encounters by the end of the Biden administration, an astounding 274% increase from the 3.1 million encounters recorded between fiscal years 2017 to 2020, according to figures in the congressional report. That does not even include around 2 million known “gotaways” that have entered the nation under this administration.
The post DHS Frees Over Half a Million Criminal Illegal Aliens Inside U.S., Murderers, Rapists, Burglars appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a Minnesota Supreme Court oral argument is scheduled for tomorrow, Tuesday, October 1, in its lawsuit over a racially discriminatory Minneapolis teachers’ contract (Clapp v. Cox, et al.(No. A23-0360).The contract provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities.
Judicial Watch obtained a victory in the Minnesota Court of Appeals, which allowed the lawsuit to proceed. Minneapolis Public Schools appealed to the Minnesota Supreme Court.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in August 2022 against Minneapolis Public Schools for violating the Equal Protection Guarantee of the Minnesota Constitution. The school district, supported by the teachers and other public employee unions, asserts that Minnesota taxpayers do not have the right to challenge the illegal spending of taxpayer money by government officials.
In its brief to the Supreme Court, Judicial Watch states:
Minneapolis Public Schools and its Amici spill a lot of ink complaining that a “complete stranger” has sued to prevent MPS from carrying out an unconstitutional provision of a contract between it and its teachers. [The Taxpayer], however, is not a stranger. She is a Minneapolis taxpayer, and this Court, since at least 1877, has recognized taxpayers as proper parties to bring such actions in Minnesota courts. This Court should not accept MPS’s and its Amici’s invitation to undermine this important check on government power.
[The Taxpayer] could not have brought a more straightforward case. She alleges that she lives in Minneapolis and pays property tax on the home she has owned since 2017…She also alleges that Minneapolis Public Schools is funded in part by her tax dollars…In addition, she alleges that MPS spends those tax dollars to carry out the various provisions of its contract with the teachers’ union….Finally, she alleges that one of those provisions violates the Minnesota Constitution….Therefore, she alleges that her tax dollars are being used in an unlawful manner.
The controversial contract was agreed to in March 2022 to end a 14-day teacher strike. The contract was recently renewed with the racial discrimination provisions intact. As the lawsuit states:
Among other things, the contract provides preferences, protections, and privileges for MPS teachers of certain races and ethnicities under a section entitled “ARTICLE 15. PROTECTIONS FOR EDUCATORS OF COLOR.” There is no similar provision covering educators who are not “of color.”
Under the contract, teachers of color are exempt from Defendant MPS’s seniority-based layoffs and reassignments, which means, when layoffs or reassignments occur, the next senior teacher who is not “of color” would be laid off or reassigned. In addition, the contract mandates that Defendants reinstate teachers of color over more senior teachers who are not “of color.”
The argument will be held:
Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2024
Time: 9:00 a.m. CT, 10:00 a.m. ET
Location: Minnesota State Capitol, Second Floor
Live stream of the argument will be available here, starting 30 minutes prior to argument.
“This is a woke, racially discriminatory contract. Not one tax dollar should be spent on it,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is being assisted in the lawsuit by Daniel N. Rosen.
The post Judicial Watch: Minnesota Supreme Court Will Hear Oral Argument in Lawsuit over Racially Discriminatory Minneapolis Teachers’ Contract appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Christian Post:
The conservative nonprofit group Judicial Watch announced Friday that it had filed the lawsuit earlier this month in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the HHS did not respond in a timely manner to a July Freedom of Information Act request.
According to the filing, the FOIA request sought records of all communications to and from HHS Assistant Secretary Levine discussing the removal of proposed limits for surgical gender interventions in the World Professional Association for Transgender Health’s 2022 Standards of Care.
“Biden-Harris appointee Admiral Levine, who abused power and is notorious for promoting transgender extremist policies, promoted mutilating surgeries for minors,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in the announcement.
“It is no wonder the Biden-Harris administration wants to cover this up with unlawful secrecy. Judicial Watch’s lawsuit to expose the truth is urgently needed to protect children.”
Read more here…
The post Biden admin. sued for records of Rachel Levine pushing to remove trans surgery age limits appeared first on Judicial Watch.
New Judicial Watch Book Rights and Freedoms in Peril, Goes on Sale October 15
Court Hears Appeal over Challenges to Counting of Ballots after Election Day
Federal Judge Sets July 20, 2026, Trial Date in Ashli Babbitt $30 Million Wrongful Death Lawsuit
Judicial Watch Petitions Supreme Court on Behalf of Teacher Fired for Conservative Social Media Posts
Soros-Tied Facebook Censorship Board May Push for Censoring Opponents of Transgender Extremism
New Judicial Watch Book Rights and Freedoms in Peril, Goes on Sale October 15
Since the release of my most recent Judicial Watch book, A Republic Under Assault, the Left has taken extraordinary steps to eradicate American liberty, motivated by a radical ideology whose adherents occupy the nation’s highest offices.
Now, in RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN PERIL: An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America (Threshold Editions; October 15, 2024), I detail a long chain of abuses officials and politicians have made against the American people and call readers to battle for the soul and survival of America.
My team and I march you to the front lines, to where the progressive movement threatens America’s most venerable institutions and undermines the core principles that make this country a beacon of hope to the world. The Left has declared war on everything from the rule of law to a colorblind U.S. Constitution, border security, and government accountability. Their anti-American agenda must be stopped to save our country’s future.
In this book, I discuss:
- Planned chaos at the border
- Lawfare targeting Trump
- Diversity scams and party spoils — Kamala Harris and “equity,” Critical Race Theory, DEI, DEI and the military, reparations and Judicial Watch’s class action lawsuit
- The Covid coverup
- An election unlike any other
- The big lie about January 6th, and Ashli Babbitt
Politicized indictments, ruined elections, invasions, and compromised politicians have placed our republican form of government in peril. There is a way forward, but we must be diligent about understanding the scope and detail of the peril.
Court Hears Appeal over Challenges to Counting of Ballots after Election Day
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held a hearing regarding a lower court ruling on Mississippi’s election law that permits absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day.
The Fifth Circuit heard the case on Tuesday, September 24. Here are some highlights from the argument from Judicial Watch senior attorney Russ Nobile and here is a link to listen to a full recording of the argument.
Extending the counting of ballots five days after Election Day established by Congress runs counter to federal law, invites fraud – and undermines voter confidence.
Judicial Watch filed the civil rights lawsuit challenging the Mississippi election law on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi (Libertarian Party of Mississippi v Wetzel et al. (No. 1:24-cv-00037)). The court consolidated the case we filed with one filed by the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and other complainants.
Our lawsuit argues:
Under federal law, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year is election day (“Election Day”) for federal elections.
Congress recently reaffirmed a single national Election Day when it enacted the Electoral Count Reform Act (“ECRA”).
Under the recent Congressional amendments, no extension of Election Day shall be allowed unless there are “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” that justify extension.
Despite Congress’ unambiguous and longstanding statement regarding a single and uniform national Election Day, Mississippi extended Election Day by allowing five additional business days after Election Day for receipt of absentee ballots.
No “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” currently exist in Mississippi to justify extending the ballot receipt deadline for the November 5, 2024, federal election for Presidential and Vice-Presential Electors.
We argued that holding voting open for five days past Election Day violates the constitutional rights of voters and candidates:
Counting untimely, illegal, and invalid votes, such as those received in violation of federal law, substantially increases the pool of total votes cast and dilutes the weight of votes cast by Plaintiff’s members and others in support of Plaintiff’s federal nominees.
Our complaint points out that, based on the reported numbers, as many as 1.7% of votes cast in Mississippi in 2020 were received after Election Day.
In our appeal filings, we explain that the Mississippi law extending Election Day is obviously at odds with federal law.
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of our work, we assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads our election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In a similar lawsuit, in 2022, on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered voters, we sued Illinois for allowing vote-by-mail ballots (even those without postmarks) to be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.
In May 2024, we sued California under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) to force it to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law (Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber et al. (No. 2:24-cv-3750)).
In March 2024, we, Breakthrough Ideas, Illinois Family Action, and Carol J. Davis sued Illinois officials under the NVRA to force them to clean the State’s voter rolls. (Judicial Watch Inc., et al., v. Illinois State Board of Elections, et al. (No. 1:24-cv-01867).
Federal Judge Sets July 20, 2026, Trial Date in Ashli Babbitt $30 Million Wrongful Death Lawsuit
Following a hearing on September 20, Judge Ana C. Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia scheduled a trial date of July 20, 2026, for the $30 million wrongful death suit filed on behalf of the estate and the family of Ashli Babbitt, who was shot and killed in the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd.
Discovery in the lawsuit has also commenced as the Court continues to consider Ashli’s motion to retransfer the lawsuit to California where it was originally filed earlier this year.
Ashli Babbitt, 35, owned and operated a successful pool business with her husband Aaron. Ashli traveled alone from San Diego to Washington, DC, to attend the Women for America First (aka Save America) rally on January 6, 2021, at the Ellipse.
The wrongful death lawsuit was filed on January 5, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the U.S. Government on behalf of the family of Ashli Babbitt (Estate of Ashli Babbitt and Aaron Babbitt, et al. v. United States of America (No. 3:24-cv-00033)).
The lawsuit includes claims against the U.S. Government for wrongful death, assault and battery, and various negligence issues.
Our complaint recounts:
The shooting occurred at the east entrance to the Speaker’s Lobby. After demonstrators filled the hallway outside the lobby, two individuals in the crowded, tightly packed hallway struck and dislodged the glass panels in the lobby doors and the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd, who is a United States Capitol Police commander and was the incident commander for the House on January 6, 2021, shot Ashli on sight as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashli before seeing her hands or assessing her intentions or even identifying her as female. Ashli was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty, and in plain view of Lt. Byrd and other officers in the lobby.
The facts speak truth. Ashli was ambushed when she was shot by Lt. Byrd. Multiple witnesses at the scene yelled, “you just murdered her.”
Lt. Byrd was never charged or otherwise punished or disciplined for Ashli’s homicide.
The lawsuit also alleges:
Lt. Byrd, who is a (US Capitol Police) commander and was the incident commander for the House on January 6, 2021, shot Ashli as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight.… Not one member of Congress was in the lobby, which was guarded by multiple armed police officers. Additional armed police officers were in the hallway outside the lobby and/or on the adjoining stairway. Ashli could not have seen Lt. Byrd, who was positioned far to Ashli’s left and on the opposite side of the doors, near an opening to the Retiring Room, a distance of approximately 15 feet and an angle of approximately 160 degrees. Sgt. Timothy Lively, one of the armed officers guarding the lobby doors from the hallway, later told officials investigating the shooting, “I saw him . . . there was no way that woman would’ve seen that.” Lt. Byrd, who was not in uniform, did not identify himself as a police officer or otherwise make his presence known to Ashli. Lt. Byrd did not give Ashli any warnings or commands before shooting her dead.
The DC district court also continues to consider Ashli’s motion to retransfer the lawsuit to Babbitt’s home of San Diego where it was originally filed.
Ashli Babbitt’s family is relieved that Ashli’s case is moving forward to trial on all fronts. They seek justice and accountability for Ashli’s violent and lawless death at the hands of U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Byrd.
In April 2024, records from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in a separate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit showed that the FBI opened a criminal investigation of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt after her killing and listed four “potential violations of federal law,” including felony rioting and civil disorder.
In September 2023, we received records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that detail the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.
A previous review of records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandum justifying the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt
In January 2023, documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, we released multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Michael Byrd.
Judicial Watch Petitions Supreme Court on Behalf of Teacher Fired for Conservative Social Media Posts
Judicial Watch filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court challenging the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in the case filed on behalf of Kari MacRae, a Massachusetts high school teacher who was fired in retaliation for social media posts which decried woke values such as critical race theory being taught in schools. The posts predated her employment at Hanover High School. Judicial Watch argues the Supreme Court should take up the case as the lower courts misapplied the First Amendment and Supreme Court precedent.
We filed a lawsuit for Ms. MacRae against Hanover High School Principal Matthew Mattos and Hanover School Superintendent Matthew Ferron in November 2021, asserting a claim for First Amendment retaliation (MacRae v. Matthew Mattos, EL AL. (No. 21-cv-11917, 23-1817)).
MacRae was hired as a Hanover High School teacher on August 31, 2021 but was fired on September 29, 2021, over several TikTok posts that were made months prior to her hiring at the school. MacRae, who in May of 2021 was elected to the Bourne School Committee, made the posts in her personal capacity as a citizen and candidate for public office.
“I got fired specifically for a social media post I made,” she said. “That’s a violation of free speech,” MacRae told the Cape Cod Times in an interview published on October 13, 2021.
The lawsuit details that Mattos met with MacRae on September 24, 2021 to inform her that he was investigating the impact of six memes and two TikTok videos that MacRae posted which were referenced in a September 22, 2021, Boston Globe article.
On May 18, 2021, as part of her campaign for school committee member, MacRae posted a TikTok video which stated, in part:
So pretty much the reason I ran for school board and the reason I’m taking on this responsibility is to ensure that students, at least in our town, are not being taught critical race theory. That they’re not being taught that the country was built on racism. So they’re not being taught that they can choose whether or not they want to be a girl or a boy. It’s one thing to include and it’s one thing to be inclusive. And it’s one thing to educate everybody about everything. It’s completely another thing to push your agenda. And, with me on the school board, that won’t happen in our town.
In a letter dated September 29, 2021, Mattos fired MacRae from her position at Hanover High School, stating “I have determined that continuing your employment in light of your social media posts would have a significant impact on student learning at HHS.” Ferron reviewed and approved Mattos’ decision to fire MacRae.
No Hanover High School parent or student had raised concerns about MacRae’s employment at Hanover High School because of the social media posts.
In June, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld the lower court’s decision which concluded that Hanover Public Schools provided evidence of the potential for disruption, which justified MacRae’s firing.
We argue that MacRae was fired for unrelated, pre-employment speech on matters of public concern:
Here, MacRae spoke as a private citizen on a matter of public concern before she applied to—let alone was hired by—Hanover Public Schools. Her speech was not at school because, obviously, it could not have been. Nor was it about the school district or its administrators, teachers, parents, or students. It was not even about the town. In fact, it is undisputed that MacRae’s speech falls squarely within the (Supreme) Court’s category of private speech on matters of public concern. Her speech added to the public debate on immigration policy, racism, and gender identity.
We note that our petition “raises a question of exceptional importance for tens of millions of current and future public-school teachers:
There are approximately four million public-school teachers in the United States. There are also tens of millions of persons who aspire to be public-school teachers in the future. This case concerns whether those individuals have the same free speech rights as every other private citizen.
In a July 9, 2024, editorial that calls for the Supreme Court to review the case, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board states:
Ms. MacRae says no federal appellate court to her knowledge has held that government employers can punish employees for speech unrelated to their jobs and which occurred before they were on the payroll.
The First Circuit’s decision delineates no statute of limitation or limiting principle to employee speech that government employers can punish. A teacher could be fired for hanging a “Make America Great Again” flag at home. Political activity during college years could become grounds for dismissal. Workers who don’t agree with the left’s cultural mores may now have to self-censor in private life to avoid losing their jobs.
Donald Trump likes to say that his opponents aren’t only coming after him—they’re also coming after you. Ms. MacRae’s cancellation is a case in point that could use Supreme Court review.
Let’s cut to the chase: Kari MacRae was fired because she spoke out against woke critical race theory before she was hired as a teacher at Hanover High School. The firing was a blatant violation of her First Amendment free speech rights. The Supreme Court should step in and uphold the First Amendment.
In February 2021, Judicial Watch filed a civil rights lawsuit on behalf of David Flynn, the father of two Dedham Public School students, who was removed from his position as head football coach after exercising his right as a citizen to raise concerns about his daughter’s seventh-grade history class curriculum being changed to include biased coursework on politics, race, gender equality, and diversity (Flynn v. Forrest et al. (No. 21-cv-10256)). The case was ultimately settledwith the Superintendent acknowledging in a letter “the important and valid issues” raised by Flynn and specific changes in school policies because of Flynn’s complaint,
In July 2021, we filed a federal civil rights lawsuit on behalf of Palatine, IL, tenured high school teacher Jeanne Hedgepeth, who was fired by the suburban-Chicago school district where she had worked for 20 years after posting comments on Facebook criticizing the riots, violence, and shootings in Chicago in the aftermath of the May 25, 2020, killing of George Floyd. Hedgepeth made the posts on her personal Facebook page while vacationing after the end of the school year, just as some of the most severe violence was occurring. In her posts, Hedgepeth recommended studying Thomas Sowell, whom she described as a “treasure” and a “truth seeker,” and praised political commentator and activist Candice Owens and talk show host Larry Elder. She alleges that the firing violated her First Amendment rights.
Soros-Tied Facebook Censorship Board May Push for Censoring Opponents of Transgender Extremism
Facebook may be on the verge of a mass censorship operation on major area of public debate – to help the Left! Our Corruption Chronicles blog looks into it.
The Facebook (now Meta) censorship board stacked with leftists, many with deep connections to leftwing billionaire George Soros, is considering if social media posts complaining about transgender females—biological men who claim to be in the wrong body and identify as women—constitute hate speech, bullying or harassment. This is relevant because the oversight board, as it is officially known, determines which posts get blocked from the world’s most popular social networking website which has an estimated 5 billion users. Other topics recently considered by the board include whether anti-immigration posts fall under hate speech since Meta has declared that refugees, migrants and asylum seekers are protected against “the most severe attacks” on its platforms.
Now the panel is preparing to examine a pair of 2024 posts reported for hate speech, bullying and harassment multiple times but allowed by Meta to remain on Facebook and its other popular social media platform Instagram. Users appealed to Meta against its decision not to remove the posts, but the California-based technology conglomerate determined that neither violated its “community standards.” At least two individuals reported the content to the oversight board, which announced recently that it is taking on the cases. In one a Facebook user in the United States posted a video of a woman confronting a transgender woman—a biological man—for using the women’s bathroom. “The post refers to the person being confronted as a man and asks why it is permitted for them to use a women’s bathroom,” the board writes in its announcement. The other complaint involves an Instagram account that posted a video of a transgender girl—a biological boy—winning a female sports competition in the U.S. In the post spectators vocally disapprove of the result and the athlete is identified as a boy, “questioning whether they are female,” according to the censorship panel.
Meta’s hate speech policy prohibits direct attacks targeting a person or group of people based on protected characteristics, including sex, gender identity and sexual orientation, but does not include misgendering as a form of prohibited attack. “Misgendering means referring to a person using a word, especially a pronoun or the way in which they are addressed, that does not reflect their gender identity,” the oversight board explains. Meta standards for bullying and harassment were not met in either case because there was no explicit call for exclusion and there was no “cognizable attack or call for exclusion” in either social media post. One of the users who appealed Meta’s decision to keep the posts on its platform played the “transphobic” card and the other asserted that the post attacks and harasses the transgender athlete. “The Board selected these cases to assess whether Meta’s approach to moderating discussions around gender identity respects users’ freedom of expression and the rights of transgender and non-binary people,” the panel writes, adding that both fall under its “hate speech against marginalized groups and gender strategic priorities.”
It seems like the panel is fabricating terms to align with the left’s political correctness on steroids. Not surprising considering who sits on the censorship board, which Judicial Watch exposed shortly after it was launched. For starters, the group of 21 is overwhelmingly leftist and likely to restrict conservative views. Nearly half of the members have ties to Soros, the wealthy philanthropist who dedicates huge sums to spreading a radical left agenda that includes targeting conservative politicians, erasing national borders and identities, financing civil unrest and orchestrating refugee crises for political gain. Some on the oversight board have made political contributions to top Democrats such as Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren and others have publicly expressed their disdain for former President Donald Trump.
Among the panel’s standouts is András Sajó, the founding Dean of Legal Studies at Soros’s Central European University and a board member of his Open Society Foundations (OSF) Justice Initiative. Alan Rusbridger, a former British newspaper editor and Oxford University official, serves on the board of directors of the Committee to Protect Journalists, which has received at least $750,000 from OSF. Afia Asantewaa Sariyev, a human rights attorney, is the program manager at Soros’s Open Society Initiative for West Africa. Sudhir Krishnaswamy, an Indian lawyer and civil society activist, runs a nonprofit called Centre for Law and Policy Research that focuses on transgender rights, gender equality and public health. The group is a grantee of a justice foundation that pocketed $1.4 million from OSF. The list of Meta judges connected to Soros and the organized left continues. Read more about it in a Judicial Watch report published last year.
Until next week,
The post Ashli Babbitt Lawsuit Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
After nearly three decades of ensuring that Mexican avocado imports are not infected with insects and diseases that could destroy American growers, U.S. agriculture inspectors are being pulled from Mexico and the critical vetting will be conducted by locals south of the border. The surprising move, announced recently by the Mexican government, was kept under the radar by the Biden administration and the thousands of commercial growers in this country who will be most heavily impacted learned about it in an English-language Mexican news site. The recent pact to transfer inspections to Mexican workers after so many years shows the confidence that the U.S. has in their product, the Mexican government writes in its announcement. “With this agreement the United States recognizes the commitment of Mexican producers, who for more than 27 years have not had sanitary problems in the exportation process,” Mexican officials say.
That is because inspectors from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) used a multi-step process to vet the shipments, assuring the avocados were safe to bring into the country. Mexico is the world’s largest avocado producer, and the United States is by far its biggest customer. In 2024 Mexico’s avocado production is forecasted at 2.77 million metric tons, according to the USDA, and 81% of it is going to the U.S. Last year $2.7 billion in Mexican avocados came into the country. Around 73% of the Latin American nation’s avocados are grown in Michoacan, a western state well known for drug cartel violence. In 2022 a USDA inspector was threatened after questioning the integrity of an avocado shipment and refusing to certify it. Earlier this year the U.S. suspended inspections of avocado and mango shipments after two USDA employees were assaulted and held by assailants in Michoacan. A week later the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, Ken Salazar, said inspections would resume to “eliminate the impediments to the trade of avocado and mango to the United States from Michoacan.”
A few months later the Biden administration quietly delegated the critical task to the Mexican government, which is famously corrupt and should not be trusted. Avocado production is essential to Mexico’s economy and it generates a lot of jobs, according to the government’s recent announcement. That gives the U.S. tremendous leverage to assure the safety of its inspectors if indeed that is why the USDA is making such a senseless change to a system that has had tremendous success for so many years. American growers are outraged and say they have everything to lose if Mexican inspectors do not perform the job correctly. In a letter to USDA Secretary Thomas J. Vilsack the California Avocado Commission, which represents nearly 2,000 commercial growers, writes that the change reverses the long-established inspection process designed to prevent invasions of known pests in Mexico that would devastate their industry. “This process was the foundation for the initial decision allowing the importation of avocados from Mexico into the United States,” the group writes, adding that pulling USDA inspectors appears to be a politically driven decision.
The pest prevention program adopted by the USDA decades ago has worked in large measure because APHIS inspectors have been directly involved in all significant aspects of the program’s operation beginning with orchard certification, the California Avocado Commission confirms. “It is well known that their physical presence greatly reduces the opportunity of others to game the system,” says the letter to Vilsack, who was also Obama’s USDA secretary. “What assurances can APHIS provide us that its unilateral reversal of the process will be equal to or better than what has protected us?” the growers ask Vilsack. The trade group adds that it is looking for specifics as to why the USDA has concluded that substituting American inspectors with Mexican government inspectors is in their best interest. “Discontent with your decision and disregard of our industry is growing by the hour,” the commission writes in its letter to the nation’s agriculture secretary.
The post After 27 Years U.S. Lets Mexico Inspect its American-Bound Avocados, Risking Pest Invasion appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a petition for a writ of certiorarito the United States Supreme Court challenging the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in the case filed on behalf of Kari MacRae, a Massachusetts high school teacher who was fired in retaliation for social media posts which decried woke values such as critical race theory being taught in schools. The posts predated her employment at Hanover High School. Judicial Watch argues the Supreme Court should take up the case as the lower courts misapplied the First Amendment and Supreme Court precedent.
Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit for Ms. MacRae against Hanover High School Principal Matthew Mattos and Hanover School Superintendent Matthew Ferron in November 2021, asserting a claim for First Amendment retaliation (MacRae v. Matthew Mattos, ET AL.(No. 21-cv-11917, 23-1817)).
MacRae was hired as a Hanover High School teacher on August 31, 2021 but was fired on September 29, 2021, over several TikTok posts that were made months prior to her hiring at the school. MacRae, who in May of 2021 was elected to the Bourne School Committee, made the posts in her personal capacity as a citizen and candidate for public office.
“I got fired specifically for a social media post I made,” she said. “That’s a violation of free speech,” MacRae told the Cape Cod Times in an interview published on October 13, 2021.
The lawsuit details that Mattos met with MacRae on September 24, 2021 to inform her that he was investigating the impact of six memes and two TikTok videos that MacRae posted which were referenced in a September 22, 2021, Boston Globe article.
On May 18, 2021, as part of her campaign for school committee member, MacRae posted a TikTok video which stated, in part:
So pretty much the reason I ran for school board and the reason I’m taking on this responsibility is to ensure that students, at least in our town, are not being taught critical race theory. That they’re not being taught that the country was built on racism. So they’re not being taught that they can choose whether or not they want to be a girl or a boy. It’s one thing to include and it’s one thing to be inclusive. And it’s one thing to educate everybody about everything. It’s completely another thing to push your agenda. And, with me on the school board, that won’t happen in our town.
In a letter dated September 29, 2021, Mattos fired MacRae from her position at Hanover High School, stating “I have determined that continuing your employment in light of your social media posts would have a significant impact on student learning at HHS.” Ferron reviewed and approved Mattos’ decision to fire MacRae.
No Hanover High School parent or student had raised concerns about MacRae’s employment at Hanover High School because of the social media posts.
In June, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld the lower court’s decision which concluded that Hanover Public Schools provided evidence of the potential for disruption, which justified MacRae’s firing.
Judicial Watch argues that MacRae was fired for unrelated, preemployment speech on matters of public concern:
Here, MacRae spoke as a private citizen on a matter of public concern before she applied to—let alone was hired by—Hanover Public Schools. Her speech was not at school because, obviously, it could not have been. Nor was it about the school district or its administrators, teachers, parents, or students. It was not even about the town. In fact, it is undisputed that MacRae’s speech falls squarely within the (Supreme) Court’s category of private speech on matters of public concern. Her speech added to the public debate on immigration policy, racism, and gender identity.
Judicial Watch notes its petition “raises a question of exceptional importance for tens of millions of current and future public-school teachers:
There are approximately four million public-school teachers in the United States. There are also tens of millions of persons who aspire to be public-school teachers in the future. This case concerns whether those individuals have the same free speech rights as every other private citizen.
In a July 9, 2024, editorial that calls for the Supreme Court to review the case, the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board states:
Ms. MacRae says no federal appellate court to her knowledge has held that government employers can punish employees for speech unrelated to their jobs and which occurred before they were on the payroll.
The First Circuit’s decision delineates no statute of limitation or limiting principle to employee speech that government employers can punish. A teacher could be fired for hanging a “Make America Great Again” flag at home. Political activity during college years could become grounds for dismissal. Workers who don’t agree with the left’s cultural mores may now have to self-censor in private life to avoid losing their jobs.
Donald Trump likes to say that his opponents aren’t only coming after him—they’re also coming after you. Ms. MacRae’s cancellation is a case in point that could use Supreme Court review.
“Let’s cut to the chase: Kari MacRae was fired because she spoke out against woke critical race theory before she was hired as a teacher at Hanover High School. The firing was a blatant violation of her First Amendment free speech rights. The Supreme Court should step in and uphold the First Amendment,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
In February 2021, Judicial Watch filed a civil rights lawsuit on behalf of David Flynn, the father of two Dedham Public School students, who was removed from his position as head football coach after exercising his right as a citizen to raise concerns about his daughter’s seventh-grade history class curriculum being changed to include biased coursework on politics, race, gender equality, and diversity (Flynn v. Forrest et al.(No. 21-cv-10256)). The case ultimately settled with the Superintendent acknowledging in a letter “the important and valid issues” raised by Flynn and specific changes in school policies because of Flynn’s complaint,
In July 2021, Judicial Watch filed a federal civil rights lawsuit on behalf of Palatine, IL, tenured high school teacher Jeanne Hedgepeth, who was fired by the suburban-Chicago school district where she had worked for 20 years after posting comments on Facebook criticizing the riots, violence, and shootings in Chicago in the aftermath of the May 25, 2020, killing of George Floyd. Hedgepeth made the posts on her personal Facebook page while vacationing after the end of the school year, just as some of the most severe violence was occurring. In her posts, Hedgepeth recommended studying Thomas Sowell, whom she described as a “treasure” and a “truth seeker,” and praised political commentator and activist Candice Owens and talk show host Larry Elder. She alleges that the firing violated her First Amendment rights.
The post Judicial Watch Petitions Supreme Court on Behalf of Massachusetts Teacher Fired for Conservative Social Media Posts appeared first on Judicial Watch.
“When it comes to fighting for the American people’s ‘right to know,’ no one holds a candle to Tom Fitton and his team at Judicial Watch”
—Sean Hannity
RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN PERILAn Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America
By New York Times Bestselling Author
Tom FittonOn Sale October 15, 2024
Since the release of bestselling author Tom Fitton’s third book, A Republic Under Assault, the Left has taken extraordinary steps to eradicate American liberty, motivated by a radical ideology whose adherents occupy the nation’s highest offices. Now in RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN PERIL: An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America (Threshold Editions; October 15, 2024), Fitton details a long chain of abuses officials and politicians have made against the American people and calls readers to battle for the soul and survival of America.
Fitton and his team at Judicial Watch march readers to the front lines where the progressive movement threatens America’s most venerable institutions, undermining the core principles that make this country a beacon of hope to the world. The Left has declared war on everything from the rule of law to a colorblind US Constitution, border security, and government accountability. Their anti-American agenda must be stopped to save our country’s future.
In an interview about RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN PERIL, Tom Fitton can discuss:
- Planned chaos at the border
- Lawfare targeting Trump
- Diversity scams and party spoils — Kamala Harris and “Equity,” Critical Race Theory, DEI, DEI and the Military, Reparations and Judicial Watch’s class action lawsuit
- The Covid Coverup
- An election unlike any other
- The Big Lie about January 6th, and Ashli Babbitt
- And much more
“Politicized indictments, ruined elections, invasions, and compromised politicians have placed our republican form of government in peril,” says Fitton. “There is a way forward, but we must be diligent about understanding the scope and detail of the peril.” Shedding light on the truths and secrets of the left, RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN PERIL provides that way forward.
About the Author
Tom Fitton serves as president of Judicial Watch and brings thirty years’ experience in conservative public policy to America’s largest and most effective government watchdog organization. The New York Times bestselling author of several books, including A Republic Under Assault and The Corruption Chronicles, Fitton is one of the world’s leading conservative voices on government corruption, with Judicial Watch having filed hundreds of lawsuits to expose liberal government misconduct and abuse. Fitton holds a BA from George Washington University. Visit JudicialWatch.org.
RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN PERIL:
An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America
By Tom Fitton | Threshold Editions | 240 pages | Pub Date: October 15, 2024
ISBN13: 9781668062142 | Hardcover | $30.00
ISBN: 9781668062166 | E-book | $14.99
ISBN: 9781797190662| Audio | $19.99
THRESHOLD EDITIONS is an imprint dedicated to publishing works that impact the great political, policy, and philosophical debates of our time by providing a forum for the thinkers and doers across the ever-expanding contemporary conservative spectrum.
SIMON & SCHUSTER, a global leader in general interest publishing, is dedicated to providing the best in fiction and nonfiction for readers of all ages, and in all printed, digital and audio formats. Its distinguished roster of authors includes many of the world’s most popular and widely recognized writers, and winners of the most prestigious literary honors and awards. It is home to numerous well-known imprints and divisions such as Simon & Schuster, Scribner, Atria Books, Gallery Books, Adams Media, Avid Reader Press, Simon & Schuster Children’s Publishing and Simon & Schuster Audio and international companies in Australia, Canada, India, and the United Kingdom, and proudly brings the works of its authors to readers in more than 200 countries and territories. For more information visit our website at www.simonandschuster.com
The post ‘Rights and Freedoms in Peril, an Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America’ by Tom Fitton on Sale Oct 15 appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Facebook (now Meta) censorship board stacked with leftists, many with deep connections to leftwing billionaire George Soros, is considering if social media posts complaining about transgender females—biological men who claim to be in the wrong body and identify as women—constitute hate speech, bullying or harassment. This is relevant because the oversight board, as it is officially known, determines which posts get blocked from the world’s most popular social networking website which has an estimated 5 billion users. Other topics recently considered by the board include whether anti-immigration posts fall under hate speech since Meta has declared that refugees, migrants and asylum seekers are protected against “the most severe attacks” on its platforms.
Now the panel is preparing to examine a pair of 2024 posts reported for hate speech, bullying and harassment multiple times but allowed by Meta to remain on Facebook and its other popular social media platform Instagram. Users appealed to Meta against its decision not to remove the posts, but the California-based technology conglomerate determined that neither violated its “community standards.” At least two individuals reported the content to the oversight board, which announced recently that it is taking on the cases. In one a Facebook user in the United States posted a video of a woman confronting a transgender woman—a biological man—for using the women’s bathroom. “The post refers to the person being confronted as a man and asks why it is permitted for them to use a women’s bathroom,” the board writes in its announcement. The other complaint involves an Instagram account that posted a video of a transgender girl—a biological boy—winning a female sports competition in the U.S. In the post spectators vocally disapprove of the result and the athlete is identified as a boy, “questioning whether they are female,” according to the censorship panel.
Meta’s hate speech policy prohibits direct attacks targeting a person or group of people based on protected characteristics, including sex, gender identity and sexual orientation, but does not include misgendering as a form of prohibited attack. “Misgendering means referring to a person using a word, especially a pronoun or the way in which they are addressed, that does not reflect their gender identity,” the oversight board explains. Meta standards for bullying and harassment were not met in either case because there was no explicit call for exclusion and there was no “cognizable attack or call for exclusion” in either social media post. One of the users who appealed Meta’s decision to keep the posts on its platform played the “transphobic” card and the other asserted that the post attacks and harasses the transgender athlete. “The Board selected these cases to assess whether Meta’s approach to moderating discussions around gender identity respects users’ freedom of expression and the rights of transgender and non-binary people,” the panel writes, adding that both fall under its “hate speech against marginalized groups and gender strategic priorities.”
It seems like the panel is fabricating terms to align with the left’s political correctness on steroids. Not surprising considering who sits on the censorship board, which Judicial Watch exposed shortly after it was launched. For starters, the group of 21 is overwhelmingly leftist and likely to restrict conservative views. Nearly half of the members have ties to Soros, the wealthy philanthropist who dedicates huge sums to spreading a radical left agenda that includes targeting conservative politicians, erasing national borders and identities, financing civil unrest and orchestrating refugee crises for political gain. Some on the oversight board have made political contributions to top Democrats such as Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren and others have publicly expressed their disdain for former President Donald Trump.
Among the panel’s standouts is András Sajó, the founding Dean of Legal Studies at Soros’s Central European University and a board member of his Open Society Foundations (OSF) Justice Initiative. Alan Rusbridger, a former British newspaper editor and Oxford University official, serves on the board of directors of the Committee to Protect Journalists, which has received at least $750,000 from OSF. Afia Asantewaa Sariyev, a human rights attorney, is the program manager at Soros’s Open Society Initiative for West Africa. Sudhir Krishnaswamy, an Indian lawyer and civil society activist, runs a nonprofit called Centre for Law and Policy Research that focuses on transgender rights, gender equality and public health. The group is a grantee of a justice foundation that pocketed $1.4 million from OSF. The list of Meta judges connected to Soros and the organized left continues. Read more about it a Judicial Watch report published last year.
The post Gripes of Trans Using Women’s Bathroom, Winning Girls’ Sports Title Considered for Hate Speech by Soros-Tied Facebook Censorship Board appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has ordered a hearing regarding a lower court ruling on Mississippi’s election law that permits absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day. The Fifth Circuit will hear the case on Tuesday, September 24, at 1:00 p.m. CT, 2:00 p.m. ET. Links to listen live – or to a recording of the argument after the hearing – can be found here.
Judicial Watch filed the civil rights lawsuit challenging the Mississippi election law on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi (Libertarian Party of Mississippi v Wetzel et al. (No. 1:24-cv-00037)). The court consolidated the case filed by Judicial Watch with one filed by the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and other complainants.
Judicial Watch’s lawsuit argues:
Under federal law, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year is election day (“Election Day”) for federal elections.
Congress recently reaffirmed a single national Election Day when it enacted the Electoral Count Reform Act (“ECRA”).
Under the recent Congressional amendments, no extension of Election Day shall be allowed unless there are “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” that justify extension.
Despite Congress’ unambiguous and longstanding statement regarding a single and uniform national Election Day, Mississippi extended Election Day by allowing five additional business days after Election Day for receipt of absentee ballots.
No “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” currently exist in Mississippi to justify extending the ballot receipt deadline for the November 5, 2024, federal election for Presidential and Vice-Presential Electors.
Judicial Watch argued that holding voting open for five days past Election Day violates the constitutional rights of voters and candidates:
Counting untimely, illegal, and invalid votes, such as those received in violation of federal law, substantially increases the pool of total votes cast and dilutes the weight of votes cast by Plaintiff’s members and others in support of Plaintiff’s federal nominees.
The complaint points out that, based on the reported numbers, as many as 1.7% of votes cast in Mississippi in 2020 were received after Election Day.
In its appeal filings, Judicial Watch explains that the Mississippi law extending Election Day is obviously at odds with federal law.
“Extending the counting of ballots five days after the Election Day established by Congress runs counter to federal law and invites fraud – and undermines voter confidence,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “We’re pleased that the court will quickly hear our appeal for lawful election procedures.”
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In a similar lawsuit, in 2022, Judicial Watch, on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered voters, suedIllinois for allowing vote-by-mail ballots (even those without postmarks) to be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.
In May 2024, Judicial Watch sued California under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) to force it to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law (Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber et al. (No. 2:24-cv-3750)).
In March 2024, Judicial Watch, Breakthrough Ideas, Illinois Family Action, and Carol J. Davis sued Illinois officials under the NVRA to force them to clean the State’s voter rolls. (Judicial Watch Inc., et al., v. Illinois State Board of Elections, et al. (No. 1:24-cv-01867).
In December 2023, a notice letter was sent to election officials in the District of Columbia notifying them of evident violations of the NVRA, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The letter pointed out that D.C. publicly reported removing few or no ineligible voter registrations under a key provision of the NVRA. The letter threatened a federal lawsuit unless the violations were corrected in a timely fashion. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, DC, officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.”
In July 2023 Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decisionof the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
Judicial Watch in July 2023 also settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with Judicial Watch and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from Judicial Watch. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle a Judicial Watch NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
Judicial Watch settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
The post Judicial Watch: Federal Court Speeds Appeal over Challenges to State’s Counting of Ballots that Arrive after Election Day appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
A federal judge scheduled a trial date for a wrongful death lawsuit brought by the family of Jan. 6 protester Ashli Babbitt, who died after being shot by U.S. Capitol Police officer Michael Byrd.
The watchdog group Judicial Watch, which is helping in the lawsuit filed by Babbitt’s husband, Aaron, revealed that Judge Ana C. Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia scheduled a trial date of July 20, 2026, for the $30 million wrongful death suit.
“Ashli Babbitt’s family is relieved Ashli’s case is moving forward to trial on all fronts,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “They seek justice and accountability for Ashli’s violent and lawless death at the hands of U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Byrd.”
Read more here…
The post Ashli Babbitt $30 million ‘wrongful death’ suit gets green light appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that, following a hearing on September 20, Judge Ana C. Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia scheduled a trial date of July 20, 2026, for the $30 million wrongful death suit filed on behalf of the estate and the family of Ashli Babbitt, who was shot and killed in the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd. Discovery in the lawsuit has also commenced as the Court continues to consider Ashli’s motion to retransfer the lawsuit to California where it was originally filed earlier this year.
Ashli Babbitt, 35, owned and operated a successful pool business with her husband Aaron. Ashli traveled alone from San Diego to Washington, DC, to attend the Women for America First (aka Save America) rally on January 6, 2021, at the Ellipse.
The wrongful death lawsuit was filed on January 5, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the U.S. Government on behalf of the family of Ashli Babbitt (Estate of Ashli Babbitt and Aaron Babbitt, et al. v. United States of America (No. 3:24-cv-00033)).
The lawsuit includes claims against the U.S. Government for wrongful death, assault and battery, and various negligence issues.
The Judicial Watch complaint recounts:
The shooting occurred at the east entrance to the Speaker’s Lobby. After demonstrators filled the hallway outside the lobby, two individuals in the crowded, tightly packed hallway struck and dislodged the glass panels in the lobby doors and the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd, who is a United States Capitol Police commander and was the incident commander for the House on January 6, 2021, shot Ashli on sight as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashli before seeing her hands or assessing her intentions or even identifying her as female. Ashli was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty, and in plain view of Lt. Byrd and other officers in the lobby.
The facts speak truth. Ashli was ambushed when she was shot by Lt. Byrd. Multiple witnesses at the scene yelled, “you just murdered her.”
Lt. Byrd was never charged or otherwise punished or disciplined for Ashli’s homicide.
The lawsuit also alleges:
Lt. Byrd, who is a (US Capitol Police) commander and was the incident commander for the House on January 6, 2021, shot Ashli as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight.… Not one member of Congress was in the lobby, which was guarded by multiple armed police officers. Additional armed police officers were in the hallway outside the lobby and/or on the adjoining stairway. Ashli could not have seen Lt. Byrd, who was positioned far to Ashli’s left and on the opposite side of the doors, near an opening to the Retiring Room, a distance of approximately 15 feet and an angle of approximately 160 degrees. Sgt. Timothy Lively, one of the armed officers guarding the lobby doors from the hallway, later told officials investigating the shooting, “I saw him . . . there was no way that woman would’ve seen that.” Lt. Byrd, who was not in uniform, did not identify himself as a police officer or otherwise make his presence known to Ashli. Lt. Byrd did not give Ashli any warnings or commands before shooting her dead.
The DC district court also continues to consider Ashli’s motion to retransfer the lawsuit to Babbitt’s home of San Diego where it was originally filed.
“Ashli Babbitt’s family is relieved Ashli’s case is moving forward to trial on all fronts. They seek justice and accountability for Ashli’s violent and lawless death at the hands of U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Byrd,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
In April 2024, records from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in a separate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit showed that the FBI opened a criminal investigation of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt after her killing and listed four “potential violations of federal law,” including felony rioting and civil disorder.
In September 2023, Judicial Watch received records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that detail the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.
A previous review of records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandum justifying the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
In January 2023, documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, Judicial Watch released multiple audio, visualand photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Michael Byrd.
The post Judicial Watch: Federal Judge Sets July 20, 2026, Trial Date in Ashli Babbitt $30 Million Wrongful Death Lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Pursues Civil Rights Lawsuit against Reparations Policy
Judicial Watch Sues over Trip to Cuba Led by Reps. Omar and Jayapal
Judicial Watch Sues for Records about Transgender Surgeries for Minors
ICE Issues Half the Detainers for Criminal Aliens Under Biden than Trump
Judicial Watch Pursues Civil Rights Lawsuit against Reparations Policy
We’re not backing away from our effort to stop an unconstitutional city program.
We asked a court to reject a motion by the City of Evanston, IL, to dismiss our class action lawsuit on behalf of six individuals over the city’s use of race as an eligibility requirement for a reparations program.
This program makes $25,000 direct cash payments to black residents and descendants of black residents who lived in Evanston between the years 1919 and 1969.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division (Flinn et al. v Evanston (No. 1:24-cv-04269)).
We allege in the complaint that the program violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. In response to the city’s motion to dismiss, Judicial Watch argues that the case should continue to go forward because:
Plaintiffs have alleged all facts necessary to state a timely claim that, but for their race, they are eligible to participate in the program and receive $25,000 direct cash payments. The program’s eligibility requirements are simple, straightforward, and easy to satisfy, and Plaintiffs have alleged that they were and are “ready and able” to satisfy them at all relevant times. They need not allege anything more to invoke this Court’s jurisdiction.
[T]he program’s use of a race-based eligibility requirement is presumptively unconstitutional, and remedying societal discrimination is not a compelling government interest. Nor has remedying discrimination from as many as 105 years ago or remedying intergenerational discrimination ever been recognized as a compelling government interest. Among the program’s other fatal flaws is that it uses race as a proxy for discrimination without requiring proof of discrimination.
Evanston’s reparations scheme rejects a colorblind Constitution and unconstitutionally discriminates against anyone who does not identify as Black or African American. The court should allow our civil rights lawsuit to move forward.
Our lawsuits challenging unconstitutional discrimination are extensive.
On January 29, 2024, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of San Francisco taxpayers over a city program that discriminates in favor of biological black and Latino men who identify as women in the distribution of tax money. The lawsuit was filed after we earlier forced the release of records from the City of San Francisco showing the city prioritized tax money for black and Latino transgenders (biological men) in the Guaranteed Income for Trans People program.
In December 2023, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s ruling and allowed our historic lawsuit filed on behalf of a Minneapolis taxpayer over a teachers’ contract that provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities to proceed.
The City of Asheville, NC, in January 2022 settled our federal civil rights lawsuit after agreeing to remove all racially discriminatory provisions in a city-funded scholarship program. Additionally, the city also agreed to remove racially discriminatory eligibility provisions in a related program that provides grants to educators.
In May 2022, we won a court battle against California’s gender quota law for corporate boards. The verdict came after a 28-day trial. The verdict followed a similar ruling in Judicial Watch’s favor in April finding California’s race, ethnicity and LGBT quotas or corporate boards unconstitutional.
The rule of law and the equal protection provisions of our state and federal constitutions are under dramatic attack. You can be sure your Judicial Watch will stand fast in the courts against these racialist, leftist assaults on the American way.
Judicial Watch Sues over Trip to Cuba Led by Reps. Omar and Jayapal
Why won’t the Biden-Harris administration release records of a trip to Cuba by leftist members of Congress?
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the State Department for all records related to the secretive trip in February 2024 of a Congressional Progressive Caucus delegation to communist Cuba led by Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:24-cv-01950).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the State Department failed to adequately respond to a February 28, 2024, FOIA request for:
All records related to the Congressional Delegation to Cuba in February 2024. For purposes of clarification, the delegation included Rep. Ilhan Omar, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, and others (please see https://news.yahoo.com/were-members-u-congressional-progressive-200304832.html). This request includes, but is not limited to, all related agendas, briefing materials, and records of communication.
The trip had not been reported in Cuban state media until the Miami Herald reported on February 27, 2024, that Omar and Jayapal led a delegation of about a dozen people who visited the communist island which has been under U.S. embargo for more than 60 years. The delegation to Cuba included a congressional staffer from the office of Rep. Barbara Lee’s (D-CA) office.
Jayapal, who chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and Omar have criticized the embargo and have advocated for the removal of the Communist-controlled Cuba from the U.S. list of nations which sponsor terrorism.
The New York Post reported in February: “The mysterious trip, which took place during a week when the House was in recess, also overlapped with a visit to Havana by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.”
Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, the son of Cuban immigrants, wrote on X: “Pro-Hamas members of Marxist congressional squad just returned from a secret visit with anti-American dictatorship in Cuba.”
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) wrote on X: “It’s outrageous that Members of Congress would visit a country that jails, abuses, and murders their citizens and supports Iran, Russia and Communist China against our interests. Perhaps their time would be better spent listening to the Cubans crossing our southern border & risking their lives on makeshift rafts to find out why they’re fleeing Communism.”
Extreme Leftist members of Congress traveled to Cuba to provide aid and comfort for the terrorist-supporting, murderous Communist regime. What is the Biden-Harris administration hiding about this scandalous, taxpayer-funded trip?
Judicial Watch Sues for Records about Transgender Surgeries for Minors
The Biden-Harris administration is letting its extreme leftist ideology affect the health of our children.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for all records of communications of Assistant Secretary Rachel Levine regarding pressure put on an international group of medical experts to remove age limit guidelines on transgender procedures (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:24-cv-02588)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after Health and Human Services failed to respond to a July 3, 2024, FOIA request for:
All records of communications sent to and from HHS assistant secretary Rachel Levine regarding the removal of minimum ages for the treatment of children in the World Professional Association for Transgender Health’s (WPATH) 2022 standards of care. This includes but is not limited to communications with wpath, Walter Bouman, the World Health Organization (“WHO”), Dr. Jason Rafferty, Chase Strangio, Sarah Boateng, Amy Tishelman, and Dr. Eli Coleman. A reasonable search should include, but not be limited to, the search terms “2022 standards of care,” “SOC-8,” “minimum age,” “transgender care,” and “WPATH.”
According to a June 24, 2024, Alabama court filing in Boe v. Marshall, Levine feared that World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) draft guidelines would make it difficult for American transgender youth to obtain access to the procedures, including gender-changing surgery: “These were age 14 for cross-sex hormone treatment; age 15 for chest masculinization surgery; age 16 for breast augmentation and facial surgery; and age 17 for metoidioplasty, orchidectomy (castration), hysterectomy, and fronto-orbital remodeling.”
Psychologist Dr. James Cantor provided expert testimony on World Professional Association for Transgender Health documents as part of litigation challenging an Alabama law. Cantor testified that “Assistant Secretary Levine … influence[d] the substantive content of SOC-8 [Standards of Care], based on political goals rather than science. Specifically, Assistant Secretary Levine, through a staff member, pressured WPATH to remove recommended minimum ages for medical transition treatments from SOC-8.”
In a communication provided to the court an association member had written:
Sarah Boateng, who is Adm. Levine’s chief of staff [said the] biggest concern is the section below in the Adolescent Chapter that lists specific minimum ages for treatment, she is confident, based on the rhetoric she is hearing in DC, and from what we have already seen, that these specific listings of ages, under 18, will result in devastating legislation for trans care. She wonders if the specific ages can be taken out and perhaps an adjunct document could be created that is published or distributed in a way that is less visible than the SOC8, is the way to go….
We sent the document to Admiral Levine … She likes the SOC-8 [Standards of Care] very much but she was very concerned that having ages (mainly for surgery) will affect access to health care for trans youth and maybe adults too. Apparently the situation in the USA is terrible and she and the Biden administration worried that having ages in the document will make matters worse.
Cantor further testified:
As a result of this additional pressure, on top of that from Assistant Secretary Levine, WPATH capitulated and removed the text in violation of its own process despite the preference of its own committee members to retain the age limits.
According to a June 25, 2024, New York Times report, the eighth edition of its standards of care, released in September 2022, had no age minimums for transgender procedures.
Read the full “Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Version 8” here. Sections six and seven focus on adolescents and children.
Biden-Harris appointee Admiral Levine, who abused power and is notorious for promoting transgender extremist policies, promoted mutilating surgeries for minors. It is no wonder the Biden-Harris administration wants to cover this up with unlawful secrecy. Our lawsuit to expose the truth is urgently needed to protect children.
ICE Issues Half the Detainers for Criminal Aliens Under Biden than Trump
Criminals from other countries are on the loose through the United States, thanks to the carte blanche the Biden/Harris administration has given them. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the frightening details.
Besides failing miserably to control illegal immigration at the southwest border, the Biden administration has also been shamefully derelict when it comes to interior enforcement, allowing hundreds of thousands of criminal aliens to remain in the country by issuing half the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainers than the Trump administration. In one city the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) premier law enforcement agency has issued an astounding 13,398% fewer detainers under Biden, and another has seen a 1,179% drop compared to the previous administration. Seven American cities with substantial migrant populations have seen triple digit percentage drops in ICE detainers under the current president.
The hair-raising figures are included in a new report issued by the nonpartisan Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University. Stats obtained from the government are broken down by jurisdiction and interactive maps identify regions of the country where ICE issued detainers for migrants embroiled in the criminal system. Information about counties, states, local law enforcement agencies and the criminal aliens for which detainers were issued is also provided. From fiscal year 2021 through the first quarter of fiscal year 2024, the Biden administration has issued 295,456 detainers to 4,305 law enforcement agencies nationwide. The Trump administration issued around twice as many detainers with the most delivered in Los Angeles, California (20,318), followed by Houston, Texas (19,289) and Phoenix, Arizona (17,294). A dozen cities received 5,000 or more detainers when Trump was commander-in-chief and 25 got 3,000 or more, according to the report.
ICE detainers are a key tool to successfully conduct interior enforcement by apprehending and deporting criminals not authorized to remain in the U.S. In fact the agency says they are “critical” to identify and ultimately remove criminal aliens who are currently in federal, state or local custody. Officially it is a notice that DHS issues to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies informing them that ICE intends to assume custody of an individual in their custody. An immigration detainer serves three key functions, according to ICE: “1) to notify an LEA [law enforcement agency] that ICE intends to assume custody of an alien in the LEA’s custody once the alien is no longer subject to the LEA’s detention; 2) to request information from an LEA about an alien’s impending release so ICE may assume custody before the alien is released from the LEA’s custody; and 3) to request that the LEA maintain custody of an alien who would otherwise be released for a period not to exceed 48 hours (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays) to provide ICE time to assume custody.” Not all police departments cooperate because many local governments have passed sanctuary measures that offer illegal immigrants, even those convicted of state crimes, sanctuary.
As a result, criminal aliens released inside the country are committing crimes against Americans at an alarming rate, according to a report published just weeks ago by the House Judiciary Committee. The probe found that, of the millions of illegal immigrants who have entered the United States under the Biden administration’s disastrous open border policies, over 617,000 have criminal records and they are victimizing Americans and terrorizing communities throughout the nation. “The Biden-Harris Administration’s radical policies ensure that criminal illegal aliens can remain in the United States indefinitely, even after they have committed a crime,” congressional investigators found. As an example, the congressional committee offers the case of four illegal immigrants from Venezuela who viciously attacked a man on a Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) train earlier this year. DHS released one of the men inside the U.S. in 2022 and the other three in 2023 after crossing the Mexican border. Three of the men were on pretrial release after shoplifting arrests when they committed their most recent crime in the Windy City.
“For more than three-and-a-half years, President Joe Biden and ‘border czar’ Vice President Kamala Harris have orchestrated the largest mass release of illegal aliens into the country in American history,” federal lawmakers write in the report, adding that well over seven million illegal aliens have entered the U.S. under this administration. “The results are all too predictable: cities overwhelmed, public services crushed, and communities shattered by the criminality of some illegal aliens.”
Until next week,
The post Reparations Lawsuit Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. State Department for all records related to the secretive trip in February 2024 of a Congressional Progressive Caucus delegation to communist Cuba led by Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State(No. 1:24-cv-01950).
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the State Department failed to adequately respond to a February 28, 2024, FOIA request for:
All records related to the Congressional Delegation to Cuba in February 2024. For purposes of clarification, the delegation included Rep. Ilhan Omar, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, and others (please see https://news.yahoo.com/were-members-u-congressional-progressive-200304832.html). This request includes, but is not limited to, all related agendas, briefing materials, and records of communication.
The trip had not been reported in Cuban state media until the Miami Herald reported on February 27, 2024, that Omar and Jayapal led a delegation of about a dozen people who visited the communist island which has been under U.S. embargo for more than 60 years. The delegation to Cuba included a congressional staffer from the office of Rep. Barbara Lee’s (D-CA) office.
Jayapal, who chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus, and Omar have criticized the embargo and have advocated for the removal of the Communist-controlled Cuba from the U.S. list of nations which sponsor terrorism.
The New York Post reported in February: “The mysterious trip, which took place during a week when the House was in recess, also overlapped with a visit to Havana by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.”
Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, the son of Cuban immigrants, wrote on X: “Pro-Hamas members of Marxist congressional squad just returned from a secret visit with anti-American dictatorship in Cuba.”
Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY) wrote on X: “It’s outrageous that Members of Congress would visit a country that jails, abuses, and murders their citizens and supports Iran, Russia and Communist China against our interests. Perhaps their time would be better spent listening to the Cubans crossing our southern border & risking their lives on makeshift rafts to find out why they’re fleeing Communism.”
“Extreme Leftist members of Congress traveled to Cuba to provide aid and comfort the terrorist-supporting, murderous Communist regime. What is the Biden-Harris administration hiding about this scandalous, taxpayer-funded trip?” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The post Judicial Watch Sues State Dept for Records on Congressional Delegation to Cuba Led by Democratic Reps. Omar and Jayapal appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for all records of communications of Assistant Secretary Rachel Levine regarding pressure put on an international group of medical experts to remove age limit guidelines on transgender procedures (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services(No. 1:24-cv-02588)).
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after Health and Human Services failed to respond to a July 3, 2024, FOIA request for:
All records of communications sent to and from HHS assistant secretary Rachel Levine regarding the removal of minimum ages for the treatment of children in the World Professional Association for Transgender Health’s (WPATH) 2022 standards of care. This includes but is not limited to communications with wpath, Walter Bouman, the World Health Organization (“WHO”), Dr. Jason Rafferty, Chase Strangio, Sarah Boateng, Amy Tishelman, and Dr. Eli Coleman. A reasonable search should include, but not be limited to, the search terms “2022 standards of care,” “SOC-8,” “minimum age,” “transgender care,” and “WPATH.”
According to a June 24, 2024, Alabama court filing in Boe v. Marshall, Levine feared that World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) draft guidelines would make it difficult for American transgender youth to obtain access to the procedures, including gender-changing surgery: “These were age 14 for cross-sex hormone treatment; age 15 for chest masculinization surgery; age 16 for breast augmentation and facial surgery; and age 17 for metoidioplasty, orchidectomy (castration), hysterectomy, and fronto-orbital remodeling.”
Psychologist Dr. James Cantor provided expert testimony on World Professional Association for Transgender Health documents as part of litigation challenging the Alabama law. Cantor testified that “Assistant Secretary Levine … influence[d] the substantive content of SOC-8 [Standards of Care], based on political goals rather than science. Specifically, Assistant Secretary Levine, through a staff member, pressured WPATH to remove recommended minimum ages for medical transition treatments from SOC-8.”
In a communication provided to the court an association member had written:
Sarah Boateng, who is Adm. Levine’s chief of staff [said the] biggest concern is the section below in the Adolescent Chapter that lists specific minimum ages for treatment, she is confident, based on the rhetoric she is hearing in DC, and from what we have already seen, that these specific listings of ages, under 18, will result in devastating legislation for trans care. She wonders if the specific ages can be taken out and perhaps an adjunct document could be created that is published or distributed in a way that is less visible than the SOC8, is the way to go….
We sent the document to Admiral Levine … She likes the SOC-8 [Standards of Care] very much but she was very concerned that having ages (mainly for surgery) will affect access to health care for trans youth and maybe adults too. Apparently the situation in the USA is terrible and she and the Biden administration worried that having ages in the document will make matters worse.
Cantor further testified:
As a result of this additional pressure, on top of that from Assistant Secretary Levine, WPATH capitulated and removed the text in violation of its own process despite the preference of its own committee members to retain the age limits.
According to a June 25, 2024, New York Times report, the eighth edition of its standards of care, released in September 2022, had no age minimums for transgender procedures.
Read the full “Standards of Care for the Health of Transgender and Gender Diverse People, Version 8”
here. Sections six and seven focus on adolescents and children.
“Biden-Harris appointee Admiral Levine, who abused power and is notorious for promoting transgender extremist policies, promoted mutilating surgeries for minors,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It is no wonder the Biden-Harris administration wants to cover this up with unlawful secrecy. Judicial Watch’s lawsuit to expose the truth is urgently needed to protect children.”
The post Judicial Watch Sues Biden-Harris Agency for Records about Promoting Transgender Surgeries for Minors appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Tom Fitton in Washington Times:
Several days ago, America was on the brink of chaos. On September 18, Donald J. Trump was scheduled to be sentenced by Judge Juan Merchan in New York City in the case regarding whether he intended to violate federal campaign finance rules. Up until Friday, September 6th, Mr. Merchan’s position showed remarkable disdain for the rule of law and the Supreme Court. The Manhattan judge was hellbent on delivering headlines heralding “Trump Sentenced to Jail on Rikers Island” just 48 days out from Election Day.
However, everything changed on Sept. 6 when Mr. Merchan backtracked his decision and granted Mr. Trump’s plea to delay a ruling on the indictment and possible sentencing until after the Nov. 5 election.
This decision is a moment of triumph not only for Mr. Trump but also for election integrity and the rule of law in this country. As Judicial Watch has long documented, the incessant legal onslaught against Trump has corrupted foundational American institutions and turned judges, prosecutors, and the legal system into political weapons to silence the voices of American voters.
Read more here…
The post Merchan backtracks, but lawfare still deployed against Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Following up on reports that the Biden Secret Service denied President Trump’s requests for additional Secret Service protection, Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for all Secret Service and other records regarding potential increased protective services to former President Trump’s security detail prior to the attempt on his life at his July 13 campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-02495)).
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the agency failed to respond to a July 16 FOIA request for:
All records including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, video or audio recordings, photographs, outlook calendars, meeting minutes, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, briefings, presentations, notes, summaries, requests for assistance, between or among the Office of the Secretary and / or Office of the Deputy Secretary, Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Secret Service, referring or relating to any potential increase or addition of protective resources to President Trump’s protective security detail.
One day after Trump was wounded at the Butler rally, Secret Service spokesperson Anthony Guglielmi said claims that increased protective services requests from Trump’s Secret Service detail had been denied were “absolutely false.”
On July 15, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who oversees the Secret Service, called claims that he had personally denied such requests “baseless and irresponsible” and “unequivocally false” in a CNN interview.
The Washington Pos reported on July 20 that the Secret Service had repeatedly denied requests for additional security at Trump events for two years prior to the July 13 assassination attempt by 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks.
According to the Post’s report, Secret Service agents on Trump’s detail had requested magnetometers and additional agents to assist with security screenings at large public gatherings Trump attended, as well as additional snipers and specialty teams at other outdoor events.
Guglielmi admitted to the Post that the Secret Service had denied Trump’s request for additional security but claimed it had only learned about the new information after the July 13 shooting.
Kimberly Cheatle, who was appointed Secret Service Director by President Biden in August 2022, resigned on July 23, one day after she testified before a congressional committee and was highly criticized by both Democrats and Republicans for the security failures on July 13. She called the attempt on Trump’s life the Secret Service’s “most significant operational failure” in decades but failed to answer lawmakers’ specific questions about the investigation into the assassination attempt.
“The Biden-Harris Secret Service lied about denying President Trump increased protection requests and is now trying to cover up that deadly scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Biden-Harris administration has yet to release one record about the Trump assassination attempt under FOIA – which is why Judicial Watch is now in federal court.”
In August, Judicial Watch received Secret Service records that showed the Secret Service has made it a top priority that “diversity and inclusion is not just ‘talked about’ – but demonstrated by all employees through ‘Every Action, Every Day.’” [Emphasis in original]
Judicial Watch also uncovered records from the district attorney’s office in Butler County, PA, detailing the extensive preparation of local police for the rally at which former President Trump was shot, including sniper teams, counter assault teams and a quick response force.
In response to a separate open records request, Judicial Watch obtained bodycam footage of the July 13 assassination events from the Butler Township Police Department.
Judicial Watch reported that the FBI withheld information on a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for information about its coordination with the U.S. Secret Service regarding the July 13 Butler, PA, rally.
On July 31, Judicial Watch reported that the United States Secret Service completely denied multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for documents about the assassination attempt on former President Trump.
Judicial Watch has more than 25 FOIA and open records currently pending on the shooting of Trump with the Biden administration and local and state officials and agencies in Pennsylvania.
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Secret Service Protection Requests by Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Federal Agency Trolling Social Media, Reporting ‘Domestic Violent Extremism’
Judicial Watch Sues for Biden Climate Czar John Podesta’s Records
Criminal Aliens “Committing Crimes Against Americans at An Alarming Rate”
Federal Agency Trolling Social Media, Reporting ‘Domestic Violent Extremism’
Here’s an inside peek at how the Deep State is monitoring the free speech of people with whom it disagrees.
We received five pages of documents from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA – a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)) – revealing that CISA is trolling on social media and reporting on alleged “domestic violent extremism” (DVE).
We received these documents through a December 28, 2022, FOIA request for reports or communications from January 1, 2020, to the present regarding:
-
Credible or specific plans to attack electricity infrastructure.
-
Information or intelligence communicated with the private sector and state and local partners, regarding threats to electricity infrastructure.
-
Communications or briefings provided to the Electricity Sub-Sector Coordinating Council Charter regarding threats to electricity infrastructure.
-
Confirmed attacks on any electricity infrastructure by any person or group labeled as “domestic extremists” or “domestic terrorists.”
According to the documents, on December 31, 2020, CISA Central sent an email to NRMC-iRAC (National Risk Management Center [NRMC]) and a host of redacted email addresses, “Subject:…Threats to Electricity Industry”…The email is marked UNCLASSIFIED – FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY with the caveat (TLP:GREEN), meaning the information has limited dissemination and should not be disseminated outside the recipient’s organization without permission. The salutation of the email is to NRMC and CISA Intel. The email states:
CISA Central respectfully requests your assistance with answering the below request for information…Response requested NL T 1200 ET on 04 January 2021.
Requested Information:
-
- Credible intelligence regarding threats or risks to the electricity industry in connection with 5G (including 5G conspiracy-related theories).
- In preparation for the upcoming Electoral College count on January 6 in Washington DC, is there any credible intelligence regarding threats or risks to the electricity industry, including any DVE threats to the power grid or assets in/around the DC area.
A second email is predicated on the email above, dated December 31, 2020, from (redacted) sent to CISA Central and a host of redacted emails, with the Subject: RFI – DHS/CISA. The email states:
In light of both recent and upcoming events, the E-ISAC requests any unclassified information from DHS CISA that can be shared with utility members in the U.S. and Canada, on the following questions:
-
- As a follow-up to the recent incident in Nashville, do you have any credible intelligence regarding threats or risks to the electricity industry in connection with 5G (including 5G conspiracy-related theories)?
- In preparation for the upcoming Electoral College count on January 6 in Washington DC, do you have any credible intelligence regarding threats or risks to the electricity industry, including any DVE threats to the power grid or assets in/around the DC area?
Timeline: If any information is available and can be shared, a response by this Monday, January 4, 2021, would be greatly appreciated.
The email’s signature block is partially redacted, with the unredacted portion reading, “Principal Analyst, Physical Security, Electricity Information Sharing and Analysis Center (NERC), North American Electric Reliability Corporation.”
On February 24, 2021, CISA Central sent an email to CISA-Intel and a host of redacted email recipients with the Subject: …Threats to the Power Grid – Nationwide….The email is marked UNCLASSIFIED – FOR OFFICIAL USE ONL:
CISA Intel and NRMC, CISA Central respectfully requests your assistance with answering the below requested for information….
Response requested NL T 1700 ET on 26 Feb.
Requested Information: The E-ISAC requesting any information about increases in threats toward the North American power grid, or any intelligence about credible threats to the power grid.
Background Information: The E-ISAC discovered social media posts containing threatening information directed at the power grid. The E-ISAC is requesting any information about increases in threats toward the North American power grid, or any intelligence about credible threats to the power grid?
Threat 1: Sadako Poker (https://twitter[.]com/SadakoPoker) – Use of SILO is recommended for all defanged links. Also, be advised links contain offensive material.
-
- Individual describes themselves as an “armchair revolutionary.” A scan of their twitter page found the following two threads which contained threatening information. I was not able to determine Sadako Poker’s exact philosophy or affiliation, they referenced arguing with racists, but also shared potentially racist memes.
- Thread A: Retweeted another person’s thread (Bleppyman), that thread is also attached and described more before. But, essentially points out that bringing down 9 substations would cause society to collapse.
- Thread B: Mentioned taking down the power grid and blaming Antifa as a false flag operation. It is unclear on behalf of whom, but I take this to mean they are not Antifa aligned. Thread also seems specifically anti-government, and possibly pro-white race.
Individual 2: Bleppyman (https://twitter[.]com/bleppyman)
-
- Not sure exactly individuals’ philosophical affiliation, perhaps acerbic skeptic, seems to dislike left and right. Seems to spend a fair amount of time on race.
- There was one main thread, which split into two parts, which different people commented on, so I labeled those A and B and numbered them in order, since they wouldn’t fit on one page.
- Thread A: Responding to a video describing the grid as very fragile, aging infrastructure and citing a 2014 FERG study saying taking out 9 substations could cause nationwide blackout (see: https://www.utilitydive.com/news/could-terrorists-really-black-out-thepower-grid/241192/ ). Then ties that to Metcalf. People pointed out that this is akin to terrorism talk, threat of arrest. Noted a historic attack on French Nuclear facility (1982, communist group attacked plant in construction with 5 anti-tank rockets. Article in screenshot: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/215/4533/641.1 ). Note that all electrical grids are unprotected and that comms are also vulnerable. Vague threat against 9 substations, couched as a joke. A couple supportive comments: “Based, death to America.” “Stop giving me ideas LOL” “Whitepilled again” [Note: not a racial reference, apparently reference to hope and optimism]
- Thread B: Focusing on how to damage substations. Identifies coolant system on transformers, and suggests rifles (using euphemisms for rifles). Same reference to Metcalf as above. 1984 reference (picture). Discussion on euphemisms for rifles.
These documents are an example of how the Deep State CISA agency trolls social media to snoop on Americans. The woke protocol sweeping the federal bureaucracies allows CISA snoopers to target individuals who are supposedly sharing First Amendment-protected content.
(We have been in the forefront of uncovering government efforts to censor free speech and suppress opposition.
In June, we uncovered heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in a FOIA lawsuit showing state election officials in the days before and after the 2020 election flagging online content deemed “misinformation” and sending it to the Center for Internet Security (CIS), a DHS-funded nonprofit, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), and others. These records detail federal-state censorship coordination in the 2020 Election.
In December 2023, we received records from DHS that showed a close collaboration between CISA and the leftist Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) to engage in “real-time narrative tracking” on all major social media platforms in the days leading up to the 2020 election.
In November 2023, we obtained records from DHS showing that CISA communicated during the 2020 election campaign with the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to flag online election content for censorship and suppression.
In May 2022, YouTube censored our video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and our YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview with me. We continue to post its video content on our Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In July 2021, we uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the Covid narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
In May 2021, we revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In April 2021, we published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
We have produced a four-part documentary, “Censored and Controlled,” that details the coordinated effort by the FBI and other government agencies and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates.)
Judicial Watch Sues for Biden Climate Czar John Podesta’s Records
The Harris/Biden administration is in cover-up mode on all types of matters.
We were forced to file a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Energy for records regarding Joe Biden’s Climate Czar John Podesta and/or his brother Tony Podesta that are tied to the lobbying firm Podesta.com (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Energy (No. 1:24-cv-02174))
We sued after the Energy Department failed to respond to an April 3, 2024, FOIA request for access to:
-
All emails between any official or employee of the Department of Energy and any email address terminating in the domain “Podesta.com.”
-
All agendas, briefing materials, notes, or other records created in preparation for, during, or pursuant to any meeting between any official or employee of the Department of Energy and Anthony Podesta and/or Helen Hagerty. For purposes of clarification, Hagerty is a lobbyist with the firm Podesta.com.
John Podesta in March replaced John Kerry as Joe Biden’s U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate (Climate Czar), overseeing the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act, which has been called “the largest green slush fund in American history,” and coordinating interagency efforts to advance the Biden administration’s climate agenda. Specifically, Podesta is in charge of allocating funds for clean energy projects and ensuring that they align with the administration’s goals of reducing carbon emissions and transitioning to renewable energy sources, including major infrastructure projects related to the energy grid.
Concerns have been raised by The Washington Free Beacon about potential conflicts of interest arising from John Podesta advising the Biden administration on climate policy while having close ties to Podesta.com, a lobbying firm co-founded by his brother, Tony Podesta:
His [John’s] brother Tony Podesta could reap the benefits as a longtime lobbyist for foreign Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) companies—including one founded by a Russian energy oligarch.
“It’s no secret that John Podesta is the person behind this moratorium … Congress should take a very hard look at the fact that his own brother stands to financially benefit from a restriction of U.S. LNG on the global market, whether it be from his past work with the Qataris or current reported work with Russian-backed entities with interest in LNG.”
Simply put, John Podesta and the Biden-Harris administration can’t be trusted. That the Biden-Harris ‘Energy’ Department is hiding documents in violation of FOIA about John Podesta is all you need to know.
We have been relentless in using FOIA to uncover the covered-up bribery and influence peddling.
In October 2024, we published an Investigative Bulletin titled “John Podesta: The Scandal Master Returns,” which recounts:
Students of scandal took note when President Biden announced the appointment of one of the dirtiest figures in presidential politics as his clean energy czar. John Podesta, the White House said, would step in as “Senior Adviser to the President for Clean Energy Innovation and Implementation,” overseeing the new Inflation Reduction Act’s “expansive” energy and climate provisions. Expansive it is, Podesta is now in charge of a $370 billion pot of federal cash and incentives approved under the new law. History suggests he will not be shy in deploying the federal funds to reward Democratic Party allies, punish opponents, and protect Joe Biden.
On March 8, 2024, we published a Corruption Chronicles article examining how a Chinese Mining Co. that was sold to a Swiss firm hired Biden’s new Clean Energy Czar John Podesta’s brother Tony to Lobby the United States Government.
In May 2018, we released State Department records showing the Podesta Group working on behalf of the pro-Russia Ukrainian political group “Party of Regions.” The records also showed longtime Obama and Clinton counselor John Podesta lobbying on behalf of his brother’s firm.
I’ll be sure to report back to you if and when we are able to extract any documents on this latest Clinton-ally cover-up!
Criminal Aliens “Committing Crimes Against Americans at An Alarming Rate”
Being out and about in our cities is becoming increasingly dangerous, thanks to the Biden-Harris border invasion. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
Of the millions of illegal immigrants who have entered the United States under the Biden administration’s radical open border policies, over 617,000 have criminal records and they are victimizing Americans and terrorizing communities throughout the nation. “The consequences are dire, with illegal aliens committing crimes against Americans at an alarming rate,” according to a report published by the House Judiciary Committee. “The Biden-Harris Administration’s radical policies ensure that criminal illegal aliens can remain in the United States indefinitely, even after they have committed a crime.” The document focuses on the cases of four illegal immigrants from Venezuela who viciously attacked a man on a Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) train earlier this year. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released one of the men inside the U.S. in 2022 and the other three in 2023 after crossing the Mexican border. Three of the men were on pretrial release after shoplifting arrests when they committed their most recent crime in the Windy City.
In February, the Venezuelan migrants—Yonnier Jose Guasamucare-Garcia, Carlos Luis Carreno-Carreno, Johandry Fernando Loyo-Rodriguez, and Wilker Miguel Gutierrez Sierra—were arrested in connection with a “violent knifepoint attack” on a 49-year-old man riding a CTA train on a Saturday afternoon. The victim was put into a “vicious chokehold” that left him unconscious and was robbed of money and a cellphone. The four illegal aliens listed their home address as state-funded migrant shelters when they got arrested. A local news stationreported that the perpetrators were 18 to 22 years old and quoted a public defender confirming that at the time they were “all staying in area shelters.” One of the Venezuelans entered the U.S. under a special program for Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) that has welcomed nearly half a million migrants under the age of 18 in the last few years. As of July 2, 2024, three of the Venezuelan criminals remained in the custody of Chicago law enforcement officials, but one was released with an electronic monitoring device.
Files obtained by federal lawmakers reveal that Guasamucare-Garcia entered the U.S. in Eagle Pass, Texas on September 18, 2022, as a UAC and claimed to have an uncle in Houston. He was released to a sponsor and about a year later was arrested in Chicago for retail theft. Less than a year later Carreno-Carreno also crossed into the U.S. in the Eagle Pass area and “claimed a credible fear of return to his home country.” He was released on his own recognizance with a Notice to Appear (NTA) in Chicago immigration court on May 20, 2026. A few months later he was arrested in Chicago for shoplifting. Loyo-Rodriguez also entered the U.S. near Eagle Pass in July 2023, the records show. He voluntarily walked back to Mexico after a U.S. asylum officer told him about a special parole program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans that required him to leave and apply via the CBP One app, though he never did and instead about a month later crossed the border near El Paso. His file says that Border Patrol determined he was “likely to abscond,” but the agency released him into the country anyway. A few months later Loyo-Rodriguez was arrested in Chicago for shoplifting. Gutierrez Sierra was encountered by Border Patrol near El Paso in late September of 2023. He was released inside the country “due to lack of space” and was given an NTA in a Houston immigration court on January 24, 2024.
The Venezuelans’ case helps illustrate the real-world consequences for American citizens of the Biden-Harris immigration policies, the House Judiciary Committee points out, adding that the effect of those policies will be felt for years to come. “For more than three-and-a-half years, President Joe Biden and “border czar” Vice President Kamala Harris have orchestrated the largest mass release of illegal aliens into the country in American history,” the congressional panel writes. “Well over 7 million illegal aliens are now in the United States because of the Biden-Harris Administration’s radical immigration policies. The results are all too predictable: cities overwhelmed, public services crushed, and communities shattered by the criminality of some illegal aliens.”
Until next week…
The post Illegal Alien Crime Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received five pages of documents from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA – a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)) revealing that CISA is trolling on social media and reporting on alleged “domestic violent extremism” (DVE).
The document production comes through a December 28, 2022, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by Judicial Watch to CISA for reports or communications from January 1, 2020, to the present regarding:
-
Credible or specific plans to attack electricity infrastructure.
-
Information or intelligence communicated with the private sector and state and local partners, regarding threats to electricity infrastructure.
-
Communications or briefings provided to the Electricity Sub-Sector Coordinating Council Charter regarding threats to electricity infrastructure.
-
Confirmed attacks on any electricity infrastructure by any person or group labeled as “domestic extremists” or “domestic terrorists.”
According to the new documents obtained by Judicial Watch, on December 31, 2020, CISA Central sent an email to NRMC-iRAC (National Risk Management Center [NRMC]) and a host of redacted email addresses, “Subject:…Threats to Electricity Industry”…The email is marked UNCLASSIFIED – FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY with the caveat (TLP:GREEN), meaning the information has limited dissemination and should not be disseminated outside the recipient’s organization without permission. The salutation of the email is to NRMC and CISA Intel. The email states:
CISA Central respectfully requests your assistance with answering the below request for information…Response requested NL T 1200 ET on 04 January 2021.
Requested Information:
-
- Credible intelligence regarding threats or risks to the electricity industry in connection with 5G (including 5G conspiracy-related theories).
- In preparation for the upcoming Electoral College count on January 6 in Washington DC, is there any credible intelligence regarding threats or risks to the electricity industry, including any DVE threats to the power grid or assets in/around the DC area.
A second email is predicated on the email above, dated December 31, 2020, from (redacted) sent to CISA Central and a host of redacted emails, with the Subject: RFI – DHS/CISA. The email states:
In light of both recent and upcoming events, the E-ISAC requests any unclassified information from DHS CISA that can be shared with utility members in the U.S. and Canada, on the following questions:
-
- As a follow-up to the recent incident in Nashville, do you have any credible intelligence regarding threats or risks to the electricity industry in connection with 5G (including 5G conspiracy-related theories)?
- In preparation for the upcoming Electoral College count on January 6 in Washington DC, do you have any credible intelligence regarding threats or risks to the electricity industry, including any DVE threats to the power grid or assets in/around the DC area?
Timeline: If any information is available and can be shared, a response by this Monday, January 4, 2021, would be greatly appreciated.
The email’s signature block is partially redacted, with the unredacted portion reading, “Principal Analyst, Physical Security, Electricity Information Sharing and Analysis Center (NERC), North American Electric Reliability Corporation.”
On February 24, 2021, CISA Central sent an email to CISA-Intel and a host of redacted email recipients with the Subject: …Threats to the Power Grid – Nationwide….The email is marked UNCLASSIFIED – FOR OFFICIAL USE ONL:
CISA Intel and NRMC, CISA Central respectfully requests your assistance with answering the below requested for information….
Response requested NL T 1700 ET on 26 Feb.
Requested Information: The E-ISAC requesting any information about increases in threats toward the North American power grid, or any intelligence about credible threats to the power grid.
Background Information: The E-ISAC discovered social media posts containing threatening information directed at the power grid. The E-ISAC is requesting any information about increases in threats toward the North American power grid, or any intelligence about credible threats to the power grid?
Threat 1: Sadako Poker (https://twitter[.]com/SadakoPoker) – Use of SILO is recommended for all defanged links. Also, be advised links contain offensive material.
-
- Individual describes themselves as an “armchair revolutionary.” A scan of their twitter page found the following two threads which contained threatening information. I was not able to determine Sadako Poker’s exact philosophy or affiliation, they referenced arguing with racists, but also shared potentially racist memes.
- Thread A: Retweeted another person’s thread (Bleppyman), that thread is also attached and described more before. But, essentially points out that bringing down 9 substations would cause society to collapse.
- Thread B: Mentioned taking down the power grid and blaming Antifa as a false flag operation. It is unclear on behalf of whom, but I take this to mean they are not Antifa aligned. Thread also seems specifically anti-government, and possibly pro-white race.
Individual2: Bleppyman (https://twitter[.]com/bleppyman)
-
- Not sure exactly individuals’ philosophical affiliation, perhaps acerbic skeptic, seems to dislike left and right. Seems to spend a fair amount of time on race.
- There was one main thread, which split into two parts, which different people commented on, so I labeled those A and B and numbered them in order, since they wouldn’t fit on one page.
- Thread A: Responding to a video describing the grid as very fragile, aging infrastructure and citing a 2014 FERG study saying taking out 9 substations could cause nationwide blackout (see: https://www.utilitydive.com/news/could-terrorists-really-black-out-thepower-grid/241192/ ). Then ties that to Metcalf. People pointed out that this is akin to terrorism talk, threat of arrest. Noted a historic attack on French Nuclear facility (1982, communist group attacked plant in construction with 5 anti-tank rockets. Article in screenshot: https://science.sciencemag.org/content/215/4533/641.1 ). Note that all electrical grids are unprotected and that comms are also vulnerable. Vague threat against 9 substations, couched as a joke. A couple supportive comments: “Based, death to America.” “Stop giving me ideas LOL” “Whitepilled again” [Note: not a racial reference, apparently reference to hope and optimism]
- Thread B: Focusing on how to damage substations. Identifies coolant system on transformers, and suggests rifles (using euphemisms for rifles). Same reference to Metcalf as above. 1984 reference (picture). Discussion on euphemisms for rifles.
“These documents show how the Deep State CISA agency trolls social media to snoop on Americans,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The woke protocol sweeping the federal bureaucracies allows CISA snoopers to target individuals who are supposedly sharing First Amendment-protected content.”
Judicial Watch has been in the forefront of uncovering government efforts to censor free speech and suppress opposition.
In June, Judicial Watch also uncovered heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in a FOIA lawsuit showing state election officials in the days before and after the 2020 election flagging online content deemed “misinformation” and sending it to the Center for Internet Security (CIS), a DHS-funded nonprofit, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), and others. These records detail federal-state censorship coordination in the 2020 Election.
In December 2023, Judicial Watch received records from DHS that showed a close collaboration between CISA and the leftist Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) to engage in “real-time narrative tracking” on all major social media platforms in the days leading up to the 2020 election.
In November 2023, Judicial Watch obtained records from DHS showing that CISA communicated during the 2020 election campaign with the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to flag online election content for censorship and suppression.
In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch’s YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. Judicial Watch continues to post its video content on its Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the Covid narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
Judicial Watch has produced a four-part documentary, “Censored and Controlled,” that details the coordinated effort by the FBI and other government agencies and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates.
The post Judicial Watch: Documents Reveal Federal Agency Trolling Social Media, Reporting on Alleged ‘Domestic Violent Extremism’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Of the millions of illegal immigrants who have entered the United States under the Biden administration’s radical open border policies, over 617,000 have criminal records and they are victimizing Americans and terrorizing communities throughout the nation. “The consequences are dire, with illegal aliens committing crimes against Americans at an alarming rate,” according to a report published by the House Judiciary Committee. “The Biden-Harris Administration’s radical policies ensure that criminal illegal aliens can remain in the United States indefinitely, even after they have committed a crime.” The document focuses on the cases of four illegal immigrants from Venezuela who viciously attacked a man on a Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) train earlier this year. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released one of the men inside the U.S. in 2022 and the other three in 2023 after crossing the Mexican border. Three of the men were on pretrial release after shoplifting arrests when they committed their most recent crime in the Windy City.
In February, the Venezuelan migrants—Yonnier Jose Guasamucare-Garcia, Carlos Luis Carreno-Carreno, Johandry Fernando Loyo-Rodriguez, and Wilker Miguel Gutierrez Sierra—were arrested in connection with a “violent knifepoint attack” on a 49-year-old man riding a CTA train on a Saturday afternoon. The victim was put into a “vicious chokehold” that left him unconscious and was robbed of money and a cellphone. The four illegal aliens listed their home address as state-funded migrant shelters when they got arrested. A local news station reported that the perpetrators were 18 to 22 years old and quoted a public defender confirming that at the time they were “all staying in area shelters.” One of the Venezuelans entered the U.S. under a special program for Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) that has welcomed nearly half a million migrants under the age of 18 in the last few years. As of July 2, 2024, three of the Venezuelan criminals remained in the custody of Chicago law enforcement officials, but one was released with an electronic monitoring device.
Files obtained by federal lawmakers reveal that Guasamucare-Garcia entered the U.S. in Eagle Pass, Texas on September 18, 2022, as a UAC and claimed to have an uncle in Houston. He was released to a sponsor and about a year later was arrested in Chicago for retail theft. Less than a year later Carreno-Carreno also crossed into the U.S. in the Eagle Pass area and “claimed a credible fear of return to his home country.” He was released on his own recognizance with a Notice to Appear (NTA) in Chicago immigration court on May 20, 2026. A few months later he was arrested in Chicago for shoplifting. Loyo-Rodriguez also entered the U.S. near Eagle Pass in July 2023, the records show. He voluntarily walked back to Mexico after a U.S. asylum officer told him about a special parole program for Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans that required him to leave and apply via the CBP One app, though he never did and instead about a month later crossed the border near El Paso. His file says that Border Patrol determined he was “likely to abscond,” but the agency released him into the country anyway. A few months later Loyo-Rodriguez was arrested in Chicago for shoplifting. Gutierrez Sierra was encountered by Border Patrol near El Paso in late September of 2023. He was released inside the country “due to lack of space” and was given an NTA in a Houston immigration court on January 24, 2024.
The Venezuelans’ case helps illustrate the real-world consequences for American citizens of the Biden-Harris immigration policies, the House Judiciary Committee points out, adding that the effect of those polices will be felt for years to come. “For more than three-and-a-half years, President Joe Biden and “border czar” Vice President Kamala Harris have orchestrated the largest mass release of illegal aliens into the country in American history,” the congressional panel writes. “Well over 7 million illegal aliens are now in the United States because of the Biden-Harris Administration’s radical immigration policies. The results are all too predictable: cities overwhelmed, public services crushed, and communities shattered by the criminality of some illegal aliens.”
The post Criminal Aliens Released in U.S. “Committing Crimes Against Americans at An Alarming Rate” appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Energy for records regarding Joe Biden’s Climate Czar John Podesta and/or his brother Tony Podesta that are tied to the lobbying firm Podesta.com (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Energy(No. 1:24-cv-02174))
The suit was filed after the Energy Department failed to respond to an April 3, 2024, Judicial Watch FOIA request for access to:
A. All emails between any official or employee of the Department of Energy and any email address terminating in the domain “Podesta.com.”
B. All agendas, briefing materials, notes, or other records created in preparation for, during, or pursuant to any meeting between any official or employee of the Department of Energy and Anthony Podesta and/or Helen Hagerty. For purposes of clarification, Hagerty is a lobbyist with the firm Podesta.com.
John Podesta in March replaced John Kerry as Joe Biden’s U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate (Climate Czar), overseeing the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act, which has been called “the largest green slush fund in American history,” and coordinating interagency efforts to advance the Biden administration’s climate agenda. Specifically, Podesta is in charge of allocating funds for clean energy projects and ensuring that they align with the administration’s goals of reducing carbon emissions and transitioning to renewable energy sources, including major infrastructure projects related to the energy grid.
Concerns have been raised by The Washington Free Beacon about potential conflicts of interest arising from John Podesta advising the Biden administration on climate policy while having close ties to Podesta.com, a lobbying firm co-founded by his brother, Tony Podesta:
His [John’s] brother Tony Podesta could reap the benefits as a longtime lobbyist for foreign Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) companies—including one founded by a Russian energy oligarch.
“It’s no secret that John Podesta is the person behind this moratorium … Congress should take a very hard look at the fact that his own brother stands to financially benefit from a restriction of U.S. LNG on the global market, whether it be from his past work with the Qataris or current reported work with Russian-backed entities with interest in LNG.”
“Simply put, John Podesta and the Biden-Harris administration can’t be trusted,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “That the Biden-Harris ‘Energy’ Department is hiding documents in violation of FOIA about John Podesta is all you need to know.”
Judicial Watch has been relentless in using FOIA to uncover the covered-up bribery and influence peddling.
In October 2024, Judicial Watch published an Investigative Bulletin titled “John Podesta: The Scandal Master Returns,” which recounts:
Students of scandal took note when President Biden announced the appointment of one of the dirtiest figures in presidential politics as his clean energy czar. John Podesta, the White House said, would step in as “Senior Adviser to the President for Clean Energy Innovation and Implementation,” overseeing the new Inflation Reduction Act’s “expansive” energy and climate provisions. Expansive it is, Podesta is now in charge of a $370 billion pot of federal cash and incentives approved under the new law. History suggests he will not be shy in deploying the federal funds to reward Democratic Party allies, punish opponents, and protect Joe Biden.
On March 8, 2024, Judicial Watch published a Corruption Chronicles article examining how a Chinese Mining Co. that was sold to a Swiss firm hired Biden’s new Clean Energy Czar John Podesta’s brother Tony to Lobby the United States Government.
In May 2018, Judicial Watch Judicial Watch released State Department records showing the Podesta Group working on behalf of the pro-Russia Ukrainian political group “Party of Regions.” The records also showed longtime Obama and Clinton counselor John Podesta lobbying on behalf of his brother’s firm.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Energy Department for Biden Climate Czar John Podesta’s Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
While Americans endure high inflation, soaring unemployment, and the enormous cost of an unprecedented illegal immigration crisis the Biden administration is dedicating $2 million to fight corruption in Mexican sports betting. That includes “crimes” such as match-fixing, betting and book making, illegal and legal gambling. The goal, according to a State Department grant announcement, is to disrupt the laundering of illicit proceeds by Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCO) while “undermining the integrity of sports at all levels.” Sports gambling is a vehicle of predatory betting, addiction, loansharking, and match-fixing, according to the agency’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), which is doling out the money to address the problem.
The U.S. government has long assessed that Mexican TCOs—drug cartels—are the greatest criminal threat to the country and that they are smuggling mass quantities of deadly illicit fentanyl into communities throughout the nation. Nine Mexican TCOs have the greatest drug trafficking impact on the U.S., according to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Among them are the Sinaloa and Juárez cartels, Los Zetas, La Familia Michoacána, Los Rojos and Guerreros Unidos. The TCOs maintain drug distribution cells in cities across the U.S. that report to leaders in Mexico and dominate the nation’s drug market. At a congressional Homeland Security hearing last year various federal sources in counterterrorism, intelligence and drug enforcement testified that Mexican TCOs have seized unprecedented control of the southwest border. This indicates that securing the border would seriously impact TCO’s prime revenue source—drug smuggling, not sports betting.
The State Department acknowledges this in its Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs Mexico Summary, which says Mexican TCOs pose grave threats to national security and exacerbate the U.S. drug epidemic by trafficking heroin, fentanyl and methamphetamine as well as cocaine from Colombia into the country. The criminal enterprises also profit from fuel theft, human smuggling, extortion and kidnapping, the agency writes, adding that to confront the threats there needs to be a reduction in drug cultivation and production as well as secure borders and ports and an increase in drug interdictions. “INL strengthens our shared security by providing training and equipment to Mexican agencies to disrupt the movement of weapons, cash, and drugs,” the State Department’s Mexico summary reads, adding that “INL assistance enhances U.S.-Mexican coordination against transnational threats.”
Sports betting does not appear in any of the government’s threat assessments of Mexican TCOs, yet American taxpayers will fork over $2 million for this questionable project that aims to round up analysts, investigators, and prosecutors from state and federal units in Mexico’s notoriously corrupt government to investigate and prosecute financial crimes and corruption related to sports. “This can include, but is not limited to transnational sports corruption investigations, evidence collection and evaluation, bet monitoring and analysis, match fixing, theft of funds, embezzlement, etc.,” the grant announcement says. The U.S. will also fund the creation of a public media messaging campaign regarding corruption in sports and illegal sports betting, gambling and match fixing as well as a means to report the crimes to relevant authorities in the impoverished Latin American nation. “Major sporting events, including but not limited to, the 2026 FIFA World Cup which will be jointly hosted by the U.S., Mexico and Canada, will likely be exploited by TCOs to further their illicit gains,” the State Department writes in an apparent effort to justify its allocation. “Law enforcement in Mexico need robust, rigorous and independent training on how to combat corruption within sports and legal/illegal sports gambling markets.”
It is worth noting that American and Mexican nonprofits and educational institutions that apply for a piece of the grant cash must include a gender, equity and inclusion analysis that addresses the ways in which women, gender diverse persons and members of other marginalized and underrepresented groups might be affected by the work. That includes a consideration of their safe and meaningful participation. Finally, to strengthen the chances of receiving the award to fight corruption in Mexican sports betting, nonprofits are directed to describe how they will minimize inequities.
The post U.S. Dedicates $2 Million to Combat Corruption in Mexican Sports Betting appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
The National Institutes of Health doesn’t want you to use the words “animal,” “testing” or “cruel” in comments on its social media pages. Too bad, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit told the agency.
Animal experimentation is at the heart of First Amendment and Freedom of Information Act litigation against the feds, with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals recently defeating NIH in court and Judicial Watch suing the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for stonewalling its requests for communications about an alleged COVID-19 coverup.
Neither agency responded to Just the News queries for their response to the legal developments.
Read more here…
The post NIH censorship of critics unconstitutional, appeals court says, HHS sued for COVID coverup records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Secret Service Records: DEI Is Priority in ‘Every Action, Every Day’
Federal Court Speeds Appeal over Counting of Ballots Arriving after Election Day
U.S. Fails to Monitor Illegal Alien Minors, Risking Forced Labor, Trafficking
Secret Service Records: DEI Is Priority in ‘Every Action, Every Day’
For years the Secret Service has seemed to place woke politics over their protection and law enforcement mission.This is confirmed in 311 pages of U.S. Secret Service (USSS) records we received that show the agency has made it a top priority that “diversity and inclusion is not just ‘talked about’ – but demonstrated by all employees through ‘Every Action, Every Day.’” [Emphasis in original]
The records show the Secret Service, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), demands that 12 percent of its workforce be composed of “persons with disabilities,” and that it is the policy of the Secret Service to provide equal employment opportunity without regard to such non-merit factors as “disability (physical or mental).”
We obtained the records in a FOIA lawsuit against DHS for records relating to an incident in April at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland in which a Secret Service agent assigned to protect Vice President Kamala Harris got into a scuffle with colleagues (Judicial Watch v. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-01705)).
According to an April 24 report by the Washington Examiner, a Secret Service agent was removed from her duties after physically attacking the commanding agent in charge and other agents who tried to subdue her.
A later report states: “The agents involved in restraining [Michelle] Herczeg were especially concerned because she still had her gun in the holster. They wrestled her to the ground, took the gun from her, cuffed her, and then removed her from the terminal.” The report also states that, following the incident at Joint Base Andrews, which is the home base for Air Force One and Air Force Two. “Secret Service agents and officers are privately questioning the hiring process and whether the agency had adequately screened Herczeg’s background.”
The newly obtained records include an undated document titled “Secret Service Inclusion and Engagement Council Charter: Changing the Game of Diversity and Inclusion,” in which the Secret Service puts forth a strategy for the council and establishes an “SES-level Executive Champion for Inclusion and Engagement:
The IEC’s collective duty is to help the Secret Service build, foster, create, and inspire a workforce where diversity and inclusion is not just “talked about” — but demonstrated by all employees through “Every Action, Every Day.” [Emphasis in original]
The document notes that the Secret Service’s Inclusion and Engagement Council “will not rely solely on the legal requirements underscoring the principles of EEO and the voluntary initiatives in Diversity programs; rather, the IEC will seek innovative solutions outside the agency’s mandated requirements to create a culture where differences are valued and appreciated, and employee engagement is encouraged.”
The “Inclusive Diversity Vision Statement” instructs: “To be the employer of choice and ‘gold standard’ for leveraging inclusive diversity by modeling the qualities of mutual respect, admiration, and appreciation for cultural differences and varying perspectives.”
A document dated fiscal year (FY) 2023 and titled “Affirmative Action Plan for the Recruitment, Hiring, Advancement, and Retention of Persons with Disabilities” states that the Secret Service should have a “numerical goal” to have “persons with disabilities” (PWDs) make up 12 percent of its workforce.
In a 2005 Secret Service “Human Resources and Training Manual,” the general provisions state that it is the policy of the Secret Service to provide equal employment opportunity without regard to such non-merit factors as “disability (physical or mental):”
It is the policy of the Secret Service to provide equal employment opportunity throughout the Service for all employees, former employees, and applicants for employment who are otherwise eligible and qualified, without regard to such non-merit factors as race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability (physical or mental), parental status, protected genetic information, sexual orientation, age, or reprisal for objecting to discrimination or prior or current participation in the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaint process. This policy applies to appointments, details, career development, training, reassignments, promotions, and assignments of work, and to any other actions or situations affecting employment status where the possibility exists for consideration of non-merit factors.
The document also outlines a program within Secret Service called “Special Emphasis Programs” that:
[A]re designed to assist the organization in meeting its affirmative action responsibilities. SEPs are affirmative action programs established to increase the representation, retention, and advancement of their constituent groups in underrepresented occupations and grades. SEPs are also charged with promoting cultural awareness, identifying policies, procedures, and practices affecting their groups and advising management on actions, which may increase participation of minorities, women and persons with disabilities in all Secret Service programs and activities. The Secret Service delivers the following six programs:
Federal Women
Hispanic Employment
African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Persons with Disabilities/Disabled Veterans
American Indian/Alaskan Native
A document titled “Diversity Management Program” dated February 2001 explains: “The Diversity Management Program has been established in the Secret Service as a means of achieving an organizational culture which values diversity and utilizes employees to their fullest potential regardless of age, gender, race or other factors.”
The document also establishes the “Duties, Functions and Responsibilities” of the Diversity Management Program, including the goals:
Promotes awareness of diversity within the workplace, enhances interpersonal relationships, and strives to create an organizational culture that is free from racism, sexism, and other biases.
Actively supports the recruitment, development, advancement, and retention of a diverse workforce.
An undated Secret Service Human Resources PowerPoint training slideshow, titled “SAITC-UDITC [Special Agent Introductory Training Course-Uniformed Division Introductory Training Course] Zero Tolerance Briefing” outlines “Special Emphasis Programs” as focusing “special attention on groups that are not represented or have less than expected participation rates in specific occupational categories or grade levels within the agency’s workforce,” including among others, “Federal Women’s Program,” “Hispanic Program,” and “LGBT Program.”
We recently uncovered records from the district attorney’s office in Butler County, PA, detailing the extensive preparation of local police for the rally at which former President Trump was shot, including sniper teams, counter assault teams and a quick response force.
On August 9, in response to a separate open records request, we obtained bodycam footage of the July 13 assassination events from the Butler Township Police Department.
On August 12 reported that the FBI withheld information on a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for information about its coordination with the U.S. Secret Service regarding the July 13 Butler, PA, rally.
On July 31, we reported that the United States Secret Service completely denied multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for documents about the assassination attempt on former President Trump.
We have more than 25 FOIA and open records currently pending on the shooting of Trump with the Biden administration and local and state officials and agencies in Pennsylvania.
Lawsuits are coming, so stay tuned….
Federal Court Speeds Appeal over Counting of Ballots Arriving after Election Day
Extending the counting of ballots for five days after the Election Day established by Congress runs counter to federal law, invites fraud, and undermines voter confidence. That’s why we’re pleased that a federal appellate court will quickly hear our appeal for lawful election procedures.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has ordered a hearing regarding a lower court ruling on Mississippi’s election law that permits absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day. The Fifth Circuit will hear the case on Tuesday, September 24.
We filed the civil rights lawsuit challenging the Mississippi election law on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi (Libertarian Party of Mississippi v Wetzel et al. (No. 1:24-cv-00037)). The court consolidated our case with one filed by the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and other complainants.
Our lawsuit argues:
Under federal law, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year is election day (“Election Day”) for federal elections.
Congress recently reaffirmed a single national Election Day when it enacted the Electoral Count Reform Act (“ECRA”).
Under the recent Congressional amendments, no extension of Election Day shall be allowed unless there are “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” that justify extension.
Despite Congress’ unambiguous and longstanding statement regarding a single and uniform national Election Day, Mississippi extended Election Day by allowing five additional business days after Election Day for receipt of absentee ballots.
No “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” currently exist in Mississippi to justify extending the ballot receipt deadline for the November 5, 2024, federal election for Presidential and Vice-Presential Electors.
We argue that holding voting open for five days past Election Day violates the constitutional rights of voters and candidates:
Counting untimely, illegal, and invalid votes, such as those received in violation of federal law, substantially increases the pool of total votes cast and dilutes the weight of votes cast by Plaintiff’s members and others in support of Plaintiff’s federal nominees.
Our complaint points out that, based on the reported numbers, as many as 1.7% of votes cast in Mississippi in 2020 were received after Election Day.
In our appeal filings, we explain that the Mississippi law extending Election Day is obviously at odds with federal law.
As you know we are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of our work, we assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads our election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In a similar lawsuit, in 2022, on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered voters, we sued Illinois for allowing vote-by-mail ballots (even those without postmarks) to be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.
Here’s a great list of our tremendous election law efforts:
In July 2024, we sent a notice letter to the Oregon secretary of state on behalf of the Constitution Party of Oregon and an Oregon registered voter, notifying them of evident violations of the National Voter Registration Act(NVRA) of 1993, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The notice letter to Oregon serves as a “pre-suit” notice. The letter points out that “According to your state’s responses to the EAC’s [federal government’s Election Assistance Commission] survey, 19 Oregon counties reported removing zero voter registrations from November 2020 to November 2022 pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) of the NVRA for failing to respond to a Confirmation Notice and failing to vote in two consecutive general federal elections. Another 10 counties reported just a handful of such removals during the same two-year period.”
In May 2024, we sued California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law (Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber et al. (No. 2:24-cv-3750)).
In December 2023, notice letters were sent to election officials in the District of Columbia, California, and Illinois, notifying them of evident violations of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The letters point out that these jurisdictions publicly reported removing few or no ineligible voter registrations under a key provision of the NVRA. The letters threatened federal lawsuits unless the violations were corrected in a timely fashion. In response to our inquiries, Washington, DC, officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.” NVRA lawsuits subsequently were commenced against California and Illinois.
In July 2023 we filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
In July 2023 we also settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with us and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to our communications. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle our NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide us with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit we filed in 2017.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle our NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide us with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit we filed in 2017.
We settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
U.S. Fails to Monitor Illegal Alien Minors, Risking Forced Labor, Trafficking
Tens of thousands of young people coming across the Southwestern border have essentially vanished and are at risk of abuse and trafficking thanks to the Biden-Harris administration. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the details of this massive Biden-Harris administration failure.
A year after a mainstream newspaper reported that the Biden administration lost track of 85,000 illegal immigrant minors welcomed into the United States upon crossing the Mexican border, a federal audit reveals that tens of thousands have subsequently vanished from the government’s radar and hundreds of thousands go unmonitored. It marks the latest in a multitude of scandals involving the nearly half a million Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC)—rebranded Unaccompanied Children (UC) by the Biden administration to be more politically correct—admitted into the country in the last few years. The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which operates under Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), is responsible for caring for UAC, which are overwhelmingly males over the age of 14, according to government figures. They come from Guatemala (42%), Honduras (28%), El Salvador (9%), Mexico (8%) and “other” (13%).
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the “premier” Homeland Security law enforcement agency created after 9/11 to safeguard the nation and preserve national security, is responsible for monitoring the location and status of all UAC inside the U.S. This is important because many of the minors have been victims of abuse and exploitation but also because some have committed violent crimes after being released into American communities. This includes a teen from El Salvador who raped and murdered a Maryland woman, two teens—one from El Salvador and other from Guatemala—charged with raping a 14-year-old girl at a public high school, and a pair of 17-year-old Central Americans who executed a Massachusetts man by shooting him in the head shortly after crossing the southwest border. Both had ties to the famously violent gang known as Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), renowned for drug distribution, murder, rape, robbery, home invasions, kidnappings, vandalism, and other brutal crimes.
Despite the documented threats presented by some UAC and media reports exposing how many are victimized, ICE fails to keep proper track of the young migrants once released into the country by HHS and the agency does not initiate removal proceedings for those who should be deported. Investigators from the Department of Homeland Security Inspector General (DHS IG) found that the agency transferred more than 448,000 illegal immigrant minors to HHS between 2019 and 2023 but was not able to account for the location of more than 32,000 UAC and failed to serve more than 291,000 illegal immigrant minors “who warranted placement in removal proceedings under 8 U.S. Code Section 1229(a)” a Notice to Appear (NTA) in court. “Additionally, even though HHS is responsible for the care and custody of UCs, ICE did not always inform HHS’ Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) when UCs failed to appear in immigration court after release from HHS’ custody,” the DHS IG report states, adding that ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) officers at only one of the 10 field offices probed by investigators attempted to locate UACs who did not appear in immigration court.
The DHS watchdog also points out that the underage migrants may be at high risk for trafficking, exploitation or forced labor and ICE must take immediate action to ensure the safety of those residing in the United States. By not issuing NTAs to hundreds of thousands of UAC who were not placed in removal proceedings, the report says the agency limits its chances of having contact with the illegal aliens when they are released from HHS custody, which reduces opportunities to verify their safety. “Without an ability to monitor the location and status of UCs, ICE has no assurance UCs are safe from trafficking, exploitation, or forced labor,” auditors write.
The government’s UAC program has for years been rocked by many other problems that have put young migrants at risk, including physical and sexual abuse at U.S.-funded shelters. In 2021 Judicial Watch obtained records from HHS documenting 33 incidents of physical and sexual abuse during a one-month period at shelters where the government houses UAC until they are relocated with a sponsor. That year a federal audit blasted the agency for failing to protect UAC from sexual misconduct at the facilities. During a six-month period alone, investigators from the HHS Inspector General’s office uncovered more than 750 incidents involving sexual misconduct at dozens of shelters housing minor detainees. Last year the HHS IG slammed the agency for failing to properly vet employees and contractors who care for the illegal immigrant minors. Just weeks ago, the U.S. sued a nonprofit it has paid billions to house migrant youths for sexually abusing them for years.
Until next week,
The post Election Lawsuit Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 311 pages of U.S. Secret Service (USSS) records that show the Secret Service has made it a top priority that “diversity and inclusion is not just ‘talked about’ – but demonstrated by all employees through ‘Every Action, Every Day.’” [Emphasis in original]
The records show the Secret Service, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), demands that 12 percent of its workforce be composed of “persons with disabilities,” and that it is the policy of the Secret Service to provide equal employment opportunity without regard to such non-merit factors as “disability (physical or mental).”
Judicial Watch obtained the records in a FOIA lawsuit against DHS for records relating to an incident in April at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland in which a Secret Service agent assigned to protect Vice President Kamala Harris got into a scuffle with colleagues (Judicial Watch v. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-01705)).
According to an April 24 report by the Washington Examiner, a Secret Service agent was removed from her duties after physically attacking the commanding agent in charge and other agents who tried to subdue her.
A later report states: “The agents involved in restraining [Michelle] Herczeg were especially concerned because she still had her gun in the holster. They wrestled her to the ground, took the gun from her, cuffed her, and then removed her from the terminal.” The report also states that, following the incident at Joint Base Andrews, which is the home base for Air Force One and Air Force Two. “Secret Service agents and officers are privately questioning the hiring process and whether the agency had adequately screened Herczeg’s background.”
The newly obtained records include an undated document titled “Secret Service Inclusion and Engagement Council Charter: Changing the Game of Diversity and Inclusion,” in which the Secret Service puts forth a strategy for the council and establishes an “SES-level Executive Champion for Inclusion and Engagement:
The IEC’s collective duty is to help the Secret Service build, foster, create, and inspire a workforce where diversity and inclusion is not just “talked about” — but demonstrated by all employees through “Every Action, Every Day.” [Emphasis in original]
The document notes that the Secret Service’s Inclusion and Engagement Council “will not rely solely on the legal requirements underscoring the principles of EEO and the voluntary initiatives in Diversity programs; rather, the IEC will seek innovative solutions outside the agency’s mandated requirements to create a culture where differences are valued and appreciated, and employee engagement is encouraged.”
The “Inclusive Diversity Vision Statement” instructs: “To be the employer of choice and ‘gold standard’ for leveraging inclusive diversity by modeling the qualities of mutual respect, admiration, and appreciation for cultural differences and varying perspectives.”
A document dated fiscal year (FY) 2023 and titled “Affirmative Action Plan for the Recruitment, Hiring, Advancement, and Retention of Persons with Disabilities” states that the Secret Service should have a “numerical goal” to have “persons with disabilities” (PWDs) make up 12 percent of its workforce.
In a 2005 Secret Service “Human Resources and Training Manual,” the general provisions state that it is the policy of the Secret Service to provide equal employment opportunity without regard to such non-merit factors as “disability (physical or mental):”
It is the policy of the Secret Service to provide equal employment opportunity throughout the Service for all employees, former employees, and applicants for employment who are otherwise eligible and qualified, without regard to such non-merit factors as race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability (physical or mental), parental status, protected genetic information, sexual orientation, age, or reprisal for objecting to discrimination or prior or current participation in the Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaint process. This policy applies to appointments, details, career development, training, reassignments, promotions, and assignments of work, and to any other actions or situations affecting employment status where the possibility exists for consideration of non-merit factors.
The document also outlines a program within Secret Service called “Special Emphasis Programs” that:
[A]re designed to assist the organization in meeting its affirmative action responsibilities. SEPs are affirmative action programs established to increase the representation, retention, and advancement of their constituent groups in underrepresented occupations and grades. SEPs are also charged with promoting cultural awareness, identifying policies, procedures, and practices affecting their groups and advising management on actions, which may increase in participation of minorities, women and persons with disabilities in all Secret Service programs and activities. The Secret Service delivers the following six programs:
Federal Women
Hispanic Employment
African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Persons with Disabilities/Disabled Veterans
American Indian/Alaskan Native
A document titled “Diversity Management Program” dated February 2001 explains: “The Diversity Management Program has been established in the Secret Service as a means of achieving an organizational culture which value diversity and utilizes employees to their fullest potential regardless of age, gender, race or other factors.”
The document also establishes the “Duties, Functions and Responsibilities” of the Diversity Management Program, including the goals:
Promotes awareness of diversity within the workplace, enhances interpersonal relationships, and strives to create an organizational culture that is free from racism, sexism, and other biases.
Actively supports the recruitment, development, advancement, and retention of a diverse workforce.
An undated Secret Service Human Resources PowerPoint training slideshow, titled “SAITC-UDITC [Special Agent Introductory Training Course-Uniformed Division Introductory Training Course] Zero Tolerance Briefing” outlines “Special Emphasis Programs” as focusing “special attention on groups that are not represented or have less than expected participation rates in specific occupational categories or grade levels within the agency’s workforce,” including among others, “Federal Women’s Program,” “Hispanic Program,” and “LGBT Program.”
“These documents show that the Secret Service, for years, has seemed to place woke politics over their protection and law enforcement mission in, as their DEI policy states: ‘Every Action, Every Day,’” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch recently uncovered records from the district attorney’s office in Butler County, PA, detailing the extensive preparation of local police for the rally at which former President Trump was shot, including sniper teams, counter assault teams and a quick response force.
On August 9, in response to a separate open records request, Judicial Watch obtained bodycam footage of the July 13 assassination events from the Butler Township Police Department.
On August 12 Judicial Watch reported that the FBI withheld information on a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for information about its coordination with the U.S. Secret Service regarding the July 13 Butler, PA, rally.
On July 31, Judicial Watch reported that the United States Secret Service completely denied multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for documents about the assassination attempt on former President Trump.
Judicial Watch has more than 25 FOIA and open records currently pending on the shooting of Trump with the Biden administration and local and state officials and agencies in Pennsylvania.
The post Judicial Watch: Secret Service Records Reveal DEI Is Prioritized for All Agency Employees in ‘Every Action, Every Day’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has ordered a hearing regarding a lower court ruling on Mississippi’s election law that permits absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day. The Fifth Circuit will hear the case on Tuesday, September 24, at 3 p.m. CT, 2 p.m. ET.
Judicial Watch filed the civil rights lawsuit challenging the Mississippi election law on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi (Libertarian Party of Mississippi v Wetzel et al. (No. 1:24-cv-00037)). The court consolidated the case filed by Judicial Watch with one filed by the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and other complainants.
Judicial Watch’s lawsuit argues:
Under federal law, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year is election day (“Election Day”) for federal elections.
Congress recently reaffirmed a single national Election Day when it enacted the Electoral Count Reform Act (“ECRA”).
Under the recent Congressional amendments, no extension of Election Day shall be allowed unless there are “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” that justify extension.
Despite Congress’ unambiguous and longstanding statement regarding a single and uniform national Election Day, Mississippi extended Election Day by allowing five additional business days after Election Day for receipt of absentee ballots.
No “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” currently exist in Mississippi to justify extending the ballot receipt deadline for the November 5, 2024, federal election for Presidential and Vice-Presential Electors.
Judicial Watch argued that holding voting open for five days past Election Day violates the constitutional rights of voters and candidates:
Counting untimely, illegal, and invalid votes, such as those received in violation of federal law, substantially increases the pool of total votes cast and dilutes the weight of votes cast by Plaintiff’s members and others in support of Plaintiff’s federal nominees.
The complaint points out that, based on the reported numbers, as many as 1.7% of votes cast in Mississippi in 2020 were received after Election Day.
In its appeal filings, Judicial Watch explains that the Mississippi law extending Election Day is obviously at odds with federal law.
“Extending the counting of ballots five days after the Election Day established by Congress runs counter to federal law and invites fraud – and undermines voter confidence,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “We’re pleased that the court will quickly hear our appeal for lawful election procedures.”
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In a similar lawsuit, in 2022, Judicial Watch, on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered voters, sued Illinois for allowing vote-by-mail ballots (even those without postmarks) to be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.
In July 2024, Judicial Watch sent a notice letter to the Oregon secretary of state on behalf of itself, the Constitution Party of Oregon and an Oregon registered voter, notifying them of evident violations of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The notice letter to Oregon serves as a “pre-suit” notice. The letter points out that “According to your state’s responses to the EAC’s [federal government’s Election Assistance Commission] survey, 19 Oregon counties reported removing zero voter registrations from November 2020 to November 2022 pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) of the NVRA for failing to respond to a Confirmation Notice and failing to vote in two consecutive general federal elections. Another 10 counties reported just a handful of such removals during the same two-year period.”
In May 2024, Judicial Watch sued California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law (Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber et al. (No. 2:24-cv-3750)).
In December 2023, notice letters were sent to election officials in the District of Columbia, California, and Illinois, notifying them of evident violations of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The letters point out that these jurisdictions publicly reported removing few or no ineligible voter registrations under a key provision of the NVRA. The letters threatened federal lawsuits unless the violations were corrected in a timely fashion. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, DC, officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.” NVRA lawsuits subsequently were commenced against California and Illinois.
In July 2023 Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decisionof the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
Judicial Watch in July 2023 also settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with Judicial Watch and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from Judicial Watch. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle a Judicial Watch NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle a Judicial Watch NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
Judicial Watch settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
The post Judicial Watch: Federal Court Speeds Appeal over Challenges to State’s Counting of Ballots that Arrive after Election Day appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Blaze Media:
The FBI and the Biden-Harris administration are engaged in a “major-league cover-up on the near-assassination of former President Trump,” Judicial Watch Inc. asserted Aug. 12.
The accusation came after the FBI denied Judicial Watch’s request for records on the July 13 Pennsylvania rally at which Donald J. Trump was shot by Thomas Matthew Crooks.
Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the FBI on July 26, seeking documents, emails, presentations, and other data regarding the FBI’s coordination with the U.S. Secret Service in preparation for the July 13 rally in Butler, Pennsylvania, at which Trump was shot in the ear. The request covered the time period from June 15 to present.
The FBI cited FOIA exemption 7A, which allows withholding of information that “would deprive a person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication.” It did not elaborate or provide context for use of this exemption.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, said the records denial and reasoning raise some pointed questions.
Read more here…
The post FBI engaged in ‘major-league cover-up’ of Trump assassination attempt: Judicial Watch appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Blaze Media:
Judicial Watch has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to force the CIA to disclose any involvement in the January 6 Capitol riot — and President Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch isn’t giving up.
After coming across documents that showed that the CIA had teams present at the Capitol and responding to the alleged pipe bombs found near the RNC and DNC, as well as other agents on standby, Fitton believes there’s a lot more to the story than the public is being told.
“This was astonishing news to us,” Fitton tells BlazeTV hosts Jill Savage of “Blaze News Tonight” and James Poulos of “Zero Hour.”
“We didn’t know the CIA had operators deployed on January 6 at the U.S. Capitol, and I’m sure it’s a surprise to Americans that the CIA was conducting law enforcement activities here in America,” he continues.
Read more here…
The post BOMBSHELL: The CIA was at the Capitol on January 6 — doing what? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From New York Post:
An new image of Donald Trump’s would-be assassin sitting on a wall looking and at his phone emerged Friday, showing the moments before he took a shot at the ex-president’s life.
Thomas Matthew Crooks can be seen perched on a wall in a grassy area of the Butler Farm Show Grounds in Butler, Pa., on July 13 as he waited for Trump, 78, to take the stage.
In the picture taken from above, Crooks, 20, appears to be scrolling on his cellphone, which was found alongside a remote transmitter after he was killed by return fire from a Secret Service sniper.
In the picture, the gunman is wearing the same gray influencer-branded shirt he was seen sporting in the only other image previously released of Crooks in the lead-up to the shooting, which killed retired fire chief Corey Comperatore, 50, and seriously injured David Dutch, 57, and James Copenhaver, 74.
The new image was released Saturday by Judicial Watch, along with documents that detail how local law enforcement was stationed in preparation for the rally.
Read more here…
The post New image of would-be Trump assassin Thomas Matthew Crooks just before deadly shooting emerges appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Butler Police, District Attorney Release Shooter Photos, Police Trump Rally Security Preparations
FBI Refuses to Release Trump Assassination Records
Soros Spends $117 Million to Elect, Control Leftist County Prosecutors
Butler Police, District Attorney Release Shooter Photos, Police Trump Rally Security Preparations
We received four pages of documents from the district attorney’s office in Butler County, Pennsylvania, detailing the extensive preparation of local police for the rally at which former President Trump was shot.
Local Pennsylvania law enforcement has been more transparent about the Trump assassination attempt than the Biden-Harris administration, which is in full cover-up mode.
The preparation by local officials included sniper teams, counter-assault teams, and a quick response force.
On August 9, in response to a separate open records request, we also obtained bodycam footage of the July 13 assassination events from the Butler Township Police Department.
We received today’s records in response to July 26, 2024, Pennsylvania Right To Know Request for:
All records and documents related to President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign rally that was held in Butler, PA, on July 13, 2024, including but not limited to:
1) site security plans, risk or threat assessments, designation of security perimeters, plans for responding to suspicious activity or an active threat or attack, memoranda of understanding, or other documents establishing roles and responsibilities of federal agencies and state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) law enforcement partner agencies, and associated chains of command.
2) All audio/video/photographic recordings captured on body-worn cameras or other electronic devices in your possession.
Please provide records from July 1, 2024, to present.
Included with the documents were two photographs of Matthew Crooks, the shooter, who was killed by law enforcement snipers.
On July 9th, at 10:17 p.m., Sgt. Edward Lenz, Adams Township Police Department, Mars, PA, emails Richard Goldinger, with a “cc” To William Mayhugh, with the subject: “Butler ESU Deployment” Request/ Presidential Rally 7 /13/24”. The email states:
Good evening Rich!
I just want to ensure you have the information and details regarding the request for Butler ESU to assist this Saturday at the presidential candidate rally:
Butler Twp PD and the US Secret Service have requested our assistance at the rally. I have had several discussions with the USSS, and as of today they are requesting assistance from us with providing sniper/ overwatch support, counterassault teams, and a quick reaction force. Our current plan is to provide 2 sniper elements, 2 mobile counterassault teams, and a quick reaction force.
-
- The sniper elements would provide overwatch for the rally and would work in conjunction with the secret service counter-sniper unit.
- The counterassault teams would be dedicated teams that would respond to and address an attack directed at the presidential candidate inside of the venue, whether it be a coordinated attack with multiple assailants, or a single attacker.
- The quick response force would be dedicated to respond to and address any high-risk incidents occurring outside of the venue. They would not respond to civil disturbances – this would be handled by uniformed members of PSP. The QRF would assist PSP at the request of incident commander, and upon the approval of the ESU commander.
This will be manpower intensive, and Beaver County ESU and Washington County SWAT have agreed to supplement with manpower – Beaver ESU is going to send their armor with 6-8 operators, and Washington County SWAT is going to send a sniper element along with 3-4 operators. The request for assistance will be officially made through Region 13.Our current plan is to rally at 0900 for a briefing, and to be operational by 1100. As long as the timeline doesn’t shift, we should be releasing the assisting agencies by 1830, but I expect Butler ESU to remain operational until a majority of the farm snow grounds has been cleared.
We have a law enforcement walkthrough at the farm show Thursday at 1000 , and Bill is coming to that as well I believe.
As always, if you have any questions let me know, and I will follow up with more information should anything in our plan change!
Stay safe!
Ed
On July 9th, 2014, at 1:18 p.m., Lenz sends an email to Steven Bicehouse, with a “cc” to Kevin Mikulan, with the subject: “Region 13 Tactical Support Request”. The email states:
Good evening Sir!
Butler ESU has been requested to assist Butler Township Police and the US Secret Service at the presidential rally this Saturday, July 13 2024. Throughout my discussions with the USSS, they have requested we provide sniper teams and counterassault teams, as well as an additional element available outside of the venue. This will be manpower intensive, and I spoke with Pat Young from Beaver County ESU and Guy Kuzak from Washington County SWAT to ask for some assistance. Both offered to send a squad of guys with equipment to assist but asked that an official request be submitted for Region 13 assets.
I have never submitted a request for a pre-scheduled detail, and I’m not exactly sure what information you would need:
Date: 7/13/2024
Tactical Team Deployment Type: Dignitary Protection w/ counterassault and sniper deployments Event Details: Presidential Candidate Rally
Event Location : Butler Farm Show Grounds
Staging Location: 121 Sparks Ave, Butler PA 16001, Butler Township FD
Arrival Time: 0900
Expected End Time: 1830 (Region assets will be released as soon as it is operationally feasible, Butler ESU assets will expect to remain later)
Beaver County: Butler County ESU is requesting assistance from Beaver County ESU, specifically their armor asset, manpower, and tactical equipment as determined by operational needs.
Washington County: Butler County ESU is requesting assistance from Washington County SWAT, specifically with manpower and tactical equipment as determined by operational needs.
If you do need further information just let me know, and I will get whatever you need! Thank you!
We have more than 25 FOIA and open records currently pending on the shooting of Trump with the Biden administration and local and state officials and agencies in Pennsylvania.
Expect several FOIA lawsuits soon (see below!)
FBI Refuses to Release Trump Assassination Records
The FBI withheld information in our FOIA request about its coordination with the Secret Service regarding the July 13 Butler, Pennsylvania, rally at which former President Trump was shot.
In denying our FOIA request, the FBI cites FOIA exemption 7(A), which applies to information that “could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings”
Our request on July 26 asked for:
All records of the FBI, including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, video or audio recordings, photographs, drawings, outlook calendars, meeting minutes, finished intelligence products, bulletins, raw intelligence, threat products, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, briefings, presentations, notes, summaries, or other form of record, regarding preparation and coordination with the USSS for former President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign rally that was held in Butler, PA, on July 13, 2024. Please provide records from June 15, 2024, to present.
We are pursuing the next steps in preparation for litigation.
Were there others involved in the assassination attempt on Trump? If not, then why would the FBI use the excuse of protecting someone’s right to a fair trial to hide records on the FBI’s and Secret Service’s inexcusable failures to protect Trump from being nearly assassinated. The Biden-Harris administration is running a major league cover-up on the near assassination of former President Trump.
The Secret Service also recently refused to honor FOIA requests for information on the shooting.
(In July we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for records relating to an incident at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland in which a Secret Service agent assigned to protect Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly got into a scuffle with colleagues.
In June we received 116 pages of Secret Service records from the Department of Homeland Security that reveal the details about several incidents in which Secret Service personnel were bitten by President Biden’s dog Commander, sometimes requiring medical attention.
In October 2022 we sued the Department of Homeland Security for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding the raid on President Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made during the raid on August 8, 2022.)
Soros Spends $117 Million to Elect, Control Leftist County Prosecutors
One reason our streets aren’t safe is the soft-on-crime prosecutors supported by George Soros. Our Corruption Chroniclesblog reports.
In a scheme to promote a radical leftwing overhaul of the U.S. justice system, billionaire George Soros has spent about $117 million in the last few years to elect then control dozens of liberal county prosecutors throughout the nation, a new report reveals. Once elected the prosecutors, typically known as district attorneys who represent the government in criminal cases, meet regularly with representatives from Soros-funded nonprofits that coordinate and manage the chief officials responsible for upholding and enforcing the law in their respective districts. The Soros machine orders prosecutors to practice leftist policies that are soft on crime, target police and political opponents. The district attorneys are also directed not to enforce certain laws such as those protecting children from chemical castration and genital mutilation, procedures justified by the left as “life-saving gender-affirming” for transgender individuals.
The extraordinary details of the robust Soros effort to overhaul the nation’s justice system by embedding leftist prosecutors throughout the country were uncovered during a year-long investigation by the Media Research Center (MRS). Dedicated to documenting and combating the falsehoods and censorship of the news media, the Washington D.C.-based group examined thousands of pages of documents that show a “shocking level” of control by the Soros-funded nonprofits over many county prosecutors. “The Soros machine sets their policies and priorities, staffs their offices with hand-picked leftists, dictates media narratives, lobbies government officials and perverts the American justice system,” the MRC probe found. The investigation determined that the Soros enterprise dedicated at least $40 million to help elect 126 prosecutors and an additional $77,663,316 to the leftist nonprofits that issue their marching orders once they are in office.
MRC used public records requests to obtain 7,785 pages of internal communications from dozens of Soros-backed prosecutors and examined official files as well as electronic mail, text messages, chats, and other communications. The documents expose how the Hungarian billionaire’s groups directed the liberal prosecutors to manipulate laws involving drugs, abortion, illegal immigration, election integrity, capital punishment and even childhood sex changes. One of the key groups directing the local prosecutors is Fair and Justice Prosecution (FJP), a nonprofit committed to promoting a justice system grounded in fairness, equity and compassion. “Great strides have been made in promoting justice reforms that recognize that prior ‘tough on crime’ and incarceration-driven practices have not always resulted in safer or healthier communities,” according to FJP. The group is a sponsored project of the Tides Center, another Soros-funded conglomerate dedicated to advancing social justice. “FJP held at least 51 private meetings and published 33 formal statements and pledges that contained signatures from prosecutors within its network between 2021 and 2022 alone,” the MRC report states.
Examples include 508 communications—emails, virtual meetings, in-person conversations—between San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin’s office and FJP during an 18-month period, averaging at least one communication a day. Five county prosecutors in Texas worked so closely that they created a shared group chat to strategize on refusing to enforce statutes that ran afoul of their leftist political views. Combined, the elected officials represent over seven million Texans and the documents reviewed by MRC show they strategized to undermine political opponents, including the state’s Republican attorney general. “At least 30 percent of the U.S. population currently lives under the boot of the Soros prosecutors who were pressured to sign pledges vowing to adhere to various Soros priorities,” the report says, adding that the “Soros machine” arranged dozens of joint statements and pledges signed by 123 of the 126 prosecutors vowing to adhere to the leftist billionaire’s priorities.
Besides embedding like-minded county prosecutors nationwide, the records obtained by MRC show that Soros also spent at least $35 million to support anti-police groups and causes in one year alone after George Floyd’s death. His beloved FJP defended the violence and racial unrest triggered by the Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa movements, accusing the American criminal justice system of being systematically racist. Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) also dedicated $220 million for racial justice and black empowerment in the aftermath of Floyd’s death.
Until next week,
The post New Trump Shooting Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received four pages of documents from the district attorney’s office in Butler County, PA, detailing the extensive preparation of local police for the rally at which former President Trump was shot.
The preparation included sniper teams, counter assault teams and a quick response force.
On August 9, in response to a separate open records request, Judicial Watch obtained bodycam footage of the July 13 assassination events from the Butler Township Police Department.
Judicial Watch received today’s records in response to a July 26, 2024, Pennsylvania Right To Know Request for:
All records and documents related to President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign rally that was held in Butler, PA, on July 13, 2024, including but not limited to:
1) site security plans, risk or threat assessments, designation of security perimeters, plans for responding to suspicious activity or an active threat or attack, memoranda of understanding, or other documents establishing roles and responsibilities of federal agencies and state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) law enforcement partner agencies, and associated chains of command.
2) All audio/video/photographic recordings captured on body-worn cameras or other electronic devices in your possession.
Please provide records from July 1, 2024, to present.
Included with the documents were two photographs of Matthew Crooks, the shooter, who was killed by law enforcement snipers.
On July 9th, at 10:17 p.m., Sgt. Edward Lenz, Adams Township Police Department, Mars, PA, emails Richard Goldinger, with a “cc” To William Mayhugh,, with the subject: “Butler ESU Deployment” Request/ Presidential Rally 7 /13/24”. The email states:
Good evening Rich!
I just want to ensure you have the information and details regarding the request for Butler ESU to assist this Saturday at the presidential candidate rally:
Butler Twp PD and the US Secret Service have requested our assistance at the rally. I have had several discussions with the USSS, and as of today they are requesting assistance from us with providing sniper/ overwatch support, counterassault teams, and a quick reaction force. Our current plan is to provide 2 sniper elements, 2 mobile counterassault teams, and a quick reaction force.
-
- The sniper elements would provide overwatch for the rally and would work in conjunction with the secret service counter-sniper unit.
- The counterassault teams would be dedicated teams that would respond to and address an attack directed at the presidential candidate inside of the venue, whether it be a coordinated attack with multiple assailants, or a single attacker.
- The quick response force would be dedicated to respond to and address any high-risk incidents occurring outside of the venue. They would not respond to civil disturbances – this would be handled by uniformed members of PSP. The QRF would assist PSP at the request of incident commander, and upon the approval of the ESU commander.This will be manpower intensive, and Beaver County ESU and Washington County SWAT have agreed to supplement with manpower – Beaver ESU is going to send their armor with 6-8 operators, and Washington County SWAT is going to send a sniper element along with 3-4 operators. The request for assistance will be officially made through Region 13.Our current plan is to rally at 0900 for a briefing, and to be operational by 1100. As long as the timeline doesn’t shift, we should be releasing the assisting agencies by 1830, but I expect Butler ESU to remain operational until a majority of the farm snow grounds has been cleared.
We have a law enforcement walkthrough at the farm show Thursday at 1000 , and Bill is coming to that as well I believe.
As always, if you have any questions let me know, and I will follow up with more information should anything in our plan change!
Stay safe!
Ed
On July 9th, 2014, at 1:18 p.m., Lenz sends an email to Steven Bicehouse, with a “cc” to Kevin Mikulan, with the subject: “Region 13 Tactical Support Request”. The email states:
Good evening Sir!
Butler ESU has been requested to assist Butler Township Police and the US Secret Service at the presidential rally this Saturday, July 13 2024. Throughout my discussions with the USSS, they have requested we provide sniper teams and counterassault teams, as well as an additional element available outside of the venue. This will be manpower intensive, and I spoke with Pat Young from Beaver County ESU and Guy Kuzak from Washington County SWAT to ask for some assistance. Both offered to send a squad of guys with equipment to assist but asked that an official request be submitted for Region 13 assets.
I have never submitted a request for a pre-scheduled detail, and I’m not exactly sure what information you would need:
Date: 7/13/2024
Tactical Team Deployment Type: Dignitary Protection w/ counterassault and sniper deployments Event Details: Presidential Candidate Rally
Event Location : Butler Farm Show Grounds
Staging Location: 121 Sparks Ave, Butler PA 16001, Butler Township FD
Arrival Time: 0900
Expected End Time: 1830 (Region assets will be released as soon as it is operationally feasible, Butler ESU assets will expect to remain later)
Beaver County: Butler County ESU is requesting assistance from Beaver County ESU, specifically their armor asset, manpower, and tactical equipment as determined by operational needs.
Washington County: Butler County ESU is requesting assistance from Washington County SWAT, specifically with manpower and tactical equipment as determined by operational needs.
If you do need further information just let me know, and I will get whatever you need! Thank you!
“Local Pennsylvania law enforcement has been more transparent about the Trump assassination attempt than the Biden-Harris administration, which is in full cover-up mode,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
On August 12 Judicial Watch reported that the FBI withheld information on a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for information about its coordination with the U.S. Secret Service regarding the July 13 Butler, PA, rally.
On July 31, Judicial Watch reported that the United States Secret Service completely denied multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for documents about the assassination attempt on former President Trump.
Judicial Watch has more than 25 FOIA and open records currently pending on the shooting of Trump with the Biden administration and local and state officials and agencies in Pennsylvania.
The post Judicial Watch: New Documents Released on Trump Assassination Attempt – Include Photos of Shooter and Details of Local Law Enforcement Support appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In a scheme to promote a radical leftwing overhaul of the U.S. justice system, billionaire George Soros has spent about $117 million in the last few years to elect then control dozens of liberal county prosecutors throughout the nation, a new report reveals. Once elected the prosecutors, typically known as district attorneys who represent the government in criminal cases, meet regularly with representatives from Soros-funded nonprofits that coordinate and manage the chief officials responsible for upholding and enforcing the law in their respective districts. The Soros machine orders prosecutors to practice leftist policies that are soft on crime, target police and political opponents. The district attorneys are also directed not to enforce certain laws such as those protecting children from chemical castration and genital mutilation, procedures justified by the left as “life-saving gender-affirming” for transgender individuals.
The extraordinary details of the robust Soros effort to overhaul the nation’s justice system by embedding leftist prosecutors throughout the country were uncovered during a year-long investigation by the Media Research Center (MRS). Dedicated to documenting and combating the falsehoods and censorship of the news media, the Washington D.C.-based group examined thousands of pages of documents that show a “shocking level” of control by the Soros-funded nonprofits over many county prosecutors. “The Soros machine sets their policies and priorities, staffs their offices with hand-picked leftists, dictates media narratives, lobbies government officials and perverts the American justice system,” the MRC probe found. The investigation determined that the Soros enterprise dedicated at least $40 million to help elect 126 prosecutors and an additional $77,663,316 to the leftist nonprofits that issue their marching orders once they are in office.
MRC used public records requests to obtain 7,785 pages of internal communications from dozens of Soros-backed prosecutors and examined official files as well as electronic mail, text messages, chats, and other communications. The documents expose how the Hungarian billionaire’s groups directed the liberal prosecutors to manipulate laws involving drugs, abortion, illegal immigration, election integrity, capital punishment and even childhood sex changes. One of the key groups directing the local prosecutors is Fair and Justice Prosecution (FJP), a nonprofit committed to promoting a justice system grounded in fairness, equity and compassion. “Great strides have been made in promoting justice reforms that recognize that prior ‘tough on crime’ and incarceration-driven practices have not always resulted in safer or healthier communities,” according to FJP. The group is a sponsored project of the Tides Center, another Soros-funded conglomerate dedicated to advancing social justice. “FJP held at least 51 private meetings and published 33 formal statements and pledges that contained signatures from prosecutors within its network between 2021 and 2022 alone,” the MRC report states.
Examples include 508 communications—emails, virtual meetings, in-person conversations—between San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin’s office and FJP during an 18-month period, averaging at least one communication a day. Five county prosecutors in Texas worked so closely that they created a shared group chat to strategize on refusing to enforce statutes that ran afoul of their leftist political views. Combined the elected officials represent over seven million Texans and the documents reviewed by MRC show they strategized to undermine political opponents, including the state’s Republican attorney general. “At least 30 percent of the U.S. population currently lives under the boot of the Soros prosecutors who were pressured to sign pledges vowing to adhere to various Soros priorities,” the report says, adding that the “Soros machine” arranged dozens of joint statements and pledges signed by 123 of the 126 prosecutors vowing to adhere to the leftist billionaire’s priorities.
Besides embedding like-minded county prosecutors nationwide, the records obtained by MRC show that Soros also spent at least $35 million to support anti-police groups and causes in one year alone after George Floyd’s death. His beloved FJP defended the violence and racial unrest triggered by the Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa movements, accusing the American criminal justice system of being systemically racist. Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) also dedicated $220 million for racial justice and black empowerment in the aftermath of Floyd’s death.
The post Soros Spends $117 Million to Elect, Control Leftist County Prosecutors Throughout U.S. appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) withheld information on a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for information about its coordination with the U.S. Secret Service regarding the July 13 Butler, PA, rally at which former President Trump was shot.
In denying Judicial Watch’s FOIA request, the FBI cites FOIA exemption 7(A), which applies to information that “could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings”
The Judicial Watch FOIA request on July 26 asked for:
All records of the FBI, including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, video or audio recordings, photographs, drawings, outlook calendars, meeting minutes, finished intelligence products, bulletins, raw intelligence, threat products, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, briefings, presentations, notes, summaries, or other form of record, regarding preparation and coordination with the USSS for former President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign rally that was held in Butler, PA, on July 13, 2024. Please provide records from June 15, 2024, to present.
Judicial Watch is pursuing the next steps in preparation for litigation.
“Were there others involved in the assassination attempt on Trump? If not, then why would the FBI use the excuse of protecting someone’s right to a fair trial to hide records on the FBI’s and Secret Service’s inexcusable failures to protect Trump from being nearly assassinated,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “The Biden-Harris administration is running a major league cover-up on the near assassination of former President Trump.”
The Secret Service also recently refused to honor FOIA requests for information on the shooting.
Judicial Watch has over 25 FOIA and open records requests currently pending on the shooting of Trump with the Biden administration, local and state officials, and agencies in Pennsylvania.
In July 2024, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for records relating to an incident at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland in which a Secret Service agent assigned to protect Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly got into a scuffle with colleagues.
In June 2024, Judicial Watch received 116 pages of United States Secret Service records from the Department of Homeland Security through the Freedom of Information Act that reveal the details about several incidents in which Secret Service personnel were bitten by President Biden’s dog Commander, sometimes requiring medical attention.
In October 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Homeland Security for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding the raid on President Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made during the raid on August 8, 2022.
The post Judicial Watch: FBI Refuses to Release Trump Assassination Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times:
Marine Corps security officers were told that one of the Jordanians who tried to enter Quantico earlier this year was on the terror watchlist, according to the Serious Incident Report filed after the incursion.
The report, which was obtained via open-records request by Judicial Watch, bears out the Jordanians’ assertion that they were making deliveries for Amazon. But their illegal immigrant status raises other questions about how they came to be in the delivery truck.
The report identified the driver as Mohammed Khair Hassan Dabous and said Hasan Yousef Hamdan was a passenger in the delivery truck that tried to make its way onto Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia.
Sentries arrested them after their vehicle tried to leave an inspection area. When they ran checks on the men, a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer confirmed to the sentries that Mr. Hamdan “was on a terror watchlist.”
ICE said Wednesday that Mr. Hamdan was investigated and has been deemed not to be a terror risk.
The May 3 incident made headlines and Republicans on Capitol Hill have demanded answers about the men.
Now the new Quantico incident and ICE information are filling in some of those questions.
Read more here…
The post Jordanian who tried to enter Quantico Marine base was on terror watchlist, incident report says appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Breitbart:
An incident report, obtained by Judicial Watch, reveals that one of the two Jordanian illegal aliens — accused of trying to breach Marine Corps Base Quantico in Prince William County, Virginia, in May — “was on a terror watch list.”
Judicial Watch obtained the incident report, filed by Marine Base Quantico to Marine Headquarters, through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. According to the report, on May 3, 32-year-old Hasan Yousef Hamdan and 28-year-old Mohammad Khair Dabous drove a truck to the base’s main gate and claimed they were making a delivery to Quantico Town’s post office.
Hamdan and Dabous did not have credentials to enter the base. Despite orders to stop, the report alleges that the pair tried to breach the base. Hamdan, according to the report, only had a Jordanian passport on his person.
Read more here…
The post Report: One of Two Illegal Aliens Who Tried to Breach U.S. Marine Base ‘Was on Terror Watch List’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
A federal judge has ordered the Justice Department to “answer” charges in a $30 million wrongful death suit on behalf of Ashli Babbitt, the 35-year-old Trump supporter shot dead as she entered a lobby just off the House floor during the Jan. 6 Capitol riots.
In a sign that the case filed by Babbitt’s estate and Washington-based Judicial Watch has been greenlighted, U.S. District Court Judge Ana C. Reyes gave the government a month to address four of the seven counts in the lawsuit.
Those four include the “wrongful” death count as well as negligence and assault and battery claims against then-U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd.
The judge also said she would listen to further pleas from Judicial Watch to have the trial heard in San Diego, home to Babbitt’s husband. A court there sent the case to Washington, where most of the Jan. 6 cases have been heard.
“Ashli Babbitt’s family is thrilled the $30 million wrongful death lawsuit for her outrageous killing is moving full speed ahead,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
Read more here….
The post Justice Department ordered to answer for Jan. 6 killing of Ashli Babbitt appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judge Orders Justice Department to Answer Babbitt Wrongful Death Lawsuit
Judicial Watch Sues for Fauci Records Tied to FOIA/Covid Cover-Up
Jordanian Illegal Alien Who Tried to Breach Military Base Released
Judge Orders Justice Department to Answer Babbitt Wrongful Death Lawsuit
Our case on behalf of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt, who was murdered in the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, is going forward.
Her family is thrilled that the lawsuit for her outrageous killing is moving full speed ahead.
Following a hearing on August 6, Judge Ana C. Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the Biden Justice Department to answer the $30 million wrongful death suit filed on behalf of Babbitt’s estate. She was killed by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd.
The court gave the government 30 days, until September 6, to answer the complaint. The order also states that we can file a reply brief by August 23 in its petition to have the case returned to Babbitt’s home of San Diego where it was originally filed:
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Ana C. Reyes: Pre-motion Conference held on 8/6/2024 via Zoom. For the reasons stated on the record, Plaintiff may file a reply brief by 8/23/24. Defendant to file a partial answer as to counts 1,2,6 and 7 by 9/6/2024. Rule 26 to be filed by 9/13/2024. Status Conference set for 9/20/2024 at 03:00 PM in Telephonic/VTC before Judge Ana C. Reyes.
Babbitt, 35, an Air Force veteran, owned and operated a successful pool business with her husband Aaron. Ashli traveled alone from San Diego to Washington, DC, to attend the Women for America First (aka Save America) rally on January 6, 2021, at the Ellipse.
We filed the lawsuit on January 5, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the U.S. Government on behalf of Ashli Babbitt’s family. (Estate of Ashli Babbitt and Aaron Babbitt, et al. v. United States of America (No. 3:24-cv-00033)).
The Justice Department must respond to the lawsuit’s claims for wrongful death, assault and battery, negligence, and a claim for “survival action” under federal law. (As a result of the court’s order, the lawsuit will proceed on these key counts, as the court considers the Biden administration’s request to dismiss certain other claims.)
Our complaint recounts:
The shooting occurred at the east entrance to the Speaker’s Lobby. After demonstrators filled the hallway outside the lobby, two individuals in the crowded, tightly packed hallway struck and dislodged the glass panels in the lobby doors and the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd, who is a United States Capitol Police commander and was the incident commander for the House on January 6, 2021, shot Ashli on sight as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashli before seeing her hands or assessing her intentions or even identifying her as female. Ashli was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty, and in plain view of Lt. Byrd and other officers in the lobby.
The lawsuit points out that, based on prior incidents involving Lt. Byrd, the Capitol Police, Capitol Police Board, and ultimately Congress, as Lt. Byrd’s employer, “knew or should have known that Lt. Byrd was prone to behave in a dangerous or otherwise incompetent manner.”
The next hearing is set for September 20.
In April 2024, records from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in a separate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit showed that the FBI opened a criminal investigation of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt after her killing and listed four “potential violations of federal law,” including felony rioting and civil disorder.
In September 2023, we received records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that details the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.
A previous review of records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandum justifying the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
In January 2023, documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, we released multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Byrd.
Judicial Watch Sues for Fauci Records Tied to FOIA/Covid Cover-Up
The Fauci operation seems to have had contempt for the public’s right to know about what exactly it was up to during Covid.
We filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records of retired NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, various top officials, grantees, and contractors regarding efforts to subvert FOIA and other information requests about Covid issues (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:24-cv-02185)).
We sued after the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID – part of the NIH and a component of HHS) failed to respond to a May 23, 2024, FOIA request for records on:
-
Dr. David Morens, former top Scientific Advisor to retired NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, and current Senior Advisor at NIH, soliciting help, advice, or assistance in any manner from any employee of the NIAID or NIH’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) office including a) Margeret Moore b) Robin Schofield c) Marianne Manheim to circumvent, avoid (i.e. through use of private email, phone calls, deleting emails, etc.), or otherwise not respond in accordance with FOIA laws and regulations to FOIA requests.
-
Dr. Anthony Fauci, retired NIAID Director, NIH, soliciting help, advice, or assistance in any manner from any employee of the NIAID or NIH’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) office including a) Margeret Moore b) Robin Schofield c) Marianne Manheim to circumvent, avoid (i.e. through use of private email, phone calls, deleting emails, etc.), or otherwise not respond in accordance with FOIA laws and regulations to FOIA requests.
-
Communications between NIH and/or NIAD FOIA employees, including a) Marianne Manheim; b) Robin Schofield; c) Karen Lampe; concerning withholding information requested through FOIA regarding EcoHealth Alliance (EHA) and/or the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
-
Communications of Dr. David Morens, including use of private email, or advising anyone (internal or external to NIH) to communicate using private email channels (i.e. gmail) to conduct official government business when discussing the “Daszak Grant”, “COVID”, “EcoHealth Alliance”, “EHA”, “secret”, “kickbacks”, “Trump”, “Tony”, “WIV”, or the “Wuhan Institute of Virology”. This paragraph includes communications with a) Dr. Anthony Fauci, email domains.@nih.gov or @gmail.com b) Dr. Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance email domain @ecohealthalliance.org c) Dr. Gerald Keusch, Boston University email domain @bu.edu d) Rich Roberts, New England Biolabs email domain @neb.come) Jay Peter Hotez, Baylor College of Medicine email domain @bcm.edu e) Tom Monath, Croze Biopharma, email domain @crozebiopharma.com f) James LeDuc, University of Texas Medical Branch, email domain @utmb.edu g) Laura Kramer, NY Health Department, email domain @health.ny.gov h) Nancye Green, Donovan Green Health, email domain@dgtwo.com.
-
Communications of Dr. David Morens with any employee at EcoHealth Alliance (email domain: @ecohealthalliance.org) regarding how to respond to NIH compliance efforts, requests, or investigations, concerning the NIH grant with EcoHealth Alliance.
-
Communications of Dr. Anthony Fauci, including using a private email, or advising anyone (internal or external to NIH) to communicate using private email channels (i.e. gmail) to conduct official government business when discussing the “Daszak Grant”, “COVID”, “EcoHealth Alliance”, “EHA”, “secret”, “kickbacks”, “Trump”, “Tony” “WIV”, or the “Wuhan Institute of Virology”. This paragraph includes communications with a) Dr. Anthony Fauci, email domains.@nih.gov or @gmail.com b) Dr. Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance email domain @ecohealthalliance.org c) Dr. Gerald Keusch, Boston University email domain @bu.edu d) Rich Roberts, New England Biolabs email domain @neb.com e) Jay Peter Hotez, Baylor College of Medicine email domain @bcm.edu e) Tom Monath, Croze Biopharma, email domain @crozebiopharma.com f) James LeDuc, University of Texas Medical Branch, email domain @utmb.edu g) Laura Kramer, NY Health Department, email domain @health.ny.gov h) Nancye Green, Donovan Green Health, email domain@dgtwo.com.
On May 22, 2024, Morens testified before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic at a hearing titled “A Hearing with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Senior Scientific Advisor, Dr. David Morens,” in which it was reported:
Evidence obtained by the Select Subcommittee shows Dr. Morens unlawfully deleted federal COVID-19 records, shared nonpublic information about National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant processes with his “best-friend” EcoHealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak, and likely lied to Congress multiple times.
In prepared remarks by House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic Chairman Bran Wenstrup, he notes:
We have evidence that Dr. Morens purposefully evaded public transparency required by the Freedom of Information Act by intentionally using a personal email account for official business.
We have evidence that Dr. Morens unlawfully deleted government records and may have engaged with the NIH FOIA office to assist this illegal action.
We have evidence that Dr. Morens routinely acted as an intermediary between Dr. Daszak and Dr. Fauci.
And we have evidence that Dr. Morens took affirmative steps to assist Dr. Daszak so that EcoHealth could have its grant reinstated after it was suspended under the Trump Administration.
Margeret Moore, who is cited in the our records requests, seems to be the so-called “FOIA Lady,” who allegedly advised Morens on how to circumvent FOIA and avoid responding to FOIA requests. She was then (now retired) NIAID’s FOIA public liaison whose official responsibilities included: “assisting in reducing delays; increasing transparency and understanding of the status of requests; and resolving disputes between you and the agency.” In two emails from February 24 and 25, 2021, which were subpoenaed by the Pandemic Subcommittee, Morens writes:
2/24/21 to a redacted recipient at a gmail address: … I learned from our foia lady here how to make emails disappear after I am foia’d but before the search starts, so I think we are all safe. Plus I deleted most of those earlier emails after sending them to gmail. D.
2/25/21 to Gerald Keusch at a Boston University email address and cc’d to Peter Daszak and another redacted recipient at EcoHealth Alliance: … I learned the tricks last year from an old friend, Marg Moore, who leads our FOIA office and also hates FOIAs.
Also on May 22, the Select Subcommittee issued a memo titled “Allegations of Wrongdoing and Illegal Activity by Dr. David Morens, Senior Advisor to National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases former Director, Dr. Anthony Fauci,” in which it is noted that Morens initially responded to a request for records with 2,000 responsive pages and after being subpoenaed supplied approximately 30,000 more pages of records:
Evidence in possession of the Select Subcommittee suggests that Dr. Morens knowingly transmitted official records to Dr. Fauci via his personal e-mail. If true, this raises serious questions of whether Dr. Fauci took part in a conspiracy amongst the highest levels of NIAID to hide official records regarding the origins of COVID-19.
The following day, the committee issued a “hearing wrap up” regarding Morens’ testimony:
Evidence obtained by the Select Subcommittee prior to the hearing showed that Dr. Morens … deliberately obstructed the Select Subcommittee’s investigation into the origins of COVID-19 to protect Dr. Fauci, unlawfully deleted federal COVID-19 records, and shared nonpublic information about National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant processes with his “best-friend” EcoHealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak. Dr. Morens’s testimony confirmed these discoveries and proved that he clearly believes the laws of the federal government do not apply to him. Members used Dr. Morens’s own emails as evidence of his misconduct and pressed Dr. Morens to explain why he displayed such contempt for the American people while serving as a senior official at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Our FOIA lawsuits and investigations have uncovered much of what the public knows about many Covid-19 controversies:
- In June 2024, we sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records from the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR) regarding after action reports, review of procedures, or studies concerning the preparation for and response to the Covid-19 pandemic.
- In April 2024, we uncovered FBI records that showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
- Emails between U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and top Facebook executives in 2021 regarding the censorship of user posts about Covid controversies showed Facebook leadership seeking to “better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”
- Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it.
- Records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
- HHS records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
- Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the Covid shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
- We obtained HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA Covid-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformities after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Heavily redacted records from the FDA regarding the Covid-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on Covid booster use and approval.
- HHS records detailed internal discussions about myocarditis and the Covid vaccine. Other documents detailed adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
- We uncovered HHS records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration propaganda campaign to push the Covid-19 vaccine.
- HHS records revealed previously redacted locations of Covid-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
- NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also showed National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), James W. Le Duc, warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the Covid-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records obtained from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and Covid-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was canceled because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- Our four-part documentary regarding the coordinated effort by the government and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates is available here.
Jordanian Illegal Alien Who Tried to Breach Military Base Released
Any ordinary citizen would rightly be suspicious of two illegal aliens trying to enter a critical U.S. military base in a truck early in the morning, especially since one was on a terror watch list, not in the Biden era, as our Corruption Chroniclesblog reveals.
Though the Biden administration has publicly denied it, one of the Jordanian illegal immigrants released from federal custody after being charged for trying to breach a U.S. military base appears on a terror watch list, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. The men, 32-year-old Hasan Yousef Hamdan and 28-year-old Mohammad Khair Dabous, posted bail in early June and were released by the Washington D.C. Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) division of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the records show. A Department of Justice (DOJ) immigration judge in Annandale, Virginia set Dabous’ bail at $10,000 and Hamdan’s at $15,000 and they were freed after posting bond and agreeing to stay away from military facilities and to appear in court for immigration hearings.
Judicial Watch has been investigating the matter since the Jordanians tried to infiltrate Marine Corps Base Quantico on May 3, quickly firing off a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain records that could shed light on what occurred that day and uncover any threat that the individuals may represent. The Virginia base is about 35 miles south of Washington D.C. and houses the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Academy and Laboratory as well as a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) facility and Marine Corps commands that include the unit that flies the president’s Marine One helicopter. Initial reports revealed that in the early morning hours of May 3, Hamdan and Dabous drove a truck to the military installation’s main gate and told guards they were making a delivery to Quantico Town’s post office. They ignored guards’ orders to stop when they could not provide credentials required to gain access to the facility. The illegal immigrants were arrested and charged with misdemeanor trespassing on military property.
A Serious Incident Report (SIR) filed by Marine Base Quantico to Marine Headquarters confirms that a white box truck driven by Dabous tried to access the installation via a gate on Fuller Road. Guards asked for a license to conduct a visitor check and directed Dabous to move the truck into the inspection area. While the guard transmitted the drivers’ license information for vetting, the truck moved forward from the holding area and final denial barriers were deployed, according to the SIR report obtained by Judicial Watch. The passenger, Hamdan, could only provide a Jordanian passport for identification and both men were taken into custody. “Hamdan illegally entered the United States 20 days ago from Mexico into California where Hamdan was arrested and sent to an immigration camp with a deportation court date in 2026,” the SIR report states. An ICE officer, whose name is redacted in the document, “telephonically confirmed” to the Marine Criminal Investigations Division (CID) that “Hamdan was on a terror watch list,” the report says, further revealing that ICE personnel assumed custody of Hamadan and Dabous for further processing.
Despite the Marine SIR documenting that Hamdan appears on a terror watch list, the government—specifically ICE—has consistently denied it. A spokesperson for ICE ERO in Washington D.C. told Judicial Watch that neither man posed a threat to national security or the public. The spokesperson, James Covington, assured that the agency is “focused on smart, effective immigration enforcement that protects the homeland through the arrest and removal of those who undermine the safety of our communities and the integrity of our immigration laws.” Covington also emphasized that “regardless of nationality, ICE makes custody determinations on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with U.S. law and U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy, considering the circumstances of each case” and that ICE officers “apply prosecutorial discretion in a responsible manner, informed by their experience as law enforcement professionals and in a way that best protects the communities we serve.”
While Hamdan is one of hundreds on the terror watchlist to sneak into the country through the famously porous southern border, Dabous was admitted in the U.S. on September 11, 2022, as an F-1 nonimmigrant student with authorization to remain for the duration of his student status, records obtained by Judicial Watch show. On January 14, 2023, Dabous’ Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) record was set to “terminated,” indicating that his permission to be in the country expired, though he never left. Judicial Watch will continue investigating this case and fighting for records that can further uncover the outrageous security lapses associated with the Biden administration’s dangerous open border measures.
Until next week,
The post Ashli Babbitt Lawsuit Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that following a hearing on August 6, Judge Ana C. Reyes of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the U.S. Department of Justice to answer the $30 million wrongful death suit filed on behalf of the estate of Ashli Babbitt, who was killed in the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd. The court gave the government 30 days, until September 6, to answer the complaint. The order also states that Judicial Watch can file a reply brief by August 23 in its petition to have the case returned to Babbitt’s home of San Diego where it was originally filed:
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Ana C. Reyes: Pre-motion Conference held on 8/6/2024 via Zoom. For the reasons stated on the record, Plaintiff may file a reply brief by 8/23/24. Defendant to file a partial answer as to counts 1,2,6 and 7 by 9/6/2024. Rule 26 to be filed by 9/13/2024. Status Conference set for 9/20/2024 at 03:00 PM in Telephonic/VTC before Judge Ana C. Reyes.
Babbitt, 35, owned and operated a successful pool business with her husband Aaron. Ashli traveled alone from San Diego to Washington, DC, to attend the Women for America First (aka Save America) rally on January 6, 2021, at the Ellipse.
The wrongful death lawsuit was filed on January 5, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the U.S. Government on behalf of the family of Ashli Babbitt, the U.S. Air Force veteran who was shot and killed inside the U.S. Capitol by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021 (Estate of Ashli Babbitt and Aaron Babbitt, et al. v. United States of America (No. 3:24-cv-00033)).
The Justice Department must respond to the lawsuit’s claims for wrongful death, assault and battery, negligence and a claim for “survival action” under federal law. (As a result of the court’s order, the lawsuit will proceed on these key counts, as the court considers the Biden administration’s request to dismiss certain other claims.)
The Judicial Watch complaint recounts:
The shooting occurred at the east entrance to the Speaker’s Lobby. After demonstrators filled the hallway outside the lobby, two individuals in the crowded, tightly packed hallway struck and dislodged the glass panels in the lobby doors and the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd, who is a United States Capitol Police commander and was the incident commander for the House on January 6, 2021, shot Ashli on sight as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashli before seeing her hands or assessing her intentions or even identifying her as female. Ashli was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty, and in plain view of Lt. Byrd and other officers in the lobby.
The lawsuit points out that, based on prior incidents involving Lt. Byrd, the Capitol Police, Capitol Police Board, and ultimately Congress, as Lt. Byrd’s employer, “knew or should have known that Lt. Byrd was prone to behave in a dangerous or otherwise incompetent manner.”
The next hearing is set for September 20.
“Ashli Babbitt’s family is thrilled the $30 million wrongful death lawsuit for her outrageous killing is moving full speed ahead,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
In April 2024, records from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in a separate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit showed that the FBI opened a criminal investigation of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt after her killing and listed four “potential violations of federal law,” including felony rioting and civil disorder.
In September 2023, Judicial Watch received records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that detail the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.
A previous review of records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandum justifying the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
In January 2023, documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, Judicial Watch released multiple audio, visualand photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Byrd.
The post Judicial Watch: Federal Judge Orders Biden Justice Department to Answer Ashli Babbitt $30 Million Wrongful Death Lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Under Vice President Kamala Harris’s laughable tenure as the Biden administration’s border czar a record number of illegal immigrants on the terrorist watchlist have entered the United States through the southwest border and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), created after 9/11 to protect the country from another terrorist attack, has released at least 99 into American communities. That is not all. Immigration judges have granted bail to at least 27 illegal aliens on the terrorist watchlist, asylum to at least four and terminated the cases of two known or suspected terrorists, according to startling government figures embedded in a congressional report released this week.
The data, which covers three-and-a-half years of the Biden administration, illustrates that the damage produced by its flagrant open border policies is even worse than previously imagined and the derelict measures have clearly generated serious national security issues. During the Biden-Harris tenure an astounding 5.4 million illegal immigrants have been released into the United States with an additional 2 million known “gotaways” escaping into the country, the report, published by the House Judiciary Committee, reveals. “Among those more than 7.3 million illegal aliens are 375 illegal aliens on the U.S. government’s terrorist watchlist who have been apprehended by Border Patrol under President Biden’s and Vice President Harris’s watch,” the document reads. “That is a more than 3,000 percent increase of watchlisted alien encounters compared to all four years of the Trump Administration.”
The illegal immigrants on the terrorist watchlist encountered by Border Patrol between fiscal years 2021 and 2023 come from 36 different countries, including nations with an active terrorist presence such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritania, Pakistan, Somalia, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkey, Uzbekistan, and Yemen. The probe found that so far in fiscal year 2024, which ends in September, federal agents along the Mexican border have encountered tens of thousands of illegal immigrants from countries that could present national security risks, including 2,134 Afghan nationals, 33,347 Chinese, 541 Iranians, 520 Syrians and 3,104 Uzbeks. Just weeks ago, federal authorities released into the country three of eight Tajik nationals with potential ties to the terrorist group Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) after using the Biden administration’s fraud-infested CBP One phone application to schedule appointments at ports of entry. Four were caught by federal agents while crossing the border and one arrived at a port of entry without scheduling an appointment through the app.
“The crisis at the southwest border caused by the Biden-Harris Administration has raised serious national security risks, with the number of potential terrorists encountered at the southwest border skyrocketing since January 2021,” the report confirms. The document includes recent congressional testimony from FBI Director Christopher Wray acknowledging that untold scores of potential terrorists have also entered the U.S. because they were not on the terrorist watchlist at the time DHS released them into the country. “[T]here has been a lot of focus on the number of known or suspected terrorists encountered at the border,” Wray told lawmakers in July. “And that number has increased over the last five or six years, and that should be of concern. But frankly, to me, the bigger concern is individuals who weren’t, either weren’t on the [terrorist] watchlist at the time they came in because there wasn’t information known yet that ties them to terrorism, and it is only after they get in that some new piece of information develops somewhere overseas and now we know. That is a bigger concern.”
Just this week Judicial Watch reported that one of the Jordanian illegal immigrants released from federal custody after being charged for trying to breach Marine Corps Base Quantico appears on a terror watch list. His name is Hasan Yousef Hamdan, a 32-year-old who crossed into California from Mexico earlier this year and was issued a 2026 deportation court date, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. Though the government has consistently denied that Hamdan represented a threat or appeared on the terrorist watchlist a Marine Corps Serious Incident Report (SIR) obtained by Judicial Watch via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) says that an ICE officer “telephonically confirmed” to the Marine Criminal Investigations Division (CID) that “Hamdan was on a terror watch list.”
The post Over 3,000% Hike in Illegal Aliens on Terror Watchlist, DHS Frees Dozens in U.S., Judges Grant Bail appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records of Fauci, various top officials, grantees, and contractors regarding efforts to subvert FOIA and other information requests about Covid issues (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services(No. 1:24-cv-02185)).
The suit was filed after the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID – part of the NIH and a component of HHS) failed to respond to a May 23, 2024, FOIA request for records on:
-
Dr. David Morens, former top Scientific Advisor to retired NIAID Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, and current Senior Advisor at NIH, soliciting help, advice, or assistance in any manner from any employee of the NIAID or NIH’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) office including a) Margeret Moore b) Robin Schofield c) Marianne Manheim to circumvent, avoid (i.e. through use of private email, phone calls, deleting emails, etc.), or otherwise not respond in accordance with FOIA laws and regulations to FOIA requests.
-
Dr. Anthony Fauci, retired NIAID Director, NIH, soliciting help, advice, or assistance in any manner from any employee of the NIAID or NIH’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) office including a) Margeret Moore b) Robin Schofield c) Marianne Manheim to circumvent, avoid (i.e. through use of private email, phone calls, deleting emails, etc.), or otherwise not respond in accordance with FOIA laws and regulations to FOIA requests.
-
Communications between NIH and/or NIAD FOIA employees, including a) Marianne Manheim; b) Robin Schofield; c) Karen Lampe; concerning withholding information requested through FOIA regarding EcoHealth Alliance (EHA) and/or the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
-
Communications of Dr. David Morens, including use of private email, or advising anyone (internal or external to NIH) to communicate using private email channels (i.e. gmail) to conduct official government business when discussing the “Daszak Grant”, “COVID”, “EcoHealth Alliance”, “EHA”, “secret”, “kickbacks”, “Trump”, “Tony”, “WIV”, or the “Wuhan Institute of Virology”. This paragraph includes communications with a) Dr. Anthony Fauci, email domains.@nih.gov or @gmail.com b) Dr. Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance email domain @ecohealthalliance.org c) Dr. Gerald Keusch, Boston University email domain @bu.edu d) Rich Roberts, New England Biolabs email domain @neb.com e) Jay Peter Hotez, Baylor College of Medicine email domain @bcm.edu e) Tom Monath, Croze Biopharma, email domain @crozebiopharma.com f) James LeDuc, University of Texas Medical Branch, email domain @utmb.edu g) Laura Kramer, NY Health Department, email domain @health.ny.gov h) Nancye Green, Donovan Green Health, email domain@dgtwo.com.
-
Communications of Dr. David Morens with any employee at EcoHealth Alliance (email domain: @ecohealthalliance.org) regarding how to respond to NIH compliance efforts, requests, or investigations, concerning the NIH grant with EcoHealth Alliance.
-
Communications of Dr. Anthony Fauci, including using a private email, or advising anyone (internal or external to NIH) to communicate using private email channels (i.e. gmail) to conduct official government business when discussing the “Daszak Grant”, “COVID”, “EcoHealth Alliance”, “EHA”, “secret”, “kickbacks”, “Trump”, “Tony” “WIV”, or the “Wuhan Institute of Virology”. This paragraph includes communications with a) Dr. Anthony Fauci, email domains.@nih.gov or @gmail.com b) Dr. Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance email domain @ecohealthalliance.org c) Dr. Gerald Keusch, Boston University email domain @bu.edu d) Rich Roberts, New England Biolabs email domain @neb.com e) Jay Peter Hotez, Baylor College of Medicine email domain @bcm.edu e) Tom Monath, Croze Biopharma, email domain @crozebiopharma.com f) James LeDuc, University of Texas Medical Branch, email domain @utmb.edu g) Laura Kramer, NY Health Department, email domain @health.ny.gov h) Nancye Green, Donovan Green Health, email domain@dgtwo.com.
On May 22, 2024, Morens testified before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic at a hearing titled “A Hearing with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Senior Scientific Advisor, Dr. David Morens,” in which it was reported:
Evidence obtained by the Select Subcommittee shows Dr. Morens unlawfully deleted federal COVID-19 records, shared nonpublic information about National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant processes with his “best-friend” EcoHealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak, and likely lied to Congress multiple times.
In prepared remarks by House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic Chairman Brad Wenstrup, he notes:
We have evidence that Dr. Morens purposefully evaded public transparency required by the Freedom of Information Act by intentionally using a personal email account for official business.
We have evidence that Dr. Morens unlawfully deleted government records and may have engaged with the NIH FOIA office to assist this illegal action.
We have evidence that Dr. Morens routinely acted as an intermediary between Dr. Daszak and Dr. Fauci.
And we have evidence that Dr. Morens took affirmative steps to assist Dr. Daszak so that EcoHealth could have its grant reinstated after it was suspended under the Trump Administration.
Margeret Moore, who is cited in the Judicial Watch records requests, seems to be the so-called “FOIA Lady,” who allegedly advised Morens on how to circumvent FOIA and avoid responding to FOIA requests. She was then (now retired) NIAID’s FOIA public liaison whose official responsibilities included: “assisting in reducing delays; increasing transparency and understanding of the status of requests; and resolving disputes between you and the agency.” In two emails from February 24 and 25, 2021, which were subpoenaed by the Pandemic Subcommittee, Morens writes:
2/24/21 to a redacted recipient at a gmail address: … I learned from our foia lady here how to make emails disappear after I am foia’d but before the search starts, so I think we are all safe. Plus I deleted most of those earlier emails after sending them to gmail. D.
2/25/21 to Gerald Keusch at a Boston University email address and cc’d to Peter Daszak and another redacted recipient at EcoHealth Alliance: … I learned the tricks last year from an old friend, Marg Moore, who leads our FOIA office and also hates FOIAs.
Also on May 22, the Select Subcommittee issued a memo titled “Allegations of Wrongdoing and Illegal Activity by Dr. David Morens, Senior Advisor to National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases former Director, Dr. Anthony Fauci,” in which it is noted that Morens initially responded to a request for records with 2,000 responsive pages and after a being subpoenaed supplied approximately 30,000 more pages of records:
Evidence in possession of the Select Subcommittee suggests that Dr. Morens knowingly transmitted official records to Dr. Fauci via his personal e-mail. If true, this raises serious questions of whether Dr. Fauci took part in a conspiracy amongst the highest levels of NIAID to hide official records regarding the origins of COVID-19.
The following day, the committee issued a “hearing wrap up” regarding Morens’ testimony:
Evidence obtained by the Select Subcommittee prior to the hearing showed that Dr. Morens … deliberately obstructed the Select Subcommittee’s investigation into the origins of COVID-19 to protect Dr. Fauci, unlawfully deleted federal COVID-19 records, and shared nonpublic information about National Institutes of Health (NIH) grant processes with his “best-friend” EcoHealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak. Dr. Morens’s testimony confirmed these discoveries and proved that he clearly believes the laws of the federal government do not apply to him. Members used Dr. Morens’s own emails as evidence of his misconduct and pressed Dr. Morens to explain why he displayed such contempt for the American people while serving as a senior official at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“The Fauci operation seems to have had contempt for the public’s right to know about what exactly it was up to regarding Covid,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “There was obviously a systematic attempt by HHS bureaucrats to circumvent FOIA requests during the Covid era. This new lawsuit can further help undo this cover-up.”
Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuits and investigations have uncovered much of what the public knows about many Covid-19 controversies:
- In June 2024, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records from the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR) regarding after action reports, review of procedures, or studies concerning the preparation for and response to the Covid-19 pandemic
- In April 2024, Judicial Watch uncovered FBI records that showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
- Emails between U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and top Facebook executives in 2021 regarding the censorship of user posts about Covid controversies showed Facebook leadership seeking to “better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”
- Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it.
- Records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
- HHS records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
- Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the Covid shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
- Judicial Watch obtained HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA Covid-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Heavily redacted records from the FDA regarding the Covid-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on Covid booster use and approval.
- HHS records detailed internal discussions about myocarditis and the Covid vaccine. Other documents detailed adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
- Judicial Watch uncovered HHS records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration propaganda campaign to push the Covid-19 vaccine.
- HHS records revealed previously redacted locations of Covid-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
- NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also showed National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc, warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the Covid-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records obtained from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and Covid-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was cancelled because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- Judicial Watch’s four-part documentary regarding the coordinated effort by the government and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates is available here.
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Fauci Emails and Agency Records Tied to FOIA/Covid Cover-Up appeared first on Judicial Watch.
“When it comes to fighting for the American people’s ‘right to know,’ no one holds a candle to Tom Fitton and his team at Judicial Watch.”
–Sean Hannity
Tom Fitton returns with an exhaustive investigation into the progressive movement’s efforts to dismantle the venerable institutions of American rights and freedoms.
The post Rights and Freedoms in Peril: An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Blaze TV:
‘The CIA should come clean on exactly what its role at the protests was.’
Judicial Watch filed a federal lawsuit seeking to force the Central Intelligence Agency to disclose any involvement it had at or around the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Filed July 24, the Freedom of Information Act suit was brought after Judicial Watch alleges the CIA ignored its six-part FOIA request for Jan. 6-related records.
“Judicial Watch forced the Justice Department to admit CIA personnel were at the January 6, 2021, disturbance; now the CIA should come clean on exactly what its role at the protests was,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch sues for records of any CIA presence on January 6 appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
A $30 million wrongful death lawsuit against the federal government on behalf of Jan. 6 Capitol riot victim Ashli Babbitt will get its first hearing tomorrow in a Washington federal court.
Judicial Watch today announced that the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia will host the hearing at 4 p.m. tomorrow.
Read more here…
The post Ashli Babbitt $30 million wrongful death suit gets first hearing appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:The Islamic extremist Taliban has received at least $239 million in U.S. aid aimed at counterterrorism after State Department vetting procedures fell apart, according to a government watchdog.The government watchdog, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), issued a July 2024 report identifying at least 29 grants where the Taliban may have erroneously received counterterrorism funds.SIGAR “investigators found that the State Department failed to comply with its own counterterrorism partner vetting requirements in Afghanistan,” Judicial Watch reported.The funds came from State Department divisions called “Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor” and “International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs.”Read more here…The post Taliban gets $239 million in aid after failure of State Dept. vetting appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Though the Biden administration has publicly denied it, one of the Jordanian illegal immigrants released from federal custody after being charged for trying to breach a U.S. military base appears on a terror watch list, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. The men, 32-year-old Hasan Yousef Hamdan and 28-year-old Mohammad Khair Dabous, posted bail in early June and were released by the Washington D.C. Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) division of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the records show. A Department of Justice (DOJ) immigration judge in Annandale, Virginia set Dabous’ bail at $10,000 and Hamdan’s at $15,000 and they were freed after posting bond and agreeing to stay away from military facilities and to appear in court for immigration hearings.
Judicial Watch has been investigating the matter since the Jordanians tried to infiltrate Marine Corps Base Quantico on May 3, quickly firing off a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain records that could shed light on what occurred that day and uncover any threat that the individuals may represent. The Virginia base is about 35 miles south of Washington D.C. and houses the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Academy and Laboratory as well as a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) facility and Marine Corps commands that include the unit that flies the president’s Marine One helicopter. Initial reports revealed that in the early morning hours of May 3, Hamdan and Dabous drove a truck to the military installation’s main gate and told guards they were making a delivery to Quantico Town’s post office. They ignored guards’ orders to stop when they could not provide credentials required to gain access to the facility. The illegal immigrants were arrested and charged with misdemeanor trespassing on military property.
A Serious Incident Report (SIR) filed by Marine Base Quantico to Marine Headquarters confirms that a white box truck driven by Dabous tried to access the installation via a gate on Fuller Road. Guards asked for a license to conduct a visitor check and directed Dabous to move the truck into the inspection area. While the guard transmitted the drivers’ license information for vetting, the truck moved forward from the holding area and final denial barriers were deployed, according to the SIR report obtained by Judicial Watch. The passenger, Hamdan, could only provide a Jordanian passport for identification and both men were taken into custody. “Hamdan illegally entered the United States 20 days ago from Mexico into California where Hamdan was arrested and sent to an immigration camp with a deportation court date in 2026,” the SIR report states. An ICE officer, whose name is redacted in the document, “telephonically confirmed” to the Marine Criminal Investigations Division (CID) that “Hamdan was on a terror watch list,” the report says, further revealing that ICE personnel assumed custody of Hamadan and Dabous for further processing.
Despite the Marine SIR documenting that Hamdan appears on a terror watch list, the government—specifically ICE—has consistently denied it. A spokesperson for ICE ERO in Washington D.C. told Judicial Watch that neither man posed a threat to national security or the public. The spokesperson, James Covington, assured that the agency is “focused on smart, effective immigration enforcement that protects the homeland through the arrest and removal of those who undermine the safety of our communities and the integrity of our immigration laws.” Covington also emphasized that “regardless of nationality, ICE makes custody determinations on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with U.S. law and U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy, considering the circumstances of each case” and that ICE officers “apply prosecutorial discretion in a responsible manner, informed by their experience as law enforcement professionals and in a way that best protects the communities we serve.”
While Hamdan is one of hundreds on the terror watchlist to sneak into the country through the famously porous southern border, Dabous was admitted in the U.S. on September 11, 2022, as an F-1 nonimmigrant student with authorization to remain for the duration of his student status, records obtained by Judicial Watch show. On January 14, 2023, Dabous’ Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) record was set to “terminated,” indicating that his permission to be in the country expired, though he never left. Judicial Watch will continue investigating this case and fighting for records that can further uncover the outrageous security lapses associated with the Biden administration’s dangerous open border measures.
The post Jordanian Illegal Alien who Tried to Breach Military Base Released Despite Being on Terror Watchlist appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Newsmax:
The Secret Service has denied all three Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests seeking documents, videos and advance survey security assessments, among other items, related to the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, the Judicial Watch reports.
The agency, citing Title 5 U.S.C. § 552(B)(7)(A), said “any potentially responsive records, if they exist, are exempt as disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. The citation of the above exemption is not to be construed as the only exemption which may be available under the FOIA.”
Read more here…
The post FOIA Requests Tied to Trump Shooting Denied appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Townhall:
A new report from Judicial Watch found that the U.S. mistakingly gave hundreds of millions of dollars to the Taliban after the State Department failed to properly vet award recipients.
At least $239 million in taxpayer money has landed in the hands of terrorists since the Biden Administration’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan. The State Department appears not to have followed its own counterterrorism partner vetting requirements in Afghanistan before approving the 29 grants to several local entities.
Read more here…
The post Major Biden-Harris Mistake Gave Taliban $239 Million In U.S. Aid appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Note: The court has advanced the hearing to 3:15 p.m. ET.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a hearing will be held on August 6 at 4 p.m. ET in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia in the $30 million wrongful death lawsuit filed on behalf of the estate of Ashli Babbitt.
(Judicial Watch has asked that the case be returned to San Diego so that it can appeal the California Southern District Court’s earlier venue transfer to Washington, DC.)
This is the first hearing to be held in the wrongful death lawsuit that was filed on January 5, 2024, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against the U.S. Government on behalf of the family of Ashli Babbitt, the U.S. Air Force veteran who was shot and killed inside the U.S. Capitol by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021 (Estate of Ashli Babbitt and Aaron Babbitt, et al. v. United States of America (No. 3:24-cv-00033)). The lawsuit includes claims against the U.S. Government for wrongful death, assault and battery, and various negligence issues.
Babbitt was a 35-year-old resident of San Diego, CA, where she owned and operated a successful pool business with her husband Aaron. Ashli traveled alone from San Diego to Washington, DC, to attend the Women for America First (aka Save America) rally on January 6, 2021, at the Ellipse.
As the Judicial Watch complaint recounts:
The shooting occurred at the east entrance to the Speaker’s Lobby. After demonstrators filled the hallway outside the lobby, two individuals in the crowded, tightly packed hallway struck and dislodged the glass panels in the lobby doors and the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd, who is a United States Capitol Police commander and was the incident commander for the House on January 6, 2021, shot Ashli on sight as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight. Lt. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashli before seeing her hands or assessing her intentions or even identifying her as female. Ashli was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty, and in plain view of Lt. Byrd and other officers in the lobby.
The facts speak truth. Ashli was ambushed when she was shot by Lt. Byrd. Multiple witnesses at the scene yelled, “you just murdered her.”
Lt. Byrd was never charged or otherwise punished or disciplined for Ashli’s homicide.
The U.S. District for the Southern District of California, at the request of the Biden Justice Department, transferred this case to the DC District Court on June 12, 2024.
In a July 2024 motion to retransfer the case, Judicial Watch argues:
The Southern District of California transferred this case to the District of Columbia … without a hearing, against the will of [the Estate of Ashli Babbitt] …
This hasty process afforded Plaintiffs no opportunity to seek a stay of the order or petition for mandamus relief from the order although they clearly had a right to do both.
The Justice Department later asked the court to dismiss the case in the D.C. District Court.
Judicial Watch argues that nothing in the case should be decided until the matter of venue is resolved.
“Ashli Babbitt and her family deserve accountability and justice for her wrongful death on January 6. In short, there was no good reason for Lt. Byrd to ambush and shoot her,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “But the Biden Justice Department, rather than admit government wrongdoing, is doing its best try to ensure Ashli never gets her full day in court.”
In April 2024, records from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in a separate Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit showed that the FBI opened a criminal investigation of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt after her killing and listed four “potential violations of federal law,” including felony rioting and civil disorder.
In September 2023, Judicial Watch received records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that detail the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.
A previous review of records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandum justifying the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
In January 2023, documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, Judicial Watch released multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Byrd.
The post Judicial Watch: Federal Court Hearing Set for August 6 in Ashli Babbitt $30M Wrongful Death Lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Biden 9/11 Plea Deal Outrage
Secret Service Rejects Judicial Watch FOIA Requests About Assassination Attempt on Trump
Judicial Watch Sues for Records of CIA Personnel Deployed for January 6 Protests
Judicial Watch Asks Court to Order Justice Department to Turn Over Audio of President Biden’s Interviews with Special Counsel Robert Hur
113 Non-Citizens Voted in DC Presidential Primary
Judicial Watch Files FCC Complaint Against NBC for Airing Obscene and Indecent Content from Olympics Opening Ceremony
As AG Kamala Harris Helped Man Become Nation’s First Undocumented Lawyer
Biden 9/11 Plea Deal Outrage
Surrender! The Biden Defense Department agreed to a plea deal with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and two other top terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Jihadist terrorists and other American enemies are surely celebrating their comrades’ victory, made possible by the Biden administration’s surrender in court to the men responsible for helping murder nearly 3,000 Americans. America is less safe as a result of this Harris-Biden betrayal.
The Left has been opposing the timely prosecution of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for years. (Obama tried to shut down Gitmo, for example.) Judicial Watch representatives have been monitoring the proceedings in Gitmo, and our representative is there now as an observer. We can attest based on extensive experience that the process has been a circus from the get-go.
9/11 survivors and families — and all Americans — are rightly outraged by this miscarriage of justice.
We are America’s leading organization on issues related to the 9/11 attacks. We are running a longstanding monitoring project of the proceedings against the terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Our representatives have visited the facility at least 80 times to observe the proceedings.
For more than 20 years we have represented Lynn Faulkner, the husband of a 9/11 victim, in litigation now pending in New York federal court seeking to hold defendants accountable including Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and others.
We have compiled the largest collection of government records pertaining to the spiritual leader of the 9/11 hijackers, Anwar al-Awlaki, through our investigations and litigation.
In July we reported that the Transportation Safety Administration, created after 9/11, has no idea how aviation security was affected when it plucked federal air marshals from their duties to help with the Mexican border crisis.
In June 2023 we reported that the U.S. has failed to properly remove millions who overstayed their visas, which at least four of the September 11 hijackers did.
In June 2021 we reported that four “forever prisoners” were released as part of a Biden administration initiative to clear out the top security facility that houses the world’s most dangerous Islamic terrorists, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
In September 2020 we reported that it took nearly two decades after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil for every state to finally comply with a federal law requiring minimum security standards for driver’s licenses and identification cards.
In September 2015 we filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking records of communications between the Office of the Secretary of State and the White House/Executive Office of the President following the capture and slaying of Osama bin Laden.
In June 2004 we submitted to the 9/11 Commission documents showing that Saudi Arabian nationals, including bin Laden family members, were allowed to fly out of the United States immediately following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The documents represent the first admission by the government that the flights occurred at all. We are asking the 9/11 Commission to investigate and reconcile previous contradictory testimony about Saudis being allowed to leave the country.
And you can be sure we will also try to get to the bottom of this latest betrayal.
Secret Service Rejects Judicial Watch FOIA Requests About Assassination Attempt on Trump
A real stench is rising out of Butler, PA, and Washington DC.
The United States Secret Service completely denied multiple FOIA requests for documents about the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.
On July 16, 2024, we filed three comprehensive FOIA requests seeking emails, videos, and advance survey security assessments, among other documents related to the assassination attempt.
The Secret Service produced not one record in response:
At this time, pursuant to Title 5 U.S.C. § 552(B)(7)(A), any potentially responsive records, if they exist, are exempt as disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. The citation of the above exemption is not to be construed as the only exemption which may be available under the FOIA.
We are pursuing the next steps in preparation for litigation.
The Biden Secret Service is in cover-up mode in its inexcusable and epic failure to protect former President Trump and other innocents. For Secret Service leaders to promise transparency to Congress while hiding every possible FOIA record from the American people is yet another indictment of this corrupt and failing agency.
We have more than 25 pending FOIA and open records requests with the Biden administration and local and state officials and agencies in Pennsylvania on the shooting.
Expect lawsuits to follow….
Judicial Watch Sues for Records of CIA Personnel Deployed for January 6 Protests
Judicial Watch just filed an important FOIA lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency for all records related to any shots fired inside the U.S. Capitol building on January 6, 2021, and records of requests for CIA support, including bomb technicians and bomb-detecting dogs placed on standby or used in response to the massive protests in and around Washington, DC (Judicial Watch v. Central Intelligence Agency (No. 1:24-cv-02172)).
We sued after the CIA failed to respond to our March 13, 2024, FOIA request asking the agency to produce records related to:
- Shots fired inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
- A person being shot inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
- Requests for CIA support or assistance at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
- Bomb technician support or assistance to any potential or actual bombs or explosive devices in response to the massive protests in and around the Washington DC area on January 6, 2021.
- Accelerant or explosives K-9s (bomb detection dogs) placed on standby or used in Washington, DC, in response to the massive protests in and around Washington, DC on January 6, 2021.
- Any after action reports concerning the events that took place in Washington, DC on January 6, 2021.
In March, we received 88 pages of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) records from the Department of Justice in a FOIA lawsuit that show the CIA deployed personnel to Washington, DC on January 6, 2021.
The records include a series of text messages under the heading “January 7 Intel Chain” in which two separate references to participation by the CIA are made. One states that “two CIA bomb techs” are assisting with “a pipe bomb scene on New Jersey and D ST SE.” Another record references “several CIA dog teams on standby.”
We forced the Justice Department to admit CIA personnel were at the January 6, 2021, disturbance. Now the CIA should come clean on exactly what its role at the protests was.
We are extensively investigating (and litigation) January 6 issues.
In February 2024, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of Aaron Babbitt, the late Ashli Elizabeth Babbitt’s husband, and Ashli Babbitt’s estate against the U.S. Department of Justice for all FBI files on Ashli Babbitt, a U.S. Air Force veteran who was shot and killed inside the U.S. Capitol by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021.
In October 2023 we announced that we received the court-ordered declaration of James W. Joyce, senior counsel in the Office of the General Counsel for the Capitol Police, in which he describes emails among senior officials of the United States Capitol Police (USCP) in January 2021 that show warnings of possible January 6 protests that could lead to serious disruptions at the U.S. Capitol.
In September we received records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that detail the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.
A previous review of records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandum justifying the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
In January 2023 documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021 we released multiple audio, visual, and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Byrd.
In October 2021 United States Park Police records related to the January 6, 2021, demonstrations at the U.S. Capitol showed that on the day before the January 6 rally featuring President Trump, U.S. Park Police expected a “large portion” of the attendees to march to the U.S. Capitol and that the FBI was monitoring the January 6 demonstrations, including travel to the events by “subjects of interest.”
Judicial Watch Asks Court to Order Justice Department to Turn Over Audio of President Biden’s Interviews with Special Counsel Robert Hur
President Biden’s inability to perform his duties is being shielded from the public eye by Deep State agencies such as the Department of Justice.
One example of this is our legal battle for the infamous “Biden tapes.” In fact, Judicial Watch filed a reply brief asking a federal court to expeditiously rule in our favor and order the Biden Justice Department to produce within 14 days the audio recordings of Special Counsel Robert Hur’s interviews of President Biden in the criminal investigation into Biden’s theft and disclosure of classified records. (Judicial Watch, Heritage Foundation, Cable News Network, Inc., et al v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700-TJK))
On March 11, 2024,we filed its FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a February 2024 FOIA request for records of all Special Counsel interviews of President Biden (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)).
Although a redacted transcript of the Biden interview was released on April 15 in response to our lawsuit, the public has a significant interest in hearing the audio recordings “because an open question remains about whether Special Counsel Hur’s conclusion that President Biden should not be prosecuted for his mishandling of classified records [and] is supported by the evidence.”
The Biden Justice Department, in seeking to keep the audio recordings secret, asked the court to ignore precedent and rewrite FOIA law. The Biden agency: demands that a law enforcement/executive privilege exemption be rewritten to help Joe Biden; wants to change FOIA law to protect (after 50 years of being a politician) President Joe Biden’s privacy in his voice; and seeks to potentially end FOIA with a new argument that the possible “AI” alteration of the Hur recordings is reason to keep the recordings and any government record a secret from the public.
As we explain in our latest filing, the Justice Department continues to baselessly assert executive privilege; “doubles down” on its insufficient argument of “potential harm to unspecified and undefined ongoing investigations;” and engages in unsupported speculation on “concerns that the release of the audio recordings could reasonably be expected to chill cooperation with future high-profile law enforcement investigations.”
We state that, in its continued withholding of the recordings, the Justice Department wrongly argues that FOIA “allows for it to withhold the audio recordings that contain the voice of the President of the United States, who has been an elected federal officeholder for more than 50 years, speaking the same substantive information contained in the transcripts.”
Even though President Biden is no longer running for re-election, we state, “the substantial public interest in determining whether the Special Counsel “pulled any punches” (or even “swung too far”) when investigating President Biden remains.”
The Biden Justice Department wants to destroy FOIA in order to protect Joe Biden. In our 30 years of work, we have never seen such a dishonest assault on the people’s right to know. The Court can’t order the release of the Biden tapes soon enough.
The Heritage Foundation and a CNN-led media coalition lawsuits have been joined with our lawsuit.
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
We have several ongoing FOIA lawsuits about Biden’s document scandals and the related unprecedented partisan prosecutorial and judicial abuses of former President Donald J. Trump.
113 Non-Citizens Voted in DC Presidential Primary
It’s a voting free-for-all in your nation’s capital. Aliens, legal AND illegal, are welcomed in the voting booths.
We received an Excel spreadsheet of names and other data from the District of Columbia Board of Elections revealing that 113 non-citizens voted in the June “2024 Presidential Primary.”
The alien voter information was produced in response to Judicial Watch’s July 3, 2024, D.C., Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for:
a. All public records that identify the number of non-citizens who voted in the June 2024 primary;
b. The wards in which they are located;
c. The party affiliation they registered as;
d. Any records that identify whether the non-citizens are lawfully or unlawfully present aliens; and
e. Records that identify the same information for non-citizens registered to vote who will be eligible to vote in the general election (i.e., including independents).
This spreadsheet updates data we received earlier through a pre-primary D.C. FOIA request (May 14, 2024) to the D.C.Board of Elections for records regarding the number of noncitizens registered to vote in Washington, D.C. under the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act. The data showed that at the time 583 foreign nationals were registered to vote in the June primary election. The records from the earlier FOIA request also confirmed that noncitizens can be election workers in the District of Columbia.
Based on the updated, post-primary data from the spreadsheet and from the D.C. Board of Elections website, the turnout rate in the primary among non-U.S.-citizen registrants was 19.3%, as compared to the turnout rate among U.S.-Citizen registrants of 25.9%.
The records we previously obtained include a Board of Elections meeting transcript that explains that noncitizens are not required to have an ID to vote. If they do not have proof of residence when they go to register to vote or vote for the first time they can still vote by “Special Ballot.” Also, prisoners are welcome to vote, according to a “Voting Guide for Incarcerated Residents.”
The fact that 113 foreign nationals voted in the presidential primary in Washington, D.C., is a national scandal, is an insult to every American voter, and may be a violation of federal law.
While federal law prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections, there are at least two states and local jurisdictions in the United States that allow non-citizens who are legal permanent residents to vote in local elections. These include:
- Maryland: Barnesville, Cheverly, Chevy Chase, Garrett Park, Glen Echo, Hyattsville, Martin’s Additions, Mount Rainier, Riverdale Park, Somerset, Takoma Park.
- Vermont: Burlington, Montpelier, Winooski.
In May we received records from the District of Columbia, explaining to illegal aliens and other noncitizens how they can register to vote in local elections.
Judicial Watch Files FCC Complaint Against NBC for Airing Obscene and Indecent Content from Olympics Opening Ceremony
Haven’t we had enough public obscenities? And to see it on the world state of the Olympics is beyond the pale.
That is why Judicial Watch filed a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) complaint against NBC for airing obscene and indecent content from the Olympics Opening Ceremony.
The blasphemous Olympics’ Opening Ceremony that included, among other obscene and indecent acts, a man partially exposing himself around children, is patently offensive for any sensible American and requires immediate FCC action against NBC.
Our FCC complaint reads in part:
NBC and its various stations/outlets on TV, cable and Internet carried (and continues to make available) the Olympics Opening Ceremony on July 26, which included an adult male purposefully exposing (himself) in the presence of a child/children. This content is both obscene and indecent and, to make matters worse, was aired during viewing hours when it was likely seen by millions of children and minors.
The obscene/indecent content occurred during a portion of the ceremonies that mocked Jesus Christ and the Last Supper. The Olympics was forced to issue an apology over the content.
According to the FCC, “federal law prohibits obscene, indecent and profane content from being broadcast on the radio or TV.” The FCC further states:
Obscene content does not have protection by the First Amendment. For content to be ruled obscene, it must meet a three-pronged test established by the Supreme Court: It must appeal to an average person’s prurient interest; depict or describe sexual conduct in a “patently offensive” way; and, taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
Indecent content portrays sexual or excretory organs or activities in a way that is patently offensive but does not meet the three-prong test for obscenity.
Profane content includes “grossly offensive” language that is considered a public nuisance.
The FCC notes airing obscene or indecent content is a federal crime:
It is a violation of federal law to air obscene programming at any time. It is also a violation of federal law to broadcast indecent or profane programming during certain hours. Under 18 U.S.C. Section 1464, “[w]hoever utters any obscene, indecent, or profane language by means of radio communication shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.” Under 18 U.S.C. Section 1468(a), “[w]hoever knowingly utters any obscene language or distributes any obscene matter by means of cable television or subscription services on television, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or by a fine in accordance with this title, or both.” Likewise, under 47 U.S.C. Section 559, “[w]hoever transmits over any cable system any matter which is obscene or otherwise unprotected by the Constitution of the United States shall be fined under Title 18 or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.” Section 73.3999 of the Commission’s rules, applicable to broadcast stations, bans the broadcast of obscene material and prohibits radio and television broadcasts of indecent material between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
The Justice Department should also launch an investigation, especially given the use of children in this obscene and indecent NBC broadcast.
Any person can file a complaint about the NBC broadcast directly with the FCC: https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/27646986117268-TV-Form-Descriptions-of-Complaint-Issues.
As AG Kamala Harris Helped Man Become Nation’s First Undocumented Lawyer
Kamala Harris’ outrageous support for illegal aliens goes way back to her days in California state office. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the details.
Years before her catastrophic failure as the Biden administration’s border czar, Vice President Kamala Harris helped an illegal alien become the nation’s first undocumented lawyer while she was California’s top law enforcement official. In a court brief filed during the illegal alien’s years-long legal battle to obtain a law license, then California Attorney General Harris wrote that “it is not a crime either to be present or to work in the United States without immigration status.” Even the Obama administration opposed an illegal immigrant practicing law in the United States and the Department of Justice (DOJ) challenged it, arguing that a 1996 immigration reform law precludes undocumented aliens from receiving commercial and professional licenses issued by states and the federal government. Accordingly, the California Supreme Court blocked the illegal immigrant’s license to practice law and the case went on for years until Harris intervened on the migrant’s behalf.
Though it occurred over a decade ago, the story resurfaced this week as part of the mainstream media’s love fest with Harris since she replaced Joe Biden as the Democratic candidate for president. A Sacramento newspaper published a celebratory puff piece in which the illegal immigrant attorney, Sergio Covarrubias-Garcia, praises Harris for intervening to help him become a lawyer despite living in the U.S. illegally and being sentenced for reentering the country after being deported. Garcia was born in the Mexican state of Michoacán and first came to the U.S. illegally as an infant but lived in both Mexico and the U.S. until permanently moving to northern California at the age of 17. A court document obtained by Judicial Watch shows that he was convicted and sentenced after “pleading guilty to being an alien found unlawfully in the United States after previously having been removed.”
Garcia graduated from a public high school in a northern California farming town and reportedly earned scholarships to “prestigious universities,” but could not accept them “due to his status as an undocumented immigrant,” according to a biography published by a public university where he delivered an inspirational lecture. He enrolled at Butte Community College near his home and completed his undergraduate degree at the publicly-funded California State University Chico before graduating from Cal Northern School of Law, a private school in Chico. Garcia passed the California State Bar exam in 2009 but was prohibited from practicing law because he was an illegal immigrant. His case received a lot of media attention with open border groups and many of the state’s Latino legislators supporting him. The feds, on the other hand, rightfully litigated to stop the illegal alien from practicing law in the country.
Then Harris came to the rescue. She submitted a written brief to the court supporting Garcia’s case and provided a taxpayer-funded lawyer from the attorney general’s office to argue for him in front of the California Supreme Court, according to the recently published news story. Contradicting the Obama DOJ, Harris’s court brief said a license for Garcia would comply with state and federal policies that “encourage immigrants, both documented and undocumented, to contribute to society.” The legal filing continues to claim that “it is not a crime either to be present or to work in the United States without immigration status, and Garcia has never been charged with the crime of unlawful entry. In fact, Garcia has been forthright about his immigration status with federal officials and has been approved for a visa when one becomes available.” Keep in mind, this is our border czar.
Garcia, who is 47 years old, is of course “fully backing Harris on her campaign to become the first female president of the United States” and is eternally grateful to the former California Attorney General. “To know that the ‘top cop’ in California did not hate me for being undocumented and was supporting me and wanting me to achieve my dream, that was huge,” Garcia says in the article. One of the attorneys who represented Garcia and is currently the dean of the University of California Davis Law School confirms that Harris’s endorsement “made the difference” in the case and eventually led to Garcia obtaining his law license. “When the highest law enforcement officer of a state weighs in and says this is legal, this is permissible, this is possible, the Supreme Court of the State of California listens,” said the UC Davis Law Dean, Kevin Johnson. “She could have ducked and covered and tried to avoid any political controversy.” Harris took it a step further and even awarded the nation’s first illegal immigrant to practice law with a medal of valor.
Until next week,
The post Secret Service Cover-Up! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for all records related to any shots fired inside the U.S. Capitol building on January 6, 2021, and records of requests for CIA support including bomb technicians and bomb-detecting dogs placed on standby or used in response to the massive protests in and around Washington, DC (Judicial Watch v. Central Intelligence Agency(No. 1:24-cv-02172)).
The lawsuit was filed after the CIA failed to respond to Judicial Watch’s March 13, 2024, FOIA request asking the agency to produce records related to:
Shots fired inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
A person being shot inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Requests for CIA support or assistance at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Bomb technician support or assistance to any potential or actual bombs or explosive devices in response to the massive protests in and around the Washington DC area on January 6, 2021.
Accelerant or explosives K-9s (bomb detection dogs) placed on standby or used in Washington, DC, in response to the massive protests in and around Washington, DC on January 6, 2021.
Any after action reports concerning the events that took place in Washington, DC on January 6, 2021.
In March, Judicial Watch received 88 pages of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) records from the Department of Justice in a FOIA lawsuit that show the CIA deployed personnel to Washington, DC on January 6, 2021.
The records include a series of text messages under the heading “January 7 Intel Chain” in which two separate references to participation by the CIA are made. One states that “two CIA bomb techs” are assisting with “a pipe bomb scene on New Jersey and D ST SE.” Another record references “several CIA dog teams on standby.”
“Judicial Watch forced the Justice Department to admit CIA personnel were at the January 6, 2021 disturbance, now the CIA should come clean on exactly what its role at the protests was,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is extensively investigating the events of January 6.
In February 2024, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit on behalf of Aaron Babbitt, the late Ashli Elizabeth Babbitt’s husband, and Ashli Babbitt’s estate against the U.S. Department of Justice for all FBI files on Ashli Babbitt, a U.S. Air Force veteran who was shot and killed inside the U.S. Capitol by then-Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd on January 6, 2021.
In October 2023, Judicial Watch announced that it received the court-ordered declaration of James W. Joyce, senior counsel in the Office of the General Counsel for the Capitol Police, in which he describes emails among senior officials of the United States Capitol Police (USCP) in January 2021 that show warnings of possible January 6 protests that could lead to serious disruptions at the U.S. Capitol.
In September, it received records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that detail the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.
A previous review of records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandumjustifying the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
In January 2023, documentsfrom the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, Judicial Watch released multiple audio, visual, and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Byrd.
In October 2021, United States Park Police records related to the January 6, 2021, demonstrations at the U.S. Capitol showed that on the day before the January 6 rally featuring President Trump, U.S. Park Police expected a “large portion” of the attendees to march to the U.S. Capitol and that the FBI was monitoring the January 6 demonstrations, including travel to the events by “subjects of interest.”
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Records on CIA Personnel Deployed for January 6, 2021 Protests appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton issued the following statement after the revelation that the Biden Defense Department agreed to a plea deal with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and two other top terrorists held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba:
Jihadist terrorists and other American enemies are surely celebrating their comrades’ plea deal victory, made possible by the Biden administration’s surrender in court to the men responsible for helping murder nearly 3,000 Americans. America is less safe as a result of this Harris-Biden betrayal.
The Left has been opposing the timely prosecution of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for years. (Obama tried to shut down Gitmo, for example.) Judicial Watch representatives have been monitoring the proceedings in Gitmo, and our representative is there now as an observer. We can attest based on extensive experience that the process has been a circus from the get-go.
9/11 survivors and families — and all Americans — are rightly outraged by this miscarriage of justice.
Judicial Watch is America’s leading organization of issues related to the 9/11 attacks. As noted above, Judicial Watch is running a longstanding monitoring project of the proceedings against the terrorist detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Its representatives have visited the facility at least 80 times to observe the proceedings.
For more than 20 years Judicial Watch has represented Lynn Faulkner, the husband of a 9/11 victim, in litigation now pending in New York federal court seeking to hold defendants accountable including Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and others.
Judicial Watch has compiled the largest collection of government records pertaining to the spiritual leader of the 9/11 hijackers, Anwar al-Awlaki through its investigations and litigation.
In July, Judicial Watch reported that the Transportation Safety Administration, created after 9/11 to protect the nation’s transportation, has no idea how aviation security was affected when it plucked federal air marshals from their duties to help with the Mexican border crisis.
In June 2023, it reported that the U.S. has failed to properly remove millions who overstayed their visas, which at least four of the September 11 hijackers did.
In June 2021, Judicial Watch reported that four “forever prisoners” were released as part of a Biden administration initiative to clear out the top security facility that houses the world’s most dangerous Islamic terrorists, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
In September 2020, it reported that it took nearly two decades after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil for every state to finally comply with a federal law requiring minimum security standards for driver’s licenses and identification cards.
In September 2015, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking records of communications between the Office of the Secretary of State and the White House/Executive Office of the President following the capture and slaying of Osama bin Laden.
In June 2004, Judicial Watch submitted to the 9/11 Commission documents that show that Saudi Arabian nationals, including bin Laden family members, were allowed to fly out of the United States immediately following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The documents represent the first admission by the government that the flights occurred at all. Judicial Watch is asking the 9/11 Commission to investigate and reconcile previous contradictory testimony about Saudis being allowed to leave the country.
The post Judicial Watch Statement on the Biden Administration Plea Deal with 9/11 Terrorists appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Years before her catastrophic failure as the Biden administration’s border czar, Vice President Kamala Harris helped an illegal alien become the nation’s first undocumented lawyer while she was California’s top law enforcement official. In a court brief filed during the illegal alien’s years-long legal battle to obtain a law license, then California Attorney General Harris wrote that “it is not a crime either to be present or to work in the United States without immigration status.” Even the Obama administration opposed an illegal immigrant practicing law in the United States and the Department of Justice (DOJ) challenged it, arguing that a 1996 immigration reform law precludes undocumented aliens from receiving commercial and professional licenses issued by states and the federal government. Accordingly, the California Supreme Court blocked the illegal immigrant’s license to practice law and the case went on for years until Harris intervened on the migrant’s behalf.
Though it occurred over a decade ago, the story resurfaced this week as part of the mainstream media’s love fest with Harris since she replaced Joe Biden as the Democratic candidate for president. A Sacramento newspaper published a celebratory puff piece in which the illegal immigrant attorney, Sergio Covarrubias-Garcia, praises Harris for intervening to help him become a lawyer despite living in the U.S. illegally and being sentenced for reentering the country after being deported. Garcia was born in the Mexican state of Michoacán and first came to the U.S. illegally as an infant but lived in both Mexico and the U.S. until permanently moving to northern California at the age of 17. A court document obtained by Judicial Watch shows that he was convicted and sentenced after “pleading guilty to being an alien found unlawfully in the United States after previously having been removed.”
Garcia graduated from a public high school in a northern California farming town and reportedly earned scholarships to “prestigious universities,” but could not accept them “due to his status as an undocumented immigrant,” according to a biography published by a public university where he delivered an inspirational lecture. He enrolled at Butte Community College near his home and completed his undergraduate degree at the publicly-funded California State University Chico before graduating from Cal Northern School of Law, a private school in Chico. Garcia passed the California State Bar exam in 2009 but was prohibited from practicing law because he was an illegal immigrant. His case received a lot of media attention with open border groups and many of the state’s Latino legislators supporting him. The feds, on the other hand, rightfully litigated to stop the illegal alien from practicing law in the country.
Then Harris came to the rescue. She submitted a written brief to the court supporting Garcia’s case and provided a taxpayer-funded lawyer from the attorney general’s office to argue for him in front of the California Supreme Court, according to the recently published news story. Contradicting the Obama DOJ, Harris’s court brief said a license for Garcia would comply with state and federal policies that “encourage immigrants, both documented and undocumented, to contribute to society.” The legal filing continues to claim that “it is not a crime either to be present or to work in the United States without immigration status, and Garcia has never been charged with the crime of unlawful entry. In fact, Garcia has been forthright about his immigration status with federal officials and has been approved for a visa when one becomes available.” Keep in mind, this is our border czar.
Garcia, who is 47 years old, is of course “fully backing Harris on her campaign to become the first female president of the United States” and is eternally grateful to the former California Attorney General. “To know that the ‘top cop’ in California did not hate me for being undocumented and was supporting me and wanting me to achieve my dream, that was huge,” Garcia says in the article. One of the attorneys who represented Garcia and is currently the dean of the University of California Davis Law School confirms that Harris’s endorsement “made the difference” in the case and eventually led to Garcia obtaining his law license. “When the highest law enforcement officer of a state weighs in and says this is legal, this is permissible, this is possible, the Supreme Court of the State of California listens,” said the UC Davis Law Dean, Kevin Johnson. “She could have ducked and covered and tried to avoid any political controversy.” Harris took it a step further and even awarded the nation’s first illegal immigrant to practice law with a medal of valor.
The post As AG Kamala Harris Defied Obama DOJ to Help Man Become Nation’s First Undocumented Lawyer appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the United States Secret Service completely denied multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for documents about the assassination attempt on former President Trump.
On July 16, 2024, Judicial Watch filed three comprehensive FOIA requests seeking emails, videos, and advance survey security assessments, among other documents related to the assassination attempt on Trump
The Secret Service refused to produce not one record in response:
At this time, pursuant to Title 5 U.S.C. § 552(B)(7)(A), any potentially responsive records, if they exist, are exempt as disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. The citation of the above exemption is not to be construed as the only exemption which may be available under the FOIA.
Judicial Watch is pursuing the next steps in preparation for litigation.
“The Biden Secret Service is in cover-up mode on its inexcusable and epic failure to protect former President Trump and other innocents,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “For Secret Service leaders to promise transparency to Congress while hiding every possible FOIA record from the American people is yet another indictment of this corrupt and failing agency.”
Judicial Watch has over 25 FOIA and open records currently pending on the shooting of Trump with the Biden administration and local and state officials and agencies in Pennsylvania.
In July 2024, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for records relating to an incident at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland in which a Secret Service agent assigned to protect Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly got into a scuffle with colleagues.
In June 2024, Judicial Watch received 116 pages of United States Secret Service records from the Department of Homeland Security through the Freedom of Information Act that reveal the details about several incidents in which Secret Service personnel were bitten by President Biden’s dog Commander, sometimes requiring medical attention.
In October 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Homeland Security for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding the raid on President Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made during the raid on August 8, 2022.
The post Judicial Watch: Secret Service Rejects FOIA Requests for Any Records About Assassination Attempt on Former President Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a reply brief asking a federal court to expeditiously rule in Judicial Watch’s favor and order the Biden Justice Department to produce within 14 days the audio recordings of Special Counsel Robert Hur’s interviews of President Biden in the criminal investigation into Biden’s theft and disclosure of classified records. (Judicial Watch, Heritage Foundation, Cable News Network, Inc., et al v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700-TJK))
On March 11, 2024, Judicial Watch filed its FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a February 2024 FOIA request for records of all Special Counsel interviews of President Biden (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)).
Although a redacted transcript of the Biden interview was released on April 15 in response to Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, the public has a significant interest in hearing the audio recordings “because an open question remains about whether Special Counsel Hur’s conclusion that President Biden should not be prosecuted for his mishandling of classified records [and] is supported by the evidence.”
The Biden Justice Department, in seeking to keep the audio recordings secret, asked the court to ignore precedent and rewrite FOIA law. The Biden agency: demands that a law enforcement/executive privilege exemption be rewritten to help Joe Biden; wants to change FOIA law to protect (after 50 years of being a politician) President Joe Biden’s privacy in his voice; and seeks to potentially end FOIA with a new argument that the possible “AI” alteration of the Hur recordings is reason to keep the recordings and any government record a secret from the public.
As Judicial Watch explains in its latest filing, the Justice Department continues to baselessly assert executive privilege; “doubles down” on its insufficient argument of “potential harm to unspecified and undefined ongoing investigations;” and engages in unsupported speculation on “concerns that the release of the audio recordings could reasonably be expected to chill cooperation with future high-profile law enforcement investigations.”
Judicial Watch states that, in its continued withholding of the recordings, the Justice Department wrongly argues that FOIA “allows for it to withhold the audio recordings that contain the voice of the President of the United States, who has been an elected federal officeholder for more than 50 years, speaking the same substantive information contained in the transcripts.”
Even though President Biden is no longer running for re-election, Judicial Watch states, “the substantial public interest in determining whether the Special Counsel “pulled any punches” (or even “swung too far”) when investigating President Biden remains.”
“The Biden Justice Department wants to destroy FOIA in order to protect Joe Biden,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “In our 30 years of work, Judicial Watch has never seen such a dishonest assault on the people’s right to know. The Court can’t order the release of the Biden tapes soon enough.”
The Heritage Foundation and a CNN-led media coalition lawsuits have been joined with Judicial Watch’s lawsuit.
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Judicial Watch has several ongoing FOIA lawsuits about Biden’s document scandals and the related unprecedented partisan prosecutorial and judicial abuses of former President Donald J. Trump.
The post Judicial Watch Requests Court Order Justice Department To Turn Over Audio of President Biden’s Interviews with Special Counsel Robert Hur appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times:
Meanwhile, Judicial Watch filed a Federal Communications Commission complaint against NBCUniversal, which is broadcasting the games, for “airing obscene and indecent content from the Olympics Opening Ceremony.”
The complaint noted that the drag queens were joined by child performers during a dance scene on a catwalk and in the “Last Supper” segment, even though the blue-painted Dionysius actor was nearly naked.
“The blasphemous Olympics’ Opening Ceremony which included, among other obscene and indecent acts, a man partially exposing himself around children, is patently offensive for any sensible American and requires immediate FCC action against NBC,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
Read more here…
The post French accused of ‘gaslighting’ with ‘Last Supper’ denials as outcry over anti-Christian mocker appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Less than a year after Judicial Watch reported that the Taliban has established fake nonprofits to steal millions of dollars in U.S. aid to Afghanistan, a new investigation reveals that the terrorist group has also received hundreds of millions in development assistance from Uncle Sam because the State Department fails to properly vet award recipients. At least $239 million have likely filled the coffers of the extremists running the Islamic republic since the 2021 U.S. military withdraw, according to a report published this month by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR). The money was disbursed by State Department divisions known as Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) and International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) to implement development projects intended to help achieve American foreign policy and national security goals in Afghanistan.
Investigators found that the State Department failed to comply with its own counterterrorism partner vetting requirements in Afghanistan before awarding at least 29 grants to various local entities. The agency has a system to identify whether prospective awardees have a record of ethical business practices and is supposed to conduct a risk assessment to determine if programming funds may benefit terrorists or terrorist-affiliates before distributing American taxpayer dollars. In the more than two dozen cases examined, the agency did not bother and failed to keep proper records. “Because DRL and INL could not demonstrate their compliance with State’s partner vetting requirements, there is an increased risk that terrorist and terrorist affiliated individuals and entities may have illegally benefited from State spending in Afghanistan,” the SIGAR report says. “As State continues to spend U.S. taxpayer funds on programs intended to benefit the Afghan people, it is critical that State knows who is actually benefitting from this assistance in order to prevent the aid from being diverted to the Taliban or other sanctioned parties, and to enable policymakers and other oversight authorities to better scrutinize the risks posed by State’s spending.”
The watchdog found issues with 29 awards distributed by DRL and INL. For instance, DRL failed to properly screen the recipients of seven awards totaling about $12 million, investigators found. INL did not provide any supporting documentation for 19 of its 22 awards totaling about $295 million so there is no way to determine if they complied with the vetting requirements. The State Department acknowledged that not all its bureaus have complied with document retention requirements, which makes it conveniently impossible to fully assess the magnitude of its transgressions. The explanation offered for INL not retaining records is “employee turnover and the dissolution of the Afghanistan-Pakistan office,” according to the report. SIGAR points out that, given the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan in August 2021, it is critical that U.S. government activities adhere to the laws, regulations, and policies intended to prevent certain transactions with terrorists.
Besides establishing fraudulent non-governmental organizations (NGO) to loot big chunks of the $3 billion in humanitarian aid that the U.S. has given Afghanistan since the Biden administration’s abrupt military withdraw, the Taliban has raked in millions more by charging taxes, permit fees and import duties. That money has flowed through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), a famously corrupt State Department arm that got $63.1 billion for foreign assistance and diplomatic engagement this year, and the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), the government’s international broadcasting services that aims to inform, engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy. The United Nations has also received $1.6 billion in U.S. funding for Afghanistan and a large percentage of that money most likely went to the Taliban as well, according to a federal audit, because the U.S. government does not require the leftist world body to report on taxes, fees or duties incurred on American funds for activities in Afghanistan.
The post Taliban Gets $239 Mil in U.S. Afghanistan Aid after State Dept. Fails to Vet Awardees appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
The legal watchdog Judicial Watch filed a complaint on Monday with the Federal Communications Commission against NBC for airing an “obscene and indecent” Olympic opening ceremony skit that some say mocked the Last Supper.
The group said the skit included a man exposing himself during the ceremony watched by millions, including children.
“The blasphemous Olympics’ Opening Ceremony, which included, among other obscene and indecent acts, a man partially exposing himself around children, is patently offensive for any sensible American and requires immediate FCC action against NBC,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “The Justice Department should also launch an investigation, especially given the use of children in this obscene and indecent NBC broadcast.”
Read more here…
The post NBC faces FCC complaint over airing ‘obscene’ Olympics Last Supper parody appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received an Excel spreadsheet of names and other data from the District of Columbia Board of Elections revealing that 113 non-citizens voted in the June “2024 Presidential Primary.”
The alien voter information was produced in response to a Judicial Watch July 3, 2024, D.C. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for:
a. All public records that identify the number of non-citizens who voted in the June 2024 primary;
b. The wards in which they are located;
c. The party affiliation they registered as;
d. Any records that identify whether the non-citizens are lawfully or unlawfully present aliens; and
e. Records that identify the same information for non-citizens registered to vote who will be eligible to vote in the general election (i.e., including independents).
This spreadsheet updates data received earlier by Judicial Watch through a pre-primary D.C. FOIA request (May 14, 2024) to the D.C. Board of Elections for records regarding the number of noncitizens registered to vote in Washington, D.C. under the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act. The data showed that at the time 583 foreign nationals were registered to vote in the June primary election. The records from the earlier FOIA request also confirmed that noncitizens can be election workers in the District of Columbia.
Based on the updated, post-primary data from the spreadsheet and from the D.C. Board of Elections website, the turnout rate in the primary among non-U.S.-citizen registrants was 19.3%, as compared to the turnout rate among U.S.-Citizen registrants of 25.9%.
The records previously obtained by Judicial Watch include a Board of Elections meeting transcript that explains that noncitizens are not required to have an ID to vote. If they do not have proof of residence when they go to register to vote or vote for the first time they can still vote by “Special Ballot.” Also, prisoners are welcome to vote, according to a “Voting Guide for Incarcerated Residents.”
“The fact that 113 foreign nationals voted in the presidential primary in Washington, D.C., is a national scandal, is an insult to every American voter, and may be a violation of federal law,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
While federal law prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections, there are at least two states and local jurisdictions in the United States that allow non-citizens who are legal permanent residents to vote in local elections. These include:
-
Maryland: Barnesville, Cheverly, Chevy Chase, Garrett Park, Glen Echo, Hyattsville, Martin’s Additions, Mount Rainier, Riverdale Park, Somerset, Takoma Park.
-
Vermont: Burlington, Montpelier, Winooski.
In May 2024, Judicial Watch received records from the District of Columbia, explaining to illegal aliens and other noncitizens how they can register to vote in local elections.
The post Judicial Watch: 113 Non-Citizens Voted in DC Presidential Primary appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced it filed a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) complaint this weekend against NBC for airing obscene and indecent content from the Olympics Opening Ceremony.
The Judicial Watch FCC complaint, filed by Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton reads, in part:
NBC and its various stations/outlets on TV, cable and Internet carried (and continues to make available) the Olympics Opening Ceremony on July 26, which included an adult male purposefully exposing (himself) in the presence of a child/children. This content is both obscene and indecent and, to make matters worse, was aired during viewing hours when it was likely seen by millions of children and minors.
The obscene/indecent content occurred during a portion of the ceremonies that mocked Jesus Christ and the Last Supper. The Olympics was forced to issue an apology over the content.
According to the FCC, “federal law prohibits obscene, indecent and profane content from being broadcast on the radio or TV.” The FCC further states:
Obscene content does not have protection by the First Amendment. For content to be ruled obscene, it must meet a three-pronged test established by the Supreme Court: It must appeal to an average person’s prurient interest; depict or describe sexual conduct in a “patently offensive” way; and, taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
Indecent content portrays sexual or excretory organs or activities in a way that is patently offensive but does not meet the three-prong test for obscenity.
Profane content includes “grossly offensive” language that is considered a public nuisance.
The FCC notes airing obscene or indecent content is a federal crime:
It is a violation of federal law to air obscene programming at any time. It is also a violation of federal law to broadcast indecent or profane programming during certain hours. Under 18 U.S.C. Section 1464, “[w]hoever utters any obscene, indecent, or profane language by means of radio communication shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.” Under 18 U.S.C. Section 1468(a), “[w]hoever knowingly utters any obscene language or distributes any obscene matter by means of cable television or subscription services on television, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or by a fine in accordance with this title, or both.” Likewise, under 47 U.S.C. Section 559, “[w]hoever transmits over any cable system any matter which is obscene or otherwise unprotected by the Constitution of the United States shall be fined under Title 18 or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.” Section 73.3999 of the Commission’s rules, applicable to broadcast stations, bans the broadcast of obscene material and prohibits radio and television broadcasts of indecent material between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
“The blasphemous Olympics’ Opening Ceremony which included, among other obscene and indecent acts, a man partially exposing himself around children, is patently offensive for any sensible American and requires immediate FCC action against NBC” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Justice Department should also launch an investigation, especially given the use of children in this obscene and indecent NBC broadcast.”
Any person can file a complaint about the NBC broadcast directly with the FCC: https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/27646986117268-TV-Form-Descriptions-of-Complaint-Issues.
The post Judicial Watch Files FCC Complaint Against NBC for Airing Obscene and Indecent Content from Olympics Opening Ceremony appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Warns Oregon to Clean Voter Registration Lists or Face Federal Lawsuit
Judicial Watch Suit Seeks Edited Transcripts of Biden Special Counsel Interviews
Statement on President Biden’s Decision to Step Down from the Presidential Campaign
Pentagon DEI Budget Surges for Woke Training to Root out ‘White Privilege’
Who Is Kamala Harris?
Judicial Watch Warns Oregon to Clean Voter Registration Lists or Face Federal Lawsuit
Election law is simple. But many don’t want to follow it for reasons we can all guess. The National Voter Registration Act(NVRA) of 1993 requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the official voter rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. Among other things, the NVRA requires registrations to be canceled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections. In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory (Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Inst., 138 S. Ct. 1833, 1841-42 (2018)).
We sent a notice letter to the Oregon secretary of state on behalf of ourselves, the Constitution Party of Oregon and an Oregon registered voter, notifying them of evident violations of the NVRA, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. Our notice letter to Oregon serves as a “pre-suit” notice.
The letter states:
According to your state’s responses to the EAC’s [federal government’s Election Assistance Commission] survey, 19 Oregon counties reported removing zero voter registrations from November 2020 to November 2022 pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) of the NVRA for failing to respond to a Confirmation Notice and failing to vote in two consecutive general federal elections. Another 10 counties reported just a handful of such removals during the same two-year period.
Furthermore, not a single one of Oregon’s 36 counties reported any data whatsoever to the EAC regarding inactive registrations. Instead, in the relevant column where the data should have been, the survey response for each of Oregon’s counties merely stated, “Data not available.”
Oregon’s non-compliance with the NVRA is further illustrated by the unusually high registration rates observed in several of its counties. Comparing the data your state reported to the EAC regarding the total registrations for each county to the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent five-year estimates of the numbers of resident citizens over the age of eighteen suggests that eight Oregon counties have more voter registrations than citizens of voting age. Several federal courts have determined that such high registration rates are sufficient grounds for alleging a failure to comply with the NVRA’s requirement to make reasonable efforts to remove voters by reason of death or change of address.
States are required by federal law to report data concerning their removal programs to the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC). Every few years the EAC publishes this data as part of a report it provides to Congress. The most recent report and accompanying datasets were released in June of this year.
Dirty election rolls can mean dirty elections. With a presidential election less than four months away, it is vital that Oregon get about the business of cleaning its voter registration rolls of ineligible voters to eliminate any cloud of doubt over the legitimacy of its balloting.
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of our work, we assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls across the country, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, our senior attorney, leads our election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
A hearing was recently held in another case we filed that challenges a Mississippi election law permitting absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day.
In May 2024, we sued California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of us and the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law (Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber et al. (No. 2:24-cv-3750)).
In December 2023, we sent three other notice letters to election officials in the District of Columbia, California, and Illinois, notifying them of evident violations of the NVRA, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. In response to our inquiries, Washington, D.C., officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.”
In July 2023 we filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decisionof the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study we conducted in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
In July 2023, we also settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with us and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from us. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, we filed a federal lawsuit against the Illinois State Board of Elections and its Executive Director, Bernadette Matthews, over their failure to clean Illinois’ voter rolls and to produce election-related records as required by federal law.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle our NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide us with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit we filed in 2017.
We settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another of our lawsuits.
In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
This leadership for election integrity only happens because of the generous support of our members. If you aren’t a part of Judicial Watch’s cause and movement, I encourage you to support us right here! And if you have already supported our work, thank you – and I encourage you to make another donation because you know the fight never stops!
Judicial Watch Suit Seeks Edited Transcripts of Biden Special Counsel Interviews
The Biden Justice Department is engaged in a major league cover-up for Joe Biden. Hiding audio recordings, altering transcripts, and ignoring FOIA law shows that the Biden team is desperate to avoid disclosure about Joe Biden’s cognitive condition.
We just filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice for records of communication between the agency and the White House regarding the altered transcripts of Special Counsel Robert Hur’s October 2023 interviews of President Biden in the criminal investigation into Biden’s theft and disclosure of classified records (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-02176)). The lawsuit is one of three federal FOIA lawsuits we filed this week concerning the Hur investigation.
(In a separate lawsuit, we forced the Biden administration to admit that the transcripts of the audio recordings have been altered and are not accurate.)
We filed the lawsuit after the Justice Department inadequately responded to a FOIA request on June 1, 2024, for:
All records of communication between any official or employee of the Department of Justice and any official or employee of the Executive Office of the President regarding the creation, editing, or release of the transcript of the interviews of President Biden by Special Counsel Robert Hur on October 8, 2023 and October 9, 2023. This request includes, but is not limited to, all such communications including Mr. Hur and/or any other official or employee assigned to or employed by Mr. Hur’s office.
All records of communication between any official or employee of the Department of Justice and the court reporter(s) responsible for the creation or editing of the transcripts of the interviews described in part one of this request and/or any other officer, employee, or representative of Free State Reporting, Inc. This request includes, but is not limited to, all such communications including Mr. Hur and/or any other official or employee assigned to or employed by Mr. Hur’s office.
All directions, instructions, or other guidance documents provided to the court reporter(s) responsible for the creation or editing of the transcripts of the interviews described in part one of this request and/or any other officer, employee, or representative of Free State Reporting, Inc. regarding the creation or editing of those transcripts.
Also this week, we filed two other FOIA lawsuits, one for the background materials referenced in Hur’s February 2020 report (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-02177) and one for all communications about the Hur report with the Office of the White House Counsel and Biden’s personal lawyers (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-02179)).
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
And with all the well-placed concern about Joe Biden’s cognitive status, the public interest in the release of the tapes is as important than ever. The court could rule at any time so check back for updates!
Statement on President Biden’s Decision to Step Down from the Presidential Campaign
President Joe Biden’s resignation from the presidential race is the result of a corrupt, arrogant, and anti-democratic process. Biden was forced to pull out of the presidential race as the result of a dangerously corrupt pressure campaign led by Obama, Pelosi, Schumer and like-minded Democrats, which has effectively disenfranchised 14 million Americans who voted in the Democratic presidential primaries.
Few Americans will buy the DC establishment’s scheme to remove Biden from the presidential campaign over cognitive issues while ignoring his inability to serve as Commander-in-Chief.
Vice President Kamala Harris and the majority of the cabinet need to step up and invoke the 25th Amendment. And, Congress should do an emergency investigation into Biden’s fitness for office. The assassination attempt on former President Trump adds increased urgency to ensure we have a fully capable president. This is truly a national security crisis.
And to make matters worse, we have this “coup against democracy,” as the Left likes to say. We are not going to know who the nominee of the Democratic Party for the office of president of the United States will be until August. It’s election interference, pure and simple. There is nothing about this process that’s normal, appropriate or honest.
A snap national primary (or primaries) to pick a new nominee would seem to be the most “democratic” approach to Biden’s decision not to seek reelection. At a minimum, a careful state-by-state and federal legal analysis is a necessary first step to help determine whether Biden can be replaced on the presidential ballot at this late stage in the presidential campaign. Judicial Watch is already investigating this election integrity issue. That the votes of 14 million Americans would be casually tossed aside by Democratic Party elites is a major corruption and election interference scandal.
Pentagon DEI Budget Surges for Woke Training to Root out ‘White Privilege’
Our Corruption Chronicles blog has carefully documented the dangerous woke ideology ruining our military. As you can see from our latest report, the Leftist abuse and waste seem to be getting worse:
The Pentagon dedicates tens of millions of dollars annually to Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs throughout the armed forces and cadets at the nation’s military academies receive extensive training about racism, sexism, unconscious bias, and intersectionality.
A year-long research project conducted by a special commission at a public university think tank has uncovered the unbelievable details behind a costly Department of Defense (DOD) initiative to root out so-called white privilege white supremacy in the military. The study, conducted by the Center for American Institutions at Arizona State University (ASU), began as a review of civic education in the military and uncovered a fervent woke movement throughout the nation’s armed forces. “Our research team did not expect to find Critical Race Theory so embedded and pervasive,” the center’s director, Donald T. Critchlow, an ASU American political history professor, writes in the introduction of a recently published report. He confirms that there is CRT and DEI training across the military from the Pentagon through the ranks.
It is important to note that the sole purpose of the U.S. armed forces is to defend the nation against external enemies, therefore the DOD’s mission is to provide the military forces needed to deter war and ensure the country’s security. The agency is the government’s largest with 3.4 million service members and civilians—in the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Space Force and Coast Guard—stationed at 4,800 sites in over 160 countries. Under the Biden administration the DOD budget for DEI training has increased significantly from $68 million in fiscal year 2022 to $86.5 million in fiscal year 2023, the report states. The agency is requesting a whopping $114.7 million for fiscal year 2024, according to DOD figures obtained by ASU researchers. “Training is implemented by a vast DEI bureaucracy that extends from senior leaders at the Pentagon to the lowest ranks,” the report says, adding that the “U.S. military now has a well-developed, taxpayer-funded DEI bureaucracy dedicated to rooting out ‘white privilege’ and white supremacy, and that allows for (and sometimes teaches) the overt criticism of the United States, its founding, its founders, and its founding documents, alleging that they are all rooted in systemic racism.”
Few training modules are available to the public, but the report includes enough to get the full picture. The Air Force teaches airmen to use proper pronouns as an element of inclusion and its Air Combat Command toolkit features examinations of white privilege. An Army course on race and gender in American military history defines racism as a possibility for a dominant group, while people of color merely express prejudice and gender as a social construct. The Navy promotes a “sailor’s drag show aboard a warship” and its anti-extremist training considers the violent and radical Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement to be a positive, apolitical public policy issue. A Marine Corps CRT course emphasizes diversity and inclusion while claiming that colorblindness is unsound because it protects white supremacy. The Marine Corps has also launched a special initiative “to eradicate racism, sexism, and negative biases that diminish our warfighting effectiveness.”
The military academies all have federally mandated offices of diversity and inclusion that coordinate training and support based on gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity and promote celebrations based on those identities. West Point offers a minor in diversity and inclusion studies and courses such as “social inequality” as well as classes that focus on feminist and queer theory. The Air Force Academy has a Transgender Working Group and U.S. history is an optional elective while required classes cover BLM, the New York Times’ 1619 project that aims to “reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of Black Americans at the very center of the United States” and white fragility. The Naval Academy requires faculty to attend a diversity and inclusion conference and future Humanities and Social Sciences instructors to submit diversity statements describing how they will contribute to the academy’s diversity and inclusion mission.
In the last few years we have sued the DOD to obtain more information about the military’s outrageous DEI initiatives, including anti-American CRT propaganda at three academies. In 2022 we received hundreds of pages of records outlining CRT instruction at West Point that includes material on “whiteness,” a social science class on race, gender, and sexuality that focuses on queer theory, and a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” Months later, we obtained the Air Force Academy’s CRT training of cadets that shows the academy has made race and gender instruction a top priority. This includes a race, gender and sexuality course as a core class and mandatory training for cadets and staff on DEI concepts and skills to decrease incidents of microaggressions and unconscious bias. A cultural immersion movie nights initiative was also launched to teach cadets about racism, racial discrimination and the several historical events and policies that have impacted minorities through cinema.
Who Is Kamala Harris?
Our chief investigative reporter Micah Morrison covers the rise of Kamal Harris (and certain fact the Big Media don’t want you to know) in Judicial Watch’s Investigative Bulletin:
The world will quickly be getting to know presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee Kamala Harris. Her long relationship—personal and political—with the scandal-scarred California power broker Willie Brown is instructive. Brown was instrumental in Harris’s rise in California politics. In return, she may have protected him and his allies from damaging investigations.
Brown rose through the ranks of the California State Assembly and became Speaker in 1980. He served in that post for fourteen years, ruling with an iron fist in a velvet glove, rewarding allies with lucrative patronage posts and punishing opponents. He called himself the “Ayatollah of the Assembly.” In 1996, he was elected mayor of San Francisco, serving two terms. Along the way, he attracted the attention of the FBI, which repeatedly investigated him but failed to bring charges.
The FBI may have failed, but Brown had plenty of critics. “The legacy of Willie Brown has been one of corruption and incompetence in government, and the [FBI] probes were a reflection of that,” the head of San Francisco Common Cause told the San Francisco Chronicle in 2004.
By 2004, Brown was on his term-limited way out of office, but one of his key allies, Kamala Harris, was on her way up. Harris was elected San Francisco District Attorney in 2003. Brown had put his formidable political machine behind Harris, swinging a come-from-behind election her way.
It was not the first time Willie Brown had given Kamala Harris a helping hand. The two dated in 1994 and 1995. In 1994, Brown appointed the then-obscure county prosecutor to two influential state commissions—the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and the California Medical Assistance Commission. Harris’s political rise was launched—elected DA in 2003 and 2007, California Attorney General in 2010 and 2014, United States Senator in 2016, and Vice President in 2020.
Questions persist about what Harris may have done for Brown and his allies. The investigative journalist Peter Schweizer noted in a recent interview with Breitbart that in her first DA race, Harris ran against the incumbent prosecutor, who was investigating corruption allegations against Brown. “And when she won,” Schweizer said, “she dropped a whole series of cases” connected to Brown.
The biggest case, Schweizer said, involves an 800-page document from the diocese of the Catholic Church in San Francisco detailing accusations of sexual abuse linked to “individuals and entities” with connections to the Democratic Party. But when “Kamala Harris came in, not only did she not prosecute anybody involved in the scandals, she actually refused to release the 800-page document. And it has been reported in San Francisco, that document disappeared and never was to be found.”
Those are serious charges that raise serious questions. What cases were dropped when Kamala Harris became San Francisco DA? Does she appear in records of FBI investigations of Willie Brown? What became of the San Francisco diocese investigation? Where is the 800-page report? Judicial Watch is investigating these issues and other matters linked to Democratic Party power brokers in California.
As for Willie Brown, now 90, he remains a strong Harris supporter. In a hastily called sidewalk press conference after President Biden announced he would not run for re-election, Brown suggested that the president should resign immediately, stepping aside for Harris.
A Biden resignation would “silence all of this nonsense about how to select some new nominee,” Brown said. “Her chances go up if he would at this moment say not only am I no longer the candidate, I’m no longer the president—she is.”
Until next week,
The post Biden Crisis Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice for records of communication between the agency and White House regarding the altered transcripts of Special Counsel Robert Hur’s October 2023 interviews of President Biden in the criminal investigation into Biden’s theft and disclosure of classified records (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice(No. 1:24-cv-02176)). The lawsuit is one of three federal FOIA lawsuits filed this week concerning the Hur investigation.
(A separate Judicial Watch lawsuit forced the Biden administration to admit that the transcripts of the audio recordings have been altered and are not accurate.)
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the Justice Department inadequately responded to a FOIA request on June 1, 2024, for:
All records of communication between any official or employee of the Department of Justice and any official or employee of the Executive Office of the President regarding the creation, editing, or release of the transcript of the interviews of President Biden by Special Counsel Robert Hur on October 8, 2023 and October 9, 2023. This request includes, but is not limited to, all such communications including Mr. Hur and/or any other official or employee assigned to or employed by Mr. Hur’s office.
All records of communication between any official or employee of the Department of Justice and the court reporter(s) responsible for the creation or editing of the transcripts of the interviews described in part one of this request and/or any other officer, employee, or representative of Free State Reporting, Inc. This request includes, but is not limited to, all such communications including Mr. Hur and/or any other official or employee assigned to or employed by Mr. Hur’s office.
All directions, instructions, or other guidance documents provided to the court reporter(s) responsible for the creation or editing of the transcripts of the interviews described in part one of this request and/or any other officer, employee, or representative of Free State Reporting, Inc. regarding the creation or editing of those transcripts.
Judicial Watch this week also filed two other FOIA lawsuits, one for the background materials referenced in Hur’s February 2020 report(Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-02177) and one for all communications about the Hur report with the Office of the White House Counsel and Biden’s personal lawyers (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-02179)).
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
“The Biden Justice Department is engaged in a major league cover-up for Joe Biden,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Hiding audio recordings, altering transcripts, and ignoring FOIA law shows that the Biden team is desperate to avoid disclosure about Joe Biden’s cognitive condition.”
The post Judicial Watch Sues Justice Dept for Communications with Biden White House Regarding Edited Transcripts of Special Counsel Interviews appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Pentagon dedicates tens of millions of dollars annually to Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs throughout the armed forces and cadets at the nation’s military academies receive extensive training about racism, sexism, unconscious bias, and intersectionality. A year-long research project conducted by a special commission at a public university think tank has uncovered the unbelievable details behind a costly Department of Defense (DOD) initiative to root out so-called white privilege white supremacy in the military. The study, conducted by the Center for American Institutions at Arizona State University (ASU), began as a review of civic education in the military and uncovered a fervent woke movement throughout the nation’s armed forces. “Our research team did not expect to find Critical Race Theory so embedded and pervasive,” the center’s director, Donald T. Critchlow, an ASU American political history professor, writes in the introduction of a recently published report. He confirms that there is CRT and DEI training across the military from the Pentagon through the ranks.
It is important to note that the sole purpose of the U.S. armed forces is to defend the nation against external enemies, therefore the DOD’s mission is to provide the military forces needed to deter war and ensure the country’s security. The agency is the government’s largest with 3.4 million service members and civilians—in the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, Space Force and Coast Guard—stationed at 4,800 sites in over 160 countries. Under the Biden administration the DOD budget for DEI training has increased significantly from $68 million in fiscal year 2022 to $86.5 million in fiscal year 2023, the report states. The agency is requesting a whopping $114.7 million for fiscal year 2024, according to DOD figures obtained by ASU researchers. “Training is implemented by a vast DEI bureaucracy that extends from senior leaders at the Pentagon to the lowest ranks,” the report says, adding that the “U.S. military now has a well-developed, taxpayer-funded DEI bureaucracy dedicated to rooting out ‘white privilege’ and white supremacy, and that allows for (and sometimes teaches) the overt criticism of the United States, its founding, its founders, and its founding documents, alleging that they are all rooted in systemic racism.”
Few training modules are available to the public, but the report includes enough to get the full picture. The Air Force teaches airmen to use proper pronouns as an element of inclusion and its Air Combat Command toolkit features examinations of white privilege. An Army course on race and gender in American military history defines racism as a possibility for a dominant group, while people of color merely express prejudice and gender as a social construct. The Navy promotes a “sailor’s drag show aboard a warship” and its anti-extremist training considers the violent and radical Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement to be a positive, apolitical public policy issue. A Marine Corps CRT course emphasizes diversity and inclusion while claiming that colorblindness is unsound because it protects white supremacy. The Marine Corps has also launched a special initiative “to eradicate racism, sexism, and negative biases that diminish our warfighting effectiveness.”
The military academies all have federally mandated offices of diversity and inclusion that coordinate training and support based on gender, sexuality, race, ethnicity and promote celebrations based on those identities. West Point offers a minor in diversity and inclusion studies and courses such as “social inequality” as well as classes that focus on feminist and queer theory. The Air Force Academy has a Transgender Working Group and U.S. history is an optional elective while required classes cover BLM, the New York Times’ 1619 project that aims to “reframe the country’s history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of Black Americans at the very center of the United States” and white fragility. The Naval Academy requires faculty to attend a diversity and inclusion conference and future Humanities and Social Sciences instructors to submit diversity statements describing how they will contribute to the academy’s diversity and inclusion mission.
In the last few years Judicial Watch has sued the DOD to obtain more information about the military’s outrageous DEI initiatives, including anti-American CRT propaganda at three academies. In 2022 we received hundreds of pages of records outlining CRT instruction at West Point that includes material on “whiteness,” a social science class on race, gender, and sexuality that focuses on queer theory, and a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” Months later, Judicial Watch obtained the Air Force Academy’s CRT training of cadets that shows the academy has made race and gender instruction a top priority. This includes a race, gender and sexuality course as a core class and mandatory training for cadets and staff on DEI concepts and skills to decrease incidents of microaggressions and unconscious bias. A cultural immersion movie nights initiative was also launched to teach cadets about racism, racial discrimination and the several historical events and policies that have impacted minorities through cinema.
The post Pentagon DEI Budget Surges for Military-Wide Woke Training to Root out “White Privilege” appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it sent a notice letter to the Oregon secretary of state on behalf of itself, the Constitution Party of Oregon and an Oregon registered voter, notifying them of evident violations of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The notice letter to Oregon serves as a “pre-suit” notice.
The NVRA requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the official voter rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. Among other things, the NVRA requires registrations to be cancelled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections. In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory (Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Inst., 138 S. Ct. 1833, 1841-42 (2018)).
The letter states:
According to your state’s responses to the EAC’s [federal government’s Election Assistance Commission] survey, 19 Oregon counties reported removing zero voter registrations from November 2020 to November 2022 pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) of the NVRA for failing to respond to a Confirmation Notice and failing to vote in two consecutive general federal elections. Another 10 counties reported just a handful of such removals during the same two-year period.
Furthermore, not a single one of Oregon’s 36 counties reported any data whatsoever to the EAC regarding inactive registrations. Instead, in the relevant column where the data should have been, the survey response for each of Oregon’s counties merely stated, “Data not available.”
Oregon’s non-compliance with the NVRA is further illustrated by the unusually high registration rates observed in several of its counties. Comparing the data your state reported to the EAC regarding the total registrations for each county to the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent five-year estimates of the numbers of resident citizens over the age of eighteen suggests that eight Oregon counties have more voter registrations than citizens of voting age. Several federal courts have determined that such high registration rates are sufficient grounds for alleging a failure to comply with the NVRA’s requirement to make reasonable efforts to remove voters by reason of death or change of address.
States are required by federal law to report data concerning their removal programs to the federal Election Assistance Commission (EAC). Every few years the EAC publishes this data as part of a report it provides to Congress. The most recent report and accompanying datasets were released in June of this year.
“Dirty election rolls can mean dirty elections,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “With a presidential election less than four months away, it is vital that Oregon get about the business of cleaning its voter registration rolls of ineligible voters to eliminate any cloud of doubt over the legitimacy of its balloting.”
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in across the country, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
A hearing was recently held in another case filed by Judicial Watch that challenges a Mississippi election law permitting absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day.
In May 2024, Judicial Watch sued California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law (Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber et al. (No. 2:24-cv-3750)).
In December 2023, Judicial Watch sent three other notice letters to election officials in the District of Columbia, California, and Illinois, notifying them of evident violations of the NVRA, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, D.C., officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.”
In July 2023 Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decisionof the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
Judicial Watch in July 2023 also settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with Judicial Watch and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from Judicial Watch. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Judicial Watch filed a federal lawsuit against the Illinois State Board of Elections and its Executive Director, Bernadette Matthews, over their failure to clean Illinois’ voter rolls and to produce election-related records as required by federal law.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle a Judicial Watch NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
Judicial Watch settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
The post Judicial Watch Warns Oregon to Clean Voter Registration Lists or Face Federal Lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From the National Review:
The Justice Department has discovered transcripts of conversations between Joe Biden and his ghostwriter that DOJ lawyers previously denied having, as the agency continues to stonewall Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits demanding documents related to Biden’s disclosure of classified information.
Federal officials said in a court filing Monday that they located transcripts from a portion of the audio recordings of Biden’s conversations with ghostwriter Mark Zwonitzer, after telling a judge the month before that special counsel Robert Hur’s office did not have transcripts of the audio. The court filing, submitted as part of a lawsuit brought by the Heritage Foundation, was first reported by Politico and preceded a hearing scheduled for Tuesday morning.
The Heritage Foundation and Judicial Watch are partnering with news outlets in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for the audio tapes and transcripts of Biden’s lengthy two-day interview with Hur during his investigation.
Read more here…
The post Justice Department Finds Transcripts of Biden’s Interviews with Ghostwriter after Insisting They Did Not Exist appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From the Daily Mail:
Agents were accused of improperly intervening in the investigation into whether the President’s son Hunter Biden lied on federal firearms forms to buy a revolver at a Delaware gun shop in 2018.
In June, Hunter was convicted on three felony charges related to the purchase.
But early on in that case, FBI documents revealed, that the gun store owner claimed that Secret Service agents showed up at his business and asked to remove the documents Hunter has signed.
The Secret Service has denied the claims, but two years later, the government transparency group Judicial Watch obtained hundreds of pages of internal communications between Secret Service officials about the alleged incident.
Read more here…
The post Damning new Secret Service whistleblower claims about Trump shooting reveal staffing crisis, untrained agents – and the agency’s woke ‘nepo-hire’ director’s links to Jill Biden appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
The Department of Justice is fighting with outside organizations attempting to use the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to get access to former special counsel Robert Hur’s recorded interview with President Joe Biden.
According to the Washington Examiner, attorneys at the DOJ argued that there is “no basis” under FOIA to hand over such recordings.
Some of the groups attempting to get access to the recordings include a CNN-led media coalition, the Heritage Foundation and Judicial Watch.
Hur released a report earlier this year that concluded that Biden “willfully” retained classified documents from his time as vice president, he knew he had them as far back as 2017, and shared them with an author who was ghostwriting his memoir.
Read more here…
The post Justice Department rejects efforts from groups using FOIA to get access to Hur tapes appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Independent Journal Review:
The Department of Justice (DOJ) is blocking several groups from obtaining audio recordings from President Joe Biden’s interview with former special counsel Robert Hur, according to the Washington Examiner.
The DOJ rejected Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests from several entities attempting to gain access to the Biden-Hur tapes, prompting them to file a lawsuit Thursday, the Washington Examiner reported. The lawsuit was joined by Judicial Watch, Heritage Foundation and a CNN-led media coalition that includes The Associated Press, CBS, Reuters and other companies.
The Daily Caller News Foundation also filed a FOIA request to obtain the audio tapes on Feb. 13, but the DOJ said the request remains pending.
Read more here…
The post DOJ Blocks Conservative Groups, Media From Obtaining Biden-Hur Tapes appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From the Washington Examiner:
The Department of Justice is fighting efforts from several groups to obtain audio recordings of the interview former special counsel Robert Hur conducted with President Joe Biden last year, according to court documents filed Thursday evening.
DOJ attorneys wrote that there is “no basis” under the Freedom of Information Act for the department to provide the recordings of Biden’s interview, an argument that comes after the department released the transcript of it in March.
Three separate entities have joined the lawsuit as they attempt to force the DOJ to comply with their FOIA requests: the conservative groups Judicial Watch and the Heritage Foundation and a CNN-led media coalition that includes the Associated Press, CBS, Reuters, and several other companies.
Read more here…
The post DOJ rejects outside groups’ efforts to FOIA Hur tapes appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The world will quickly be getting to know presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee Kamala Harris. Her long relationship—personal and political—with the scandal-scarred California power broker Willie Brown is instructive. Brown was instrumental in Harris’s rise in California politics. In return, she may have protected him and his allies from damaging investigations.
Brown rose through the ranks of the California State Assembly and became Speaker in 1980. He served in that post for fourteen years, ruling with an iron fist in a velvet glove, rewarding allies with lucrative patronage posts and punishing opponents. He called himself the “Ayatollah of the Assembly.” In 1996, he was elected mayor of San Francisco, serving two terms. Along the way, he attracted the attention of the FBI, which repeatedly investigated him but failed to bring charges.
The FBI may have failed, but Brown had plenty of critics. “The legacy of Willie Brown has been one of corruption and incompetence in government, and the [FBI] probes were a reflection of that,” the head of San Francisco Common Cause told the San Francisco Chronicle in 2004.
By 2004, Brown was on his term-limited way out of office, but one of his key allies, Kamala Harris, was on her way up. Harris was elected San Francisco District Attorney in 2003. Brown had put his formidable political machine behind Harris, swinging a come-from-behind election her way
It was not the first time Willie Brown had given Kamala Harris a helping hand. The two dated in 1994 and 1995. In 1994, Brown appointed the then-obscure county prosecutor to two influential state commissions—the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and the California Medical Assistance Commission. Harris’s political rise was launched—elected DA in 2003 and 2007, California Attorney General in 2010 and 2014, United States Senator in 2016, and Vice President in 2020.
Questions persist about what Harris may have done for Brown and his allies. The investigative journalist Peter Schweizer noted in a recent interview with Breitbart that in her first DA race, Harris ran against the incumbent prosecutor, who was investigating corruption allegations against Brown. “And when she won,” Schweizer said, “she dropped a whole series of cases” connected to Brown.
The biggest case, Schweizer said, involves an 800-page document from the diocese of the Catholic Church in San Francisco detailing accusations of sexual abuse linked to “individuals and entities” with connections to the Democratic Party. But when “Kamala Harris came in, not only did she not prosecute anybody involved in the scandals, she actually refused to release the 800-page document. And it has been reported in San Francisco, that document disappeared and never was to be found.”
Those are serious charges that raise serious questions. What cases were dropped when Kamala Harris became San Francisco DA? Does she appear in records of FBI investigations of Willie Brown? What became of the San Francisco diocese investigation? Where is the 800-page report? Judicial Watch is investigating these issues and other matters linked to Democratic Party power brokers in California.
As for Willie Brown, now 90, he remains a strong Harris supporter. In a hastily called sidewalk press conference after President Biden announced he would not run for re-election, Brown suggested that the president should resign immediately, stepping aside for Harris.
A Biden resignation would “silence all of this nonsense about how to select some new nominee,” Brown said. “Her chances go up if he would at this moment say not only am I no longer the candidate, I’m no longer the president—she is.”
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post Who Is Kamala Harris? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Basic Income Today:
In January 2024, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit alleging that the program violates the State of California’s equal protection clause, discriminating on the basis of sex and race.
“The transgender extremists running San Francisco are illegally using taxpayer money to hand out free cash to transgender individuals based on race and sex in blatant violation of the state’s constitution,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement announcing the lawsuit.
Judicial Watch is a conservative government-watchdog organization that promotes Donald Trump and other right-wing interests. Recently, they have filed several lawsuits against programs and policies that take gender and race into account.
Read more here…
The post San Francisco’s basic income program for trans people to end after cuts, conservative lawsuits appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The U.S. government’s largest housing provider for illegal immigrant minors, which has received billions of dollars from American taxpayers since Barack Obama was president, is now being sued by the Biden administration for raping, sexually abusing and harassing the children Uncle Sam pays it to shelter. The Texas-based nonprofit that has raked in enormous amounts of public funds is called Southwest Key and it operates 29 shelters that provide temporary housing for the hundreds of thousands of Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC), migrants under the age of 18, welcomed into the country in the last few years. The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which operates under Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is responsible for caring for UAC and in fiscal year 2021 provided shelter for an unprecedented 122,731 young migrants and 118,938 in fiscal year 2023, according to government figures. The overwhelming majority (76%) of UAC are over 14 years of age and 61% are boys, the stats show. They come from Guatemala (42%), Honduras (28%), El Salvador (9%), Mexico (8%) and “other” (13%).
Allegations of sexual and physical abuse at UAC shelters have circulated for years and back in 2021 Judicial Watch obtained records from HHS documenting 33 incidents of physical and sexual abuse during a one-month period at shelters where the government houses UAC until they are relocated with a sponsor. Months earlier, the agency got slammed in a federal audit for failing to protect UAC from sexual misconduct at the facilities. During a six-month period alone, investigators from the HHS Inspector General’s office uncovered more than 750 incidents involving sexual misconduct at dozens of shelters housing minor detainees. The investigation was launched because ORR-funded facilities for years reported allegations of sexual and physical abuse of minors in their care, some resulting in criminal convictions. For example, in one case a facility employee was convicted of sexually abusing seven UAC and in another an employee was convicted of attempting to coerce a minor to engage in illicit sexual activity and exchanging explicit videos and images with others.
Now, after all these years, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is finally taking legal action after unknown numbers of migrant kids were victimized by the same provider for around a decade. In its complaint the DOJ writes that from at least 2015 through at least 2023, multiple Southwest Key employees have subjected UAC in their care to repeated and unwelcome sexual abuse, harassment, and misconduct and a hostile housing environment, including severe sexual abuse and rape, solicitation of sex acts, solicitation of nude photos, entreaties for sexually inappropriate relationships, sexual comments and gestures, leering, and inappropriate touching. In some cases, the feds say, Southwest Key employees charged with caring for the migrants threatened them to maintain their silence. “In harassing these children, these Southwest Key employees exploited the children’s vulnerabilities, language barriers, and distance from family and loved ones,” the lawsuit, filed in an Austin, Texas federal court states.
Laughably, though the crimes have persisted consistently over many years, HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra, a former California Attorney General and longtime congressman in the Golden State, said this in a statement: “HHS has a zero-tolerance policy for all forms of sexual abuse, sexual harassment, inappropriate sexual behavior, and discrimination.” Bidens Health Secretary added that the DOJ’s lawsuit against Southwest Key “raises a serious pattern or practice concern” and assured that his agency will collaborate with federal prosecutors and oversight agencies to hold its care-giving programs like Southwest Key accountable. “And we will continue to closely evaluate our assignment of children into care-giving programs to ensure the safety and well-being of every child in HHS custody,” Becerra proclaimed.
The heinous allegations and years-long evidence of wrongdoing against this nonprofit have not stopped the government cash from flowing, however. In the last few years alone, HHS has given Southwest Key over $13 million, according to recent government grant records. The money is listed as going to health care and social assistance, community food and housing, emergency, and other relief services. The contracts continued even though the DOJ reveals in its lawsuit that even after ORR issued multiple corrective actions Southwest Key failed to consistently follow federal requirements for preventing, detecting and reporting abuse including sexual harassment, failed to take appropriate or sufficient action to protect the children in its care and discouraged children from disclosing sexual harassment in violation of federal requirements.
The post U.S. Sues Nonprofit it Has Paid Billions to House Migrant Youths for Sexually Abusing Them for Years appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Sues for Records of Joint Base Andrews Scuffle Involving Kamala Harris’ Secret Service Detail
Judicial Watch announced recently it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records relating to an incident at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland in which a Secret Service agent assigned to protect Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly got into a scuffle with colleagues.
Judicial Watch Asks Court to Reject Effort to Shut Down Lawsuit to Clean Up Voter Rolls in Illinois
“Dirty voter rolls can mean dirty elections, and Illinois’ voting rolls are a mess,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Rather than trying to shut down our lawsuit, Illinois should take immediate steps to clean its rolls to both prevent fraud and increase voter confidence in the elections.”
CDC Invests Millions to Study if Mobile Text Program Helps Transgender Women of Color Avert HIV
The U.S. will spend millions of dollars to implement and evaluate if an interactive text messaging program used by the government is effective in helping transgender women of color and young men who have sex with men (YMSM) take readily available measures to protect against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a sexually transmitted infection that attacks the body’s immune system. The mobile health intervention is known as PrEPmate, and it is supposed to increase HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) adherence and retention within the demographic by delivering “youth-tailored” text messages with interactive content, reminders for clinic appointments and prescriptions as well as a dashboard that may be integrated into electronic medical records.
| Police Chief Investigated for Fraud Out as Air Marshal Deputy Director Weeks after TSA Appointment |
After just a few weeks the Biden administration’s egregious choice to serve as Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) deputy director has stepped down, thanks in part to Judicial Watch’s reporting. Americans can also thank the highly trained aviation security specialists who brought it to our attention and the Air Marshal National Council, the union that represents thousands of agents nationwide and has exposed a multitude of scandals that have rocked the agency in recent years.
In The News
FOIA suit targets Secret Service director’s DEI pushWashington Examiner
A judicial watchdog on Friday said it has filed a suit against the Department of Homeland Security for details about a troubling scuffle between Secret Service agents for Vice President Kamala Harris at Joint Base Andrews in April.
Judicial Watch Statement on Judge Cannon’s Decision to Dismiss Trump Documents ProsecutionJudicial Watch Statement on the Assassination Attempt on Former President Donald TrumpVideo Highlights
FITTON: Biden Secret Service INEXCUSABLY FAILS Trump! @JudicialWatch INVESTIGATES!Major General Robert Dees on the National Center for Healthy VeteransSecret Service FAILURE at Trump Rally—Judicial Watch Investigates!The post Judicial Watch Sues for Records of Joint Base Andrews Scuffle Involving Kamala Harris’ Secret Service Detail appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the resignation of President Joe Biden as the Democratic Party presidential nominee:
President Joe Biden’s resignation from the presidential race is the result of a corrupt, arrogant, and anti-democratic process. Biden was forced to pull out of the presidential race as the result of a dangerously corrupt pressure campaign led by Obama, Pelosi, Schumer and like-minded Democrats, which has effectively disenfranchised 14 million Americans who voted in the Democratic presidential primaries.
Few Americans will buy the DC establishment’s scheme to remove Biden from the presidential campaign over cognitive issues while ignoring his inability to serve as Commander-in-Chief.
Vice President Kamala Harris and the majority of the cabinet need to step up and invoke the 25th Amendment. And, Congress should do an emergency investigation into Biden’s fitness for office. The assassination attempt on former President Trump adds increased urgency to ensure we have a fully capable president. This is truly a national security crisis.
And to make matters worse, we have this “coup against democracy,” as the Left likes to say. We are not going to know who the nominee of the Democratic Party for the office of president of the United States will be until August. It’s election interference, pure and simple. There is nothing about this process that’s normal, appropriate or honest.
A snap national primary (or primaries) to pick a new nominee would seem to be the most “democratic” approach to Biden’s decision not to seek reelection. At a minimum, a careful state-by-state and federal legal analysis is a necessary first step to help determine whether Biden can be replaced on the presidential ballot at this late stage in the presidential campaign. Judicial Watch is already investigating this election integrity issue. That the votes of 14 million Americans would be casually tossed aside by Democratic Party elites is a major corruption and election interference scandal.
The post Judicial Watch Statement on President Biden’s Decision to Step Down from the Presidential Campaign appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Trump Assassination
Judicial Watch Applauds Judge Cannon’s Decision to End Rogue Special Counsel Prosecution of Trump
Judicial Watch Sues over Scuffle Involving VP Harris’ Secret Service Detail
Judicial Watch Asks Court to Retain Lawsuit to Clean Up Voter Rolls in Illinois
TSA Has No Idea How Air Marshal Reassignments Affected Security
Trump Assassination:
Every Judicial Watch supporter and every patriotic American is praying for President Trump, his family, the family of the Trump supporter who was murdered, and those injured on Saturday.
The radical Left has attempted to mass murder Republican congressmen, as well as Justice Kavanaugh and his family. Recently, Democratic Party leaders, through unhinged rhetoric, false allegations of misconduct, proposed legislation, and sham prosecutions, have increased the risk of assassination of President Trump, as well as violence against his supporters.
Americans can be assured that Judicial Watch has already initiated an independent investigation into the catastrophic Secret Service failures that day.
Judicial Watch Applauds Judge Cannon’s Decision to End Rogue Special Counsel Prosecution of Trump
Judicial Watch applauds Judge Cannon’s principled decision to end Jack Smith’s unconstitutional criminal proceeding that has so abused former President Trump and the rule of law.
I am an eyewitness to these abuses, as I was harassed personally by Jack Smith’s rogue operation.
Cannon’s decision, “based on the unlawful appointment and funding” of Special Counsel Smith, is a victory for the U.S. Constitution and accountable government. This case never should have seen the light of day. We have long called out the unconstitutional “special counsels” and their attendant abuses of former President Donald Trump and other innocent political targets. As Judge Cannon noted in her opinion:
The bottom line is this: The Appointments Clause is a critical constitutional restriction stemming from the separation of powers, and it gives Congress a considered role in determining the propriety of vesting appointment power for inferior officers. The Special Counsel’s position effectively usurps that important legislative authority, transferring it to a Head of Department, and in the process threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers. If the political branches wish to grant the Attorney General power to appoint Special Counsel Smith to investigate and prosecute this action with the full powers of a United States Attorney, there is a valid means by which to do so. He can be appointed and confirmed through the default method prescribed in the Appointments Clause, as Congress has directed for United States Attorneys throughout American history … or Congress can authorize his appointment through enactment of positive statutory law consistent with the Appointments Clause.
We have several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits related to the prosecutorial abuses targeting Trump
In February 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Jack Smith’s office targeting Trump and other Americans.
(Before his appointment to investigate and prosecute Trump, Jack Smith was at the center of several controversial issues, the IRS scandal among them. In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Smith’s then-Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Read more here.)
In October 2023, we sued the DOJ for records and communications between the Office of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney’s office regarding requests/receipt of federal funding/assistance in the investigation of former President Trump and his 18 codefendants in the Fulton County indictment of August 14, 2023. To date, the DOJ is refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with enforcement proceedings. Judicial Watch’s litigation challenging this is continuing.
This decision was a big victory for Trump and the rule of the law but the corrupted Biden Justice Department won’t stop trying to abuse him – so there will be much more work to be done!
Judicial Watch Sues over Scuffle Involving VP Harris’ Secret Service Detail
The attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump is not the first black mark on the Biden Secret Service.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records relating to an incident at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland in which a Secret Service agent assigned to protect Vice President Kamala Harris reportedly got into a scuffle with colleagues (Judicial Watch v. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-01705)).
According to an April 24 report in the Washington Examiner, a Secret Service agent was removed from her duties after physically attacking the commanding agent in charge and other agents who tried to subdue her.
A later report states: “The agents involved in restraining [Michelle] Herczeg were especially concerned because she still had her gun in the holster. They wrestled her to the ground, took the gun from her, cuffed her, and then removed her from the terminal.” The report also states that, following the incident at Joint Base Andrews, which is the home base for Air Force One and Air Force Two:
Secret Service agents and officers are privately questioning the hiring process and whether the agency had adequately screened Herczeg’s background. Some also wonder whether her hire was part of a diversity, equity, and inclusion push in response to years of staff shortages that may have required the agency to lower its once-strict employment standards and physical performance to reach quotas for female agents and officers.
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after DHS failed to respond to an April 25, 2024, FOIA request for:
All records related to a reported incident at Joint Base Andrews in which a Secret Service agent was involved in an altercation with colleagues on or about April 23, 2024, including but not limited to incident reports, Vice Presidential protective detail agents’ emails and text messages, and emails and text messages of the following USSS officials: Director Kimberly Cheatle, Deputy Dir. Ronald Rowe, Chief Operating Officer Cynthia Radway, Asst. Dir. Michael Plati, Asst. Dir. Brian Lambert, Chief Human, Capital Officer Denise Walker Hall, Asst. Dir. David Smith, Asst. Dir. Miltom Wilson, Uniformed Division Chief Michael Buck, Chief Counsel Thomas Huse, and Chief of Communications Anthony Guglielmi.
All SF-50s, SF-52s, training completion forms, and disciplinary records of Secret Service Agent Michelle Herczeg.
All USSS and DHS policy documents related to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the hiring, employment, training and discipline of Secret Service agents.
Prior to the altercation, Herczeg reportedly arrived at Joint Base Andrews “and began acting erratically, grabbing another senior agent’s personal phone and deleting applications on it, according to two sources familiar with the matter. The other agent, a shift leader, was able to recover his phone and then acted as if nothing had happened.”
The catastrophic security failure behind the attempted assassination of Trump shows how the management and quality of Secret Service personnel are urgent issues. The Secret Service’s illicit cover-up of these documents about the Kamala Harris protective detail incident is not reassuring.
Judicial Watch Asks Court to Retain Lawsuit to Clean Up Voter Rolls in Illinois
Illinois is fighting a federal law requiring it to clean up its voter rolls.
We asked a federal court to reject the state’s motion to dismiss and end our National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) lawsuit to clean up the state’s voting rolls (Judicial Watch, Inc. et al v. The Illinois State Board of Elections et al. (No. 1:24-cv-01867)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, on behalf of the nonprofit organizations Illinois Family Action, Breakthrough Ideas, and Carol J. Davis, who is a lawfully registered voter in Illinois.
In our original complaint, we point out that 23 Illinois counties, with a combined registration list of 980,089 voters, reported removing a combined total of only 100 registrations in the last two-year reporting period under a crucial provision of the NVRA. This is an “absurdly small” number, and there “is no possible way these counties can be conducting a general program that makes reasonable effort to cancel registrations of voters who have become ineligible because of a change of residence while removing so few registrations.”
We point out:
Aside from the outright failure of 23 Illinois counties to remove registrants who fail to respond to Confirmation Notices [as required by NVRA], the complaint also listed counties who lack data that is crucial to list maintenance efforts under the NVRA. Again relying on Defendants’ own admissions to the EAC [Election Assistance Commission], the complaint notes that 34 counties could only report “Data not available” regarding Confirmation Notice removals, and 19 of these reported the same thing for death removals. In addition, 29 counties reported “Data not available” regarding the number of Confirmation Notices sent, and 22 counties said the same thing about the number of inactive registrations. In all, “[f]ifty-two of 108 Illinois jurisdictions failed to report any data to the EAC in one or more of the crucial data categories identified above.” For her part, Defendant Matthews confirmed that she “does not have access to local election authorities’ list maintenance records.” Apparently, no one in Illinois has access to this data.
Our attorneys argue:
-
Defendants have failed to implement the NVRA’s required “general program that makes a reasonable effort” to remove voters who have moved or died;
-
Defendant Matthews, who is Illinois’ chief State election official…has failed in her duty to coordinate state responsibilities under the Act; and
-
Defendants have failed to retain and provide to Plaintiffs NVRA-related records they are required to provide. The support for these allegations derives primarily from Defendants’ own admissions, in response to a survey conducted every two years by the federal Election Assistance Commission as it prepares a mandatory report to Congress, and in their correspondence with Plaintiffs.
Dirty voter rolls can mean dirty elections, and Illinois’ voting rolls are a mess. Rather than trying to shut down our lawsuit, Illinois should take immediate steps to clean its rolls to both prevent fraud and increase voter confidence in the elections.
As you know, we are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. We assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads our election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In May 2024, we sued California to force the clean-up of its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law.
In December 2023, we sent notice letters to election officials in the District of Columbia, California, and Illinois, notifying them of evident violations of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The letters point out that these jurisdictions publicly reported removing few or no ineligible voter registrations under a key provision of the NVRA. The letters threatened federal lawsuits unless the violations were corrected in a timely fashion. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, DC, officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.” NVRA lawsuits subsequently were commenced against California and Illinois.
In July 2023 we filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
In July 2023 we also settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with us and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from Judicial Watch. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle our NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
We settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
We’ll keep you update and this and our other election law cases as events warrant!
TSA Has No Idea How Air Marshal Reassignments Affected Security
Trying to cope with its disastrous border policies, the Biden administration misused skilled air marshals to “babysit” the people coming across. And it has no idea what that meant for our air security, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
The federal agency created after 9/11 to protect the nation’s transportation system has no idea how aviation security was impacted when it plucked Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) agents from their critical duties to help with the Mexican border crisis. FAMS operates under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and in the last few years the agency has forced the highly trained aviation security specialists to assist Customs and Border Protection (CBP) with the onslaught of illegal immigrants entering the country under Biden’s disastrous open border policies. The deployments outraged air marshals around the country and led to accusations of fraud, waste, and abuse of authority by TSA and FAMS leadership for unlawfully sending assets to the southern border to perform duties unrelated to transportation. FAMS is charged with protecting commercial passenger flights by deterring and countering the risk of terrorist activity, a mission impossible to fulfill from the southwest border.
When the highly trained law enforcement agents were reassigned to babysit the influx of illegal immigrants the Air Marshal National Council, which represents thousands of officers nationwide, filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General and requested that the watchdog investigate the questionable deployment of TSA assets to El Paso, Laredo and McAllen Texas, San Diego California and Tucson and Yuma Arizona. The council pointed out that the air marshals were assigned to perform hospital watch, transportation duties, law enforcement searches, welfare checks and entry control, which have no relation to TSA’s core mission of transportation security. The first recent wave of air marshals—45 officers and two supervisors—was dispatched to El Paso and Yuma on October 30, 2022, for 21-day rotations. More were assigned later to other busy locations overrun with migrants.
The TSA admits it does not know the operational impacts that the air marshal border deployments had on transportation security. “TSA cannot assure deployments did not impact FAMS’ mission to mitigate potential risks and threats to our Nation’s transportation system,” according to a DHS report issued days ago thanks to the Air Marshal National Council’s request to probe the matter. The agency did not bother to establish baseline quantifiable and measurable goals from which it could measure the effectiveness of its primary operations while air marshals were assigned to assist CBP at the southwest border, the 17-page report says. TSA incurred approximately $45 million in travel and payroll costs, but the agency was eventually reimbursed by CBP, which also operates under DHS.
Under the agreement with CBP, air marshals played the role of “immigration officers,” to perform the following duties: Escorting migrants from the point of apprehension to processing, between various Border Patrol Sector facilities, or to another entity with jurisdiction over post-processing custody; escorting migrants to and from local health providers and hospitals; conducting searches, including pat downs, and placing or removing handcuffs or restraint devices on migrants in custody before they are transported; securing CBP facilities, including detention cells, and authorizing access to various entry controlled points; escorting migrants between processing checkpoints within the facility; assisting with staffing the unaccompanied female housing facility; observing migrants in holding areas to assess their safety and well-being while awaiting processing or transportation.
Perhaps to discourage more Mexican border deployments, the DHS IG report, which has large redactions to protect sensitive information, stresses that FAMS is a risk and intelligence-based federal law enforcement organization. “TSA employs approximately [redacted] air marshals to assess, address, and mitigate potential risks and threats to our Nation’s transportation system,” the DHS watchdog writes, stating the obvious. “In addition to providing in-flight security, air marshals carry out a variety of other law enforcement–related functions.” Babysitting illegal immigrants is most certainly not one of them. FAMS was created in 1961 as a small force of only 18 “sky marshals” to counter airplane hijackers. After the 2001 terrorist attacks the force grew tremendously and plays a major role in protecting the nation’s civil aviation system.
Until next week,
The post Secret Service FAILED Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The U.S. will spend millions of dollars to implement and evaluate if an interactive text messaging program used by the government is effective in helping transgender women of color and young men who have sex with men (YMSM) take readily available measures to protect against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a sexually transmitted infection that attacks the body’s immune system. The mobile health intervention is known as PrEPmate, and it is supposed to increase HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) adherence and retention within the demographic by delivering “youth-tailored” text messages with interactive content, reminders for clinic appointments and prescriptions as well as a dashboard that may be integrated into electronic medical records.
This week the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) announced that it is doling out $3 million to nonprofits, local governments, school districts and public housing authorities to facilitate implementation of the PrEPmate intervention at three clinical sites in the nation’s southern region, where there is increased HIV disease burden. Grant recipients will monitor and evaluate how the mobile health intervention is integrated into the delivery of clinical services to improve prophylaxis adherence and retention in care, the agency writes in its announcement. The goal is to increase medication adherence and retention among patients and boost adaptability and sustainability among clinical providers. “A secondary outcome will be the identification of best practices and lessons learned for implementing PrEPmate in clinics serving YMSM and transgender women of color,” the CDC writes.
The agency, which operates under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), has already determined that PrEPmate is an evidence-based tool for the intervention of HIV prevention among YMSM, which means the recent multi-million-dollar allocation is likely going to focus more on transgender women of color. A 2016 study focusing on Latino, black and white “HIV-negative young men who have sex with men (YMSM) at risk for HIV acquisition” found that preventative care and medication adherence/persistence was greater among those using the mobile health program and a significantly larger proportion of visits to healthcare providers were completed by those men as well. PrEPmate users received weekly check in messages and daily pill-taking reminders during the 36-week study as well as videos explaining how prophylaxis works in the body.
A more recent study published less than a year ago, found that the use of measures to prevent HIV improved when using a mobile health intervention, though the program was “culturally tailored” by researchers for Spanish-speaking men who have sex with men and transgender women who spoke either English or Spanish. “A growing number of mobile health (mHealth) technologies are being developed to support HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) adherence and persistence; however, most tools have focused on men who have sex with men (MSM), and few are available in Spanish,” researchers of that study wrote. “To maximize the potential impact of these tools in reducing gender and racial/ethnic disparities and promoting health equity, mHealth tools tailored to Spanish-speaking people and transgender women are critically needed.”
The CDC’s new allocation will help meet that need since it will largely focus on transgender women of color, biological men who identify and present as women. “Transgender people, in particular transgender women, are disproportionately impacted by HIV,” the agency writes on its HIV prevention web page. “Providing high quality capacity building assistance to support HIV prevention programs and reduce disparities for transgender persons is an HIV prevention priority.” The CDC has already created a “Toolkit for Providing HIV Prevention Services to Transgender Women of Color” designed by “transgender women of color with extensive experience working in HIV prevention.” It assesses community needs, creates transgender-affirming environments, addresses mental and behavioral health needs for transgender women of color and builds community partnerships.
The post CDC Invests Millions to Study if Mobile Text Program Helps Transgender Women of Color Avert HIV appeared first on Judicial Watch.
After just a few weeks the Biden administration’s egregious choice to serve as Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) deputy director has stepped down, thanks in part to Judicial Watch’s reporting. Americans can also thank the highly trained aviation security specialists who brought it to our attention and the Air Marshal National Council, the union that represents thousands of agents nationwide and has exposed a multitude of scandals that have rocked the agency in recent years. The fleeting deputy director, Pauline (Polly) Hanson, was appointed to the position on June 14 despite a shady history that includes being investigated for fraud and conflict of interest as chief of a federal law enforcement agency. FAMS operates under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. Both function under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and have been plagued by controversy and mismanagement that has left the nation vulnerable from a security standpoint, according to multiple DHS sources interviewed by Judicial Watch over the years.
Hanson’s appointment by TSA Director David Pekoske to be second in command at FAMS immediately raised questions about the criteria to qualify for the top-secret clearance required for the position and ignited fury among air marshals nationwide. Hanson once served as chief of the Amtrak Police, a federal law enforcement agency of about 500 charged with protecting the nation’s railroad system. As Amtrak police chief Hanson was investigated for “unethical and illegal” behavior after awarding her then live in boyfriend’s company a million-dollar counterterrorism contract to train officers in her agency. Hanson was directly involved in the process for awarding the contract, according to federal court documents filed by the Inspector General for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation and failed to disclose her romantic and financial ties to the company’s senior director, Kerry Thomas. Hanson lawyered up and fought in court to limit investigators’ access to her bank records and when a judge ordered her to turn them over, she resigned as chief of the Amtrak Police. Hanson has also served as chief of Metro Transit Police in the District of Columbia and executive director of the D.C. Police’s strategic service bureau.
The baffling deputy director appointment of a candidate with a highly questionable history came just months after the administration quietly replaced the last FAMS director, marking the fourth time in around as many years that the agency got a new leader. The frequent turnover at the top highlights the instability that has prevailed at FAMS, a critical agency charged with protecting commercial passenger flights by deterring and countering the risk of terrorist activity, aircraft piracy and other crimes to protect the nation’s transportation infrastructure. A deputy director with Hanson’s record is the last thing the agency needs. Judicial Watch immediately fired off two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests—to TSA and the National Railroad Passenger Corporation Inspector General—asking for details about Hanson’s criminal and ethical investigation as Amtrak Police Chief, subsequent resignation and communications exchanged between the Amtrak Inspector General and the DHS and TSA regarding the new FAMS deputy director. Judicial Watch also requested Hanson’s employment history and administrative investigations as well as documents acknowledging or approving her security clearance authorization and DHS-TSA application forms and employment contracts.
The Air Marshal National Council asked the DHS Inspector General to reopen Hanson’s investigation days after Pekoske’s appointment to ensure she is eligible to hold a position of public trust and top-secret security clearance. “Hanson abruptly resigned while under investigation before that investigation could come to a conclusion on whether or not she violated ethical and possible criminal laws,” the complaint to the DHS watchdog states, adding that as deputy director will ultimately be in charge of all purchasing and contracts for FAMS. “If the allegations are true this is akin to letting the fox into the hen house,” the Air Marshal National Council wrote.
Knowledgeable sources such as Sonya Hightower-LaBosco, a retired air marshal who serves as executive director of the Air Marshal National Council, emphasized that it was not clear how Hanson could get a top-secret clearance with her background. Exposing the administration’s behind the scenes plot to hire a police chief investigated for unethical and illegal behavior to help run FAMS apparently ignited enough concern to change course. This week sources confirmed that Hanson is out and will not be working with the agency. The men and women charged with protecting commercial flights are incredibly thankful, according to multiple DHS sources.
The post Police Chief Investigated for Fraud Out as Air Marshal Deputy Director Weeks after TSA Appointment appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Statement on the Assassination Attempt on Former President Donald Trump
Every Judicial Watch supporter and every patriotic American is praying for President Trump, his family and the family of the Trump supporter murdered today.
TSA Can’t Assure Mexican Border Air Marshal Assignments Did Not Impact Transportation Security
The federal agency created after 9/11 to protect the nation’s transportation system has no idea how aviation security was impacted when it plucked Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) agents from their critical duties to help with the Mexican border crisis. FAMS operates under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and in the last few years the agency has forced the highly trained aviation security specialists to assist Customs and Border Protection (CBP) with the onslaught of illegal immigrants entering the country under Biden’s disastrous open border policies.
Judicial Watch: DC Board of Elections Records Reveal 583 Foreign Nationals are Registered Vote in Washington, DC
“The fact that over 500 foreign nationals can vote in local elections in Washington, DC, is a national scandal and an insult to every America citizen,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “Congress can and must stop this attack on the voting rights of citizens.”
Packs of “Fighting Age Males” in Military Uniforms Entering U.S. through Remote Arizona Town
As the nation’s largest southern border crossings finally receive mainstream media coverage years into an unprecedented illegal immigration crisis, untold numbers of “fighting age males” dressed in military uniforms are entering the United States through remote areas with no Border Patrol presence.
In The News
Biden debate performance renews spotlight on Hur tapes
Washington ExaminerSome, such as Tom Fitton, president of the conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, found the debate placed newfound importance on the Department of Justice releasing audio recordings of the interview Hur conducted with Biden last year as part of his investigation.
State Dept. hit with lawsuit over not issuing ‘wrongful’ detention for U.S. citizen jailed in Russia
Just the NewsJudicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit on Tuesday against the U.S. State Department related to the department not issuing a wrongful detention designation for U.S. citizen Jimmy Wilgus who was sentenced in Russia.
House Committees Release Damning Report on CIA Collusion With Hunter’s Laptop
TownhallHouse Committees aren’t the only ones looking into CIA collusion. On Wednesday morning Judicial Watch revealed that, thanks to a FOIA request, they received documents showing Morrell actually received rushed approval of the letter he and 50 others signed onto looking to discredit the Hunter laptop story.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Trump Assassination Attempt – FITTON REACTS - FITTON: Inexcusable Fail by Biden Secret Service - What is DC Police Hiding About January 6?
-
The post Judicial Watch On The Assassination Attempt On Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the dismissal by Judge Aileen Cannon of the documents case against former President Donald Trump, “based on the unlawful appointment and funding” of Special Counsel Jack Smith:
Judicial Watch applauds Judge Cannon’s principled decision to end this constitutionally rogue criminal proceeding that has so abused President Trump and the rule of law.
I am an eyewitness to these abuses, as I was harassed personally by Jack Smith’s rogue operation.
Today’s decision is a victory for the U.S. Constitution and accountable government. This case never should have seen the light of day. Judicial Watch has long called out the unconstitutional “special counsels” and their attendant abuses of Trump and other innocent political targets. As Judge Cannon notes in her opinion:
The bottom line is this: The Appointments Clause is a critical constitutional restriction stemming from the separation of powers, and it gives to Congress a considered role in determining the propriety of vesting appointment power for inferior officers. The Special Counsel’s position effectively usurps that important legislative authority, transferring it to a Head of Department, and in the process threatening the structural liberty inherent in the separation of powers. If the political branches wish to grant the Attorney General power to appoint Special Counsel Smith to investigate and prosecute this action with the full powers of a United States Attorney, there is a valid means by which to do so. He can be appointed and confirmed through the default method prescribed in the Appointments Clause, as Congress has directed for United States Attorneys throughout American history … or Congress can authorize his appointment through enactment of positive statutory law consistent with the Appointments Clause.
Judicial Watch has several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits related to the prosecutorial abuse targeting Trump:
In February 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that is targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.
(Before his appointment to investigate and prosecute Trump, Specia Counsel Jack Smith previously was at the center of several controversial issues, the IRS scandal among them. In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Jack Smith’s then-Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Read more here.)
In October 2023, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ for records and communications between the Office of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney’s office regarding requests/receipt of federal funding/assistance in the investigation of former President Trump and his 18 codefendants in the Fulton County indictment of August 14, 2023. To date, the DOJ is refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with enforcement proceedings. Judicial Watch’s litigation challenging this is continuing.
The post Judicial Watch Statement on Judge Cannon’s Decision to Dismiss Trump Documents Prosecution appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding an apparent assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump:
Every Judicial Watch supporter and every patriotic American is praying for President Trump, his family and the family of the Trump supporter murdered today.
The radical Left has attempted to mass murder Republican congressmen, as well as Justice Kavanaugh and his family. And recently, Democratic Party leaders, through unhinged rhetoric, false allegations of misconduct, proposed legislation, and sham prosecutions, have increased the risk of assassination of President Trump, as well as violence against his supporters.
Americans can be assured that Judicial Watch has already initiated an independent investigation into today’s events.
The post Judicial Watch Statement on the Assassination Attempt on Former President Donald Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Records Reveal 583 Foreign Nationals Registered to Vote in Washington, DC
Hearing Held in Suit Over Mississippi Post-Election Day Absentee Ballot Counting
Judicial Watch Sues for January 6 DC Police Bodycam Videos
Judicial Watch Sues Treasury Dept. for Foreign Purchases of U.S. Farmland Records
Packs of ‘Fighting Age Males’ in Military Uniforms Entering U.S.
Records Reveal 583 Foreign Nationals Registered to Vote in Washington, DC
According to federal law, only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections, but a growing number of state and local elections allow non-citizens to vote. Among them are San Francisco and Oakland, California, along with some cities in Maryland and Vermont. In February, a state appeals court ruled a similar New York City law violates the state constitution.
In May 2024, we received records from the District of Columbia, explaining to illegal aliens and other noncitizens how they can register to vote in local elections.
Now we have a better picture of voters in your nation’s capital.
We received records showing that as of June 583 foreign nationals are registered to vote in Washington, DC. The records from the Board of Elections also confirm that noncitizens can be election workers.
We received the documents in response to a May 14, 2024, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records regarding the number of noncitizens registered to vote in Washington, DC, under the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act.
In 2022 the DC Council amended the District of Columbia Election Code of 1955 “to expand the definition of the term qualified elector for the purpose of local elections to include otherwise eligible non-citizen residents.” The act went into effect in 2023 and allows noncitizens to vote in local elections for positions including mayor, attorney general, city council member, State Board of Education member or Advisory Neighborhood Commission member. Non-citizens can also vote on local referendums, ballot initiatives and recalls.
An analysis of DC voter registration records made available to us shows that on June 13, 2024, the makeup of registered voters in DC was:
- Total Voters: 457,302
- US Citizens: 456,719
- Foreign Nationals: 583
- Democrats: 353,048
- Republican: 23,482
- No Party Affiliation: 73,760
- Other: 7,012
DC records also show that noncitizens can work at the polls if they are:
- A DC resident
- At least 16 years of age
- Attend or has graduated from a public or private secondary school or institution of higher education
- Are able to speak English
The records describe a virtual town hall meeting on April 30, 2024, that explains voting to noncitizens (previously disclosed by Judicial Watch). Among the topics:
- What offices can non-citizens vote for? Which ones can they not vote for?
- Voter Registration and Voter Rights/Responsibilities
- How does voter registration work? Steps and options on how to register to vote.
- What kind of language access resources does DCBOE provide for voter registration?
- Ballots: show a sample
- Language Access
- General language access overview
- Election Day resources for Language Access: what does the DCBOE [Board of Elections] provide?
- Election must knows
- Important dates and deadlines including ballots mailed, voter registration, party affiliation, Early Voting hours, and Primary Election Day
The records we obtained include a Board of Elections meeting transcript that explains that noncitizens are not required to have an ID to vote. If they do not have proof of residence when they go to register to vote or vote for the first time they can still vote by “Special Ballot.” Also, prisoners are also welcome to vote, according to a “Voting Guide for Incarcerated Residents:”
As a District of Columbia resident, you have the right to vote, even if you are incarcerated.
Even if you are in a correctional facility outside of the District of Columbia, if you are registered, you do not lose your residency status and you have the right to vote.
Once you are properly registered, you will be mailed a ballot prior to any District of Columbia election for which you are eligible.
If your ballot was mailed to your place of incarceration and you were released prior to receiving it, you can still vote at any Vote Center during Early Voting or on Election Day.
The fact that over 500 foreign nationals can vote in local elections in Washington, DC, is a national scandal and an insult to every American citizen. Congress can and must stop this attack on the voting rights of citizens.
Hearing Held in Suit Over Mississippi Post-Election Day Absentee Ballot Counting
Federal law requires an Election Day, not an “Election Week.” This week we continued our challenge of a Mississippi election law permitting absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day. That’s illegal, violates the civil rights of voters, and encourages fraud.
A federal court hearing was held before Judge Louis Guirola, Jr., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Southern Division.
In February of this year, we filed a civil rights lawsuit on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi (Libertarian Party of Mississippi v Wetzel et al. (No. 1:24-cv-00037)). The court consolidated the case we filed with one filed by the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and other complainants.
Our lawsuit details:
Under federal law, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year is election day (“Election Day”) for federal elections.
Congress recently reaffirmed a single national Election Day when it enacted the Electoral Count Reform Act (“ECRA”).
Under the recent Congressional amendments, no extension of Election Day shall be allowed unless there are “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” that justify extension.
Despite Congress’ unambiguous and longstanding statement regarding a single and uniform national Election Day, Mississippi extended Election Day by allowing five additional business days after Election Day for receipt of absentee ballots.
No “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” currently exist in Mississippi to justify extending the ballot receipt deadline for the November 5, 2024 federal election for Presidential and Vice-Presential Electors.
We argue that holding voting open for five days past Election Day violates the constitutional rights of voters and candidates:
Counting untimely, illegal, and invalid votes, such as those received in violation of federal law, substantially increases the pool of total votes cast and dilutes the weight of votes cast by Plaintiff’s members and others in support of Plaintiff’s federal nominees.
Our complaint points out that, based on the reported numbers, as many as 1.7% of votes cast in Mississippi in 2020 were received after Election Day.
In 2022, on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered voters, we sued Illinois to prevent vote-by-mail ballots (even those without postmarks) to be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day, if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day. The case is now on appeal.
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of our work, we assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In December 2023, notice letters were sent to election officials in the District of Columbia, California, and Illinois, notifying them of evident violations of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The letters point out that these jurisdictions publicly reported removing few or no ineligible voter registrations under a key provision of the NVRA. The letters threatened federal lawsuits unless the violations were corrected in a timely fashion. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, DC, officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.” NVRA lawsuits subsequently were commenced against California and Illinois.
In July 2023 we filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
In July 2023 we settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with us and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from us. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle our NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide us with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit we filed in 2017.
We settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
Judicial Watch Sues for January 6 DC Police Bodycam Videos
Our investigation of January 6 continues.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the District of Columbia for all bodycam footage captured by Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) Officer Michael Fanone and all audio/video captured by MPD officers who responded to the protest at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 (Judicial Watch v. District of Columbia (No. 2024-CAB-003453)).
We filed suit after the Metropolitan Police Department denied our August 2021 request for:
All audio/video recordings captured on body-worn cameras from MPD officers during their response to protest activities in and around the Capitol Building on Jan. 6, 2021.
All body worn camera video captured by Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone when responding to protests at the Capitol Building on Jan. 6, 2021.
The DC Metro Police rejected our request because the videos are “part of an ongoing investigation and criminal proceeding” and their release would result in an “invasion of privacy.”
We appealed the denial, stating, “[T]he records in question are of great public interest, which outweighs any asserted privacy interests. Furthermore, the assertion of an ongoing criminal investigation does not preclude the release of the requested video, as police body-worn camera video is routinely released pending the conclusion of law enforcement proceedings.”
The Metropolitan Police acknowledged receipt of the appeal but did not respond further.
In May 2021, CNN claimed to have received “exclusive footage” of DC Metropolitan Police Officer Fanone being “assaulted while defending the U.S. Capitol” during the protest on January 6, 2021, which it subsequently aired.
In July 2021, Fanone gave testimony to a House Select Committee in which he stated, “My body camera captured the violence of the crowd directed toward me during those very frightening moments. It’s an important part of the record for this Committee’s investigation and for the country’s understanding of how I was assaulted and nearly killed as the mob attacked the Capitol that day, and I hope that everyone will be able to watch it.”
Fanone, then 41, retired from the police at the end of 2021 and went on to write a book and become a contributor for CNN.
The American people deserve the full picture from the incident at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. What are they hiding? The DC Metropolitan Police Department should be transparent and release these secret January 6 videos.
We are extensively investigating the events of January 6.
In February 2021, we filed a lawsuit under the common law right of access to public records against the U.S. Capitol Police for emails and videos concerning the January 6, 2021, protest at the Capitol.
In April 2024, we received records from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, showing that the FBI opened a criminal investigation of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt after her killing and listed four “potential violations of federal law,” including felony rioting and civil disorder.
In January 2024, we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit on behalf of Aaron Babbitt and the Ashli Babbitt Estate against the U.S. Department of Justice for all FBI files on Ashli Babbitt.
In September 2023, we received records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that detailed the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.
A previous review of records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandum documenting the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
In January 2023, documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, we released multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Byrd.
In October 2021, United States Park Police records related to the January 6, 2021, demonstrations at the U.S. Capitol showed that on the day before the January 6 rally featuring President Trump, U.S. Park Police expected a “large portion” of the attendees to march to the U.S. Capitol and that the FBI was monitoring the January 6 demonstrations, including travel to the events by “subjects of interest.”
Judicial Watch Sues Treasury Dept. for Foreign Purchases of U.S. Farmland Records
Chinese and other foreign purchases of U.S. farmland could pose a significant threat to U.S. national security. That the Biden administration is hiding records about this concerning issue is not reassuring.
We’re acting. We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Treasury for records of communication between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding the purchase of U.S. farmland by foreign entities (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of the Treasury (No. 1:24-cv-01811)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Treasury Department failed to respond to an April 10, 2024, FOIA request for:
Any and all records of communications between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture concerning, regarding, or relating to the purchase of U.S. agricultural real estate by foreign entities.
On January 19, 2024, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report which found significant gaps in information collection and timely information sharing between the Committee on Foreign Investment and other government agencies, including the USDA, concerning foreign investment in U.S. agricultural land.
The GAO report concludes:
Recent national security risks related to foreign investments in U.S. agricultural land have highlighted the importance of CFIUS’s reviews. CFIUS is the main authority to address the national security ramifications of foreign investment in the United States, according to Treasury and DOD officials. However, we found that CFIUS does not currently have regular and timely access to detailed AFIDA [Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act] information, the nation’s most comprehensive data on foreign investments in U.S. agricultural land, according to USDA officials.
For example, according to a Fox News report, in February 2023, the city council in Grand Forks, North Dakota, voted unanimously to strike down Chinese-owned food manufacturer Fufeng Group’s proposed corn mill on 300 acres of farmland it purchased which is 12 miles from the U.S. Air Force’s Grand Forks base.
In a January 2023 letter to North Dakota’s U.S. senators, Air Force Assistant Secretary Andrew Hunter pointed to the proposed corn mill’s proximity to Grand Forks Air Force Base as a major risk:
Thank you for meeting with Department of the Air Force representatives last month regarding the Fufeng Group’s proposal to build a large com milling processing plant approximately 12 miles from Grand Forks Air Force Base. Based on the briefings provided, you asked for the Department’s view of the national security implications of the Fufeng Group Limited’s proposed activity.
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) considered an October 2022 filing by the Fufeng Group to acquire certain assets in the vicinity of Grand Forks, North Dakota. Grand Forks Air Force Base is the center of military activities related to both air and space operations.
While CFIUS concluded that it did not have jurisdiction, the Department’s view is unambiguous: the proposed project presents a significant threat to national security with both near- and long-term risks of significant impacts to our operations in the area.
Packs of ‘Fighting Age Males’ in Military Uniforms Entering U.S.
Arizona is beleaguered by illegal aliens pouring across the border, and we should all be worried about the unvetted people who are being distributed throughout our country. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has some new troubling details.
As the nation’s largest southern border crossings finally receive mainstream media coverage years into an unprecedented illegal immigration crisis, untold numbers of “fighting age males” dressed in military uniforms are entering the United States through remote areas with no Border Patrol presence. It is a palpable security lapse unlikely to be reported by most news outlets and local, federal, and state law enforcement sources have provided Judicial Watch with detailed accounts, reports, diagrams, and photos of the situation which is terrorizing residents in a once harmonious Arizona town just a few miles from Mexico. They blame the Biden administration’s catastrophic open border policies for the serious problems that have gripped the area in the last few years.
The Santa Cruz and Pima County regions in southwestern Arizona have been slammed with extraordinary violence and crime fueled by Mexican cartels—smuggling drugs and humans—that are victimizing fourth and fifth-generation cattle farmers who have captured thousands of illegal immigrants on security cameras passing through their property since Joe Biden became president. Sometimes they find dead bodies and drug paraphernalia. “Violent activity has drastically increased over the past three years since the border is now perceived to be wide open,” a veteran law enforcement official told Judicial Watch this week, adding that in the communities of Amado and Arivaca American citizens feel much less safe than they did when Donald Trump was president. Both are cattle ranching towns with small populations that are diminishing because of the increased violence. Amado is nestled in the Santa Cruz River Valley about 29 miles from the Mexican border. Arivaca is situated southwest of Amado about 11 miles from Nogales, Mexico.
An unmanned Border Patrol checkpoint east of Arivaca worries residents deeply, but the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has no intention of deploying agents, according to multiple sources. In the meantime, law enforcement officials and residents confirm that young men are pouring in through the region in what appears to be an organized movement operated by Mexican cartels. “They are unemployed, the majority are fighting age males and there is a strong possibility some have undergone some level of insurgency training,” according to a law enforcement source familiar with the situation. The groups of men are usually dressed in “camouflage military uniforms, indicating a robust and well-funded supply network to ensure everyone is outfitted the same,” said an intelligence officer with extensive U.S. military training who provided Judicial Watch with pictures and graphs of recent crossings. The uniformed men also carry camouflaged backpacks and wear carpet booties to hide footprint tracks. Large piles of the disposed carpet booties litter ranches on the U.S. side, creating a hazard for cattle that consume the trash.
One longtime area rancher said that since Biden became president, he has recorded over 3,560 illegal immigrants on security cameras on his property, a tenfold increase from the previous administration. Another said he has not seen a Border Patrol agent for quite a while, likely because the frontline Homeland Security agency is overwhelmed with the onslaught of migrants in the last few years. “They have recommended we not travel to certain areas of our ranch, and we never go out there at night,” said the rancher, who does not want his name used out of fear for the safety of his family. Locals say the violence is causing the already small population of Arivaca to dwindle quickly. A few years ago, the town had 1,200 residents and now there are approximately 600. Authorities say those who leave are mostly relocating north to Green Valley, about 35 miles away, or Tucson which is around 60 miles away. The area has become so dangerous that the U.S. Forest Service told a rancher it would no longer travel there to monitor enclosure areas established to oversee endangered species.
The continuous stream of trash and human waste left behind by the staggering flow of migrants and smugglers has also devastated the local environment and livestock. Besides large piles of discarded carpet booties, mounds of plastic waste are having a detrimental effect on cattle because they eat it and become ill, ranchers said. Many also die after ingesting traces of drugs found in wrappings left behind by smugglers. To help illustrate how porous the border is in this region, one rancher said Mexican cattle regularly cruise into the U.S. side, creating a major risk of introducing illnesses to American cattle that, although inoculated, may be vulnerable to new strains and diseases that may prevail south of the border. “We removed 120 Mexican cattle over the past six months,” said a veteran rancher, who explained that it is a lot of extra work to keep the foreign livestock from mingling with local cattle to prevent unsafe beef being distributed throughout the U.S. food industry.
If Biden gets reelected the situation will likely worsen, say law enforcement officials and residents in the remote Arizona region. Other small towns are also suffering from the impact of this administration’s flagrant open border policies. Just a few months ago Judicial Watch wrote about another once tranquil border region that has been devastated by illegal immigration and drug smuggling. It is situated in Cochise County to the east of Amado and Arivaca in the picturesque Sonoran Desert surrounded by the scenic Huachuca Mountains. Human and drug traffickers regularly evade a meager force of Border Patrol agents in the mountainous region and local law enforcement officials say the addition of the new “American smuggler,” U.S. citizens, predominantly young adults from Phoenix and Tucson recruited by Mexican cartels through social media, has created deadly consequences in the communities where the American recruits often travel at dangerously high speeds through local roads and highways.
Until next week,
The post Foreign Nationals Registered to Vote in DC! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The federal agency created after 9/11 to protect the nation’s transportation system has no idea how aviation security was impacted when it plucked Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS) agents from their critical duties to help with the Mexican border crisis. FAMS operates under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and in the last few years the agency has forced the highly trained aviation security specialists to assist Customs and Border Protection (CBP) with the onslaught of illegal immigrants entering the country under Biden’s disastrous open border policies. The deployments outraged air marshals around the country and led to accusations of fraud, waste, and abuse of authority by TSA and FAMS leadership for unlawfully sending assets to the southern border to perform duties unrelated to transportation. FAMS is charged with protecting commercial passenger flights by deterring and countering the risk of terrorist activity, a mission impossible to fulfill from the southwest border.
When the highly trained law enforcement agents were reassigned to babysit the influx of illegal immigrants the Air Marshal National Council, which represents thousands of officers nationwide, filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General and requested that the watchdog investigate the questionable deployment of TSA assets to El Paso, Laredo and McAllen Texas, San Diego California and Tucson and Yuma Arizona. The council pointed out that the air marshals were assigned to perform hospital watch, transportation duties, law enforcement searches, welfare checks and entry control, which have no relation to TSA’s core mission of transportation security. The first recent wave of air marshals—45 officers and two supervisors—was dispatched to El Paso and Yuma on October 30, 2022, for 21-day rotations. More were assigned later to other busy locations overrun with migrants.
The TSA admits it does not know the operational impacts that the air marshal border deployments had on transportation security. “TSA cannot assure deployments did not impact FAMS’ mission to mitigate potential risks and threats to our Nation’s transportation system,” according to a DHS report issued days ago thanks to the Air Marshal National Council’s request to probe the matter. The agency did not bother to establish baseline quantifiable and measurable goals from which it could measure the effectiveness of its primary operations while air marshals were assigned to assist CBP at the southwest border, the 17-page report says. TSA incurred approximately $45 million in travel and payroll costs, but the agency was eventually reimbursed by CBP, which also operates under DHS.
Under the agreement with CBP, air marshals played the role of “immigration officers,” to perform the following duties: Escorting migrants from the point of apprehension to processing, between various Border Patrol Sector facilities, or to another entity with jurisdiction over post-processing custody; escorting migrants to and from local health providers and hospitals; conducting searches, including pat downs, and placing or removing handcuffs or restraint devices on migrants in custody before they are transported; securing CBP facilities, including detention cells, and authorizing access to various entry controlled points; escorting migrants between processing checkpoints within the facility; assisting with staffing the unaccompanied female housing facility; observing migrants in holding areas to assess their safety and well-being while awaiting processing or transportation.
Perhaps to discourage more Mexican border deployments, the DHS IG report, which has large redactions to protect sensitive information, stresses that FAMS is a risk and intelligence-based federal law enforcement organization. “TSA employs approximately [redacted] air marshals to assess, address, and mitigate potential risks and threats to our Nation’s transportation system,” the DHS watchdog writes, stating the obvious. “In addition to providing in-flight security, air marshals carry out a variety of other law enforcement–related functions.” Babysitting illegal immigrants is most certainly not one of them. FAMS was created in 1961 as a small force of only 18 “sky marshals” to counter airplane hijackers. After the 2001 terrorist attacks the force grew tremendously and plays a major role in protecting the nation’s civil aviation system.
The post TSA Can’t Assure Mexican Border Air Marshal Assignments Did Not Impact Transportation Security appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received records showing that as of June 583 foreign nationals are registered to vote in Washington, DC. The records from the Board of Elections also confirm that noncitizens can be election workers.
Judicial Watch received the documents in response to a May 14, 2024, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records regarding the number of noncitizens registered to vote in Washington, DC, under the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act.
In 2022 the DC Council amended the District of Columbia Election Code of 1955 “to expand the definition of the term qualified elector for the purpose of local elections to include otherwise eligible non-citizen residents.” The act went into effect in 2023 and allows noncitizens to vote in local elections for positions including mayor, attorney general, city council member, State Board of Education member or Advisory Neighborhood Commission member. Noncitizens can also vote on local referendums, ballot initiatives and recalls.
An analysis of DC voter registration records made available to Judicial Watch shows that on June 13, 2024, the makeup of registered voters in DC was:
- Total Voters: 457,302
- US Citizens: 456,719
- Foreign Nationals: 583
- Democrats: 353,048
- Republican: 23,482
- No Party Affiliation: 73,760
- Other: 7,012
DC records also show that noncitizens can work at the polls if they are:
- A DC resident
- At least 16 years of age
- Attend or has graduated from a public or private secondary school or institution of higher education
- Are able to speak English
The records describe a virtual town hall meeting on April 30, 2024, that explains voting to noncitizens (previously disclosed by Judicial Watch). Among the topics:
- What offices can non-citizens vote for? Which ones can they not vote for?
- Voter Registration and Voter Rights/Responsibilities
- How does voter registration work? Steps and options on how to register to vote.
- What kind of language access resources does DCBOE provide for voter registration?
- Ballots: show a sample
- Language Access
- General language access overview
- Election Day resources for Language Access: what does the DCBOE [Board of Elections] provide?
- Election must knows
- Important dates and deadlines including ballots mailed, voter registration, party affiliation, Early Voting hours, and Primary Election Day
The records obtained by Judicial Watch include a Board of Elections meeting transcript that explains that noncitizens are not required to have an ID to vote. If they do not have proof of residence when they go to register to vote or vote for the first time they can still vote by “Special Ballot.” Also, prisoners are also welcome to vote, according to a “Voting Guide for Incarcerated Residents:”
As a District of Columbia resident, you have the right to vote, even if you are incarcerated.
Even if you are in a correctional facility outside of the District of Columbia, if you are registered, you do not lose your residency status and you have the right to vote.
Once you are properly registered, you will be mailed a ballot prior to any District of Columbia election for which you are eligible.
If your ballot was mailed to your place of incarceration and you were released prior to receiving it, you can still vote at any Vote Center during Early Voting or on Election Day.
“The fact that over 500 foreign nationals can vote in local elections in Washington, DC, is a national scandal and an insult to every America citizen,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “Congress can and must stop this attack on the voting rights of citizens.”
In May 2024, Judicial Watch received records from the District of Columbia, explaining to illegal aliens and other noncitizens how they can register to vote in local elections.
According to federal law, only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections, but a growing number of state and local elections allow noncitizens to vote, among them are San Francisco and Oakland, California, along with some cities in Maryland and Vermont. In February, a state appeals court ruled a similar New York City law violates the state constitution.
The post Judicial Watch: DC Board of Elections Records Reveal 583 Foreign Nationals are Registered Vote in Washington, DC appeared first on Judicial Watch.
As the nation’s largest southern border crossings finally receive mainstream media coverage years into an unprecedented illegal immigration crisis, untold numbers of “fighting age males” dressed in military uniforms are entering the United States through remote areas with no Border Patrol presence. It is a palpable security lapse unlikely to be reported by most news outlets and local, federal, and state law enforcement sources have provided Judicial Watch with detailed accounts, reports, diagrams, and photos of the situation which is terrorizing residents in a once harmonious Arizona town just a few miles from Mexico. They blame the Biden administration’s catastrophic open border policies for the serious problems that have gripped the area in the last few years.
The Santa Cruz and Pima County regions in southwestern Arizona has been slammed with extraordinary violence and crime fueled by Mexican cartels—smuggling drugs and humans—that are victimizing fourth and fifth-generation cattle farmers who have captured thousands of illegal immigrants on security cameras passing through their property since Joe Biden became president. Sometimes they find dead bodies and drug paraphernalia. “Violent activity has drastically increased over the past three years since the border is now perceived to be wide open,” a veteran law enforcement official told Judicial Watch this week, adding that in the communities of Amado and Arivaca American citizens feel much less safe than they did when Donald Trump was president. Both are cattle ranching towns with small populations that are diminishing because of the increased violence. Amado is nestled in the Santa Cruz River Valley about 29 miles from the Mexican border. Arivaca is situated southwest of Amado about 11 miles from Nogales, Mexico.
An unmanned Border Patrol checkpoint east of Arivaca worries residents deeply, but the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has no intention of deploying agents, according to multiple sources. In the meantime, law enforcement officials and residents confirm that young men are pouring in through the region in what appears to be an organized movement operated by Mexican cartels. “They are unemployed, the majority are fighting age males and there is a strong possibility some have undergone some level of insurgency training,” according to a law enforcement source familiar with the situation. The groups of men are usually dressed in “camouflage military uniforms, indicating a robust and well-funded supply network to ensure everyone is outfitted the same,” said an intelligence officer with extensive U.S. military training who provided Judicial Watch with pictures and graphs of recent crossings. The uniformed men also carry camouflaged backpacks and wear carpet booties to hide footprint tracks. Large piles of the disposed carpet booties litter ranches on the U.S. side, creating a hazard for cattle that consume the trash.
One longtime area rancher said that since Biden became president, he has recorded over 3,560 illegal immigrants on security cameras on his property, a tenfold increase from the previous administration. Another said he has not seen a Border Patrol agent for quite a while, likely because the frontline Homeland Security agency is overwhelmed with the onslaught of migrants in the last few years. “They have recommended we not travel to certain areas of our ranch, and we never go out there at night,” said the rancher, who does not want his name used out of fear for the safety of his family. Locals say the violence is causing the already small population of Arivaca to dwindle quickly. A few years ago, the town had 1,200 residents and now there are approximately 600. Authorities say those who leave are mostly relocating north to Green Valley, about 35 miles away, or Tucson which is around 60 miles away. The area has become so dangerous that the U.S. Forest Service told a rancher it would no longer travel there to monitor enclosure areas established to oversee endangered species.
The continuous stream of trash and human waste left behind by the staggering flow of migrants and smugglers has also devastated the local environment and livestock. Besides large piles of discarded carpet booties, mounds of plastic waste are having a detrimental effect on cattle because they eat it and become ill, ranchers said. Many also die after ingesting traces of drugs found in wrappings left behind by smugglers. To help illustrate how porous the border is in this region, one rancher said Mexican cattle regularly cruise into the U.S. side, creating a major risk of introducing illnesses to American cattle that, although inoculated, may be vulnerable to new strains and diseases that may prevail south of the border. “We removed 120 Mexican cattle over the past six months,” said a veteran rancher, who explained that it is a lot of extra work to keep the foreign livestock from mingling with local cattle to prevent unsafe beef being distributed throughout the U.S. food industry.
If Biden gets reelected the situation will likely worsen, say law enforcement officials and residents in the remote Arizona region. Other small towns are also suffering from the impact of this administration’s flagrant open border policies. Just a few months ago Judicial Watch wrote about another once tranquil border region that has been devastated by illegal immigration and drug smuggling. It is situated in Cochise County to the east of Amado and Arivaca in the picturesque Sonoran Desert surrounded by the scenic Huachuca Mountains. Human and drug traffickers regularly evade a meager force of Border Patrol agents in the mountainous region and local law enforcement officials say the addition of the new “American smuggler,” U.S. citizens, predominantly young adults from Phoenix and Tucson recruited by Mexican cartels through social media, has created deadly consequences in the communities where the American recruits often travel at dangerously high speeds through local roads and highways.
The post Packs of “Fighting Age Males” in Military Uniforms Entering U.S. through Remote Arizona Town appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Suit was Filed on Behalf of Libertarian Party of Mississippi
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced that a federal court hearing is set for today, Tuesday, July 9, at 1:30 p.m. ET, 12:30 CT, challenging a Mississippi election law permitting absentee ballots to be received as late as five business days after Election Day. The hearing is before Judge Louis Guirola, Jr. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Southern Division.
Judicial Watch filed the civil rights lawsuit on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi (Libertarian Party of Mississippi v Wetzel et al. (No. 1:24-cv-00037)). The court has consolidated the case filed by Judicial Watch with one filed by the Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, and other complainants.
Judicial Watch’s lawsuit details:
Under federal law, the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year is election day (“Election Day”) for federal elections.
Congress recently reaffirmed a single national Election Day when it enacted the Electoral Count Reform Act (“ECRA”).
Under the recent Congressional amendments, no extension of Election Day shall be allowed unless there are “force majeureevents that are extraordinary and catastrophic” that justify extension.
Despite Congress’ unambiguous and longstanding statement regarding a single and uniform national Election Day, Mississippi extended Election Day by allowing five additional business days after Election Day for receipt of absentee ballots.
No “force majeure events that are extraordinary and catastrophic” currently exist in Mississippi to justify extending the ballot receipt deadline for the November 5, 2024 federal election for Presidential and Vice-Presential Electors.
Judicial Watch argues that holding voting open for five days past Election Day violates the constitutional rights of voters and candidates:
Counting untimely, illegal, and invalid votes, such as those received in violation of federal law, substantially increases the pool of total votes cast and dilutes the weight of votes cast by Plaintiff’s members and others in support of Plaintiff’s federal nominees.
The complaint points out that, based on the reported numbers, as many as 1.7% of votes cast in Mississippi in 2020 were received after Election Day.
In 2022, Judicial Watch, on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered voters, sued Illinois to prevent vote-by-mail ballots (even those without postmarks) to be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day, if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day. The case is now on appeal.
“The law requires an ‘Election Day,’ not an ‘Election Week.’ Mississippi’s five-day extension of Election Day beyond the date set by Congress is illegal, violates the civil rights of voters, and encourages fraud,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In December 2023, notice letters were sent to election officials in the District of Columbia, California, and Illinois, notifying them of evident violations of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) of 1993, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. The letters point out that these jurisdictions publicly reported removing few or no ineligible voter registrations under a key provision of the NVRA. The letters threatened federal lawsuits unless the violations were corrected in a timely fashion. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, DC, officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.” NVRA lawsuits subsequently were commenced against California and Illinois.
In July 2023 Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decisionof the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
Judicial Watch in July 2023 also settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which now grants access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state for the past 15 elections.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with Judicial Watch and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from Judicial Watch. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to extensive public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle a Judicial Watch NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed the removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
Judicial Watch settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
The post Judicial Watch: Hearing Set for Mississippi Post-Election Day Absentee Ballot Counting appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Sues Treasury Dept. for Records on Foreign Purchases of U.S. Farmland
Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Treasury for records of communication between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding the purchase of U.S. farmland by foreign entities (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of the Treasury (No. 1:24-cv-01811)).
Judicial Watch Sues State Department for Records Related to Imprisonment of U.S. Citizen James Vincent Wilgus in Russia
Judicial Watch announced recently it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. State Department for all records related to why the department has not issued a “wrongful” detention designation for Jimmy Wilgus, a U.S. citizen sentenced to 12.5 years in a Russian penal colony on allegedly false charges based on a forced confession and fabricated evidence.
U.S. Blames COVID for Granting 7.1 Million Foreigners Visas without Proper Vetting
In addition to the unfathomable immigration crisis that has jolted the nation during the Biden administration, millions of foreign nationals have been granted visas to enter the United States without proper vetting that includes in-person interviews and the collection of fingerprints similar to the Visa Express program used by three of the 9/11 hijackers. How could this occur more than two decades after the worst terrorist attack on American soil? Blame it on COVID-19, according to the explanation offered by the federal officials charged with safeguarding the nation.
Judicial Watch Statement on Supreme Court’s Immunity Ruling
Judicial Watch is in the forefront of the court battles for transparency regarding the Biden administration’s targeting of Trump.
In The News
Is Joe Biden Fit to Be the President of the United States?
FITTON: Initiate the 25th Amendment now
Washington TimesThose videos of President Biden freezing, getting lost in his thoughts, shuffling, slurring his words, wandering off and simply checking out are “cheap fakes,” according to risible talking points the White House is now peddling.
Biden Witnessed His Dog Attack Multiple Secret Service Members: Document
The Daily WirePresident Joe Biden witnessed multiple attacks against U.S. Secret Service (USSS) members by his dog Commander while in office, according to a newly revealed document.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Should Biden Be Replaced? - FITTON: HUGE Supreme Court Trump WIN! - FITTON: Biden out on Monday?
-
The post New Lawsuit on Foreign Purchases of U.S. Farmland appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the District of Columbia for all bodycam footage captured by Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) Officer Michael Fanone and all audio/video captured by MPD officers who responded to the protest at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 (Judicial Watch v. District of Columbia(No. 2024-CAB-003453)).
The lawsuit was filed after the Metropolitan Police Department denied Judicial Watch’s August 2021 request for:
All audio/video recordings captured on body-worn cameras from MPD officers during their response to protest activities in and around the Capitol Building on Jan. 6, 2021.
All body worn camera video captured by Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police Officer Michael Fanone when responding to protests at the Capitol Building on Jan. 6, 2021.
The DC Metro Police rejected Judicial Watch’s request because the videos are “part of an ongoing investigation and criminal proceeding” and their release would result in an “invasion of privacy.”
Judicial Watch appealed the denial, stating, “[T]he records in question are of great public interest, which outweighs any asserted privacy interests. Furthermore, the assertion of an ongoing criminal investigation does not preclude the release of the requested video, as police body-worn camera video is routinely released pending the conclusion of law enforcement proceedings.”
The Metropolitan Police acknowledged receipt of the appeal but did not respond further.
In May 2021, CNN claimed to have received “exclusive footage” of DC Metropolitan Police Officer Fanone being “assaulted while defending the U.S. Capitol” during the protest on January 6, 2021, which it subsequently aired.
In July 2021, Fanone gave testimony to a House Select Committee in which he stated, “My body camera captured the violence of the crowd directed toward me during those very frightening moments. It’s an important part of the record for this Committee’s investigation and for the country’s understanding of how I was assaulted and nearly killed as the mob attacked the Capitol that day, and I hope that everyone will be able to watch it.”
Fanone, then 41, retired from the police at the end of 2021 and went on to write a book and become a contributor for CNN.
“The American people deserve the full picture from the incident at the Capitol on January 6, 2021,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “What are they hiding? The DC Metropolitan Police Department should be transparent and release these secret January 6 videos.”
Judicial Watch is extensively investigating the events of January 6.
In February 2021, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit under the common law right of access to public records against the U.S. Capitol Police for emails and videos concerning the January 6, 2021, protest at the Capitol.
In April 2024, Judicial Watch received records from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit, showing that the FBI opened a criminal investigation of Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt after her killing and listed four “potential violations of federal law,” including felony rioting and civil disorder.
In January 2024, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit on behalf of Aaron Babbitt and the Ashli Babbitt Estate against the U.S. Department of Justice for all FBI files on Ashli Babbitt.
In September 2023, Judicial Watch received records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a FOIA lawsuit that detailed the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.
A previous review of records from that lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandum documenting the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
In January 2023, documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showed U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In November 2021, Judicial Watch released multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Byrd.
In October 2021, United States Park Police records related to the January 6, 2021, demonstrations at the U.S. Capitol showed that on the day before the January 6 rally featuring President Trump, U.S. Park Police expected a “large portion” of the attendees to march to the U.S. Capitol and that the FBI was monitoring the January 6 demonstrations, including travel to the events by “subjects of interest.”
The post Judicial Watch Sues for January 6 DC Police Bodycam Videos appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Treasury for records of communication between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding the purchase of U.S. farmland by foreign entities (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of the Treasury(No. 1:24-cv-01811)).
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Treasury Department failed to respond to an April 10, 2024, FOIA request for:
Any and all records of communications between the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture concerning, regarding, or relating to the purchase of U.S. agricultural real estate by foreign entities.
On January 19, 2024, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report which found significant gaps in information collection and timely information sharing between the Committee on Foreign Investment and other government agencies, including the USDA, concerning foreign investment in U.S. agricultural land.
The GAO report concludes:
Recent national security risks related to foreign investments in U.S. agricultural land have highlighted the importance of CFIUS’s reviews. CFIUS is the main authority to address the national security ramifications of foreign investment in the United States, according to Treasury and DOD officials. However, we found that CFIUS does not currently have regular and timely access to detailed AFIDA [Agricultural Foreign Investment Disclosure Act] information, the nation’s most comprehensive data on foreign investments in U.S. agricultural land, according to USDA officials.
For example, according to a Fox News report, in February 2023, the city council in Grand Forks, North Dakota, voted unanimously to strike down Chinese-owned food manufacturer Fufeng Group’s proposed corn mill on 300 acres of farmland it purchased which is 12 miles from the U.S. Air Force’s Grand Forks base.
In a January 2023 letter to North Dakota’s U.S. senators, Air Force Assistant Secretary Andrew Hunter pointed to the proposed corn mill’s proximity to Grand Forks Air Force Base as a major risk:
Thank you for meeting with Department of the Air Force representatives last month regarding the Fufeng Group’s proposal to build a large com milling processing plant approximately 12 miles from Grand Forks Air Force Base. Based on the briefings provided, you asked for the Department’s view of the national security implications of the Fufeng Group Limited’s proposed activity. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) considered an October 2022 filing by the Fufeng Group to acquire certain assets in the vicinity of Grand Forks, North Dakota. Grand Forks Air Force Base is the center of military activities related to both air and space operations.
While CFIUS concluded that it did not have jurisdiction, the Department’s view is unambiguous: the proposed project presents a significant threat to national security with both near- and long-term risks of significant impacts to our operations in the area.
“Chinese and other foreign purchases of U.S. farmland could pose a significant threat to U.S. national security. That the Biden administration is hiding records about this concerning issue is not reassuring,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Treasury Dept. for Records on Foreign Purchases of U.S. Farmland appeared first on Judicial Watch.
A Victory for The Rule of Law
Judicial Watch Sues State Over Imprisonment of U.S. Citizen in Russia
U.S. Blames COVID for Granting 7.1 Million Visas Without Proper Vetting
Happy Independence Day!
A Victory for The Rule of Law
The commonsense Supreme Court presidential immunity ruling is a victory for former President Trump, the U.S. Constitution, and the rule of law. The Biden administration’s political decision to try to put Trump in jail for simply being president was unsurprisingly rejected by the Supreme Court.
Make no mistake, the Supreme Court is imposing a virtually insurmountable burden on Jack Smith in his vicious pursuit of Trump over the election and document disputes. The unprecedented charges against Trump were frivolous to begin with and, after today’s decision, should be shut down completely by the Justice Department.
We are at the forefront of the court battles for transparency regarding the Biden administration’s targeting of Trump.
In May, we received a recording of a phone message left by an FBI special agent for someone at the Secret Service in the context of the raid on President Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago, Florida.
In March 2024, we sued the U.S. Department of Energy for records about the retroactive termination of former Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.
In August 2023, we filed a lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for records of the Archives’ role in Trump’s White House records controversy; whether it offered Trump a secure storage location other than the National Archives; and if the Archives consulted with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence regarding the classification or declassification procedures of any of the alleged classified documents found at Trump’s Florida residence.
In June 2023,we obtained DOJ records that showed top officials of the National Security Division discussing the political implications of Trump allowing CNN to use closed-circuit TV (CCTV) footage of the raid on his Mar-a-Lago home. The documents confirmed that the Justice Department had asked that Mar-a-Lago CCTV be turned off before the raid.
A separate Judicial Watch lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration resulted in the release of records about the unprecedented document dispute between Archives and Trump. Click here or here to review the records.
In August 2022, we successfully sued to unseal the search warrant affidavit used to justify the unprecedented raid on Trump’s home.
In September 2022, we filed lawsuits against the DOJ for its records and the FBI’s records about the Mar-a-Lago raid search warrant application and approval, as well as communications about the warrant between the FBI, Executive Office of the President and the Secret Service.
As the nation faces a crisis over President Biden’s fitness for office, the rule of law – and Judicial Watch’s role in enforcing it – will be key to our survival as a republic.
Judicial Watch Sues State Over Imprisonment of U.S. Citizen in Russia
We’re going to court because we are concerned about the life of an American citizen U.S. citizen wrongly imprisoned in Russia.
Judicial Watch just filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. State Department for all records related to the department not issuing a “wrongful” detention designation for Jimmy Wilgus, a U.S. citizen sentenced to 12.5 years in a Russian penal colony on allegedly false charges based on a forced confession and fabricated evidence (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:24-cv-01879).
On November 7, 2016, Wilgus, an American musician living in Russia with his Russian wife, was arrested and charged with indecent exposure in an area in Russia that Wilgus’s family said he has never visited, according to a March 31, 2023, report by CBS’s WUSA9 we cited in the lawsuit.
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the State Department failed to respond to a February 27, 2024, FOIA request for:
All records related to the detention of American citizen James Vincent Wilgus in Russia. This request includes, but is not limited to, all records related to the proposed designation of Mr. Wilgus’ detention as “wrongful” as defined by the Robert Levinson Hostage Recovery and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act and all related records of communication between any official or employee of the Department of State and any other individual or entity.
The CBS news report titled “The Forgotten American” details:
Jimmy Wilgus, a musician from New Jersey, was in Russia in 2016 working on a movie soundtrack with a Russian film director when he was ambushed and thrown into a van…. His parents, Jim and Bella Wilgus, say their son was helping his stepdaughter get into a taxi just moments before he was grabbed…. The Wilgus family says Jimmy was forced to sign confession papers for a crime he did not commit.… The family says witnesses testified claiming Jimmy committed a crime in an area of Russia he had never even visited…. Jimmy Wilgus was sentenced to 12 years in prison after a reportedly closed-door trial, where his mother claims the [U.S.] embassy was not even allowed to attend.
Wilgus is being held in IK-17, a penal colony in Mordovia, Russia.
According to Radio Free Europe, since Wilgus was imprisoned, there reportedly have been at least nine other Americans detained by Russia and two notable prisoner swaps between the United States and Russia involving Americans detained well after his imprisonment. According to the report, there are discussions about other prisoner swaps. Wilgus is not among those mentioned in the article.
In a March 24, 2023, op-ed for the New York Post, Wilgus’s parents, James and Bella Wilgus, stated:
“We’re proud to say IK-17 has failed to break Jimmy’s spirit and will — but it has destroyed his health. He now suffers from a spinal issue, osteochondrosis, as well as a failing liver and hypertension that wasn’t present prior to his incarceration.”
Jimmy Wilgus, who may very well die in captivity in a Russian prison, deserves support from the State Department. And the State Department’s refusal to turn over records about the agency’s handling of Wilgus’s case is concerning to say the least.
U.S. Blames COVID for Granting 7.1 Million Visas Without Proper Vetting
The panicked response to Covid has harmed our nation in numerous ways, especially by undermining our national security and your public safety as it relates to immigration. Our Corruption Chronicles blog explores the details:
In addition to the unfathomable immigration crisis that has jolted the nation during the Biden administration, millions of foreign nationals have been granted visas to enter the United States without proper vetting that includes in-person interviews and the collection of fingerprints similar to the Visa Express program used by three of the 9/11 hijackers. How could this occur more than two decades after the worst terrorist attack on American soil? Blame it on COVID-19, according to the explanation offered by the federal officials charged with safeguarding the nation.
The Department of State (DoS) issues visas to individuals seeking entry into the U.S. on a temporary basis for study, tourism, medical treatment, business, and temporary work. When the pandemic hit in 2020 the agency waived requirements to conduct consular interviews and collect fingerprints for some nonimmigrant visa applicants and 7.1 million got in without proper screening between 2020 and 2023, a recently published federal audit reveals. The agency said the waiver was issued to address staffing limitations and visa backlogs, according to the probe which was conducted by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General. In its report, which includes multiple redactions to supposedly protect sensitive information, the watchdog refers to the enormous amount of visa waivers as an “urgent issue” that must be addressed.
The security lapse was created by the State Department when the task of screening the foreign visa holders was passed along to Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the overwhelmed frontline agency charged with keeping terrorists and their weapons out of the U.S. during an unprecedented onslaught of illegal immigrants. Unbelievably the Inspector General found that CBP, which must balance facilitating lawful travel and trade with protecting land and seaports amid a deluge of migrants, was not informed which foreign visa holders arriving at the U.S. border were not properly vetted by the State Department. “CBP Office of Field Operations (OFO) port directors at some U.S. ports of entry had not been aware of the interview and fingerprint waiver program,” the report states, adding that it was not until March 2024 that the State Department began providing CBP with information on visa holders who were not screened. It is not clear why visa applicants are still not vetted abroad by consular offices even though the pandemic is no longer an issue.
Even when CBP officials finally began receiving the information from the State Department involving individuals whose requirement for consular interviews had been waived, management chose not to conduct thorough checks because it would “inundate” the process. “CBP OFO officials told us that no formal notification was provided to the Field Offices and frontline officers because CBP did not want to overload the officers with information,” investigators write in the report. “Further, they added that CBP receives hundreds of alerts each day, but officials must prioritize what information is shared with frontline officers.” CBP officials told the DHS IG that, instead of providing officers with access to the information, they plan to work with the National Targeting Center to identify any risks posed by visa holders who had their interview waived by the State Department.
This information is alarming considering CBP is responsible for screening all foreign visitors and returning American citizens upon arrival at a United States port of entry (POE). Just a few days ago, the agency came under fire for failing to use technology, procedures, and coordination to adequately protect the border resulting in the entry of criminals, suspected terrorists, and other nefarious actors into the country. A federal probe found that the agency used varied and sometimes inconsistent inspection procedures for travelers arriving in vehicles at land ports of entry and that it does not have the technology to perform biometric matching on travelers arriving in vehicles at the crossings. Specifically, CBP uses non-standard inspection procedures for vehicle passengers and fails to query all vehicle occupants to identify criminal warrants, national security concerns to border crossing history before admitting them into the U.S. The last thing this agency needs is the added duty of screening foreign visa applicants, which is supposed to be performed by consular offices abroad.
Happy Independence Day!
As we celebrate the signing of the Declaration of Independence this weekend we must be mindful that it took great courage for the 56 men to put their signatures to this revolutionary document.
Hostilities had already broken out between the British and colonial militias at Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts. The English king had declared the colonies to be in open rebellion, and the U.S. Congress had formed an army under the command of George Washington.
The signers knew they were committing an act of high treason against the British Crown that could cost each man his life. Pennsylvania’s Benjamin Rush later wrote of the “pensive and awful silence which pervaded the house when we were called up, one after another, to the table of the President of Congress,” to sign “what was believed by many at that time to be our own death warrants.”
So let us honor, remember, and celebrate what the Left so often attacks the brave, beautiful and, dare I say it, holyfounding document that originated our great nation – The Declaration of Independence, which I reprint below:
In Congress, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America, When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavored to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
In the fighting spirit of this Declaration, and on behalf of all of us here at Judicial Watch, I wish you a Happy Independence Day!
Until next week,
The post Supreme Court VICTORY! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit on Tuesday against the U.S. State Department related to the department not issuing a wrongful detention designation for U.S. citizen Jimmy Wilgus who was sentenced in Russia.
Judicial Watch is seeking “all records related to why the department has not issued a ‘wrongful’ detention designation for Jimmy Wilgus, a U.S. citizen sentenced to 12.5 years in a Russian penal colony on allegedly false charges based on a forced confession and fabricated evidence.”
Wilgus, originally from New Jersey, was arrested and charged with indecent exposure on November 7, 2016 in a part of Russia that his family said he hasn’t visited before, according to WUSA9 report that Judicial Watch cited in the lawsuit. At the time, Wilgus was living in Russia with his wife, who is from Russia.
Read more here…
The post State Dept. hit with lawsuit over not issuing ‘wrongful’ detention for U.S. citizen jailed in Russia appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
Some, such as Tom Fitton, president of the conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, found the debate placed newfound importance on the Department of Justice releasing audio recordings of the interview Hur conducted with Biden last year as part of his investigation.
“Obviously the manner and the tone can only be ascertained by the audio, and as we saw last night, that helps one draw certain conclusions,” Fitton said, adding that the debate “highlights why there’s a public interest in the release of the tapes.”
Read more here…
The post Biden debate performance renews spotlight on Hur tapes appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Townhall:
House Committees aren’t the only ones looking into CIA collusion. On Wednesday morning Judicial Watch revealed that, thanks to a FOIA request, they received documents showing Morrell actually received rushed approval of the letter he and 50 others signed onto looking to discredit the Hunter laptop story.
“This is a rush job, as it needs to get out as soon as possible,” Morrell claimed in an email where Polymeropoulos was copied. His request was approved in just six hours by the CIA.
“These documents are astounding. That the CIA would turn around a campaign document like this for Joe Biden’s team in six hours is insane news,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “This seems to be demonstrable campaign interference by the CIA, and that should be alarming to all Americans.”
Read more here….
The post House Committees Release Damning Report on CIA Collusion With Hunter’s Laptop appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In addition to the unfathomable immigration crisis that has jolted the nation during the Biden administration, millions of foreign nationals have been granted visas to enter the United States without proper vetting that includes in-person interviews and the collection of fingerprints similar to the Visa Express program used by three of the 9/11 hijackers. How could this occur more than two decades after the worst terrorist attack on American soil? Blame it on COVID-19, according to the explanation offered by the federal officials charged with safeguarding the nation.
The Department of State (DoS) issues visas to individuals seeking entry into the U.S. on a temporary basis for study, tourism, medical treatment, business, and temporary work. When the pandemic hit in 2020 the agency waived requirements to conduct consular interviews and collect fingerprints for some nonimmigrant visa applicants and 7.1 million got in without proper screening between 2020 and 2023, a recently published federal audit reveals. The agency said the waiver was issued to address staffing limitations and visa backlogs, according to the probe which was conducted by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General. In its report, which includes multiple redactions to supposedly protect sensitive information, the watchdog refers to the enormous amount of visa waivers as an “urgent issue” that must be addressed.
The security lapse was created by the State Department when the task of screening the foreign visa holders was passed along to Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the overwhelmed frontline agency charged with keeping terrorists and their weapons out of the U.S. during an unprecedented onslaught of illegal immigrants. Unbelievably the Inspector General found that CBP, which must balance facilitating lawful travel and trade with protecting land and seaports amid a deluge of migrants, was not informed which foreign visa holders arriving at the U.S. border were not properly vetted by the State Department. “CBP Office of Field Operations (OFO) port directors at some U.S. ports of entry had not been aware of the interview and fingerprint waiver program,” the report states, adding that it was not until March 2024 that the State Department began providing CBP with information on visa holders who were not screened. It is not clear why visa applicants are still not vetted abroad by consular offices even though the pandemic is no longer an issue.
Even when CBP officials finally began receiving the information from the State Department involving individuals whose requirement for consular interviews had been waved, management chose not to conduct thorough checks because it would “inundate” the process. “CBP OFO officials told us that no formal notification was provided to the Field Offices and frontline officers because CBP did not want to overload the officers with information,” investigators write in the report. “Further, they added that CBP receives hundreds of alerts each day, but officials must prioritize what information is shared with frontline officers.” CBP officials told the DHS IG that, instead of providing officers with access to the information, they plan to work with the National Targeting Center to identify any risks posed by visa holders who had their interview waived by the State Department.
This information is alarming considering CBP is responsible for screening all foreign visitors and returning American citizens upon arrival at a United States port of entry (POE). Just a few days ago, the agency came under fire for failing to use technology, procedures, and coordination to adequately protect the border resulting in the entry of criminals, suspected terrorists, and other nefarious actors into the country. A federal probe found that the agency used varied and sometimes inconsistent inspection procedures for travelers arriving in vehicles at land ports of entry and that it does not have the technology to perform biometric matching on travelers arriving in vehicles at the crossings. Specifically, CBP uses non-standard inspection procedures for vehicle passengers and fails to query all vehicle occupants to identify criminal warrants, national security concerns to border crossing history before admitting them into the U.S. The last thing this agency needs is the added duty of screening foreign visa applicants, which is supposed to be performed by consular offices abroad.
The post U.S. Blames COVID for Granting 7.1 Million Foreigners Visas without Proper Vetting appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. State Department for all records related to why the department has not issued a “wrongful” detention designation for Jimmy Wilgus, a U.S. citizen sentenced to 12.5 years in a Russian penal colony on allegedly false charges based on a forced confession and fabricated evidence(Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State(No. 1:24-cv-01879).
On November 7, 2016, Wilgus, an American musician living in Russia with his Russian wife, was arrested and charged with indecent exposure in an area in Russia that Wilgus’s family said he has never visited, according to a March 31, 2023, report by CBS’s WUSA9 cited by Judicial Watch in the lawsuit.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the State Department failed to respond to a February 27, 2024, FOIA request for:
All records related to the detention of American citizen James Vincent Wilgus in Russia. This request includes, but is not limited to, all records related to the proposed designation of Mr. Wilgus’ detention as “wrongful” as defined by the Robert Levinson Hostage Recovery and Hostage-Taking Accountability Act and all related records of communication between any official or employee of the Department of State and any other individual or entity.
The CBS news report titled “The Forgotten American” details:
Jimmy Wilgus, a musician from New Jersey, was in Russia in 2016 working on a movie soundtrack with a Russian film director when he was ambushed and thrown into a van…. His parents, Jim and Bella Wilgus, say their son was helping his stepdaughter get into a taxi just moments before he was grabbed…. The Wilgus family say Jimmy was forced to sign confession papers for a crime he did not commit.… The family says witnesses testified claiming Jimmy committed a crime in an area of Russia he had never even visited…. Jimmy Wilgus was sentenced to 12 years in prison after a reportedly closed-door trial, where his mother claims the [U.S.] embassy was not even allowed to attend.
Wilgus is being held in IK-17, a penal colony in Mordovia, Russia.
According to Radio Free Europe, since Wilgus was imprisoned, there reportedly have been at least nine other Americans detained by Russia and two notable prisoner swaps between the United States and Russia involving Americans detained well after his imprisonment. According to the report, there are discussions about other prisoner swaps, however, Wilgus is not among those mentioned in the article.
In a March 24, 2023, op-ed for the New York Post, Wilgus’s parents, James and Bella Wilgus, stated:
“We’re proud to say IK-17 has failed to break Jimmy’s spirit and will — but it has destroyed his health. He now suffers from a spinal issue, osteochondrosis, as well as a failing liver and hypertension that wasn’t present prior to his incarceration.”
“Jimmy Wilgus, who may very well die in captivity in a Russian prison, deserves support from the State Department,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And the State Department’s refusal to turn over records about the agency’s handling of Wilgus’s case is concerning to say the least.”
The post Judicial Watch Sues State Department for Records Related to Imprisonment of U.S. Citizen James Vincent Wilgus in Russia appeared first on Judicial Watch.
CIA Rushed Approval of Hunter Laptop Letter by Former Intel Officials
Judicial Watch Announces President Tom Fitton’s Fourth Book
DHS Lets Criminals, Suspected Terrorists into U.S., Agency Watchdog Affirms
CIA Rushed Approval of Hunter Laptop Letter by Former Intel Officials
We received eight pages of records from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), showing Mike Morell, former acting CIA director under President Obama, requesting CIA permission to publish a letter by former intelligence community leaders stating that they believed the laptop emails exposing Hunter Biden’s connections to Ukraine were Russian disinformation.
Morrell’s request for prepublication review incredibly was approved in just six hours by the CIA.
We forced the release of the material through a June 23, 2023, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the CIA failed to respond to a May 11, 2023, request (Judicial Watch v. Central Intelligence Agency (No. 1:23-cv-01844)). We are asking for:
Records and communications of the Prepublication Classification Review Board, Central Intelligence Agency, including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, cables, voice recordings, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, presentations, notes, or other form of record, regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter involving the Hunter Biden laptop story potentially having Russian involvement or being a Russian disinformation plot.
“This is a rush job, as it needs to get out as soon as possible,” Morell wrote in an email on Monday, October 19, 2020, at 6:36 a.m., to the CIA’s Publications Classification Review Board (PCRB) with a copy to Marc Polymeropoulos, a former CIA senior intelligence officer.
This was five days after the New York Post published an article on the Hunter Biden emails, three days before a Donald Trump/Joe Biden debate, and 15 days before the presidential election.
The “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails” is included in the records. It states in part:
We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement — just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.
At 8:01 a.m. the same day, an unnamed CIA official sent Morell’s request to an official whose name is also redacted:
Below is a high profile/high alert action item for 19 October:
Former DDCIA Michael Morell submitted for review the attached manuscript (“Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails”). Mr. Morell has advised us that this article was co-authored with former DO officer Marc Polymeropoulos and that “many former senior and working-level officials from across the IC will sign and then be made public. PCRB has determined that this manuscript contains no classified information.” [Emphasis in original]
At 11:44 a.m., five hours and eight minutes after Morrell sent his request, a person whose name is redacted sends an emailstating:
You may notify former DDCIA [Deputy Director] Morell.
At 12:44 p.m. an official whose name is redacted emails Morell:
Dear Michael,
The Prepublication Classification Review Board completed its review of your article titled “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails.” The Board determined that it contains no classified information and can be published. Agency approval for publication of this material does not represent Agency endorsement or verification of this work.
If you add new material, please resubmit it before sharing, highlighting the new language to expedite our review. The PCRB appreciates your cooperation with prepublication review. You may reach out to us via [redacted] with questions or concerns.
Kind regards, PCRB Staff
These documents are astounding. That the CIA would turn around a campaign document like this for Joe Biden’s team in six hours is insane news. This seems to be demonstrable campaign interference by the CIA, and that should be alarming to all Americans.
We have multiple federal lawsuits focused on Biden family corruption:
In July, we sued the DOJ for records from the Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General regarding the Internal Revenue Service investigation of Hunter Biden.
In June 2023, we filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice for a copy of the FBI FD-1023 form that describes “an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” Judicial Watch also asked for communications about the FD-1023.
In May 2023, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives for Biden family records and communications regarding travel and finance transactions, as well as communications between the Bidens and several known business associates.
On October 14, 2022, we sued the DOJ for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
We filed a lawsuit against the U.S. State Department on April 20, 2022, for messages sent through the SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolkit) system that mention Hunter Biden.
In December 2020, State Department records obtained through our FOIA lawsuit showed that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch had specifically warned in 2017 about corruption allegations against Burisma Holdings.
In October 2020, we forced the release of State Department records that included a briefing checklist of a February 22, 2019, meeting in Kyiv between then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Sally Painter, co-founder and chief operating officer of Blue Star Strategies, a Democratic lobbying firm which was hired by Burisma Holdings to combat corruption allegations. At the time of the meeting, Hunter Biden was serving on the board of directors for Burisma Holdings.
Judicial Watch Announces President Tom Fitton’s Fourth Book
I am pleased to announce the coming publication of my fourth Judicial Watch book, Rights and Freedoms in Peril: An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America.
In it, I detail a long chain of abuses officials and political groups have made against the American people. The new book is available for pre-order now at JudicialWatchBook.com and is set for publication on October 15.
The book explores the Left’s declaration of war on everything from the rule of law to the colorblind Constitution, border security, honest elections, and government accountability. From our perch at Judicial Watch, I have witnessed in person the very abuse, lawfare, and corruption that strikes at the heart of our rights and constitutional freedoms.
Judicial Watch has filed hundreds of lawsuits to expose and stop leftist government misconduct and abuse.
My previous Judicial Watch books include A Republic Under Assault, Clean House, and The Corruption Chronicles
A Republic Under Assault, The Left’s Ongoing Attack on American Freedom, is a hard-hitting, fast-paced look at how the Radical Left and the Deep State tried to destroy the Trump presidency. It expands on the observation that “President Biden has a personal corruption problem, has obvious health challenges, must manage internal warfare between his party’s corrupt corporate wing and its rising Communists, and his moral claim on the presidency is rejected by a massive number of voters.”
The Corruption Chronicles and Clean House, revealed what Judicial Watch, the world’s largest and most effective watchdog group, uncovered in its battles against Obama administration secrecy.
The Left has taken extraordinary steps to eradicate American liberty, motivated by a radical ideology whose adherents occupy the nation’s highest offices. This upcoming book is an exhaustive investigation into the progressive movement’s efforts to dismantle the venerable institutions protecting the rights and freedoms of all Americans.
DHS Lets Criminals, Suspected Terrorists into U.S., Agency Watchdog Affirms
Remember how we created a massive federal agency to “protect us” from foreign invaders after 9/11? Of course, we all know it isn’t working, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reveals:
The massive federal agency created after 9/11 to “safeguard the American people” risks national security by allowing criminals, suspected terrorists and other nefarious actors into the United States and letting asylum seekers with derogatory information remain in the country. More than two decades after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil, this may seem unbelievable to many, but it is the ugly reality inside the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the mammoth agency with over 260,000 employees responsible for aviation and border security as well as emergency response. The Biden administration’s disastrous open border policies have jolted the agency and those on the frontline that operate under its umbrella, specifically Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
CBP is responsible for screening all foreign visitors and returning American citizens upon arrival at a United States port of entry (POE). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), another DHS conglomerate, is supposed to vet foreigners seeking asylum to verify their identities and determine eligibility. Both DHS agencies are supposed to use technology, procedures, and coordination to perform these duties, but a federal audit reveals they are not fully effective, leaving the nation at risk. “Although U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) deployed new technologies to enhance traveler screening, it could not access all Federal data necessary to enable complete screening and vetting of noncitizens seeking admission into the United States,” according to a reportmade public this month by the DHS Inspector General. The 35-page document is sprinkled with redactions to protect sensitive information, but the publicly available portions tell an alarming story. For instance, CBP used varied and sometimes inconsistent inspection procedures for travelers arriving in vehicles at land ports of entry and the agency does not have the technology to perform biometric matching on travelers arriving in vehicles at the crossings.
Incredibly, the probe found that CBP is inconsistent when it conducts inspections of travelers seeking admission to the U.S. through land crossings. Specifically, the watchdog determined that CBP used non-standard inspection procedures for vehicle passengers. “At three land POEs we visited, CBP officers did not query all vehicle occupants in Simplified Arrival to identify criminal warrants, national security concerns, or border crossing history before admitting them into the country,” the report states. “Officers at those POEs said port management frequently directed officers working vehicle primary inspection lanes to query only drivers to expedite processing. This practice leaves officers unaware of potentially derogatory information about persons in a vehicle other than the driver.” While some officers told investigators they applied experience and professional judgment when determining whether to check all persons in a vehicle, others said they felt pressured by management to release vehicles into the country without querying all occupants, even if the officer believed all passengers should be vetted before admitting the vehicle’s occupants into the country.
As for USCIS, the government agency that oversees lawful immigration to the United States, the DHS watchdog found that it did not always complete timely screenings of more than 400,000 asylum applicants between October 2017 and March 2023. “Additionally, USCIS does not have a dedicated procedure or comprehensive technology solution to perform interim screening of asylum applicants whose cases were not adjudicated within the required 180-day timeframe,” the report states. “Without capabilities to effectively screen and vet noncitizens, CBP is unable to conduct complete screening and vetting of all noncitizen travelers at air and land ports of entry.” The report proceeds to blast both DHS agencies, concluding that the lapses will continue to admit dangerous persons into the country and enable asylum seekers who may pose significant threats to public safety and national security to keep living in the United States for extended periods while awaiting an asylum decision. The DHS IG also reminds that in a past report, it identified at least two persons paroled into the U.S. as part of Operation Allies Refuge/Operation Allies Welcome who may have posed a risk to national security and the safety of local communities.
Until next week,
The post Hunter Biden Laptop Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Tom Fitton in Washington Times:
Those videos of President Biden freezing, getting lost in his thoughts, shuffling, slurring his words, wandering off and simply checking out are “cheap fakes,” according to risible talking points the White House is now peddling.
Mr. Biden and his increasingly bizarre behavior have become the punch line for jokes and memes. But cognitive decline isn’t funny; it’s tragic. In that respect, the president deserves our empathy and compassion. But Americans are right to be concerned about the immediate national security and other consequences caused by Mr. Biden’s evident disability.
The White House’s desperate distraction efforts aside, the time has come for Vice President Kamala Harris and the president’s Cabinet to do their duty under the 25th Amendment and consider whether the president’s cognitive issues preclude him from continuing to discharge his duties. As the first step, Mr. Biden’s Cabinet should demand that Mr. Biden undergo medical tests by independent medical experts to determine if he has cognitive or related disability issues.
Read more here…
The post Initiate the 25th Amendment now appeared first on Judicial Watch.
‘High Profile/High Alert Action’
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received eight pages of records from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) showing Mike Morell, former acting CIA director under President Obama, requesting CIA permission to publish a letter by former intelligence community leaders stating that they believed the laptop emails exposing Hunter Biden’s connections to Ukraine were Russian disinformation. Morrell’s request for prepublication review was approved in just six hours by the CIA.
Judicial Watch forced the release of material through a June 23, 2023, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the CIA failed to respond to a May 11, 2023, request (Judicial Watch v. Central Intelligence Agency (No. 1:23-cv-01844)). Judicial Watch is asking for:
Records and communications of the Prepublication Classification Review Board, Central Intelligence Agency, including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, cables, voice recordings, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, presentations, notes, or other form of record, regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter involving the Hunter Biden laptop story potentially having Russian involvement or being a Russian disinformation plot.
“This is a rush job, as it needs to get out as soon as possible,” Morell wrote in an email on Monday, October 19, 2020, at 6:36 a.m., to the CIA’s Publications Classification Review Board (PCRB) with a copy to Marc Polymeropoulos, a former CIA senior intelligence officer.
This was five days after the New York Post published an article on the Hunter Biden emails, three days before a Donald Trump/Joe Biden debate, and 15 days before the presidential election.
The “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails” is included in the records. It states in part:
We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement — just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.
At 8:01 a.m. the same day, an unnamed CIA official sent Morell’s request to an official whose name is also redacted:
Below is a high profile/high alert action item for 19 October:
Former DDCIA Michael Morell submitted for review the attached manuscript (“Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails”). Mr. Morell has advised us that this article was co-authored with former DO officer Marc Polymeropoulos and that “many former senior and working-level officials from across the IC will sign and then be made public. PCRB has determined that this manuscript contains no classified information.” [Emphasis in original]
At 11:44 a.m., five hours and eight minutes after Morrell sent his request, a person whose name is redacted sends an email stating:
You may notify former DDCIA [Deputy Director] Morell.
At 12:44 p.m. an official whose name is redacted emails Morell:
Dear Michael,
The Prepublication Classification Review Board completed its review of your article titled “Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails.” The Board determined that it contains no classified information and can be published. Agency approval for publication of this material does not represent Agency endorsement or verification of this work.
If you add new material, please resubmit it before sharing, highlighting the new language to expedite our review. The PCRB appreciates your cooperation with prepublication review. You may reach out to us via [redacted] with questions or concerns.
Kind regards, PCRB Staff
“These documents are astounding. That the CIA would turn around a campaign document like this for Joe Biden’s team in six hours is insane news,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “This seems to be demonstrable campaign interference by the CIA, and that should be alarming to all Americans.”
Judicial Watch has multiple federal lawsuits focused on Biden family corruption:
In July, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ for records from the Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General regarding the Internal Revenue Service investigation of Hunter Biden.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice for a copy of the FBI FD-1023 form that describes “an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” Judicial Watch also asked for communications about the FD-1023.
In May 2023, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives for Biden family records and communications regarding travel and finance transactions, as well as communications between the Bidens and several known business associates.
On October 14, 2022, Judicial Watch sued DOJ for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the U.S. State Department on April 20, 2022, for messages sent through the SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolkit) system that mention Hunter Biden.
In December 2020, State Department records obtained through a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit showed that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch had specifically warned in 2017 about corruption allegations against Burisma Holdings.
In October 2020, Judicial Watch forced the release of State Department records that included a briefing checklist of a February 22, 2019, meeting in Kyiv between then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Sally Painter, co-founder and chief operating officer of Blue Star Strategies, a Democratic lobbying firm which was hired by Burisma Holdings to combat corruption allegations. At the time of the meeting, Hunter Biden was serving on the board of directors for Burisma Holdings.
The post Judicial Watch: FOIA Lawsuit Emails Show CIA Rushed Approval of Infamous Hunter Laptop Letter by 51 Former Intel Officials Before Election appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today the publication of Rights and Freedoms in Peril: An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America, the fourth book by New York Times best-selling author and Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, in which he details a long chain of abuses officials and political groups have made against the American people. The new book is available for pre-order now at JudicialWatchBook.com and is set for publication on October 15.
The book explores the Left’s declaration of war on everything from the rule of law to the colorblind Constitution, border security, honest elections, and government accountability. From his perch at Judicial Watch, Fitton has witnessed in person the very abuse, lawfare, and corruption that strikes at the heart of our rights and constitutional freedoms.
Fitton is one of the world’s leading conservative voices against government corruption and for government transparency, with Judicial Watch having filed hundreds of lawsuits to expose and stop leftist government misconduct and abuse.
Fitton, who holds a BA from George Washington University, has led Judicial Watch for over 25 years. His previous books include A Republic Under Assault, Clean House, and The Corruption Chronicles
Fitton’s previous book, A Republic Under Assault, The Left’s Ongoing Attack on American Freedom, is a hard-hitting, fast-paced look at how the Radical Left and the Deep State tried to destroy the Trump presidency. It expands on the observation that “President Biden has a personal corruption problem, has obvious health challenges, must manage internal warfare between his party’s corrupt corporate wing and its rising Communists, and his moral claim on the presidency is rejected by a massive number of voters.”
His first two bestselling books, The Corruption Chronicles and Clean House, revealed what Judicial Watch, the world’s largest and most effective watchdog group, uncovered in its battles against Obama administration secrecy.
“The Left has taken extraordinary steps to eradicate American liberty, motivated by a radical ideology whose adherents occupy the nation’s highest offices,” Fitton says. “This book is an exhaustive investigation into the progressive movement’s efforts to dismantle the venerable institutions protecting the rights and freedoms of all Americans.”
The post Judicial Watch Announces Publication of Rights and Freedoms in Peril: An Investigative Report on the Left’s Attack on America – President Tom Fitton’s Fourth Book appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Wire:
President Joe Biden witnessed multiple attacks against U.S. Secret Service (USSS) members by his dog Commander while in office, according to a newly revealed document.According to files released to Judicial Watch by way of litigation through the Freedom of Information Act, members of the Secret Service wished each other a “safe shift” while protecting Biden due to the dozens of agents who were allegedly attacked by the German shepherd over a two year period before the dog was given away, the New York Post reported.USSS records obtained by CNN in February showed that the dog attacks numbered at least 24, but the new agency report suggests that the attacks could be more than three dozen, the Post noted.The files showed that the president reportedly accused one member of the Secret Service of lying about the attack, but personally watched at least three other attacks occur, the Post noted.Read more here…The post Biden Witnessed His Dog Attack Multiple Secret Service Members: Document appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
In its effort to blast “woke” military policies, a Washington-based legal watchdog this week sued the Pentagon for documents detailing the hows and whys of the U.S. Military Academy’s decision to delete its famous motto “Duty, Honor, Country” from its mission statement.Judicial Watch told Secrets that the move came after West Point refused to turn over information about the change. As a result, the group filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit earlier this week.“Given the woke virus infecting West Point, deleting the words ‘Duty, Honor, Country’ from its mission statement has sparked justified concern about what the Army’s rising leadership is being taught at the United States Military Academy. And the unlawful stonewalling of the release of records about the issue makes matters worse,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.Top brass at West Point shocked many when it eliminated the three words from its mission statement. The statement used to read, “To educate, train, and inspire the Corps of Cadets so that each graduate is a commissioned leader of character committed to the values of Duty, Honor, Country and prepared for a career of professional excellence and service to the Nation as an officer in the United States Army.”Read more here…The post Pentagon sued over deletion of ‘Duty, Honor, Country’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The New York Post:
Former US Attorney General Michael Mukasey has knocked current AG Merrick Garland for making a “flawed privilege assertion” to withhold audio recordings from Congress of President Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur.Mukasey, who served as the country’s chief law enforcement official under former President George W. Bush from 2007 to 2009, said in a declaration filed in federal court in Washington, DC, on Friday that Garland is wrong to harbor the recordings.Conservative groups such as the Heritage Foundation and Judicial Watch, as well as some news outlets, filed a lawsuit for the recordings earlier this year, following a Freedom of Information Act request.Read more here…The post Former AG Mukasey knocks Merrick Garland’s withholding of Biden audio files: ‘Entirely unconvincing’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The massive federal agency created after 9/11 to “safeguard the American people” risks national security by allowing criminals, suspected terrorists and other nefarious actors into the United States and letting asylum seekers with derogatory information remain in the country. More than two decades after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil, this may seem unbelievable to many, but it is the ugly reality inside the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) the mammoth agency with over 260,000 employees responsible for aviation and border security as well as emergency response. The Biden administration’s disastrous open border policies have jolted the agency and those on the frontline that operate under its umbrella, specifically Customs and Border Protection (CBP).
CBP is responsible for screening all foreign visitors and returning American citizens upon arrival at a United States port of entry (POE). U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), another DHS conglomerate, is supposed to vet foreigners seeking asylum to verify their identities and determine eligibility. Both DHS agencies are supposed to use technology, procedures, and coordination to perform these duties, but a federal audit reveals they are not fully effective, leaving the nation at risk. “Although U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) deployed new technologies to enhance traveler screening, it could not access all Federal data necessary to enable complete screening and vetting of noncitizens seeking admission into the United States,” according to a report made public this month by the DHS Inspector General. The 35-page document is sprinkled with redactions to protect sensitive information, but the publicly available portions tell an alarming story. For instance, CBP used varied and sometimes inconsistent inspection procedures for travelers arriving in vehicles at land ports of entry and the agency does not have the technology to perform biometric matching on travelers arriving in vehicles at the crossings.
Incredibly, the probe found that CBP is inconsistent when it conducts inspections of travelers seeking admission to the U.S. through land crossings. Specifically, the watchdog determined that CBP used non-standard inspection procedures for vehicle passengers. “At three land POEs we visited, CBP officers did not query all vehicle occupants in Simplified Arrival to identify criminal warrants, national security concerns, or border crossing history before admitting them into the country,” the report states. “Officers at those POEs said port management frequently directed officers working vehicle primary inspection lanes to query only drivers to expedite processing. This practice leaves officers unaware of potentially derogatory information about persons in a vehicle other than the driver.” While some officers told investigators they applied experience and professional judgement when determining whether to check all persons in a vehicle, others said they felt pressured by management to release vehicle into the country without querying all occupants, even if the officer believed all passengers should be vetted before admitting the vehicle’s occupants into the country.
As for USCIS, the government agency that oversees lawful immigration to the United States, the DHS watchdog found that it did not always complete timely screenings of more than 400,000 asylum applicants between October 2017 and March 2023. “Additionally, USCIS does not have a dedicated procedure or comprehensive technology solution to perform interim screening of asylum applicants whose cases were not adjudicated within the required 180-day timeframe,” the report states. “Without capabilities to effectively screen and vet noncitizens, CBP is unable to conduct complete screening and vetting of all noncitizen travelers at air and land ports of entry.” The report proceeds to blast both DHS agencies, concluding that the lapses will continue to admit dangerous persons into the country and enable asylum seekers who may pose significant threats to public safety and national security to keep living in the United States for extended periods while awaiting an asylum decision. The DHS IG also reminds that in a past report it identified at least two persons paroled into the U.S. as part of Operation Allies Refuge/Operation Allies Welcome who may have posed a risk to national security and the safety of local communities.
The post DHS Lets Criminals, Suspected Terrorists, Nefarious Actors into U.S., Agency Watchdog Affirms appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Asks Federal Court to Order Release of the Audio of President Biden’s Interview with Special Counsel Hur
Judicial Watch announced it requested a federal court to reject the Biden Justice Department’s request to rewrite the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and that it order the release of the audio recordings of President Biden’s interviews with Special Counsel Robert Hur within 14 days. (This lawsuit has already forced the Biden administration to confess that the transcripts of the audio recordings have been altered and are not accurate.)
Judicial Watch Sues for ATF Records on Arkansas Raid that Led to Shooting Death of Clinton National Airport Official
Judicial Watch announced recently it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) records regarding the fatal shooting of Little Rock, AR, resident and Executive Director of the Clinton National Airport Bryan Malinowski.
Judicial Watch Sues Defense Department for Records about Deletion of ‘Duty, Honor, Country’ From West Point Mission Statement
“Given the woke virus infecting West Point, deleting the words ‘Duty, Honor, Country’ from its mission statement has sparked justified concern about what the Army’s rising leadership is being taught at the United States Military Academy. And the unlawful stonewalling of the release of records about the issue makes matters worse,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch: New Records Detail Federal-State Censorship Coordination in 2020 Election
“The records provide more disturbing evidence of a conspiracy by federal, state, and ‘private’ actors to censor Americans on social media during a presidential campaign,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch will continue to expose the government’s involvement in what is an ongoing and unprecedented attack on Americans’ First Amendment rights.”
In The News
President Biden had front row seat to dog, Commander, repeatedly biting Secret Service agents: report
Fox NewsPresident Biden reportedly witnessed multiple attacks by Commander, his ferocious dog, to U.S. Secret Service (USSS) personnel – with one urging the use of a muzzle, newly released records show.
Correspondence, obtained by Judicial Watch, set the scene of life with Commander Biden – which included trips to the ER and the tailor.
How Will Trump Verdict Affect His Election Prospects? New Poll Offers First Clue
The Daily SignalMore than 6 in 10 voters, 62%, want the audio tapes from Robert Hur’s interview of Biden to be released to Congress, including 45% of Democrats. The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project, Judicial Watch, and CNN are suing the Justice Department for access to the recordings.
Delaware Court To Consider DCNF, Judicial Watch Request To Reopen Case Seeking Biden Senate Records
The Daily CallerA Delaware court is set to consider Thursday the Daily Caller News Foundation and Judicial Watch’s petition to reopen their case seeking the release of President Joe Biden’s Senate records held at the University of Delaware.
“The Hur report revelations are absolutely stunning,” said Michael Bastasch, editor-in-chief for the DCNF. “The University of Delaware has some serious explaining to do.”
Video Highlights
-
-
- Disturbing Evidence by Feds to Censor You on Social Media! - Supreme Court Should STEP UP For Trump! - Mary Margaret Olohan Re: “Detrans: True Stories of Escaping the Gender Ideology Cult”
-
The post FOIA Under Attack by Biden DOJ! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Records Detail Federal-State Censorship Coordination in 2020 Election
Judicial Watch Asks Court to Order the Release of the Audio of President Biden’s Interview with Special Counsel Hur
Judicial Watch Sues for ATF Records on Arkansas Raid that Led to Shooting Death of Clinton National Airport Official
Judicial Watch Sues over Deletion of ‘Duty, Honor, Country’ from West Point Mission Statement
Records Detail Federal-State Censorship Coordination in 2020 Election
We received 110 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that show state election officials in the days before and after the 2020 election flagging online content deemed “misinformation.”
They sent these online posts to the Center for Internet Security (CIS), a DHS-funded nonprofit, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), and others.
The records provide more disturbing evidence of a conspiracy by federal, state, and “private” actors to censor Americans on social media during a presidential campaign
Judicial Watch obtained the records in response to our lawsuit for records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), a division of DHS, and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to suppress online election content (Judicial Watch Inc. vs. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:22-cv-03560 )). We filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after DHS failed to respond to an October 2022 FOIA request.
The newly obtained records include a November 4, 2020, email report from CIS “Misinformation Reports” to Brian Scully, head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Mis-, Dis-, Malinformation (MDM) branch, a division of DHS. The report originated in the Washington State secretary of state’s office and states:
I wanted to flag the following tweet: [handle redacted]. There is no evidence for the claim being made of a widespread mail-in fraud operation to benefit Democrats in swing states.
The flagged tweet reads:
A note to ALL CONSERVATIVE media people projecting Trump victories in swing states:
Yes, Republican turn out may be strong!
Yes, that’s good news.
From a mail in state veteran: The Democrats will wait to know how many votes they have to “find”, then, they will magically appear.
On November 12, 2020, Scully sends an email with subject line “Hammer and Scorecard Tweets” to individuals whose names are redacted and have a @gmail email address a @stanford.edu email address respectively. Scully introduces the “program manager for the EIP” at Stanford University and who is “a friend of Director Krebs” (former CISA DirectorChris Krebs).
The Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was initially called the Election Misinformation Partnership, was created in the days leading up to the November 3, 2020, election. It tasked staffers with monitoring online election content 24 hours a day with a priority being “disinfo that is going viral.”
On January 19, 2021, Scully receives an email with subject line “Draft: COVID-19 What to Expect and 60-Day Plan” from an individual with a @stanford.edu email address (whose name is redacted):
[Redacted] and I wanted to pass along SIO’s [Stanford Internet Observatory] vaccine misinfo what-to-expect and 60-day plan draft whitepaper for your feedback, find it attached. Please feel free to tear it apart — it is mainly based on our experience with EIP and the vaccine misinfo we’ve seen so far.
Two days later, a redacted sender from Stanford asks Scully to give feedback on an attached document, “Virality Project Jan 19 Vaccine Weekly Briefing,” which is not included with the responsive records provided to Judicial Watch.
On November 2, 2020, a person at Facebook’s U.S. Politics and Government Outreach whose name is redacted replies to “Misinformation Reports” at CIS, and CCs Scully, someone at CISA Central, someone at CFITF (CISA’s Counter Foreign Influence Task Force) and “tips@2020partnership.atlassian.net” with the subject “Facebook post alleging submitting multiple ballots fraudulently.” The Facebook official states: “On it now. Thanks!” regarding review of a social media post reported by the Iowa Secretary of State’s office. The Facebook post is redacted.
A November 4, 2020, email from Facebook is sent to “Misinformation Reports” at CIS, Scully, CISA Central, CFITF and “tips@2020partnership.atlassian.net.” It states: “Received and looking into this,” regarding review of a social media post reported by a government official in Kentucky. The Facebook post is redacted.
In a separate November 4, 2020, email regarding a social media post reported by a Kentucky government official, a Facebook official writes: “Confirming that this has been closed out and the SoS has been notified. Thanks!” The Facebook post is redacted.
Your Judicial Watch will continue to expose the government’s involvement in what is an ongoing and unprecedented attack on Americans’ First Amendment rights.
Judicial Watch Asks Court to Order the Release of the Audio of President Biden’s Interview with Special Counsel Hur
The Biden administration wants to destroy the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to protect Joe Biden.
Judicial Watch just asked a federal court to reject the Biden Justice Department’s request to rewrite FOIA and that it ordered the release of the audio recordings of President Biden’s interviews with Special Counsel Robert Hur within 14 days.
This lawsuit has already forced the Biden administration to confess that the transcripts of the audio recordings have been altered and are not accurate.
Judicial Watch filed the first FOIA lawsuit and is the lead plaintiff asking for the Biden audio recordings of his interviews in Special Counsel Hur’s criminal investigation of Biden’s theft and disclosure of classified records (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)). The lawsuit helped force the release of a redacted transcript of the Biden interview.
The Biden Justice Department, in seeking to keep the audio recordings secret, asked the court to ignore precedent and rewrite FOIA law. The Biden agency: demands that a law enforcement/executive privilege exemption be rewritten to help Joe Biden; wants to change FOIA law to protect (after 50 years of being a politician) President Joe Biden’s privacy in his voice; and seeks to potentially end FOIA with a new argument that the possible “AI” alteration of the Hur recordings is reason to keep the keep the recordings and any government record a secret from the public.
We argue that the recordings should be released “because an open question remains about whether Special Counsel Hur’s conclusion that President Biden should not be prosecuted for his mishandling of classified records [and] is supported by the evidence.”
Further, the audio would educate the public about “whether Special Counsel Hur appropriately pursued justice by recommending to the attorney general that criminal charges should not be brought against President Biden concerning his mishandling of classified materials.” This question “is of even more import these days because another special counsel (with approval by Attorney General Garland) is currently prosecuting President Trump for allegedly engaging in similar actions. In addition to President Trump being both President Biden’s former political opponent and the current Republican nominee in the upcoming Presidential election, President Trump is the only former president or vice president to be prosecuted for such actions.”
We also criticize the Biden Justice Department’s reliance on a case that allowed the withholding of the audio of the dying cries of the Challenger astronauts as simply “repugnant.”
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
The White House admitted to the court that the transcript of President Joe Biden’s testimony to Special Counsel Robert Hur is not accurate and is missing “filler words (such as ‘um’ or ‘uh’)” and words that “may have been repeated when spoken (such as ‘I, I’ or ‘and, and’)” which were sometimes “only listed a single time in the transcripts.”
The Heritage Foundation and a CNN-led media coalition have recently been joined with our lawsuit.
Judicial Watch Sues for ATF Records on Arkansas Raid that Led to Shooting Death of Clinton National Airport Official
There was a concerning Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) raid that led to death of an American citizen back in March, and Judicial Watch immediately began investigating.
It led to our filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the ATF for records regarding the fatal shooting of Little Rock, AR, resident and Executive Director of the Clinton National Airport Bryan Malinowski (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-01679)).
We sued on June 10, 2024, after the ATF failed to respond adequately to an April 16 FOIA request for:
- All emails and text messages sent to and from ATF officials regarding Little Rock resident Bryan Malinowski who died in an ATF raid on March 19, 2024.
- All records related to the raid on the home of Bryan Malinowski, including but not limited to, re-operational briefing documents, raid plans, investigative reports, memoranda, warrants and audio and video recordings.
Malinowski died following an ATF raid in March 2024. The ATF only produced heavily redacted search warrant court filings.
On April 22, 2024, Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to ATF Director Steven Dettelbach, asking for details about “the deadly pre-dawn raid conducted by ATF in Little Rock, Arkansas, while executing a search warrant on the home of Bryan Malinowski, a local airport executive.”
An affidavit, which was unsealed after Malinowski’s death and produced to us, alleged he unlawfully sold guns without a license. Malinowski’s family lawyer and former federal prosecutor, Bud Cummins, reportedly described Malinowski’s gun sales as “a hobby and protected by the Second Amendment.” In testimony before a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives, Cummins testified, “Malinowski never broke any laws selling the way he did, even when a handful of weapons turned up at crime scenes later.”
Video footage of the raid recently released by X and the Arkansas Times, shows that Malinowski’s wife thought that the law enforcement officers raiding their home were intruders.
The Biden ATF’s deadly raid on Bryan Malinowski’s home, in what was essentially a licensing dispute, screams out for a thorough examination. Slow walking the release of basic information about this raid suggests that the ATF has something to hide.
Judicial Watch Sues over Deletion of ‘Duty, Honor, Country’ from West Point Mission Statement
Judicial Watch just filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for records regarding the deletion of the words “Duty, Honor, Country” from the United States Military Academy at West Point’s mission statement (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:24-cv-01757)). “Duty, Honor, Country” is West Point’s motto.
We sued after the Military Academy failed to respond to a March 2024 FOIA request for:
- All documents which form the basis upon which the decision was made to remove the phrase “Duty, Honor, Country” from the United States Military Academy Mission Statement, according to various reports (such ashttps://armedforces.press/report-west-point-to-remove-duty-honor-country-from-official-mission-statement/).
- All emails between the following USMA officials and other email accounts ending in .mil or .gov regarding the removal of “Duty, Honor, Country” from the USMA Mission Statement: Superintendent LTG Steve Gilland, MG Lori Robinson, and BG Shane Reeves.
In a March 12, 2024, “Message from the 61st Superintendent,” Superintendent Lt. Gen. Steven Gilland announced the change, referencing the Army’s continued commitment to “Duty, Honor and Country” and then announces the new mission statement without explaining why the words themselves were deleted:
Duty, Honor, Country is foundational to the United States Military Academy’s culture and will always remain our motto. It defines who we are as an institution and as graduates of West Point. These three hallowed words are the hallmark of the cadet experience and bind the Long Gray Line together across our great history.
Our responsibility to produce leaders to fight and win our nation’s wars requires us to assess ourselves regularly. Thus, over the past year and a half, working with leaders from across West Point and external stakeholders, we reviewed our vision, mission, and strategy to serve this purpose. We believe our mission binds the Academy to the Army — the Army in which our cadets will serve. As a result of this assessment, we recommended the following mission statement to our senior Army leadership:
To build, educate, train, and inspire the Corps of Cadets to be commissioned leaders of character committed to the Army Values and ready for a lifetime of service to the Army and Nation. [Emphasis in original]
Both the Secretary of the Army and Army Chief of Staff approved this recommendation….
Given the woke virus infecting West Point, deleting the words “Duty, Honor, Country” from its mission statement has sparked justified concern about what the Army’s rising leadership is being taught at the United States Military Academy. And the unlawful stonewalling of the release of records about the issue makes matters worse.
Our lawsuits and FOIA requests on Critical Race Theory and other leftist extremism are extensive.
In July 2023, we exposed records from the United States Air Force Academy, a component of the United States Department of Defense, which included instructional materials and emails that address topics such as Critical Race Theory, “white privilege,” and Black Lives Matter.
In March 2023, records from the U.S. Department of Defense showed the U.S. Air Force Academy has made race and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.
In June 2022, we exposed Critical Race Theory (CRT) instruction at the U.S. Military Academy, West Point. One training slide contained a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” [Emphasis in original]
Until next week,
The post FOIA Under Attack by Biden DOJ! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) records regarding the fatal shooting of Little Rock, AR, resident and Executive Director of the Clinton National Airport Bryan Malinowski (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-01679)).
The lawsuit was filed June 10, 2024, after the ATF failed to respond adequately to an April 16 FOIA request for:
A. All emails and text messages sent to and from ATF officials regarding Little Rock resident Bryan Malinowski who died in an ATF raid on March 19, 2024.
B. All records related to the raid on the home of Bryan Malinowski, including but not limited to, re-operational briefing documents, raid plans, investigative reports, memoranda, warrants and audio and video recordings.
Malinowski died following an ATF raid in March 2024. The ATF only produced heavily redacted search warrant court filings.
On April 22, 2024, Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to ATF Director Steven Dettelbach, asking for details about “the deadly pre-dawn raid conducted by ATF in Little Rock, Arkansas, while executing a search warrant on the home of Bryan Malinowski, a local airport executive.”
An affidavit, which was unsealed after Malinowski’s death and produced to Judicial Watch, alleged he unlawfully sold guns without a license. Malinowski’s family lawyer and former federal prosecutor, Bud Cummins, reportedly described Malinowski’s gun sales as “a hobby and protected by the Second Amendment.” In testimony before a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives, Cummins testified, “Malinowski never broke any laws selling the way he did, even when a handful of weapons turned up at crime scenes later.”
Video footage of the raid recently released by X and the Arkansas Times, shows that Malinowski’s wife thought that the law enforcement officers raiding their home were intruders.
“The Biden ATF’s deadly raid on Bryan Malinowski’s home, in what was essentially a licensing dispute, screams out for a thorough examination,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Slow walking the release of basic information about this raid suggests that the ATF has something to hide.”
Judicial Watch’s investigations and litigation on abusive lawfare practiced by the Biden administration includes:
On May 8, 2024, Judicial Watch received a recording of a phone message left by an FBI special agent for someone at the Secret Service (USSS) in the context of the raid on President Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago, Florida, which showed coordination between the Secret Service and the FBI on the Raid of Trump’s Home.
In March 2024, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department of Energy for records about the retroactive termination of former President Donald Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.
In August 2023, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for records of the Archives’ role in President Trump’s White House records controversy; whether it offered Trump a secure storage location other than the National Archives; and if the Archives consulted with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence regarding the classification or declassification procedures of any of the alleged classified documents found at Trump’s Florida residence.
A separate Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration resulted in the release of records about the unprecedented document dispute between Archives and President Trump. Click here or here to review the records.
In August 2022, Judicial Watch successfully sued to unseal the search warrant affidavit used to justify the unprecedented raid on the home of former President Trump.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch filed lawsuits against the DOJ for its records and the FBI’s records about the Mar-a-Lago raid search warrant application and approval, as well as communications about the warrant between the FBI, Executive Office of the President and the Secret Service.
The post Judicial Watch Sues for ATF Records on Arkansas Raid that Led to Shooting Death of Clinton National Airport Official appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Biden Justice Department Argument is ‘Repugnant’
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced it requested a federal court to reject the Biden Justice Department’s request to rewrite the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and that it order the release of the audio recordings of President Biden’s interviews with Special Counsel Robert Hur within 14 days. (This lawsuit has already forced the Biden administration to confess that the transcripts of the audio recordings have been altered and are not accurate.)
Judicial Watch filed the first FOIA lawsuit and is the lead plaintiff asking for theBiden audio recordings of his interviews in Special Counsel Hur’s criminal investigation of Biden’s theft and disclosure of classified records (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)). (The Judicial Watch lawsuit already helped force the release of a redacted transcript of the Biden interview.)
The Biden Justice Department, in seeking to keep the audio recordings secret, asked the court to ignore precedent and rewrite FOIA law. The Biden agency: demands that a law enforcement/executive privilege exemption be rewritten to help Joe Biden; wants to change FOIA law to protect (after 50 years of being a politician) President Joe Biden’s privacy in his voice; and seeks to potentially end FOIA with a new argument that the possible “AI” alteration of the Hur recordings is reason to keep the keep the recordings and any government record a secret from the public.
Judicial Watch argues that the recordings should be released “because an open question remains about whether Special Counsel Hur’s conclusion that President Biden should not be prosecuted for his mishandling of classified records [and] is supported by the evidence.”
Further, the audio would educate the public about “whether Special Counsel Hur appropriately pursued justice by recommending to the attorney general that criminal charges should not be brought against President Biden concerning his mishandling of classified materials.” This question “is of even more import these days because another special counsel (with approval by Attorney General Garland) is currently prosecuting President Trump for allegedly engaging in similar actions. In addition to President Trump being both President Biden’s former political opponent and the current Republican nominee in the upcoming Presidential election, President Trump is the only former president or vice president to be prosecuted for such actions.”
Judicial Watch also criticizes the Biden Justice Department’s reliance on a case that allowed the withholding of the audio of the dying cries of the Challenger astronauts as simply “repugnant.”
“We hope the court rejects the Biden Justice Department’s political request to rewrite FOIA law to hide the Biden tapes,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Biden administration wants to destroy FOIA in order to protect Joe Biden.”
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
The White House admitted to the court that the transcript of President Joe Biden’s testimony to Special Counsel Robert Hur is not accurate and is missing “filler words (such as ‘um’ or ‘uh’)” and words that “may have been repeated when spoken (such as ‘I, I’ or ‘and, and’)” which were sometimes “only listed a single time in the transcripts.”
The Heritage Foundation and a CNN-led media coalition have recently been joined with Judicial Watch’s lawsuit.
Judicial Watch has several ongoing FOIA lawsuits about Biden’s document scandals and the related unprecedented partisan prosecutorial and judicial abuses of former President Donald J. Trump.
The post Judicial Watch Asks Federal Court to Order Release of the Audio of President Biden’s Interview with Special Counsel Hur appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for documents and emails regarding deletion of the words “Duty, Honor, Country” from the United States Military Academy at West Point’s mission statement (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:24-cv-01757)). “Duty, Honor, Country” is West Point’s motto.
The suit was filed after the Military Academy failed to respond to a March 2024 Judicial Watch FOIA request for:
-
All documents which form the basis upon which the decision was made to remove the phrase “Duty, Honor, Country” from the United States Military Academy Mission Statement, according to various reports (such as https://armedforces.press/report-west-point-to-remove-duty-honor-country-from-official-mission-statement/).
-
All emails between the following USMA officials and other email accounts ending in .mil or .gov regarding the removal of “Duty, Honor, Country” from the USMA Mission Statement: Superintendent LTG Steve Gilland, MG Lori Robinson, and BG Shane Reeves.
In a March 12, 2024, “Message from the 61st Superintendent,” Superintendent Lt. Gen. Steven Gilland announced the change, referencing the Army’s continued commitment to “Duty, Honor and Country” and then announces the new mission statement without explaining why the words themselves were deleted:
Duty, Honor, Country is foundational to the United States Military Academy’s culture and will always remain our motto. It defines who we are as an institution and as graduates of West Point. These three hallowed words are the hallmark of the cadet experience and bind the Long Gray Line together across our great history.
Our responsibility to produce leaders to fight and win our nation’s wars requires us to assess ourselves regularly. Thus, over the past year and a half, working with leaders from across West Point and external stakeholders, we reviewed our vision, mission, and strategy to serve this purpose. We believe our mission binds the Academy to the Army — the Army in which our cadets will serve. As a result of this assessment, we recommended the following mission statement to our senior Army leadership:
To build, educate, train, and inspire the Corps of Cadets to be commissioned leaders of character committed to the Army Values and ready for a lifetime of service to the Army and Nation. [Emphasis in original]
Both the Secretary of the Army and Army Chief of Staff approved this recommendation….
“Given the woke virus infecting West Point, deleting the words ‘Duty, Honor, Country’ from its mission statement has sparked justified concern about what the Army’s rising leadership is being taught at the United States Military Academy. And the unlawful stonewalling of the release of records about the issue makes matters worse,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch lawsuits and FOIA requests on Critical Race Theory and other leftist extremism are extensive.
In July 2023, Judicial Watch exposed records from the United States Air Force Academy, a component of the United States Department of Defense, which included instructional materials and emails that address topics such as Critical Race Theory, “white privilege,” and Black Lives Matter.
In March 2023, records from the U.S. Department of Defense showed the U.S. Air Force Academy has made race and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.
In June 2022, Judicial Watch exposed Critical Race Theory (CRT) instruction at the U.S. Military Academy, West Point. One training slide contained a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.”
The post Judicial Watch Sues Defense Department for Records about Deletion of ‘Duty, Honor, Country’ From West Point Mission Statement appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The New York Post:
“Due to Secret Service retention standards, the above mentioned file(s) has been destroyed,” Secret Service FOIA Officer Kevin Tyrrell wrote to the Daily Mail, which sought the video after its existence was described in a February document release as part of public-records litigation brought by Judicial Watch.
“We’re concerned because the videos seem to be responsive to our FOIA lawsuits,” said Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton.
However, records made public Friday by Judicial Watch show that in at least one instance, Secret Service members were asked to delete logs of an attack within an hour of it happening.
Read more here…
The post Secret Service says it ‘destroyed’ tape of Biden’s dog splattering agent’s blood at White House appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Records Detail Biden Dog Attacks on Secret Service Personnel
Judicial Watch announced recently that it received 116 pages of United States Secret Service (USSS) records from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that reveal the details about several incidents in which Secret Service personnel were bitten by President Biden’s dog Commander, sometimes requiring medical attention.
U.S. to Invest $4 Mil to Reduce Barriers Impeding LGBTQI+ Youth in Latin America, Caribbean
The Biden administration plans to invest $4 million in a project aimed at reducing barriers that impede access to education and decent work for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex (LGBTQI+) youth in Latin America and the Caribbean. (For those wondering the + holds space for the expanding list of diverse gender and sexual identities). The American taxpayer dollars will fund a technical assistance venture that will improve implementation of laws, policies, and national plans to help the young LGBTQI+ population in the region, according to a preliminary grant announcement posted by the government.
Financial Impact of Illegal Immigrants on Nation’s Public Education System “Staggering”
Nearly half a million illegal immigrant minors have entered the United States through the porous Mexican border since President Joe Biden took office in 2021 and the financial impact on the nation’s public education system is staggering, according to information disclosed at a recent congressional hearing conducted to address the unprecedented crisis. “Educating illegal immigrant children requires substantial resources, altering the learning environment for all students,” said Florida Congressman Aaron Bean, who chairs a subcommittee on early childhood, elementary and secondary education for the House Education and Workforce Committee.
Judicial Watch Statement on the Hunter Biden Verdict
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding Hunter Biden being found guilty on three federal felony gun charges: The Bidens are going down in the history books with the inaugural felony conviction of a First Family member. Unlike former President Trump, Hunter Biden received a fair trial. This guilty verdict is an important first step toward accountability for Biden family corruption.
In The News
Report: Joe Biden Watched His Dog Commander Bite Secret Service Agents, Then Accused Them of Lying
BreitbartThe 81-year-old president reportedly accused a Secret Service member of lying about being attacked by Major during his first year in office, but was present for at least three separate attacks involving Commander, files released to Judicial Watch under Freedom of Information Act litigation show.
Biden repeatedly watched his dog attack Secret Service as staff wished each other ‘safe shift’: docs By Social Links for Steven Nelson
New York PostPresident Biden repeatedly watched his German shepherd Commander attack Secret Service members, who wished each other a “safe shift” as the number of incidents mounted — with one exasperated workplace safety professional urging the use of a muzzle, agency records show.
How Will Trump Verdict Affect His Election Prospects? New Poll Offers First Clue
The Daily SignalMore than 6 in 10 voters, 62%, want the audio tapes from Robert Hur’s interview of Biden to be released to Congress, including 45% of Democrats. The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project, Judicial Watch, and CNN are suing the Justice Department for access to the recordings.
Video Highlights
-
-
- HUGE! NEW Records Detail Biden Dog Attacks on Secret Service Personnel! - Rep. James Comer: “65 Pages of Evidence of Biden Corruption!” - TAMPERED: Biden Audio Transcripts Inaccurate!
-
The post Biden Dog Attack Scandal Worsens! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In a perplexing move the Biden administration has appointed a controversial figure investigated for fraud and conflict of interest as head of a federal law enforcement agency as deputy director of the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS). The assignment comes less than a year after the administration replaced the scandal-plagued director at the agency, which operates under the beleaguered Transportation Security Administration (TSA), created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. Both function under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and have been rocked by controversy and mismanagement that has left the nation vulnerable from a security standpoint, according to multiple DHS sources interviewed by Judicial Watch over the years.
When the administration quietly replaced the last FAMS director in August 2023, it marked the fourth time in around as many years that the agency got a new leader. Such frequent turnover at the top illustrates the instability that has prevailed at FAMS, a critical agency charged with protecting commercial passenger flights by deterring and countering the risk of terrorist activity, aircraft piracy and other crimes to protect the nation’s transportation infrastructure. Agents are highly trained aviation security specialists and many have expressed frustration over severe mismanagement that includes a special “VIP” program that pulled them off of high risk flights to provide certain members of Congress with extra protection on flights that failed to meet the threat criteria. The skilled law enforcement officers were also deployed to the Mexican border to perform duties unrelated to transportation, such as welfare checks, hospital watch and chauffeuring illegal immigrants. Under the most recently ousted director, Tirrell Stevenson, air marshals were also removed from missions and sent to military bases for Afghan refugees.
The recent appointment as deputy director of a law enforcement official with a sordid past has rattled many inside FAMS and raises questions about the criteria to qualify for the top-secret clearance required for the position. Her name is Pauline (Polly) Hanson and she once served as chief of the Amtrak Police, a federal law enforcement agency of about 500 charged with protecting the nation’s railroad system. As Amtrak police chief Hanson was investigated for “unethical and illegal” behavior after awarding her then live in boyfriend’s company a million-dollar counterterrorism contract to train officers in her agency. Hanson was directly involved in the process for awarding the contract, according to federal court documents filed by the Inspector General for the National Railroad Passenger Corporation and failed to disclose her romantic and financial ties to the company’s senior director, Kerry Thomas. The new FAMS deputy director lawyered up and fought in court to limit investigators’ access to her bank records and when a judge ordered her to turn them over, she resigned as chief of the Amtrak Police. Hanson has also served as chief of Metro Transit Police in the District of Columbia and executive director of the D.C. Police’s strategic service bureau.
This week Judicial Watch fired off two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests—to TSA and the National Railroad Passenger Corporation Inspector General—asking for details about Hanson’s criminal and ethical investigation as Amtrak Police Chief, subsequent resignation and communications exchanged between the Amtrak Inspector General and the DHS and TSA regarding the new FAMS deputy director. Judicial Watch also requests Hanson’s employment history and administrative investigations as well as documents acknowledging or approving her security clearance authorization and DHS-TSA application forms and employment contracts. “It is not clear how this person could get a top-secret clearance with her background,” said Sonya Hightower-LaBosco, a retired air marshal who serves as executive director of the Air Marshal National Council, a union that represents thousands of officers nationwide. “She has a dark past,” Hightower-LaBosco confirmed.
The Air Marshal National Council has asked the DHS Inspector General to reopen Hanson’s investigation to ensure she is eligible to hold a position of public trust and top-secret security clearance. “Hanson abruptly resigned while under investigation before that investigation could come to a conclusion on whether or not she violated ethical and possible criminal laws,” the complaint to the DHS watchdog states, adding that in her current position Hanson will ultimately be in charge of all purchasing and contracts for FAMS. “If the allegations are true this is akin to letting the fox into the hen house,” the Air Marshal National Council writes.
The post New Air Marshal Deputy Director Investigated for “Unethical and Illegal” Behavior as Amtrak Police Chief appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 110 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that show state election officials in the days before and after the 2020 election flagging online content deemed “misinformation” and sending it to the Center for Internet Security (CIS), a DHS-funded nonprofit, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), and others.
The records were obtained in response to a November 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), a division of DHS, and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to suppress online election content for censorship and suppression(Judicial Watch Inc. vs. U.S. Department of Homeland Security(No. 1:22-cv-03560 )). Judicial Watch filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after DHS failed to respond to an October 2022, FOIA request.
The newly obtained records include a November 4, 2020, email report from CIS “Misinformation Reports” to Brian Scully, head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Mis-, Dis-, Malinformation (MDM) branch, a division of DHS. The report originated in the Washington State secretary of state’s office and states:
I wanted to flag the following tweet: [handle redacted]. There is no evidence for the claim being made of a widespread mail-in fraud operation to benefit Democrats in swing states.
The flagged tweet reads:
A note to ALL CONSERVATIVE media people projecting Trump victories in swing states:
Yes, Republican turn out may be strong!
Yes, that’s good news.
From a mail in state veteran: The Democrats will wait to know how many votes they have to “find”, then, they will magically appear.
On November 12, 2020, Scully sends an email with subject line “Hammer and Scorecard Tweets” to individuals whose names are redacted and have a @gmail email address a @stanford.edu email address respectively. Scully introduces the “program manager for the EIP” at Stanford University and who is “a friend of Director Krebs” (former CISA Director Chris Krebs).
The Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was initially called the Election Misinformation Partnership, was created in the days leading up to the November 3, 2020, election. It tasked staffers with monitoring online election content 24 hours a day with a priority being “disinfo that is going viral.”
On January 19, 2021, Scully receives an email with subject line “Draft: COVID-19 What to Expect and 60-Day Plan” from an individual with a @stanford.edu email address (whose name is redacted):
[Redacted] and I wanted to pass along SIO’s [Stanford Internet Observatory] vaccine misinfo what-to-expect and 60-day plan draft whitepaper for your feedback, find it attached. Please feel free to tear it apart — it is mainly based on our experience with EIP and the vaccine misinfo we’ve seen so far.
Two days later, a redacted sender from Stanford asks Scully to give feedback on an attached document, “Virality Project Jan 19 Vaccine Weekly Briefing,” which is not included with the responsive records provided to Judicial Watch.
On November 2, 2020, a person at Facebook’s U.S. Politics and Government Outreach whose name is redacted replies to “Misinformation Reports” at CIS, and CCs Scully, someone at CISA Central, someone at CFITF (CISA’s Counter Foreign Influence Task Force) and “tips@2020partnership.atlassian.net” with the subject “Facebook post alleging submitting multiple ballots fraudulently.” The Facebook official states: “On it now. Thanks!” regarding review of a social media post reported by the Iowa Secretary of State’s office. The Facebook post is redacted.
ANovember 4, 2020, email from Facebook is sent to “Misinformation Reports” at CIS, Scully, CISA Central, CFITF and “tips@2020partnership.atlassian.net.” It states: “Received and looking into this,” regarding review of a social media post reported by a government official in Kentucky. The Facebook post is redacted.
In a separate November 4, 2020, email regarding a social media post reported by a Kentucky government official, a Facebook official writes: “Confirming that this has been closed out and the SoS has been notified. Thanks!” The Facebook post is redacted.
“The records provide more disturbing evidence of a conspiracy by federal, state, and ‘private’ actors to censor Americans on social media during a presidential campaign,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch will continue to expose the government’s involvement in what is an ongoing and unprecedented attack on Americans’ First Amendment rights.”
Judicial Watch has been in the forefront of uncovering government efforts to censor free speech and suppress opposition.
In January 2023, Judicial Watch sued DHS for failing to respond to an October 11, 2023, FOIA for all records regarding Judicial Watch and its President Tom Fitton held by DHS’ Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).
In December 2023, Judicial Watch received records from DHS that showed a close collaboration between CISA and the leftist Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) to engage in “real-time narrative tracking” on all major social media platforms in the days leading up to the 2020 election.
In November 2023, Judicial Watch obtained records from DHS showing that CISA communicated during the 2020 election campaign with the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to flag online election content for censorship and suppression.
In October 2023, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Justice (DOJ) for records of any payments made by the FBI to Twitter (now known as X). The payments were disclosed in internal Twitter documents (the “Twitter Files”) made available by Elon Musk to journalists.
Also in October, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) for records concerning censorship of social media users.
In April 2023, Judicial Watch filed two lawsuits against the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies for communications between the agencies and Facebook and Twitter regarding the government’s involvement in content moderation and censorship on the social media platforms.
In a separate lawsuit file in June 2023, Judicial Watch sued DHS for all records of communications tied to the Election Integrity Partnership. Based on representations from the EIP (see hereand here), the federal government, social media companies, the EIP, theCenter for Internet Security(a non-profit organization funded partly by DHS and the Defense Department) and numerous other leftist groups communicated privately via the Jira software platform developed by Atlassian.
In February 2023, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department Homeland Security (DHS) for records showing cooperation between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and social media platforms to censor and suppress free speech.
Judicial Watch in January 2023 sued the DOJ for records of communications between the FBI and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. Thevideo, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch’s YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. Judicial Watch continues to post its video content on its Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the Covid narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
Judicial Watch has produced a four-part documentary, “Censored and Controlled,” that details the coordinated effort by the FBI and other government agencies and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates.
The post Judicial Watch: New Records Detail Federal-State Censorship Coordination in 2020 Election appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Hunter Verdict Update
Records Detail Disturbing Biden Dog Attacks on Secret Service Personnel
Hearing Held on Reopening Lawsuit for President Biden’s Senate Records
Jack Smith’s Questionable Past
Financial Impact of Illegals on Public Education System Is ‘Staggering’
Hunter Verdict Update
The Bidens are going down in the history books with the inaugural felony conviction of a First Family member. Unlike former President Trump, Hunter Biden received a fair trial. This guilty verdict is an important first step toward accountability for Biden family corruption.
The public would do well to remember that the Justice Department was dragged, kicking and screaming into this prosecution of Hunter. Our successful Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation, exposing federal special protection and the cover-up of Hunter Biden’s gun scandal, shows how this case could have been brought years ago.
We’ve been at the forefront of pressuring the federal government to come clean about its role in protecting Hunter Biden.
We sued the FBI for records regarding the gun owned by Hunter Biden that reportedly was thrown in a trash can behind a Delaware grocery store. In a joint status report to the court, the FBI stated it would not produce records about the incident due to an “ongoing criminal investigation.”
In February 2023, from a separate lawsuit, we released records from the United States Secret Service that implicated the FBI in the unusual action of helping Hunter Biden.
In response to a February 24, 2021, email inquiry from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” Schreckinger responds: “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation.”
In October 2020, The Blaze reported that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by Hallie Biden, the widow of then-presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau. In 2021, Politico reported:
Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO.
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
We have several FOIA lawsuits and information requests focused on Biden family corruption.
We are suing the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for all agency records relating to the Department of Justice or Internal Revenue Service (IRS) investigations of Hunter Biden and all records relating to efforts to interview lawyer Patrick Kevin Morris regarding Hunter Biden.
In June 2023, we sued the CIA for all communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter Biden laptop story as having “all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign.”
In July 2023, we sued the DOJ for records from the Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General regarding the Internal Revenue Service investigation of Hunter Biden.
In June 2023, we filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice for a copy of the FBI FD-1023 form that describes “an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” Judicial Watch also asked for communications about the FD-1023.
In May 2023, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives for Biden family records and communications regarding travel and finance transactions, as well as communications between the Bidens and several known business associates.
On October 14, 2022, we sued the DOJ for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
We filed a lawsuit against the U.S. State Department on April 20, 2022, for messages sent through the SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolkit) system that mention Hunter Biden.
In December 2020, State Department records obtained through a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit showed that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch had specifically warned in 2017 about corruption allegations against Burisma Holdings.
In October 2020, we forced the release of State Department records that included a briefing checklist of a February 22, 2019, meeting in Kyiv between then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Sally Painter, co-founder and chief operating officer of Blue Star Strategies, a Democratic lobbying firm which was hired by Burisma Holdings to combat corruption allegations. At the time of the meeting, Hunter Biden was serving on the board of directors for Burisma Holdings.
Records Detail Disturbing Biden Dog Attacks on Secret Service Personnel
Joe and Jill Biden let their dogs attack dozens of Secret Service and White House personnel.
Judicial Watch just received 116 pages of records from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that reveal the details about several incidents in which Secret Service personnel were bitten, sometimes requiring medical attention.
The records come in response to a February 2024 lawsuit we filed after the DHS failed to respond to a September 27, 2023, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-00429)). We asked for:
Any and all records related to incidents of aggression and bites involving the Biden family dog, “Commander”, including but not limited to communications sent to and from USSS officials in the Uniformed and Non-Uniformed Divisions involved in White House operations and the Presidential Protection Division.
The records include a September 12, 2023, email between Secret Service officials stating:
POTUS took Commander (on a leash) to the Kennedy Garden this evening for a walk. While POTUS and Commander were in the Kennedy Garden I was standing half way from the Book-Sellers and the Family Theater. POTUS opened the Book-Seller door and said [redacted]. As I started to walk toward him to see if he needed help, Commander ran through his legs and bit my left arm through the front of my jacket. I pulled my arm away and yelled no. POTUS also yelled [redacted] to Commander. POTUS then [redacted]. I obliged and Commander let me pet him. When turning to close the door, Commander jumped again and bit my left arm for the second time. POTUS again yelled at Commander and attached the leash to him. My suit coat has 3 holes,1 being all the way through. No skin was broken.
On September 14, 2023, an agent in the Presidential Protective Detail, whose name is redacted, using the subject line “5/12/2021” sent an email to a colleague with several attachments, including photos of suits, repair estimates and a “Damage to Personal Property” form indicating that a dog biting incident had occurred on May 12, 2021. In the claim form, the agent asks for $943 for a new suit, because: “Through no fault or negligence of my own, the coat was torn by a dog bite.”
On September 25, 2023, a sergeant in the Uniformed Division emails a colleague that Commander bit an agent that day.
You currently have [redacted] and [redacted] available after 2055 hours.
FYI – there was a dog bite and the Officer may need to go the hospital.
[Redacted] is covering for [redacted] who was at [redacted].
Have a safe shift!
A Secret Service log the same day reported that at 8:06 p.m. on September 25, 2023:
OFC. [redacted] (POST [redacted] ADVISED BIT BY FAMILY PET AND REQUESTED SECTOR OFFICIAL.
SGT. [redacted] REQUESTED EMT TO RESPOND.
At 8:08 p.m. the log notes:
OFC. [redacted] [redacted] ADVISED WHITE HOUSE MEDICAL HELD POST [redacted].
OFC. [redacted] [redacted] ADVISED FAMILY PET 2nd FLOOR RESIDENCE.”
The last entry in the log indicates “[8:58 p.m.] – CAPT. [redacted] REQUEST JOC [Joint Operations Center] LOG TO BE DELETED.”
The next day, CNN reporter Betsy Klein emails the Secret Service asking, “if you are able to confirm that a uniformed female USSS officer was hospitalized for a biting incident with Commander Biden last night.”
Anthony Guglielmi, chief of communications, replies:
Yesterday around 8pm, a Secret Service Uniformed Division police officer came in contact with a First Family pet and was bitten. The officer was treated by medical personnel on complex and I am not aware of any hospitalization.
The CNN report produced multiple queries from various media outlets. Guglielmi sent the same response to each.
A September 27, 2023, email from a Secret Service worker’s compensation official in the Safety, Health & Environmental Division writes to several colleagues: “Heads up and FYI. TMZ just reported a dog bite at the White House! Can we please find a way to get this dog muzzled.”
A colleague asks, “How does TMZ know before we do???” An official in the same division responds “Not sure. We must get this dog muzzled.” Another replies, “Geezzzz…” Another adds, “Unbelievable!”
Two days earlier an article was published, which notes (referencing Judicial Watch disclosures) “President Biden’s Dog Commander Allegedly Bit 7 People.”
These documents show Joe Biden is personally responsible for attacks by his dog Commander on Secret Service personnel. No wonder the Biden White House forced us to go to federal court for these records.
Our FOIA requests and lawsuits exposed initial White House falsehoods about the severity and number of attacks by the Bidens’ previous dog, Major. We then received a tip that Commander was also attacking Secret Service personnel and uncovered documents last July showing 10 biting incidents.
According to a Judicial Watch source, President Biden mistreated his dogs. The source disclosed Biden punched and kicked his dogs.
In February 2024 we received 269 pages of records related to incidents of aggression by Commander, including at least 23 biting incidents. After one incident, East Wing public tours were stopped for approximately 20 minutes due to the blood on the floor. These records include a spreadsheet of 22 incident reports between October 2022 and June 2023, 10 of which required medical treatment.
On May 14, 2024, we filed a separate lawsuit after the Department of Homeland Security failed to respond to a February 28, 2024, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-01397)). Judicial Watch is asking for:
All emails and text messages sent to and from the following officials regarding the submission of CA-1 Forms (“Notice of Traumatic Injury and Claim for Continuation of Pay or Compensation”) in connection with bites by Biden family dogs: Director Kimberly Cheatle, Deputy Dir. Ronald Rowe, Chief Operating Officer Cynthia Radway, Asst. Dir. Michael Plati, Asst. Dir. Brian Lambert, Chief Human Capital Officer Denise Walker Hall, Asst. Dir. David Smith, Asst. Dir. Miltom Wilson, Uniformed Division Chief Michael Buck, Chief Counsel Thomas Huse, and Chief of Communications Anthony Guglielmi.
Hearing Held on Reopening Lawsuit for President Biden’s Senate Records
We were in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware this week for a hearing on our petition to reopen our case for the release of Joe Biden’s Senate records kept at the University of Delaware. We have powerful evidence that the courts were misled about the Biden papers.
Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation asked the court to reopen the case in light of the findings of Special Counsel Robert Hur that contradict representations made under oath by representatives of the University of Delaware that no consideration was paid to Biden in connection with his gift of his Senate records.
In July 2020, we filed the FOIA lawsuit for the records, which are housed at the university’s library (Judicial Watch Inc. and The Daily Caller News Foundation v. DE Department of Justice and University of Delaware (No. N20A-07-001 CEB)).
In July 2023 the Delaware Supreme Court sided with the university, denying the release of the records because the university stated to the courts that no tax dollars were used to manage them.
On February 5, 2024, Hur released his report on the scandal. It calls into question the representations by the university that no state tax dollars were used to manage the papers, which Hur also found to have contained unlawfully retained classified information.
In its petition to reopen the case, we argue:
The [university’s affidavit] provides, in relevant part, that no consideration was paid to President Biden, “State funded or otherwise,” in connection with the Senatorial Papers. To the contrary, the Special Counsel Report found that “Mr. Biden asked two of his former longtime Senate staffers to review his boxes in courtesy storage,” and that “[t]he staffers were paid by the University of Delaware to perform the pre-gift review….”
“The Hur report revelations are absolutely stunning,” said Michael Bastasch, editor-in-chief for the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The University of Delaware has some serious explaining to do.”
At the hearing’s conclusion, the judge said he would rule “relatively soon.”
Jack Smith’s Questionable Past
Anti-Trump prosecutor Jack Smith has an interesting and troubling professional background. Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, looks back in Investigative Bulletin.
The International Criminal Court at the Hague was back in the news recently with the announcement by its chief prosecutor that he would seek charges against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes in Gaza, while simultaneously seeking charges against the leaders of Hamas for war crimes in Israel. This obscene act of moral equivalency tells you all you need to know about the ICC. It’s also a reminder that the most powerful prosecutor at work in the U.S. today, Special Counsel Jack Smith, has significant connections to the controversial court and another Hague tribunal.
From 2008 to 2010, Smith was the Investigative Coordinator for the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC—the same office that today is seeking arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant from a three-judge ICC panel. Founded in 2002 to pursue war crimes, the ICC has been viewed with skepticism by, among others, the U.S., Israel, Russia, China, and many African nations. In 2018, then-National Security Adviser John Bolton castigated the ICC for its failure to “deter and punish atrocity crimes” and its “threat to American sovereignty.” Last week, reacting to news of the Netanyahu arrest warrant, the House voted to sanction the ICC.
ICC records indicate that during and shortly after Smith’s tenure at the organization, it brought cases against high-ranking figures in the Congo, Sudan, Kenya, the Ivory Coast, and Libya. None appear to have resulted in convictions.
But back at Main Justice, Obama Administration figures were impressed. In 2010, Smith was plucked to head the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section—a big promotion for a relatively untested young prosecutor. He served until 2015, supervising cases against former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, New York power broker Sheldon Silver, former Congressman Rick Renzi, and CIA operative Jeffery Sterling, among others.
In 2014, Smith was eyed by Congressional investigators examining IRS targeting of conservative groups. Smith testified that following a meeting with IRS official Lois Lerner, his office “had a dialogue” with the FBI about opening investigations into conservative groups, according to a copy of the interview obtained by CNN. Smith said the conversations did not lead to investigations. It does not appear that the Smith work product from the House probe—interview transcripts, investigator notes, memos—was ever made public. Read more about Judicial Watch’s investigation of the IRS affair here.
By 2018, Smith was back at the Hague, this time as chief prosecutor for the Kosovo Specialist Chambers, anotherhighly unusual judicial body, formed to prosecute war crimes committed during the 1998-2000 Kosovo War. In 2020, Smith indicted the former president of Kosovo, Hasim Thaci, for war crimes committed in 1998 and 1999. Thaci was extradited to the Hague and his trial is currently underway.
In 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland brought Smith back to the U.S. to take over the investigation of former president Donald Trump. The rest is history. Two indictments of Trump quickly followed, along with rising public concern about Smith’s targeting of the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination.
Judicial Watch has launched several investigations of Smith. We’re closely tracking developments at the Hague for what they might reveal about Smith’s prosecutorial conduct. We sued the Justice Department after it denied our FOIA request for the names of senior staff working for Smith; Justice responded by asking a federal court to keep those names secret. We also sued for records and communications between Smith and state prosecutors in the separate Georgia investigation of Trump. To date, in that case, the Justice Department has refused to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with law enforcement proceedings. We’ll continue pressing forward on all fronts.
Financial Impact of Illegals on Public Education System Is ‘Staggering’
You can’t throw open the border to millions of people without consequences. One big cost for taxpayers and our children is in our schools, as our Corruption Chronicles blog shows.
Nearly half a million illegal immigrant minors have entered the United States through the porous Mexican border since President Joe Biden took office in 2021 and the financial impact on the nation’s public education system is staggering, according to information disclosed at a recent congressional hearing conducted to address the unprecedented crisis.
“Educating illegal immigrant children requires substantial resources, altering the learning environment for all students,” said Florida Congressman Aaron Bean, who chairs a subcommittee on early childhood, elementary and secondary education for the House Education and Workforce Committee. “Overcrowded classrooms, the need for new facilities, and strained student-to-teacher ratios are just some of the challenges,” Bean added, offering that in just four states—California, New York, Texas, and Arizona—the cost of integrating illegal immigrant children into public schools reached nearly three-quarters of a billion dollars in one fiscal year. “If we assume that every illegal immigrant child encountered by border patrol enters the school system, the cost nationwide would be over two billion dollars annually,” said the lawmaker who conducted the recent hearing, titled “The Consequences of Biden’s Border Chaos for K-12 Schools.”
Public schools are often the first to feel the impact of open border policies, according to testimony delivered at the hearing. That is partly because in 1982 the Supreme Court prohibited states from denying illegal immigrant children a public-school education. Since the ruling was issued, tens of millions of illegal aliens have entered the U.S. through the southern border with a substantial chunk enrolling in public schools across the country. Some come with family and others come without a guardian, which the government classifies as Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC). Besides providing them with a free taxpayer-funded education, Uncle Sam also spends billions of dollars annually to house, medically treat and entertain UAC. Last year the Biden administration quietly doled out tens of millions of dollars for the long-term foster care of UAC to further assist migrants under the age of 17, including pregnant and parenting teens and those who are especially vulnerable or with other special needs.
The impact on public education is just a snippet of the problem. Several examples were offered at the recent congressional hearing. In New York students were switched to online learning because nearly 2,000 illegal immigrants were sheltered in a school gymnasium. In Austin, Texas teachers had to conduct classes in hallways and conference rooms to accommodate over 400 newly enrolled illegal immigrant children. In Denver, Colorado an influx of over 40,000 illegal immigrants forced the state to spend an extra $24 million to cover the cost. In Chicago the mayor says the city’s resources are “tapped out,” and a local teacher reveals that over 40% of students qualify for English learner services and the numbers keep growing. In Massachusetts public schools have absorbed 2,000 new illegal immigrant students, forcing districts to find emergency housing with little notice. In New Mexico there have been incidents of adult-age illegal immigrants hiding in a middle school to avoid apprehension from Border Patrol, which led to the arrest of six illegal immigrants and prompted temporary lockdowns.
Last year a congressional report that revealed the cost of illegal immigration is greater than the annual gross domestic product of 15 states disclosed that nearly four million illegal aliens attend public schools around that country and most receive special services for Limited English Proficiency (LEP) costing American taxpayers nearly $59 billion. New York City alone is spending around $440 million to educate about 11,500 illegal aliens who will likely remain in the system for years to come. Laughably, at last week’s K-12 congressional hearing only one witness—from the National Council of La Raza—testified that the nation’s education system actually benefits from the influx of illegal immigrants. Her name is Amalia Chamorro, education policy director at the leftist nonprofit. “In our nation’s schools, immigrant students are a significant asset in their classrooms,” Chamorro testified. “They are known for their resilience, grit, and problem-solving skills, which are critical for 21st-century learning. In fact, research shows that immigrant students have such a high level of motivation to succeed and learn, they contribute to positive classroom environments that benefit all students.”
Until next week,
The post Biden Dog Attack Scandal Worsens! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Breitbart:
The 81-year-old president reportedly accused a Secret Service member of lying about being attacked by Major during his first year in office, but was present for at least three separate attacks involving Commander, files released to Judicial Watch under Freedom of Information Act litigation show.
A previously unreported incident on Sept. 12, 2023, featured a pair of bites in which Commander tore holes in a Secret Service member’s suit as Biden took him for a walk in the Kennedy Garden along the South Lawn of the White House.
Read more here….
The post Report: Joe Biden Watched His Dog Commander Bite Secret Service Agents, Then Accused Them of Lying appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News:
President Biden reportedly witnessed multiple attacks by Commander, his ferocious dog, to U.S. Secret Service (USSS) personnel – with one urging the use of a muzzle, newly released records show.
Correspondence, obtained by Judicial Watch, set the scene of life with Commander Biden – which included trips to the ER and the tailor.
Read more here…
The post President Biden had front row seat to dog, Commander, repeatedly biting Secret Service agents: report appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From New York Post:
WASHINGTON — President Biden repeatedly watched his German shepherd Commander attack Secret Service members, who wished each other a “safe shift” as the number of incidents mounted — with one exasperated workplace safety professional urging the use of a muzzle, agency records show.
The 81-year-old president reportedly accused a Secret Service member of lying about being attacked by Major during his first year in office, but was present for at least three separate attacks involving Commander, files released to Judicial Watch under Freedom of Information Act litigation show.
Read more here…
The post Biden repeatedly watched his dog attack Secret Service as staff wished each other ‘safe shift’: docs By Social Links for Steven Nelson appeared first on Judicial Watch.
‘Can we please find a way to get this dog muzzled’ – Secret Service official
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 116 pages of United States Secret Service (USSS) records from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that reveal the details about several incidents in which Secret Service personnel were bitten by President Biden’s dog Commander, sometimes requiring medical attention.
The records come in response to a February 2024 lawsuit that was filed after the Department of Homeland Security failed to respond to a September 27, 2023, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-00429)). Judicial Watch asks for:
Any and all records related to incidents of aggression and bites involving the Biden family dog, “Commander”, including but not limited to communications sent to and from USSS officials in the Uniformed and Non-Uniformed Divisions involved in White House operations and the Presidential Protection Division.
The newly obtained records include a September 12, 2023, email between Secret Service officials stating:
POTUS took Commander (on a leash) to the Kennedy Garden this evening for a walk. While POTUS and Commander were in the Kennedy Garden I was standing half way from the Book-Sellers and the Family Theater. POTUS opened the Book-Seller door and said [redacted]. As I started to walk toward him to see if he needed help, Commander ran through his legs and bit my left arm through the front of my jacket. I pulled my arm away and yelled no. POTUS also yelled [redacted] to Commander. POTUS then [redacted]. I obliged and Commander let me pet him. When turning to close the door, Commander jumped again and bit my left arm for the second time. POTUS again yelled at Commander and attached the leash to him. My suit coat has 3 holes,1 being all the way through. No skin was broken.
On September 14, 2023, an agent in the Presidential Protective Detail, whose name is redacted, using the subject line “5/12/2021” sent an email to a colleague with several attachments, including photos of suits, repair estimates and a “Damage to Personal Property” form indicating that a dog biting incident had occurred on May 12, 2021. In the claim form, the agent asks for $943 for a new suit, because: “Through no fault or negligence of my own, the coat was torn by a dog bite.”
On September 25, 2023, a sergeant in the Uniformed Division emails a colleague that Commander bit an agent that day.
You currently have [redacted] and [redacted] available after 2055 hours.
FYI – there was a dog bite and the Officer may need to go the hospital.
[Redacted] is covering for [redacted] who was at [redacted].
Have a safe shift!
A Secret Service log the same day reported that at 8:06 p.m. on September 25, 2023:
OFC. [redacted] (POST [redacted] ADVISED BIT BY FAMILY PET AND REQUESTED SECTOR OFFICIAL.
SGT. [redacted] REQUESTED EMT TO RESPOND.
At 8:08 p.m. the log notes:
OFC. [redacted] [redacted] ADVISED WHITE HOUSE MEDICAL HELD POST [redacted].
OFC. [redacted] [redacted] ADVISED FAMILY PET 2nd FLOOR RESIDENCE.”
The last entry in the log indicates “[8:58 p.m.] – CAPT. [redacted] REQUEST JOC [Joint Operations Center] LOG TO BE DELETED.”
The next day, CNN reporter Betsy Klein emails the Secret Service asking, “if you are able to confirm that a uniformed female USSS officer was hospitalized for a biting incident with Commander Biden last night.”
Anthony Guglielmi, chief of communications, replies:
Yesterday around 8pm, a Secret Service Uniformed Division police officer came in contact with a First Family pet and was bitten. The officer was treated by medical personnel on complex and I am not aware of any hospitalization.
The CNN report produced multiple queries from various media outlets. Guglielmi sent the same response to each.
A September 27, 2023, email from a Secret Service worker’s compensation official in the Safety, Health & Environmental Division writes to several colleagues: “Heads up and FYI. TMZ just reported a dog bite at the White House! Can we please find a way to get this dog muzzled.”
A colleague asks, “How does TMZ know before we do???” An official in the same division responds “Not sure. We must get this dog muzzled.” Another replies, “Geezzzz…”. Another adds, “Unbelievable!”
Two days earlier an article was published, which notes “President Biden’s Dog Commander Allegedly Bit 7 People.”
“These documents show Joe Biden is personally responsible for attacks by his dog Commander on Secret Service personnel,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “No wonder the Biden White House forced us to go to federal court for these records.”
Judicial Watch FOIA requests and lawsuits exposed initial White House falsehoods about the severity and number of attacks by the Bidens’ previous dog, Major. Judicial Watch then received a tip that Commander was also attacking Secret Service personnel and uncovered documents last July showing 10 biting incidents.
According to a Judicial Watch source, President Biden mistreated his dogs. The source disclosed Biden punched and kicked his dogs.
In February 2024 Judicial Watch received 269 pages of records related to incidents of aggression by Commander, including at least 23 biting incidents. After one incident, East Wing public tours were stopped for approximately 20 minutes due to the blood on the floor. These records include a spreadsheet of 22 incident reports between October 2022 and June 2023, 10 of which required medical treatment.
On May 14, 2024, Judicial Watch filed a separate lawsuit after the Department of Homeland Security failed to respond to a February 28, 2024, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:24-cv-01397)). Judicial Watch is asking for
All emails and text messages sent to and from the following officials regarding the submission of CA-1 Forms (“Notice of Traumatic Injury and Claim for Continuation of Pay or Compensation”) in connection with bites by Biden family dogs: Director Kimberly Cheatle, Deputy Dir. Ronald Rowe, Chief Operating Officer Cynthia Radway, Asst. Dir. Michael Plati, Asst. Dir. Brian Lambert, Chief Human Capital Officer Denise Walker Hall, Asst. Dir. David Smith, Asst. Dir. Miltom Wilson, Uniformed Division Chief Michael Buck, Chief Counsel Thomas Huse, and Chief of Communications Anthony Guglielmi.
The post Judicial Watch: Records Detail Biden Dog Attacks on Secret Service Personnel appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Signal:
More than 6 in 10 voters, 62%, want the audio tapes from Robert Hur’s interview of Biden to be released to Congress, including 45% of Democrats. The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project, Judicial Watch, and CNN are suing the Justice Department for access to the recordings.
In a recent development, the Justice Department admitted to altering the Biden transcript by removing “filler words” such as “um” or “uh.” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said that “the transcript is not accurate and was changed in a way to help Biden.”
Read more here…
The post How Will Trump Verdict Affect His Election Prospects? New Poll Offers First Clue appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Daily Caller:
A Delaware court is set to consider Thursday the Daily Caller News Foundation and Judicial Watch’s petition to reopen their case seeking the release of President Joe Biden’s Senate records held at the University of Delaware.
“The Hur report revelations are absolutely stunning,” said Michael Bastasch, editor-in-chief for the DCNF. “The University of Delaware has some serious explaining to do.” (RELATED: DCNF, Judicial Watch Ask Delaware Court To Reopen Case Seeking Biden’s Senate Records Following Special Counsel Report)
Judicial Watch sued for the records on behalf of itself and the DCNF in July 2020 following the university’s denial of the records request, which it claimed was because the records were not related to the expenditure of public funds.
“We have powerful evidence that the courts were misled about the Biden papers,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.
Read more here…
The post Delaware Court To Consider DCNF, Judicial Watch Request To Reopen Case Seeking Biden Senate Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration plans to invest $4 million in a project aimed at reducing barriers that impede access to education and decent work for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex (LGBTQI+) youth in Latin America and the Caribbean. (For those wondering the + holds space for the expanding list of diverse gender and sexual identities). The American taxpayer dollars will fund a technical assistance venture that will improve implementation of laws, policies, and national plans to help the young LGBTQI+ population in the region, according to a preliminary grant announcement posted by the government.
The money will flow through the Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB), a Department of Labor (DOL) division that spends millions of dollars annually to strengthen global labor standards, enforce labor commitments among trading partners and promote racial and gender equity. The ILAB also helps combat international child labor, forced labor and human trafficking. Among its recent projects is a $3 million program to protect and advocate for migrant workers, particularly Mexican nationals participating in U.S. Temporary Foreign Worker programs, and a $4.5 million venture to improve compliance with international labor standards in Ecuador’s cut flower and banana sectors. That initiative aims to empower worker organizations, producers, and indigenous groups to address labor violations as well as increase government capacity in the south American nation of about 18 million to enforce labor laws.
The new multi-million-dollar LGBTQI+ Latin American/Caribbean allocation is still missing details of the specific activities it will fund since it was just announced by the administration. In some cases, the government makes general grant information public with few specifics to give perspective grant recipients—typically leftist nonprofits in cases like this—a heads up and more details follow in subsequent announcements. The initial document states that the desired outcomes include improved knowledge among key labor stakeholders about the barriers to education and access to decent work among LGBTQI+ youth, increased coordination among key labor stakeholders to boost access to decent work opportunities and increased capacity of LGBTQI+ key labor stakeholders to provide youth with safe and affirming environments. Judicial Watch will follow the grant process and report on the specific initiatives once they are established.
The allocation for this project appears to be inspired by the results of a probe sanctioned by the DOL to study the fundamental labor rights, working conditions, and access to employment for LGBTQI+ individuals in Latin America. The federal agency contracted a Maryland-based consulting firm called Manhattan Strategy Group, which describes itself as an innovative management and social sciences consulting firm dedicated to fostering positive social change, to conduct the research. The group published its findings recently in a 17-page report that states LGBTQI+ individuals in Latin America experience various types of discrimination, including religious discrimination, workplace discrimination, school victimization, sexual identity expression, disadvantages in the presence of authorities, institutional exclusion, and denial of rights. Specific to education, students identifying as LGBTQI+ have negative experiences within school, including experiencing a lack of school safety via harassment and assault, anti-LGBTQI+ remarks, and a lack of supportive school staff, according to the report. The document determines that, although research on the employment of LGBTQI+ individuals in Latin America is limited, there is a positive relationship between legal protections and inclusive policies and positive economic outcomes for LGBTQI+ individuals.
The DOL is advised by the social sciences consulting firm to launch interventions, including the development of LGBTQI+-inclusive curricula and federal and employer policies, because they are promising and may indicate opportunities for capacity building while more research is conducted. The Biden administration quickly heeded the call, announcing the multi-million-dollar project shortly after the report’s publication. Seems like the administration is dedicated to the LGBTQI+ cause in Latin America. Not that long ago, it funded 12 drag theater performances in Ecuador to promote tolerance, diversity and inclusion.
The post U.S. to Invest $4 Mil to Reduce Barriers Impeding LGBTQI+ Youth in Latin America, Caribbean appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The New York Post:
WASHINGTON — Republican leaders expressed satisfaction Tuesday after Hunter Biden was convicted on three counts of lying about his drug addiction to buy a gun — while demanding that his father, President Biden, face greater legal scrutiny for his ties to the first son’s foreign business dealings.
“The public would do well to remember that the Justice Department was dragged kicking and screaming into this prosecution of Hunter,” said Tom Fitton, the president of conservative legal group Judicial Watch.
Read more here…
The post Republicans hail Hunter Biden trial verdict as ‘step toward accountability’ — call for ‘Big Guy’ to be next appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Nearly half a million illegal immigrant minors have entered the United States through the porous Mexican border since President Joe Biden took office in 2021 and the financial impact on the nation’s public education system is staggering, according to information disclosed at a recent congressional hearing conducted to address the unprecedented crisis. “Educating illegal immigrant children requires substantial resources, altering the learning environment for all students,” said Florida Congressman Aaron Bean, who chairs a subcommittee on early childhood, elementary and secondary education for the House Education and Workforce Committee. “Overcrowded classrooms, the need for new facilities, and strained student-to-teacher ratios are just some of the challenges,” Bean added, offering that in just four states—California, New York, Texas, and Arizona—the cost of integrating illegal immigrant children into public schools reached nearly three-quarters of a billion dollars in one fiscal year. “If we assume that every illegal immigrant child encountered by border patrol enters the school system, the cost nationwide would be over two billion dollars annually,” said the lawmaker who conducted the recent hearing, titled “The Consequences of Biden’s Border Chaos for K-12 Schools.”
Public schools are often the first to feel the impact of open border policies, according to testimony delivered at the hearing. That is partly because in 1982 the Supreme Court prohibited states from denying illegal immigrant children a public-school education. Since the ruling was issued, tens of millions of illegal aliens have entered the U.S. through the southern border with a substantial chunk enrolling in public schools across the country. Some come with family and others come without a guardian, which the government classifies as Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC). Besides providing them with a free taxpayer-funded education, Uncle Sam also spends billions of dollars annually to house, medically treat and entertain UAC. Last year the Biden administration quietly doled out tens of millions of dollars for the long-term foster care of UAC to further assist migrants under the age of 17, including pregnant and parenting teens and those who are especially vulnerable or with other special needs.
The impact on public education is just a snippet of the problem. Several examples were offered at the recent congressional hearing. In New York students were switched to online learning because nearly 2,000 illegal immigrants were sheltered in a school gymnasium. In Austin, Texas teachers had to conduct classes in hallways and conference rooms to accommodate over 400 newly enrolled illegal immigrant children. In Denver, Colorado an influx of over 40,000 illegal immigrants forced the state to spend an extra $24 million to cover the cost. In Chicago the mayor says the city’s resources are “tapped out,” and a local teacher reveals that over 40% of students qualify for English learner services and the numbers keep growing. In Massachusetts public schools have absorbed 2,000 new illegal immigrant students, forcing districts to find emergency housing with little notice. In New Mexico there have been incidents of adult-age illegal immigrants hiding in a middle school to avoid apprehension from Border Patrol, which led to the arrest of six illegal immigrants and prompted temporary lockdowns.
Last year a congressional report that revealed the cost of illegal immigration is greater than the annual gross domestic product of 15 states disclosed that nearly four million illegal aliens attend public schools around that country and most receive special services for Limited English Proficiency (LEP) costing American taxpayers nearly $59 billion. New York City alone is spending around $440 million to educate about 11,500 illegal aliens who will likely remain in the system for years to come. Laughably, at last week’s K-12 congressional hearing only one witness—from the National Council of La Raza—testified that the nation’s education system actually benefits from the influx of illegal immigrants. Her name is Amalia Chamorro, education policy director at the leftist nonprofit. “In our nation’s schools, immigrant students are a significant asset in their classrooms,” Chamorro testified. “They are known for their resilience, grit, and problem-solving skills, which are critical for 21st -century learning. In fact, research shows that immigrant students have such a high level of motivation to succeed and learn, they contribute to positive classroom environments that benefit all students.”
The post Financial Impact of Illegal Immigrants on Nation’s Public Education System “Staggering” appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Records Show FBI Provided Democrats with Information on Whistleblowers Who Testified at May 2023 Weaponization Hearing
Judicial Watch announced recently it received 54 pages of records from the Department of Justice in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit which show the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA) provided a Democrat staffer with information on FBI whistleblowers who detailed the bureau’s targeting of political opponents and retaliation for their testifying at a May 18, 2023, hearing of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
Jack Smith and the International Criminal Court
The International Criminal Court at the Hague was back in the news recently with the announcement by its chief prosecutor that he would seek charges against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes in Gaza, while simultaneously seeking charges against the leaders of Hamas for war crimes in Israel. This obscene act of moral equivalency tells you all you need to know about the ICC. It’s also a reminder that the most powerful prosecutor at work in the U.S. today, Special Counsel Jack Smith, has significant connections to the controversial court and another Hague tribunal.
Judicial Watch Sues HHS for Records on Preparation for and Response to Covid-19 Pandemic
“The Fauci-led federal response to the pandemic was panicked, political, and harmed the lives and liberties of Americans,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This new lawsuit aims to get the bottom of this disaster.”
U.S. Pays to Combat AI-Generated Misinformation in Iraq Claiming Democracy is at Risk
It was only a matter of time before the Biden administration’s absurd—and costly—initiative to combat misinformation spilled over into artificial intelligence (AI) and the moment has arrived with a government-funded program to counter the fake crisis in Iraq of all places. American taxpayers will dole out tens of thousands of dollars to train social media influencers, journalists and journalism students in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region (IKR) and Kirkuk governorate to spot misinformation in AI.
In The News
FOIA docs show FBI official ‘colluded’ with Democrat staffers on FBI whistleblowers: Judicial Watch
Just the NewsDocuments that Judicial Watch obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request show that an FBI official “colluded” with House Democrat staffers ahead of a hearing with FBI whistleblowers.
“These troubling records show how the FBI colluded with Democrats hostile to FBI whistleblowers who were set to testify to Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement.
City sued for paying hundreds of Black residents $25,000 in reparations
The Washington PostEvanston, a Chicago suburb, has been credited with launching the country’s first government-funded reparations program for Black Americans. It has paid out nearly $5 million to 193 of the town’s Black residents over the past two years.
But now a conservative advocacy group has filed a class-action lawsuit to kill the program, arguing that it discriminates against the suburb’s non-Black residents.
Air Force Hired Drag Queen For Bingo, Glow Party, Invoice Reveals
The Daily WireThe Air Force spent hundreds of taxpayer dollars to hire a drag queen for “drag bingo” and a “glow party,” according to internal documents obtained by Judicial Watch.
Drag queen “Miss Lexi Andrews” was hired by the 423rd Support Squadron at the RAF Alconbury Air Base in England for a “drag bingo” event on June 23, 2022, and a “glow party” on June 24, 2022, an invoice obtained by Judicial Watch through a freedom of information request shows. The cost for the “bingo” event was $150 while the “glow party” ran the Air Force $250.
Video Highlights
-
-
- TAMPERED: Biden Audio Transcripts Inaccurate! - Why Hasn’t Garland Been Held in Contempt of Congress? - Justice Alito DUNKS On Far Left Senators!
-
The post FBI Provided Democrats with Information on Whistleblowers! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The International Criminal Court at the Hague was back in the news recently with the announcement by its chief prosecutor that he would seek charges against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes in Gaza, while simultaneously seeking charges against the leaders of Hamas for war crimes in Israel. This obscene act of moral equivalency tells you all you need to know about the ICC. It’s also a reminder that the most powerful prosecutor at work in the U.S. today, Special Counsel Jack Smith, has significant connections to the controversial court and another Hague tribunal.
From 2008 to 2010, Smith was the Investigative Coordinator for the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICC—the same office that today is seeking arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant from a three-judge ICC panel. Founded in 2002 to pursue war crimes, the ICC has been viewed with skepticism by, among others, the U.S., Israel, Russia, China, and many African nations. In 2018, then-National Security Adviser John Bolton castigated the ICC for its failure to “deter and punish atrocity crimes” and its “threat to American sovereignty.” Last week, reacting to news of the Netanyahu arrest warrant, the House voted to sanction the ICC.
ICC records indicate that during and shortly after Smith’s tenure at the organization, it brought cases against high-ranking figures in the Congo, Sudan, Kenya, the Ivory Coast, and Libya. None appear to have resulted in convictions.
But back at Main Justice, Obama Administration figures were impressed. In 2010, Smith was plucked to head the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section—a big promotion for a relatively untested young prosecutor. He served to 2015, supervising cases against former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, New York power broker Sheldon Silver, former Congressman Rick Renzi, and CIA operative Jeffery Sterling, among others.
In 2014, Smith was eyed by Congressional investigators examining IRS targeting of conservative groups. Smith testified that following a meeting with IRS official Lois Lerner, his office “had a dialogue” with the FBI about opening investigations into conservative groups, according to a copy of the interview obtained by CNN. Smith said the conversations did not lead to investigations. It does not appear that the Smith work product from the House probe—interview transcripts, investigator notes, memos—was ever made public. Read more about Judicial Watch’s investigation of the IRS affair here.
By 2018, Smith was back at the Hague, this time as chief prosecutor for the Kosovo Specialist Chambers, another highly unusual judicial body, formed to prosecute war crimes committed during the 1998-2000 Kosovo War. In 2020, Smith indicted the former president of Kosovo, Hasim Thaci, for war crimes committed in 1998 and 1999. Thaci was extradited to the Hague and his trial is currently underway.
In 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland brought Smith back to the U.S. to take over the investigation of former president Donald Trump. The rest is history. Two indictments of Trump quickly followed, along with rising public concern about Smith’s targeting of the frontrunner for the GOP presidential nomination.
Judicial Watch has launched several investigations of Smith. We’re closely tracking developments at the Hague for what they might reveal about Smith’s prosecutorial conduct. We sued the Justice Department after it denied our FOIA request for the names of senior staff working for Smith; Justice responded by asking a federal court to keep those names secret. We also sued for records and communications between Smith and state prosecutors in the separate Georgia investigation of Trump. To date, in that case, the Justice Department has refused to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with law enforcement proceedings. We’ll continue pressing forward on all fronts.
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post Jack Smith and the International Criminal Court appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Justice Department Admits Transcript of Biden Interviews Is Inaccurate
Records Show FBI Provided Democrats with Information on Whistleblowers
Judicial Watch Sues HHS for Records on Response to Covid-19 Pandemic
Taliban Gets Millions in U.S. Aid by Charging Taxes, Permit Fees, Import Duties
Justice Department Admits Transcript of Biden Interviews Is Inaccurate
The White House admitted to a federal court that the transcript of President Joe Biden’s testimony to Special Counsel Robert Hur is not accurate. It is missing “filler words (such as ‘um’ or ‘uh’)” and words that “may have been repeated when spoken (such as ‘I, I’ or ‘and, and’)” which were sometimes “only listed a single time in the transcripts.”
In a new filing, the Biden Justice Department makes extraordinary assertions of executive privilege and privacy to hide the Biden audio. The agency makes the unprecedented assertion that because “AI” could be used to alter Biden’s words the material should be kept secret.
The Justice Department filing, filed around 11:00 p.m. last Friday night, May 31, includes a statement by Bradley Weinsheimer, associate deputy attorney general, which reads in part:
-
After the interview, SCO [Special Counsel Office] created written transcripts of the audio recording with the assistance of a trained professional court reporter – one transcript for each day of the interview. I have read the entirety of the written transcripts of the interview. As I listened to the audio recording, I compared it to the transcripts of the audio recording and specifically listened for differences between the transcripts and audio recording. In a few instances, the transcripts indicate that some words from the audio recording are indiscernible. In listening to the audio recording and reviewing the transcripts, I agree that in those instances the words are indiscernible.
-
The interview transcripts are accurate transcriptions of the words of the interview contained in the audio recording, except for minor instances such as the use of filler words (such as “um” or “uh”) when speaking that are not always reflected on the transcripts, or when words may have been repeated when spoken (such as “I, I” or “and, and”) but sometimes was only listed a single time in the transcripts. Besides these exceedingly minor differences, based on my simultaneous review of the transcripts while listening to the audio recording, the transcripts accurately capture the words spoken during the interview on the audio recording with no material differences between the audio recording and transcripts. None of the minor differences include any audible substantive exchanges – that is, based on my review, there is no material omission of words be tween the audio recording and transcripts. Special Counsel Hur and FBI personnel who attended the interview and compared the audio recording to the transcripts also informed me of their determination that the transcripts accurately reflect the words spoken on the audio recording aside from the minor instances I described above. Special Counsel Hur emphasized to me that it was important for purposes of his investigation that the interview transcripts be accurate.
Wow. Our Freedom of Information Act lawsuit forced the Biden team to admit what everyone suspected – that the transcript is not accurate and was changed in a way to help Biden. There is nothing ordinary about this, and the transcript inaccuracy issues seem to help Biden’s political campaign needs. We have since initiated a new FOIA request on Biden’s Nixonian tape scandal.
Judicial Watch has several ongoing FOIA lawsuits about Biden’s document scandals and the related unprecedented partisan prosecutorial and judicial abuses of former President Donald J. Trump.
On March 11, 2024, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a February 2024 FOIA request for records of all Special Counsel interviews of President Biden (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)). A redacted transcript of the Biden interview was released on April 15.
In April, the Justice Department told the court that it would not disclose the audio recordings of special counsel interviews with President Joe Biden in order to protect Biden’s “privacy” interests.
On February 5, 2024, Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
The Heritage Foundation and a CNN-led media coalition were recently joined with our lawsuit.
Records Show FBI Provided Democrats with Information on Whistleblowers
Troubling records we received in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit show how the FBI colluded with Democrats hostile to FBI whistleblowers who were set to testify to Congress.
We received 54 pages of records from the Department of Justice that show the FBI Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA) providing a Democrat staffer with information on FBI whistleblowers who detailed the bureau’s targeting of political opponents and retaliation for their testifying at a May 18, 2023, hearing of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
A May 23, 2023, email from Damon Marx, senior counsel in the office of New York Democrat Rep. Dan Goldman, shows that the FBI provided documents apparently pertaining to the whistleblowers that were “very helpful” to Goldman.
Marx writes to an FBI Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA) official whose name is redacted:
We spoke last week before the Weaponization hearing on Thursday. Thanks again for sending over those documents. They were very helpful to the Congressman.
Francesco (my colleague cc’ed here) and I will be good points of contact for you going forward. Both of us broadly cover law enforcement; however, in terms of specifics, I cover cybersecurity, counterterrorism, and much of the Congressman’s committee work, while Francesco covers issues ranging from immigration to gun violence.
We would love to meet in person next time you have the chance. Please let us know when you’re available for coffee or just to swing by the office. And don’t hesitate to reach out on any other matters!
The CC’d colleague is Francesco Arreaga, then a Democrat staffer on the House Homeland Security Committee and former Elizabeth Warren campaign staffer.
On May 18, 2023, a hearing was held by the House Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. Highlights of the hearing include:
It is clear from these disclosures, and especially in wake of Special Counsel John Durham’s report, that the FBI has become politically weaponized.
To date, the Committee and Select Subcommittee have received whistleblower testimony from several current and former FBI employees who chose to risk their careers to expose abuses and misconduct in the FBI. Some of these employees—Special Agents Garret O’Boyle and Stephen Friend, Supervisory Intelligence Analyst George Hill, and Staff Operations Specialist Marcus Allen—have chosen to speak on the record about their experiences.
During the hearing, Allen was allowed to discuss the suspension he incurred for merely forwarding open-source news articles to his colleagues, as his job required:
Q. And why exactly did you send th[e] email[s]?
A. I sent [the emails] just for awareness because the[y] . . . indicated potential problems with the investigation as far as informants were concerned, and our organization’s potential forthrightness about the utilization of informants there on that day. That might have some impact on our cases and the subjects that we’re looking up, and just a general awareness overall for the investigation as a whole, that there might have been some kind of potential Federal involvement with the activities on January 6th, and I thought it was important enough that it like warranted our attention, you know.
Q. Is it safe to say that you sending th[ose] email[s] was part of your job at the time?
A. Yes.
The Committee explained that “[b]ecause these open-source articles questioned the FBI’s handling of the violence at the Capitol, the FBI suspended Allen for ‘conspiratorial views in regards to the events of January 6th . . . .’”
The day before the hearing, the FBI revoked the security clearances of three agents who testified, Steve Friend, Garret O’Boyle, and Marcus Allen, according to a letter the bureau sent to congressional investigators and obtained by ABC News. Allen’s clearance was recently reinstated.
The records include a May 16, 2023, email to an FBI OCA official, whose name is redacted, from Marx, who writes:
It’s my understanding that you’re out this week, but if you have a moment to chat about some of the witnesses for Thursday’s Weaponization hearing, it would be super helpful. Please let me know if you’re available tomorrow when you have a chance.
The FBI OCA official responds:
Sure, give me a call when you can.
In a May 9, 2023, email to Goldman’s then-Deputy Chief of Staff and Legislative Director Erin Meegan, an FBI OCA official whose name is redacted writes:
I was disappointed I didn’t get the opportunity to meet you during our trip to Quantico. We are planning to take another trip there, maybe later this summer, so hopefully you’ll be able to join us then. I serve as [redacted]. OCA plays a key role in communicating with lawmakers and their staffers about FBI activities and is the primary point of contact for all Congressional matters.
I would like an opportunity to meet with you to properly introduce myself and tell you more about the mission of OCA, along with providing information about what OCA can offer your office. I would also like to know what issues Rep. Goldman and your office are interested in to see if there is any way I can assist in those areas. Additionally, based on my background, I think I may be able to provide insight or answer some questions about issues that do not require senior FBI leadership briefings or hearings.
The Judicial Watch October 2023 lawsuit that uncovered these documents was filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to a May 18, 2023, FOIA request (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-03003)). Judicial Watch asked for:
All records of communication between any official or employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and any member of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, any staff member for the subcommittee, or any staff member for any subcommittee member between April 1, 2023, and the present.
For purposes of clarification, in the request, Judicial Watch provided the following link, which identified the members of the committee: https://judiciary.house.gov/subcommittees/committee-judiciary/select-subcommittee-weaponization-federal-government
Judicial Watch is in the forefront of uncovering the weaponizing of the federal government against whistleblowers.
Judicial Watch represented Marcus Allen, a decorated veteran, FBI analyst and witness before the Weaponization Subcommittee, in a lawsuit against FBI Director Christopher Wray for violating Allen’s constitutional rights by falsely accusing him of holding “conspiratorial views,” stripping his security clearance, and suspending him from duty without pay. On May 31, 2024, Allen’s security clearance was reinstated.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch sued for all FBI communications from bureau officials using several systems and databases regarding investigations carried out after an October 4, 2021, memo from Attorney General Merrick Garland instructing investigators to target American parents due to an alleged “increase in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence against school board members, teachers and workers in our nation’s public schools” In a March 21, 2023, report on the Garland memo, the Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government cited FBI data which states that 25 inquiries under the threat tag “EDUOFFICIALS” had been opened since the bureau began tracking the alleged incidents.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) that raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
Judicial Watch recently sued the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for all agency records relating to the Department of Justice or Internal Revenue Service (IRS) investigations of Hunter Biden and all records relating to efforts to interview lawyer Patrick Kevin Morris regarding Hunter Biden.
Judicial Watch Sues HHS for Records on Response to Covid-19 Pandemic
The Anthony Fauci-led federal response to the Covid-19 pandemic was panicked, political, and put the lives and liberties of Americans at risk. We filed a new lawsuit to get to the bottom of this disaster.
Our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit is against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records from the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR) regarding after action reports, review of procedures, or studies concerning the preparation for and response to the Covid-19 pandemic (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:24-cv-01352)).
We sued after HHS failed to comply with an August 19, 2022, FOIA request for:
Records and/or communications of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Department of Health and Human Services, that refer to and/or document any after action reports, lessons learned, after action reviews, review of procedures, analysis, studies, [or] “hot washes,” concerning preparing and/or responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In January 2022, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its report titled “COVID-19: HHS and DOD Transitioned Vaccine Responsibilities to HHS, but Need to Address Outstanding Issues,” which included “Recommendations for Executive Action” such as:
In July 2022, HHS stated that as it conducts after-action reviews and gathers lessons learned, it aims to include key stakeholders including, but not limited to federal partners, manufacturers, and others as appropriate. In January 2024, HHS provided an update on its lessons learned activities, noting that it had completed its efforts to obtain and incorporate input from these stakeholders. We reviewed the documentation and in February 2024, requested additional specificity on how HHS conducted the lessons learned effort and with which agencies they coordinated. As of April 2024, we have not yet received HHS’s response.
In May 2022, DOD stated that it is supportive of gathering and documenting lessons learned. It further stated that HHS, as the sole successor organization to the CAG, should assume responsibility to obtain and incorporate additional inputs from key external stakeholders. In April 2024, DOD stated that it does not plan to take action in response to the recommendation. We recognize HHS’s role, and agree that it should take lead responsibility for obtaining and incorporating input from external stakeholders. We further recognize the critical role that DOD played as part of the CAG and the important functions that several of its component agencies provided, such as acquisition support. As such, we continue to believe that DOD’s coordination on obtaining and incorporating lessons learned will be an integral aspect of HHS’s efforts. We will continue to monitor this recommendation until HHS conducts any further lessons learned outreach to external stakeholders, including the extent to which it coordinates with DOD in doing so. As of April 2024, we have not yet received HHS’s clarifying information on its efforts to conduct lessons learned.
Our FOIA lawsuits and investigations have uncovered much of what the public knows about many Covid-19 controversies:
- In April 2024, we uncovered FBI records that showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
- Emails between U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and top Facebook executives in 2021 regarding the censorship of user posts about Covid controversies showed Facebook leadership seeking to “better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”
- Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it.
- Records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
- HHS records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
- Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the Covid shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
- We obtained HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA Covid-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Heavily redacted records from the FDA regarding the Covid-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on Covid booster use and approval.
- HHS records detailed internal discussions about myocarditis and the Covid vaccine. Other documents detailed adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
- We uncovered HHS records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration propaganda campaign to push the Covid-19 vaccine.
- HHS records revealed previously redacted locations of Covid-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
- NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also showed National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), James W. Le Duc, warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the Covid-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records obtained from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and Covid-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was canceled because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- Our four-part documentary regarding the coordinated effort by the government and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates is available here.
Taliban Gets Millions in U.S. Aid by Charging Taxes, Permit Fees, Import Duties
When your tax dollars are shipped overseas they are up for grabs, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
Of the nearly $3 billion in humanitarian aid that the United States has given Afghanistan since the 2021 military withdrawal, at least $11 million—and likely a lot more—has gone to the Taliban, according to a new federal auditthat reveals the U.S. “has continued to be the largest international donor supporting the Afghan people since the former Afghan government collapsed and the Taliban returned to power in August 2021.” The terrorist group has taken the millions in humanitarian and development assistance intended to help the people of Afghanistan in the form of taxes, fees, import duties, permit charges, licenses, or public utility services. The Taliban has probably received a much bigger chunk of the humanitarian assistance because the parties involved in the cash giveaway, including federal agencies, the famously corrupt United Nations and handpicked nonprofits, do not bother keeping track.
“SIGAR also found that the $10.9 million paid by 38 U.S. Department of State (State), U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) implementing partners is likely only a fraction of the total amount of U.S. assistance funds provided to the Taliban in taxes, fees, duties, and utilities because UN agencies receiving U.S. funds did not collect data or provide relevant information about their subawardees’ payments,” the watchdog writes in its latest report. “From October 2021 through September 2023, the UN received $1.6 billion in U.S. funding for programming in Afghanistan, approximately 63 percent of all U.S. assistance funding for Afghanistan during that period.” The U.S. government does not require the leftist world body to report on taxes, fees, duties or utilities incurred on American funds for activities in Afghanistan, the probe found.
Aid to Afghanistan predates President Biden’s abrupt troop withdrawal but since the fall of the U.S.-backed Afghan government in August 2021, Uncle Sam has dedicated significant resources to fulfill the basic needs of the Afghan people with little oversight. “These efforts include addressing food security, agriculture, health, and education, as well as undertaking programs designed to improve economic conditions and human rights in Afghanistan, particularly the rights of women, girls, and minority communities,” the SIGAR report states. The Taliban has disrupted activities required to disburse the aid in a variety of ways, including attempts to divert funds or infiltrate nonprofits on the ground. Investigators found that more than a dozen partner organizations reported direct pressure from the Taliban when distributing American aid, including diverting food and other aid to populations chosen by the terrorist group and its forced approval of program design and implementation.
Just a few months ago Judicial Watch reported that the Taliban has created fake nonprofits to get millions in U.S. humanitarian aid since the 2021 military withdraw. The terrorist group has established fraudulent non-governmental organizations (NGO), typically nonprofits with humanitarian missions such as improving public or social welfare, that annually receive billions of dollars from American taxpayers. The money flows through various federal agencies, including the departments of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security and State. Specifically, the Taliban is benefiting from American education funding through the establishment of fraudulent NGOs to receive donor assistance and it has infiltrated and extorted existing Afghan NGOs delivering educational assistance. The alarming information was disclosed in a SIGAR report published in October 2023. The watchdog’s latest probe also disclosed that partners delivering U.S. aid in Afghanistan stated the Taliban regularly inquiries about ways to obtain donor funding, including through the establishment of Afghan NGOs.
It is not like American government officials do not know the Taliban is taking the money. A report issued last year by the United States Institute of Peace, the federal institution founded by Congress to promote worldwide conflict resolution, concluded that foreign-funded assistance is unlikely to prove effective as leverage to shape the Taliban government’s behavior. “On the contrary, the Taliban are likely to increasingly regard foreign funded activities as just another potential revenue stream,” the U.S. Institute of Peace found. “Any form of humanitarian or development assistance is prone to manipulation by the Taliban. Aid/development delivery … exposes [foreign donors] to Taliban coercion with little leverage or recourse to resist.”
Until next week,
The post Biden Transcript Is Inaccurate! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Telegraph:
The legal challenge, filed by conservative group Judicial Watch on behalf of six residents, argues that the scheme’s “race-based eligibility requirement” violates the US Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which concerns the rights of citizens.
“This programme redistributes tax dollars based on race,” Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch president, said, according to The Washington Post. “That’s just a brazen violation of the law.”
Read more here…
The post Reparations scheme which pays $25,000 to black people sued for discrimination appeared first on Judicial Watch.
It was only a matter of time before the Biden administration’s absurd—and costly—initiative to combat misinformation spilled over into artificial intelligence (AI) and the moment has arrived with a government-funded program to counter the fake crisis in Iraq of all places. American taxpayers will dole out tens of thousands of dollars to train social media influencers, journalists and journalism students in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region (IKR) and Kirkuk governorate to spot misinformation in AI. According to the government’s grant announcement: “The rise of AI-generated disinformation poses significant concerns to the ability of the public and media to fairly and accurately report on current events, given the ability of bots to spread information, and deepfakes to make it extraordinarily difficult to tell truth from fiction–putting democracy itself at risk.”
The alarmist language has been repeatedly utilized by the administration to justify spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to battle a fictitious crisis created by the president and his advisors to control information. The movement started in the U.S. with a controversial Department of Homeland Security (DHS) panel known as the Disinformation Governance Board and has expanded worldwide with American-funded media disinformation networks that train foreign reporters and officials how to counter information considered by the administration to be unfavorable. Just a few weeks ago the U.S. dedicated half a million dollars to help journalists in Africa counter disinformation and youth spot truth in fake news. Earlier in the year the administration doled out $50,000 to counter disinformation in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan by training journalists with handpicked “U.S. subject matter experts” with a mandate of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA).
The latest allocation to combat AI-generated disinformation also includes a DEIA mandate that requires proposals from grant seekers to demonstrate how the program advances equity with respect to race, ethnicity, religion, income, geography, and/or disability, among other factors. “The proposal may also demonstrate how the program will further engagement in underserved communities and with individuals from underserved communities,” according to the grant announcement published this week. The goal is to train 15 social media influencers and 100 newly minted journalists how AI is used to produce and disseminate disinformation, how to recognize disinformation, and how to explain it in clear language to their audiences without scare tactics in a way that empowers audiences rather than demoralizes them. “Influencers should, as a result, create at least two pieces of unique content on disinformation for their audiences; journalists and journalism students should write and publish at least two stories on disinformation,” the grant document states.
It is hardly surprising that the administration’s pricey misinformation endeavor expanded to AI considering the broad reach of previously funded programs. Earlier this year the Department of Justice (DOJ), charged with upholding the rule of law, keeping the country safe and protecting civil rights, created a new category of censorship by doling out nearly $1 million to track the spread of “mis-, dis-, and mal-information (MDM)” by internet users. The money went to a public university in South Carolina that is supposed to map the spread of MDM in real time and create an online dashboard with a special MDM tracker. To justify the investment the Biden administration laughably asserts that the project is critical to avert “violent extremism,” and explains that “nationally publicized political events often become focal points of MDM, which are exploited by various individuals and groups to launch disinformation campaigns and trigger spontaneous or crowd-sourced diffusion of disinformation….”
Last summer a congressional probe exposed a scandalous government misinformation scheme in which the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) colluded with a compromised Ukrainian intelligence agency to censor the speech of Americans. The federal agency responsible for protecting the nation against terrorists, violent street gangs and serial killers joined forces with the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), which is widely known to be infiltrated by Russian-aligned forces, to take down the authentic social media accounts of Americans. This includes a verified U.S. State Department profile and those belonging to American journalists.
The post U.S. Pays to Combat AI-Generated Misinformation in Iraq Claiming Democracy is at Risk appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
Documents that Judicial Watch obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request show that an FBI official “colluded” with House Democrat staffers ahead of a hearing with FBI whistleblowers.
“These troubling records show how the FBI colluded with Democrats hostile to FBI whistleblowers who were set to testify to Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement.
Judicial Watch sued the Department of Justice after it failed to respond to its original request for the documents. After the lawsuit, the documents were provided. The request was for “all records of communication between any official or employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and any member of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, any staff member for the subcommittee, or any staff member for any subcommittee member between April 1, 2023, and the present.”
Read more here…
The post FOIA docs show FBI official ‘colluded’ with Democrat staffers on FBI whistleblowers: Judicial Watch appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records from the Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response (ASPR) regarding after action reports, review of procedures, or studies concerning the preparation for and response to the Covid-19 pandemic (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:24-cv-01352)).
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after HHS failed to comply with an August 19, 2022, FOIA request for:
Records and/or communications of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Department of Health and Human Services, that refer to and/or document any after action reports, lessons learned, after action reviews, review of procedures, analysis, studies, [or] “hot washes,” concerning preparing and/or responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.
In January 2022, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its report titled “COVID-19: HHS and DOD Transitioned Vaccine Responsibilities to HHS, but Need to Address Outstanding Issues,” which included “Recommendations for Executive Action” such as:
In July 2022, HHS stated that as it conducts after-action reviews and gathers lessons learned, it aims to include key stakeholders including, but not limited to federal partners, manufacturers, and others as appropriate. In January 2024, HHS provided an update on its lessons learned activities, noting that it had completed its efforts to obtain and incorporate input from these stakeholders. We reviewed the documentation and in February 2024, requested additional specificity on how HHS conducted the lessons learned effort and with which agencies they coordinated. As of April 2024, we have not yet received HHS’s response.
In May 2022, DOD stated that it is supportive of gathering and documenting lessons learned. It further stated that HHS, as the sole successor organization to the CAG, should assume responsibility to obtain and incorporate additional inputs from key external stakeholders. In April 2024, DOD stated that it does not plan to take action in response to the recommendation. We recognize HHS’s role, and agree that it should take lead responsibility for obtaining and incorporating input from external stakeholders. We further recognize the critical role that DOD played as part of the CAG and the important functions that several of its component agencies provided, such as acquisition support. As such, we continue to believe that DOD’s coordination on obtaining and incorporating lessons learned will be an integral aspect of HHS’s efforts. We will continue to monitor this recommendation until HHS conducts any further lessons learned outreach to external stakeholders, including the extent to which it coordinates with DOD in doing so. As of April 2024, we have not yet received HHS’s clarifying information on its efforts to conduct lessons learned.
“The Fauci-led federal response to the pandemic was panicked, political, and harmed the lives and liberties of Americans,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This new lawsuit aims to get the bottom of this disaster.”
Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuits and investigations have uncovered much of what the public knows about many Covid-19 controversies:
- In April 2024, Judicial Watch uncovered FBI records that showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
- Emails between U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and top Facebook executives in 2021 regarding the censorship of user posts about Covid controversies showed Facebook leadership seeking to “better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”
- Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it.
- Records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
- HHS records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
- Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the Covid shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
- Judicial Watch obtained HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA Covid-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Heavily redacted records from the FDA regarding the Covid-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on Covid booster use and approval.
- HHS records detailed internal discussions about myocarditis and the Covid vaccine. Other documents detailed adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
- Judicial Watch uncovered HHS records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration propaganda campaign to push the Covid-19 vaccine.
- HHS records revealed previously redacted locations of Covid-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
- NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also showed National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc, warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the Covid-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records obtained from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and Covid-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was cancelled because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- Judicial Watch’s four-part documentary regarding the coordinated effort by the government and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates is available here.
The post Judicial Watch Sues HHS for Records on Preparation for and Response to Covid-19 Pandemic appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 54 pages of records from the Department of Justice in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit which show the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA) provided a Democrat staffer with information on FBI whistleblowers who detailed the bureau’s targeting of political opponents and retaliation for their testifying at a May 18, 2023 hearing of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
A May 23, 2023, email from Damon Marx, senior counsel in the office of New York Democrat Rep. Dan Goldman, shows that the FBI provided documents apparently pertaining to the whistleblowers that were “very helpful” to Goldman.
Marx writes to an FBI Office of Congressional Affairs (OCA) official whose name is redacted:
We spoke last week before the Weaponization hearing on Thursday. Thanks again for sending over those documents. They were very helpful to the Congressman.
Francesco (my colleague cc’ed here) and I will be good points of contact for you going forward. Both of us broadly cover law enforcement; however, in terms of specifics, I cover cybersecurity, counterterrorism, and much of the Congressman’s committee work, while Francesco covers issues ranging from immigration to gun violence.
We would love to meet in person next time you have the chance. Please let us know when you’re available for coffee or just to swing by the office. And don’t hesitate to reach out on any other matters!
The CC’d colleague is Francesco Arreaga, then a Democrat staffer on the House Homeland Security Committee and former Elizabeth Warren campaign staffer.
On May 18, 2023, a hearing was held by the House Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government. Highlights of the hearing include:
It is clear from these disclosures, and especially in wake of Special Counsel John Durham’s report, that the FBI has become politically weaponized.
To date, the Committee and Select Subcommittee have received whistleblower testimony from several current and former FBI employees who chose to risk their careers to expose abuses and misconduct in the FBI. Some of these employees—Special Agents Garret O’Boyle and Stephen Friend, Supervisory Intelligence Analyst George Hill, and Staff Operations Specialist Marcus Allen—have chosen to speak on the record about their experiences.
During the hearing, Allen was allowed to discuss the suspension he incurred for merely forwarding open-source news articles to his colleagues, as his job required:
Q. And why exactly did you send th[e] email[s]?
A. I sent [the emails] just for awareness because the[y] . . . indicated potential problems with the investigation as far as informants were concerned, and our organization’s potential forthrightness about the utilization of informants there on that day. That might have some impact on our cases and the subjects that we’re looking up, and just a general awareness overall for the investigation as a whole, that there might have been some kind of potential Federal involvement with the activities on January 6th, and I thought it was important enough that it like warranted our attention, you know.
Q. Is it safe to say that you sending th[ose] email[s] was part of your job at the time?
A. Yes.
The Committee explained that “[b]ecause these open-source articles questioned the FBI’s handling of the violence at the Capitol, the FBI suspended Allen for ‘conspiratorial views in regards to the events of January 6th . . . .’”
The day before the hearing, the FBI revoked the security clearances of three agents who testified, Steve Friend, Garret O’Boyle, and Marcus Allen, according to a letter the bureau sent to congressional investigators and obtained by ABC News. Allen’s clearance was recently reinstated.
The records include a May 16, 2023, email to an FBI OCA official, whose name is redacted, from Marx, who writes:
It’s my understanding that you’re out this week, but if you have a moment to chat about some of the witnesses for Thursday’s Weaponization hearing, it would be super helpful. Please let me know if you’re available tomorrow when you have a chance.
The FBI OCA official responds:
Sure, give me a call when you can.
In a May 9, 2023, email to Goldman’s then-Deputy Chief of Staff and Legislative Director Erin Meegan, an FBI OCA official whose name is redacted writes:
I was disappointed I didn’t get the opportunity to meet you during our trip to Quantico. We are planning to take another trip there, maybe later this summer, so hopefully you’ll be able to join us then. I serve as [redacted]. OCA plays a key role in communicating with lawmakers and their staffers about FBI activities and is the primary point of contact for all Congressional matters.
I would like an opportunity to meet with you to properly introduce myself and tell you more about the mission of OCA, along with providing information about what OCA can offer your office. I would also like to know what issues Rep. Goldman and your office are interested in to see if there is any way I can assist in those areas. Additionally, based on my background, I think I may be able to provide insight or answer some questions about issues that do not require senior FBI leadership briefings or hearings.
The Judicial Watch October 2023 lawsuit that uncovered these documents was filed after the Justice Department failed to respond to a May 18, 2023, FOIA request (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-03003)). Judicial Watch asked for:
All records of communication between any official or employee of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and any member of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, any staff member for the subcommittee, or any staff member for any subcommittee member between April 1, 2023, and the present.
For purposes of clarification, in the request, Judicial Watch provided the following link, which identified the members of the committee: https://judiciary.house.gov/subcommittees/committee-judiciary/select-subcommittee-weaponization-federal-government
“These troubling records show how the FBI colluded with Democrats hostile to FBI whistleblowers who were set to testify to Congress,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is in the forefront of uncovering the weaponizing of the federal government against whistleblowers.
Judicial Watch represented Marcus Allen, a decorated veteran, FBI analyst and witness before the Weaponization Subcommittee, in a lawsuit against FBI Director Christopher Wray for violating Allen’s constitutional rights by falsely accusing him of holding “conspiratorial views,” stripping his security clearance, and suspending him from duty without pay. On May 31, 2024, Allen’s security clearance was reinstated.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch sued for all FBI communications from bureau officials using several systems and databases regarding investigations carried out after an October 4, 2021, memo from Attorney General Merrick Garland instructing investigators to target American parents due to an alleged “increase in harassment, intimidation and threats of violence against school board members, teachers and workers in our nation’s public schools” In a March 21, 2023, report on the Garland memo, the Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government cited FBI data which states that 25 inquiries under the threat tag “EDUOFFICIALS” had been opened since the bureau began tracking the alleged incidents.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) that raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
Judicial Watch recently sued the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for all agency records relating to the Department of Justice or Internal Revenue Service (IRS) investigations of Hunter Biden and all records relating to efforts to interview lawyer Patrick Kevin Morris regarding Hunter Biden.
The post Judicial Watch: Records Show FBI Provided Democrats with Information on Whistleblowers Who Testified at May 2023 Weaponization Hearing appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Washington Times:
The first U.S. city to offer reparations to Black residents now faces a federal class-action lawsuit alleging its program discriminates against non-Black residents in violation of the Constitution.
The conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch filed the class-action suit last month against Evanston, Illinois. The city of about 75,000 people outside Chicago in Cook County became the first locality in 2021 to implement a reparations program for Black people.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit on behalf of six residents who say they would apply for the city’s payment program except for the fact that they aren’t the right race.
Read more here…
The post First U.S. city to offer Black residents reparations faces class-action lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Christian Post:
Freedom of Information Act documents obtained by Judicial Watch and CatholicVote.org purport to show that the U.S. Air Force has used taxpayer money to promote drag shows, drag queen story hours and other LGBT pride events for military personnel and their children.
After multiple “no records” responses to their repeated inquiries, the U.S. Department of Defense ultimately released 25 pages of documents detailing the funding of drag events on U.S. military installations, according to the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.
The nonprofits requested “all emails and text messages sent to and from the Secretary of Defense, Lloyd J. Austin, III, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Kathleen Hicks and the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff regarding drag shows and drag story hours on U.S. military installations.”
Read more here…
The post US Air Force promoted drag events on military bases, internal documents show appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller:
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley criticized the Department of Justice (DOJ) Monday for claiming that the possibility of a “deepfake” as a result of artificial intelligence (AI) warranted blocking the release of audio of an interview with President Joe Biden.The DOJ raised the possibility of the manipulative use of AI in a Friday court filing seeking to block release of the interview Biden had with the office of special counsel Robert Hur, according to Politico. Turley said that the Justice Department’s “illogical” argument made no sense, saying that the release of the tape would make it more difficult to produce deepfakes of the conversation.In the filing, the Justice Department also admitted to making alternations to the transcripts, according to Judicial Watch, a public interest law firm seeking release of the audio from Biden’s interview. The Biden administration invoked executive privilege to block the audio on May 16.Read more here…The post Jonathan Turley Blasts DOJ For Using ‘Deepfake’ Possibility As Reason For Not Releasing Biden Interview Audio appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Wire:
The Air Force spent hundreds of taxpayer dollars to hire a drag queen for “drag bingo” and a “glow party,” according to internal documents obtained by Judicial Watch.Drag queen “Miss Lexi Andrews” was hired by the 423rd Support Squadron at the RAF Alconbury Air Base in England for a “drag bingo” event on June 23, 2022, and a “glow party” on June 24, 2022, an invoice obtained by Judicial Watch through a freedom of information request shows. The cost for the “bingo” event was $150 while the “glow party” ran the Air Force $250.The invoice was obtained as part of an investigation by CatholicVote Civil Action and Judicial Watch into the Air Force’s promotion of drag queens, which made headlines two years ago after a drag queen story hour for children — scheduled to be held at an American air base in Germany — was canceled following public outcry.“How on Earth is it appropriate to spend our limited defense dollars on promoting these sexually themed events for children and adults rather than on advancing the military’s mission,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “As we see in these troubling Air Force records, our nation’s military is being ruined by woke ideology.”Read more here…The post Air Force Hired Drag Queen For Bingo, Glow Party, Invoice Reveals appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Post:
Evanston, a Chicago suburb, has been credited with launching the country’s first government-funded reparations program for Black Americans. It has paid out nearly $5 million to 193 of the town’s Black residents over the past two years.But now a conservative advocacy group has filed a class-action lawsuit to kill the program, arguing that it discriminates against the suburb’s non-Black residents.The lawsuit is part of a wave of cases spurred on the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision striking down affirmative action in college admissions. Conservative groups have since targeted diversity fellowships and waged a legal battle to force the federal Minority Business Development Agency to open up to White business owners.“This program redistributes tax dollars based on race,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, the group that filed the lawsuit against Evanston. “That’s just a brazen violation of the law.”Read more here…The post City sued for paying hundreds of Black residents $25,000 in reparations appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Of the nearly $3 billion in humanitarian aid that the United States has given Afghanistan since the 2021 military withdraw at least $11 million—and likely a lot more—has gone to the Taliban, according to a new federal audit that reveals the U.S. “has continued to be the largest international donor supporting the Afghan people since the former Afghan government collapsed and the Taliban returned to power in August 2021.” The terrorist group has taken the millions in humanitarian and development assistance intended to help the people of Afghanistan in the form of taxes, fees, import duties, permit charges, licenses, or public utility services. The Taliban has probably received a much bigger chunk of the humanitarian assistance because the parties involved in the cash giveaway, including federal agencies, the famously corrupt United Nations and handpicked nonprofits, do not bother keeping track.
“SIGAR also found that the $10.9 million paid by 38 U.S. Department of State (State), U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) implementing partners is likely only a fraction of the total amount of U.S. assistance funds provided to the Taliban in taxes, fees, duties, and utilities because UN agencies receiving U.S. funds did not collect data or provide relevant information about their subawardees’ payments,” the watchdog writes in its latest report. “From October 2021 through September 2023, the UN received $1.6 billion in U.S. funding for programming in Afghanistan, approximately 63 percent of all U.S. assistance funding for Afghanistan during that period.” The U.S. government does not require the leftist world body to report on taxes, fees, duties or utilities incurred on American funds for activities in Afghanistan, the probe found.
Aid to Afghanistan predates President Biden’s abrupt troop withdraw but since the fall of the U.S.-backed Afghan government in August 2021, Uncle Sam has dedicated significant resources to fulfill the basic needs of the Afghan people with little oversight. “These efforts include addressing food security, agriculture, health, and education, as well as undertaking programs designed to improve economic conditions and human rights in Afghanistan, particularly the rights of women, girls, and minority communities,” the SIGAR report states. The Taliban has disrupted activities required to disburse the aid in a variety of ways, including attempts to divert funds or infiltrate nonprofits on the ground. Investigators found that more than a dozen partner organizations reported direct pressure from the Taliban when distributing American aid, including diverting food and other aid to populations chosen by the terrorist group and its forced approval of program design and implementation.
Just a few months ago Judicial Watch reported that the Taliban has created fake nonprofits to get millions in U.S. humanitarian aid since the 2021 military withdraw. The terrorist group has established fraudulent non-governmental organizations (NGO), typically nonprofits with humanitarian missions such as improving public or social welfare, that annually receive billions of dollars from American taxpayers. The money flows through various federal agencies, including the departments of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security and State. Specifically, the Taliban is benefiting from American education funding through the establishment of fraudulent NGOs to receive donor assistance and it has infiltrated and extorted existing Afghan NGOs delivering educational assistance. The alarming information was disclosed in a SIGAR report published in October 2023. The watchdog’s latest probe also disclosed that partners delivering U.S. aid in Afghanistan stated the Taliban regularly inquiries about ways to obtain donor funding, including through the establishment of Afghan NGOs.
It is not like American government officials do not know the Taliban is taking the money. A report issued last year by the United States Institute of Peace, the federal institution founded by Congress to promote worldwide conflict resolution, concluded that foreign-funded assistance is unlikely to prove effective as leverage to shape the Taliban government’s behavior. “On the contrary, the Taliban are likely to increasingly regard foreign funded activities as just another potential revenue stream,” the U.S. Institute of Peace found. “Any form of humanitarian or development assistance is prone to manipulation by the Taliban. Aid/development delivery…exposes [foreign donors] to Taliban coercion with little leverage or recourse to resist.”
The post Taliban Gets Millions in U.S. Afghanistan Aid by Charging Taxes, Permit Fees, Import Duties appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Biden Justice Department Admits Special Counsel Transcript of Biden Interviews Is Inaccurate
Judicial Watch announced that the White House admitted in a federal court that the transcript of President Joe Biden’s testimony to Special Counsel Robert Hur is not accurate and is missing “filler words (such as ‘um’ or ‘uh’)” and words that “may have been repeated when spoken (such as ‘I, I’ or ‘and, and’)” which were sometimes “only listed a single time in the transcripts.”
Judicial Watch Sues CIA for Records on Hunter Biden Investigation, Including Interview of Biden Lawyer Kevin Morris
Los Angeles-based lawyer Morris is reportedly a friend of Hunter Biden’s, who allegedly loaned the president’s son millions of dollars. Since 2019, Morris has allegedly loaned him approximately $4.9 million for “personal expenses,” including federal taxes.
Judicial Watch Statement on the Trump Verdict
Pure corruption. Judicial Watch denounces this absurd verdict and Soviet-style criminal proceeding that has so abused President Trump. What just happened to Trump up in New York is criminal.
Judicial Watch: Defense Dept. Records Show U.S. Air Force Hosted ‘Drag Story Time’ and Other ‘Drag’ Events
“How on Earth is it appropriate to spend our limited defense dollars on promoting these sexually themed events for children and adults rather than on advancing the military’s mission,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “As we see in these troubling Air Force records, our nation’s military is being ruined by woke ideology.”
In The News
Biden Justice Department Refuses to Release Audio of Biden Special Counsel Interviews—Cites Biden’s Privacy
Judicial Watch Judicial Watch announced that the Justice Department has told the court that it will not disclose the audio recordings of special counsel interviews with President Joe Biden in order to protect Biden’s “privacy” interests. On March 11, 2024, Judicial Watch filed its FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a February 2024 FOIA request.
Biden Justice Department Admits Special Counsel Transcript of Biden Interviews Is Inaccurate
Judicial Watch“Wow. Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuit forced the Biden team to admit what everyone suspected – that the transcript is not accurate and was changed in a way to help Biden,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “There is nothing ordinary about this, and the transcript inaccuracy issues seem to help Biden’s political campaign needs. We today initiated a new FOIA request on this Biden’s Nixonian tape scandal.”
Transcript tampering? DOJ says written record of Biden interview with prosecutors omitted words
Just the NewsThe Justice Department admitted in a federal court document that the transcript of President Joe Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur regarding his handling of classified documents omitted some repeated words and filler words such as “um.” “The transcript is not accurate and was changed in a way to help Biden,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “There is nothing ordinary about this, and the transcript inaccuracy issues seem to help Biden’s political campaign needs.”
Video Highlights
-
-
- LAWFARE in America—against Trump! - FITTON: “TRUMP IS INNOCENT!” - BREAKING: THEY TAMPERED WITH THE BIDEN TAPE TRANSCRIPTS!
-
The post Judicial Watch Denounces Abuse of Trump! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From BizPac Review:
Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice has offered what Judicial Watch has called an “unprecedented assertion” that the audio recording of President Joe Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur should be kept from the public because “AI” — artificial intelligence — could be used to alter Biden’s words.
Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the DOJ in March for failing to respond to requests for the tape, and filed a new lawsuit on Friday in response to the “AI” argument, which it called a “disturbing development.”
“Wow. Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuit forced the Biden team to admit what everyone suspected – that the transcript is not accurate and was changed in a way to help Biden,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a release. “There is nothing ordinary about this, and the transcript inaccuracy issues seem to help Biden’s political campaign needs. We, today initiated a new FOIA request on this Biden’s Nixonian tape scandal.”
Read here….The post DOJ cites AI deepfakes as reason to withhold Hur interview audio appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Filed New FOIA Request Today on Disturbing Development
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced that the White House admitted in a federal court that the transcript of President Joe Biden’s testimony to Special Counsel Robert Hur is not accurate and is missing “filler words (such as ‘um’ or ‘uh’)” and words that “may have been repeated when spoken (such as ‘I, I’ or ‘and, and’)” which were sometimes “only listed a single time in the transcripts.” In its new filing the Biden Justice Department makes the extraordinary assertions of executive privilege and privacy to hide the Biden audio. The agency makes the unprecedented assertion that because “AI” could be used to alter Biden’s words the material should be kept secret.
The Justice Department filing, filed around 11:00 p.m. last night (Friday), reads in part:
-
After the interview, SCO [Special Counsel Office] created written transcripts of the audio recording with the assistance of a trained professional court reporter – one transcript for each day of the interview. I have read the entirety of the written transcripts of the interview. As I listened to the audio recording, I compared it to the transcripts of the audio recording and specifically listened for differences between the transcripts and audio recording. In a few instances, the transcripts indicate that some words from the audio recording are indiscernible. In listening to the audio recording and reviewing the transcripts, I agree that in those instances the words are indiscernible.
-
The interview transcripts are accurate transcriptions of the words of the interview contained in the audio recording, except for minor instances such as the use of filler words (such as “um” or “uh”) when speaking that are not always reflected on the transcripts, or when words may have been repeated when spoken (such as “I, I” or “and, and”) but sometimes was only listed a single time in the transcripts. Besides these exceedingly minor differences, based on my simultaneous review of the transcripts while listening to the audio recording, the transcripts accurately capture the words spoken during the interview on the audio recording with no material differences between the audio recording and transcripts. None of the minor differences include any audible substantive exchanges – that is, based on my review, there is no material omission of words be tween the audio recording and transcripts. Special Counsel Hur and FBI personnel who attended the interview and compared the audio recording to the transcripts also informed me of their determination that the transcripts accurately reflect the words spoken on the audio recording aside from the minor instances I described above. Special Counsel Hur emphasized to me that it was important for purposes of his investigation that the interview transcripts be accurate.
“Wow. Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuit forced the Biden team to admit what everyone suspected – that the transcript is not accurate and was changed in a way to help Biden,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “There is nothing ordinary about this, and the transcript inaccuracy issues seem to help Biden’s political campaign needs. We today initiated a new FOIA request on this Biden’s Nixonian tape scandal.”
On March 11, 2024, Judicial Watch filed its FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a February 2024 FOIA request for records of all Special Counsel interviews of President Biden (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)). A redacted transcript of the Biden interview was released on April 15.
In April, the Justice Department told the court that it would not disclose the audio recordings of special counsel interviews with President Joe Biden in order to protect Biden’s “privacy” interests.
On February 5, 2024, Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
The Heritage Foundation and a CNN-led media coalition have recently been joined with Judicial Watch’s lawsuit.
Judicial Watch has several ongoing FOIA lawsuits about Biden’s document scandals and the related unprecedented partisan prosecutorial and judicial abuses of former President Donald J. Trump.
The post Judicial Watch: Biden Justice Department Admits Special Counsel Transcript of Biden Interviews Is Inaccurate appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Denounces the Absurd Trump Verdict
Defense Department Records Show U.S. Air Force Hosted ‘Drag Story Time’
Judicial Watch Sues CIA for Records on Hunter Biden Investigation
Biden Agency Releasing Suspected Terrorists Threatens Military Bases, Infrastructure
Judicial Watch Denounces the Absurd Trump Verdict
Pure corruption. Judicial Watch denounces this absurd guilty verdict and Soviet-style criminal proceeding that has so abused President Trump. What just happened to Trump up in New York is criminal.
The verdict is no surprise considering the rigged, kangaroo court proceedings run by a biased, conflicted judge and an unethical, politicized Democratic Party prosecution team. May 30, 2024, the day the verdict came down, was a terrible day for the rule of law that will go down in infamy. This whole process is compromised, and this verdict should be overturned in an emergency fashion.
The evidence shows that Trump committed no crimes, and this is a prosecution about “nothing.” This and other Democratic Party-political prosecutions of Trump are an abomination under law and are destabilizing to our nation.
Judicial Watch will continue to expose in court the truth about these attacks on the rule of law, free and fair elections, and the U.S. Constitution. In the meantime, our elections have officially been compromised by this politicized prosecution.
We have several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits related to the prosecutorial abuse targeting Trump.
In March 2024, we filed a Georgia Open Records Act lawsuit against District Attorney Fani Willis and Fulton County, Georgia, for records of any communication Willis and the county had with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee. The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County after Willis and the county denied having any responsive records.
In February 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that is targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.
(Before his appointment to investigate and prosecute Trump, Special Counsel Jack Smith was at the center of several controversial issues, the IRS scandal among them. In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Jack Smith’s then-Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Read more here.)
In January 2024, we filed a lawsuit against Fulton County, Georgia, for records regarding the hiring of Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor by Willis. Wade was hired to pursue unprecedented criminal investigations and prosecutions against former President Trump and others over the 2020 election disputes.
In October 2023, we sued the DOJ for records and communications between the Office of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney’s office regarding requests/receipt of federal funding/assistance in the investigation of former President Trump and his 18 codefendants in the Fulton County indictment of August 14, 2023. To date, the DOJ is refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with enforcement proceedings. Judicial Watch’s litigation challenging this is continuing.
Through the New York Freedom of Information Law, in July 2023, we received the engagement letter showing New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg paid $900 per hour for partners and $500 per hour for associates to the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher law firm for the purpose of suing Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in an effort to shut down the House Judiciary Committee’s oversight investigation into Bragg’s unprecedented indictment of Trump.
You can expect that the government abuses targeting Trump will not stop and will only increase – and you can also expect that Judicial Watch will not stop investigating and exposing this dangerous threat to our republican form of government.
Defense Department Records Show U.S. Air Force Hosted ‘Drag Story Time’
Your nation’s military is being ruined by woke ideology.
Judicial Watch received 25 pages of records regarding drag shows, drag story hours and other pride events for military personnel and their dependent minors organized and paid for by the U.S. Air Force.
We obtained the documents through a May 5, 2023, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted withCatholicVote Civic Action to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD). The Defense Department issued at least half a dozen “no records” responses to the FOIA request prior to finally releasing these records. We requested:
All emails and text messages sent to and from the Secretary of Defense, Lloyd J. Austin, III, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Kathleen Hicks and the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff regarding drag shows and drag story hours on U.S. military installations …
All Department of Defense documentation, including but not limited to PowerPoints, flyers, handouts, that were or are being used to promote any drag shows and drag story hours on U.S. military installations …
All Department of Defense documentation regarding the funding of drag shows and drag story hours on U.S. military installations …
A June 10, 2021, social media post by the Ramstein & Vogelweh Air Force Libraries advertises:
We’re celebrating PRIDE month with our very first DRAG STORY TIME! Our local Drag King, Sauvage, will be reading some of our favorite stories about what makes each of us special. Story time begins at 1030!
Graphics included with the post include a rainbow flag and two books from which Drag King Sauvage intends to read. The first book is titled “I Am Perfectly Designed” by Karamo Brown. The second book is titled “The HIPS on the DRAG QUEEN Go Swish, Swish, Swish” with a depiction of three males in dresses.
The records also include a graphic for a June 2 “Drag Queen Story Time” event at the Ramstein Library.
An advertisement for an 18 and older event on June 4 called “Drag Karaoke” at “Club E” with “special guest from Monarchy of RoyalTEA” announces prizes for “best dressed” and drink specials.
An advertisement for a seven-week summer reading program re-promotes “Drag Queen Storytime” on June 10 and shows each week given a different color identification for events that include virtual story times, teen socials and scavenger hunts.
The newly obtained records include several additional advertisements for adult events (e.g. Bingo Night, Karaoke Night and D&I Pride Night) at “Club E” and the “Galaxy Club.”
A communication from the marketing department of the 100th Force Support Squadron discusses proofs of brochures, posters and tickets for a “LGBT Obsurvance [sic] Event” to be held at the Galaxy Club on February 25, 2022. The names of all participants in the chain are redacted.
One individual requests:
Can you pretty please with a cherry on top please add, Drag In front of Show? Drag Show: 7:pm, I will need it on the tickets as well. Will I be getting a proof for the 250 pre-sale tickets? Please advise.
Later in the chain, an individual states:
I just had TSg [Redacted] in my office requesting LGBT Observance removed and changed to Drag Show. She claims she spoke to the FSSS [Force Support Squadron] commander. If you like [sic] to confirm with her before changing. I will pick up what is printed. I will not need anymore [sic] printed material except for an electronic sli.de with the change so they can print as they wish. I will take the 60 tickets and all printed material. It will work. No more printed material we are fine with what was done.
May 2022 meeting minutes from an international diversity and inclusion group called “Pathfinders” lists an extensive number of upcoming Pride Month and Diversity Day events that will be supported at Ramstein Air Force Base.
A May 2022 email with redacted sender and recipient(s) and subject line “Diversity and Inclusion Events” contains a list of upcoming events:
- Luau at the Crown – Asian American Pacific Islander Heritage Month (AAPIHM)
- Lei Making at the CDC (RAFA & RAFC)
- Luau at the Stukeley (AAPIHM)
- Lunch and Learn (AAPIHM)
- Origami at the Youth Center (RAFA only)
- Color Run (RAFC)
- Juneteenth (RAFA & RAFC)
- Drag Show Bingo (RAFA)
- Glow Party/Karaoke (RAFA)
- Diversity Day (All bases) – Strat Calendar
In a May 30, 2022, email with redacted sender and recipient and the subject line “Drag Events” the sender writes:
I have attached our posters, FSS [Force Support Squadron] Calendar, and screen shots of the Facebook events. I’ve also attached a screenshot of the video the drag queen sent us to promote the events. The full video is too big for the NIPR server. The images are too big for the server so I am sending this in 2 emails. Also, I’m sure we also did at least one e-blast but I can’t seem to find it in my email. Let me know if you need anything else.
A June 2022 invoice for $400 covers booking Miss Lexi Andrews, Drag Queen, for an appearance at “Drag Queen Bingo” on June 23 and a performance at a “Glow Party” the following day.
“The Department of Defense has once again proven that radical leftist ideology is more important than military preparedness and protecting Americans from tangible threats at home and abroad,” said Tim Huelskamp, Ph.D., CatholicVote senior advisor. “After an entire year of stonewalling, the DOD finally returned materials from just one command in one branch, which confirmed what we feared – that taxpayer funds were being used to promote drag shows and radical gender ideology on military bases, with full approval from Air Force leadership.”
How on Earth is it appropriate to spend our limited defense dollars on promoting these sexually themed events for children and adults rather than on advancing the military’s mission?
Judicial Watch Sues CIA for Records on Hunter Biden Investigation
Judicial Watch is digging into reports that federal agencies interfered in investigations of Hunter Biden.
In our latest effort, we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency for all agency records relating to the Department of Justice or Internal Revenue Service investigations of Hunter Biden and all records relating to efforts to interview lawyer Patrick Kevin Morris regarding Hunter Biden (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (No. 1:24-cv-01537)).
Los Angeles-based lawyer Morris is reportedly a friend of Hunter Biden’s, who allegedly loaned the president’s son millions of dollars. Since 2019, Morris has allegedly loaned him approximately $4.9 million for “personal expenses,” including federal taxes.
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the CIA failed to respond to two FOIA requests. The first, dated March 22, 2024, asks the agency for:
All documents and communications referring or relating to the Department of Justice or Internal Revenue Service investigation of Rober Hunter Biden, DPOB: February 4, 1970, Wilmington, DE.
All documents and communications referring or relating to Attorney Patrick Kevin Morris, including but not limited to requests or efforts to interview Mr. Morris concerning Robert Hunter Biden.
The second FOIA request, dated March 27, 2024, asks the CIA for:
All records of communications including, but not limited to, emails and text messages between officials of the CIA and officials of the U.S. Justice Department regarding Hunter Biden and/or Hunter Biden’s lawyer, Kevin Morris.
In March 2024, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer revealed that a whistleblower disclosed to the committees that the CIA intervened to stop the IRS from interviewing Morris:
Recently, the Committees received information from a whistleblower alleging that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) intervened in the investigation of Hunter Biden to prevent the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) investigators from interviewing [Morris]. We therefore write to request relevant material from the CIA.
As part of the impeachment inquiry, the Committees are investigating, among other things, whether President Biden “abuse[d] his power as President to impede, obstruct, or otherwise hinder investigations or the prosecution of Hunter Biden.” As background, for years, the IRS and DOJ had been investigating Hunter Biden for tax crimes. The Committees have documented how the DOJ deviated from its standard processes to afford preferential treatment to Hunter Biden. The Committees learned about the deviations in the spring of 2023 after two brave whistleblowers testified to Congress that DOJ officials deviated “from the normal process that provided preferential treatment, in this case to Hunter Biden . . . .” Among other deviations, DOJ officials restricted what investigative steps the investigators could pursue, tipped off Hunter Biden’s attorneys about investigative steps, and even prevented investigators from conducting witness interviews. The whistleblowers’ testimony about the preferential treatment provided to Hunter Biden has been corroborated by testimony from other witnesses and documents the Committees have received.
Hunter Biden faces two separate criminal trials in June. Biden’s trial on gun charges in Delaware is scheduled to begin on June 3. On June 20, his trial on various tax charges begins in California.
It is more than interesting that the CIA is stonewalling our Hunter Biden-related request.
We have several FOIA lawsuits and information requests focused on Biden family corruption.
We sued the FBI for records regarding the gun owned by Hunter Biden that reportedly was thrown in a trash can behind a Delaware grocery store. In a joint status report to the court, the FBI stated it would not produce records about the incident due to an “ongoing criminal investigation.”
In February 2023, from a separate lawsuit, we released records from the United States Secret Service that implicate the FBI in the unusual action to help Hunter Biden.
In response to a February 24, 2021, email inquiry from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” Schreckinger responds: “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation.”
In October 2020, The Blaze reported that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by Hallie Biden, the widow of then-presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau. In 2021, Politico reported:
Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO.
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
In June 2023, we sued the CIA for all communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter Biden laptop story as having “all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign.”
In July 2023, we sued the DOJ for records from the Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General regarding the Internal Revenue Service investigation of Hunter Biden.
In June 2023, we filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice for a copy of the FBI FD-1023 form that describes “an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” Judicial Watch also asked for communications about the FD-1023.
In May 2023, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives for Biden family records and communications regarding travel and finance transactions, as well as communications between the Bidens and several known business associates.
On October 14, 2022,we sued the DOJ for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
We filed a lawsuit against the U.S. State Department on April 20, 2022, for messages sent through the SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolkit) system that mention Hunter Biden.
In December 2020, State Department records obtained through a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit showed that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch had specifically warned in 2017 about corruption allegations against Burisma Holdings.
In October 2020, weh forced the release of State Department records that included a briefing checklist of a February 22, 2019, meeting in Kyiv between then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Sally Painter, co-founder and chief operating officer of Blue Star Strategies, a Democratic lobbying firm which was hired by Burisma Holdings to combat corruption allegations. At the time of the meeting, Hunter Biden was serving on the board of directors for Burisma Holdings.
Biden Agency Releasing Suspected Terrorists Threatens Military Bases, Infrastructure
The recent incident involving two Jordanian nationals trying to breach the Marine base at Quantico is concerning. And it highlights the national security risk of the Biden administration permitting a border invasion, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
Under the Biden administration the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has a pattern of releasing suspected terrorists at the southwest border resulting in national security risks that include threats to U.S. military installations and critical infrastructure, a congressional committee affirms. Federal lawmakers reveal that since Biden took office the U.S. Border Patrol has encountered at least 351 illegal aliens on the Terrorist Screening Data Set coming into the country between ports of entry. Among them are two Jordanian nationals who recently attempted to breach a military base not far from the nation’s capital. The men drove a truck to the main gate of Marine Corps Base Quantico earlier this month and ignored guards’ orders to stop when they could not provide credentials required to gain access to the facility. The Virginia base is about 35 miles south of Washington, D.C.
Now the House Homeland Security Committee, established nearly two decades ago to ensure that the American people are protected from terrorist attacks, is investigating the matter and demanding action from administration officials charged with safeguarding the nation, including the secretaries of Homeland Security (Alejandro Mayorkas) and Defense (Lloyd Austin) as well as FBI Director Christopher Wray. In a letter to the Biden officials, high-ranking committee members including chairman Mark Green of Tennessee, ask for documents and other pertinent information to aid in their investigation into threats posed by foreign nationals to U.S. military bases and other critical infrastructure. That includes communications such as text messages and electronic mail between DHS, DOD and the FBI related to the May 3 incident at Marine Corps Base Quantico, documents to identify the names and countries of origin of the truck’s occupants and their current alien file. The committee also wants files with all derogatory information in the Terrorist Screening Data Set associated with any individual who attempted to breach the military compound and all files containing notes from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and prosecutors referring to the individuals involved.
The attempted breach at the Marine Corps base reflects a possibly more dire reality for the state of U.S. national security, the committee members write, adding recent congressional testimony delivered by the FBI director. “As Director Wray stated in a recent Senate hearing, ‘a wide array of very dangerous threats . . . emanate from the border, requiring ‘much greater vigilance’ to protect the country.” The legislators point out that DHS’s relaxed vetting standards, which complement Biden’s avowed desire to surge the border with inadmissible migrants, have created an environment ripe for exploitation by individuals aiming to undermine the United States at its most critical points. “If individuals on the terrorist watchlist are so emboldened to attempt to breach a Marine Corps base, the Department of Homeland Security and the entire executive branch must act swiftly to identify, apprehend, and detain such hostile actors on American soil,” the letter states.
The recent incident in Virginia appears to be part of a broader security issue involving U.S. military bases and foreign intruders. Less than a year ago a mainstream newspaper published an alarming exposé involving Chinese nationals, sometimes posing as tourists, accessing military bases and other sensitive U.S. sites as many as 100 times. In the story U.S. officials, from agencies such as the FBI and DOD, describe the incidents as espionage threats designed to test security practices at U.S. military installations and other federal sites. Examples include Chinese nationals—required to report back to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)—crossing into a U.S. missile range in New Mexico to scuba divers swimming in murky waters near a U.S. government rocket-launch facility in Florida. The same Homeland Security Committee also initiated an investigation into the Chinese breaches after learning about them in the media. In a September 2023 letter to Mayorkas, Wray and Austin, the committee points out that the “persistent and multi-faceted threats posed by the CCP to U.S. homeland security have only intensified under the Biden-Harris administration.”
Until next week,
The post Judicial Watch Denounces Abuse of Trump! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Daily Caller:
The Air Force paid for bingo and party events attended by a drag queen in 2022, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch.The 423d Force Support Squadron spent $400 to host two separate events with a drag queen who goes by “Miss Lexi Andrews,” according to an invoice obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by Judicial Watch. One event is described as an “appearance” with Andrews at “Drag Queen Bingo” on June 23, 2022; the other was a “performance” by Andrews at a “glow party” one day later in June 2022.Andrews is advertised as an “Internationally Performing Drag Queen, Author, Instrumentalist, Vocalist, Dancer, & Performer,” and has been based out of both the U.K. and Washington, D.C., according to social media profiles.Read more here….The post Air Force Paid For Drag Queen To Appear At ‘Bingo’ Event And ‘Glow Party,’ Docs Show appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for all agency records relating to the Department of Justice or Internal Revenue Service (IRS) investigations of Hunter Biden and all records relating to efforts to interview lawyer Patrick Kevin Morris regarding Hunter Biden (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (No. 1:24-cv-01537)).
Los Angeles-based lawyer Morris is reportedly a friend of Hunter Biden’s, who allegedly loaned the president’s son millions of dollars. Since 2019, Morris has allegedly loaned him approximately $4.9 million for “personal expenses,” including federal taxes.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the CIA failed to respond to two FOIA requests. The first, dated March 22, 2024, asks the agency for:
All documents and communications referring or relating to the Department of Justice or Internal Revenue Service investigation of Rober Hunter Biden, DPOB: February 4, 1970, Wilmington, DE.
All documents and communications referring or relating to Attorney Patrick Kevin Morris, including but not limited to requests or efforts to interview Mr. Morris concerning Robert Hunter Biden.
The second FOIA request, dated March 27, 2024, asks the CIA for:
All records of communications including, but not limited to, emails and text messages between officials of the CIA and officials of the U.S. Justice Department regarding Hunter Biden and/or Hunter Biden’s lawyer, Kevin Morris.
In March 2024, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and Oversight and Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer revealed that a whistleblower disclosed to the committees that the CIA intervened to stop the IRS from interviewing Morris:
Recently, the Committees received information from a whistleblower alleging that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) intervened in the investigation of Hunter Biden to prevent the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) investigators from interviewing [Morris]. We therefore write to request relevant material from the CIA.
As part of the impeachment inquiry, the Committees are investigating, among other things, whether President Biden “abuse[d] his power as President to impede, obstruct, or otherwise hinder investigations or the prosecution of Hunter Biden.” As background, for years, the IRS and DOJ had been investigating Hunter Biden for tax crimes. The Committees have documented how the DOJ deviated from its standard processes to afford preferential treatment to Hunter Biden. The Committees learned about the deviations in the spring of 2023 after two brave whistleblowers testified to Congress that DOJ officials deviated “from the normal process that provided preferential treatment, in this case to Hunter Biden . . . .” Among other deviations, DOJ officials restricted what investigative steps the investigators could pursue, tipped off Hunter Biden’s attorneys about investigative steps, and even prevented investigators from conducting witness interviews. The whistleblowers’ testimony about the preferential treatment provided to Hunter Biden has been corroborated by testimony from other witnesses and documents the Committees have received.
Hunter Biden faces two separate criminal trials in June. Biden’s trial on gun charges in Delaware is scheduled to begin on June 3. On June 20, his trial on various tax charges begins in California.
“It is more than interesting that the CIA is stonewalling Judicial Watch’s Hunter Biden-related request,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch has several FOIA lawsuits and information requests focused on Biden family corruption.
Judicial Watch previously sued the FBI for records regarding the gun owned by Hunter Biden that reportedly was thrown in a trash can behind a Delaware grocery store. In a joint status report to the court, the FBI stated it would not produce records about the incident due to an “ongoing criminal investigation.”
In February 2023, from a separate lawsuit, Judicial Watch released records from the United States Secret Service that implicate the FBI in the unusual action to help Hunter Biden.
In response to a February 24, 2021, email inquiry from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” Schreckinger responds: “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation.”
In October 2020, The Blaze reported that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by Hallie Biden, the widow of then-presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau. In 2021, Politico reported:
Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO.
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch sued the CIA for all communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter Biden laptop story as having “all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign.”
In July 2023, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ for records from the Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General regarding the Internal Revenue Service investigation of Hunter Biden.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice for a copy of the FBI FD-1023 form that describes “an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” Judicial Watch also asked for communications about the FD-1023.
In May 2023, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives for Biden family records and communications regarding travel and finance transactions, as well as communications between the Bidens and several known business associates.
On October 14, 2022, Judicial Watch sued DOJ for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the U.S. State Department on April 20, 2022, for messages sent through the SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolkit) system that mention Hunter Biden.
In December 2020, State Department records obtained through a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit showed that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch had specifically warned in 2017 about corruption allegations against Burisma Holdings.
In October 2020, Judicial Watch forced the release of State Department records that included a briefing checklist of a February 22, 2019, meeting in Kyiv between then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Sally Painter, co-founder and chief operating officer of Blue Star Strategies, a Democratic lobbying firm which was hired by Burisma Holdings to combat corruption allegations. At the time of the meeting, Hunter Biden was serving on the board of directors for Burisma Holdings.
The post Judicial Watch Sues CIA for Records on Hunter Biden Investigation, Including Interview of Biden Lawyer Kevin Morris appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the unprecedented prosecution of President Donald Trump by Democrats in New York:
Pure corruption. Judicial Watch denounces this absurd verdict and Soviet-style criminal proceeding that has so abused President Trump. What just happened to Trump up in New York is criminal.
The guilty verdict against Trump is no surprise considering the rigged, kangaroo court proceedings run by a biased, conflicted judge and an unethical, politicized Democratic Party prosecution team. Today is a terrible day for the rule of law that will go down in infamy. This whole process is compromised, and this verdict should be overturned in an emergency fashion.
The evidence shows that Trump committed no crimes, and this is a prosecution about “nothing.” This and other Democratic Party-political prosecutions of Trump are an abomination under law and are destabilizing to our nation.
Judicial Watch will continue to expose in court the truth about these attacks on the rule of law, free and fair elections, and the U.S. Constitution. In the meantime, our elections have officially been compromised by this politicized prosecution.
Judicial Watch has several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits related to the prosecutorial abuse targeting Trump:
In March 2024, Judicial Watch filed a Georgia Open Records Act lawsuit against District Attorney Fani Willis and Fulton County, Georgia, for records of any communication Willis and the county had with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee. The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County after Willis and the county denied having any responsive records.
In February 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that is targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.
(Before his appointment to investigate and prosecute Trump, Specia Counsel Jack Smith previously was at the center of several controversial issues, the IRS scandal among them. In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Jack Smith’s then-Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Read more here.)
In January 2024, Judicial Watch filed lawsuit against Fulton County, Georgia, for records regarding the hiring of Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor by District Attorney Fani Willis. Wade was hired to pursue unprecedented criminal investigations and prosecutions against former President Trump and others over the 2020 election disputes.
In October 2023, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ for records and communications between the Office of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney’s office regarding requests/receipt of federal funding/assistance in the investigation of former President Trump and his 18 codefendants in the Fulton County indictment of August 14, 2023. To date, the DOJ is refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with enforcement proceedings. Judicial Watch’s litigation challenging this is continuing.
Through the New York Freedom of Information Law, in July 2023, Judicial Watch received the engagement letter showing New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg paid $900 per hour for partners and $500 per hour for associates to the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher law firm for the purpose of suing Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in an effort to shut down the House Judiciary Committee’s oversight investigation into Bragg’s unprecedented indictment of former President Donald Trump.
The post Judicial Watch Statement on the Trump Verdict appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 25 pages of records regarding drag shows, drag story hours and other pride events for military personnel and their dependent minors organized and paid for by the U.S. Air Force.
The documents were obtained through a May 5, 2023, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) by Judicial Watch and CatholicVote Civic Action. The Defense Department issued at least half a dozen “no records” responses to the FOIA request prior to finally releasing these records. Judicial Watch and Catholic Vote requested:
All emails and text messages sent to and from the Secretary of Defense, Lloyd J. Austin, III, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, Kathleen Hicks and the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff regarding drag shows and drag story hours on U.S. military installations…
All Department of Defense documentation, including but not limited to PowerPoints, flyers, handouts, that were or are being used to promote any drag shows and drag story hours on U.S. military installations…
All Department of Defense documentation regarding the funding of drag shows and drag story hours on U.S. military installations …
A June 10, 2021, social media post by the Ramstein & Vogelweh Air Force Libraries advertises:
We’re celebrating PRIDE month with our very first DRAG STORY TIME! Our local Drag King, Sauvage, will be reading some of our favorite stories about what makes each of us special. Story time begins at 1030!
Graphics included with the post include a rainbow flag and two books from which Drag King Sauvage intends to read. The first book is titled “I Am Perfectly Designed” by Karamo Brown. The second book is titled “The HIPS on the DRAG QUEEN Go Swish, Swish, Swish” with a depiction of three males in dresses.
The records also include a graphic for a June 2 “Drag Queen Story Time” event at the Ramstein Library.
An advertisement for an 18 and older event on June 4 called “Drag Karaoke” at “Club E” with “special guest from Monarchy of RoyalTEA” announces prizes for “best dressed” and drink specials.
An advertisement for a seven-week summer reading program re-promotes “Drag Queen Storytime” on June 10 and shows each week given a different color identification for events that include virtual story times, teen socials and scavenger hunts.
The newly obtained records include several additional advertisements for adult events (e.g. Bingo Night, Karaoke Night and D&I Pride Night) at “Club E” and the “Galaxy Club.”
A communication from the marketing department of the 100th Force Support Squadron discusses proofs of brochures, posters and tickets for a “LGBT Obsurvance [sic] Event” to be held at the Galaxy Club on February 25, 2022. The names of all participants in the chain are redacted.
One individual requests:
Can you pretty please with a cherry on top please add, Drag In front of Show? Drag Show: 7:pm, I will need it on the tickets as well. Will I be getting a proof for the 250 pre-sale tickets? Please advise.
Later in the chain, an individual states:
I just had TSg [Redacted] in my office requesting LGBT Observance removed and changed to Drag Show. She claims she spoke to the FSSS [Force Support Squadron] commander. If you like [sic] to confirm with her before changing. I will pick up what is printed. I will not need anymore [sic] printed material except for an electronic sli.de with the change so they can print as they wish. I will take the 60 tickets and all printed material. It will work. No more printed material we are fine with what was done.
May 2022 meeting minutes from an international diversity and inclusion group called “Pathfinders” lists an extensive number of upcoming Pride Month and Diversity Day events that will be supported at Ramstein Air Force Base.
A May 2022 email with redacted sender and recipient(s) and subject line “Diversity and Inclusion Events” contains a list of upcoming events:
- Luau at the Crown – Asian American Pacific Islander Heritage Month (AAPIHM)
- Lei Making at the CDC (RAFA & RAFC)
- Luau at the Stukeley (AAPIHM)
- Lunch and Learn (AAPIHM)
- Origami at the Youth Center (RAFA only)
- Color Run (RAFC)
- Juneteenth (RAFA & RAFC)
- Drag Show Bingo (RAFA)
- Glow Party/Karaoke (RAFA)
- Diversity Day (All bases) – Strat Calendar
In a May 30, 2022, email with redacted sender and recipient and subject line “Drag Events” the sender writes:
I have attached our posters, FSS [Force Support Squadron] Calendar, and screen shots of the Facebook events. I’ve also attached a screenshot of the video the drag queen sent us to promote the events. The full video is too big for the NIPR server. The images are too big for the server so I am sending this in 2 emails. Also, I’m sure we also did at least one e-blast but I can’t seem to find it in my email. Let me know if you need anything else.
A June 2022 invoice for $400 covers booking Ms. Lexi Andrews, Drag Queen, for an appearance at “Drag Queen Bingo” on June 23 and a performance at a “Glow Party”the following day.
“The Department of Defense has once again proven that radical leftist ideology is more important than military preparedness and protecting Americans from tangible threats at home and abroad,” said Tim Huelskamp, Ph.D., CatholicVote Senior Advisor. “After an entire year of stonewalling, the DOD finally returned materials from just one command in one branch, which confirmed what we feared – that taxpayer funds were being used to promote drag shows and radical gender ideology on military bases, with full approval from Air Force leadership.”
“How on Earth is it appropriate to spend our limited defense dollars on promoting these sexually themed events for children and adults rather than on advancing the military’s mission,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “As we see in these troubling Air Force records, our nation’s military is being ruined by woke ideology.”
The post Judicial Watch: Defense Dept. Records Show U.S. Air Force Hosted ‘Drag Story Time’ and Other ‘Drag’ Events appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Chicago Sun-Times:
A conservative group has filed a class-action lawsuit against the city of Evanston arguing that the north suburb’s reparations program meant to repay historical wrongs against Black residents violates the U.S. Constitution.
The nonprofit organization Judicial Watch filed the federal lawsuit last week on behalf of six residents who are not Black but whose relatives lived in Evanston between 1919 and 1969 — the 50-year period of housing discrimination that caused segregation of Black residents in the city.
The residents say in the lawsuit that Evanston’s first-in-the-nation reparations plan violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment because the program uses race as a requirement for eligibility.
The “program is nothing more than a ploy to redistribute tax dollars to individuals based on race,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “This scheme unconstitutionally discriminates against anyone who does not identify as Black or African American. This class action, civil rights lawsuit will be a historic defense of our color-blind Constitution.”
Read more here….
The post Evanston’s reparations program violates equal protection in U.S. Constitution, lawsuit contends appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller:
The class-action lawsuit led by Judicial Watch, a conservative group, casts doubt on the future of the watershed reparations program in Evanston, a Chicago suburb.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, says Evanston’s scheme was ‘nothing more than a ploy to redistribute tax dollars to individuals based on race.’
It ‘unconstitutionally discriminates against anyone who does not identify as black or African American,’ he added.
Read more here…
The post First-in-the-nation reparations scheme SLAPPED by lawsuit that calls $25,000 payouts to blacks ‘unconstitutional’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller:
Dirty voter rolls make for dirty elections. Sloppy registration and accountability procedures and/or willful blindness to loaded-up voter rolls are key ingredients for mischief, manipulation, and other voting “irregularities.”
Bloated, inaccurate voter registrations can create the conditions that undermine public confidence in the already badly damaged reputations of officials and agencies administering our elections. The federal voting law, the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA), acknowledges that–and that’s why Section 8 of that law requires the states to make “a reasonable effort to remove the names of ineligible voters from the official lists of eligible voters.”
Read more here…
The post FARRELL: Clean Voter Rolls Matter appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Epoch Times:
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, told The Epoch Times that Justice Merchan “enabled the lawlessness of this case” by allowing it to move forward.
“He is compromised ethically as a donor to the Biden campaign,” Mr. Fitton said.
“The jury process is being abused and being used to give credence in a kangaroo court,” Mr. Fitton told The Epoch Times. “Typically, a jury would not get this case because there are no charges.”Read more here…
The post Legal Analysts Share Thoughts About Trump Trial appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Under the Biden administration the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has a pattern of releasing suspected terrorists at the southwest border resulting in national security risks that include threats to U.S. military installations and critical infrastructure, a congressional committee affirms. Federal lawmakers reveal that since Biden took office the U.S. Border Patrol has encountered at least 351 illegal aliens on the Terrorist Screening Data Set coming into the country between ports of entry. Among them are two Jordanian nationals who recently attempted to breach a military base not far from the nation’s capital. The men drove a truck to the main gate of Marine Corps Base Quantico earlier this month and ignored guards’ orders to stop when they could not provide credentials required to gain access to the facility. The Virginia base is about 35 miles south of Washington D.C.
Now the House Homeland Security Committee, established nearly two decades ago to ensure that the American people are protected from terrorist attacks, is investigating the matter and demanding action from administration officials charged with safeguarding the nation, including the secretaries of Homeland Security (Alejandro Mayorkas) and Defense (Lloyd Austin) as well as FBI Director Christopher Wray. In a letter to the Biden officials, high-ranking committee members including chairman Mark Green of Tennessee, ask for documents and other pertinent information to aid in their investigation into threats posed by foreign nationals to U.S. military bases and other critical infrastructure. That includes communications such as text messages and electronic mail between DHS, DOD and the FBI related to the May 3 incident at Marine Corps Base Quantico, documents to identify the names and countries of origin of the truck’s occupants and their current alien file. The committee also wants files with all derogatory information in the Terrorist Screening Data Set associated with any individual who attempted to breach the military compound and all files containing notes from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers and prosecutors referring to the individuals involved.
The attempted breach at the Marine Corps base reflects a possibly more dire reality for the state of U.S. national security, the committee members write, adding recent congressional testimony delivered by the FBI director. “As Director Wray stated in a recent Senate hearing, ‘a wide array of very dangerous threats . . . emanate from the border, requiring ‘much greater vigilance’ to protect the country.” The legislators point out that DHS’s relaxed vetting standards, which complement Biden’s avowed desire to surge the border with inadmissible migrants, have created an environment ripe for exploitation by individuals aiming to undermine the United States at its most critical points. “If individuals on the terrorist watchlist are so emboldened to attempt to breach a Marine Corps base, the Department of Homeland Security and the entire executive branch must act swiftly to identify, apprehend, and detain such hostile actors on American soil,” the letter states.
The recent incident in Virginia appears to be part of a broader security issue involving U.S. military bases and foreign intruders. Less than a year ago a mainstream newspaper published an alarming exposé involving Chinese nationals, sometimes posing as tourists, accessing military bases and other sensitive U.S. sites as many as 100 times. In the story U.S. officials, from agencies such as the FBI and DOD, describe the incidents as espionage threats designed to test security practices at U.S. military installations and other federal sites. Examples include Chinese nationals—required to report back to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)—crossing into a U.S. missile range in New Mexico to scuba divers swimming in murky waters near a U.S. government rocket-launch facility in Florida. The same Homeland Security Committee also initiated an investigation into the Chinese breaches after learning about them in the media. In a September 2023 letter to Mayorkas, Wray and Austin, the committee points out that the “persistent and multi-faceted threats posed by the CCP to U.S. homeland security have only intensified under the Biden-Harris administration.”
The post DHS Pattern of Releasing Suspected Terrorists Threatening U.S. Military Bases, Critical Infrastructure appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Files Class Action Lawsuit over Reparations
Judicial Watch announced recently it filed a class action lawsuit against Evanston, Illinois, on behalf of six individuals over the city’s use of race as an eligibility requirement for a reparations program which makes $25,000 payments to black residents and descendants of black residents who lived in Evanston between the years 1919 and 1969. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
Mexican Cartels Dictate Flow of Nearly all Illicit Drugs into the U.S., DEA Confirms
In addition to record-breaking numbers of illegal immigrants hemorrhaging into the United States through Mexico, cartels in the Latin American border nation have caused the worst drug crisis in U.S. history, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). The federal agency, which operates under the Department of Justice (DOJ), is responsible for enforcing the nation’s controlled substances laws and regulations as well as investigating criminals and gangs that traffic illegal drugs into the country. In its annual National Drug Threat Assessment (NDTA), released this month, the DEA outlines and gauges illicit drug threats and trafficking trends endangering the United States. Mexican cartels are at the heart of the report, specifically the Sinaloa and Jalisco Nueva Generación cartels.
Judicial Watch Asks Minnesota Supreme Court to Allow Taxpayer Lawsuit over Racially Discriminatory Minneapolis Teachers’ Contract to Proceed to Trial
Judicial Watch announced recently it filed a brief in the Minnesota Supreme Court asking it to affirm a state Appeals Court decision allowing its taxpayer lawsuit over a racially discriminatory Minneapolis teachers’ contract to proceed to trial
Trump Trial: The Prosecution Rests, Lawfare at Court, Where’s the Crime?
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has been dancing around the question for months. The prosecution produced a cacophony of tawdry testimony from a porn star (Stormy Daniels) and a former Trump aide turned convicted felon turned cooperating witness (Michael Cohen) but their claims had little to do with the allegations at the center of the case. Trump is charged with thirty-four felony counts of falsifying business records, generally a low-level misdemeanor. But New York state law elevates the misdemeanor charge to a felony if the defendant’s “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime,” and that’s where Bragg has placed his big bet.
In The News
Conservative group files lawsuit over Evanston reparations program
The Chicago Tribune
The suit, filed Thursday by the group Judicial Watch, names as plaintiffs six people whose relatives once lived in Evanston during a 50-year period of housing discrimination that often deprived Black residents from building wealth through homeownership and kept them segregated to a tiny enclave on the city’s western edge.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told the Tribune that Evanston’s program is “just a proxy for giving out money to people based on race.”
Chicago suburb faces federal class action over reparations program
Courthouse NewsSix people filed a federal class action against the Chicago suburb of Evanston on Wednesday, hoping to scrap the racial component of a local program meant to address historic racial injustice.
The Restorative Housing Program is an Evanston initiative to compensate Black residents for housing discrimination they or their ancestors may have faced between 1919 and 1969. It assists eligible applicants with buying or improving their own
‘This Is Very Illegal’: Experts Say Fauci’s Top Aide Likely Broke The Law By Deleting Emails, Using Private Account
The Daily CallerA top advisor for former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci may have illegally taken actions to avoid records requests, experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.
David Morens, a former senior adviser to Fauci, both deleted emails to evade Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and told people multiple times to contact him at his personal email address to get around such requests, according to emails released by the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday. Morens, in his emails, also suggested that Fauci used his private email address to conduct government business.
Video Highlights
-
-
- FARRELL: We Need the Audio of Biden’s Interview with Hur! - FARRELL: Biden’s Crimes Against Humanity at The Border - Illegal Aliens Can Vote in DC Elections!
-
The post New Lawsuit Against “Reparations” appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Chicago Tribune:
The suit, filed Thursday by the group Judicial Watch, names as plaintiffs six people whose relatives once lived in Evanston during a 50-year period of housing discrimination that often deprived Black residents from building wealth through homeownership and kept them segregated to a tiny enclave on the city’s western edge.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told the Tribune that Evanston’s program is “just a proxy for giving out money to people based on race.”
“It looks to me like Evanston wants to be on the cutting edge,” Fitton said. “We don’t want those anti-discrimination protections to be upended through these types of programs. It’s important this be corrected as soon as possible so other states, localities and the federal government don’t go down this path of dolling out tax money to individuals simply based on race.”
Read more here…
The post Conservative group files lawsuit over Evanston reparations program appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues for Emails of Fauci Advisor on Non-Government Account
Judicial Watch Files Class Action Lawsuit over Reparations in Evanston, Illinois
Judicial Watch Asks Minnesota Supreme Court to Allow Taxpayer Lawsuit over Racially Discriminatory Minneapolis Teachers’ Contract to Proceed to Trial
Trump Trial: The Prosecution Rests, Lawfare at Court, Where’s the Crime?
Memorial Day – ‘I will not fail thee nor forsake thee’
Judicial Watch Sues for Emails of Fauci Advisor on Non-Government Account
In an echo of the Hillary Clinton email scandal, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Service (HHS) for official emails in the personal email account of senior advisor to Anthony Fauci David Morens(Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:24-cv-01203)). Fauci was director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, from 1984 to 2022.
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a component of HHS, failed to respond to an October 25, 2023, FOIA request for: “All work-related emails sent to and from NIAID Senior Advisor David Morens on non-government email accounts.”
The House Select Committee on the Coronavirus Pandemic on April 16, 2024, issued a subpoena to Morens, stating:
On June 29, 2023, the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic … requested information pertaining to your use of personal e-mail. In response to that request, you voluntarily participated in a transcribed interview on January 18, 2024, and produced a portion of the requested documents on November 20, 2023.
[T]he Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability has authorized the attached subpoena, compelling your production of certain documents and information by April 30, 2024.
Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), chairman of the subcommittee, issued a press release regarding the subpoena, stating:
Recent whistleblower allegations revealed new, additional evidence that Dr. Morens intentionally used his personal email to hide conversations about the origins of COVID-19 and subvert federal transparency laws. Last week, Dr. Morens’s self-proclaimed “best friend” — EcoHealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak — released four document tranches that confirmed the whistleblower’s allegations. Notably, Dr. Daszak is at the center of controversy related to his use of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
On April 19, 2024, the committee released an email between Morens and EcoHealth President Peter Daszak, containing “confidential” information that Fauci had been briefed about biosafety labs.
And, perhaps not conicidentally, congressional investigators just released emails showing that Morens collaborated with the agency’s “FOIA lady” to ensure certain documents would not be disclosed to the public!
Our FOIA lawsuits and investigations have uncovered much of what the public knows about many Covid-19 controversies:
- On April 19, 2024, we reported that it received records from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in a FOIA request that showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Fauci’s NIAID grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
- Emails between U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and top Facebook executives in 2021 regarding the censorship of user posts about Covid controversies showed Facebook leadership seeking to “better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”
- Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it.
- Records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
- HHS records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
- Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the Covid shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
- We obtained HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA Covid-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformities after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Heavily redacted records from the FDA regarding the Covid-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on Covid booster use and approval.
- HHS records detailed internal discussions about myocarditis and the Covid vaccine. Other documents detailed adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
- We uncovered HHS records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration propaganda campaign to push the Covid-19 vaccine.
- HHS records revealed previously redacted locations of Covid-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
- NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also showed National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), James W. Le Duc, warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the Covid-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records obtained from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and Covid-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was canceled because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- Our four-part documentary regarding the coordinated effort by the government and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates is available here.
You can see that Judicial Watch is the national leader in exposing the terrible government secrecy and misconduct tied to Covid. The latest developments about secret emails and FOIA evasion shows our work is not done.
Judicial Watch Files Class Action Lawsuit over Reparations in Evanston, Illinois
Evanston, Illinois, has gotten into the reparations game, and we’re taking steps to shut it down.
Judicial Watch filed a class action lawsuit against the city on behalf of six individuals over the city’s use of race as an eligibility requirement for a reparations program which makes $25,000 payments to black residents and descendants of black residents who lived in Evanston between 1919 and 1969.
The civil rights lawsuit challenges “on Equal Protection grounds Defendant City of Evanston’s use of race as an eligibility requirement for a program that makes $25,000 payments to residents and direct descendants of residents of the city five-plus decades if not more than a century ago. Plaintiffs seek a judgment declaring Defendant’s use of race to be unconstitutional.
Plaintiffs also seek an injunction enjoining Defendant from continuing to use race as a requirement for receiving payment under the program and request that the Court award them and all class members damages in the amount of $25,000 each.”
Through a series of resolutions, the Evanston City Council created a program to provide $25,000 cash payments to residents who lived in Evanston between 1919 and 1969 and their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.
The program violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment because:
Remedying societal discrimination is not a compelling governmental interest. Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469, 505 (1989); see also Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 307 ((1978) (opinion of Powell, J.) (describing “societal discrimination” as “an amorphous concept of injury that may be ageless in its reach into the past.”) Remedying discrimination from 55 to 105 years ago or remedying discrimination experienced at any time by an individual’s parents, grandparents, or great grandparents has not been recognized as a compelling governmental interest…
Defendant also has not and cannot demonstrate that its use of a race as an eligibility requirement is narrowly tailored. Among other shortcomings, Defendant’s use of race as a proxy for experiencing discrimination between 1919 and 1969 does not limit eligibility to persons who actually experienced discrimination during that relevant time period and therefore is overinclusive. Defendant also failed to consider race-neutral alternatives, such as requiring prospective recipients to show that they or their parents, grandparents, or great grandparents actually experienced housing discrimination during the relevant time period because of an Evanston ordinance, policy, or procedure, as Defendant requires for the third group of prospective recipients. Nor did Defendant take into account race-neutral anti-discrimination remedies before adopting its race-based eligibility requirement.
The first group of persons eligible for the $25,000 payments are current Evanston residents who identify as Black or African American and were at least 18 years of age between 1919 and 1969. Evanston refers to this group as “ancestors.”
The second group are individuals who identify as Black or African American who are at least 18 years of age and have at least one parent, grandparent, or great grandparent who identifies (or identified) as Black or African American, lived in Evanston for any period between 1919 and 1969, and was at least 18 at the time. Evanston refers to this group as “direct descendants.” A “direct descendant” is not required to be a current resident of Evanston to receive the payment.
We argue in the lawsuit: “At no point in the application process are persons in the first and second groups required to present evidence that they or their ancestors experienced housing discrimination or otherwise suffered harm because of an unlawful Evanston ordinance, policy, or procedure or some other unlawful act or series of acts by Evanston between 1919 and 1969. In effect, Evanston is using race as a proxy for having experienced discrimination during this time period.”
The city committed $20 million to the program.
We state in the lawsuit that the six plaintiffs satisfy all eligibility requirements for participating in the program as “direct descendants” other than the race requirement (the actual number of individuals who are potential class members is in the tens of thousands).
The Evanston, Illinois’ ‘reparations’ program is nothing more than a ploy to redistribute tax dollars to individuals based on race. This scheme unconstitutionally discriminates against anyone who does not identify as Black or African American. This class action, civil rights lawsuit will be a historic defense of our color-blind Constitution.
Our lawsuits challenging unconstitutional discrimination are extensive.
On January 29, 2024, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of San Francisco taxpayers over a city program that discriminates in favor of biological black and Latino men who identify as women in the distribution of tax money. The lawsuit was filed after Judicial Watch earlier forced the release of records from the City of San Francisco showing the city prioritized tax money for black and Latino transgenders (biological men) in the Guaranteed Income for Trans People program.
In December 2023, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s ruling and allowed our historic lawsuit filed on behalf of a Minneapolis taxpayer over a teachers’ contract that provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities to proceed.
The City of Asheville, NC, in January 2022 settled a Judicial Watch federal civil rights lawsuit after agreeing to remove all racially discriminatory provisions in a city-funded scholarship program. Additionally, the city also agreed to remove racially discriminatory eligibility provisions in a related program that provides grants to educators.
In May 2022, we won a court battle against California’s gender quota law for corporate boards. The verdict came after a 28-day trial. The verdict followed a similar ruling in Judicial Watch’s favor in April finding California’s diversity mandate for corporate boards unconstitutional.
Judicial Watch Asks Minnesota Supreme Court to Allow Taxpayer Lawsuit over Racially Discriminatory Minneapolis Teachers’ Contract to Proceed to Trial
We filed a brief in the Minnesota Supreme Court asking it to affirm a state Appeals Court decision allowing its taxpayer lawsuit over a racially discriminatory Minneapolis teachers’ contract to proceed to trial (Deborah Jane Clapp v. Rochelle Cox et al. (No. A23-0360).
On December 4, 2023, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled in favor of our historic lawsuit filed on behalf of a Minneapolis taxpayer over the teachers’ contract, and allowed the case to proceed to trial. The contract provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities (Clapp v. Cox et al. (No. 27-CV-22-12454)).
We originally filed the lawsuit in August 2022 against the superintendent of the Minneapolis Public Schools, the Minneapolis Public Schools, and the Minneapolis Board of Education (together referenced as “MPS”) for violating the Equal Protection Guarantee of the Minnesota Constitution. MPS, supported by the teachers and other public employee unions, assert that Minnesota taxpayers don’t have the right to challenge the illegal spending of taxpayer money by government officials.
In our brief to the Supreme Court, we argue:
Minneapolis Public Schools and its Amici spill a lot of ink complaining that a “complete stranger” has sued to prevent MPS from carrying out an unconstitutional provision of a contract between it and its teachers. Plaintiff-Respondent Deborah Clapp, however, is not a stranger. She is a Minneapolis taxpayer, and this Court, since at least 1877, has recognized taxpayers as proper parties to bring such actions in Minnesota courts. This Court should not accept MPS’s and its Amici’s invitation to undermine this important check on government power.
Clapp could not have brought a more straightforward case. She alleges that she lives in Minneapolis and pays property tax on the home she has owned since 2017…She also alleges that Minneapolis Public Schools is funded in part by her tax dollars…In addition, she alleges that MPS spends those tax dollars to carry out the various provisions of its contract with the teachers’ union….Finally, she alleges that one of those provisions violates the Minnesota Constitution….Therefore, she alleges that her tax dollars are being used in an unlawful manner.
The December 2023 Appellate Court ruling came after the Hennepin County District Court dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that our taxpayer client lacked standing and that her claims were not ripe. We appealed, and the Minnesota Court of Appeals overturned the lower court’s dismissal of the case.
The controversial contract was agreed to in March 2022 to end a 14-day teacher strike. The Minneapolis Federation of Teachers ratified the contract shortly after the agreement was reached. The Minneapolis Board of Education ratified it in May 2022. The contract was recently renewed with the racial discrimination provisions intact.
Our initial complaint asked the District Court to enter a judgment declaring all actions taken to implement the racial and ethnic preference provisions of Article 15 of the contract to be illegal. The lawsuit also asks that the court declare illegal the use of any taxpayer dollars to implement these provisions of the contract and that MPS be prohibited from taking any actions to implement these racial and ethnic provisions. Our complaint states:
Among other things, the contract provides preferences, protections, and privileges for MPS teachers of certain races and ethnicities under a section entitled “ARTICLE 15. PROTECTIONS FOR EDUCATORS OF COLOR.” There is no similar provision covering educators who are not “of color.”
Under the contract, teachers of color are exempt from Defendant MPS’s seniority-based layoffs and reassignments, which means, when layoffs or reassignments occur, the next senior teacher who is not “of color” would be laid off or reassigned. In addition, the contract mandates that Defendants reinstate teachers of color over more senior teachers who are not “of color.”
Under the appeals court ruling, the lawsuit was to go back to Hennepin County District Court for further proceedings, but MPS appealed the case to the Minnesota Supreme Court before those proceedings could commence.
There is a leftist cadre of government and public employee union officials in Minneapolis who want to engage in lawless woke, anti-white discrimination – and they want to deprive taxpayers of their rights to stop the abuse. Our lawsuit aims to shut down an extreme leftist attack on the bedrock constitutional principle that no one can be denied equal treatment under the law on account of race.
We are assisted in the lawsuit by Daniel N. Rosen.
Our lawsuits and FOIA requests on Critical Race Theory and other leftist extremism are extensive.
In April 2024, Judicial Watch presented oral argument to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in the case filed on behalf of Kari MacRae, a Massachusetts high school teacher who was fired in retaliation for posts on social media that predated her employment at Hanover High School.
On February 5, 2024, Judicial Watch filed a public records lawsuit in the Superior Court for Suffolk County, Massachusetts, against the City of Boston after the city failed to produce records related to the “Electeds of Color Holiday Party” hosted by Boston Mayor Michelle Wu in December 2023.
(USAFA), a component of the United States Department of Defense, which included instructional materials and emails that address topics such as Critical Race Theory, “white privilege,” and Black Lives Matter.
In March 2023, records from the U.S. Department of Defense showed the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA) had made race and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.
We filed a California Public Records Act lawsuit against the Oakland Unified School District for records on a racially segregated “playdate” held on August 26, 2023, by one of the district’s elementary schools.
The City of Asheville, NC, in January 2022 settled a Judicial Watch federal civil rights lawsuit after agreeing to remove all racially discriminatory provisions in a city-funded scholarship program. Additionally, the city also agreed to remove racially discriminatory eligibility provisions in a related program that provides grants to educators.
In May 2022, we won a court battle against California’s gender quota law for corporate boards. The verdict came after a 28-day trial. The verdict followed a similar ruling in Judicial Watch’s favor in April finding California’s diversity mandate for corporate boards unconstitutional.
Trump Trial: The Prosecution Rests, Lawfare at Court, Where’s the Crime?
We don’t have to assert that the prosecution of Donald Trump in New York is political. The words and actions of the judge and prosecutors are doing it for us. Micah Morrison, our chief investigative correspondent, reports in Investigative Bulletin.
The Trump prosecution rested its case Monday with a central question unanswered: where’s the crime?
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has been dancing around the question for months. The prosecution produced a cacophony of tawdry testimony from a porn star (Stormy Daniels) and a former Trump aide turned convicted felon turned cooperating witness (Michael Cohen) but their claims had little to do with the allegations at the center of the case. Trump is charged with thirty-four felony counts of falsifying business records, generally a low-level misdemeanor. But New York state law elevates the misdemeanor charge to a felony if the defendant’s “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime,” and that’s where Bragg has placed his big bet.
That other crime? Bragg insists he doesn’t have to name it. The “law does not so require,” he said at a news conference announcing the indictment—and in a court filing he doubled down, citing a legal finding that there is “no requirement” to “establish what particular crime was intended.” Good luck putting that one past a jury of New Yorkers.
Bragg has offered several theories of “another crime.”
“The primary crime we have alleged is New York state election law section 17-152,” a Bragg prosecutor told the court in the opening days of the trial. “The entire case is predicated on the idea that there was a conspiracy to influence the election in 2016.”
But Trump is not charged with an election law violation, and Bragg is on shaky legal ground with a 17-152 prosecution. A Washington Post search revealed only three prosecutions in forty-five years for violation of the statute. In one case, the defendant was acquitted; in the two others, charges were dropped.
Bragg also has suggested Trump violated federal campaign finance laws. In a court filing, Bragg alleged that Trump violated the federal Election Campaign Act by purchasing and suppressing “damaging information” from porn star Stormy Daniels. Other prosecutors have looked at this attempt to stretch a state charge to include a federal crime with skepticism. Both Bragg’s predecessor as Manhattan DA, Cy Vance, and the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York declined to charge Trump in the case.
Mark Pomerantz, a senior Vance prosecutor who resigned after differences with Bragg on Trump prosecutions, is dismissive of the state-federal gambit. In his book, “People vs. Donald Trump,” Pomerantz writes that the DA’s office spent a lot of time on the “gnarly legal question” of whether the “other crime” clause on the New York state books could be expanded to cover a federal crime. The issue has “never been litigated,” Pomerantz notes, and “no one could predict with certainty how an appellate court might eventually rule.”
Bragg’s third “another crime” gambit is perhaps the strangest: tax fraud. In a “Statement of Facts” accompanying the Trump indictment, Bragg suggests that Trump violated New York tax laws by conspiring with Michael Cohen to file a fraudulent tax return “that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme” to buy the silence of Stormy Daniels. Cohen, according to Bragg, paid Stormy Daniels $130,000. But Trump repaid Cohen $420,000. Why? According to the DA, so Cohen could then “characterize the payment as income on his tax returns, instead of a reimbursement,” leaving Cohen with a tidy $180,000 profit.
Jacob Sullum notes in Reason: if “Cohen mischaracterized a reimbursement as income on state or city tax forms, that would be a peculiar sort of fraud, since the effect would be to increase his tax liability. This theory of ‘another crime’ requires jurors to accept the proposition that tax fraud can entail paying the government more than was actually owed.”
Cohen admitted in court Monday to stealing money from the Trump Organization, an admission that damages the prosecution’s key witness.
Can Bragg overcome Cohen’s credibility problems and sway the jury? The cards are stacked in Bragg’s favor. The DA, his top prosecutor, and the judge all have close ties to a Democratic Party that apparently will stop at nothing to inflict damage on the Republican presidential frontrunner.
Judicial Watch has reported on Bragg’s strong ties to New York progressive politics. As New York state’s chief deputy attorney general, he helped lead a lawsuit against the Trump Foundation that resulted in its closure and a $2 million fine. In August 2022, he convicted Trump Organization chief financial officer Allan Weisselberg on charges of tax fraud and falsifying business records. In December 2022, he convicted the Trump Organization on charges related to off-the-books payments to Weisselberg and others. Bragg makes no secret of his anti-Trump bias. “I’ve sued Trump more than a hundred times,” he’s proudly noted.
In December 2022, Bragg recruited senior Justice Department official Matthew Colangelo—the lead prosecutor in the current trial—for the Trump prosecution team. In the Biden Administration, Colangelo served as acting associate attorney general and principal associate attorney general. Prior to going to Washington, Colangelo worked on the New York state attorney general’s investigation of the Trump Foundation. In 2018, Colangelo was paid $12,000 for “political consulting” by the Democratic National Committee. In the Obama White House years, he served as deputy director of the National Economic Council, chief of staff at the Labor Department, and deputy associate attorney general in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.
The presiding judge at the Trump trial, Juan Merchan, found himself in hot water earlier this year when news emerged that his daughter, Loren Merchan, was president of a left-wing digital advertising firm, Authentic Campaigns. The firm has close ties to high-profile Democrats, including Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Adam Schiff. Trump vigorously protested and Merchan responded with a gag order. His daughter aside, Merchan himself is worth a closer look. Like virtually all New York judges, he came up through the ranks of the Democratic Party’s political machine. Though considerably weakened by decades of fitful corruption reform, machine politics still plays a big role in the state’s judicial appointments. Merchan began his career as a prosecutor in the Manhattan DA’s office, moved on to the state attorney general’s office, and was appointed a family court judge by Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2006. In 2009, he was appointed to his current position at criminal court. In July, Merchan received a “caution” letter from the New York Commission of Judicial Conduct warning him about donations to Joe Biden and other Democratic causes.
Will any of this matter when the Trump case goes to the jury? Judges and prosecutors have many ways of putting a thumb on the scale of justice. But juries famously often surprise, and no-nonsense New Yorkers—even those from deep blue Manhattan—may look with considerable skepticism at a courtroom that appears to be piling on a famous defendant and a prosecutor who won’t even name the crime at the heart of the case.
Memorial Day – ‘I will not fail thee nor forsake thee’
Memorial Day helps us ponder the ultimate sacrifice of untold numbers of fellow American patriots who gave their lives to preserve and defend our God-given freedoms and our constitutional republic.
As we honor those heroes next week, I thought it would be appropriate to honor them while looking forward to the 80thAnniversary of D-Day. I reproduce below President Ronald Reagan’s famous 1984 speech (on the 40th Anniversary), honoring the “Boys of Pointe du Hoc”:
We’re here to mark that day in history when the Allied armies joined in battle to reclaim this continent to liberty. For 4 long years, much of Europe had been under a terrible shadow. Free nations had fallen, Jews cried out in the camps, millions cried out for liberation. Europe was enslaved, and the world prayed for its rescue. Here in Normandy the rescue began. Here the Allies stood and fought against tyranny in a giant undertaking unparalleled in human history.
We stand on a lonely, windswept point on the northern shore of France. The air is soft, but 40 years ago at this moment, the air was dense with smoke and the cries of men, and the air was filled with the crack of rifle fire and the roar of cannon. At dawn, on the morning of the 6th of June, 1944, 225 Rangers jumped off the British landing craft and ran to the bottom of these cliffs. Their mission was one of the most difficult and daring of the invasion: to climb these sheer and desolate cliffs and take out the enemy guns. The Allies had been told that some of the mightiest of these guns were here and they would be trained on the beaches to stop the Allied advance.
The Rangers looked up and saw the enemy soldiers—the edge of the cliffs shooting down at them with machine guns and throwing grenades. And the American Rangers began to climb. They shot rope ladders over the face of these cliffs and began to pull themselves up. When one Ranger fell, another would take his place. When one rope was cut, a Ranger would grab another and begin his climb again. They climbed, shot back, and held their footing. Soon, one by one, the Rangers pulled themselves over the top, and in seizing the firm land at the top of these cliffs, they began to seize back the continent of Europe. Two hundred and twenty-five came here. After 2 days of fighting, only 90 could still bear arms.
Behind me is a memorial that symbolizes the Ranger daggers that were thrust into the top of these cliffs. And before me are the men who put them there.
These are the boys of Pointe du Hoc. These are the men who took the cliffs. These are the champions who helped free a continent. These are the heroes who helped end a war.
Gentlemen, I look at you and I think of the words of Stephen Spender’s poem. You are men who in your “lives fought for life… and left the vivid air signed with your honor.”
I think I know what you may be thinking right now—thinking “we were just part of a bigger effort; everyone was brave that day.” Well, everyone was. Do you remember the story of Bill Millin of the 51st Highlanders? Forty years ago today, British troops were pinned down near a bridge, waiting desperately for help. Suddenly, they heard the sound of bagpipes, and some thought they were dreaming. Well, they weren’t. They looked up and saw Bill Millin with his bagpipes, leading the reinforcements and ignoring the smack of the bullets into the ground around him.
Lord Lovat was with him—Lord Lovat of Scotland, who calmly announced when he got to the bridge, “Sorry I’m a few minutes late,” as if he’d been delayed by a traffic jam, when in truth he’d just come from the bloody fighting on Sword Beach, which he and his men had just taken.
There was the impossible valor of the Poles who threw themselves between the enemy and the rest of Europe as the invasion took hold, and the unsurpassed courage of the Canadians who had already seen the horrors of war on this coast. They knew what awaited them there, but they would not be deterred. And once they hit Juno Beach, they never looked back.
All of these men were part of a rollcall of honor with names that spoke of a pride as bright as the colors they bore: the Royal Winnipeg Rifles, Poland’s 24th Lancers, the Royal Scots Fusiliers, the Screaming Eagles, the Yeomen of England’s armored divisions, the forces of Free France, the Coast Guard’s “Matchbox Fleet” and you, the American Rangers.
Forty summers have passed since the battle that you fought here. You were young the day you took these cliffs; some of you were hardly more than boys, with the deepest joys of life before you. Yet, you risked everything here. Why? Why did you do it? What impelled you to put aside the instinct for self-preservation and risk your lives to take these cliffs? What inspired all the men of the armies that met here? We look at you, and somehow we know the answer. It was faith and belief; it was loyalty and love.
The men of Normandy had faith that what they were doing was right, faith that they fought for all humanity, faith that a just God would grant them mercy on this beachhead or on the next. It was the deep knowledge—and pray God we have not lost it—that there is a profound, moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest. You were here to liberate, not to conquer, and so you and those others did not doubt your cause. And you were right not to doubt.
You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One’s country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it’s the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. All of you loved liberty. All of you were willing to fight tyranny, and you knew the people of your countries were behind you.
The Americans who fought here that morning knew word of the invasion was spreading through the darkness back home. They fought—or felt in their hearts, though they couldn’t know in fact, that in Georgia they were filling the churches at 4 a.m., in Kansas they were kneeling on their porches and praying, and in Philadelphia they were ringing the Liberty Bell.
Something else helped the men of D-Day: their rockhard belief that Providence would have a great hand in the events that would unfold here; that God was an ally in this great cause. And so, the night before the invasion, when Colonel Wolverton asked his parachute troops to kneel with him in prayer he told them: Do not bow your heads, but look up so you can see God and ask His blessing in what we’re about to do. Also that night, General Matthew Ridgway on his cot, listening in the darkness for the promise God made to Joshua: “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee.”
These are the things that impelled them; these are the things that shaped the unity of the Allies.
When the war was over, there were lives to be rebuilt and governments to be returned to the people. There were nations to be reborn. Above all, there was a new peace to be assured. These were huge and daunting tasks. But the Allies summoned strength from the faith, belief, loyalty, and love of those who fell here. They rebuilt a new Europe together.
There was first a great reconciliation among those who had been enemies, all of whom had suffered so greatly. The United States did its part, creating the Marshall plan to help rebuild our allies and our former enemies. The Marshall plan led to the Atlantic alliance—a great alliance that serves to this day as our shield for freedom, for prosperity, and for peace.
In spite of our great efforts and successes, not all that followed the end of the war was happy or planned. Some liberated countries were lost. The great sadness of this loss echoes down to our own time in the streets of Warsaw, Prague, and East Berlin. Soviet troops that came to the center of this continent did not leave when peace came. They’re still there, uninvited, unwanted, unyielding, almost 40 years after the war. Because of this, allied forces still stand on this continent. Today, as 40 years ago, our armies are here for only one purpose—to protect and defend democracy. The only territories we hold are memorials like this one and graveyards where our heroes rest.
We in America have learned bitter lessons from two World Wars: It is better to be here ready to protect the peace, than to take blind shelter across the sea, rushing to respond only after freedom is lost. We’ve learned that isolationism never was and never will be an acceptable response to tyrannical governments with an expansionist intent.
But we try always to be prepared for peace; prepared to deter aggression; prepared to negotiate the reduction of arms; and, yes, prepared to reach out again in the spirit of reconciliation. In truth, there is no reconciliation we would welcome more than a reconciliation with the Soviet Union, so, together, we can lessen the risks of war, now and forever.
It’s fitting to remember here the great losses also suffered by the Russian people during World War II: 20 million perished, a terrible price that testifies to all the world the necessity of ending war. I tell you from my heart that we in the United States do not want war. We want to wipe from the face of the Earth the terrible weapons that man now has in his hands. And I tell you, we are ready to seize that beachhead. We look for some sign from the Soviet Union that they are willing to move forward, that they share our desire and love for peace, and that they will give up the ways of conquest. There must be a changing there that will allow us to turn our hope into action.
We will pray forever that some day that changing will come. But for now, particularly today, it is good and fitting to renew our commitment to each other, to our freedom, and to the alliance that protects it.
We are bound today by what bound us 40 years ago, the same loyalties, traditions, and beliefs. We’re bound by reality. The strength of America’s allies is vital to the United States, and the American security guarantee is essential to the continued freedom of Europe’s democracies. We were with you then; we are with you now. Your hopes are our hopes, and your destiny is our destiny.
Here, in this place where the West held together, let us make a vow to our dead. Let us show them by our actions that we understand what they died for. Let our actions say to them the words for which Matthew Ridgway listened: “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee.”
Strengthened by their courage, heartened by their value [valor], and borne by their memory, let us continue to stand for the ideals for which they lived and died.
Thank you very much, and God bless you all.
I wish you a safe and blessed Memorial Day.
Until next week,
The post New Lawsuit Against “Reparations” appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Courthouse News:
Six people filed a federal class action against the Chicago suburb of Evanston on Wednesday, hoping to scrap the racial component of a local program meant to address historic racial injustice.The Restorative Housing Program is an Evanston initiative to compensate Black residents for housing discrimination they or their ancestors may have faced between 1919 and 1969. It assists eligible applicants with buying or improving their own homes, and in some cases qualifies households for direct payments of up to $25,000.The six plaintiffs in the lawsuit said they would qualify for the program’s $25,000 payment as well, were eligibility not limited to 20th century Black Evanston residents and their descendants. None of the plaintiffs are Black and none currently live in Evanston, but their parents did.“But for the program’s race-based eligibility requirement, plaintiffs would be in line to receive $25,000 direct cash payments as ‘direct descendants,'” the plaintiffs argued.The plaintiffs are being represented in the suit by Michael Bekesha, a senior attorney with the conservative legal nonprofit Judicial Watch. Bekesha claimed in a phone interview that the Restorative Housing Program violated equal protection law by excluding non-Black people.“The program is unconstitutional as it is written and as it’s being applied,” Bekesha said.Read more here…The post Chicago suburb faces federal class action over reparations program appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller:
A top advisor for former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci may have illegally taken actions to avoid records requests, experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation.David Morens, a former senior adviser to Fauci, both deleted emails to evade Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and told people multiple times to contact him at his personal email address to get around such requests, according to emails released by the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday. Morens, in his emails, also suggested that Fauci used his private email address to conduct government business.In an April 2021 email to Peter Daszak, the president of EcoHealth Alliance, Morens said that there is “no worry about FOIAs” as he can “either send stuff to Tony [Fauci] on his private email, or hand it to him at work or at his house.”“He is too smart to let his colleagues send him stuff that could cause trouble,” Morens continued.“These revelations are startling,” Judicial Watch senior attorney Michael Bekesha told the DCNF. “It appears as though Dr. Morens and maybe others at NIH sought to circumvent, if not violate, the law by using personal email accounts and deleting emails.”Bekesha said Morens’ conduct could run afoul of the Federal Records Act, the Freedom of Information Act and the Privacy Act.Read more here…The post ‘This Is Very Illegal’: Experts Say Fauci’s Top Aide Likely Broke The Law By Deleting Emails, Using Private Account appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Evanston, Illinois Directs $25,000 Payments Exclusively to Blacks
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a class action lawsuit against Evanston, Illinois on behalf of six individuals over the city’s use of race as an eligibility requirement for a reparations program which makes $25,000 payments to black residents and descendants of black residents who lived in Evanston between the years 1919 and 1969. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
The class action, civil rights lawsuit challenges “on Equal Protection grounds Defendant City of Evanston’s use of race as an eligibility requirement for a program that makes $25,000 payments to residents and direct descendants of residents of the city five-plus decades if not more than a century ago. Plaintiffs seek a judgment declaring Defendant’s use of race to be unconstitutional. Plaintiffs also seek an injunction enjoining Defendant from continuing to use race as a requirement for receiving payment under the program and request that the Court award them and all class members damages in the amount of $25,000 each.” Through a series of resolutions, the Evanston City Council created a program to provide $25,000 cash payments to residents who lived in Evanston between 1919 and 1969 and their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.
The program violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and fails to satisfy “strict scrutiny,” justifying government race discrimination:
Remedying societal discrimination is not a compelling governmental interest. Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co., 488 U.S. 469, 505 (1989); see also Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 307 ((1978) (opinion of Powell, J.) (describing “societal discrimination” as “an amorphous concept of injury that may be ageless in its reach into the past.”) Remedying discrimination from 55 to 105 years ago or remedying discrimination experienced at any time by an individual’s parents, grandparents, or great grandparents has not been recognized as a compelling governmental interest…
Defendant also has not and cannot demonstrate that its use of a race as an eligibility requirement is narrowly tailored. Among other shortcomings, Defendant’s use of race as a proxy for experiencing discrimination between 1919 and 1969 does not limit eligibility to persons who actually experienced discrimination during that relevant time period and therefore is overinclusive. Defendant also failed to consider race-neutral alternatives, such as requiring prospective recipients show that they or their parents, grandparents, or great grandparents actually experienced housing discrimination during the relevant time period because of an Evanston ordinance, policy, or procedure, as Defendant requires for the third group of prospective recipients. Nor did Defendant take into account race-neutral anti-discrimination remedies before adopting its race-based eligibility requirement.
The first group of persons eligible for the $25,000 payments are current Evanston residents who identify as Black or African American and were at least 18 years of age between 1919 and 1969. Evanston refers to this group as “ancestors.”
The second group are individuals who identify as Black or African American who are at least 18 years of age and have at least one parent, grandparent, or great grandparent who identifies (or identified) as Black or African American, lived in Evanston for any period between 1919 and 1969, and was at least 18 at the time. Evanston refers to this group as “direct descendants.” A “direct descendant” is not required to be a current resident of Evanston to receive the payment.
Judicial Watch states in the lawsuit: “At no point in the application process are persons in the first and second groups required to present evidence that they or their ancestors experienced housing discrimination or otherwise suffered harm because of an unlawful Evanston ordinance, policy, or procedure or some other unlawful act or series of acts by Evanston between 1919 and 1969. In effect, Evanston is using race as a proxy for having experienced discrimination during this time period.”
The city committed $20 million to the program.
Judicial Watch states in the lawsuit that the six plaintiffs satisfy all eligibility requirements for participating in the program as “direct descendants” other that the race requirement (the actual number of individuals who are potential class members is in the tens of thousands).
“The Evanston, Illinois’ ‘reparations’ program is nothing more than a ploy to redistribute tax dollars to individuals based on race,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This scheme unconstitutionally discriminates against anyone who does not identify as Black or African American. This class action, civil rights lawsuit will be a historic defense of our color-blind Constitution.”
Judicial Watch is being assisted in the lawsuit by Christine Svenson of Chalmers, Adams, Backer & Kaufman, LLC.
Judicial Watch lawsuits challenging unconstitutional discrimination are extensive.
On January 29, 2024, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit on behalf of San Francisco taxpayers over a city program that discriminates in favor of biological black and Latino men who identify as women in the distribution of tax money. The lawsuit was filed after Judicial Watch earlier forced the release of records from the City of San Francisco showing the city prioritized tax money for black and Latino transgenders (biological men) in the Guaranteed Income for Trans People program.
In December 2023, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s ruling and allowed Judicial Watch’s historic lawsuit filed on behalf of a Minneapolis taxpayer over a teachers’ contract that provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities to proceed.
The City of Asheville, NC, in January 2022 settled a Judicial Watch federal civil rights lawsuit after agreeing to remove all racially discriminatory provisions in a city-funded scholarship program. Additionally, the city also agreed to remove racially discriminatory eligibility provisions in a related program that provides grants to educators.
In May 2022, Judicial Watch won a court battle against California’s gender quota law for corporate boards. The verdict came after a 28-day trial. The verdict followed a similar ruling in Judicial Watch’s favor in April finding California’s diversity mandate for corporate boards unconstitutional.
The post Judicial Watch Files Class Action Lawsuit over Reparations appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In addition to record-breaking numbers of illegal immigrants hemorrhaging into the United States through Mexico, cartels in the Latin American border nation have caused the worst drug crisis in U.S. history, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). The federal agency, which operates under the Department of Justice (DOJ), is responsible for enforcing the nation’s controlled substances laws and regulations as well as investigating criminals and gangs that traffic illegal drugs into the country. In its annual National Drug Threat Assessment (NDTA), released this month, the DEA outlines and gauges illicit drug threats and trafficking trends endangering the United States. Mexican cartels are at the heart of the report, specifically the Sinaloa and Jalisco Nueva Generación cartels.
Sinaloa is one of the most powerful drug cartels in the world, according to the DOJ, and is largely responsible for the manufacturing and importing of fentanyl that gets distributed in the U.S. It operates as a sophisticated business of drug traffickers and money launderers that get precursor chemicals mostly from China to manufacture synthetic drugs in Mexico that eventually come into the U.S. Jalisco is one of Mexico’s “most murderous drug smuggling rings,” according to a U.S. congressman and former Navy SEAL who earlier this year introduced a bill to kill or capture the cartel’s leaders. Jalisco is notorious for trafficking cocaine and methamphetamine into the U.S. as well as for its gruesome murders. “These two cartels are global criminal enterprises that have developed global supply chain networks,” DEA Administrator Anne Milgram says in the latest NDTA, adding that they rely on chemical and pill press companies in China for material to manufacture drugs and operate clandestine labs in Mexico where they manufacture the drugs. Then they utilize their vast distribution networks to transport them into the United States, Milgram said.
Nearly all the methamphetamines sold in the United States today is manufactured in Mexico, according to the DEA, and it is purer and more potent than in years past. Fentanyl is the deadliest drug threat the U.S. has ever faced, killing nearly 38,000 Americans in the first six months of 2023 alone, the NDTA reveals. Fentanyl and other synthetic drugs, like methamphetamine, are responsible for nearly all the fatal drug overdoses and poisonings in our country. “The Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels command worldwide organized criminal networks that all play a role in producing and delivering fentanyl, methamphetamine, and other illicit drugs by the ton,” the DEA report states. “They operate extensive global supply chains, from precursor chemicals to production facilities, and direct a complex web of conspirators that includes international shippers, cross-border transporters, corrupt officials, tunnel builders, shell companies, money launderers, and others.” The two Mexican syndicates have total control over each segment of the criminal drug trade with no competition in the U.S. and an established presence in every American state. “Together, the Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels have caused the worst drug crisis in U.S. history,” the DEA writes in this year’s report.
Americans may logically wonder how tons of drugs flow so freely into the country through a land border that is supposed to be relentlessly protected, especially after 9/11 and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to prevent another terrorist attack. According to the DEA the Mexican cartels are actually in charge and they dictate the flow of nearly all illicit drugs into the U.S. “Their dominance over the synthetic drug trade is evident in the relentless stream of illicit fentanyl and methamphetamine crossing the border toward U.S. markets,” the DEA report says. The agency says no single cartel controls specific border crossings or ports of entry into the United States and some drug shipments cross the border between, not through, official ports of entry. “The size and firepower of the cartel that controls the border region of Mexico immediately south of the U.S. border, however, does dictate which other drug trafficking groups have to pay a piso to smuggle drugs through the region toward the border, and which are barred from transiting the region altogether,” the DEA writes, adding that Sinaloa exerts near-total control over the border region south of Arizona and most of California.
The post Mexican Cartels Dictate Flow of Nearly all Illicit Drugs into the U.S., DEA Confirms appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times:
Under Mr. Biden, human beings are broken daily on the hard, sharp edge of the U.S.-Mexico border. Borders are often dangerous places, and this is Mr. Biden’s border. He told Americans his administration would be humane, fair and orderly. It is none of those things.
Mr. Biden’s decisions and orders could easily result in his indictment on charges of “crimes against humanity.” What would be the likely counts in Mr. Biden’s indictment? Mr. Biden’s border is a place of murder, enslavement, torture, rape, and other inhumane acts. HIs administration has “lost” 85,000 children — a number that will grow. Hundreds of thousands of children have been forced into labor, as documented by no less than The New York Times.
Mr. Biden has directed and overseen the deliberate, systematic deconstruction of U.S. border security and immigration laws and policies. Mr. Biden’s border will be remembered as the symbol representing his administration’s willful neglect of basic human values, sliding into the abyss of mass exploitation and degradation.
Read more here…
The post Holding Biden accountable for his border crimes appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a brief in the Minnesota Supreme Court asking it to affirm a state Appeals Court decision allowing its taxpayer lawsuit over a racially discriminatory Minneapolis teachers’ contract to proceed to trial (Deborah Jane Clapp v. Rochelle Cox et al.(No. A23-0360).
On December 4, 2023, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s historic lawsuit filed on behalf of a Minneapolis taxpayer over the teachers’ contract, and allowed the case to proceed to trial. The contract provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities (Clapp v. Cox et al.(No. 27-CV-22-12454)).
Judicial Watch originally filed the lawsuit in August 2022 against the superintendent of the Minneapolis Public Schools, the Minneapolis Public Schools, and the Minneapolis Board of Education (together referenced as “MPS”) for violating the Equal Protection Guarantee of the Minnesota Constitution. MPS, supported by the teachers and other public employee unions, assert that Minnesota taxpayers don’t have to right to challenge the illegal spending of taxpayer money by government officials.
In its brief to the Supreme Court, Judicial Watch states:
Minneapolis Public Schools and its Amici spill a lot of ink complaining that a “complete stranger” has sued to prevent MPS from carrying out an unconstitutional provision of a contract between it and its teachers. Plaintiff-Respondent Deborah Clapp, however, is not a stranger. She is a Minneapolis taxpayer, and this Court, since at least 1877, has recognized taxpayers as proper parties to bring such actions in Minnesota courts. This Court should not accept MPS’s and its Amici’s invitation to undermine this important check on government power.
Clapp could not have brought a more straightforward case. She alleges that she lives in Minneapolis and pays property tax on the home she has owned since 2017…She also alleges that Minneapolis Public Schools is funded in part by her tax dollars…In addition, she alleges that MPS spends those tax dollars to carry out the various provisions of its contract with the teachers’ union….Finally, she alleges that one of those provisions violates the Minnesota Constitution….Therefore, she alleges that her tax dollars are being used in an unlawful manner.
The December 2023 Appellate Court ruling came after the Hennepin County District Court dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that Judicial Watch’s taxpayer client lacked standing and that her claims were not ripe. Judicial Watch appealed, and the Minnesota Court of Appeals overturned the lower court’s dismissal of the case.
The controversial contract was agreed to in March 2022 to end a 14-day teacher strike. The Minneapolis Federation of Teachers ratified the contract shortly after the agreement was reached. The Minneapolis Board of Education ratified it in May 2022. The contract was recently renewed with the racial discrimination provisions intact.
Judicial Watch’s initial complaint asked the District Court to enter a judgement declaring all actions taken to implement the racial and ethnic preference provisions of Article 15 of the contract to be illegal. The lawsuit also asks that the court declare illegal the use of any taxpayer dollars to implement these provisions of the contract and that MPS be prohibited from taking any actions to implement these racial and ethnic provisions. The Judicial Watch complaint states:
Among other things, the contract provides preferences, protections, and privileges for MPS teachers of certain races and ethnicities under a section entitled “ARTICLE 15. PROTECTIONS FOR EDUCATORS OF COLOR.” There is no similar provision covering educators who are not “of color.”
Under the contract, teachers of color are exempt from Defendant MPS’s seniority-based layoffs and reassignments, which means, when layoffs or reassignments occur, the next senior teacher who is not “of color” would be laid off or reassigned. In addition, the contract mandates that Defendants reinstate teachers of color over more senior teachers who are not “of color.”
Under the appeals court ruling, the lawsuit was to go back to Hennepin County District Court for further proceedings, but MPS appealed the case to the Minnesota Supreme Court before those proceedings could commence.
“There is a leftist cadre of government and public employee union officials in Minneapolis who want to engage in lawless woke, anti-white discrimination – and they want deprive taxpayers of their rights to stop the abuse” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The lawsuit aims to shut down an extreme leftist attack on the bedrock constitutional principle that no one can be denied equal treatment under the law on account of race.”
Judicial Watch is being assisted in the lawsuit by Daniel N. Rosen.
Judicial Watch lawsuits and FOIA requests on Critical Race Theory and other leftist extremism are extensive.
In April 2024, Judicial Watch presented oral argument to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in the case filed on behalf of Kari MacRae, a Massachusetts high school teacher who was fired in retaliation for posts on social media that predated her employment at Hanover High School.
On February 5, 2024, Judicial Watch filed a public records lawsuit in the Superior Court for Suffolk County, Massachusetts, against the City of Boston after the city failed to produce records related to the “Electeds of Color Holiday Party” hosted by Boston Mayor Michelle Wu in December 2023.
On January 29, 2024, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit on behalf of San Francisco taxpayers over a city program that discriminates in favor of biological black and Latino men who identify as women in the distribution of tax money. The lawsuit was filed after Judicial Watch earlier forced the release of records from the City of San Francisco showing the city prioritized tax money for black and Latino transgenders (biological men) in the (GIFT) program.
In July 2023, Judicial Watch exposed records from the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA), a component of the United States Department of Defense, which included instructional materials and emails that address topics such as Critical Race Theory, “white privilege,” and Black Lives Matter.
In March 2023, records from the U.S. Department of Defense showed the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA) has made race and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.
Judicial Watch filed a California Public Records Act lawsuit against the Oakland Unified School District for records on a racially segregated “playdate” held on August 26, 2023, by one of the district’s elementary schools.
The City of Asheville, NC, in January 2022 settled a Judicial Watch federal civil rights lawsuit after agreeing to remove all racially discriminatory provisions in a city-funded scholarship program. Additionally, the city also agreed to remove racially discriminatory eligibility provisions in a related program that provides grants to educators.
In May 2022, Judicial Watch won a court battle against California’s gender quota law for corporate boards. The verdict came after a 28-day trial. The verdict followed a similar ruling in Judicial Watch’s favor in April finding California’s diversity mandate for corporate boards unconstitutional.
The post Judicial Watch Asks Minnesota Supreme Court to Allow Taxpayer Lawsuit over Racially Discriminatory Minneapolis Teachers’ Contract to Proceed to Trial appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Minnesota may soon pass a discriminatory law called “Increase Teachers of Color Act” that will dedicate millions of dollars to programs that only racial minorities can benefit from. The goal, according to legislators in the nation’s 12th-largest state, is to improve diversity in schools by increasing the number of teachers of color throughout Minnesota with taxpayer-funded scholarships and opportunities. Under the measure, $10 million will be dedicated to the minority initiative, which will establish a scholarship program to support undergraduate and graduate students preparing to become teachers if they belong to “racial or ethnic groups underrepresented in the state’s teacher workforce,” according to language in the proposed bill. Applicants must “affirm to the teacher preparation program or the Office of Higher Education that the applicant is a person of color or American Indian.”
The state lawmaker who sponsored the law, Mary Frances Clardy, says it will provide $5 million to mentor and retain teachers of color and around 500 scholarships annually of up to $10,000, which she calls an “investment in aspiring BIPOC teachers.” The acronym stands for black, indigenous, and other people of color and has been adopted by leftist officials nationwide as well as the federal government under the Biden administration. “The two main purposes for this bill is closing the opportunity gaps, as far as recruiting and preparing teachers, and employing them and retaining them in the system,” said Clardy, a Democrat who represents the southern Twin Cities Metro area in the Minnesota House of Representatives. An English teacher, Laketa Buice, who spoke in support of Clardy’s law before a Minnesota House Education Finance Committee testified that many of her students at the St. Paul City School that employs her have told her she is their first black teacher. “That made my heart warm, but also a bit saddened because children deserve the right to see a representation of themselves in the teachers that educate them,” Buice said.
At the hearing research was presented from the Minnesota Association of Colleges for Teacher Education to demonstrate how important it is for students be taught by teachers with the same racial background. In Minnesota, about 6% of the teacher workforce identifies as a person of color or indigenous, while about 37% of students identify as students of color or indigenous. “The need for this support arises out of the urgent need to create a teacher workforce that reflects the students in our schools,” according to the coalition, which added that research also backs providing financial support to people of color in teacher preparation programs as a strategy to increase representation in the education workforce. “This bill represents necessary legislation to strengthen existing programs and to create new efforts needed to attract, prepare, license and retain an increased number of teachers of color and American Indian teachers in Minnesota,” the association proclaimed at the hearing.
A University of Minnesota education professor advocating for the new law to increase teachers of color in the state claims in a local news report that minorities leave the field prematurely compared to their white counterparts due to “lack of diversity and racial battle fatigue.” The professor, Jehanne Beaton-Zirps, runs a program called DirecTrack to Teaching that exposes undergraduates at the public university to the culture of teaching and schools with the goal of preparing them for teaching license programs. According to Beaton-Zirps many “really, really talented teachers of color” have been through her program at the University of Minnesota but leave after teaching for two years. Her previously mentioned “racial battle fatigue” is presumably what pushed the talented teachers of color out of the profession prematurely, though no further details were offered to support the theory.
Some states have implemented measures or created policies to diversify the teacher workforce as the student population shifts, though they have not necessarily allocated millions of dollars for exclusionary minority-only scholarships like Minnesota. Connecticut passed a law last year that requires all boards of education throughout the state to implement plans for recruiting, hiring and retaining teachers of color. A few years ago, Colorado launched a teacher recruitment program for low-income and traditionally underserved high school students. Other states have a pipeline with Minority-serving institutions (MSIs), which produce a significant share of the nation’s teachers of color.
The post Minnesota’s “Increase Teachers of Color Act” will Devote Millions to Help Only Racial Minorities appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Trump prosecution rested its case Monday with a central question unanswered: where’s the crime?
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has been dancing around the question for months. The prosecution produced a cacophony of tawdry testimony from a porn star (Stormy Daniels) and a former Trump aide turned convicted felon turned cooperating witness (Michael Cohen) but their claims had little to do with the allegations at the center of the case. Trump is charged with thirty-four felony counts of falsifying business records, generally a low-level misdemeanor. But New York state law elevates the misdemeanor charge to a felony if the defendant’s “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime,” and that’s where Bragg has placed his big bet.
That other crime? Bragg insists he doesn’t have to name it. The “law does not so require,” he said at a news conference announcing the indictment—and in a court filing he doubled down, citing a legal finding that there is “no requirement” to “establish what particular crime was intended.” Good luck putting that one past a jury of New Yorkers.
Bragg has offered several theories of “another crime.”
“The primary crime we have alleged is New York state election law section 17-152,” a Bragg prosecutor told the court in the opening days of the trial. “The entire case is predicated on the idea that there was a conspiracy to influence the election in 2016.”
But Trump is not charged with an election law violation, and Bragg is on shaky legal ground with a 17-152 prosecution. A Washington Post search revealed only three prosecutions in forty-five years for violation of the statute. In one case, the defendant was acquitted; in the two others, charges were dropped.
Bragg also has suggested Trump violated federal campaign finance laws. In a court filing, Bragg alleged that Trump violated the federal Election Campaign Act by purchasing and suppressing “damaging information” from porn star Stormy Daniels. Other prosecutors have looked at this attempt to stretch a state charge to include a federal crime with skepticism. Both Bragg’s predecessor as Manhattan DA, Cy Vance, and the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York declined to charge Trump in the case.
Mark Pomerantz, a senior Vance prosecutor who resigned after differences with Bragg on Trump prosecutions, is dismissive of the state-federal gambit. In his book, “People vs. Donald Trump,” Pomerantz writes that the DA’s office spent a lot of time on the “gnarly legal question” of whether the “other crime” clause on the New York state books could be expanded to cover a federal crime. The issue has “never been litigated,” Pomerantz notes, and “no one could predict with certainty how an appellate court might eventually rule.”
Bragg’s third “another crime” gambit is perhaps the strangest: tax fraud. In a “Statement of Facts” accompanying the Trump indictment, Bragg suggests that Trump violated New York tax laws by conspiring with Michael Cohen to file a fraudulent tax return “that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme” to buy the silence of Stormy Daniels. Cohen, according to Bragg, paid Stormy Daniels $130,000. But Trump repaid Cohen $420,000. Why? According to the DA, so Cohen could then “characterize the payment as income on his tax returns, instead of a reimbursement,” leaving Cohen with a tidy $180,000 profit.
Jacob Sullum notes in Reason: if “Cohen mischaracterized a reimbursement as income on state or city tax forms, that would be a peculiar sort of fraud, since the effect would be to increase his tax liability. This theory of ‘another crime’ requires jurors to accept the proposition that tax fraud can entail paying the government more than was actually owed.”
Cohen admitted in court Monday to stealing money from the Trump Organization, an admission that damages the prosecution’s key witness.
Can Bragg overcome Cohen’s credibility problems and sway the jury? The cards are stacked in Bragg’s favor. The DA, his top prosecutor, and the judge all have close ties to a Democratic Party that apparently will stop at nothing to inflict damage on the Republican presidential frontrunner.
Judicial Watch has reported on Bragg’s strong ties to New York progressive politics. As New York state’s chief deputy attorney general, he helped lead a lawsuit against the Trump Foundation that resulted in its closure and a $2 million fine. In August 2022, he convicted Trump Organization chief financial officer Allan Weisselberg on charges of tax fraud and falsifying business records. In December 2022, he convicted the Trump Organization on charges related to off-the-books payments to Weisselberg and others. Bragg makes no secret of his anti-Trump bias. “I’ve sued Trump more than a hundred times,” he’s proudly noted.
In December 2022, Bragg recruited senior Justice Department official Matthew Colangelo—the lead prosecutor in the current trial—for the Trump prosecution team. In the Biden Administration, Colangelo served as acting associate attorney general and principal associate attorney general. Prior to going to Washington, Colangelo worked on the New York state attorney general’s investigation of the Trump Foundation. In 2018, Colangelo was paid $12,000 for “political consulting” by the Democratic National Committee. In the Obama White House years, he served as deputy director of the National Economic Council, chief of staff at the Labor Department, and deputy associate attorney general in the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division.
The presiding judge at the Trump trial, Juan Merchan, found himself in hot water earlier this year when news emerged that his daughter, Loren Merchan, was president of a left-wing digital advertising firm, Authentic Campaigns. The firm has close ties to high-profile Democrats, including Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and Adam Schiff. Trump vigorously protested and Merchan responded with a gag order. His daughter aside, Merchan himself is worth a closer look. Like virtually all New York judges, he came up through the ranks of the Democratic Party’s political machine. Though considerably weakened by decades of fitful corruption reform, machine politics still plays a big role in the state’s judicial appointments. Merchan began his career as a prosecutor in the Manhattan DA’s office, moved on to the state attorney general’s office, and was appointed a family court judge by Mayor Michael Bloomberg in 2006. In 2009, he was appointed to his current position at criminal court. In July, Merchan received a “caution” letter from the New York Commission of Judicial Conduct warning him about donations to Joe Biden and other Democratic causes.
Will any of this matter when the Trump case goes to the jury? Judges and prosecutors have many ways of putting a thumb on the scale of justice. But juries famously often surprise, and no-nonsense New Yorkers—even those from deep blue Manhattan—may look with considerable skepticism at a courtroom that appears to be piling on a famous defendant and a prosecutor who won’t even name the crime at the heart of the case.
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post Trump Trial: The Prosecution Rests, Lawfare at Court, Where’s the Crime? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Breitbart:
Judicial Watch, the watchdog organization, is suing California election officials to force them to remove ineligible and inactive registrants from the state’s voter rolls.
The lawsuit, filed this month, urges the court to force California Secretary of State Shirley Weber (D) to abide by the voter list maintenance requirements included in the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).
According to the lawsuit, officials in 21 California counties removed five or fewer registrants from their voter rolls in its latest statewide clean-up ranging from November 2020 to November 2022. Of those 21 counties, 16 counties removed zero registrants.
Altogether, the 21 counties removed just 11 registrants from their voter rolls despite having nearly six million registrants total.
For comparison, officials in San Diego County, California, from November 2020 to November 2022, removed more than 130,000 registrants out of the 2.3 million registrants on their voter rolls.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch Sues California to Remove Ineligible Registrants from Voter Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From PJ Media:
The judge now infamous for his role in the politically charged New York case against Donald Trump reportedly received an official “caution” for his ethics violation.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton cited the as-yet-unreleased caution letter to Judge Juan Merchan as proof of the latter’s ethical failure. While a sitting judge, Merchan reportedly donated to Democrats, including Donald Trump’s current Democrat presidential opponent Joe Biden. The latest news is that Merchan was officially cautioned over this ethics failure.
Fitton had originally posted back on May 6, 2023, “Judges are prohibited under ethics rules from donating to political campaigns and organizations. Accordingly, there are legitimate concerns about Judge Merchan’s reported political contributions while a sitting judge to Biden and Democratic causes.” Merchan is a dedicated Democrat, it would seem, indicating political bias in the trial of GOP frontrunner Trump.
On May 18, citing Reuters, Fitton further posted on Twitter/X, “UPDATE Judicial Conduct Commission Vindicates Trump: The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct dismissed an ethics complaint with a ‘caution’ to Judge Merchan over his donations to the Biden campaign and other Democratic causes.”
Read more here…
The post Tom Fitton: ‘Caution’ Letter Proves Judge Merchan’s Ethics Violation appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From the Washington Examiner
President Joe Biden‘s assertion of executive privilege over special counsel Robert Hur’s audio recording of their classified documents interview sparked criticism from Republicans and legal experts after the president previously waived his privilege of the interview transcript.
A few hours before the House Judiciary Committee‘s hearing to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt over the audio, Biden’s counsel and the Department of Justice revealed the president had decided at the eleventh hour to claim executive privilege over the recordings, meaning Biden had asserted his right under the separation of powers to withhold the audio from Congress.
House GOP members spent much of the Judiciary hearing, and later an Oversight Committee hearing, questioning the validity of Biden’s assertion, arguing it was for political reasons and a way to avoid shedding light on the president’s “declining” mental state.
“That tape must be quite something if the administration of the president has decided to assert executive privilege to keep it from the committee in the course of an impeachment inquiry,” Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC) said during the Judiciary hearing, referencing the broader inquiry the GOP is conducting into the Biden family’s business dealings.
Tom Fitton, the president of the conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, said Biden’s move “appears to be a novel use of executive privilege” and that he plans to file a legal challenge to it.
Read more here…
The post Biden’s executive privilege over Hur audio, but not transcript, draws scrutiny appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Service (HHS) for official emails in the personal email account of senior advisor to Anthony Fauci, David Morens (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:24-cv-01203)). Fauci served as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, from 1984 to 2022.
Judicial Watch sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a component of HHS, failed to respond to an October 25, 2023, FOIA request for: “All work-related emails sent to and from NIAID Senior Advisor David Morens on non-government email accounts.”
The House Select Committee on the Coronavirus Pandemic on April 16, 2024, issued a subpoena to Morens, stating:
On June 29, 2023, the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic … requested information pertaining to your use of personal e-mail. In response to that request, you voluntarily participated in a transcribed interview on January 18, 2024, and produced a portion of the requested documents on November 20, 2023.
[T]he Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability has authorized the attached subpoena, compelling your production of certain documents and information by April 30, 2024.
Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH), chairman of the subcommittee, issued a press release regarding the subpoena, stating:
Recent whistleblower allegations revealed new, additional evidence that Dr. Morens intentionally used his personal email to hide conversations about the origins of COVID-19 and subvert federal transparency laws. Last week, Dr. Morens’s self-proclaimed “best friend” — EcoHealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak — released four document tranches that confirmed the whistleblower’s allegations. Notably, Dr. Daszak is at the center of controversy related to his use of U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
On April 19, 2024, the committee released an email between Morens and EcoHealth President Peter Daszak, containing “confidential” information that Fauci had been briefed about biosafety labs.
“This lawsuit for the hidden emails of a top Fauci adviser echoes the Hillary Clinton email scandal,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuits and investigations have uncovered much of what the public knows about many Covid-19 controversies:
- On April 19, 2024, Judicial Watch reported that it received records from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in a FOIA request that showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Fauci’s NIAID grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
- Emails between U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and top Facebook executives in 2021 regarding the censorship of user posts about Covid controversies showed Facebook leadership seeking to “better understand the scope of what the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”
- Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it.
- Records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) included the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
- HHS records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
- Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the Covid shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
- Judicial Watch obtained HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA Covid-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Heavily redacted records from the FDA regarding the Covid-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on Covid booster use and approval.
- HHS records detailed internal discussions about myocarditis and the Covid vaccine. Other documents detailed adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
- Judicial Watch uncovered HHS records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration propaganda campaign to push the Covid-19 vaccine.
- HHS records revealed previously redacted locations of Covid-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
- NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also showed National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), James W. Le Duc, warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the Covid-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records obtained from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and Covid-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was canceled because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- Judicial Watch’s four-part documentary regarding the coordinated effort by the government and Big Tech to censor and suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop, Covid-19, and election debates is available here.
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Official Emails of Key Fauci Advisor on Non-Government Email Account appeared first on Judicial Watch.
New Documents Reveal DC Training for Noncitizen Voting
HHS Rules Certain Illegal Immigrants Eligible for Obamacare
New Documents Reveal DC Training for Noncitizen Voting
If you think concerns about illegal aliens becoming voters are overblown, look no further than your nation’s capital.
We received 13-pages of records from the District of Columbia explaining to illegal aliens and other noncitizens how they can register to vote in local elections.
The records came in response to an April 12, 2024, FOIA request for:
- Materials presented and/or provided at the training;
- Communications advertising/promoting the training; and
- Materials provided to participants/attendees after the training.
On April 10, 2024, DC held a training event titled ”Non-Citizen Voting Education Virtual Training” in which DC announced noncitizen voting would begin in 2024.
A PowerPoint presentation explains:
Non-US citizen residents of the District of Columbia can vote in local elections under the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022. Non-US citizen residents can vote in District elections for the offices of Mayor, Attorney General, Chairman or member(s) of the DC Council, member(s) of the State [sic] Board of Education, or Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner(s) Non-US citizen residents cannot vote for Federal Offices
To register to vote in the District of Columbia as a non-citizen, you must: Be at least 17 years old and 18 years old by the next General Election; Maintain residency in the District of Columbia for at least 30 days prior to the election in which you intend to vote; Not claim voting residence or the right to vote in any state, territory, or country; Not been found by a court to be legally incompetent to vote.
You must provide proof of your address in the District of Columbia at an Early Vote Center prior to Election Day or at the polling place assigned to your address on Election Day.
In 2023 the DC Council amended the District of Columbia Election Code of 1955 to expand the definition of the term qualified elector to include otherwise eligible noncitizen residents, including illegal aliens.
According to federal law, only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections, but a growing number of state and local elections allow noncitizens to vote, among them San Francisco and Oakland, California, along with some cities in Maryland and Vermont. In February, a state appeals court ruled a similar New York City law violates the state constitution.
DC’s law went a step further than those jurisdictions, though, by extending the franchise to undocumented immigrants.
The District’s action was opposed by congressional Republicans. but they failed to overturn the measure.
Illegal aliens and noncitizens should not vote in any elections. That Congress allows the votes of citizens to be legally stolen by illegal aliens in our nation’s capital is inexcusable.
HHS Rules Certain Illegal Immigrants Eligible for Obamacare
Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports on the Biden administration latest back-door amnesty for yet another category of illegal aliens:
Illegal immigrants protected by a controversial Obama amnesty program for adults who came to the U.S. as children are eligible to receive government-subsidized health insurance under a new Biden administration rule that will cost American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars annually. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently amended its regulations to extend the publicly funded perk to migrants who have benefited from Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), a measure enacted by the former president by executive order after Congress repeatedly rejected legislation offering illegal aliens similar protections. The failed bill was called Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM Act) and those shielded by Obama’s order are often referred to as Dreamers.
So-called Dreamers specifically do not qualify for government-subsidized insurance under Obama’s disastrous healthcare overhaul, officially called the Affordable Care Act (ACA) but better known as Obamacare. The 2010 measure requires individuals to be citizens or lawfully present in the United States to enroll in a qualified health plan through the Obamacare exchange. ACA also requires enrollees to be lawfully present in the U.S. to be eligible for insurance affordability programs such as cost sharing reductions and advance payments of the premium tax credit. A few years after Obamacare passed, HHS issued regulations that explicitly exclude recipients of the former president’s DACA from being categorized as lawfully present in the country for the purpose of subsidized health insurance under ACA. The agency explained that allowing Dreamers to participate in the government’s insurance affordability programs was not consistent with the relief that the special amnesty initiative afforded, a reference to temporary protection from deportation.
Now HHS has done an about face, issuing a rule that makes DACA recipients eligible to enroll in a qualified health plan through an Obamacare exchange or a state basic health program. “Specifically, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients and certain other noncitizens will be included in the definitions of “lawfully present” that are used to determine eligibility to enroll in a QHP through an Exchange, for Advance Payments of the Premium Tax Credit (APTC) and Cost-Sharing Reductions (CSRs), or for a BHP,” the new rule states. It will take effect on November 1 and HHS estimates that it will cost American taxpayers about $305 million annually. The agency explains in the new 145-page rule that after “further review and consideration, it is clear that the DACA policy is intended to provide recipients with a degree of stability and assurance that would allow them to obtain education and lawful employment, including because recipients remain lower priorities for removal.” Therefore, the document says, “extending eligibility to these individuals is consistent with those goals.”
More than half a million illegal immigrants are currently protected under DACA, according to government figures, and over 800,000 under the age of 31 have been shielded from deportation and allowed to obtain work permits and drivers licenses since the measure was enacted. A big chunk of DACA applicants have arrest records, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Homeland Security agency that administers the nation’s lawful immigration system. Nearly 110,000 illegal aliens who requested the special Obama-era amnesty for adults who came to the U.S. as children have criminal histories for offenses that include assault, battery, rape, murder and driving under the influence. Tens of thousands of DACA recipients have multiple arrests and hundreds have more than 10 arrests, according to USCIS.
A few years ago, migrants protected under DACA were among rioters and looters arrested and criminally charged with crimes during a Black Lives Matter “Justice for George Floyd” protest in downtown Phoenix, Arizona. Among them was 30-year-old Mexican national Maxima Guerrero, a community organizer with a Phoenix-based grassroots migrant justice organization called Puente Movement. During the riots, Guerrero and her fellow DACA friends occupied a vehicle “loaded with incendiary devices,” according to a high-level Phoenix Police source. Now, thanks to the Biden administration, lawbreakers like Guerrero and her friends can get their health insurance subsidized by Uncle Sam.
Until next week,
The post Illegal Aliens Vote – in DC! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration’s wasteful endeavor to combat misinformation is expanding internationally with half a million American taxpayer dollars going to Africa to help journalists thousands of miles across the Atlantic counter disinformation and youth spot truth in fake news. It is part of an expansive effort to divert substantial amounts of public funds for a fictitious crisis created by the president and his advisors to control information. The movement started domestically with a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) panel known as the Disinformation Governance Board, which was technically dismantled after major backlash. Taxpayer dollars keep flowing to related causes nationwide, however. Millions in DHS terrorism prevention grants have gone to combat “misinformation and disinformation” and to create media disinformation networks worldwide. Large sums have also gone to related projects such as fighting science misinformation and misperceptions in black communities and, of course, COVID-19 misinformation, especially involving minorities and vaccines.
More recently, the initiative has spread globally with government dollars going to causes that should ignite fury in those who pay taxes. For example, earlier this year the Biden administration dedicated $50,000 to counter disinformation in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan by training journalists with handpicked “U.S. subject matter experts” with a mandate of Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA). The special training will occur over six months and consist of three-day quarterly workshops conducted by the so-called U.S. subject matter experts selected by the administration. The goal is to empower journalists in Pakistan with the skills and knowledge to effectively counter misinformation and disinformation, ensuring accurate and responsible reporting, according to the administration. Grant recipients had to submit proposals that show their program will advance the principles of DEIA related to race, ethnicity, gender identity, religion and sexual orientation as well as underserved communities.
In the latest foreign allocation to counter misinformation, Uncle Sam is doling out $500,000 to steer Africa in the right direction, specifically reporters and kids. The administration will spend $250,000 to organize a training on understanding and countering disinformation for African Journalists that aims to empower reporters with the skills and knowledge to effectively counter misinformation and disinformation, according to the administration. The goal is to ensure accurate and responsible reporting and it will be accomplished with a series of workshops that will train African journalists to understand and identify misinformation/disinformation and its impact, recognize red flags and manipulative tactics and help them master ethical reporting. Training will be conducted virtually in French and English over six months and will consist of online presentations and dialogues between American experts and the African audience. “The extensive spread of false information poses a significant obstacle to the stability and prosperity of African nations,” the government’s grant announcement states, adding that “a clear correlation exists between the extent of disinformation and societal unrest.”
Another $250,000 will go to help empower youth, young adults, educators, community leaders and organizers with the skills and knowledge to effectively counter misinformation and disinformation. The U.S. will fund a series of workshops, also virtually in French and English over six months, to help young Africans understand media literacy and identify bias. The Biden administration’s handpicked American experts will teach them to evaluate sources, recognize types of media and guide them in identifying propaganda and fake news. The workshops will emphasize the impact of disinformation such as the effects it has on public opinion, democracy and social cohesion. “In Africa, the rise of disinformation, accelerated by digital technology, demands urgent media literacy initiatives among youth,” the U.S. grant announcement says, repeating that the escalation in false information correlates directly with societal unrest and democratic erosion. “With over 60% of Africa’s population under 25, empowering youth with media literacy skills is critical,” the document states.
In an apparent effort to support funding the cause, earlier this year the Biden administration warned about Russian efforts to spread deadly disinformation in Africa, especially involving U.S. and western health initiatives in the world’s second-largest continent. According to the warning the Kremlin’s disinformation campaign in Africa has recruited local journalists, bloggers and members of the public to bolster Russia’s image and denigrate other countries. “Foreign information manipulation” is a critical threat around the world and a dangerous destabilizing tactic, the State Department warns.
The post Biden Administration Devotes Half a Million Dollars to Combat Misinformation in Africa appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Washington, D.C., hosted an online training camp last month to help illegal immigrants sign up to vote in city elections.
Making good on new legislation granting illegal immigrants voting rights, even for those who have lived in the district for just 30 days, the city joined a handful of others in opening the vote to undocumented migrants.
The training PowerPoint, provided to legal watchdog Judicial Watch under a Freedom of Information Act request, said that some form of government identification was required to register.
Read more here…
The post DC hosted voting registration training for illegal immigrants appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Illegal immigrants protected by a controversial Obama amnesty program for adults who came to the U.S. as children are eligible to receive government-subsidized health insurance under a new Biden administration rule that will cost American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars annually. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently amended its regulations to extend the publicly funded perk to migrants who have benefited from Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), a measure enacted by the former president by executive order after Congress repeatedly rejected legislation offering illegal aliens similar protections. The failed bill was called Development Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM Act) and those shielded by Obama’s order are often referred to as Dreamers.
So-called Dreamers specifically do not qualify for government-subsidized insurance under Obama’s disastrous healthcare overhaul, officially called the Affordable Care Act (ACA) but better known as Obamacare. The 2010 measure requires individuals to be citizens or lawfully present in the United States to enroll in a qualified health plan through the Obamacare exchange. ACA also requires enrollees to be to be lawfully present in the U.S. to be eligible for insurance affordability programs such as cost sharing reductions and advance payments of the premium tax credit. A few years after Obamacare passed, HHS issued regulations that explicitly exclude recipients of the former president’s DACA from being categorized as lawfully present in the country for the purpose of subsidized health insurance under ACA. The agency explained that allowing Dreamers to participate in the government’s insurance affordability programs was not consistent with the relief that the special amnesty initiative afforded, a reference to temporary protection from deportation.
Now HHS has done an about face, issuing a rule that makes DACA recipients eligible to enroll in a qualified health plan through an Obamacare exchange or a state basic health program. “Specifically, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients and certain other noncitizens will be included in the definitions of “lawfully present” that are used to determine eligibility to enroll in a QHP through an Exchange, for Advance Payments of the Premium Tax Credit (APTC) and Cost-Sharing Reductions (CSRs), or for a BHP,” the new rule states. It will take effect on November 1 and HHS estimates that it will cost American taxpayers about $305 million annually. The agency explains in the new 145-page rule that after “further review and consideration, it is clear that the DACA policy is intended to provide recipients with a degree of stability and assurance that would allow them to obtain education and lawful employment, including because recipients remain lower priorities for removal.” Therefore, the document says, “extending eligibility to these individuals is consistent with those goals.”
More than half a million illegal immigrants are currently protected under DACA, according to government figures, and over 800,000 under the age of 31 have been shielded from deportation and allowed to obtain work permits and drivers licenses since the measure was enacted. A big chunk of DACA applicants have arrest records, according to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the Homeland Security agency that administers the nation’s lawful immigration system. Nearly 110,000 illegal aliens who requested the special Obama-era amnesty for adults who came to the U.S. as children have criminal histories for offenses that include assault, battery, rape, murder and driving under the influence. Tens of thousands of DACA recipients have multiple arrests and hundreds have more than 10 arrests, according to USCIS.
A few years ago, migrants protected under DACA were among rioters and looters arrested and criminally charged with crimes during a Black Lives Matter “Justice for George Floyd” protest in downtown Phoenix, Arizona. Among them was 30-year-old Mexican national Maxima Guerrero, a community organizer with a Phoenix-based grassroots migrant justice organization called Puente Movement. During the riots, Guerrero and her fellow DACA friends occupied a vehicle “loaded with incendiary devices,” according to a high-level Phoenix Police source. Now, thanks to the Biden administration, lawbreakers like Guerrero and her friends can get their health insurance subsidized by Uncle Sam.
The post HHS Rules Illegal Immigrants Protected by DACA Eligible for Govt.-Subsidized Obamacare appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Sues California to Force Clean-Up of Voting Rolls
“Dirty voting rolls can mean dirty elections. And California’s voting rolls continue to be a mess,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch litigation already caused the state to remove over a million outdated names from the rolls in California but our new lawsuit shows there is more work to do.”
Judicial Watch: Voicemail Recording Shows FBI and Secret Service Coordination on Raid of Trump’s Home
Judicial Watch announced recently that it received a recording of a phone message left by an FBI special agent for someone at the Secret Service in the context of the raid on President Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago, Florida.
Fani Willis Fails to Answer Public Records Lawsuit – Judicial Watch Files Motion for ‘Default Judgment’
Judicial Watch announced recently that it asked the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, to declare a default judgment against District Attorney Fani Willis in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit seeking records of communications Willis had with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee.
Judicial Watch: New Documents Reveal DC Training for Noncitizen Voting
Judicial Watch announced today that it received 13-pages of records in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the District of Columbia, explaining to illegal aliens and other noncitizens how they can register to vote in local elections.
In The News
Records Show NY District Attorney Alvin Bragg Paid over $900/Hour to Shut Down House Judiciary Oversight into Indictment of President Trump
Judicial WatchThe House Judiciary Committee on March 20 sent a letter to Bragg, demanding records related to the “unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial authority: “The facts surrounding the impending indictment have “been known for years.” Michael Cohen, President Trump’s disgraced former lawyer, pleaded guilty over four years ago to charges based on the same facts at issue in the impending indictment. By July 2019, however, federal prosecutors determined that no additional people would be charged alongside Cohen.”
Justice Department rebuked for delay tactics in Biden-Hur tapes pursuant to judge’s orderFox NewsThe Justice Department faced criticism on Friday for pushing back on a federal court’s order to expedite the timeline for determining whether recordings of President Biden’s interviews with then-Special Counsel Robert Hur should be released.
The situation developed after advocacy groups filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the recording last month.
‘Absolutely incredible!’ Unsealed records in Trump ‘classified doc’ case exposes ODD detailBizPac ReviewThe latest unsealed records regarding the former president’s legal woes were deemed “absolutely incredible” after records showed part of the classified documents case “we never heard.”
Throughout the week, United States District Judge Aileen Cannon followed through with a decision regarding the release of records in former President Donald Trump’s Florida case over his alleged mishandling of classified documents. Now, roughly 20 months after his Palm Beach, Florida home was raided by the FBI, commentator Julie Kelly spotlighted a particular detail about an order for Trump’s team to first “come get” what he was indicted for having.
Video Highlights
-
-
- FITTON: Biden FBI Spoiled “Evidence” Against Trump! - FARRELL: JW is the Govt Watchdog that Uncovered Hillary’s Outlaw Email Server - Biden FBI Tried to Justify Ashli Babbitt’s Killing?!
-
The post Judicial Watch Sues California to Force Clean-Up of Voting Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
- Roy is the lead sponsor of new legislation that will soon hit the House floor to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in federal elections
- DC City Council voted to allow illegal immigrants to vote last year
Newly released documents about a Washington, D.C. training program for illegal immigrants to vote in local elections prove the need for the SAVE act, according to Rep. Chip Roy.
‘The radical progressive Democrats in the DC city government couldn’t be prouder of the fact that they’re going to have illegal aliens voting in their elections; yet, they want us to believe that it’s going to stop there, and that none of them are going to try — or be encouraged — to illegally vote in federal elections? Give me a break,’ Roy, R-Texas, told DailyMail.com.
‘Without the verification measures in the SAVE Act, we’re basically asking people who are already breaking the law by coming to the US illegally to abide by the honor system. No way; American elections should belong to American citizens, period.’
Roy is the lead sponsor of new legislation that will soon hit the House floor to prevent illegal immigrants from voting in federal elections – a practice that is already illegal and thought to be rare.
But documents obtained by Judicial Watch detail a PowerPoint shown in a D.C. Board of Elections event entitled ‘Non-Citizen Voting Education Virtual Training.’
Read more here…
The post Illegal migrants are being ‘encouraged’ to vote, top Republican warns after shocking documents reveals ‘training’ for noncitizens to cast ballots in Washington D.C. appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 13-pages of records in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request from the District of Columbia, explaining to illegal aliens and other noncitizens how they can register to vote in local elections.
The records came in response to an April 12, 2024, FOIA request for:
- Materials presented and/or provided at the training;
- Communications advertising/promoting the training; and
- Materials provided to participants/attendees after the training.
On April 10, 2024, DC held a training event titled ”Non-Citizen Voting Education Virtual Training” in which DC announced noncitizen voting would begin in 2024.
The PowerPoint presentation explains:
Non-US citizen residents of the District of Columbia can vote in local elections under the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2022. Non-US citizen residents can vote in District elections for the offices of Mayor, Attorney General, Chairman or member(s) of the DC Council, member(s) of the State [sic] Board of Education, or Advisory Neighborhood Commissioner(s) Non-US citizen residents cannot vote for Federal Offices
To register to vote in the District of Columbia as a non-citizen, you must: Be at least 17 years old and 18 years old by the next General Election; Maintain residency in the District of Columbia for at least 30 days prior to the election in which you intend to vote; Not claim voting residence or the right to vote in any state, territory, or country; Not been found by a court to be legally incompetent to vote.
**
You must provide proof of your address in the District of Columbia at an Early Vote Center prior to Election Day or at the polling place assigned to your address on Election Day.
In 2023 the DC Council amended the District of Columbia Election Code of 1955 to expand the definition of the term qualified elector to include otherwise eligible noncitizen residents, including illegal aliens.
DC’s law went a step further than those jurisdictions, though, by extending the franchise to undocumented immigrants.
The District’s action was opposed by congressional Republicans but they failed to overturn the measure.
“Illegal aliens and noncitizens should not vote in any elections,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “That Congress allows the votes of citizens to be legally stolen by illegal aliens in our nation’s capital is inexcusable.”
According to federal law, only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections, but a growing number of state and local elections allow noncitizens to vote, among them San Francisco and Oakland, California, along with some cities in Maryland and Vermont. In February, a state appeals court ruled a similar New York City law violates the state constitution.
The post Judicial Watch: New Documents Reveal DC Training for Noncitizen Voting appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Justice Department faced criticism on Friday for pushing back on a federal court’s order to expedite the timeline for determining whether recordings of President Biden’s interviews with then-Special Counsel Robert Hur should be released.
The situation developed after advocacy groups filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for the recording last month.
The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project, as well as Judicial Watch and CNN, all filed requests seeking the release of the tapes, which congressional Republicans have sought and unsuccessfully subpoenaed. The three organizations’ FOIA requests were combined into one suit.
In April, the DOJ announced it would not abide by a subpoena from House Republicans, while maintaining its cooperation with Congress’ Biden family investigation has been “extraordinary.” That development led Reps. James Comer, R-Ky., and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, to threaten Attorney General Merrick Garland with a contempt of Congress citation.
However, Washington, D.C.’s U.S. District Court ruled this week there would be an expedited briefing schedule to litigate the release of the tapes, which Republicans claim will further prove Biden’s cognitive decline and lack of fitness for office.
Read more here…
The post Justice Department rebuked for delay tactics in Biden-Hur tapes pursuant to judge’s order appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Fani Willis Fails to Answer Lawsuit – Judicial Watch Seeks Default Judgment
Judicial Watch Sues California to Force Clean-Up of Voting Rolls
Voicemail Shows FBI/Secret Service Coordination on Trump Raid
Fani Willis Fails to Answer Lawsuit – Judicial Watch Seeks Default Judgment
Is the Georgia DA trying to hide something or is she just incompetent?
Judicial Watch just asked the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, to declare a default judgment against District Attorney Fani Willis in our lawsuit for records of communications Willis had with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee.
Our lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County, GA, after Willis and the county denied having any records responsive to an August 2023 Georgia Open Records Act request for communications with the Special Counsel’s office and/or the January 6 Committee (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Fani Willis et al. (No. 24-CV-002805)). (Judicial Watch dismissed Fulton County from the lawsuit.)
In our motion we note that Willis was served with the lawsuit on March 11, 2024, but that she has not yet answered it:
Defendant has not filed an answer and no answer has been served upon [Judicial Watch].… Defendant’s answer was due 30 days after service, or on April 10, 2024. Pursuant to [Georgia law] the case automatically became in default when an answer was not filed by the due date. Further pursuant to that Code section, Defendant was permitted as a matter of right to open the default within 15 days of the day of default, or by April 25, 2024.
Our attorneys assert that we are now entitled to a verdict and judgment by default.
Our lawsuit details Willis’ “representation about not having records responsive to the request is likely false.” Judicial Watch refers to a December 5, 2023, letter from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to Willis that cites a December 2021, letter from Willis to then-House January 6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson. In that letter Willis requested assistance from the committee and offered to travel to DC.
We also cite news reports and other records which “indicate that representatives of Willis’ office traveled to Washington, DC, and met with January 6 Select Committee staffers in April, May, and November 2022, as Willis proposed in her December 17, 2021 letter …”
I think this is the first time in Judicial Watch’s 30 years that a government official failed to answer an open records lawsuit in court. This further shows Ms. Willis has something to hide about her collusion with the Biden administration and Nancy Pelosi’s Congress on her unprecedented and compromised “get-Trump” prosecution.
We are assisted in the case by John Monroe of John Monroe Law in Georgia.
Judicial Watch has several FOIA lawsuits related to the prosecutorial abuse targeting Trump.
In February 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that is targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.
(Before his appointment to investigate and prosecute Trump, Special Counsel Jack Smith previously was at the center of several controversial issues, the IRS scandal among them. In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Jack Smith’s then-Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Read more here.)
In January 2024, we filed a lawsuit against Fulton County, Georgia, for records regarding the hiring of Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor by District Attorney Fani Willis. Wade was hired to pursue unprecedented criminal investigations and prosecutions against former President Trump and others over the 2020 election disputes.
In October 2023, we sued the DOJ for records and communications between the Office of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney’s office regarding requests/receipt of federal funding/assistance in the investigation of former President Trump and his 18 codefendants in the Fulton County indictment of August 14, 2023. To date, the DOJ is refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with enforcement proceedings. Judicial Watch’s litigation challenging this is continuing.
Through the New York Freedom of Information Law, in July 2023, we received the engagement letter showing New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg paid $900 per hour for partners and $500 per hour for associates to the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher law firm for the purpose of suing Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in an effort to shut down the House Judiciary Committee’s oversight investigation into Bragg’s unprecedented indictment of former President Donald Trump.
Be sure to check back for more developments in this Fani Willis lawsuit!
Judicial Watch Sues California to Force Clean-Up of Voting Rolls
Judicial Watch is the national leader in ensuring the clean-up of voter registration rolls.
Your Judicial Watch just filed a historic lawsuit to force California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law (Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber et al. (No. 2:24-cv-3750)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California to compel the defendants to comply with their voter list maintenance obligations under Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).
The National Voter Registration Act requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the official voter rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. The law requires registrations to be canceled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections.
In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory. In February 2023, Los Angeles Countyconfirmed removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since the year before, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit we filed in 2017. (Legal pressure from Judicial Watch ultimately led to the removal of up to four million ineligible voters from voter rolls in New York, California, Pennsylvania, Colorado, North Carolina, Kentucky, Ohio, and elsewhere.)
Judicial Watch filed the latest lawsuit after uncovering a broad failure to clean up voter rolls in dozens of California counties.
The complaint details that, in correspondence with Judicial Watch, that California:
admit[ted] that 21 California counties removed five or fewer registrations pursuant to [the NVRA] … for failing to respond to a Confirmation Notice and then failing to vote in two general federal elections … from November 2020 to November 2022. Sixteen of the 21 counties removed zero such registrations during this period. The 21 counties are: Alameda (1 such removal), Alpine (0), Calaveras (0), Imperial (0), Lake (1), Modoc (0), Placer (0), Plumas (0), San Benito (0), San Bernardino (0), San Luis Obispo (5), San Mateo (0), Santa Barbara (0), Santa Cruz (0), Shasta (0), Siskiyou (2), Solano (0), Stanislaus (0), Trinity (0), Ventura (0), and Yolo (2).
Together, these 21 counties reported a combined total of 11 removals under Section 8(d)(1)(B) during this two-year reporting period.
The complaint notes that “these 21 counties contain about 22% of the population of California.” The lawsuit alleges that, in Judicial Watch’s experience “based on years of enforcing the NVRA,” there “is no possible way any county” with such “absurdly small” removal numbers can be complying with the NVRA’s requirement “to cancel the registrations of voters who have become ineligible because of a change of residence.” The complaint points out that about 11.6% of California residents move each year, and that in the last year for which data are available (2022) “about 818,000 California residents moved out of state.”
Our lawsuit also points out that another 16 California counties could not even “tell how many registrations were removed pursuant to [the NVRA] … The 16 counties are: Del Norte, El Dorado, Inyo, Kern, Lassen, Marin, Mendocino, Merced, Mono, Nevada, Orange, Riverside, San Joaquin, Santa Clara, Sonoma, and Tulare.” These 16 counties together “contain about 28% of the population of California.”
Dirty voting rolls can mean dirty elections. And California’s voting rolls continue to be a mess. Our litigation already caused the state to remove over a million outdated names from the rolls in California, but our new lawsuit shows there is more work to do.
As I noted above, Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of our work, we assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls across the country, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In March 2023, we filed a federal lawsuit against the Illinois State Board of Elections and its Executive Director, Bernadette Matthews, over their failure to clean Illinois’ voter rolls and to produce election-related records as required by federal law.
Judicial Watch in February 2024 filed a civil rights lawsuit on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi, challenging a Mississippi election law permitting absentee ballots to be received as long as five business days after Election Day.
In December 2023, we sent notice letters to election officials in the District of Columbia, California, and Illinois, notifying them of evident violations of the NVRA, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, D.C., officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.”
In July 2023, we filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361)). According to a national studyconducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
In a separate lawsuit, in July 2023 we settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, obtaining access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with Judicial Watch and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from Judicial Watch. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle our NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
We settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
Voicemail Shows FBI/Secret Service Coordination on Trump Raid
Our Judicial Watch team received a concerning recording of a phone message left by an FBI special agent for someone at the Secret Service in the context of the raid on President Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago, Florida.
The August 11, 2022, recording says:
Yes, hi, this is Special Agent [redacted] from FBI [unintelligible]. We met on Monday [the day of the raid]. We have a couple of specific follow-up asks of you, um, so give me a call so we can discuss that. My number is [redacted]. Again, my name is [redacted]. Thanks, bye.
The recording was uncovered in an October 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the raid on President Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made during the raid on August 8, 2022 (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:22-cv-03147)).
This recording is real-time evidence of the Biden administration’s whole government operation to abuse Trump by raiding his home. We will continue to piece together the details of the conspiracy to launch an unprecedented and malicious raid on the home of Biden’s chief political opponent.
Judicial Watch remains in the forefront of the court battles for transparency regarding the Biden administration’s targeting of Trump.
In March 2024, we sued the U.S. Department of Energy for records about the retroactive termination of former President Donald Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.
In August 2023, we filed a lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for records of the Archives’ role in President Trump’s White House records controversy; whether it offered Trump a secure storage location other than the National Archives; and if the Archives consulted with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence regarding the classification or declassification procedures of any of the alleged classified documents found at Trump’s Florida residence.
In June 2023, we obtained DOJ records that showed top officials of the National Security Division discussing the political implications of Trump allowing CNN to use closed-circuit TV (CCTV) footage of the raid on his Mar-a-Lago home. The documents confirmed that the Justice Department had asked that Mar-a-Lago CCTV be turned off before the raid.
A separate Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration resulted in the release of records about the unprecedented document dispute between Archives and President Trump. Click here or here to review the records.
In August 2022, we successfully sued to unseal the search warrant affidavit used to justify the unprecedented raid on the home of former President Trump.
In September 2022, we filed lawsuits against the DOJ for its records and the FBI’s records about the Mar-a-Lago raid search warrant application and approval, as well as communications about the warrant between the FBI, Executive Office of the President and the Secret Service.
Until next week,
The post NEW Lawsuit to Clean Dirty Voter Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received a recording of a phone message left by an FBI special agent for someone at the Secret Service in the context of the raid on President Trump’s home in Mar-a-Lago, Florida.
The August 11, 2022, recording says:
Yes, hi, this is Special Agent [redacted] from FBI [unintelligible]. We met on Monday [the day of the raid]. We have a couple of specific follow-up asks of you, um, so give me a call so we can discuss that. My number is [redacted]. Again, my name is [redacted]. Thanks, bye.
The recording was uncovered in an October 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the raid on President Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made during the raid on August 8, 2022 (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S Department of Homeland Security(No. 1:22-cv-03147)).
“This recording is real-time evidence of the Biden administration’s whole government operation to abuse Trump by raiding his home. Judicial Watch will continue to piece together the details of the conspiracy to launch an unprecedented and malicious raid on the home of Biden’s chief political opponent,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
Judicial Watch is in the forefront of the court battles for transparency regarding Biden administration’s targeting of Trump.
In March 2024, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department of Energy for records about the retroactive termination of former President Donald Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.
In August 2023, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for records of the Archives’ role in President Trump’s White House records controversy; whether it offered Trump a secure storage location other than the National Archives; and if the Archives consulted with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence regarding the classification or declassification procedures of any of the alleged classified documents found at Trump’s Florida residence.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch obtained DOJ records that showed top officials of the National Security Division discussing the political implications of Trump allowing CNN to use closed-circuit TV (CCTV) footage of the raid on his Mar-a-Lago home. The documents confirmed that the Justice Department had asked that Mar-a-Lago CCTV be turned off before the raid.
A separate Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration resulted in the release of records about the unprecedented document dispute between Archives and President Trump. Click here or here to review the records.
In August 2022, Judicial Watch successfully sued to unseal the search warrant affidavit used to justify the unprecedented raid on the home of former President Trump.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch filed lawsuits against the DOJ for its records and the FBI’s records about the Mar-a-Lago raid search warrant application and approval, as well as communications about the warrant between the FBI, Executive Office of the President and the Secret Service.
The post Judicial Watch: Voicemail Recording Shows FBI and Secret Service Coordination on Raid of Trump’s Home appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a lawsuit to force California to clean up its voter rolls. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Libertarian Party of California, asks the court to compel California to make “a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls” as required by federal law (Judicial Watch Inc. and the Libertarian Party of CA v. Shirley Weber et al. (No. 2:24-cv-3750)).
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California to compel the defendants to comply with their voter list maintenance obligations under Section 8 of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA).
The National Voter Registration Act requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the official voter rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. The law requires registrations to be cancelled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections.
In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory. In February 2023, Los Angeles County confirmed removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since the year before, under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017. (Legal pressure from Judicial Watch ultimately led to the removal of up to four million ineligible voters from voter rolls in New York, California, Pennsylvania, Colorado, North Carolina, Kentucky, Ohio, and elsewhere.)
Judicial Watch filed the latest lawsuit after uncovering a broad failure to clean up voter rolls in dozens of California counties.
The complaint details that, in correspondence with Judicial Watch, that California:
admit[ted] that 21 California counties removed five or fewer registrations pursuant to [the NVRA] … for failing to respond to a Confirmation Notice and then failing to vote in two general federal elections … from November 2020 to November 2022. Sixteen of the 21 counties removed zero such registrations during this period. The 21 counties are: Alameda (1 such removal), Alpine (0), Calaveras (0), Imperial (0), Lake (1), Modoc (0), Placer (0), Plumas (0), San Benito (0), San Bernardino (0), San Luis Obispo (5), San Mateo (0), Santa Barbara (0), Santa Cruz (0), Shasta (0), Siskiyou (2), Solano (0), Stanislaus (0), Trinity (0), Ventura (0), and Yolo (2).
Together, these 21 counties reported a combined total of 11 removals under Section 8(d)(1)(B) during this two-year reporting period.
The complaint notes that “these 21 counties contain about 22% of the population of California.” The lawsuit alleges that, in Judicial Watch’s experience “based on years of enforcing the NVRA,” there “is no possible way any county” with such “absurdly small” removal numbers can be complying with the NVRA’s requirement “to cancel the registrations of voters who have become ineligible because of a change of residence.” The complaint points out that about 11.6% of California residents move each year, and that in the last year for which data are available (2022) “about 818,000 California residents moved out of state.”
The Judicial Watch lawsuit also points out that another 16 California counties could not even “tell how many registrations were removed pursuant to [the NVRA] … The 16 counties are: Del Norte, El Dorado, Inyo, Kern, Lassen, Marin, Mendocino, Merced, Mono, Nevada, Orange, Riverside, San Joaquin, Santa Clara, Sonoma, and Tulare.” These 16 counties together “contain about 28% of the population of California.”
“Dirty voting rolls can mean dirty elections. And California’s voting rolls continue to be a mess,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch litigation already caused the state to remove over a million outdated names from the rolls in California but our new lawsuit shows there is more work to do.”
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in across the country, among other achievements.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
In March 2023, Judicial Watch filed a federal lawsuit against the Illinois State Board of Elections and its Executive Director, Bernadette Matthews, over their failure to clean Illinois’ voter rolls and to produce election-related records as required by federal law.
Judicial Watch in February 2024 filed a civil rights lawsuit on behalf of the Libertarian Party of Mississippi, challenging a Mississippi election law permitting absentee ballots to be received as long as five business days after Election Day.
In December 2023, Judicial Watch sent notice letters to election officials in the District of Columbia, California, and Illinois, notifying them of evident violations of the NVRA, based on their failure to remove inactive voters from their registration rolls. In response to Judicial Watch’s inquiries, Washington, D.C., officials admitted that they had not complied with the NVRA, promptly removed 65,544 outdated names from the voting rolls, promised to remove 37,962 more, and designated another 73,522 registrations as “inactive.”
In July 2023, Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decisionof the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361)). According to a national study conducted by Judicial Watch in 2020, Maine’s statewide registration rate was 101% of eligible voters.
In a separate lawsuit, Judicial Watch in July 2023 settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, obtaining access to the current centralized statewide list of registered voters for the state.
In April 2023, Pennsylvania settled with Judicial Watch and admitted in court filings that it removed 178,258 ineligible registrations in response to communications from Judicial Watch. The settlement commits Pennsylvania and five of its counties to public reporting of statistics regarding their ongoing voter roll clean-up efforts for the next five years.
In March 2023, Colorado agreed to settle a Judicial Watch NVRA lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch with the most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years.
Judicial Watch settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional-districts gerrymander.
The post Judicial Watch Sues California to Force Clean-Up of Voting Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it asked the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia, to declare a default judgment against District Attorney Fani Willis in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit seeking records of communications Willis had with Special Counsel Jack Smith and the House January 6 Committee.
The lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of Fulton County, GA, after Willis and the county denied having any records responsive to an August 2023 Georgia Open Records Act request for communications with the Special Counsel’s office and/or the January 6 Committee (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Fani Willis et al.(No. 24-CV-002805)). (Judicial Watch dismissed Fulton County from the lawsuit.)
In its motion Judicial Watch noted that Willis was served with the lawsuit on March 11, 2024, but that she has not yet answered it:
Defendant has not filed an answer and no answer has been served upon [Judicial Watch].… Defendant’s answer was due 30 days after service, or on April 10, 2024. Pursuant to [Georgia law] the case automatically became in default when an answer was not filed by the due date. Further pursuant to that Code section, Defendant was permitted as a matter of right to open the default within 15 days of the day of default, or by April 25, 2024.
Judicial Watch asserts it is now entitled to a verdict and judgment by default.
In its lawsuit Judicial Watch states that Willis’ “representation about not having records responsive to the request is likely false.” Judicial Watch refers to a December 5, 2023, letter from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan to Willis that cites a December 2021, letter from Willis to then-House January 6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson. In that letter Willis requested assistance from the committee and offered to travel to DC.
Judicial Watch also cited news reports and other records which “indicate that representatives of Willis’s office traveled to Washington, DC, and met with January 6 Select Committee staffers in April, May, and November 2022, as Willis proposed in her December 17, 2021 letter …”
“I think this is the first time in Judicial Watch’s thirty years that a government official failed to answer an open records lawsuit in court,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “This further shows Ms. Willis has something to hide about her collusion with the Biden administration and Nancy Pelosi’s Congress on her unprecedented and compromised ‘get-Trump’ prosecution.”
Judicial Watch is assisted in the case by John Monroe of John Monroe Law in Georgia.
Judicial Watch has several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits related to the prosecutorial abuse targeting Trump:
In February 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice asked a federal court to allow the agency to keep secret the names of top staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office that is targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.
(Before his appointment to investigate and prosecute Trump, Specia Counsel Jack Smith previously was at the center of several controversial issues, the IRS scandal among them. In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Jack Smith’s then-Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Read more here.)
In January 2024, Judicial Watch filed lawsuit against Fulton County, Georgia, for records regarding the hiring of Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor by District Attorney Fani Willis. Wade was hired to pursue unprecedented criminal investigations and prosecutions against former President Trump and others over the 2020 election disputes.
In October 2023, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ for records and communications between the Office of U.S. Special Counsel Jack Smith and the Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney’s office regarding requests/receipt of federal funding/assistance in the investigation of former President Trump and his 18 codefendants in the Fulton County indictment of August 14, 2023. To date, the DOJ is refusing to confirm or deny the existence of records, claiming that to do so would interfere with enforcement proceedings. Judicial Watch’s litigation challenging this is continuing.
Through the New York Freedom of Information Law, in July 2023, Judicial Watch received the engagement letter showing New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg paid $900 per hour for partners and $500 per hour for associates to the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher law firm for the purpose of suing Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in an effort to shut down the House Judiciary Committee’s oversight investigation into Bragg’s unprecedented indictment of former President Donald Trump.
The post Fani Willis Fails to Answer Public Records Lawsuit – Judicial Watch Files Motion for ‘Default Judgment’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Biden Justice Department Won’t Release Biden Special Counsel Recordings
NPR’s New CEO Sits on Board of Soros-Funded Activist Group that Pushes for Censorship
Biden Justice Department Won’t Release Biden Special Counsel Recordings
The Justice Department has told the court that it will not disclose the audio recordings of special counsel interviews with President Joe Biden to protect Biden’s “privacy” interests.
Biden’s Justice Department informed us and the court that it would assert Exemptions 6 and 7(C) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to prevent the release of the two audio recordings of Biden’s interviews with Special Counsel Robert Hur. Exemption 6 applies to “personnel and medical files and similar files” when disclosure of such information “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” Exemption 7 (C) applies to “records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes,” the disclosure of which “could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”
On March 11, 2024, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the department failed to respond to a February 2024 FOIA request for records of all Special Counsel interviews of President Biden (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)). A redacted transcript of the Biden interview was released on April 15.
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
This is yet another brazen cover-up. The Biden Justice Department’s political gambit in asserting Joe Biden’s privacy concerns in order to withhold audio of his criminal interviews with the special counsel really takes the cake. Obviously, the public’s right to know outweighs Joe Biden’s privacy in this widely public case. And, of course, President Biden can simply waive any privacy so the public can fully understand why he was given a pass from criminal prosecution.
NPR’s New CEO Sits on Board of Soros-Funded Activist Group that Pushes for Censorship
The hiring of the new liberal CEO to National Public Radio (NPR) is causing concern due to the organization being publicly funded. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the latest:
In a grim indicator of how news will be covered on taxpayer dime, the new head of the government-funded National Public Radio (NPR) is on the board of a leftwing activist organization called Center for Democracy and Technology that pushes for censorship and receives funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. Her name is Katherine Maher, a former Wikimedia Foundation CEO, with liberal views publicly expressed throughout the years in her social media posts. In 2018, she called former President Donald Trump a racist in a post that has since been deleted, according to a mainstream newspaper report. A couple of years ago Maher shared a photo of herself in a “President Biden” campaign hat. In a 2021 video clip the new NPR chief describes the First Amendment as the top challenge in the fight against disinformation, a fictitious crisis created by the Biden administration to control information.
Maher takes over at NPR as a longtime NPR editor, Uri Berliner, reveals that liberal bias has altered the public radio network’s coverage in recent years, resulting in errors on major stories such as the Hamas attacks in Israel, Hunter Biden’s laptop scandal and COVID-19. “It’s true NPR has always had a liberal bent, but during most of my tenure here, an open-minded, curious culture prevailed,” Berliner, a 25-year NPR veteran wrote in a recently published essay. “We were nerdy, but not knee-jerk, activist, or scolding. In recent years, however, that has changed. Today, those who listen to NPR or read its coverage online find something different: the distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population. An open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don’t have an audience that reflects America. That wouldn’t be a problem for an openly polemical news outlet serving a niche audience. But for NPR, which purports to consider all things, it’s devastating both for its journalism and its business model.” Berliner confirms that race and identity have become paramount in nearly every aspect of the workplace and journalists are required to ask everyone they interview about race, gender, and ethnicity.
A few days ago, Berliner, a senior business editor, resigned, citing Maher’s response to his recent exposé. In an email to the radio network’s new CEO, Berliner wrote: “I am resigning from NPR, a great American institution where I have worked for 25 years. I respect the integrity of my colleagues and wish for NPR to thrive and do important journalism. But I cannot work in a newsroom where I am disparaged by a new CEO whose divisive views confirm the very problems at NPR I cite in my Free Press essay.” NPR and its new chief declined to comment publicly but the network’s news executive, Edith Chapin, wrote a memo to employees saying that inclusion among staff, sourcing and overall coverage is critical to telling the nuanced stories of this country and our world.
NPR is simply following the mainstream media’s leftist trajectory, though it has a duty to remain objective because it receives taxpayer dollars. The radio network was created over five decades ago as an educational news source that operates under the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which also includes television’s Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). Its headquarters are in Washington D.C., and it has more than 1,000 radio stations nationwide. CPB’s 2024 operating budget is a whopping $535 million and, though most of it does not go to NPR, the public radio network says “federal funding is essential” and its continuation is critical. In fact, the news outlet’s website states that the elimination of federal funding would result in fewer programs, less journalism and eventually the loss of public radio stations.
This month a Virginia congressman introduced legislation to strip NPR of public money so that no taxpayer dollars fund its “radical left messaging.” The proposed legislation prohibits federal funding of NPR and prevents local public radio stations from using federal grant money to purchase content or pay dues to NPR. “It is bad enough that so many media outlets push their slanted views instead of reporting the news, but it is even more egregious for hardworking taxpayers to be forced to pay for it,” said Congressman Bob Good, the lawmaker behind the measure. “My legislation would ensure no taxpayer dollars are used to fund the woke, leftist propaganda of National Public Radio.”
Until next week,
The post Biden Audio Tapes Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced that the Justice Department has told the court that it will not disclose the audio recordings of special counsel interviews with President Joe Biden in order to protect Biden’s “privacy” interests.
The Biden Justice Department informed Judicial Watch and the court that it would assert Exemptions 6 and 7(C) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to prevent the release of the two audio recordings of Biden’s interviews with Special Counsel Robert Hur. Exemption 6 applies to “personnel and medical files and similar files” when disclosure of such information “would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.” Exemption 7 (C) applies to “records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes,” the disclosure of which “could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”
On March 11, 2024, Judicial Watch filed its FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a February 2024 FOIA request for records of all Special Counsel interviews of President Biden (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)). A redacted transcript of the Biden interview was released on April 15.
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
“This is yet another brazen cover-up. The Biden Justice Department’s political gambit in asserting Joe Biden’s privacy concerns in order to withhold audio of his criminal interviews with the special counsel really takes the cake,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Obviously, the public’s right to know outweighs Joe Biden’s privacy in this widely public case. And, of course, President Biden can simply waive any privacy so the public can fully understand why he was given a pass from criminal prosecution.”
Judicial Watch has several ongoing FOIA lawsuits about Biden’s document scandals and the related unprecedented partisan prosecutorial and judicial abuses of former President Donald J. Trump.
The post Judicial Watch: Biden Justice Department Refuses to Release Audio of Biden Special Counsel Interviews—Cites Biden’s Privacy appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From BizPac Review:
The latest unsealed records regarding the former president’s legal woes were deemed “absolutely incredible” after records showed part of the classified documents case “we never heard.”
Throughout the week, United States District Judge Aileen Cannon followed through with a decision regarding the release of records in former President Donald Trump’s Florida case over his alleged mishandling of classified documents. Now, roughly 20 months after his Palm Beach, Florida home was raided by the FBI, commentator Julie Kelly spotlighted a particular detail about an order for Trump’s team to first “come get” what he was indicted for having.
“WELL WELL WELL I am pretty sure we never heard this part of the ‘classified documents/box’ story! More from unredacted motions in FLA–this from an unsealed transcript of a witness interview,” posted Kelly on X over a screenshot of the release.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, offered his own take on the revelations as he succinctly argued, “It was a set-up from the get-go.”
Read more here…
The post ‘Absolutely incredible!’ Unsealed records in Trump ‘classified doc’ case exposes ODD detail appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Trump Trial Prosecutors Face Big Problems
The Donald Trump business records trial opened yesterday in New York City with prosecutors signaling a wide-ranging case. Documents—business records—related to payments from the Trump Organization to an adult film star showed “election fraud” and a “criminal conspiracy and cover up” designed to prevent information about an alleged affair from emerging before the 2016 presidential election, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said.
NPR’s New CEO Sits on Board of Soros-Funded Activist Group that Pushes for Censorship
In a grim indicator of how news will be covered on taxpayer dime, the new head of the government-funded National Public Radio (NPR) is on the board of a leftwing activist organization called Center for Democracy and Technology that pushes for censorship and receives funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. Her name is Katherine Maher, a former Wikimedia Foundation CEO, with liberal views publicly expressed throughout the years in her social media posts.
Judicial Watch Opposes Justice Department Effort to Delay Decision Regarding Special Counsel’s Biden Interview Transcripts
Judicial Watch announced recently it filed an opposition to the Justice Department’s request to the court for an additional month to decide whether to produce audio/video recordings of the special counsel interview of President Biden.
Govt. Sues Republican Donors’ Biz for “Racially Discriminatory Hiring Practice” over Background Checks
The Biden administration appears to be using a federal agency to go after a family that has donated significantly to Republicans by suing its company for “racially discriminatory hiring practice” over background checks. The business, Sheetz Inc., is a chain of convenience stores and the Sheetz family has long supported Republicans in Pennsylvania and the Midwest, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch.
In The News
Report: Flyers Urging Illegals To Vote For Biden Found In Left-Wing Group’s Office In Mexico
The FederalistFlyers reportedly posted around a Resource Center Matamoros facility in Mexico encouraged illegal immigrants — who are not eligible to vote in the United States — to vote for President Joe Biden in November, according to The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. One of the organizations operating out of the Resource Center Matamoros (RCM) has ties to Biden’s Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, whose articles of impeachment the U.S. House of Representatives delivered to the Senate Tuesday afternoon.
FBI found it ‘alarming’ that Fauci-funded virus research at Wuhan lab would leave no trace of ‘human manipulation’
The New York PostThe FBI was tipped off in April 2020 to gain-of-function virus research in China, funded by the agency formerly headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci, that “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation,” emails from agents at the bureau show.
FBI: Fauci Funded ‘Alarming’ COVID Research in Wuhan
NewsmaxA new COVID-19 revelation has come about via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request released Friday.
In the FOIA, internal FBI communications show the Bureau was tipped off in April 2020 that the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), under the leadership of Dr. Anthony Fauci, had funded coronavirus gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Biden FBI Tried to Justify Ashli Babbitt’s Killing?! - Chris Farrell at the Border: “This is What Biden & Mayorkas Have Done!” - The Politicization of the CIA with John A. Gentry
-
The post Trump Persecution Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judge Stops Justice Department Stonewalling in Releasing Biden Interview Recordings
Judicial Watch Sues Over Termination of President Trump’s Security Clearance
Trump Trial Prosecutors Face Big Problems
Biden Agency Sues Republican Donor’s Business for Racial Discrimination
NPR’s New CEO Sits on Board of Soros Censorship Group
Judge Stops Justice Department Stonewalling in Releasing Biden Interview Recordings
We’re pleased to report that a federal judge has blocked the Justice Department’s effort to delay producing recordings of President Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur.
The Biden Justice Department was trying to help Joe Biden politically by hiding the recordings of his special counsel interviews. These recordings are essential to the public interest in obtaining information about any presidential misconduct, crimes, and cognitive challenges.
The Justice Department was supposed to let us and the court know its position on releasing the recordings on April 30. However, the agency asked the court for at least one more month (May 27 or later) to state its position on whether it is going to release any recordings.
We filed an opposition to the department’s request, and Judge Timothy Kelly of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia agreed with us.
Here’s the background. On March 11, 2024, we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after Justice failed to respond to a February 2024 FOIA request for records of all special counsel interviews of President Biden (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)). A redacted transcript of the Biden interview was released on April 15.
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
We argue:
This case could not be any more straightforward, and [the Justice Department] cannot and does not provide any substantive reasons why an extension of time is necessary at this time…. Judicial Watch, along with other media organizations as well as Congressional committees, have sought these materials to enable the public to form its own conclusions about the Special Counsel’s characterizations of President Biden’s testimony.
[The Justice Department] can alleviate any administrative burden by informing Judicial Watch and the Court whether it intends to produce the recordings. If it produces the recordings, the case is over.
(We have several ongoing FOIA lawsuits about Biden’s document scandals and the related unprecedented partisan prosecutorial and judicial abuses of former President Donald J. Trump.)
I’ll be sure to report back to you if we hear any news of the release of the Biden audio (or video) recordings!
Judicial Watch Sues Over Termination of President Trump’s Security Clearance
Biden’s lieutenants in the federal bureaucracy are brazen in their efforts to get Trump.
Judicial Watch just filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Energy for records about the retroactive termination of former President Donald Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Energy (No. 1:24-cv-00744)).
We cite Trump’s January 12, 2024, motion to compel discovery in his criminal prosecution in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, in which the former president asserts that Department of Energy attempted to terminate his security clearance retroactively after his June 2023 indictment by Special Counsel Jack Smith (United States v. Trump, et al., (No. 9:23-cr-80101)).
We filed the lawsuit after the Energy Department failed to comply with a January 18, 2024, FOIA request for its records and communications concerning retroactively terminating Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.
In our lawsuit we point to the February 2024 response to Trump’s January 2024 motion in which Smith acknowledges the existence of a June 2023 memorandum prepared by an Energy Department official regarding the security clearance.
The Special Counsel’s office describes the memorandum’s contents and asserts that it had produced the record to Trump. Smith also acknowledges requesting and receiving additional “responsive” records from the Energy Department, including “approximately 30 pages of records and eight emails.” Smith asserts that he was “now producing” the 30 pages to Trump and withholding the eight emails.
Trump’s lawyers suggest in the January 2024 motion to compel discovery that Trump had a high-level security clearance as recently as 2023.
Lawyers for Trump say a government document from June 2023 still listed him with a “Q” clearance from the Energy Department. The document was dated a few weeks after prosecutors indicted Trump in the classified documents case. A “Q” clearance refers to a type of security clearance handled by the Department of Energy, which holds classified information focused largely on nuclear secrets.
It looks like the Department of Energy is trying to manufacture a criminal case. What are they hiding?
We are in the forefront of court battles for transparency in the Biden administration’s targeting of Trump.
In August 2023, we filed a lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for records of the Archives’ role in President Trump’s White House records controversy; whether it offered Trump a secure storage location other than the National Archives; and if the Archives consulted with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence regarding the classification or declassification procedures of any of the alleged classified documents found at Trump’s Florida residence.
In June 2023, we obtained DOJ records that showed top officials of the National Security Division discussing the political implications of Trump allowing CNN to use closed-circuit TV (CCTV) footage of the raid on his Mar-a-Lago home. The documents confirmed that the Justice Department had asked that Mar-a-Lago CCTV be turned off before the raid.
A separate Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration resulted in the release of records about the unprecedented document dispute between Archives and President Trump. Click here or here to review the records.
In August 2022, we successfully sued to unseal the search warrant affidavit used to justify the unprecedented raid on the home of former President Trump.
In September 2022, we filed lawsuits against the DOJ for its records and the FBI’s records about the Mar-a-Lago raid search warrant application and approval, as well as communications about the warrant between the FBI, Executive Office of the President and the Secret Service.
In October 2022, we sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the raid on Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made during the raid.
In November 2022, we sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all communications between the Secret Service and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the search warrant that precipitated the raid on former Trump’s Florida residence at Mar-a-Lago.
Trump Trial Prosecutors Face Big Problems
Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, takes apart the silly case brought in Manhattan against Donald Trump by DA Alvin Bragg. From our latest Investigative Bulletin:
The Donald Trump business records trial opened yesterday in New York City with prosecutors signaling a wide-ranging case. Documents—business records—related to payments from the Trump Organization to an adult film star showed “election fraud” and a “criminal conspiracy and cover up” designed to prevent information about an alleged affair from emerging before the 2016 presidential election, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said.
At the heart of the case are thirty-four counts of falsifying business records—generally misdemeanor charges that in this case Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg is attempting to elevate to felonies. Trump defense attorney Todd Blanche told the jury that the thirty-four Bragg charges signified no crimes—that Trump was just doing what a business leader does: sign papers prepared by his office.
“The thirty-four counts are really just thirty-four pieces of paper.” Blanche said. Regarding the paper trail offered up by the prosecution, Blanche said that Trump “had nothing to do with the invoice, with the check being generated or with the entry on the ledger.” Blanche also attacked the prosecution’s contention that the payments were attempts to influence the 2016 election. “I have a spoiler alert,” he said. “There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It’s called democracy.”
Prosecutors face two big problems with their case: a deeply flawed key witness and a largely untested legal ploy to leverage misdemeanor business-records charges into felony-level convictions.
The case centers around former Trump Organization executive turned Trump nemesis, Michael Cohen. A self-proclaimed former Trump “fixer,” Cohen has a long criminal record and well-known hatred for the forty-fifth president of the United States. In 2016, Cohen expected a position in the Trump Administration, which was not forthcoming. Cohen later became a frequent guest on MSNBC, railing against Trump, and in 2022 he published a three-hundred-page diatribe against Trump, “Revenge.”
In 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty in federal court to tax evasion, campaign finance violations related to the current New York case, and false statements. He was sentenced to a three-year prison term. Later that year, he was back in federal court to plead guilty to lying to Congress.
A month ago, a judge denied Cohen’s request for an early end to his supervised release from jail time, saying Cohen had likely “committed perjury” in past testimony—a finding brushed aside by the judges in Trump’s current civil and criminal cases in New York.
Much of the current case will hinge on Cohen’s credibility on the stand. It’s worth noting that both federal authorities and Bragg’s predecessor as Manhattan DA, Cy Vance, declined to bring the business-records case, uneasy with Cohen and a strategy for getting the misdemeanor charges to felony-level crimes. Mark Pomerantz, a senior Vance prosecutor who resigned after differences with Bragg on Trump prosecutions, noted in his book, “People vs. Donald Trump,” that while Cohen could be charming and credible, he also was “a somewhat feral creature.” Cohen, Pomerantz wrote, has a “penchant for publicity, exaggeration, and grandiose statements” that turns people off.
The second big problem for prosecutors are those thirty-four business records charges usually clocking in as misdemeanors. In opening statements, the prosecution indicated it could prove the charges were felonies by showing they were connected to “election fraud.” But the statute prosecutors rely on has nothing to do with election law. New York state law (Section 175.10 of the penal code) moves falsification of business records from misdemeanor to felony if the defendant’s “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime.”
What precisely is that other crime? At the moment, prosecutors aren’t saying. But eventually they’ll have to come up with something specific.
With a jury drawn from deep blue Manhattan, it may not matter. Jurors may simply dislike Trump so much that they’ll look for any path to conviction. But juries are unpredictable. And the view from here is that Michael Cohen could emerge as a big liability. That sketchy ploy to elevate misdemeanors into felonies also gives the Trump team strong grounds for appeal.
Biden Agency Sues Republican Donor’s Business for Racial Discrimination
The Biden administration continues to use its weaponized government agencies to go after its political opposition. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the latest:
The Biden administration appears to be using a federal agency to go after a family that has donated significantly to Republicans by suing its company for “racially discriminatory hiring practice” over background checks. The business, Sheetz Inc., is a chain of convenience stores and the Sheetz family has long supported Republicans in Pennsylvania and the Midwest, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. In the last few years, the Sheetz’s have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republican causes and political candidates, including presidential candidate Mitt Romney, Pennsylvania Senate candidate Dave McCormick and the National Republican Congressional Committee. The most recent donation of $24,500 by Chairman Steve Sheetz was made a few months ago to McCormick, a West Point graduate and combat veteran endorsed by former President Donald Trump.
Now the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which is charged with enforcing the nation’s workplace discrimination laws, is suing Sheetz Inc. for “racially discriminatory hiring practice” over background checks. The agency charges that the company’s criminal history screening causes discriminatory impact against black, native American and other workers. In the lawsuit the Biden administration writes that Sheetz has maintained a longstanding practice of screening all job applicants for records of criminal conviction and then denying them employment based on those records. The company operates stores in over 600 locations throughout six states. The EEOC charges that the background checks disproportionately screened out black, native American/Alaska native and multiracial applicants. “Sheetz’s company-wide hiring practices violated provisions of Title VII that prohibit disparate impact discrimination,” according to the agency.
In its complaint, which was filed in Maryland, the EEOC does not allege that Sheetz was motivated by race when making hiring decisions. The criminal screenings nevertheless resulted in racial discrimination, which violates federal law prohibiting facially neutral employment practices that cause a discriminatory impact because of race when those practices are not job-related and consistent with business necessity or where alternative practices with less discriminatory impact are available. “Federal law mandates that employment practices causing a disparate impact because of race or other protected classifications must be shown by the employer to be necessary to ensure the safe and efficient performance of the particular jobs at issue,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Debra M. Lawrence. “Even when such necessity is proven, the practice remains unlawful if there is an alternative practice available that is comparably effective in achieving the employer’s goals but causes less discriminatory effect.” An EEOC director stresses the agency’s commitment to reintegrating individuals with criminal records into society by ensuring they have fair access to employment and other essential services.
Last fall the EEOC directed government agencies to “widely publicize” they are “hiring persons with criminal conduct issues in their background checks” as part of a Biden executive order requiring diversity, equity and inclusion in the federal workforce by, among other things, expanding employment opportunities for convicted individuals. Job applicants with criminal records are rarely eliminated from government jobs since the president issued the directive, the EEOC conceded at the time, but agency leaders believe more must be done to accommodate them and, when conducting background checks, the agency says employers should take a holistic approach with consideration for mitigating circumstances. In two reports issued last year, the EEOC explained that before Biden’s order an agency task force charged with identifying vulnerable workers and finding ways to better serve them classified “formerly incarcerated persons as one category of vulnerable workers due to the challenges they face in securing employment after their incarceration.” Years ago, the agency also made background checks related to arrest and conviction records among its “national substantive area priorities because African Americans and Latinos are disproportionately incarcerated.” Now the taxpayer-funded federal agency is going after businesses that screen employees with background checks, spending public resources to sue them.
NPR’s New CEO Sits on Board of Soros Censorship Group
Taxpayer funding of National Public Radio has been an issue for years, and now it has boiled over with the selection of a new CEO with radical leftist views. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports more details on her current and radical activities:
In a grim indicator of how news will be covered on taxpayer dime, the new head of the government-funded National Public Radio (NPR) is on the board of a leftwing activist organization called Center for Democracy and Technology that pushes for censorship and receives funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. Her name is Katherine Maher, a former Wikimedia Foundation CEO, with liberal views publicly expressed throughout the years in her social media posts. In 2018, she called former President Donald Trump a racist in a post that has since been deleted, according to a mainstream newspaper report. A couple of years ago Maher shared a photo of herself in a “President Biden” campaign hat. In a 2021 video clip the new NPR chief describes the First Amendment as the top challenge in the fight against disinformation, a fictitious crisis created by the Biden administration to control information.
Maher takes over at NPR as a longtime NPR editor, Uri Berliner, reveals that liberal bias has altered the public radio network’s coverage in recent years, resulting in errors on major stories such as the Hamas attacks in Israel, Hunter Biden’s laptop scandal and COVID-19. “It’s true NPR has always had a liberal bent, but during most of my tenure here, an open-minded, curious culture prevailed,” Berliner, a 25-year NPR veteran wrote in a recently published essay. “We were nerdy, but not knee-jerk, activist, or scolding. In recent years, however, that has changed. Today, those who listen to NPR or read its coverage online find something different: the distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population. An open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don’t have an audience that reflects America. That wouldn’t be a problem for an openly polemical news outlet serving a niche audience. But for NPR, which purports to consider all things, it’s devastating both for its journalism and its business model.” Berliner confirms that race and identity have become paramount in nearly every aspect of the workplace and journalists are required to ask everyone they interview about race, gender, and ethnicity.
A few days ago, Berliner, a senior business editor, resigned, citing Maher’s response to his recent exposé. In an email to the radio network’s new CEO, Berliner wrote: “I am resigning from NPR, a great American institution where I have worked for 25 years. I respect the integrity of my colleagues and wish for NPR to thrive and do important journalism. But I cannot work in a newsroom where I am disparaged by a new CEO whose divisive views confirm the very problems at NPR I cite in my Free Press essay.” NPR and its new chief declined to comment publicly but the network’s news executive, Edith Chapin, wrote a memo to employees saying that inclusion among staff, sourcing and overall coverage is critical to telling the nuanced stories of this country and our world.
NPR is simply following the mainstream media’s leftist trajectory, though it has a duty to remain objective because it receives taxpayer dollars. The radio network was created over five decades ago as an educational news source that operates under the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which also includes television’s Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). Its headquarters are in Washington D.C., and it has more than 1,000 radio stations nationwide. CPB’s 2024 operating budget is a whopping $535 million and, though most of it does not go to NPR, the public radio network says “federal funding is essential” and its continuation is critical. In fact, the news outlet’s website states that the elimination of federal funding would result in fewer programs, less journalism and eventually the loss of public radio stations.
This month a Virginia congressman introduced legislation to strip NPR of public money so that no taxpayer dollars fund its “radical left messaging.” The proposed legislation prohibits federal funding of NPR and prevents local public radio stations from using federal grant money to purchase content or pay dues to NPR. “It is bad enough that so many media outlets push their slanted views instead of reporting the news, but it is even more egregious for hardworking taxpayers to be forced to pay for it,” said Congressman Bob Good, the lawmaker behind the measure. “My legislation would ensure no taxpayer dollars are used to fund the woke, leftist propaganda of National Public Radio.”
Until next week,
The post Trump Persecution Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In a grim indicator of how news will be covered on taxpayer dime, the new head of the government-funded National Public Radio (NPR) is on the board of a leftwing activist organization called Center for Democracy and Technology that pushes for censorship and receives funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. Her name is Katherine Maher, a former Wikimedia Foundation CEO, with liberal views publicly expressed throughout the years in her social media posts. In 2018, she called former President Donald Trump a racist in a post that has since been deleted, according to a mainstream newspaper report. A couple of years ago Maher shared a photo of herself in a “President Biden” campaign hat. In a 2021 video clip the new NPR chief describes the First Amendment as the top challenge in the fight against disinformation, a fictitious crisis created by the Biden administration to control information.
Maher takes over at NPR as a longtime NPR editor, Uri Berliner, reveals that liberal bias has altered the public radio network’s coverage in recent years, resulting in errors on major stories such as the Hamas attacks in Israel, Hunter Biden’s laptop scandal and COVID-19. “It’s true NPR has always had a liberal bent, but during most of my tenure here, an open-minded, curious culture prevailed,” Berliner, a 25-year NPR veteran wrote in a recently published essay. “We were nerdy, but not knee-jerk, activist, or scolding. In recent years, however, that has changed. Today, those who listen to NPR or read its coverage online find something different: the distilled worldview of a very small segment of the U.S. population. An open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don’t have an audience that reflects America. That wouldn’t be a problem for an openly polemical news outlet serving a niche audience. But for NPR, which purports to consider all things, it’s devastating both for its journalism and its business model.” Berliner confirms that race and identity have become paramount in nearly every aspect of the workplace and journalists are required to ask everyone they interview about race, gender, and ethnicity.
A few days ago, Berliner, a senior business editor, resigned, citing Maher’s response to his recent exposé. In an email to the radio network’s new CEO, Berliner wrote: “I am resigning from NPR, a great American institution where I have worked for 25 years. I respect the integrity of my colleagues and wish for NPR to thrive and do important journalism. But I cannot work in a newsroom where I am disparaged by a new CEO whose divisive views confirm the very problems at NPR I cite in my Free Press essay.” NPR and its new chief declined to comment publicly but the network’s news executive, Edith Chapin, wrote a memo to employees saying that inclusion among staff, sourcing and overall coverage is critical to telling the nuanced stories of this country and our world.
NPR is simply following the mainstream media’s leftist trajectory, though it has a duty to remain objective because it receives taxpayer dollars. The radio network was created over five decades ago as an educational news source that operates under the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which also includes television’s Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). Its headquarters are in Washington D.C., and it has more than 1,000 radio stations nationwide. CPB’s 2024 operating budget is a whopping $535 million and, though most of it does not go to NPR, the public radio network says “federal funding is essential” and its continuation is critical. In fact, the news outlet’s website states that the elimination of federal funding would result in fewer programs, less journalism and eventually the loss of public radio stations.
This month a Virginia congressman introduced legislation to strip NPR of public money so that no taxpayer dollars fund its “radical left messaging.” The proposed legislation prohibits federal funding of NPR and prevents local public radio stations from using federal grant money to purchase content or pay dues to NPR. “It is bad enough that so many media outlets push their slanted views instead of reporting the news, but it is even more egregious for hardworking taxpayers to be forced to pay for it,” said Congressman Bob Good, the lawmaker behind the measure. “My legislation would ensure no taxpayer dollars are used to fund the woke, leftist propaganda of National Public Radio.”
The post NPR’s New CEO Sits on Board of Soros-Funded Activist Group that Pushes for Censorship appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed an opposition to the Justice Department’s request to the court for an additional month to decide whether to produce audio/video recordings of the special counsel interview of President Biden. Currently, the Justice Department is supposed to let the court and Judicial Watch know its position on releasing the recordings on April 30. But the agency just asked the court for at least one more month (May 27 or later) to state its position on whether it is going to release any recordings.
On March 11, 2024, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Department of Justice failed to respond to a February 2024 FOIA request for records of all special counsel interviews of President Biden (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-00700)). A redacted transcript of the Biden interview was released on April 15.
On February 5, 2024, Special Counsel Robert Hur issued the “Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware Private Residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.”
In the report, Hur called Biden a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and declined to charge Biden with a “serious felony:”
We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.
Prior to the finalization of the report, the White House issued a letter to the Special Counsel’s office attacking the report’s “treatment of President Biden’s memory,” and added “there is ample evidence from your interview that the President did well in answering your questions …”
Judicial Watch argues:
This case could not be any more straightforward, and [the Justice Department] cannot and does not provide any substantive reasons why an extension of time is necessary at this time…. Judicial Watch, along with other media organizations as well as Congressional committees, have sought these materials to enable the public to form its own conclusions about the Special Counsel’s characterizations of President Biden’s testimony.
[The Justice Department] can alleviate any administrative burden by informing Judicial Watch and the Court whether it intends to produce the recordings. If it produces the recordings, the case is over.
“The Biden Justice Department is trying to help Joe Biden politically by hiding the recordings of his special counsel interviews,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The recordings of the Biden interview are essential to the public interest in obtaining information about any presidential misconduct, crimes, and cognitive challenges.”
Judicial Watch has several ongoing FOIA lawsuits about Biden’s document scandals and the related unprecedented partisan prosecutorial and judicial abuses of former President Donald J. Trump.
The post Judicial Watch Opposes Justice Department Effort to Delay Decision Regarding Special Counsel’s Biden Interview Transcripts appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Federalist:
Flyers reportedly posted around a Resource Center Matamoros facility in Mexico encouraged illegal immigrants — who are not eligible to vote in the United States — to vote for President Joe Biden in November, according to The Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. One of the organizations operating out of the Resource Center Matamoros (RCM) has ties to Biden’s Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, whose articles of impeachment the U.S. House of Representatives delivered to the Senate Tuesday afternoon.
Mayorkas — whose disastrous handling of the invasion at the southern border earned him impeachment by the House — was formerly on the board of HIAS and in his current role with the Biden administration has met with members of both Angry Tias and Abuelas as well as LUPE, according to Judicial Watch.
Read more here…
The post Report: Flyers Urging Illegals To Vote For Biden Found In Left-Wing Group’s Office In Mexico appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The New York Post:
The FBI was tipped off in April 2020 to gain-of-function virus research in China, funded by the agency formerly headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci, that “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation,” emails from agents at the bureau show.
At least one FBI agent at the bureau’s Newark Field Office referred to the revelation as “alarming.”
Another agent called the tip “interesting,” and vowed to follow-up with others at the FBI.
The five-pages of emails were obtained by conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch via a Freedom of Information Act request and released Friday.
“These smoking gun documents showed the FBI quickly understood that Fauci’s agency funded the gain-of-function research that could disguise the resulting coronavirus as ‘natural,’” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.
Read more here…
The post FBI found it ‘alarming’ that Fauci-funded virus research at Wuhan lab would leave no trace of ‘human manipulation’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Newsmax:
A new COVID-19 revelation has come about via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request released Friday.
In the FOIA, internal FBI communications show the Bureau was tipped off in April 2020 that the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), under the leadership of Dr. Anthony Fauci, had funded coronavirus gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
The “alarming” nature of the FOIA draws on a paragraph in the NIAID grant’s “description,” which, in its original form, appears to be erased from the internet. Nonetheless, the paragraph in the FOIA mentions how a “novel” coronavirus would be engineered “to infect human cells” while leaving no trace of its lab origins — thereby misleading future researchers — in the case of a future outbreak — that the novel virus had sprung out of nature.
Judicial Watch released the five FOIA pages of internal FBI communications on Friday.
“These smoking gun documents showed the FBI quickly understood that Fauci’s agency funded the gain-of-function research that could disguise the resulting coronavirus as ‘natural,'” Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch President, said, according to the New York Post.
“These new documents further demonstrate the need for a comprehensive criminal investigation into Fauci’s gain-of-function scandal.”
Read more here…
The post FBI: Fauci Funded ‘Alarming’ COVID Research in Wuhan appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration appears to be using a federal agency to go after a family that has donated significantly to Republicans by suing its company for “racially discriminatory hiring practice” over background checks. The business, Sheetz Inc., is a chain of convenience stores and the Sheetz family has long supported Republicans in Pennsylvania and the Midwest, according to records obtained by Judicial Watch. In the last few years, the Sheetz’s have donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republican causes and political candidates, including presidential candidate Mitt Romney, Pennsylvania Senate candidate Dave McCormick and the National Republican Congressional Committee. The most recent donation of $24,500 by Chairman Steve Sheetz was made a few months ago to McCormick, a Westpoint graduate and combat veteran endorsed by former President Donald Trump.
Now the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which is charged with enforcing the nation’s workplace discrimination laws, is suing Sheetz Inc. for “racially discriminatory hiring practice” over background checks. The agency charges that the company’s criminal history screening causes discriminatory impact against black, native American and other workers. In the lawsuit the Biden administration writes that Sheetz has maintained a longstanding practice of screening all job applicants for records of criminal conviction and then denying them employment based on those records. The company operates stores in over 600 locations throughout six states. The EEOC charges that the background checks disproportionately screened out black, native American/Alaska native and multiracial applicants. “Sheetz’s companywide hiring practices violated provisions of Title VII that prohibit disparate impact discrimination,” according to the agency.
In its complaint, which was filed in Maryland, the EEOC does not allege that Sheetz was motivated by race when making hiring decisions. The criminal screenings nevertheless resulted in racial discrimination, which violates federal law prohibiting facially neutral employment practices that cause a discriminatory impact because of race when those practices are not job-related and consistent with business necessity or where alternative practices with less discriminatory impact are available. “Federal law mandates that employment practices causing a disparate impact because of race or other protected classifications must be shown by the employer to be necessary to ensure the safe and efficient performance of the particular jobs at issue,” said EEOC Regional Attorney Debra M. Lawrence. “Even when such necessity is proven, the practice remains unlawful if there is an alternative practice available that is comparably effective in achieving the employer’s goals but causes less discriminatory effect.” An EEOC director stresses the agency’s commitment to reintegrating individuals with criminal records into society by ensuring they have fair access to employment and other essential services.
Last fall the EEOC directed government agencies to “widely publicize” they are “hiring persons with criminal conduct issues in their background checks” as part of a Biden executive order requiring diversity, equity and inclusion in the federal workforce by, among other things expanding employment opportunities for convicted individuals. Job applicants with criminal records are rarely eliminated from government jobs since the president issued the directive, the EEOC conceded at the time, but agency leaders believe more must be done to accommodate them and, when conducting background checks, the agency says employers should take a holistic approach with consideration for mitigating circumstances. In two reports issued last year, the EEOC explained that before Biden’s order an agency task force charged with identifying vulnerable workers and finding ways to better serve them classified “formerly incarcerated persons as one category of vulnerable workers due to the challenges they face in securing employment after their incarceration.” Years ago, the agency also made background checks related to arrest and conviction records among its “national substantive area priorities because African Americans and Latinos are disproportionately incarcerated.” Now the taxpayer-funded federal agency is going after businesses that screen employees with background checks, spending public resources to sue them.
The post Govt. Sues Republican Donors’ Biz for “Racially Discriminatory Hiring Practice” over Background Checks appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Donald Trump business records trial opened yesterday in New York City with prosecutors signaling a wide-ranging case. Documents—business records—related to payments from the Trump Organization to an adult film star showed “election fraud” and a “criminal conspiracy and cover up” designed to prevent information about an alleged affair from emerging before the 2016 presidential election, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said.
At the heart of the case are thirty-four counts of falsifying business records—generally misdemeanor charges that in this case Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg is attempting to elevate to felonies. Trump defense attorney Todd Blanche told the jury that the thirty-four Bragg charges signified no crimes—that Trump was just doing what a business leader does: sign papers prepared by his office.
“The thirty-four counts are really just thirty-four pieces of paper.” Blanche said. Regarding the paper trail offered up by the prosecution, Blanche said that Trump “had nothing to do with the invoice, with the check being generated or with the entry on the ledger.” Blanche also attacked the prosecution’s contention that the payments were attempts to influence the 2016 election. “I have a spoiler alert,” he said. “There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It’s called democracy.”
Prosecutors face two big problems with their case: a deeply flawed key witness and a largely untested legal ploy to leverage misdemeanor business-records charges into felony-level convictions.
The case centers around former Trump Organization executive turned Trump nemesis, Michael Cohen. A self-proclaimed former Trump “fixer,” Cohen has a long criminal record and well-known hatred for the forty-fifth president of the United States. In 2016, Cohen expected a position in the Trump Administration, which was not forthcoming. Cohen later became a frequent guest on MSNBC, railing against Trump, and in 2022 he published a three-hundred-page diatribe against Trump, “Revenge.”
In 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty in federal court to tax evasion, campaign finance violations related to the current New York case, and false statements. He was sentenced to a three-year prison term. Later that year, he was back in federal court to plead guilty to lying to Congress.
A month ago, a judge denied Cohen’s request for an early end to his supervised release from jail time, saying Cohen had likely “committed perjury” in past testimony—a finding brushed aside by the judges in Trump’s current civil and criminal cases in New York.
Much of the current case will hinge on Cohen’s credibility on the stand. It’s worth noting that both federal authorities and Bragg’s predecessor as Manhattan DA, Cy Vance, declined to bring the business-records case, uneasy with Cohen and a strategy for getting the misdemeanor charges to felony-level crimes. Mark Pomerantz, a senior Vance prosecutor who resigned after differences with Bragg on Trump prosecutions, noted in his book, “People vs. Donald Trump,” that while Cohen could be charming and credible, he also was “a somewhat feral creature.” Cohen, Pomerantz wrote, has a “penchant for publicity, exaggeration, and grandiose statements” that turns people off.
The second big problem for prosecutors are those thirty-four business records charges usually clocking in as misdemeanors. In opening statements, the prosecution indicated it could prove the charges were felonies by showing they were connected to “election fraud.” But the statute prosecutors rely on has nothing to do with election law. New York state law (Section 175.10 of the penal code) moves falsification of business records from misdemeanor to felony if the defendant’s “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime.”
What precisely is that other crime? At the moment, prosecutors aren’t saying. But eventually they’ll have to come up with something specific.
With a jury drawn from deep blue Manhattan, it may not matter. Jurors may simply dislike Trump so much that they’ll look for any path to conviction. But juries are unpredictable. And the view from here is that Michael Cohen could emerge as a big liability. That sketchy ploy to elevate misdemeanors into felonies also gives the Trump team strong grounds for appeal.
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post Trump Trial Prosecutors Face Big Problems appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: FBI Records Indicate Fauci Agency Funded Gain-of-Function Wuhan Lab Research ‘Would leave no signatures of purposeful human manipulation’
Judicial Watch announced recently it received 5 pages of records from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request that show an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including “gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of purposeful human manipulation.”
Texas Border Operation Captures Half a Million Illegal Immigrants, Thousands of Felons
The Biden administration’s failure to secure the Mexican border forced Texas officials to establish a security initiative that has endured heavy criticism from Democrats and the media despite its success in apprehending hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants—including thousands of criminals—and seizing millions of lethal doses of fentanyl. It is known as Operation Lone Star, and it was launched by Governor Greg Abbott in March 2021 as the illegal immigration crisis gripped his border state. Under the program, the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Texas National Guard pick up the slack for the federal government, which is charged with protecting the famously porous southern border but has failed miserably to do so. Operation Lone Star works to stop the smuggling of drugs, weapons and people into Texas, and interdict transnational criminal activity between ports of entry.
Judicial Watch Sues Intelligence Chief for Damage Assessment on Joe Biden’s Mishandling of Classified Documents
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after ODNI failed to comply with a February 21, 2024, FOIA request for damage assessments and equity reviews performed by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence related to the materials improperly removed by Biden.
Jailed Felons among Thousands who Scammed COVID Relief Program out of Billions of Dollars
Fraud and corruption are so rampant in the U.S. government’s mammoth pandemic relief program that the Justice Department created a special COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force (CFETF) to crack down on scams and recover some of the stolen funds. A few days ago, it published an update on its work and American taxpayers should be furious.
In The News
Patronis flips script on Whitehouse, demands any records related to wife and Citizens Insurance
The Sun SentinelIn a letter to Whitehouse, Patronis said he found the Democratic senator’s requests in November and March for information about Citizens Property Insurance Corp. “especially alarming” in light of an ethics complaint by conservative foundation Judicial Watch asserting that Whitehouse voted for environmental projects that financially benefitted his wife’s consulting business.
Judicial Watch routinely targets Democrats and members of the Biden Administration with lawsuits and Freedom of Information Act requests, and then posts stories about the requests on its website.
Riot revisited: Trump’s plan to pardon Jan. 6 defendants
Washington Examiner
Some, such as Tom Fitton, president of the conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, say the term hostages is a “fair analysis” and that Trump would be right to wield pardon power in their favor.
“These are folks who are the victim of government abuse,” Fitton told the Washington Examiner. “Call them what you will. They need to be pardoned. They need to have their sentences commuted.”
Why can’t Donald Trump stop verbally attacking judges, prosecutors – and anybody who crosses him?
The IndependentTom Fitton, the president of the conservative organisation Judicial Watch, says Mr Trump is right to criticise the legal system, including judges, arguing that many of his complaints are “well-founded”.
“It’s his absolute right as a citizen to raise these issues, and certainly as a criminal defendant and presidential candidate there are even heightened First Amendment protections for what he has said,” he tells The Independent. “Unfortunately, we have too many judges acting politically as opposed to following and applying the law in an unbiased manner.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Alex Marlow Re: Breitbart News and Censorship - Ashli Babbitt’s Husband: FBI Continues Character Assassination of Ashli Babbitt! - FITTON on Congress: The Fails Continue!
-
The post SMOKING GUN FBI DOCS ON FAUCI SCANDAL appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Energy for records about the retroactive termination of former President Donald Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Energy (No. 1:24-cv-00744)).
In the lawsuit, Judicial Watch cites Trump’s January 12, 2024, motion to compel discovery in his criminal prosecution in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, in which the former president asserts that DOE attempted to terminate his security clearance retroactively after his June 2023 indictment by Special Counsel Jack Smith (United States v. Trump, et al., (No. 9:23-cr-80101)).
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the Energy Department failed to comply with a January 18, 2024, FOIA request for its records and communications concerning retroactively terminating Trump’s security clearance and/or access to classified information.
Judicial Watch in the lawsuit points to the February 2024 response to Trump’s January 2024 motion in which Smith acknowledges the existence of a June 2023 memorandum prepared by an Energy Department official regarding the security clearance.
The Special Counsel’s office describes the memorandum’s contents and asserts that it had produced the record to Trump. Smith also acknowledges requesting and receiving additional “responsive” records from DOE, including “approximately 30 pages of records and eight emails.” Smith asserts that he was “now producing” the 30 pages to Trump and withholding the eight emails.
Trump’s lawyers suggest in the January 2024 motion to compel discovery that Trump had a high-level security clearance as recently as 2023.
Lawyers for Trump say a government document from June 2023 still listed him with a “Q” clearance from the DOE. The document was dated a few weeks after prosecutors indicted Trump in the classified documents case. A “Q” clearance refers to a type of security clearance handled by the Department of Energy, which holds classified information focused largely on nuclear secrets.
“It looks like the Department of Energy is trying to manufacture a criminal case,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “What are they hiding?”
Judicial Watch is in the forefront of the court battles for transparency regarding Biden administration’s targeting of Trump.
In August 2023, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for records of the Archives’ role in President Trump’s White House records controversy; whether it offered Trump a secure storage location other than the National Archives; and if the Archives consulted with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence regarding the classification or declassification procedures of any of the alleged classified documents found at Trump’s Florida residence.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch obtained DOJ records that showed top officials of the National Security Division discussing the political implications of Trump allowing CNN to use closed-circuit TV (CCTV) footage of the raid on his Mar-a-Lago home. The documents confirmed that the Justice Department had asked that Mar-a-Lago CCTV be turned off before the raid.
A separate Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration resulted in the release of records about the unprecedented document dispute between Archives and President Trump. Click here or here to review the records.
In August 2022, Judicial Watch successfully sued to unseal the search warrant affidavit used to justify the unprecedented raid on the home of former President Trump.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch filed lawsuits against the DOJ for its records and the FBI’s records about the Mar-a-Lago raid search warrant application and approval, as well as communications about the warrant between the FBI, Executive Office of the President and the Secret Service.
In October 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the raid on Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made during the raid.
In November 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all communications between the Secret Service and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the search warrant that precipitated the raid on former Trump’s Florida residence at Mar-a-Lago.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Energy Department for Records on Retroactive Termination of President Trump’s Security Clearance appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the announcement by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to initiate an impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden: The House took a necessary step for accountability and justice in opening an impeachment inquiry into President Biden. The American people have a right to know […]
The post Judicial Watch Statement on Impeachment Inquiry into President Joe Biden appeared first on Judicial Watch.
To ensure “equity is a key priority,” a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) anti-terrorism program that annually doles out millions of dollars to combat violence in local communities is awarding a substantial chunk of funds to recipients devoted to underserved populations, including a D.C. nonprofit dedicated to empowering lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) […]
The post To Prioritize Equity DHS Anti-Terrorism Funds go to Groups Devoted to Underserved Populations appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues for Details of Biden Administration Bank Bailouts
‘LGBTQ+ Trailblazers’ Join 9/11 Rescuers, Helen Keller in Dept of Labor Hall of Honor
Judicial Watch Sues for Details of Biden Administration Bank Bailouts
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit against three federal agencies for details of the Biden agencies’ decision to expand asset protection to large depositors in the Silicon Valley and Signature Bank government takeovers (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of the Treasury, et al. (No. 1:23-cv-01174)).
The fact that the responsible Biden officials are hiding documents about the issue suggests that they have something to hide.
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System after the agencies failed to respond to March 13 and 14, 2023, FOIA requests for:
- All records relating to the systemic risk exception granted to Silicon Valley Bank. Such records include minutes, memoranda, and any communications between the [agency] and employees and/or representatives of Silicon Valley Bank.
- All records concerning the systemic risk exception granted to Signature Bank. Such records include minutes, memoranda, and any communications between the [agency] and employees and/or representatives of Signature Bank.
Silicon Valley Bank in Santa Clara, CA, failed on March 10, 2023, and Signature Bank in New York City failed two days later. On March 12 the Fed, FDIC, and Treasury Department, with the approval of President Biden, announced that a “systemic risk exception” was being invoked for both banks. This, they claimed, would fully protect all depositors.
The FDIC’s standard deposit insurance coverage limit is $250,000 per depositor, per FDIC-insured bank, per ownership category. A systemic risk exception allows the FDIC, after multiple agency reviews, to protect uninsured depositors over the $250,000 insured limit.
The Hill reported that midsize banks are lobbying federal officials to guarantee all bank deposits over the next two years and that small, community banks “have spoken out against paying more to cover the failure of larger banks such as SVB.” The article points out that “only around 10 percent of deposits in community banks are over the $250,000 limit, compared to roughly 90 percent for Silicon Valley Bank,” according to Cam Fine, former CEO of the Independent Community Bankers of America.
Fortune reported that the FDIC listed large companies that were “in no real danger” of failure that it bailed out in the wake of the Silicon Valley Bank collapse:
The $1 billion that Sequoia, the firm famous for backing iconic companies including Apple, Google and WhatsApp, had at SVB made up a fraction of its $85 billion assets under management.
Kanzhun, which had $902.9 million in deposits with SVB … was heavily backed by Chinese giant Tencent before it went public on the Nasdaq in 2021, was among the largest Chinese companies to IPO in the US that year.
Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) said during a hearing of the Senate Banking Committee. “I think, you know, had had [sic] deposits of over $3 billion, and I think Roku had deposits of over $500 million, but there are a lot of people, a lot of firms in Silicon Valley Bank that had deposits well over $1 million, over $5 million.”
Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) reportedly lobbied for the bailout “after the failed bank began lobbying California’s government and donating to Newsom’s wife.” Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats were lobbied for the bailout. Silicon Valley was also a major supporter of President Biden in the 2020 election.
The bank’s board reportedly had many Democratic Party ties, including “a Hillary Clinton mega-donor” as well as someone who “worked for President Barack Obama before her own political career spectacularly failed.” A third was a “prolific contributor to Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi — who owns a Napa Valley vineyard just 15 minutes” away.
We have been instrumental in uncovering previous bank bailout information.
In February 2011, we obtained FDIC records through a FOIA lawsuit filed on behalf of former Federal Reserve and FDIC employee Vern McKinley that pertained to the Citigroup and Bank of America bailouts, as well as documents detailing the FDIC’s Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, which guaranteed unsecured debt of private financial institutions and provided them “full coverage of non-interest bearing [sic] deposit transaction accounts, regardless of dollar amount.” Included were unredacted minutes from FDIC Board meetings during which FDIC officials and staff discussed the rationale for the bailouts which centered on the “systemic risk” of allowing the two financial institutions to fail.
In October 2011, we petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, asking for a review of a lower court ruling validating the Federal Reserve’s decision to withhold documents about its $29 billion bailout of Bear Stearns.
In April 2012, McKinley and I co-authored an op-ed in The Washington Times titled “Bernanke’s Fairy Tale Recession Story for Kids; Records Show Fed Had No Coherent Strategy for Bank Bailouts,” which stated in part:
It’s an oldie but a goodie for our Federal Reserve chairman. In one of his recent lectures at George Washington University (GWU), Ben S. Bernanke made the self-congratulatory assertion that the “forceful policy response” led by the Federal Reserve in 2008 helped avoid a more serious economic downturn.
This rhetoric is nothing new. Mr. Bernanke has made similar remarks in the past. As he confided in one interview, “I was not going to be the Federal Reserve chairman who presided over the second Great Depression.” It is clear that like Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, who recently trumpeted the fourth anniversary of his role in the Bear Stearns bailout, Mr. Bernanke is aggressively using the GWU lectures to shape his legacy before he steps down.
‘LGBTQ+ Trailblazers’ Join 9/11 Rescuers, Helen Keller in Dept of Labor Hall of Honor
Last year we told you how the Census Bureau was spending $10 million to research how best to add questions about sexual orientation and gender identity on surveys. A few months ago, I commented on the CIA celebrating its LGBTQ+ officers.
Now Biden’s Department of Labor has joined the fray, honoring three people whose contributions to American labor are dubious at best. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the details:
The Biden administration is inducting a transgender woman and two gay men into the Department of Labor (DOL) Hall of Honor, describing them as “LGBTQ+ Trailblazers” that helped advance workplace protections and equity. The trio will join the likes of the 9/11 rescue workers who “engaged in a heroic effort to rescue survivors of terrorist attacks,” President Ronald Reagan, United Farm Workers of America leader César Chávez and disability rights advocate Helen Keller. Last year’s inductees were the essential workers of the Coronavirus pandemic who showed up when everyone else stayed home. The DOL notes that they were disproportionately women and workers of color.
“The Labor Hall of Honor recognizes individuals and groups whose distinctive contributions to the field of labor have enhanced the quality of life of millions – yesterday, today, and for generations to come,” the agency writes in its Hall of Honor Inductees page. “Nominees are considered on a rolling basis, and formal induction ceremonies are conducted at the U.S. Department of Labor in Washington, D.C.” Every inductee is listed along with a portrait and a brief description of what they did to deserve the honor. The first to be recognized in 1989 was Cyrus S. Ching, a labor union leader who was appointed director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service by President Harry Truman. Ching “established a pattern of constructive cooperation with employees,” according to the DOL, which includes a quote from Ching calling collective bargaining one of the greatest cornerstones of our democratic institutions.
Besides the LGBTQ+ trailblazers this year’s honorees include dozens of Thai garment workers discovered by federal agents in 1995 at a sweatshop in the southern California city of El Monte, which is in Los Angeles County. The case sparked national outcry, according to the DOL, and inspired legislation against human trafficking and forced labor. “Through sheer determination and perseverance, the workers defied the odds and fought bravely for the freedom, rights and protections long denied to them,” the agency writes in this year’s Hall of Honor announcement. “Their case galvanized significant changes in U.S. labor and immigration law.” The Thais were allowed to stay in the U.S. and were provided with a path to citizenship. “The El Monte Thai garment workers serve as a lasting reminder of the importance of the Department of Labor’s mission to protect rights of all workers,” said the agency’s acting secretary, Julie Su, adding that their contributions to federal labor and immigration laws cannot be understated.
After all, the DOL conducts the annual Hall of Honor induction to “recognize extraordinary individuals whose distinctive contributions to the field of labor elevated working conditions, wages and overall quality of life of America’s working families.” It remains unclear how the LGBTQ+ trailblazers met the criteria, but the agency is nevertheless honoring them. The transgender woman, Aimee Stephens, got fired and received a severance package after working six years at a Detroit funeral home as a man. When Stephens informed her employer that she was taking leave to undergo gender affirming surgery and would return as a woman in 2013, the owner terminated her, and the Obama Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued the business for sex discrimination. In 2016 a federal court ruled in favor of the funeral home, but a federal appellate court reversed the decision after the EEOC appealed. In 2020 the Supreme Court ruled against the funeral home, which argued that federal protections against sex discrimination do not include gender identity or transgender status.
The two gay men who will be honored this month along with the transgender woman also took their case to the Supreme Court. Donald Zarda was a skydiving instructor in Long Island, New York when he came out as gay to ease a female customer’s concern. The customer complained and Zarda got fired for misconduct. He sued his employer alleging that he got fired based on his sexual orientation. A federal court in New York ruled in favor of the employer in 2014 and, although Zarda died later that year, his family appealed on his behalf, citing violation of the Civil Rights Act. The other DOL honoree, Gerald Bostock, claims he got fired as a child welfare advocate in a Georgia county after joining a gay recreational softball league in 2013. Last year the county approved a $825,000 settlement to resolve the case.
Until next week,
The post Biden Bank Bailouts! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against three federal agencies for details of the Biden agencies’ decision to expand asset protection to large depositors in the Silicon Valley and Signature Bank government takeovers (Judicial Watch Inc. V. U.S. Department of the Treasury, et al. (No. 1:23-cv-01174)).
Judicial Watch filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System after the agencies failed to respond to March 13 and 14, 2023, FOIA requests for:
- All records relating to the systemic risk exception granted to Silicon Valley Bank. Such records include minutes, memoranda, and any communications between the [agency] and employees and/or representatives of Silicon Valley Bank.
- All records concerning the systemic risk exception granted to Signature Bank. Such records include minutes, memoranda, and any communications between the [agency] and employees and/or representatives of Signature Bank.
Silicon Valley Bank in Santa Clara, CA, failed on March 10, 2023, and Signature Bank in New York City failed two days later. On March 12 the Fed, FDIC, and Treasury Department, with the approval of President Biden, announced that a “systemic risk exception” was being invoked for both banks. This, they claimed, would fully protect all depositors.
The FDIC’s standard deposit insurance coverage limit is $250,000 per depositor, per FDIC-insured bank, per ownership category. A systemic risk exception allows the FDIC, after multiple agency reviews, to protect uninsured depositors over the $250,000 insured limit.
The Hill reported that midsize banks are lobbying federal officials to guarantee all bank deposits over the next two years and that small, community banks “have spoken out against paying more to cover the failure of larger banks such as SVB.” The article points out that “only around 10 percent of deposits in community banks are over the $250,000 limit, compared to roughly 90 percent for Silicon Valley Bank,” according to Cam Fine, former CEO of the Independent Community Bankers of America.
Fortune reported that the FDIC listed large companies that were “in no real danger” of failure that it bailed out in the wake of the Silicon Valley Bank collapse:
The $1 billion that Sequoia, the firm famous for backing iconic companies including Apple, Google and WhatsApp, had at SVB made up a fraction of its $85 billion assets under management.
Kanzhun, which had $902.9 million in deposits with SVB … was heavily backed by Chinese giant Tencent before it went public on the Nasdaq in 2021, was among the largest Chinese companies to IPO in the US that year.
Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) said during a hearing of the Senate Banking Committee. “I think, you know, had had [sic] deposits of over $3 billion, and I think Roku had deposits of over $500 million, but there are a lot of people, a lot of firms in Silicon Valley Bank that had deposits well over $1 million, over $5 million.”
Governor Gavin Newsom (D-CA) reportedly lobbied for the bailout “after the failed bank began lobbying California’s government and donating to Newsom’s wife.” Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats were lobbied for the bailout. Silicon Valley was also a major supporter of President Biden in the 2020 election.
The bank’s board reportedly had many Democratic Party ties, including “a Hillary Clinton mega-donor” as well as someone who “worked for President Barack Obama before her own political career spectacularly failed.” A third was a “prolific contributor to Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi — who owns a Napa Valley vineyard just 15 minutes” away.
“The costly Biden bank bailouts have all the hallmarks of political favoritism and government overreach,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “Certainly, the fact that the responsible Biden officials are hiding documents about the issue suggests that they have something to hide.”
Judicial Watch was instrumental in uncovering previous bank bailout information.
In February 2011, Judicial Watch obtained FDIC records through a FOIA lawsuit filed on behalf of former Federal Reserve and FDIC employee Vern McKinley that pertained to the Citigroup and Bank of America bailouts, as well as documents detailing the FDIC’s Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, which guaranteed unsecured debt of private financial institutions and provided them “full coverage of non-interest bearing [sic] deposit transaction accounts, regardless of dollar amount.” Included were unredacted minutes from FDIC Board meetings during which FDIC officials and staff discussed the rationale for the bailouts which centered on the “systemic risk” of allowing the two financial institutions to fail.
In October 2011, Judicial Watch petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court, asking for a review of a lower court ruling validating the Federal Reserve’s decision to withhold documents about its $29 billion bailout of Bear Stearns.
In April 2012, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton and McKinley co-authored an op-ed that ran in The Washington Times titled “Bernanke’s Fairy Tale Recession Story for Kids; Records Show Fed Had No Coherent Strategy for Bank Bailouts,” which stated in part:
It’s an oldie but a goodie for our Federal Reserve chairman. In one of his recent lectures at George Washington University (GWU), Ben S. Bernanke made the self-congratulatory assertion that the “forceful policy response” led by the Federal Reserve in 2008 helped avoid a more serious economic downturn.
This rhetoric is nothing new. Mr. Bernanke has made similar remarks in the past. As he confided in one interview, “I was not going to be the Federal Reserve chairman who presided over the second Great Depression.” It is clear that like Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, who recently trumpeted the fourth anniversary of his role in the Bear Stearns bailout, Mr. Bernanke is aggressively using the GWU lectures to shape his legacy before he steps down.
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Details of Biden Administration Bank Bailouts appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration is inducting a transgender woman and two gay men into the Department of Labor (DOL) Hall of Honor, describing them as “LGBTQ+ Trailblazers” that helped advance workplace protections and equity. The trio will join the likes of the 9/11 rescue workers who “engaged in a heroic effort to rescue survivors of terrorist attacks,” President Ronald Reagan, United Farm Workers of America leader César Chávez and disability rights advocate Helen Keller. Last year’s inductees were the essential workers of the Coronavirus pandemic who showed up when everyone else stayed home. The DOL notes that they were disproportionately women and workers of color.
“The Labor Hall of Honor recognizes individuals and groups whose distinctive contributions to the field of labor have enhanced the quality of life of millions – yesterday, today, and for generations to come,” the agency writes in its Hall of Honor Inductees page. “Nominees are considered on a rolling basis, and formal induction ceremonies are conducted at the U.S. Department of Labor in Washington, D.C.” Every inductee is listed along with a portrait and a brief description of what they did to deserve the honor. The first to be recognized in 1989 was Cyrus S. Ching, a labor union leader who was appointed director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service by President Harry Truman. Ching “established a pattern of constructive cooperation with employees,” according to the DOL, which includes a quote from Ching calling collective bargaining one of the greatest cornerstones of our democratic institutions.
Besides the LGBTQ+ trailblazers this year’s honorees include dozens of Thai garment workers discovered by federal agents in 1995 at a sweatshop in the southern California city of El Monte, which is in Los Angeles County. The case sparked national outcry, according to the DOL, and inspired legislation against human trafficking and forced labor. “Through sheer determination and perseverance, the workers defied the odds and fought bravely for the freedom, rights and protections long denied to them,” the agency writes in this year’s Hall of Honor announcement. “Their case galvanized significant changes in U.S. labor and immigration law.” The Thais were allowed to stay in the U.S. and were provided with a path to citizenship. “The El Monte Thai garment workers serve as a lasting reminder of the importance of the Department of Labor’s mission to protect rights of all workers,” said the agency’s acting secretary, Julie Su, adding that their contributions to federal labor and immigration laws cannot be understated.
Afterall, the DOL conducts the annual Hall of Honor induction to “recognize extraordinary individuals whose distinctive contributions to the field of labor elevated working conditions, wages and overall quality of life of America’s working families.” It remains unclear how the LGBTQ+ trailblazers met the criteria, but the agency is nevertheless honoring them. The transgender woman, Aimee Stephens, got fired and received a severance package after working six years at a Detroit funeral home as a man. When Stephens informed her employer that she was taking leave to undergo gender affirming surgery and would return as a woman in 2013, the owner terminated her, and the Obama Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued the business for sex discrimination. In 2016 a federal court ruled in favor of the funeral home, but a federal appellate court reversed the decision after the EEOC appealed. In 2020 the Supreme Court ruled against the funeral home, which argued that federal protections against sex discrimination do not include gender identity or transgender status.
The two gay men who will be honored this month along with the transgender woman also took their case to the Supreme Court. Donald Zarda was a skydiving instructor in Long Island, New York when he came out as gay to ease a female customer’s concern. The customer complained and Zarda got fired for misconduct. He sued his employer alleging that he got fired based on his sexual orientation. A federal court in New York ruled in favor of the employer in 2014 and, although Zarda died later that year, his family appealed on his behalf, citing violation of the Civil Rights Act. The other DOL honoree, Gerald Bostock, claims he got fired as a child welfare advocate in a Georgia county after joining a gay recreational softball league in 2013. Last year the county approved a $825,000 settlement to resolve the case.
The post “LGBTQ+ Trailblazers” Join 9/11 Rescue Workers, Helen Keller in DOL Hall of Honor appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Documents Show Biden Justice Department’s Unprecedented Targeting of January 6 Protestors
FBI Says it Won’t Produce Records on Intervention to Help Hunter Biden on Missing Gun Due to ‘Ongoing Criminal Investigation,’ Federal Judge Orders Sept. 6 Hearing on Records Dispute
Pfizer Records Reveal 23-Person Study of COVID Vaccine Booster Safety and Effectiveness before Approval
Years after Judicial Watch Exposes ISIS/ Cartel Ties, Media Finally Reports It
Documents Show Biden Justice Department’s Unprecedented Targeting of January 6 Protestors
When the government decides to investigate ordinary citizens, it can wield enormous, intrusive power. Such was the case after January 6.
This is confirmed in 90 pages of records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, that we recently obtained in our Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit.
These documents detail a troubling and unprecedented deployment of federal resources to prosecute Americans caught up in the January 6 disturbance. The documents seem to describe a massive political and spy operation masquerading as a law enforcement operation.
We filed our lawsuit against the Justice Department and FBI for records related to the death of Ashli Babbitt (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:21-cv-02462)).
Here are the details of what we learned.
A January 25, 2021, confidential draft chart indicates staff assignments. Several “Lead AUSAs” (assistant U.S. attorneys) are listed. One is assigned to “White Nationalist Militias.” Two others are assigned to “Proud Boys.” Another is assigned to “Oath Keepers.”
The chart identifies “Branch 2: Priority Incidents and Subjects.” Its tasks are to investigate “specific incidents comprising the Capitol attack. Branch investigations are staffed by Criminal Division sections with designated lead prosecutors reporting up to their section supervisors:”
To identify and prosecute the individuals and organizations responsible for planting pipe bombs at the DNC and RNC.
To identify and prosecute rioting activity in the “Speaker’s Lobby,” and in particular to determine whether there is civilian criminal culpability for the death of Ashli Babbitt.
To identify and prosecute rioters responsible for the death of USCP Brian Sicknick.
To review force allegations against USCP and MPD officers, including the officer-involved shooting of Ashli Babbitt….
The chart lists “Branch 3: Intake, Assignment and Rapid Indictment” as: “Branch 3 intakes proposed prosecutions against individual rioters and assigns them for horizontal prosecutors; it also may channel individual defendants to Branches 1 and 2 based on those branches’ responsibilities. Branch 3 is the fulcrum of our reactive prosecutorial effort.”
The chart then describes a process for the “rapid indictment” of January 6 defendants:
Phase 1: Command Center (FMC): Co-located prosecutors and law enforcement agents in the command center screen referrals and assign them to Phase 2 or refer them/push up intelligence to Branches 1 and 2.
Phase 2: Complaints (FMC/Details): Cases referred from Phase 1 are assigned to AUSAs, a CTS [likely Civil Trial Section] attorney, and a WFO [FBI Washington Field Office] team who work in coordination with AUSOs/FBI field offices throughout the country to obtain criminal complaints and appropriate process.
Phase 3: Rapid Indictment (FMC): Cases charged out of Branch 3 are funneled to this unit, which will rapidly indict them. Only priority cases and Branch 2 and 3 cases are indicted by vertically organized AUSAs.
Phase 4: Indicted Prosecutions (Criminal Division): Indicted cases are returned/assigned for prosecution. Cases are centrally tracked with ticklers for Speedy Trial Act, discovery, intelligence gathering.
The chart describes “Branch 4: Advance Litigation Support” as “Branch 4 is a litigation, coordination and technology branch that provides support to all three investigative branches. Branch 4 has both litigation and technological responsibilities.”
The chart lists five roles for personnel to carry out:
Mass Data Collection (Process/Litigation): This team will coordinate and handle sensitive search warrants and other process directed at collecting large scale data (e.g., Geofence/Ad Tech).
Media Issues (Process/Litigation): This team will coordinate evidence collection from the media under the Justice Manual and develop litigation strategy for media-related defenses.
Filter (Support/Litigation): This team will develop filter protocols, staff filter reviews, and support filter-related litigation.”
Discovery (Planning/Litigation): This team will coordinate discovery, including protocols, Giglio, and litigation, focused on addressing “One Government” issues.
Litigation Technology (Support/Analysis): This team will stand up and maintain the apparatus tailored to store, process, analyze, and produce the unprecedented amount of data.
“Investigation and Litigation Technology Support Apparatus” lays out the array of technological sources to be use against January 6 defendants. The chart lists “Categories of data” which includes “cell phone records and device location data, cell phone data dumps, ad tech company locational data, financial locational data, social media accounts, email accounts, cloud storage accounts, financial records, flight travel records, and others.”
“Technological needs” listed in the chart include “devoted cloud storage, processing capacity to upload data to analytical and review platforms, analytical tools (e.g., Palantir), devoted review platform accessible across multiple DOJ and law enforcement components, and integration capacity – for purposes of analysis and discovery.”
“Complicating issues” related to the “Investigation and Litigation Technology Support Apparatus” include “unprecedented volume, high number of prosecutors, agents, analysts and support staff involved, data collected by multiple FBI field offices, trial prosecutions,” and others.
A previous review of records from this lawsuit highlighted the prosecution declination memorandum justifying the decision not to prosecute U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd for the shooting death of Babbitt.
We are engaged in a comprehensive, independent investigation into the January 6 disturbance:
- January 2023: documentsfrom the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, showe U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
- August 2023: A hearingwas held in federal court in our lawsuit against the U.S. Capitol Police seeking videos and emails concerning the protest at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
- Through its police department, Congress arguesthat the videos and emails are not public records, there is no public interest in their release, and that “sovereign immunity” prevents citizens from suing for their release.
- November 2021: we releasedmultiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records included a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Byrd.
- October 2021, United States Park Police recordsrelated to the January 6, 2021, demonstrations at the U.S. Capitol showed that on the day before the January 6 rally featuring President Trump, U.S. Park Police expected a “large portion” of the attendees to march to the U.S. Capitol and that the FBI was monitoring the January 6 demonstrations, including travel to the events by “subjects of interest.”
Our investigations continue on the January 6 overreach, and you can expect additional, important litigation on this topic!
FBI Says it Won’t Produce Records on Intervention to Help Hunter Biden on Missing Gun Due to ‘Ongoing Criminal Investigation,’ Federal Judge Orders Sept. 6 Hearing on Records Dispute
A federal court just scheduled a hearing for next week in our lawsuit for records regarding the gun owned by Hunter Biden that reportedly was thrown in a trash can behind a Delaware grocery store. In a joint status report to the court, the FBI stated it would not produce records about the incident due to an “ongoing criminal investigation.”
The video hearing was set by DC U.S. District Court Judge Jia M. Cobb for September 6, 2023, at 10:00 a.m.
We filed the lawsuit after the FBI withheld records in response to a January 30, 2023, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-00920)). We are asking for:
All records, including investigative reports, telephone logs, witness statements, memoranda, and firearms purchase documentation, related to the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of a firearm owned by Hunter Biden discarded in a Delaware trash receptacle circa October 2018.
All records of communications of FBI officials regarding the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of the firearm.
The FBI claims it has completed a search for records responsive to our FOIA request but alleges an unspecified number are exempt from disclosure due to an “ongoing criminal investigation:”
FBI has completed a search for records responsive to [Judicial Watch’s] request and is currently processing those records. FBI’s position is that the number of potentially responsive records is exempt from disclosure under FOIA exemption 7(A), as this case relates to an ongoing criminal investigation. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A) (FOIA does not apply to information where disclosure “could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings”); see also U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Delaware, Tax and Firearm Charges Filed Against Robert Hunter Biden, U.S. Department of Justice (June 20, 2023), https://www.justice.gov/usao-de/pr/tax-and-firearm-charges-filed-against-robert-hunter-biden . An ongoing investigation creates the need for increased internal review, including in this case review by the Special Counsel.
We argue Biden’s FBI is withholding information about the number of documents they are hiding and whether any records will ultimately be released:
This is case is indisputably of significant public interest. It is also time sensitive. [Judicial Watch] has asked and Defendant has refused to provide the number of potentially responsive records that needs to be processed in this case. Without this number, Plaintiff cannot evaluate – let alone agree to – a processing time of 120 days … Because this case could proceed down several different paths, [Judicial Watch] believes this case may benefit from a status conference at this juncture.
This is nothing but a continuing stonewall on the FBI’s reported clean-up operation to shield Hunter Biden from facing the criminal consequences of his gun scandal – this time using the compromised special counsel ‘investigation’ of Hunter as a new excuse to hide records that we asked for back in January.
In February 2023, from a separate lawsuit, we released recordsfrom the United States Secret Service that implicate the FBI in the unusual action to help Hunter Biden.
In response to a February 24, 2021, email inquiry from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” Schreckinger responds: “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation.”
In October 2020, The Blaze reported that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by Hallie Biden, the widow of then-presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau. In 2021, Politico reported:
Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO.
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
We have at least 10 federal lawsuits focused on Biden family corruption.
In June 2023, we sued the CIA for all communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter Biden laptop story as having “all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign.”
In July, we sued the DOJ for records from the Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General regarding the Internal Revenue Service investigation of Hunter Biden.
In June 2023, we filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice for a copy of the FBI FD-1023 form that describes “an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” We also asked for communications about the FD-1023.
In May 2023, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives for Biden family records and communications regarding travel and finance transactions, as well as communications between the Bidens and several known business associates.
On October 14, 2022, we sued the DOJ for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
We filed a lawsuit against the U.S. State Department on April 20, 2022, for messages sent through the SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolkit) system that mention Hunter Biden.
In December 2020, State Department records obtained through our FOIA lawsuit showed that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch had specifically warned in 2017 about corruption allegations against Burisma Holdings.
In October 2020, we forced the release of State Department records that included a briefing checklist of a February 22, 2019, meeting in Kyiv between then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Sally Painter, co-founder and chief operating officer of Blue Star Strategies, a Democratic lobbying firm which was hired by Burisma Holdings to combat corruption allegations. At the time of the meeting, Hunter Biden was serving on the board of directors for Burisma Holdings.
I’ll be sure to keep you updated, as events warrant, on all our Biden corruption investigations and litigation!
Pfizer Records Reveal 23-Person Study of COVID Vaccine Booster Safety and Effectiveness before Approval
Now that COVID chatter has returned, and President Biden is talking about a vaccine, we are learning how skimpy a 2021 study used to justify the Pfizer booster was.
We uncovered 58 pages of records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showing that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its COVID vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it. The FDA indicated that this production of records “represents our complete response to your request; no additional productions are anticipated.”
Judicial Watch forced the release of the records through a March 2022 lawsuit filed after the Department of Health and Human Services failed to respond to an August 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records “submitted by Pfizer and BioNTech to the FDA, including BARDA, relating to ‘booster’ vaccinations for the SARS-CoV-2 virus” (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-00730)).
Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, BARDA, has been heavily involved with the development of the COVID-19 vaccine. According to its website:
The Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) provides an integrated, systematic approach to the development of the necessary vaccines, drugs, therapies, and diagnostic tools for public health medical emergencies such as chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) accidents, incidents and attacks; pandemic influenza (PI), and emerging infectious diseases (EID).
BioNTech is a German pharmaceutical company that partnered with Pfizer in developing the original vaccine.
The records include a July study titled “Phase 1 Booster Safety and Immunogenicity Data up to 1 Month Post-Dose 3 of BNT162b2 30 µg [micrograms] in Study C4591001” provided “preliminary safety and immunogenicity data” for a group that had received two vaccine shots and, seven to nine months later, a third (booster) shot:
This submission includes preliminary findings from a subset of younger (18 to 55 years of age) and older (65 to 85 years of age) participants in the Phase 1 part of Study C4591001 who completed the initial two-dose series of BNT162b2 30 µg, given approximately 3 weeks apart, and then received a third dose (booster) of BNT162b2 30 µg approximately 7 to 9 months after the second dose. Data were collected through the cutoff date of 13 May 2021.
The participants were evaluated for symptoms up to one month after the booster shot. The booster’s immunogenicity, or how well a vaccine works over time, was evaluated seven days and one month after the booster:
SARS-CoV-2 50% neutralization titers were assessed in sera drawn before BNT162b2 Dose 1 (on Day 1); 7 days and 1 month after BNT162b2 Dose 2; before Dose 3; and 7 days and 1 month after Dose 3.
The participants included 11 people aged 18 to 55 and 12 people aged 65 to 85. Of the younger group, there were nine females and two males; eight of whom were white, one was black and two were Asian. Of the older group six were female, six were males, and all were white.
The study reports that a booster dose increases the breadth of neutralizing response against SARS-CoV-2 variants and that the data suggests that a third dose could prolong protection and further increase the breadth of protection:
[T]he durability of protection from vaccination and the required frequency of booster doses are unknown at this time. To date, results from the global Phase 1/2/3 study of BNT162b2 indicate robust protection lasting at least 6 months, despite modest waning of immunity over time. Booster doses have the potential to keep protection high if immunity continues to decline over time.
This Pfizer study was sent to Marion Gruber, PhD, director of the Office of Vaccines Research and Review.
An August 13, 2021, FDA-CBER (Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research) report is titled “Phase 1 Booster (Dose 3) Immunogenicity at 1 Month Post-Dose 3 in Study C4591001: SARS-CoV-2 Wild-Type and Delta Variant Neutralization Data.”
On August 24, 2021, the White House stated it was moving “aggressively” to roll out booster shots despite not yet receiving clearance from the FDA to give everyone third doses.
Shortly thereafter, it was reported that Gruber and her deputy, Phil Krause, were leaving the agency because they were frustrated with Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Biden White House interference in vaccine decisions. Gruber and Krause were among a group of resigning doctors who agreed that “Available evidence doesn’t yet indicate a need for COVID-19 vaccine booster shots among the general population …”
On September 21, 2021, just over a month after Pfizer’s second submission, the FDA approved a single booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for those over 65, for those 18 to 64 at a high risk of severe Covid-19, and for those whose frequent institutional or occupational exposure puts them at high risk of serious complications of COVID-19.
The FDA said it based its decision on the documents presented by Pfizer, as well as input from the CDC, the Israeli Ministry of Health and the University of Bristol in the UK.
Three weeks after approval, about 8.9 million boosters had been administered.
With the planned push for new boosters by the Biden administration, the public would do well to examine these troubling documents about the shotgun approval of prior COVID boosters.
Years after Judicial Watch Exposes ISIS/ Cartel Ties, Media Finally Reports It
As they say, you heard it here first. Our reporting on the southern border has been second to none, especially regarding dangerous elements exploiting the lack of security there. Our Corruption Chronicles blog gives an update on the national security risks of open borders:
Nearly a decade after Judicial Watch exposed that Mexican drug cartels and Islamic terrorists have teamed up to smuggle foreigners into the United States through the southern border, the mainstream media is finally reporting it and the government has been forced to acknowledge it. A national news outlet revealed this week that a smuggler with ties to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) helped more than a dozen nationals from the Central Asian nation of Uzbekistan, a former Soviet republic, enter the U.S. via Mexico. Under the Biden administration’s catastrophic open border policies, the Uzbek’s asked for asylum and to remain in the country.
Now the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is probing the matter, according to the news report, which says that multiple sources confirmed a “scramble set off when US intelligence officials found that the migrants traveled with the help of a smuggler with ties to ISIS.” The incident was so serious that an urgent classified intelligence report was circulated to the president’s top cabinet officials in their morning briefing book and a flurry of urgent meetings among top national security and administration officials were initiated, the article states. Counterterrorism officials say the breach shows that the U.S. is “deeply vulnerable to the possibility that terrorists could sneak across the southern border.” That has already occurred as Judicial Watch reported years ago. Back in 2016, we uncovered an operation in which Mexican drug traffickers help Islamic terrorists stationed in Mexico cross into the U.S. to explore targets for future attacks. Among the jihadists that have traveled back and forth through the porous southwest border is a Kuwaiti named Shaykh Mahmood Omar Khabir, an ISIS operative who lives in the Mexican state of Chihuahua not far from El Paso, Texas.
All these years later a Biden administration spokeswoman from the National Security Council is quoted in this week’s news story trying to downplay the severity of the most recent security lapse, though other unidentified government officials reveal the migrants from Uzbekistan are still under FBI scrutiny as possible criminal threats. Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) took the event seriously enough to begin detaining, vetting, and expediting the removal of other migrants who also used the same ISIS-connected network. The government should properly screen every foreign national upon entering the U.S. rather than wait until a red flag arises once they are inside the country. Why does it take the involvement of an ISIS smuggler for federal authorities to go back and double check illegal aliens already disbursed into unsuspecting communities throughout the nation?
The chilling reality is that Islamic terrorists have taken advantage of this lax security system for many years. Back in the spring of 2015 Judicial Watch reported about an ISIS camp operating just a few miles from El Paso, Texas in an area known as “Anapra” just west of Ciudad Juárez in the Mexican state of Chihuahua. At the time sources, including a Mexican Army field grade officer and a Mexican Federal Police Inspector, confirmed that “coyotes” engaged in human smuggling—and working for the Juárez Cartel—help move ISIS terrorists through the desert and across the border between Santa Teresa and Sunland Park, New Mexico. To the east of El Paso and Ciudad Juárez, cartel-backed “coyotes” also smuggle ISIS terrorists through the porous border between Acala and Fort Hancock, Texas. The specific areas are exploited by ISIS because of their understaffed municipal and county police forces, and the safe havens they provide for the unchecked large-scale drug smuggling that was already ongoing.
The problem is almost certain to get worse as illegal immigration skyrockets under the Biden administration and its reckless open border policies facilitate the business model of Mexican drug cartels, also known as Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCO). Under Biden, the sophisticated criminal enterprises have seized unprecedented control of the southwest border, according to congressional testimony delivered recently by federal sources in counterterrorism, intelligence and drug enforcement.
Until next week,
The post New: Secret FBI Records on Hunter Biden! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that a federal court scheduled a hearing in its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records regarding the gun owned by Hunter Biden that reportedly was thrown in a trash can behind a Delaware grocery store. In a joint status report to the court, the FBI stated it would not produce records about the incident due to an “ongoing criminal investigation.”
The video hearing was set by DC U.S. District Court Judge Jia M. Cobb for September 6, 2023, at 10:00 a.m.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the FBI withheld records in response to a January 30, 2023, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-00920)). Judicial Watch is asking for:
All records, including investigative reports, telephone logs, witness statements, memoranda, and firearms purchase documentation, related to the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of a firearm owned by Hunter Biden discarded in a Delaware trash receptacle circa October 2018.
All records of communications of FBI officials regarding the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of the firearm.
The FBI claims it has completed a search for records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request but alleges an unspecified number are exempt from disclosure due to an “ongoing criminal investigation:”
FBI has completed a search for records responsive to [Judicial Watch’s] request and is currently processing those records. FBI’s position is that the number of potentially responsive records is exempt from disclosure under FOIA exemption 7(A), as this case relates to an ongoing criminal investigation. See 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A) (FOIA does not apply to information where disclosure “could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings”); see also U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Delaware, Tax and Firearm Charges Filed Against Robert Hunter Biden, U.S. Department of Justice (June 20, 2023), https://www.justice.gov/usao-de/pr/tax-and-firearm-charges-filed-against-robert-hunter-biden . An ongoing investigation creates the need for increased internal review, including in this case review by the Special Counsel.
Judicial Watch argues the Biden FBI is withholding information about the number of documents they are hiding and whether any records will ultimately be released:
This is case is indisputably of significant public intertest. It is also time sensitive. [Judicial Watch] has asked and Defendant has refused to provide the number of potentially responsive records that needs to be processed in this case. Without this number, Plaintiff cannot evaluate – let alone agree to – a processing time of 120 days … Because this case could proceed down several different paths, [Judicial Watch] believes this case may benefit from a status conference at this juncture.
“The FBI continues to stonewall on its reported clean-up operation to shield Hunter Biden from facing the criminal consequences of his gun scandal – this time using the compromised Special Counsel ‘investigation’ of Hunter as a new excuse to hide records that we asked for back in January,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.”
In February 2023, from a separate lawsuit, Judicial Watch released recordsfrom the United States Secret Service that implicate the FBI in the unusual action to help Hunter Biden.
In response to a February 24, 2021, email inquiry from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” Schreckinger responds: “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation.”
In October 2020, The Blaze reported that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by Hallie Biden, the widow of then-presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau. In 2021, Politico reported:
Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO.
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
Judicial Watch has at least 10 federal lawsuits focused on Biden family corruption.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch sued the CIA for all communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter Biden laptop story as having “all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign.”
In July, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ for records from the Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General regarding the Internal Revenue Service investigation of Hunter Biden.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice for a copy of the FBI FD-1023 form that describes “an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” Judicial Watch also asked for communications about the FD-1023.
In May 2023, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the National Archives for Biden family records and communications regarding travel and finance transactions, as well as communications between the Bidens and several known business associates.
On October 14, 2022, Judicial Watch sued DOJ for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the U.S. State Department on April 20, 2022, for messages sent through the SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolkit) system that mention Hunter Biden.
In December 2020, State Department records obtained through a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit showed that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch had specifically warned in 2017 about corruption allegations against Burisma Holdings.
In October 2020, Judicial Watch forced the release of State Department records that included a briefing checklist of a February 22, 2019, meeting in Kyiv between then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Sally Painter, co-founder and chief operating officer of Blue Star Strategies, a Democratic lobbying firm which was hired by Burisma Holdings to combat corruption allegations. At the time of the meeting, Hunter Biden was serving on the board of directors for Burisma Holdings.
The post Judicial Watch: FBI Says it Won’t Produce Records on Intervention to Help Hunter Biden on Missing Gun Due to ‘Ongoing Criminal Investigation,’ Federal Judge Orders Sept. 6 Hearing on Records Dispute appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch released 58 pages of records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showing that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to its COVID vaccine booster before asking the FDA to approve it. The FDA indicated that this production of records “represents our complete response […]
The post Judicial Watch: Pfizer Records Reveal 23-Person Study of COVID Vaccine Booster Safety and Effectiveness before Approval appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Nearly a decade after Judicial Watch exposed that Mexican drug cartels and Islamic terrorists have teamed up to smuggle foreigners into the United States through the southern border, the mainstream media is finally reporting it and the government has been forced to acknowledge it. A national news outlet revealed this week that a smuggler with […]
The post Years after Judicial Watch Exposes ISIS, Mexican Cartel Ties Media Finally Reports It appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 90 pages of records from the Executive Office for United States Attorneys, a component of the Department of Justice, in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that detail the extensive apparatus the Biden Justice Department set up to investigate and prosecute January 6 protestors.’’ The […]
The post Judicial Watch: Records Show Biden Justice Department Set Up Unprecedented Apparatus to Target January 6 Protestors appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: President Joe Biden was blasted by conservatives on social media for “spiking the football” with a fundraising link posted on X.com as former President Trump was arrested in Georgia. “Apropos of nothing, I think today’s a great day to give to my campaign,” Biden posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, around the same time […]
The post Biden blasted for fundraising as Trump arrested in Georgia: ‘Spikes the football’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Western Journal: The Capitol Police lieutenant who shot Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt to death during the Capitol incursion will be promoted to captain, according to a new report. Michael Byrd’s promotion was revealed by Roll Call, which said an internal document it reviewed showed Byrd is among 30 Capitol Police employees being promoted on […]
The post Ashli Babbitt’s Killer, Capitol Cop Michael Byrd, Gets Rewarded with Promotion: Report appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From BizPac Review: Conspiracy theories continue to circulate around the drowning death of the Obamas’ personal chef Tafari Campbell, due to what one media outlet is calling a “cover-up” by the Massachusetts police. “Police in Massachusetts are continuing to cover up information about the death of Obama personal chef Tafari Campbell even after declaring the […]
The post More secrecy spurs cover-up accusations surrounding death of Obamas’ chef appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch: Police Records Show Secret Service Reported Obama’s Personal Chef Tafari Campbell was Missing, Body was Found Using Sonar Judicial Watch announced recently that it received 18 pages of records through the Massachusetts Public Records Law from the Edgarton, MA, Police Department that show the Secret Service […]
The post Obama Chef Death Secrets Exposed appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In a disturbing case that illustrates the gravity of the security lapses along the southwest border, an illegal immigrant sex offender with an extensive criminal record and previously deported eight times was caught entering the country yet again through Mexico. His name is Elvis Cristian Hernandez-Ayala and the U.S. Border Patrol recently caught him trying […]
The post Deported Eight Times, Migrant Sex Offender with Vast Criminal Record Enters U.S. Again appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Police Records Show Secret Service Reported Obama’s Chef Was Missing Judicial Watch Sues Biden Agencies Over Social Media Censorship Biden Agency Abruptly Replaces Federal Air Marshal Director—Fourth Time in as Many Years Soros-Funded Initiative at Public University Trains Social Justice Reporters Police Records Show Secret Service Reported Obama’s Chef Was Missing The tragic drowning […]
The post Obama Chef Death Secrets Exposed appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed two Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits against the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies for communications between the agencies and Facebook and Twitter regarding the government’s involvement in content moderation and censorship on the social media platforms. Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues DOJ, Other Agencies for Records on Efforts to Censor Content on Social Media Platforms appeared first on Judicial Watch.
‘the names of the witness and USSS agent have been redacted’ (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 18 pages of records through the Massachusetts Public Records Law from the Edgarton, MA, Police Department that show the Secret Service reported Obama’s Personal Chef Tafari Campbell missing and that the body was found […]
The post Judicial Watch: Police Records Show Secret Service Reported Obama’s Personal Chef Tafari Campbell was Missing, Body was Found Using Sonar appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From NY Sun: Freedom of Information claim is pressed against the Central Intelligence Agency over epistle calling the Hunter Biden laptop story ‘Russian disinformation.’ Judicial Watch is pressing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the CIA. The conservative watchdog group seeks all communications about the letter calling the Hunter Biden laptop story “Russian disinformation,” […]
The post Judicial Watch Lawsuit Over Hunter Biden Laptop ‘Disinformation’ Letter Puts Administration on the Defensive appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration has abruptly—and quietly—replaced the scandal-plagued director of the Federal Air Marshal Service (FAMS), marking the fourth time in around as many years that the agency gets a new leader. Such frequent turnover at the top illustrates the instability that has prevailed at FAMS, which operates under the beleaguered Transportation Security Administration (TSA), […]
The post DHS Abruptly Replaces Air Marshal Director—Fourth Time in as Many Years appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch Sues CIA for Records about Its Role in Intel Letter Attacking Hunter Laptop Story Just Before Election Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the CIA for all communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) […]
The post CIA Helped Biden Election? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
As if the mainstream media were not leftist enough, a nationally ranked public university has launched a race-focused journalism center that trains future reporters to abandon objectivity for social justice in news coverage. It is called the Solidarity Journalism Initiative at the University of Texas at Austin and leftwing billionaire George Soros is among those […]
The post Soros-Funded Solidarity Journalism Initiative at Public University Trains Social Justice Reporters appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues CIA Over Pre-Election Letter Attacking Hunter Laptop Story Maxine Waters Celebrates Hip Hop Music Promoting Violence, Misogyny, Drugs Judicial Watch Sues CIA Over Pre-Election Letter Attacking Hunter Laptop Story Acting CIA Director Michael Morell was up early on October 19, 2020, furthering a scheme that would significantly affect the outcome of […]
The post CIA Helped Biden Election? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From American Family News: Monday’s nearly 100-page indictment of Donald Trump and 18 of his allies accuses the defendants of meddling in the 2020 election results in Georgia. But Trump’s defenders contend that all Trump and company wanted to do was challenge what they believed was a fraudulent election result in Georgia. AFN talked with Tom […]
The post Indictment after indictment can’t help but take toll: Judicial Watch appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From New York Post: A watchdog group said Thursday it is suing to get CIA records that could shed light on the process used by the intelligence agency to “clear” a letter falsely claiming that emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop were Russian disinformation. Judicial Watch, which filed the Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, is seeking […]
The post Lawsuit seeks CIA records on ‘rush job’ review of Hunter Biden laptop ‘disinformation’ letter appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Signal: Recourse to Garland’s appointment of Weiss as special counsel will have to be political, said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a government watchdog group. “Congress should and can demand a more independent special counsel,” Fitton told The Daily Signal. “Weiss should be a subject of a special counsel investigation. There […]
The post Special Counsel for Hunter Biden Doesn’t Meet DOJ Regulations. Now What? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the CIA for all communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues CIA for Records about Its Role in Intel Letter Attacking Hunter Laptop Story Just Before Election appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Keeping with her history of poor ethical and moral fitness, a veteran congresswoman who has publicly encouraged violence against presidential cabinet members and among police protestors is proudly commemorating the 50th anniversary of Hip Hop and rap, music famous for glamorizing violence, misogyny, drugs and lawlessness. Celebrating the milestone, California Democrat Maxine Waters claims that […]
The post Maxine Waters Commemorates Hip Hop Anniversary; Music Promotes Violence, Misogyny, Drugs appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch Statement on Special Counsel to Investigate Bidens Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the appointment of U.S. Attorney David Weiss as special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate Biden family finances: Attorney General Garland folded today, stopped ignoring DOJ regulations, […]
The post Biden Corruption Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Breaking: Special Counsel for Hunter Biden Not What it Seems! Hearing Set in Judicial Watch Lawsuit Seeking Videos and Emails from January 6 Protest at Capitol Judicial Watch Sues National Archives for Records of Its Role in Trump Records Dispute Mexican Cartels Get Ammo, Guns, Money from U.S. Breaking: Special Counsel for Hunter Biden […]
The post Biden Corruption Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the appointment of U.S. Attorney David Weiss as special counsel by Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate Biden family finances: Attorney General Garland folded today, stopped ignoring DOJ regulations, and finally appointed a special counsel to investigate Hunter Biden and (indirectly) President […]
The post Judicial Watch Statement on Special Counsel to Investigate Bidens appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for records of the Archives’ role in President Trump’s White House records controversy; whether it offered Trump a secure storage location other than the National Archives; and if the Archives consulted […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues National Archives for Records of Its Role in Trump Records Dispute appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner: Conservatives point to the FBI’s role in suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story in October 2020 that turned out to be accurate as one egregious example of government overreach. They worry the Biden White House could try similar tactics going forward if not restricted. “[The White House] considers concerns about mail-in balloting […]
The post Biden’s social media court fight could have major election implications appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times: Tom Fitton, president of the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, was called to testify before the grand jury that indicted Mr. Trump over his post-election actions. Mr. Fitton, who consulted with Mr. Trump following the election, said he testified to the grand jury about his concerns in 2020 when it was […]
The post Fake electors play starring role in Jan. 6 charges against Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that the federal court in Washington, DC has ordered a hearing in the lawsuit against the U.S. Capitol Police seeking videos and emails concerning the protest at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 (Judicial Watch v. United States Capitol Police (No. 1:21-cv-00401)). Judicial Watch brought its lawsuit […]
The post Judicial Watch: Hearing Set in Lawsuit against U.S. Capitol Police Seeking Videos and Emails from January 6 Protest at the U.S. Capitol appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CatholicVote: CV NEWS FEED // There are more registered voters than citizens of legal voting age in several Illinois counties, a government watchdog group just found. On August 6, Judicial Watch, a conservative organization that promotes integrity in government affairs, released the results of a study of voter records which found that 14% of […]
The post 14% of Illinois Counties Have More Voters Than Citizens of Legal Voting Age appeared first on Judicial Watch.
While Mexican drug cartels seize unprecedented control of the southwest border, the frontline Homeland Security agency charged with safeguarding the U.S. fails to regularly conduct outbound inspections that could disrupt the Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCO). The checks for traffic departing the country at ports of entry (POE) would be detrimental to the illicit operations because […]
The post No CBP Outbound Inspections: Mexican Cartels Get Ammo, Guns, Money from U.S. appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch Files Briefs in the U.S. Supreme for Review of Ninth Circuit Decisions Penalizing Group for Exposing Sales of Fetal Body Parts Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed two amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of The Center […]
The post Election Interference? Biden Admin Targets Trump, Again! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Trump Indictment: A Naked Threat and Act of Intimidation Judicial Watch Challenges Maine’s Policy Restricting Use of Statewide Voter List Judicial Watch Seeks Supreme Court Review for Group Exposing Abortion Business Trump Indictment: A Naked Threat and Act of Intimidation The Biden administration has left the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution behind […]
The post CRISIS: Biden Admin ARRESTS Trump! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In a growing national trend of rewarding illegal immigrants with official government benefits and documents, more states are offering undocumented residents official driver’s licenses. In all, 19 states and the District of Columbia have passed measures that permit foreigners living in the U.S. illegally to obtain driver’s licenses. Just last month laws went into effect […]
The post More States Offer Illegal Immigrants Driver’s Licenses in the Name of Public Safety appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the indictment of former President Donald Trump for disputing the election of President Joe Biden: The Biden administration has left the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution behind with its latest indictment of President Trump for daring to dispute the 2020 presidential election, as […]
The post Judicial Watch Statement on Trump Election Indictment appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch: Secret Service Records Reveal 10 Attacks by Biden German Shepherd ‘Commander’ Judicial Watch forced the release of the records through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that was filed after the Secret Service, a component of Homeland Security, failed to respond adequately to a December […]
The post Biden Dog Terrorizes Secret Service appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed two amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of The Center for Medical Progress (CMP) and its founder David Daleiden, one of which asks for review of the Ninth Circuit Court’s affirmation of a monetary award against CMP […]
The post Judicial Watch Files Briefs in the U.S. Supreme for Review of Ninth Circuit Decisions Penalizing Group for Exposing Sales of Fetal Body Parts appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief, supporting the decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, which struck down Maine’s policy restricting the use and distribution of the state’s voter registration list (Public Interest Legal Foundation v. Shenna Bellows (No. 23-1361). […]
The post Judicial Watch Files Amicus Brief in Support of Lawsuit Challenging Maine’s Policy Restricting Use of Statewide Voter Registration List appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Records Reveal 10 Attacks on Secret Service by Biden German Shepherd Judicial Watch Sues Justice Department for Hunter Biden IRS Investigation Documents Mexican Drug Cartels ‘Seize Unprecedented Control’ of Southwest Border Records Reveal 10 Attacks on Secret Service by Biden German Shepherd In April 2022, we released records detailing multiple attacks on Secret Service members by […]
The post Biden Dog Terrorizes Secret Service appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The National Desk: Judicial Watch, a conservative group focused on exposing government misconduct, has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Justice Department for records pertaining to the Hunter Biden investigation. “There’s powerful evidence of unprecedented corruption at the Justice Department to protect Hunter and Joe Biden,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton […]
The post Watchdog group sues DOJ for release of Hunter Biden documents appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice for records from the Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General regarding the Internal Revenue Service investigation of Hunter Biden (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Department of Justice (No. […]
The post Judicial Watch Files FOIA Lawsuit against Justice Department for Hunter Biden IRS Investigation Documents appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton went even further and stated that the development should, at a minimum, lead to an impeachment inquiry targeting Attorney General Merrick Garland. “If the DOJ had an ethical culture, this astonishing development would result in the resignations of US Attorney Weiss, Attorney General Garland and other responsible officials […]
The post Hunter Biden’s rejected plea deal puts Justice Department in hot seat appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Federalist: An Illinois district court judge ruled last week that state officials must give a coalition of conservative groups access to Illinois’ list of registered voters dating back to the state’s past 15 elections. In her July 18 decision, Judge Sara Ellis ruled that as part of an agreement between the state and the Illinois […]
The post Court: Illinois Must Forfeit Voter Roll Data To Conservative Group appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From NBC News: President Joe Biden’s dog Commander bit multiple Secret Service officers after it joined the Biden family at the end of 2021, according to records obtained by the conservative foundation Judicial Watch. One of the officers was taken to the hospital after being bitten in the upper arm and thigh last year. After that incident, a White […]
The post Biden’s dog Commander involved in biting incidents, according to records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
While the Biden administration and its allies in the mainstream media highlight a reduction in illegal immigration since the termination of a Trump-era restriction known as Title 42, Mexican drug cartels have seized unprecedented control of the nation’s southwest border. The president’s reckless open border policies have greatly facilitated the business model of Transnational Criminal […]
The post Mexican Drug Cartels “Seize Unprecedented Control” of Southwest Border appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: President Biden’s dog Commander — the nearly two and a half year old German shepherd who replaced former first dog Major over aggressive behavior — bit seven people in a four-month period, according to a new report. One of the more serious incidents involving Commander, according to internal Secret Service communications first […]
The post Biden’s dog Commander terrorizes Secret Service in ‘extremely aggressive’ rampage: emails appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Off The Press: Judicial Watch recently obtained 194 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) revealing multiple incidents involving President Joe Biden’s German Shepherd, Commander, and attacks on U.S. Secret Service (USSS) officers. These incidents occurred between October 2022 and January 2023. Please note that these records do not include […]
The post Biden’s Biter appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From New York Post: The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the dog bites — after facing criticism for non-transparency for covering up incidents involving former first dog Major. The documented attacks from September 2022 through January likely are an incomplete accounting of incidents involving Commander because the period […]
The post Biden’s dog Commander sent Secret Service officer to hospital, bit 6 others after replacing first pooch Major appeared first on Judicial Watch.
‘[I]f it wasn’t their dog he would already have been put down’ (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 194 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) revealing10 attacks by President Joe Biden’s German Shepherd, Commander, on officers of the U.S. Secret Service (USSS) between October 2022 and January 2023, and do […]
The post Judicial Watch: Secret Service Records Reveal 10 Attacks on Protective Detail Officers by Biden German Shepherd ‘Commander’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch: Illinois Settles Voter Roll Lawsuit, Agrees to Make Voter Registration List Information Public Judicial Watch announced recently it settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which […]
The post Election Integrity Legal Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Illinois Settles Lawsuit, Agrees to Make Voter Registration List Information Public BREAKING: Judicial Watch Sues for Records on Secret Service Protection for Unacknowledged Granddaughter of Joe Biden Millions More to Recruit Minorities for Jobless Benefits Amid Low Unemployment Illinois Settles Lawsuit, Agrees to Make Voter Registration List Information Public We continue our success in […]
The post Election Integrity SUCCESS! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Full Voter Registration List Information to be Provided for the Past 15 Elections (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it settled a federal election integrity lawsuit on behalf of the Illinois Conservative Union against the state of Illinois, the Illinois State Board of Elections, and its director, which grants access to the current centralized […]
The post Judicial Watch: Illinois Settles Voter Roll Lawsuit, Agrees to Make Voter Registration List Information Public appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner: While the administration has stepped up security around other key figures in the public eye recently, such as Trump special counsel Jack Smith, the U.S. Secret Service does not appear to be providing security for Navy Joan Roberts or Lunden Roberts despite at least one documented threat. That sounded odd to the […]
The post Questions raised about disowned Biden granddaughter’s security appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all internal Secret Service (USSS) communications regarding the provision or potential provision of Secret Service protection for Navy Joan Roberts, the 4-year-old daughter of Hunter Biden and grandchild of President […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Records on Secret Service Protection for Unacknowledged Granddaughter of Joe Biden appeared first on Judicial Watch.
U.S. unemployment is low and stable, yet the Biden administration keeps giving states millions of dollars to boost the number of minorities—especially non-English speaking or limited-English proficient—that sign up for government jobless benefits. The goal is to address racial disparities and promote “equitable access” to the program. The money—an unprecedented $260 million—started flowing in early […]
The post Millions More to Recruit Minorities for U.S. Jobless Benefits Amid Low Unemployment appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch Sues for FBI Records of Investigations of Parents Spurred by October 2021 Merrick Garland Memo Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for all FBI communications from bureau officials using several systems and […]
The post FBI Targets Parents! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News: Former President Donald Trump reportedly rejected suggestions from his attorneys to arrange a settlement with the Justice Department to avoid federal charges and instead, he listened to the advice of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, a conservative legal activist, and others who said he could legally keep the classified documents and […]
The post Trump rejected lawyers’ suggestions to avoid indictment, listened to Judicial Watch instead: report appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Townhill: On Wednesday, FBI Director Christopher Wray appeared before the House Judiciary Committee, during which the targeting of Catholics and pro-lifers was addressed, and the exchanges about the matter made for particularly passionate moments. Early on, Wray brought up the targeting of pro-lifers, but not by his own agency. When giving examples of domestic […]
The post FBI Director Wray Hit Hard for Bureau’s Targeting of Catholics and Pro-Lifers appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News: North Dakota is facing a lawsuit over its acceptance of mail-in ballots 13 days after Election Day and is among 18 states and Washington, D.C., that accept and tabulate ballots post-election. For absentee ballots to be accepted by mail in North Dakota, they must be postmarked the day before Election Day […]
The post Eighteen states, DC accept ballots after Election Day, with North Dakota’s deadline facing lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues Over the FBI Investigation of Parents at School Board Meetings Judicial Watch Sues DHS Over Biological Defense Program Grant to EcoHealth Alliance Biden Censorship: FBI Colludes with Ukrainian Intel to Silence Americans Judicial Watch Sues Over the FBI Investigation of Parents at School Board Meetings It is staggering to think that […]
The post FBI Targets PARENTS! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration will again delay enforcing a law requiring driver’s license security standards designed to avert another terrorist attack because it could cause “undue burden and confusion” for those using licenses that fail to meet federal standards. The administration has already used COVID-19 as an excuse to postpone the security measure’s implementation, asserting that […]
The post Post-9/11 Driver’s License Security Law Delayed over “Undue Burden and Confusion” appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records and communications between DHS component offices and the U.S. Biological Defense Program regarding a $2 million grant awarded by the DHS’s Ground Truth Network to EcoHealth Alliance (Judicial […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues DHS for Records on Grant from U.S. Biological Defense Program to EcoHealth Alliance appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In the most recently exposed Biden administration scheme to combat misinformation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) colluded with a compromised Ukrainian intelligence agency to censor the speech of Americans. The federal agency responsible for protecting the nation against terrorists, violent street gangs and serial killers joined forces with the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), […]
The post FBI Colludes with Ukrainian Intel to Censor Americans under Biden Misinformation Campaign appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for all FBI communications from bureau officials using several systems and databases regarding investigations carried out after an October 4, 2021, memo from Attorney General Merrick Garland instructing investigators to target American […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues for FBI Records of Investigations of Parents Spurred by October 2021 Merrick Garland Memo appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch: Records Show NY District Attorney Alvin Bragg Paid over $900/Hour to Shut Down House Judiciary Oversight into Indictment of President Trump Judicial Watch announced today that it received the engagement letter showing New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg paid $900 per hour for partners […]
The post Leftists Target Air Force Cadets! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: Military records obtained by a conservative watchdog show U.S. Air Force Academy instructional materials that include presentations addressing Critical Race Theory (CRT), White privilege and the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. The group, Judicial Watch, announced Friday it had obtained 478 pages of records through a November 2022 Freedom of Information Act […]
The post US military records reveal instructional materials on White privilege, CRT, Black Lives Matter: Watchdog appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Air Force Academy Instructional Materials Include Presentations on Critical Race Theory, White Privilege, and Black Lives Matter – Attacks American ‘Creation Myth’ of the Declaration of Independence Alvin Bragg Paid $900/Hour to Shut Down House Oversight into Trump Indictment Who Is David Weiss? CBP Released Illegal Immigrant on FBI Terrorist Watchlist after Arrest Air Force […]
The post Critical Race Theory – In the Air Force! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, D.C.) Judicial Watch announced today that it received 478 pages of records from the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA), a component of the United States Department of Defense, which includes instructional materials and emails that address topics such as Critical Race Theory, “white privilege,” and Black Lives Matter. Judicial Watch obtained these records as the result […]
The post Judicial Watch: Records Show Air Force Academy Instructional Materials Include Presentations on Critical Race Theory, White Privilege, and Black Lives Matter – Attacks American ‘Creation Myth’ of the Declaration of Independence appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Supreme Court Victory Judicial Watch Sues for FBI Document Alleging Bidens’ Bribery Scheme with Burisma Former Virginia Magistrate Gets Resolution in Suit Challenging Her Termination Supreme Court Victory The Supreme Court has ended race-based admissions at Harvard College and the University of North Carolina. It was long past time for the Supreme Court to require […]
The post test appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, D.C.) Judicial Watch announced today that it received the engagement letter showing New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg paid $900 per hour for partners and $500 per hour for associates to the Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher law firm for the purpose of suing Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) in an effort to shut down the House […]
The post Judicial Watch: Records Show NY District Attorney Alvin Bragg Paid over $900/Hour to Shut Down House Judiciary Oversight into Indictment of President Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From the New York Post: The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed a lower court ruling on Thursday denying a conservative watchdog group and media outlet access to a trove of documents from President Biden’s time in the Senate. In April 2020, Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation submitted Freedom of Information Act requests for the papers, […]
The post University of Delaware can keep Biden Senate papers hidden: court ruling appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From the Washington Times: The slap-on-the-wrist plea deal inappropriately given to Hunter Biden by U.S. Attorney David Weiss only raises more questions about Biden family corruption. What appears increasingly clear, however, is that the family is thoroughly compromised by foreign governments. Recent whistleblower testimony revealed a profoundly incriminating message that has ignited a firestorm over […]
The post Unmasking corruption in the Biden family appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller News Foundation: The Delaware Supreme Court sided with the University of Delaware Thursday, denying the release of President Joe Biden’s Senate records in a lawsuit brought by the Daily Caller News Foundation and Judicial Watch. The DCNF and Judicial Watch appealed to the Delaware Supreme Court in January 2023 after the […]
The post State Supreme Court Lets University of Delaware Keep Biden Senate Records Hidden From The Public appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In the latest national security blow to come out of the southwest border U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) apprehended and subsequently released an illegal immigrant on the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) terrorist watchlist. CBP arrested the migrant, whose gender is not being identified by authorities, and their family in Yuma, Arizona and supposedly […]
The post CBP Released Illegal Immigrant on FBI Terrorist Watchlist after Arizona Arrest appeared first on Judicial Watch.
On June 20, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Delaware announced a sweetheart plea deal with Hunter Biden, the son of President Biden. Hunter Biden would plead guilty to two tax charges and enter a diversion program on a gun possession charge. Diversion programs are usually focused on drug offenses—Biden has a well-documented history […]
The post Who Is David Weiss? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Supreme Court Victory Judicial Watch Sues for FBI Document Alleging Bidens’ Bribery Scheme with Burisma Former Virginia Magistrate Gets Resolution in Suit Challenging Her Termination Supreme Court Victory The Supreme Court has ended race-based admissions at Harvard College and the University of North Carolina. It was long past time for the Supreme Court to require […]
The post Biden FBI Cover-Up! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner: The politically motivated and “count stacked” indictment of former President Donald Trump by special counsel Jack Smith is an assault on the foundations of our democracy and an alarming testament to the weaponization of the Biden justice system. The principles of fairness and impartiality that underpin our rule of law have swiftly […]
The post Trump indictment exposes the DOJ’s two-tiered justice system appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch, Allied Educational Foundation Filed Amici Curiae Briefs in Supreme Court Cases Challenging Harvard, UNC Race-Based Admissions Policies (Washington, DC) Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the Supreme Court ruling reversing race-based admissions at Harvard College and the University of North Carolina: It was long past time for the Supreme […]
The post Judicial Watch Statement on Harvard Admissions Ruling appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that former Virginia magistrate Elizabeth Fuller and officials of the Office of the Executive Secretary of the Supreme Court of Virginia (“OES”) have agreed to resolve Ms. Fuller’s First Amendment lawsuit challenging her termination. The lawsuit, which Judicial Watch filed on Fuller’s behalf on March 1, 2022, alleged […]
The post Former Magistrate and Virginia Office of the Executive Secretary Agree to Resolve Lawsuit Challenging Magistrate’s Termination appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice for a copy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation(FBI) FD-1023 that describes “an alleged criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Biden and a foreign national relating to the exchange of money for policy decisions.” […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues for FBI Document Alleging Bidens’ Bribery Scheme with Burisma Owner appeared first on Judicial Watch.
More than two decades after Islamic terrorists exploited the U.S. government’s inefficient system for tracking foreigners who overstay visas, the problem is only getting worse with a startling 853,955 visa overstays in fiscal year 2022. A new report issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) tries to downplay the severity of the situation by […]
The post Record 853,955 Foreigners Overstay Visa Decades after Terrorists Did it to Execute 9/11 appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From WSJ: The implications of the “Clinton Sock Drawer” case, laid out in my op-ed “Clinton’s Sock Drawer and Trump’s Boxes” (June 14), shouldn’t be derided. The Constitution and the Presidential Records Act aren’t as simple as former Attorney General Bill Barr and letter writer James Wendel (June 20) think. Not every record created by a federal agency is […]
The post Why Trump Had a Right to Keep the Documents appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: “This week, federal government whistleblowers allege massive DOJ/FBI corrupt obstruction to protect Hunter and Biden family,” tweeted Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch. “And Biden regime sweetheart plea deal with Hunter is announced. Joe Biden’s response? Bring Hunter to WH for a State Dinner and then off to Camp David for the […]
The post Biden faces backlash for Camp David guest after IRS whistleblower allegations exposed: ‘Business to discuss?’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration is not just shattering records for admitting unprecedented numbers of illegal immigrants through the southern border, new government figures indicate it is also allowing more criminal aliens to be released into American communities after they get discharged from local jails for state crimes. The latest data shows that the number of immigrant […]
The post ICE Detainers for Illegal Immigrants in Local Jails Drop Sharply Under Biden appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Hunter Biden Plea Deal Is a Sham Judicial Watch Sues DHS for Records Tied to Election Censorship Collusion After Billions in Haiti Aid Vanish U.S. Allots Millions for Climate Funding The Hunter Biden Plea Deal Is a Sham We are not surprised that the Biden Justice Department struck a corrupt plea deal with Hunter […]
The post Hunter Biden SHAM Plea Deal appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The NY Times: Tom Fitton, who founded Judicial Watch, a conservative advocacy group in Washington, called the plea deal and diversion agreement “a miscarriage of justice whose chief beneficiary is President Biden.” He questioned why Mr. Garland had not appointed a special counsel who might have produced a public report explaining why prosecutors did […]
The post Garland’s Distance From Hunter Biden Inquiry Fails to Quell Critics appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Rife with fraud and corruption, the U.S. government’s multi-billion-dollar Haiti aid program has failed miserably to help citizens of the impoverished island nation, yet the Biden administration is sending tens of millions more under the auspice of Caribbean climate funding. At a recent meeting in the Bahamas, Vice President Kamala Harris unveiled a new $100 […]
The post After Billions in Haiti Aid Vanish U.S. Allots Millions under Caribbean Climate Funding appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all records of communications tied to the Election Integrity Partnership (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:23-cv-01698)). The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues Homeland Security for Records Tied to Election Censorship Collusion appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner: The plea deal that let first son Hunter Biden avoid jail despite federal tax and gun charges has outraged critics who said it was just the latest Justice Department sweetheart deal for the Biden family. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told Secrets that Biden’s plea agreement was “outrageous” but “not surprising.” He […]
The post Outrage over Hunter Biden avoiding jail appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the reported Biden Justice Department plea deal with Hunter Biden for misdemeanor tax violations and a false statement tied to a gun purchase: Simply put, the Garland Justice Department’s disparate treatment of Hunter Biden and President Trump is an abomination unto the […]
The post Judicial Watch Statement on Hunter Biden Plea Deal appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Biden Justice Discussed Trump’s Video of FBI Raid on Mar-a-Lago Judicial Watch Sues Air Force Over Release of Records of Rep. Anna Luna Biden Justice Discussed Trump’s Video of FBI Raid on Mar-a-Lago We continue to reveal the details of the Biden administration’s unconscionable raid on President Trump’s Florida home. We received 477 pages of records […]
The post Details on Biden Abuse of Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, D.C.) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 477 pages of records pages from the Department of Justice (DOJ) that show top officials of the National Security Division discussing the political implications of Trump allowing CNN to use closed-circuit TV (CCTV) footage of the raid on his Mar-a-Lago home. The documents confirm that the Justice Department had asked that Mar-a-Lago CCTV be […]
The post Judicial Watch: Records Show Biden Justice Department Discussions About Trump’s Closed-Circuit Video of FBI Raid on Mar-a-Lago appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for information on the improper release of the personnel records of U.S. Rep Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) by the U.S. Air Force (USAF) (Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Defense (No. […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues Air Force over Improper Release of Personnel Records of U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From USA Today: Tom Fitton, one of Trump’s most vocal supporters, said the judge’s order was so vague as to virtually guarantee a confrontation between Trump, the Justice Department and the judge who ultimately oversees the case. “When Trump starts talking about the case, which he has every right to do on the campaign trail, […]
The post Donald Trump barred from discussing case with ‘body man’, witnesses. Will that stop him? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From WSJ: Although the indictment against Donald Trump doesn’t cite the Presidential Records Act, the charges are predicated on the law. The indictment came about only because the government thought Mr. Trump took records that didn’t belong to him, and the government raided his house to find any such records. This should never have happened. […]
The post Trump’s Boxes and Clinton’s Sock Drawer appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News: Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday said that he should be exonerated of the federal charges he faces relating to his handling of classified materials because the grand jury in the case was not informed about the Presidential Records Act or about another case involving former President Bill Clinton’s storage of […]
The post Trump says he should be exonerated because jury was not informed about law or Clinton case appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From NY Post: President Joe Biden’s administration is receiving backlash online over its Pride Month display at the White House on Sunday as many Twitter users are saying it violates the US Flag Code. Biden celebrated the LGBT community in a post Saturday, revealing a set of flags hanging from the White House that faced the South Lawn. The […]
The post White House accused of US Flag Code violation over Pride Month display appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Newsmax: A judge should throw out the federal indictment against former President Donald Trump, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton tweeted on Friday. Fitton said he “carefully reviewed the indictment of Trump by his political opponents at the Biden Justice Department” and concluded that “if justice prevails, this indictment won’t survive scrutiny by honest, constitutionalist judges and will be […]
The post Judicial Watch: ‘Indictment Won’t Survive Scrutiny’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Daily Caller: Legal experts weighed in Friday on the unsealed indictment of former President Donald Trump, some called it “damning,” while others said the indictment was “political.” The 49-page indictment revealed the former president was charged with 31 counts of alleged violation of the Espionage Act, or “the willful retention of national defense information,” along with one count […]
The post ‘Damning’ And ‘Political’: Legal Experts Weigh In On Unsealed Trump Indictment appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch Statement on Trump Indictment Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the indictment of former President Donald Trump: This day will go down in infamy. The unprecedented and corrupt indictment of President Trump is built on sand and is brazen election interference. It […]
The post Trump Indictment Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Trump Indictment is More Biden Abuse of Power Delaware Supreme Court Hearing in Biden Senate Records Lawsuit Judicial Watch Sues Justice for Details on Special Counsel Smith’s Staff Record Number on FBI Terror Watchlist Caught Crossing into U.S. Via Mexico Trump Indictment is More Biden Abuse of Power Yesterday, the Biden Justice Department indicted […]
The post Trump Indictment Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that an argument will be held in the Supreme Court of Delaware on Wednesday, June 14, 2023, in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed on behalf of itself and the Daily Caller News Foundation regarding the secret deal keeping President Biden’s Senate records from being made […]
The post Judicial Watch: Supreme Court of Delaware Hearing in Lawsuit for President Biden’s Senate Records at Univ of Delaware appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the indictment of former President Donald Trump: This day will go down in infamy. The unprecedented and corrupt indictment of President Trump is built on sand and is brazen election interference. It is an indictment about nothing. Biden’s further transforming of the […]
The post Judicial Watch Statement on Trump Indictment appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CatholicVote: Hours before the June 6 deadline, the Federal Bureau of Investigation filed a motion to delay their response to CatholicVote’s Freedom of Information Act (FIOIA) request lawsuit for another 30 days. Obama appointee District Judge Rudolph Contreras agreed to the motion and delayed the FBI’s response to July 7. According to CatholicVote advisor and […]
The post FBI Files Motion to Delay in CatholicVote Lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From One America News Network: A decade old legal case that could exonerate former President Donald Trump has been buried by legacy media. “[Special counsel] Jack Smith is terrified of the only standing legal case decision from a court concerning the Presidential Records Act,” said Chris Farrell, Director of Investigations at Judicial Watch. The case […]
The post Judicial Watch: Clinton Sock Drawer Audio Tape Case Exonerates Pres. Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News: Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch on Monday announced that it had filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Justice over its refusal to disclose the names of staffers working with special counsel Jack Smith on his investigation of former President Donald Trump. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith in […]
The post Watchdog sues DOJ seeking names of special counsel staff appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: The CIA’s “WELCO-ME” pride month initiative quickly drew criticism from Twitter users who called out the government agency for “re-branding.” “CIA’s 2023 theme for #Pride Month is WELCO-ME! Wellness, Equity, LGBTQ+, Community, Openness, ME!” the CIA shared in a Twitter post Thursday revealing their plans for June pride month. “Pride Month is an occasion […]
The post Twitter users mock CIA’s pride post celebrating ‘rich history’ of ‘LGBTQ+ officers’: ‘Wildly dystopian’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
While the Biden administration and its media allies highlight that illegal immigration has dropped considerably since the termination of a Trump-era restriction, a record number of suspected terrorists have been caught trying to enter the U.S. through Mexico. Not surprisingly, mainstream news reports have focused on the positive effect that the expiration of a COVID-related […]
The post Record Number of Foreigners on FBI Terror Watchlist Caught Crossing into U.S. Via Mexico appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Sues Biden Justice Department for Refusing to Reveal Names of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Staff
Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for records disclosing the names of staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office on two investigations targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.
Another $60 Mil for VP’s Failed Project Aimed at Tackling Root Causes of Irregular Migration
Though American taxpayers spend billions on illegal immigrants in the U.S., the Biden administration keeps giving Central American nations tens of millions in humanitarian funding with the hopes that it will improve life enough to deter its citizens from coming here illegally. It is part of the administration’s costly and ill-fated effort to curb “irregular migration” via the southwest border from three targeted countries known as the northern triangle—El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras.
Major Revelations in Trump Russia Scandal, Clinton Corruption—Hillary Did It, Obama Knew—Judicial Watch Warnings Came Early & Often
Early on, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton smelled a rat. As Tom wrote in his 2020 book, A Republic Under Assault, Judicial Watch had for years been digging deep into the origins of the notorious anti-Trump Steele Dossier—“a thirty-five-page report filled with ludicrous, salacious and completely unfounded allegations”—and the relentless campaign against President Donald Trump. “Let us cast our minds back to April 2016,” Tom wrote. An investigative firm named Fusion GPS was hired to dig up dirt on candidate Trump. Fusion GPS in turn hired former British spy Christopher Steele. Steele produced the dossier, which was leaked to the press and caused a media sensation.
U.S. Put Migrant Gangbanger with MS-13 Tattoos in Foster Home after Raping, Killing Woman
The teenager who raped and murdered a Maryland woman last summer was a known gang member arrested in his native El Salvador before coming to the U.S. under a special program that welcomes illegal immigrants under the age of 18 and provides them with a multitude of taxpayer benefits. Even after getting charged with homicide federal authorities placed the migrant offender, who sports tattoos displaying affiliation with the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), in a foster home with other children.
In The News
Microsoft stonewalls on ‘review’ into State Department-backed ‘disinformation’ group
Washington Examiner
Microsoft is stonewalling on providing key details about its touted “review” into the State Department-funded Global Disinformation Index after suspending its relationship with the self-styled British “disinformation” tracker earlier this year.
John Kerry Has a Big Staff, $16.5M Budget
RealClear InvestigationsJohn Kerry, former Secretary of State and current special presidential envoy for climate, has a big staff and an even bigger budget, employing at least 45 employees with a budget of $16.5 million, according to Judicial Watch.Judicial Watch Sues National Archives for Biden Family Business Records
Judicial Watch“The Biden National Archives agency is stonewalling the release of thousands of records that could go to the heart of Biden family corruption allegations,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Video Highlights
-
-
- BIDEN CORRUPTION: Will Wray Go to Jail for Contempt? - COURT BATTLE for Nashville Murder “Manifesto” - FBI is Creating a Constitutional Crisis to Protect Biden!
-
The post Judicial Watch Sues Biden DOJ! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for records disclosing the names of staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office on two investigations targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans (Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-01485)).
Judicial Watch filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Justice Department rejected a December 9, 2022, FOIA request for staff rosters or similar records that would identify the names of employees in the Office of Special Counsel Jack Smith.
The Justice Department responded on April 12, stating that records responsive to Judicial Watch’s request have been located, but are being withheld “pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(A)” of FOIA:
Exemption 6 pertains to information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Exemption 7(A) pertains to records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, the release of which could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.
Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith in November to take over two investigations involving Trump, who is running for president in 2024.
The first investigation involves Trump’s handling of classified documents he retained at his Mar-a-Lago, Florida, residence after leaving the White House in January 2021.
The second investigation regards Trump’s challenge of the 2020 presidential election results, which allegedly included a plan to submit separate slates of electors to block Congress from certifying Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.
Garland named Smith to the position three days after Trump announced he would run for president again in 2024. Smith previously was at the center of several controversial issues, the IRS scandal among them.
“Given the overwhelming evidence of anti-Trump bias disclosed in the Durham Report, it is urgent that Americans be able to find out who is again investigating Trump from the Garland Justice Department and his appointee Jack Smith,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “Special Prosecutor Jack Smith isn’t above the law, and the American people have the right to know about just who is working on his unprecedented and politicized anti-Trump investigation.”
Through FOIA, Judicial Watch uncovered information about Special Counsel’s Mueller’s budget and staff. Judicial Watch also sued for and obtained records for the budget of Special Counsel John Durham. A Judicial Watch lawsuit also uncovered calendar entries of Mueller special counsel prosecutor Andrew Weissmann showed he led the hiring effort for the investigation that targeted President Trump.
(In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Smith’s then-Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Government officials were looking to step up a probe into requests for tax-exemption from organizations with conservative sounding names like “Tea Party” and other “political sounding names,” according to a later report by the Treasury Department’s inspector general. Smith appears to have been a key player in this attempt to silence conservative voices.
According to the documents obtained by Judicial Watch, Smith directed the head of the Justice Department’s Election Crimes Branch, Richard Pilger, to meet with the director of the IRS’s Tax-Exempt Organizations division, Lois Lerner. In one email obtained by Judicial Watch, Lerner discusses an idea that the Justice Department could build “false-statement cases” against tax-exempt conservative groups.
Judicial Watch later obtained additional documents detailing a planning meeting between Justice Department, FBI and IRS officials about possible criminal prosecutions. Thanks to Judicial Watch disclosures, House investigators discovered that the IRS improperly turned over confidential tax records of non-profit organizations to the FBI—sparking a public uproar and forcing the return of the records to the IRS. Read more about the case here.)
The post Judicial Watch Sues Biden Justice Department for Refusing to Reveal Names of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Staff appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Russia Hoax Scandal: Judicial Watch Was RIGHT — Hillary Did It and Obama Knew
Another $60 Mil for VP’s Failed Project Aimed at Irregular Migration
Russia Hoax Scandal: Judicial Watch Was RIGHT — Hillary Did It and Obama Knew
Hillary Clinton continues to insert herself into national politics, and the FBI continues to demonstrate disdain for the rule of law, but new evidence is coming to light about their role in spuriously attacking Donald Trump, and it is confirming what we at Judicial Watch have said all along. Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, lays it out in the Investigative Bulletin.
Early on, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton smelled a rat. As Tom wrote in his 2020 book, A Republic Under Assault, Judicial Watch had for years been digging deep into the origins of the notorious anti-Trump Steele Dossier—“a thirty-five-page report filled with ludicrous, salacious and completely unfounded allegations”—and the relentless campaign against President Donald Trump. “Let us cast our minds back to April 2016,” Tom wrote. An investigative firm named Fusion GPS was hired to dig up dirt on candidate Trump. Fusion GPS in turn hired former British spy Christopher Steele. Steele produced the dossier, which was leaked to the press and caused a media sensation.
“Please focus on one of the most pertinent facts in this case,” Tom wrote. “Fusion GPS was hired by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.”
Next, Tom wrote, the FBI “used [the] completely fake dossier paid for by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign to spy on Donald Trump.”
While the media and official Washington remained transfixed by allegations of Trump depredations for years, Judicial Watch proceeded to uncover key information showing that the Clintons and their allies were behind the smears that trigged a sweeping FBI investigation and special counsel probes that ruined lives and careers and nearly toppled a presidency.
Judicial Watch uncovered the FBI “EC”—the electronic communication that officially launched the “Crossfire Hurricane” counterintelligence investigation of President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. The document was written by Peter Strzok, the deputy assistant director of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division. An avowed anti-Trump partisan, Strzok was fired after an inspector general investigation revealed anti-Trump text messages (including one where Strzok vowed to “stop” Trump) between him and his lover, FBI attorney Lisa Page.
Judicial Watch exposed serious problems with the Crossfire Hurricane, court-approved FBI surveillance of an innocent American citizen, Carter Page, a part-time Trump advisor. In August 2018, in a Judicial Watch case, the Justice Department admitted in a court filing that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court held no hearings on the spy warrant applications targeting Page. Judicial Watch litigation also uncovered the secret warrants that confirmed the FBI and Justice Department misled the court in withholding evidence that the Clinton campaign was behind the information used to persuade the court to approve the surveillance warrants targeting Page.
Judicial Watch proved that high-level Justice Department and State Department officials were involved in surreptitiously circulating anti-Trump smears at the highest levels of government and providing information to the 2016 Clinton campaign. Judicial Watch obtained FBI “302” interview reports with Justice Department official Bruce Ohr. Ohr told FBI investigators that “reporting on Trump’s ties to Russia were going to the Clinton Campaign” and to “Jon Winer at the U.S. State Department and the FBI.”
Judicial Watch put sunlight on Steele Dossier author Christopher Steele’s close association with the FBI, including payments to Steele by the FBI for work as a confidential source. Documents obtained by Judicial Watch show at least eleven FBI payments to Steele, note that he was admonished by the FBI for unspecified reasons, and that eventually the bureau grew wary of Steele and dropped him as a source.
Tom insisted for years that top Obama Administration officials knew exactly what was going on. “Obama knew. Clinton knew. Biden knew,” Tom tweeted. “Comey knew. Brennan knew. McCabe knew. Strzok knew. Clapper knew. Schiff knew. FBI knew. DOJ knew. CIA knew. State knew. They all knew Trump was innocent but they smeared and spied on him.”
This month, significant new evidence comes to correct the historical record—and prove Tom right. The new evidence comes from the report of Special Counsel John Durham.
Attorney General William Barr appointed Durham in April 2019 to get to the bottom of the Russia mess. Barr told Congress he wanted a review of “the genesis and conduct of intelligence activities directed at the Trump campaign during 2016.”
Durham’s prosecution record is a bust—two failed court cases and one low-level plea deal—but his 300-page, highly detailed final report is sensational.
Durham’s central mandate was to investigate the opening and conduct of the Crossfire Hurricane probe into possible Trump collusion with elements of the Russian government, particularly whether “any person or entity violated the law in connection with the intelligence, counter-intelligence, or law-enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaign.”
“Our findings,” the Durham Report notes, “…are sobering.”
Finding: at the opening of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, there was no evidence of collusion.
“Neither U.S. law enforcement nor the intelligence community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation,” the Durham Report noted. [Italics added]
Durham goes into stunning detail. He notes that Crossfire Hurricane “was opened as a full investigation without [the FBI] ever having spoken to the persons who provided the information…without (i) any significant review of its own intelligence databases, (ii) collection and examination of any relevant intelligence from other U.S. intelligence entities, (iii) interviews of witnesses essential to understand the information it had received, (iv) using any of the standard analytical tools typically employed by the FBI in evaluating raw intelligence. Had it done so…the FBI would have learned that their own experienced Russia analysts had no information about Trump being involved with Russian leadership officials, nor were others in sensitive positions at the CIA, the NSA, and the State Department aware of such evidence.”
Finding: Obama and Biden knew about Clinton plans to link Trump to Russia.
Durham reports that top Obama administration officials—including the president, Vice President Biden, the FBI director, the Attorney General and others—were briefed by CIA Director John Brennan on reports of a plan by the Clinton campaign to “vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.”
Elements of the Clinton Plan were disclosed in 2020 when the Director of National Intelligence reported it in a declassified letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, but Durham adds significant new context—and hints there is more hidden behind the walls of government secrecy. In a classified appendix to the report, Durham notes, there are “specific indications and additional facts that heightened the potential relevance of [the Clinton Plan intelligence] to the Office’s inquiry.”
In an interview with the special counsel, Durham notes, Hillary Clinton dodged questions about “her alleged plan to stir up a scandal between Trump and the Russians. Clinton stated it was ‘really sad,’ but ‘I get it, you have to go down every rabbit hole.’”
Finding: the Steele Dossier was a slanderous Clinton campaign creation devoid of real evidence and used by the FBI to target Carter Page.
Durham devotes more than 150 pages of his report to the Steele Dossier and its devastating ramifications. “Perkins Coie, a law firm acting as counsel to the Clinton campaign…retained Fusion GPS…to conduct opposition research on Trump and his associates.” Fusion GPS hired Steele. From July through December 2016, Durham wrote, “Steele and Fusion GPS prepared a series of reports containing derogatory information about purported ties between Trump and Russia. According to the reports, important connections between Trump and Russia ran through campaign manager Paul Manafort and foreign policy advisor Carter Page.”
Durham details at length how the Steele reports “played an important role in [FBI] applications to the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] targeting Page, a U.S. person. The FBI relied substantially on the [Steele] reports to assert probable cause that Page was knowingly engaged in clandestine intelligence activities on behalf of Russia.”
The problem with the FBI’s assertion? Durham notes: “the FBI was not able to corroborate a single substantive allegation contained in the Steele reports, despite protracted efforts to do so.” [Italics added.]
Finding: Clinton good—Trump bad—the FBI repeatedly gave all things Clinton a pass while hitting Trump hard.
In the course of his investigation, Durham learned of three attempts by foreign governments to funnel money to the Clintons or otherwise buy influence. Durham is measured, but it’s easy to read between the lines on the double standard. “The speed and manner in which the FBI opened and investigated Crossfire Hurricane during the presidential election season based on raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence also reflected a noticeable departure from how it approached prior matters involving possible attempted foreign election interference plans aimed at the Clinton campaign,” Durham noted.
In the eighteen months leading up to the 2016 election, “the FBI was required to deal with a number of proposed [Clinton] investigations that had the potential of affecting the election. In each of those instances, the FBI moved with considerable caution.”
In one instance, the FBI ended the case after its confidential source was found to be funneling money to the Clintons. In a second case, the FBI placed so many restrictions on how matters were to be handled that “essentially no investigative activities occurred for months leading up to the election.” In the third case, the FBI elected to give “defensive briefings” to Clinton and others. No such briefings, Durham notes, were offered at any time to the Trump campaign.
Finding: Investigations into the Clinton Foundation were killed by top Justice Department and FBI officials.
Durham notes that beginning in January 2016, three different FBI field offices — Little Rock, New York, and Washington — “opened investigations into possible criminal activity involving the Clinton Foundation.” Foreign governments were suspected of making, or planning to make, “contributions to the Foundation in exchange for favorable or preferential treatment” from Hillary Clinton.
Top Washington officials opposed the probes, Durham reports. One Justice Department section chief interviewed by Durham recalled the department’s reaction to a Clinton Foundation briefing as “hostile.”
At a February 2016 meeting about possibly closing the Clinton Foundation cases, a participant told Durham that FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was “negative” and “annoyed” and “angry,” wanting to close the probes. “Why are we even doing this?” McCabe is reported to have said. Judicial Watch has reported extensively on McCabe and his Democratic Party ties.
FBI field officials prevailed on McCabe at that meeting to keep the investigations open, but six months later the inquiries were dead in the water, Durham reports. The Washington and Little Rock field office probes were folded into the New York investigation. But the New York investigation went nowhere because Justice Department branches in New York declined to issue subpoenas.
Last week, the New York Times added new twists to the Clinton Foundation story, noting that after prosecutors in New York declined to issue subpoenas, the case moved back to Little Rock. Prosecutors in Little Rock closed the case in January 2021 but not without protest from line FBI agents in Arkansas. The “top agent in Little Rock,” the Times reported, “wanted it known that career prosecutors, not FBI officials, were behind the decision” to close the case.
The Times reported that the FBI received an official “declination memo” closing the case in August 2021 — effectively making the decision to stop investigating the Clinton Foundation a move by the Biden Administration.
That’s a move worth a closer look. So is the FBI claim, according to the Times, that all of the evidence developed during the investigation “has been returned or otherwise destroyed.”
After all the revelations about misconduct at the highest levels of government in the Trump Russia saga, it’s impossible to take FBI assertions at face value—as John Durham has proved, and as Tom Fitton presciently recognized so long ago.
Another $60 Mil for VP’s Failed Project Aimed at Irregular Migration
The Biden border crisis persists with continued taxpayer resources. This is the case with a useless Kamala Harris border fiasco, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
Though American taxpayers spend billions on illegal immigrants in the U.S., the Biden administration keeps giving Central American nations tens of millions in humanitarian funding with the hopes that it will improve life enough to deter its citizens from coming here illegally. It is part of the administration’s costly and ill-fated effort to curb “irregular migration” via the southwest border from three targeted countries known as the northern triangle—El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Under a costly initiative run by Vice President Kamala Harris, the U.S. is investing large sums to tackle the “root causes” or drivers of irregular migration by supposedly improving conditions in the three impoverished countries “so people do not feel compelled to leave their homes.” The efforts provide hope and opportunity to the people of Central America, according to the Biden administration, by affirming that a secure and prosperous future lies in their home communities.
Since the spring of 2021, the vice president’s Central American experiment has received around $300 million. The money has done little to reduce illegal immigration from the northern triangle, government figures show. In fiscal year 2022 a record 2.4 million illegal aliens entered the country through Mexico, a major increase from an already high of 1.73 million in 2021. More than half a million of the 2022 migrants were nationals of the northern triangle, illustrating the ineffectiveness of Biden’s multi-million-dollar plan. They included 228,000 Guatemalans, 199,000 Hondurans, and 93,000 Salvadorans. It is worth noting that the region is not exactly sending its finest citizens. In 2022 Border Patrol agents apprehended hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) which was formed by Salvadoran immigrants—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist.
Money is clearly not solving the problem, though the American aid keeps flowing south. Just a few months ago, the U.S. dedicated $42.5 million to provide residents of the region with “life-saving assistance.” The funds will “support programs that reduce food insecurity for the most vulnerable, support survivors and those at risk of gender-based violence and children in need of protection, help households to restore their livelihoods, and provide safe drinking water for poor families,” the government writes in an announcement. In the document the administration further explains that besides coping with natural hazards, the Central American nations are suffering from large-scale displacements, increasing food prices, and chronic protection challenges. “The United States remains committed to providing lifesaving aid to help the people of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras,” the administration assures.
A few days ago, the government announced another $60 million to combat the root cause of irregular migration from Central America. This allotment will focus on gender-based violence (GBV), advancing human rights and HIV prevention and care as well as economic growth. Here is how some of the money will be spent. More than $10.5 million will go to address the social, economic, justice, and security aspects of GBV in Guatemala. Ten million will be dedicated to strengthening interventions to prevent GBV in Honduras and increase the chance of breaking cycles of violence. More than $5 million will help increase employment in the region by growing the number of small-scale commercial farmers and $1.3 million will be disbursed to local organizations that support regional HIV care and treatment programs. The so-called “root causes” strategy “supports programs that create economic opportunities in the region for people to live, work, and learn in safety and dignity, contribute to and benefit from the democratic process, have confidence in public institutions, and enjoy opportunities to create futures for themselves and their families at home,” according to the U.S. government. It may sound like a decent argument to keep the cash flowing, but it is clearly not working.
Until next week …
The post Hillary Caught – Again! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner: Microsoft is stonewalling on providing key details about its touted “review” into the State Department-funded Global Disinformation Index after suspending its relationship with the self-styled British “disinformation” tracker earlier this year. Following multiple Washington Examiner reports in February, Microsoft announced that it had “stopped using GDI’s services” as part of an investigation, while internal data showed that the corporation removed negative flags for conservative […]
The post Microsoft stonewalls on ‘review’ into State Department-backed ‘disinformation’ group appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From RealClear Investigations: John Kerry, former Secretary of State and current special presidential envoy for climate, has a big staff and an even bigger budget, employing at least 45 employees with a budget of $16.5 million, according to Judicial Watch. Freedom of Information Act requests from both Judicial Watch and Real Clear Investigations revealed this information, which was […]
The post John Kerry Has a Big Staff, $16.5M Budget appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Though American taxpayers spend billions on illegal immigrants in the U.S., the Biden administration keeps giving Central American nations tens of millions in humanitarian funding with the hopes that it will improve life enough to deter its citizens from coming here illegally. It is part of the administration’s costly and ill-fated effort to curb “irregular migration” via the southwest border from three targeted countries known as the northern triangle—El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Under a costly initiative run by Vice President Kamala Harris, the U.S. is investing large sums to tackle the “root causes” or drivers of irregular migration by supposedly improving conditions in the three impoverished countries “so people do not feel compelled to leave their homes.” The efforts provide hope and opportunity to the people of Central America, according to the Biden administration, by affirming that a secure and prosperous future lies in their home communities.
Since the spring of 2021, the vice president’s Central American experiment has received around $300 million. The money has done little to reduce illegal immigration from the northern triangle, government figures show. In fiscal year 2022 a record 2.4 million illegal aliens entered the country through Mexico, a major increase from an already high of 1.73 million in 2021. More than half a million of the 2022 migrants were nationals of the northern triangle, illustrating the ineffectiveness of Biden’s multi-million-dollar plan. They included 228,000 Guatemalans, 199,000 Hondurans, and 93,000 Salvadorans. It is worth noting that the region is not exactly sending its finest citizens. In 2022 Border Patrol agents apprehended hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) which was formed by Salvadoran immigrants—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist.
Money is clearly not solving the problem, though the American aid keeps flowing south. Just a few months ago, the U.S. dedicated $42.5 million to provide residents of the region with “life-saving assistance.” The funds will “support programs that reduce food insecurity for the most vulnerable, support survivors and those at risk of gender-based violence and children in need of protection, help households to restore their livelihoods, and provide safe drinking water for poor families,” the government writes in an announcement. In the document the administration further explains that besides coping with natural hazards, the Central American nations are suffering from large-scale displacements, increasing food prices, and chronic protection challenges. “The United States remains committed to providing lifesaving aid to help the people of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras,” the administration assures.
A few days ago, the government announced another $60 million to combat the root cause of irregular migration from Central America. This allotment will focus on gender-based violence (GBV), advancing human rights and HIV prevention and care as well as economic growth. Here is how some of the money will be spent. More than $10.5 million will go to address the social, economic, justice, and security aspects of GBV in Guatemala. Ten million will be dedicated to strengthening interventions to prevent GBV in Honduras and increase the chance of breaking cycles of violence. More than $5 million will help increase employment in the region by growing the number of small-scale commercial farmers and $1.3 million will be disbursed to local organizations that support regional HIV care and treatment programs. The so-called “root causes” strategy “supports programs that create economic opportunities in the region for people to live, work, and learn in safety and dignity, contribute to and benefit from the democratic process, have confidence in public institutions, and enjoy opportunities to create futures for themselves and their families at home,” according to the U.S. government. It may sound like a decent argument to keep the cash flowing, but it is clearly not working.
The post Another $60 Mil for VP’s Failed Project Aimed at Tackling Root Causes of Irregular Migration appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Early on, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton smelled a rat. As Tom wrote in his 2020 book, A Republic Under Assault, Judicial Watch had for years been digging deep into the origins of the notorious anti-Trump Steele Dossier—“a thirty-five-page report filled with ludicrous, salacious and completely unfounded allegations”—and the relentless campaign against President Donald Trump. “Let us cast our minds back to April 2016,” Tom wrote. An investigative firm named Fusion GPS was hired to dig up dirt on candidate Trump. Fusion GPS in turn hired former British spy Christopher Steele. Steele produced the dossier, which was leaked to the press and caused a media sensation.
“Please focus on one of the most pertinent facts in this case,” Tom wrote. “Fusion GPS was hired by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.”
Next, Tom wrote, the FBI “used [the] completely fake dossier paid for by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign to spy on Donald Trump.”
While the media and official Washington remained transfixed by allegations of Trump depredations for years, Judicial Watch proceeded to uncover key information showing that the Clintons and their allies were behind the smears that trigged a sweeping FBI investigation and special counsel probes that ruined lives and careers and nearly toppled a presidency.
Judicial Watch uncovered the FBI “EC”—the electronic communication that officially launched the “Crossfire Hurricane” counterintelligence investigation of President Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign. The document was written by Peter Strzok, the deputy assistant director of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division. An avowed anti-Trump partisan, Strzok was fired after an inspector general investigation revealed anti-Trump text messages (including one where Strzok vowed to “stop” Trump) between him and his lover, FBI attorney Lisa Page.
Judicial Watch exposed serious problems with the Crossfire Hurricane, court-approved FBI surveillance of an innocent American citizen, Carter Page, a part-time Trump advisor. In August 2018, in a Judicial Watch case, the Justice Department admitted in a court filing that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court held no hearings on the spy warrant applications targeting Page. Judicial Watch litigation also uncovered the secret warrants that confirmed the FBI and Justice Department misled the court in withholding evidence that the Clinton campaign was behind the information used to persuade the court to approve the surveillance warrants targeting Page.
Judicial Watch proved that high-level Justice Department and State Department officials were involved in surreptitiously circulating anti-Trump smears at the highest levels of government and providing information to the 2016 Clinton campaign. Judicial Watch obtained FBI “302” interview reports with Justice Department official Bruce Ohr. Ohr told FBI investigators that “reporting on Trump’s ties to Russia were going to the Clinton Campaign” and to “Jon Winer at the U.S. State Department and the FBI.”
Judicial Watch put sunlight on Steele Dossier author Christopher Steele’s close association with the FBI, including payments to Steele by the FBI for work as a confidential source. Documents obtained by Judicial Watch show at least eleven FBI payments to Steele, note that he was admonished by the FBI for unspecified reasons, and that eventually the bureau grew wary of Steele and dropped him as a source.
Tom insisted for years that top Obama Administration officials knew exactly what was going on. “Obama knew. Clinton knew. Biden knew,” Tom tweeted. “Comey knew. Brennan knew. McCabe knew. Strzok knew. Clapper knew. Schiff knew. FBI knew. DOJ knew. CIA knew. State knew. They all knew Trump was innocent but they smeared and spied on him.”
This month, significant new evidence comes to correct the historical record—and prove Tom right. The new evidence comes from the report of Special Counsel John Durham.
Attorney General William Barr appointed Durham in April 2019 to get to the bottom of the Russia mess. Barr told Congress he wanted a review of “the genesis and conduct of intelligence activities directed at the Trump campaign during 2016.”
Durham’s prosecution record is a bust—two failed court cases and one low-level plea deal—but his 300-page, highly detailed final report is sensational.
Durham’s central mandate was to investigate the opening and conduct of the Crossfire Hurricane probe into possible Trump collusion with elements of the Russian government, particularly whether “any person or entity violated the law in connection with the intelligence, counter-intelligence, or law-enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaign.”
“Our findings,” the Durham Report notes, “…are sobering.”
Finding: at the opening of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, there was no evidence of collusion.
“Neither U.S. law enforcement nor the intelligence community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation,” the Durham Report noted. [Italics added].
Durham goes into stunning detail. He notes that Crossfire Hurricane “was opened as a full investigation without [the FBI] ever having spoken to the persons who provided the information…without (i) any significant review of its own intelligence databases, (ii) collection and examination of any relevant intelligence from other U.S. intelligence entities, (iii) interviews of witnesses essential to understand the information it had received, (iv) using any of the standard analytical tools typically employed by the FBI in evaluating raw intelligence. Had it done so…the FBI would have learned that their own experienced Russia analysts had no information about Trump being involved with Russian leadership officials, nor were others in sensitive positions at the CIA, the NSA, and the State Department aware of such evidence.”
Finding: Obama and Biden knew about Clinton plans to link Trump to Russia.
Durham reports that top Obama administration officials—including the president, Vice President Biden, the FBI director, the Attorney General and others—were briefed by CIA Director John Brennan on reports of a plan by the Clinton campaign to “vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.”
Elements of the Clinton Plan were disclosed in 2020 when the Director of National Intelligence reported it in a declassified letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, but Durham adds significant new context—and hints there is more hidden behind the walls of government secrecy. In a classified appendix to the report, Durham notes, there are “specific indications and additional facts that heightened the potential relevance of [the Clinton Plan intelligence] to the Office’s inquiry.”
In an interview with the special counsel, Durham notes, Hillary Clinton dodged questions about “her alleged plan to stir up a scandal between Trump and the Russians. Clinton stated it was ‘really sad,’ but ‘I get it, you have to go down every rabbit hole.’”
Finding: the Steele Dossier was a slanderous Clinton campaign creation devoid of real evidence and used by the FBI to target Carter Page.
Durham devotes more than 150 pages of his report to the Steele Dossier and its devastating ramifications. “Perkins Coie, a law firm acting as counsel to the Clinton campaign…retained Fusion GPS…to conduct opposition research on Trump and his associates.” Fusion GPS hired Steele. From July through December 2016, Durham wrote, “Steele and Fusion GPS prepared a series of reports containing derogatory information about purported ties between Trump and Russia. According to the reports, important connections between Trump and Russia ran through campaign manager Paul Manafort and foreign policy advisor Carter Page.”
Durham details at length how the Steele reports “played an important role in [FBI] applications to the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court] targeting Page, a U.S. person. The FBI relied substantially on the [Steele] reports to assert probable cause that Page was knowingly engaged in clandestine intelligence activities on behalf of Russia.”
The problem with the FBI’s assertion? Durham notes: “the FBI was not able to corroborate a single substantive allegation contained in the Steele reports, despite protracted efforts to do so.” [Italics added.]
Finding: Clinton good—Trump bad—the FBI repeatedly gave all things Clinton a pass while hitting Trump hard.
In the course of his investigation, Durham learned of three attempts by foreign governments to funnel money to the Clintons or otherwise buy influence. Durham is measured, but it’s easy to read between the lines on the double standard. “The speed and manner in which the FBI opened and investigated Crossfire Hurricane during the presidential election season based on raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence also reflected a noticeable departure from how it approached prior matters involving possible attempted foreign election interference plans aimed at the Clinton campaign,” Durham noted.
In the eighteen months leading up to the 2016 election, “the FBI was required to deal with a number of proposed [Clinton] investigations that had the potential of affecting the election. In each of those instances, the FBI moved with considerable caution.”
In one instance, the FBI ended the case after its confidential source was found to be funneling money to the Clintons. In a second case, the FBI placed so many restrictions on how matters were to be handled that “essentially no investigative activities occurred for months leading up to the election.” In the third case, the FBI elected to give “defensive briefings” to Clinton and others. No such briefings, Durham notes, were offered at any time to the Trump campaign.
Finding: Investigations into the Clinton Foundation were killed by top Justice Department and FBI officials.
Durham notes that beginning in January 2016, three different FBI field offices—Little Rock, New York, and Washington—“opened investigations into possible criminal activity involving the Clinton Foundation.” Foreign governments were suspected of making, or planning to make, “contributions to the Foundation in exchange for favorable or preferential treatment” from Hillary Clinton.
Top Washington officials opposed the probes, Durham reports. One Justice Department section chief interviewed by Durham recalled the department’s reaction to a Clinton Foundation briefing as “hostile.”
At a February 2016 meeting about possibly closing the Clinton Foundation cases, a participant told Durham that FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was “negative” and “annoyed” and “angry,” wanting to close the probes. “Why are we even doing this?” McCabe is reported to have said. Judicial Watch has reported extensively on McCabe and his Democratic Party ties.
FBI field officials prevailed on McCabe at that meeting to keep the investigations open, but six months later the inquiries were dead in the water, Durham reports. The Washington and Little Rock field office probes were folded into the New York investigation. But the New York investigation went nowhere because Justice Department branches in New York declined to issue subpoenas.
Last week, the New York Times added new twists to the Clinton Foundation story, noting that after prosecutors in New York declined to issue subpoenas, the case moved back to Little Rock. Prosecutors in Little Rock closed the case in January 2021 but not without protest from line FBI agents in Arkansas. The “top agent in Little Rock,” the Times reported, “wanted it known that career prosecutors, not FBI officials, were behind the decision” to close the case.
The Times reported that the FBI received an official “declination memo” closing the case in August 2021—effectively making the decision to stop investigating the Clinton Foundation a move by the Biden Administration.
That’s a move worth a closer look. So is the FBI claim, according to the Times, that all of the evidence developed during the investigation “has been returned or otherwise destroyed.”
After all the revelations about misconduct at the highest levels of government in the Trump Russia saga, it’s impossible to take FBI assertions at face value—as John Durham has proved, and as Tom Fitton presciently recognized so long ago.
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Follow Micah on Twitter @micah_morrison. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post Major Revelations in Trump Russia Scandal, Clinton Corruption—Hillary Did It, Obama Knew—Judicial Watch Warnings Came Early & Often appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues National Archives for Biden Family Business Records
Judicial Watch Sues Treasury Department for Communications with Failed Banks
Another Illegal Protected by Sanctuary Laws Charged with Violent Crimes
Memorial Day – Why We Fight
Judicial Watch Sues National Archives for Biden Family Business Records
Joe Biden is hiding his shady business dealings abroad behind his National Archives. So we’ve filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit against the agency for Biden family’s records and communications regarding travel and finance transactions, as well as communications between the Bidens and several known business associates (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. National Archives (No. 1:23-cv-01432).
We had to sue because the National Archives has yet to produce any records in response to our February 2023 FOIA request for:
Records and/or communications from former Vice President Joseph R. Biden regarding:
- Any communication with Robert Hunter Biden, James Brian Biden, Francis William “Frank” Biden or Sara Jones Biden between January 20, 2009, and January 20, 2017, regarding:
- a) any international or domestic travel
- b) any international or domestic financial activity, including but not limited to banking and financial institutions, overseas bank accounts, credit card companies, bills, invoices, fees, agreements, financial arrangements, payments, wire transfers, contracts, QuickBooks, financial spreadsheets, business proposals, office or residential leases, rent payments, real estate transactions
- Any communication with Robert Hunter Bid en, James Brian Biden, Francis William “Frank” Biden or Sara Jones Biden between January 20, 2009, and January 20, 2017, regarding the following individuals or companies:
a) Devon Archer;
b) JiaQi Bao;
c) Tony Bobulinski;
d) Jeffrey Cooper;
e) Catherine Dodge;
f) Gongwen Dong;
g) James Gilliar;
h) Patrick Ho Chi-ping;
i) Vuk Jeremie;
j) Zang Jianjun;
k) Ye Jianming;
l) Jonathan Li;
m) Joan Mayer or Joan Peugh;
n) Francis Person;
o) Vadim Pozharskyi;
p) Eric Schwerin;
q) Robert Walker;
r) Mervyn Yan;
s) Nita Madhav;
t) Maiy Guttieri
u) Any Metabiota entity or company;
v) Any Rosemont Seneca entity or company;
w) Any Hudson West entity or company;
x) Any Owasco entity or company;
y) Any Bohai Harvest entity or company;
z) Skaneateles LLC;
aa) Eudora Global LLC;
bb) Coldharbour Capital LLC;
cc) Lion Hall Group LLC;
dd) Any CEFC entity or company; and
ee) Burisma.
- Any communication, between January 20, 2009, and January 20, 2017, between or among former Vice President Joseph R. Biden and the individuals or entities set forth in Items 2(a)-(ee) above.
- All records and documents including paper or electronic calendars such as (Outlook or Gmail) regarding former Vice President Joseph R. Biden and the individuals or entities set forth in Items 2(a)-(ee) above.
We explained to the court that in a March letter the National Archives acknowledged receiving the FOIA request, assigned it a case number and claimed it had identified “approximately 1,567 emails, 2,501 electronic files, and 445 pages of potentially responsive records that must be processed in order to respond to your request.”
The Archives also stated that, according to the Code of Federal Regulations, it is required to “notify representatives of the former President and the incumbent President and the former Vice President prior to the release of any Vice Presidentialrecords.” The letter did not say when or even whether any such notice had been given or would be given. On information and belief, no such notice has been given.
On May 10, House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-KY.) released financial records of the Biden family’s business dealings showing that millions of dollars flowed from China and other foreign sources through a labyrinth of Biden family companies:
[The] financial records reveal the Biden family and associates’ complicated network of companies set up during Joe Biden’s vice presidency and the millions the Bidens received from foreign sources. The financial records also reveal how the Bidens used complicated transactions to hide payments from foreign nationals, including CCP-linked associates, and provide clear indications of influence peddling schemes during then-Vice President Biden’s tenure.
Clearly, the Biden National Archives agency is stonewalling the release of thousands of records that could go to the heart of Biden family corruption allegations.
Judicial Watch Sues Treasury Department for Communications with Failed Banks
We’re going to court to uncover the details of Biden administration actions that could cost billions of dollars.
Your Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit against the U.S. Department of the Treasury for all communications between Treasury components Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) and the Office of Financial Research (OFR) and the failed Silicon Valley and Signature banks (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of the Treasury(No. 1:23-cv-01397)).
Both banks were forced into failure by the Biden administration in March.
The Biden administration’s actions in attempting to resolve the bank failures will cost tens of billions of dollars, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) estimated.
We sued after Treasury failed to respond to March 14, 2023, FOIA requests.
The Financial Stability Oversight Council, established by Title I of the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and signed into law by President Barack Obama on July 21, 2010, is tasked with monitoring the stability of the U.S. financial system. However, former Judicial Watch client Vern McKinley and I previously warned, “[T]he Financial Stability Oversight Council clearly is incapable of providing either financial stability or oversight. It should be eliminated.”
(On April 26, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry, along with Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Bill Huizenga, and Financial Institutions and Monetary Policy Subcommittee Chairman Andy Barr sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen in her capacity as Chair of the Oversight Council, demanding it provide information previously requested more than a month prior from its meetings immediately following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank.)
The Office of Financial Research was created, according to its website, to promote “financial stability by delivering high-quality financial data, standards and analysis” in support of the FSOC and its member agencies.
In its 2022 report to Congress, the Office of Financial Research states that it found “overall threats to U.S. financial stability were elevated compared to last year. The 2022 report discussed how the systemic risk landscape was elevated as financial institutions faced more uncertainty from rising inflation, tight credit conditions, and the geopolitical landscape.”
Massive bank failures induced by the Biden administration have rocked our economic system. The American people deserve to know the details of the costly interventions and government takeovers of Silicon Valley and Signature Banks.
That we had to sue for basic information about this banking crisis suggests the Biden administration has something to hide.
Another Illegal Alien Protected by Sanctuary Laws Charged with Violent Crimes
Jurisdictions that grant illegal aliens sanctuary are putting their citizens at risk of violent crimes, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
In yet another disturbing example of the devastation caused by open border policies, an illegal immigrant who entered the U.S. as a child a decade ago has been charged with first-degree rape, kidnapping and armed robbery in a county that proudly offers migrants sanctuary. The 20-year-old, Jose Roberto Hernandez-Penal, is accused of raping a woman and robbing her friend this month at a Maryland park after threatening the woman with a machete. Days earlier police say he raped a 15-year-old girl at the same park in Montgomery County, which has long protected illegal aliens from federal authorities.
The illegal immigrant lives in Hyattsville, which sits in another Maryland county—Prince George’s—famous for its sanctuary policies. The measures protect illegal aliens by, among other things, releasing even the most dangerous criminals from jail to shield them from deportation. Hernandez-Penal, a native of El Salvador, entered the country illegally in 2013, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) told a local media outlet, and was“ordered removed in absentia by an immigration judge” about a year later and again approximately seven months after that. Nevertheless, he remained in the country and committed heinous crimes against unsuspecting residents. Police say at approximately 2:40 p.m. on May 16 Hernandez-Penal approached two adult females on the Northwest Branch Trail of Burnt Mills East Special Park, displayed a machete, stole their property and sexually assaulted one of the victims. Upon leaving the scene, the illegal immigrant assaulted an adult male. Officials told several local news outlets that Hernandez-Penal is also suspected of raping a 15-year-old girl on the same trail of the two-acre facility a week earlier. The park is one of the hundreds operated by Montgomery County along with other recreational facilities such as basketball courts, campsites, tennis courts and playgrounds.
Detectives handling the case for the Montgomery County Police Department believe there may be additional victims of sexual assault by Hernandez-Penal that have not contacted authorities. The agency reveals that the illegal immigrant “made statements of involvement” during interviews with detectives after his recent arrest. He was then transported to the Montgomery County Central Processing Unit where he was charged with first degree rape, first degree assault, second degree assault, armed robbery, kidnapping, and weapons-related crimes. In its news release detectives urge anyone who may have been a victim of Hernandez-Penal to contact the agency’s Special Victims Investigations Division (SVID).
It is important to note that this is the same law enforcement agency that regularly releases dangerous criminals like Hernandez-Penal from jail to protect them from federal authorities. For example, a few years ago an illegal immigrant from El Salvador who raped a seven-year-old girl multiple times was released because under Montgomery County’s sanctuary law police are banned from cooperating with the feds. Rather than honor a detainer issued by ICE under a partnership known as 287(g) that notifies the federal agency of inmates in the country illegally so that they can be deported, local officials freed the child rapist on bond. Not surprisingly, the rapist vanished. Prince George’s County, where Hernandez-Penal lives, practices the same sanctuary measures. In fact, ICE has resorted to unconventional methods to capture criminals in both jurisdictions. In one instance the agency preempted Montgomery and Prince George’s counties’ imminent release of a batch of illegal immigrant offenders by publicly disclosing their identity, complete with mug shots. Most were incarcerated for sexual crimes involving children, including rape and serious physical abuse that resulted in death. A couple were jailed for murder and assault.
The Maryland cases are part of a national crisis generated by local governments around the country that offer violent illegal immigrants sanctuary. Under 287(g), ICE is notified of jail inmates in the country illegally so that they can be deported after serving time for state crimes or making bail. Unfortunately, a growing number of city and county law enforcement agencies are instead releasing the illegal aliens—many with serious convictions such as child sex offenses, rape and murder—rather than turn them over to federal authorities for removal.
Memorial Day – Why We Fight
Memorial Day helps our nation focus on the ultimate sacrifice of untold numbers of fellow Americans – Americans who gave their lives to preserve and defend our God-given freedoms and our constitutional republic.
As we honor those heroes next week, I’d like to draw your attention again to the Veterans Day speech given in 1985 by then-President Ronald Reagan. Much of his speech applies to Memorial Day, especially this portion, which remains timely today:
And the living have a responsibility to remember the conditions that led to the wars in which our heroes died. Perhaps we can start by remembering this: that all of those who died for us and our country were, in one way or another, victims of a peace process that failed; victims of a decision to forget certain things; to forget, for instance, that the surest way to keep a peace going is to stay strong.
Weakness, after all, is a temptation — it tempts the pugnacious to assert themselves — but strength is a declaration that cannot be misunderstood. Strength is a condition that declares actions have consequences. Strength is a prudent warning to the belligerent that aggression need not go unanswered.
Peace fails when we forget what we stand for. It fails when we forget that our Republic is based on firm principles, principles that have real meaning, that with them, we are the last, best hope of man on Earth; without them, we’re little more than the crust of a continent. Peace also fails when we forget to bring to the bargaining table God’s first intellectual gift to man: common sense. Common sense gives us a realistic knowledge of human beings and how they think, how they live in the world, what motivates them. Common sense tells us that man has magic in him, but also clay. Common sense can tell the difference between right and wrong. Common sense forgives error, but it always recognizes it to be error first.
We endanger the peace and confuse all issues when we obscure the truth; when we refuse to name an act for what it is; when we refuse to see the obvious and seek safety in Almighty. Peace is only maintained and won by those who have clear eyes and brave minds.
I’d like to think many Americans have “clear eyes and brave minds” and these patriots desire the same qualities in our political and judicial leaders. It certainly reflects Judicial Watch’s modest approach to our efforts.
Have a safe and blessed Memorial Day!
Until next week …
The post Biden Corruption Secrets appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The teenager who raped and murdered a Maryland woman last summer was a known gang member arrested in his native El Salvador before coming to the U.S. under a special program that welcomes illegal immigrants under the age of 18 and provides them with a multitude of taxpayer benefits. Even after getting charged with homicide federal authorities placed the migrant offender, who sports tattoos displaying affiliation with the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), in a foster home with other children. The unbelievable facts of this case are outlined in a congressional report that illustrates how the Biden administration’s radical open border policies allow dangerous criminals into American communities. “DHS did not sufficiently screen this alien for potential gang affiliation at the time of his apprehension or adequately safeguard Americans by ensuring that he would not be released into the country,” a House Judiciary Committee investigation found.
The gruesome crime occurred in July 2022 in Aberdeen, Maryland about 25 miles northeast of Baltimore. A 20-year-old woman, Kayla Hamilton, was raped and murdered by a 16-year-old from El Salvador who entered the U.S. via the Mexican border. DNA evidence collected at the crime scene led police to the young migrant, who turned 17 by the time he was arrested earlier this year. Detectives confirmed then that the perpetrator was an illegal alien and a member of MS-13. Under U.S. law illegal immigrant minors are almost always allowed to remain in the country and are quickly disbursed to a government-funded shelter upon arrival at the southwest border. The government refers to them as Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) and hundreds of thousands have entered the country in the last few years. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is charged with caring for them and the agency spends millions of dollars annually to house, medically treat, entertain, and school UAC who come mainly from Central America.
In this tragic case—as in many others—the government failed miserably to properly vet the UAC, according to the congressional probe. It found that years before coming to the U.S. the illegal immigrant murderer was arrested in El Salvador for illicit association with the MS-13, a feared street gang of mostly Central American illegal immigrants that has spread throughout the U.S. and is renowned for drug distribution, murder, rape, robbery, home invasions, kidnappings, vandalism, and other violent crimes. The affiliation should have banned him from the UAC program. Federal authorities also ignored the alien’s gang tattoos, congressional investigators say, and they were not disclosed by HHS in his case file or by the agency’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (OR) at the time of his placement or in the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) alien file at the time of his apprehension. “In addition to having indications of the alien’s criminality, the alien’s case file also shows that while his homicide charge was pending and after his affiliation with MS-13 was known, authorities placed him in a foster home with other children,” the Judiciary Committee report states, adding that an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official expressed concern for the safety of other children present in the foster home with the “violent” migrant.
The teenage gang member was apprehended by Border Patrol in Texas on March 23, 2022, just months before he raped and killed Hamilton. He told authorities that members of his family paid $4,000 to have him smuggled into the U.S. to escape gang-related threats. He was to live with a cousin in Maryland, but a month later the illegal immigrant ran away from that home. His case file provides details about his violent criminal past, congressional investigators write in the report. “Tragically, Secretary [Alejandro] Mayorkas and his department missed key warning signs about the alien’s propensity for violence, which law enforcement officials investigating the murder later uncovered,” the report says, adding that “the Biden Administration’s disregard for the safety of Americans directly resulted in the tragic and—sadly, preventable—murder of Kayla Hamilton.”
Other UAC have committed violent crimes after Uncle Sam welcomed them into the country, including two teens—one from El Salvador and other from Guatemala—charged with raping a 14-year-old girl at a Maryland public high school. In another case, two 17-year-olds from Central America executed a Massachusetts man by shooting him in the head shortly after crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. Both had ties to MS-13, authorities disclosed at the time.
The post U.S. Put Migrant Gangbanger with MS-13 Tattoos in Foster Home after Raping, Killing Woman appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In yet another disturbing example of the devastation caused by open border policies, an illegal immigrant who entered the U.S. as a child a decade ago has been charged with first-degree rape, kidnapping and armed robbery in a county that proudly offers migrants sanctuary. The 20-year-old, Jose Roberto Hernandez-Penal, is accused of raping a woman and robbing her friend this month at a Maryland park after threatening the women with a machete. Days earlier police say he raped a 15-year-old girl at the same park in Montgomery County, which has long protected illegal aliens from federal authorities.
The illegal immigrant lives in Hyattsville, which sits in another Maryland county—Prince George’s—famous for its sanctuary policies. The measures protect illegal aliens by, among other things, releasing even the most dangerous criminals from jail to shield them from deportation. Hernandez-Penal, a native of El Salvador, entered the country illegally in 2013, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) told a local media outlet, and was “ordered removed in absentia by an immigration judge” about a year later and again approximately seven months after that. Nevertheless, he remained in the country and committed heinous crimes against unsuspecting residents. Police say at approximately 2:40 p.m. on May 16 Hernandez-Penal approached two adult females on the Northwest Brach Trail of Burnt Mills East Special Park, displayed a machete, stole their property and sexually assaulted one of the victims. Upon leaving the scene, the illegal immigrant assaulted an adult male. Officials told several local news outlets that Hernandez-Penal is also suspected of raping a 15-year-old girl on the same trail of the two-acre facility a week earlier. The park is one of hundreds operated by Montgomery County along with other recreational facilities such as basketball courts, campsites, tennis courts and playgrounds.
Detectives handling the case for the Montgomery County Police Department believe there may be additional victims of sexual assault by Hernandez-Penal that have not contacted authorities. The agency reveals that the illegal immigrant “made statements of involvement” during interviews with detectives after his recent arrest. He was then transported to the Montgomery County Central Processing Unit where he was charged with first degree rape, first degree assault, second degree assault, armed robbery, kidnapping, and weapons-related crimes. In its news release detectives urge anyone who may have been a victim of Hernandez-Penal to contact the agency’s Special Victims Investigations Division (SVID).
It is important to note that this is the same law enforcement agency that regularly releases dangerous criminals like Hernandez-Penal from jail to protect them from federal authorities. For example, a few years ago an illegal immigrant from El Salvador who raped a seven-year-old girl multiple times was released because under Montgomery County’s sanctuary law police is banned from cooperating with the feds. Rather than honor a detainer issued by ICE under a partnership known as 287(g) that notifies the federal agency of inmates in the country illegally so that they can be deported, local officials freed the child rapist on bond. Not surprisingly, the rapist vanished. Prince George’s County, where Hernandez-Penal lives, practices the same sanctuary measures. In fact, ICE has resorted to unconventional methods to capture criminals in both jurisdictions. In one instance the agency preempted Montgomery and Prince George’s counties’ imminent release of a batch of illegal immigrant offenders by publicly disclosing their identity, complete with mug shots. Most were incarcerated for sexual crimes involving children, including rape and serious physical abuse that resulted in death. A couple were jailed for murder and assault.
The Maryland cases are part of a national crises generated by local governments around the country that offer violent illegal immigrants sanctuary. Under 287(g), ICE is notified of jail inmates in the country illegally so that they can be deported after serving time for state crimes or making bail. Unfortunately, a growing number of city and county law enforcement agencies are instead releasing the illegal aliens—many with serious convictions such as child sex offenses, rape and murder—rather than turn them over to federal authorities for removal.
The post Another Illegal Immigrant Protected by Local Sanctuary Laws Charged with Violent Crimes appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Archives is Withholding ‘Approximately 1,567 Emails, 2,501 Electronic Files, and 445 Pages of Potentially Responsive Records’
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the National Archives for Biden family records and communications regarding travel and finance transactions, as well as communications between the Bidens and several known business associates (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. National Archives (No. 1:23-cv-01432).
The lawsuit was filed after the National Archives have yet to produce any records in response to a February 2023 FOIA request for:
Records and/or communications from former Vice President Joseph R. Biden regarding:
- Any communication with Robert Hunter Bid en, James Brian Biden, Francis William “Frank” Biden or Sara Jones Biden between January 20, 2009, and January 20,2017, regarding:
a) any international or domestic travel
b) any international or domestic financial activity, including but not limited to banking and financial institutions, overseas bank accounts , credit card companies, bills, invoices, fees, agreements, financial arrangements, payments, wire transfers, contracts, QuickBooks, financial spreadsheets, business proposals, office or residential leases, rent payments, real estate transactions
- Any communication with Robert Hunter Bid en, James Brian Biden, Francis William “Frank” Biden or Sara Jones Biden between January 20, 2009, and January 20, 2017, regarding the following individuals or companies:
a) Devon Archer;
b) JiaQi Bao;
c) Tony Bobulinski;
d) Jeffrey Cooper;
e) Catherine Dodge;
f) Gongwen Dong;
g) James Gilliar;
h) Patrick Ho Chi-ping;
i) Vuk Jeremie;
j) Zang Jianjun;
k) Ye Jianming;
l) Jonathan Li;
m) Joan Mayer or Joan Peugh;
n) Francis Person;
o) Vadim Pozharskyi;
p) Eric Schwerin;
q) Robert Walker;
r) Mervyn Yan;
s) Nita Madhav;
t) Maiy Guttieri
u) Any Metabiota entity or company;
v) Any Rosemont Seneca entity or company;
w) Any Hudson West entity or company;
x) Any Owasco entity or company;
y) Any Bohai Harvest entity or company;
z) Skaneateles LLC;
aa) Eudora Global LLC;
bb) Coldharbour Capital LLC;
cc) Lion Hall Group LLC;
dd) Any CEFC entity or company; and
ee) Burisma.
- Any communication, between January 20, 2009, and January 20, 2017, between or among former Vice President Joseph R. Biden and the individuals or entities set forth in Items 2(a)-(ee) above.
- All records and documents including paper or electronic calendars such as (Outlook or Gmail) regarding former Vice President Joseph R. Biden and the individuals or entities set forth in Items 2(a)-(ee) above.
Judicial Watch explained to the court that in a March letter the National Archives acknowledged receiving the FOIA request, assigned it a case number and claimed it had identified “approximately 1,567 emails, 2,501 electronic files, and 445 pages of potentially responsive records that must be processed in order to respond to your request.”
The Archives also stated that, according to the Code of Federal Regulations, it is required to “notify representatives of the former President and the incumbent President and the former Vice President prior to the release of any Vice Presidential records.” The letter did not say when or even whether any such notice had been given or would be given. On information and belief, no such notice has been given.
On May 10, House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-KY.) released financial records of the Biden family’s business dealings showing that millions of dollars flowed from China and other foreign sources through a labyrinth of Biden family companies:
[The] financial records reveal the Biden family and associates’ complicated network of companies set up during Joe Biden’s vice presidency and the millions the Bidens received from foreign sources. The financial records also reveal how the Bidens used complicated transactions to hide payments from foreign nationals, including CCP-linked associates, and provide clear indications of influence peddling schemes during then-Vice President Biden’s tenure.
“The Biden National Archives agency is stonewalling the release of thousands of records that could go to the heart of Biden family corruption allegations,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The post Judicial Watch Sues National Archives for Biden Family Business Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of the Treasury for all communications between Treasury components Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) and the Office of Financial Research (OFR) and the failed Silicon Valley and Signature banks (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of the Treasury (No. 1:23-cv-01397)).
Both banks were forced into failure by the Biden administration in March.
The Biden administration’s actions in attempting to resolve the bank failures will cost tens of billions of dollars, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) estimated.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after Treasury failed to respond to March 14, 2023, FOIA requests.
The Financial Stability Oversight Council, established by Title I of the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and signed into law by President Barack Obama on July 21, 2010, is tasked with monitoring the stability of the U.S. financial system. However, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton and former Judicial Watch client Vern McKinley previously warned, “[T]he Financial Stability Oversight Council clearly is incapable of providing either financial stability or oversight. It should be eliminated.”
(On April 26, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry, along with Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Chairman Bill Huizenga, and Financial Institutions and Monetary Policy Subcommittee Chairman Andy Barr sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen in her capacity as Chair of the Oversight Council, demanding it provide information previously requested more than a month prior from its meetings immediately following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank.)
The Office of Financial Research was created, according to its website, to promote “financial stability by delivering high-quality financial data, standards and analysis” in support of the FSOC and its member agencies.
In its 2022 report to Congress, the Office of Financial Research states that it found “overall threats to U.S. financial stability were elevated compared to last year. The 2022 report discussed how the systemic risk landscape was elevated as financial institutions faced more uncertainty from rising inflation, tight credit conditions, and the geopolitical landscape.”
“Massive bank failures induced by the Biden administration have rocked our economic system,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The American people deserve to know the details of the costly interventions and government takeovers of Silicon Valley and Signature Banks. That Judicial Watch has had to sue for basic information about this banking crisis suggests the Biden administration has something to hide.”
The post Judicial Watch Sues Treasury Department for Records on Communications with Failed Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Pennsylvania Settles Voter Roll Lawsuit with Judicial Watch
“Pennsylvania’s election rolls are cleaner – and will remail cleaner – thanks to Judicial Watch. This federal lawsuit settlement is good news for voters in Pennsylvania who want to ensure that only eligible voters are on voter rolls,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch’s remarkable run of litigation successes resulted in well over 2 million ineligible registrations being removed from voter rolls across the nation in the last two years!”
Judicial Watch: Pentagon IG Concludes Naval Academy Superintendent Made False Statements in Effort to End Career of Midshipman Busy Summer Travel Looms DHS Sends Air Marshals Back to Mexican Border
Judicial Watch announced recently it received 19-pages of records from the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) consisting of an internal report by its Inspector General titled “Report of Investigation of Vice Admiral (VADM) Sean L. Buck, U.S. Navy, Superintendent, U.S. Naval Academy,” which concluded that Buck made false statements in discussions with senior Navy officials during disenrollment proceedings against a midshipman for perceived inappropriate tweets.
HHS Earmarks Millions of Dollars to Give Illegal Immigrant Minors Long Term Foster Care
It is not enough that American taxpayers spend billions of dollars annually to “temporarily” care for the onslaught of illegal immigrant minors that cross into the U.S. through the Mexican border until they get released to relatives or sponsors. Now the Biden administration is quietly doling out tens of millions more for long-term foster care through fiscal year 2024. The money will go to providers that will give Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) with no family in the U.S. continuing “quality care in a community setting.”
Judicial Watch Statement on Durham Report
This is damning information. According to the Durham Report, President Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan, then-Vice President Joe Biden, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and the infamous former Director of the FBI James Comey were briefed in August 2016 about the plan by Hillary Clinton and the DNC to create a false narrative linking President Trump to Russia.
In The News
Lack of high-profile prosecutions in Durham probe leaves Republicans fuming
The Washington Times
“The report shows a yawning gap between what went on and the prosecutorial response,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog. “I think Durham dropped the ball when it came to prosecutions, and this was a glorified administrative review.”
Gunsmoke: Dept. Of Justice Doubles Down On Bid To Keep Hunter Biden’s Illegal Gun Purchase Top Secret, Court Documents Show
Radar OnlineLast month, the watchdog group Judicial Watch slapped the DOJ with a federal lawsuit for refusing to hand over FBI documents related to the controversial incident, which involved the U.S. Secret Service and the Delaware State Police.Pressed by Judicial Watch, Pennsylvania Cleans Up Its Voter Rolls
TownhallThe settlement commits the commonwealth and five of its counties to publicly reporting the number of registered and eligible voters, both active and inactive, for the next five years. “[Pennsylvania] also agreed to publish the total number of address confirmation notices sent to registered voters and the number returned as undeliverable or not responded to,” according to Judicial Watch, and “the total number of voters removed from the registration rolls on account of death, or for failing to respond to an address confirmation notice and failing to vote in the two most recent federal general elections.” Additionally, Pennsylvania must cover $15,000 in Judicial Watch’s legal costs and fees.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Hunter and Joe PROTECTED by FBI? - John Kerry Secret Gov Operation REVEALED! - The End of America?
-
The post Judicial Watch Cleans Up PA Voter Rolls! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a court hearing will be held before Judicial District Chancery Court Judge I’Ashea Myles on Monday, May 22, 2023, in the Chancery Court for Davidson County, 20th Judicial District in the public records lawsuit for records about the March 27, 2023, shooting at The Covenant School in Tennessee, including the reported “manifesto” written by the suspected female shooter. The suit is against the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit on behalf of retired Hamilton County Sheriff James Hammond and the Tennessee Firearms Association, Inc. (TFA) (Hammond et al. v. Metropolitan Govt of Nashville et al.(No. 23-0538-III)).
The hearing will be held:
Date: Monday, May 22, 2023Time: 1 p.m. ETLocation: Tennessee Chancery Court20th District Davidson County1 Public SquareNashville, TN
On April 13, 2023, the TFA submitted two open records requests. The first request asked that the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (MNPD) produce copies of records or files and inspection of “the ‘manifesto’ reportedly found in the home of Audrey Elizabeth Hall on March 27, 2023.”
The second request asked that the MNPD produce copies of records or files and inspection “all email communications of MNPD officials regarding the mass shooting committed by Audrey Elizabeth Hale on March 27, 2023, as well as MNPD officials’ text messages regarding the same, and copies of the ‘manifesto’ reported left by Audrey Elizabeth Hale in her vehicle.”
In a separate request on April 17, 2023, Hammond asked that the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department for:
- All MNPD criminal police reports documenting this incident to include but not limited to:
a. Impound/evidence invoices
b. Photographs
c. Bodycam footage
d. City/County/State and/or federal coroner information
e. Suspect toxicology/lab results
f. Audio of calls for service
g. School video footage of suspect and officers
-
All MNPD Force Investigation Team (FIT) internal administrative investigations/reports regarding this incident to include but not limited to those mandated by The Manual of the Metropolitan Police Department of Nashville Davidson County, TN (the Department Manual) Title 1.130.050.
-
All MNPD communications, to include but not limited to directives, orders, memos, emails and/or letters, concerning the release of the contents and/or copies of the aforementioned “manifesto” of the deceased female shooting suspect.
-
All MNPD communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and/or the Office of the District Attorney, Nashville (20th Judicial District) regarding the designation of the aforementioned multiple shooting at a Christian School by a self-identified transgender suspect as a “hate crime.”
-
All MNPD criminal and/or field intelligence reports and/or received complaints involving the aforementioned shooting suspect (Audrey Hale) dated from January 1, 2020, to the date of your final response to this records request.
The MNPD denied all three requests citing without identifying any underlying criminal case or even a potential defendant.
The Tennessee Public Records Act states: “[a]ll state, county and municipal records shall … be open for personal inspection by any citizen of this state, and those in charge of the records shall not refuse such right of inspection to any citizen, unless otherwise provided by state law. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-503(a)(2)(A).” The lawsuit requests the court allow prompt access to the requested public records.
Nashville Police Department court documents filed on May 17 stated the police agency does not object to a release of the “redacted” manifesto, but many other records are still under review. Additionally, the MNPD stated the investigation could take approximately one year to complete.
John I. Harris III, Esq., of Schulman, LeRoy & Bennett, PC in Nashville, TN, is assisting Judicial Watch with the lawsuit.
The post Judicial Watch: Hearing Announced in Lawsuit Seeking Release of ‘Manifesto’ of Nashville Covenant School Shooter appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Durham Report Documents Worst Government Corruption in American History
Judicial Watch Client, Decorated Veteran and FBI Analyst Whistleblower Testifies to Congress on Weaponization of Government
Pentagon Inspector General Concludes Naval Academy Superintendent Made False Statements to End Midshipman’s Career
HHS Earmarks Millions for Illegal Immigrant Minors’ Long Term Foster Care
Durham Report Documents Worst Government Corruption in American History
Special Counsel John Durham released his long-awaited report on intelligence agency activities in the 2016 presidential election, and it is damning.
According to the Durham Report, President Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan, then-Vice President Joe Biden, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and the infamous former Director of the FBI James Comey were briefed in August 2016 about the plan by Hillary Clinton and the DNC to create a false narrative linking President Trump to Russia.
The FBI knew the Steele dossier was a sack of lies, and yet they still pushed false allegations in the nefarious FISA warrant applications against Carter Page. They made it a point to try to crush Trump and those around him. It was a purely political, banana republic effort to change the course of a presidential election and presidency.
Many key Durham report findings were already disclosed thanks to Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) investigations and litigation.
Durham let down the American people with few and failed prosecutions. Never in American history has so much government corruption faced so little accountability. Let me be clear, the FBI and Justice Department – and their political masters in the Obama White House – are responsible for the worst government corruption in American history. President Trump is a crime victim who was targeted by a seditious conspiracy by Obama, Biden, Clinton and their Deep State allies.
Judicial Watch Client, Decorated Veteran and FBI Analyst Whistleblower Testifies to Congress on Weaponization of Government
Marcus Allen, a decorated veteran, FBI analyst and Judicial Watch client, testified this week at a House Judiciary Committee’s Select Subcommittee hearing titled “Hearing on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.”
We represent Allen in a lawsuit against FBI Director Christopher Wray for violating Allen’s constitutional rights by falsely accusing him of holding “conspiratorial views,” stripping his security clearance, and suspending him from duty without pay (Marcus O. Allen v Christopher Wray (No. 22-cv-04536)). Allen is also represented by Tristan Leavitt and Jason Foster of Empower Oversight (https://empowr.us/).
The FBI revoked Allen’s security clearance because apparently, the FBI believes that any views contrary to its own regarding what occurred on January 6 constitutes as disloyalty to the United States.
The lawsuit details Allen’s outstanding military and FBI service:
Because of his outstanding military service, [Allen] was awarded the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal and the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal. In 2004, [Allen] was designated the Marine Corps Intelligence Activity Runner-Up for Intelligence NCO of the Year.
In 2015, [Allen] joined the FBI as a staff operations specialist. Among other tasks, he has provided ad hoc all-source analytical support to the FBI Charlotte Field Office Joint Terrorism Task Force. He has consistently been rated “Exceeds Fully Successful” on his FBI performance evaluations. He received the FBI Charlotte Field Office Employee of the Year Award in 2019.
[Allen] first received a Top Secret security clearance in early 2001.
Despite Allen’s exemplary service, in a January 10, 2022, letter the FBI asserted:
The Security Division has learned you have espoused conspiratorial views both orally and in writing and promoted unreliable information which indicates support for the events of January 6th. These allegations raise sufficient concerns about your allegiance to the United States and your judgment to warrant a suspension of your clearance pending further investigation.
In a February 17, 2022, letter the FBI further notified Allen that he was being placed on administrative leave without pay due to the suspension of his security clearance.
The lawsuit states:
[Allen’s] allegiance is to the United States, as he has demonstrated during his years of exemplary military and law enforcement service to his country.
[Allen] was not involved in the events of January 6 and did not support them in any material way. The FBI has made no allegation or offered any evidence to the contrary.
[Allen] has expressed no view that could be reasonably interpreted as personally expressing support or sympathy for any unlawful activity that occurred on January 6.
The FBI has not identified any specific statements or actions supporting its contention that Plaintiff has done otherwise.
We contend that the FBI did not give Allen a chance to clear himself, despite his repeated inquiries. In early May 2022, however, the FBI requested that Allen appear for an interview. He promptly complied. The interview request came only days after FBI Director Wray was confronted by members of Congress over concerns that the FBI was weaponizing the security clearance process to target politically conservative employees. Since that time, Allen has received no further word on the status of the FBI’s investigation.
On June 7, 2022, Rep. Jim Jordan, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Wray regarding the firing of FBI employees, noting that, “Multiple whistleblowers have called it a ‘purge’ of FBI employees holding conservative views.”
Pentagon Inspector General Concludes Naval Academy Superintendent Made False Statements to End Midshipman’s Career
We received 19-pages of records from the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) consisting of an internal report by its Inspector General titled “Report of Investigation of Vice Admiral (VADM) Sean L. Buck, U.S. Navy, Superintendent, U.S. Naval Academy,” which concluded that Buck made false statements in discussions with senior Navy officials during disenrollment proceedings against a midshipman for perceived inappropriate tweets.
We uncovered the internal report, dated September 2022, thanks to our March 2023 FOIA lawsuit (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense, No. 1:23-cv-00566). We sued after the Department of Defense’s Office of Inspector General (“DODIG”) failed to respond to a December 2022 FOIA request for all records related to an investigation conducted by the DODIG, which it publicly referenced in its most recent annual report to Congress. The reference is on page 54 of the Report to Congress. In the report, DODIG informed Congress of the following incident:
The DOD OIG investigated allegations that a Navy vice admiral made false official statements to senior Navy officials on three occasions. We did not substantiate the allegations. We concluded that the vice admiral did not make a false official statement, as defined by Article 107 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, on any of the three occasions. The DOD OIG initiated this investigation based on complaints filed with the DOD Hotline.
The report we just uncovered details that following Vice Admiral Buck’s interview with the midshipman at issue (whose name is redacted), Buck made false statements internally to other Navy officials on three separate occasions when he “asserted that [the midshipman] said he would use military force against civilians.” The report also notes that Buck used these false statements to support his recommendation that the midshipman be disenrolled from the Academy and be required to reimburse the Navy $174,753 for his tuition. (The DODIG’s Whistleblower Reprisal Investigations Directorate, which produced the report on Buck, “investigates allegations of whistleblower reprisals made by members of the armed services and employees, contractors, and grantees of DOD and the DOD intelligence community.”)
In a November 12, 2020, memo, Buck recommended to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Manpower and Reserve Affairs that the midshipman be disenrolled from the United States Naval Academy after Buck claimed he had lost confidence in the midshipman.
Based on Buck’s recommendation, the Secretary of Navy disenrolled the midshipman from the Naval Academy. However, after the midshipman sued, the Navy ultimately allowed him back into the Academy to complete his remaining credits, “graduate from the USNA, receive a commission as an ensign on May 28, 2021, and enter active duty.” A news report by The Stars and Stripes suggests the midshipman in question may have been Chase Standage.
The report concludes:
We concluded by a preponderance of the evidence that [Vice Admiral] Buck did not make a false official statement, as defined by Article 107 of the [Uniform Code of Military Justice] … However, we found that VADM Buck made a statement that was false during both the conference call with [redacted] on February 18, 2021, and the office visit with [redacted] on February 24, 2021. We further found that VADM Buck knew that his statements were false, but we could not determine by a preponderance of the evidence that VADM Buck intended to make those false statements on either occasion to deceive [redacted] or [redacted]. Separately, we concluded that VADM Buck did not make a false official statement to former Secretary Braithwaite.
The IG made “no recommendation” regarding Buck.
The documents show how Pentagon leaders let a vice admiral – the head of the US Naval Academy – off the hook for knowingly making false statements to justify his recommendation to end the career of a young midshipman over tweets. It is disturbing that it took a federal FOIA lawsuit to uncover how this senior officer made a series of false statements as part of his unusual effort to destroy this midshipman.
HHS Earmarks Millions for Illegal Immigrant Minors’ Long Term Foster Care
Children pouring across the border without parents are becoming wards of the state – on your dime. Our Corruption Chronicles blog explains.
It is not enough that American taxpayers spend billions of dollars annually to “temporarily” care for the onslaught of illegal immigrant minors that cross into the U.S. through the Mexican border until they get released to relatives or sponsors. Now the Biden administration is quietly doling out tens of millions more for long-term foster care through fiscal year 2024. The money will go to providers that will give Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) with no family in the U.S. continuing “quality care in a community setting.” The accommodations will focus on migrants up to 17 years of age, including pregnant and parenting teens and those who are “especially vulnerable or with other special needs,” according to the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency distributing the money. The allocation comes just weeks after Judicial Watch reported that the government is spending $50 million on “post-release” services for the never-ending influx of migrant youths.
HHS is responsible for underage migrants and the agency, through its handsomely funded Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), has spent a fortune to care for the mobs of mostly Central American youths that have crossed into the U.S. through the Mexican border in the last few years. Because those under 18 are welcomed with open arms hundreds of thousands have entered the country in the last few years and HHS spends billions of dollars annually to house, medically treat, entertain, and school UAC when they arrive in the U.S. In fact, HHS oversees dozens of state-licensed care facilities to house the young migrants when they arrive in the country and as of May 2, 2023, there are 8,492 unaccompanied children in HHS care, according to the latest agency figures. In fiscal year 2021 ORR provided shelter to an unprecedented 122,731 UAC. In fiscal year 2022, a record 149,000 UAC were apprehended by federal agents. The overwhelming majority of UAC in U.S. custody, approximately 72%, are over 14 years of age and 66% are male. Nearly half (47%) come from Guatemala, 32% from Honduras, 13% from El Salvador and 8% from other countries.
The living accommodations are supposed to be short term, until the government can place the migrants with family or a sponsor even though Uncle Sam still pays for costly medical, educational, legal and other services after release. The new funding for long term care indicates that American taxpayers will get stuck with a much bigger tab than previously disclosed to support UAC. The extended services will also include “acculturation and adaptation” care to help the illegal aliens develop social and interpersonal skills, education, legal and mental health. Daily education for the UAC in long term foster care will be a minimum of six hours based on basic academic competencies and secondarily on English language training. Foster homes will establish summer education plans tailored to the migrants’ needs, including individual counseling by a qualified mental health professional when needed. Mental health professionals will identify special needs and issues that require immediate intervention, including previous juvenile justice or criminal involvement.
“Care providers are required to provide or arrange for the required services in a manner that is sensitive to the age, culture, religion, dietary needs, native language, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other important individual needs of each” young migrant, the grant announcement states. It also says all UAC in U.S. care are entitled to human rights protections and freedom from discrimination and abuse and that providers must ensure that all migrants who are LGBTQI+ are treated fairly and served during their time in custody. “Care providers are required to have the capacity to provide services in the language spoken by the majority of UC in their facility(ies) and/or provide translation services,” the document states, adding the obvious, that “most UC in ORR custody speak Spanish.” The agency further writes that applicants for the new pot of money should “have the flexibility to care for the expanding cultural and linguistically diverse populations that are referred each year.”
This is all part of the Biden administration’s red-carpet rollout for underage illegal immigrants. It is important to note the irony of a system that spends so much money to accommodate a demographic that also includes hardcore criminals and violent gangbangers. For instance, a teenage Salvadoran gang member recently arrested for the murder of a Maryland woman came to the U.S. as a UAC. A few years ago, two UAC were charged with raping a 14-year-old girl in the bathroom of a Maryland public high school. The illegal immigrants were both charged with first-degree rape and two counts of first-degree sexual offense. Both were in the ninth grade like their victim. One came from El Salvador and the other from Guatemala. A year earlier two UAC—both 17—from Central America executed a Massachusetts man by shooting him in the head shortly after being welcomed into the U.S. by the Obama administration. Both had ties to the notoriously violent street gang Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), authorities disclosed at the time.
Until next week…
The post Durham Report Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times:
“The report shows a yawning gap between what went on and the prosecutorial response,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog. “I think Durham dropped the ball when it came to prosecutions, and this was a glorified administrative review.”
Read more here…
The post Lack of high-profile prosecutions in Durham probe leaves Republicans fuming appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 19-pages of records from the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) consisting of an internal report by its Inspector General titled “Report of Investigation of Vice Admiral (VADM) Sean L. Buck, U.S. Navy, Superintendent, U.S. Naval Academy,” which concluded that Buck made false statements in discussions with senior Navy officials during disenrollment proceedings against a midshipman for perceived inappropriate tweets.
The internal report, dated September 2022, was uncovered thanks to a Judicial Watch March 2023 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense, No. 1:23-cv-00566) filed after the Department of Defense’s Office of Inspector General (“DODIG”) failed to respond to a December 2022 FOIA request for all records related to an investigation conducted by the DODIG, which it publicly referenced in its most recent annual report to Congress. The reference is on page 54 of the Report to Congress. In the report, DODIG informed Congress of the following incident:
The DOD OIG investigated allegations that a Navy vice admiral made false official statements to senior Navy officials on three occasions. We did not substantiate the allegations. We concluded that the vice admiral did not make a false official statement, as defined by Article 107 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, on any of the three occasions. The DOD OIG initiated this investigation based on complaints filed with the DOD Hotline.
The report, just uncovered by Judicial Watch details that following Vice Admiral Buck’s interview with the midshipman at issue (whose name is redacted), Buck made false statements internally to other Navy officials on three separate occasions when he “asserted that [the midshipman] said he would use military force against civilians.” The report also notes that Buck used these false statements to support his recommendation that the midshipman be disenrolled from the Academy and be required to reimburse the Navy $174,753 for his tuition. (The DODIG’s Whistleblower Reprisal Investigations Directorate, which produced the report on Buck, “investigates allegations of whistleblower reprisals made by members of the armed services and employees, contractors and grantees of DOD and the DOD intelligence community.”)
In a November 12, 2020, memo, Buck recommended to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Manpower and Reserve Affairs that the midshipman be disenrolled from the United States Naval Academy after Buck claimed he had lost confidence in the midshipman.
Based on Buck’s recommendation, the Secretary of Navy disenrolled the midshipman from the Naval Academy. However, after the midshipman sued, the Navy ultimately allowed him back into the Academy to complete his remaining credits, “graduate from the USNA, receive a commission as an ensign on May 28, 2021, and enter active duty.” A news report by The Stars and Stripes suggests the midshipman in question may have been Chase Standage.
The report concludes:
We concluded by a preponderance of the evidence that [Vice Admiral] Buck did not make a false official statement, as defined by Article 107 of the [Uniform Code of Military Justice] … However, we found that VADM Buck made a statement that was false during both the conference call with [redacted] on February 18, 2021, and the office visit with [redacted] on February 24, 2021. We further found that VADM Buck knew that his statements were false, but we could not determine by a preponderance of the evidence that VADM Buck intended to make those false statements on either occasion to deceive [redacted] or [redacted]. Separately, we concluded that VADM Buck did not make a false official statement to former Secretary Braithwaite.
The IG made “no recommendation” regarding Buck.
“The documents show how Pentagon leaders let a vice admiral – and the head of the US Naval Academy – off the hook for knowingly making false statements to justify his recommendation to end the career of a young midshipman over tweets,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And it is disturbing that it took a federal FOIA lawsuit to uncover how this senior officer made a series of false statements as part of his unusual effort to destroy this midshipman.”
The post Judicial Watch: Pentagon IG Concludes Naval Academy Superintendent Made False Statements in Effort to End Career of Midshipman appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Hearing on California Censorship of Judicial Watch YouTube Election Integrity Video
Texas A&M Appeared to Receive Almost $500 Million from Qatar Regime
Judge Rules in Favor of Judicial Watch Client: Bucks County, PA Acted in Bad Faith in Withholding School COVID Shutdown Documents – Court Orders County to Pay $3,000
Judicial Watch Sues for ‘Manifesto’ of The Covenant School Shooter in Tennessee
Hearing in Lawsuit for Teacher Fired for Preemployment Social Media Posts
U.S. Funds Program to Support Displaced LGBTQI+ Refugees, Asylees
Hearing on California Censorship of Judicial Watch YouTube Election Integrity Video
We will be in court next week for a hearing before U.S. District Court Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong on a Motion to Dismiss brought by the California Secretary of State in our lawsuit Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Shirley Weber, in her official capacity as Secretary of State of the State of California (No. 2:22-cv-06894)
The hearing will be on Thursday, May 11, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. PT.
Our lawsuit states that the California Office of Elections Cybersecurity, which Secretary of State Shirley Weber oversees, unlawfully caused YouTube to remove our election integrity video on September 25, 2020. Specifically, our lawyers arguethat the California Secretary of State violated our First Amendment right by:
misus[ing] her authority under [California Election Code Sec. 10.5] with the intention to interfere with [Judicial Watch’s] speech by monitoring [its] speech on social media, falsely assessing [its] speech as misleading, ignoring an express limitation on her authority while giving an overly broad interpretation to other authority, and using her close working relationship with and “dedicated pathways” at YouTube to have [Judicial Watch’s] video removed within approximately 24 hours.
At the time the complaint against Weber was filed, I said, “Smoking gun documents show that California government officials, who were being advised by the Biden campaign PR operation, caused YouTube to censor a key Judicial Watch video just before the 2020 election. This egregious government censorship and election interference violated our civil rights, and our lawsuit aims to stop and expose the growing corruption of leftist government officials colluding with Big Tech allies to attack the free speech rights of Americans.”
California government officials don’t have the right to censor any American, especially on sensitive election integrity debates just before a presidential election. California’s censorship of Judicial Watch is a violation of the First Amendment, pure and simple.
Through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and other direct litigation, we continue to investigate and litigate the broad range of censorship being conducted by the Biden administration and its fellow travelers within state and local governments.
(On February 28 of this year, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department Homeland Security (DHS) for records showing collusion between federal agencies and social media to censor and suppress free speech (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:23-cv-00552)).
Also in February 2023, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against DHS for records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) that could detail coordinated censorship activities (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:23-cv-00384)).
The Elon Musk ‘Twitter Files’ are the tip of the iceberg, as the federal government ran a massive, secret censorship op against the American people. That the DHS is hiding these censorship records in violation of FOIA law shows the agency still has something to hide.
On January 13, 2023, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for communications and records of the Surgeon General’s Communications Director’s contact with social media companies regarding COVID-19 vaccines (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:23-cv-00113)). Biden’s surgeon general was abusing his office to pressure Big Tech companies to censor Americans. This lawsuit aims to uncover the details of this government attack on the First Amendment.
On January 11, 2023, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story (Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-00079)). Fitton commented, The FBI was literally paying Twitter to censor Americans just before the 2020 election! The FBI seems to have interfered in the 2020 election to help Joe Biden by encouraging Big Tech to censor Americans about the Hunter Biden laptop and other debates. And to add to the scandal, they are now covering up their misconduct.
In November 2022, we sued the DHS for all records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA), a division of DHS, and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to flag online election content for censorship and suppression.
In May 2022, YouTube censored our video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and our YouTube account was suspended for a week. Judicial Watch continues to post its video content on our Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In July 2021, we uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
In May 2021, we revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.)
Texas A&M Appeared to Receive Almost $500 Million from Qatar Regime
Why is a terrorist-aligned nation giving nearly a half billion dollars to an American university?
We received records from Texas A&M indicating that it received $485,811,921.33 in grants and contracts from the Qatar Foundation.
There appear to be discrepancies between what is listed in the gift reporting received from Texas A&M and what was reported by the school to the federal foreign gift reporting system. For instance, Texas A&M’s gift record for January 1, 2013 – May 22, 2018, only lists a total of $69,844.41 from the Qatar Foundation, whereas the Department of Education’s database shows a total of over $47 million for the same period.
The new information was released in a court victory last month in litigation on behalf of Judicial Watch client Zachor Legal Institute under the Texas Public Information Act. Zachor fought for information about the potential influence by the Qatar government’s funding of certain Texas A&M University programs and a Texas A&M campus in Education City, Al Rayyan, Qatar (Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development v. Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General (No. D-1-GN-18-006240)).
The previously hidden records include a document titled “Qatar Grants and Contracts” for January 1,2013 – May 22, 2018, lists the funds received by Texas A&M as follows:
ARAMCO $1,028,611.55
QATAR COMPUTING RESEARCH INSTITUTE $121,643.84
QATAR ENVIRONMENT & ENERGY RESEARCH $218,250.33
QATAR FOUNDATION $485,811,921.33
QATAR NATIONAL RESEARCH FUND $32,145,910.92
QATAR UNIVERSITY $226,826.03
$519,553,164.00
A second record is titled “Qatar Gifts,” which includes:
Qatar National Research Fund $39,280.82
Qatar Computing Research Institute $1,202,989.18
Aramco Services Company $100,000.00
Maersk Oil Qatar $1,536,230.88
Ooredoo $524,918.00
Qatar Biomedical Research Institute $3,000.00
Qatar Foundation $69,844.41
[$3,476,263.29]
Zachor Legal Institute is a U.S.-based advocacy group dedicated to combatting the spread of anti-Semitism. Zachor made requests under the TPIA for information about the funding or donations made to Texas A&M by the government of Qatar and agencies and subdivisions of the government of Qatar. Qatar controversially has aligned itself with Islamic terrorists and extremists which has placed it at odds with the United States, Israel and other U.S. allies in the Middle East.
Zachor began asking in 2018 for information about Qatari funding of Texas A&M research and how Texas A&M, a public university, was able to establish a degree-conferring campus in Qatar without the Texas Legislature’s permission or involvement.
In 2018, Qatar filed a lawsuit to prevent disclosure of its funding information. Our attorneys countered in the courts that neither the Qatari government nor any of its agencies are protected by exceptions under Texas law and that federal law “expressly makes the requested information public.”
In March 2023, Judge Amy Clark Meachum ruled in favor of Judicial Watch and the Zachor Legal Institute and orderedthat the documents be made public.
“Thanks to the determined and skillful work of Judicial Watch, the country now sees the extent to which foreign governments are interfering in American institutions,” said Marc Greendorfer, President of Zachor Legal Institute. “Texas A&M’s apparent sporadic and shifting compliance with federal reporting requirements concerning gifts and grants from Qatar raises many questions as to why the university seemingly failed to comply with reporting requirements and whether additional information is not being reported. Zachor will continue to pursue answers to these questions until every dollar is accounted for.”
Now we know why terrorist-linked Qatar has fought us in court to hide its financial support for Texas A&M – which we just found out is nearly a half billion dollars.
Judge Rules in Favor of Judicial Watch Client: Bucks County, PA Acted in Bad Faith in Withholding School COVID Shutdown Documents – Court Orders County to Pay $3,000
A Bucks County, PA judge ruled that the county acted “in bad faith” in withholding records that are, by law, public from Megan Brock, a parent we represented. She was sued by Bucks County to prevent the release of documents related to COVID restrictions and the re-opening of the county’s schools that she requested under the commonwealth’s Right-to-Know Law (County of Bucks v. Megan Brock (Nos. 2022-03083 and 2022-02979)).
In each of the two lawsuits filed by Bucks County, Judge Denise M. Bowman ruled on April 28 that the county must produce records Brock had requested under the Right-to-Know Law (RTK).
Judge Bowman also ruled that the county pay sanctions in the amount of $1,500 in each of the lawsuits. This is the highest amount allowed under the RTK.
The court conducted an in-camera review of the records requested by Brock, found that more than half were not properly withheld by Bucks County, and ordered the release of several records.
The court also considered evidence submitted by Brock to the Office of Open Records which consisted of records that Brock obtained from another request that should have been but were not produced in the record searches in the lawsuits. The court agreed that these evidentiary records demonstrated that Bucks County had failed to “produce documents which clearly existed, fell within the RTK Requests at issue, and were not protected from disclosure by exemption.”
These court decisions are tremendous victories for the ‘right to know’ of parents and citizens. Indeed, the Court recognized the bad faith nature of the outrageous government lawsuits against our client Megan Brock for daring to ask questions about crazed covid school shutdowns.
On February 7, 2022, Brock sent an RTK request asking for all electronic correspondence by Bucks Co. Director of Policy and Communications Eric Nagy with Board Vice Chair Diane Ellis-Marseglia, Board Chair Bob Harvie, former Director of the Commissioners’ Office of Public Information Larry King, Chief Clerk Gail Humphrey, and Health Department Director David Damsker from 8/10/2021 to 8/28/2021, on the buckscounty.gov domain. Also, all communications about Bucks County Health Department School Guidance.
On March 8, 2022, Brock sent an RTK request asking for a copy of an email sent to Acting Chief Operating OfficerMargaret McKevitt on 8/23/2021 on the buckscounty.gov domain, which contained the final copy of the Bucks County COVID-19 Amended School Guidance, including all responses.
On July 18, 2022, our local counsel, J. Chadwick Schnee, filed answers to Bucks County’s lawsuits against Brock.
In July 2022, National Review profiled Brock and Jamie Walker, parents of children in Bucks County who led the fight to re-open the county’s schools during the COVDI pandemic, “and then to keep schools open and opening close to normal.” Brock and Walker “suspect county officials and two Democratic commissioners had a hand in updating the county’s guidance, and possibly overruling their own health director, a strong advocate for in-person learning. They believe Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf’s administration coerced the county into adopting its more restrictive Covid policies and its one-size-fits-all approach to school reopening.”
Judicial Watch Sues for ‘Manifesto’ of The Covenant School Shooter in Tennessee
Judicial Watch filed a public records lawsuit for records about the March 27, 2023, shooting at The Covenant School in Tennessee, including the reported “manifesto” written by the female shooting suspect.
Our suit is against the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County in The Chancery Court for the State of Tennessee’s 20th District. We sued on behalf of retired Hamilton County Sheriff James Hammond and the Tennessee Firearms Association, Inc. (“TFA”) (No. 23-0542-III).
On April 13, 2023, the TFA submitted two open records requests. The first request asked that the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (“MNPD”) produce copies of records or files and inspection of “the ‘manifesto’ reportedly found in the home of Audrey Elizabeth Hall on March 27, 2023.”
The second request asked that the MNPD produce copies of records or files and inspection “all email communications of MNPD officials regarding the mass shooting committed by Audrey Elizabeth Hale on March 27, 2023, as well as MNPD officials’ text messages regarding the same, and copies of the ‘manifesto’ reported left by Audrey Elizabeth Hale in her vehicle.”
In a separate request on April 17, 2023, Hammond asked that the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department for:
- All MNPD criminal police reports documenting this incident to include but not limited to:
a. Impound/evidence invoices
b. Photographs
c. Bodycam footage
d. City/County/State and/or federal coroner information
e. Suspect toxicology/lab results
f. Audio of calls for service
g. School video footage of suspect and officers
-
All MNPD Force Investigation Team (FIT) internal administrative investigations/reports regarding this incident to include but not limited to those mandated by The Manual of the Metropolitan Police Department of Nashville Davidson County, TN (the Department Manual) Title 1.130.050.
-
All MNPD communications, to include but not limited to directives, orders, memos, emails and/or letters, concerning the release of the contents and/or copies of the aforementioned “manifesto” of the deceased female shooting suspect.
-
All MNPD communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and/or the Office of the District Attorney, Nashville (20th Judicial District) regarding the designation of the aforementioned multiple shooting at a Christian School by a self-identified transgender suspect as a “hate crime.”
-
All MNPD criminal and/or field intelligence reports and/or received complaints involving the aforementioned shooting suspect (Audrey Hale) dated from January 1, 2020, to the date of your final response to this records request.
The MNPD denied all three requests without identifying any underlying criminal case or even a potential defendant.
The Tennessee Public Records Act states: “[a]ll state, county and municipal records shall… be open for personal inspection by any citizen of this state, and those in charge of the records shall not refuse such right of inspection to any citizen, unless otherwise provided by state law.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-503(a)(2)(A). The lawsuit requests the Court allow prompt access to the requested public records.
Tennessee authorities have cited no credible reason for hiding the killer’s ‘manifesto’ about this deadly school shooting of three young children and three school employees. Politics shouldn’t trump transparency and the public safety. The public has an urgent right to know the details of this manifesto. That a public records lawsuit is required to try to access this key document is a scandal.
Hearing in Lawsuit for Teacher Fired for Preemployment Social Media Posts
Judicial Watch never stops. A federal court hearing will be held before Judge Denise J. Casper of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Tuesday, May 9, 2023, in the civil rights lawsuit we filed on behalf of Kari MacRae, a Massachusetts high school teacher who was fired in retaliation for posts on social media that predated her employment at Hanover High School (MacRae vs. Matthew Mattos and Matthew A. Ferron (No. 1:21-cv-11917).
Our filing laying out the First Amendment retaliation issues and evidence uncovered through several months of discovery, including deposition testimony, is available here.
MacRae, who was hired as a Hanover High School teacher on August 31, 2021, was fired over several TikTok posts that were made months prior to her hiring at the school. MacRae, who in May of 2021 was elected to the Bourne School Committee, made the posts in her personal capacity as a citizen and candidate for public office.
The evidence is that Kari MacRae was fired in retaliation for exercising her First Amendment right to speak on issues of public concern, like critical race theory and transgenderism in schools. She deserves her day in court and the chance to make her case before a federal jury.
U.S. Funds Program to Support Displaced LGBTQI+ Refugees, Asylees
The transgender extremist movement is well-funded – with your tax dollars. Our Corruption Chronicles blog explains.
The U.S. will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars—and up to $1 million—to support Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex (LGBTQI+) refugees and asylum seekers in two or more countries. The goal, according to the Biden administration, is to create global coordination, advocacy, and knowledge-sharing on protecting and assisting refugees that identify as LGBTQI+. It is worth noting that the government’s official Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) buries the real purpose of the allocation by classifying the grant as “Humanitarian Research.” The money will be disbursed by the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM). The U.S. is financing the initiative at the request of the United Nations (U.N.) to promote evidence-based decision making on priority protection, enhance tools to improve the agency’s performance and encourage other “humanitarian stakeholders” to follow recommendations.
To receive taxpayer dollars nonprofits and institutions of higher education must submit proposals that respond to several research questions involving LGBTQI+ persons, according to the grant announcement. The first one is, “what are best practices for the ethical, safe, and confidential collection, management, and reporting of data on displaced LGBTQI+ persons?” The second question asks, “what are the experiences and needs of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Queer (LGBQ) women, trans men, and intersex persons in situations of displacement and in humanitarian contexts, and what are best practices for reaching and assisting them?” That is followed by “what is the intersectionality between the health (including mental health) needs of LGBTQI+ persons and displacement?” Finally, the State Department asks potential grant recipients “what are best practices for assistance to meet these health needs?”
The U.S. was essentially directed to launch the project after a U.N. probe determined that displaced and stateless LGBTQI+ persons remain significantly under-identified and under-documented in humanitarian response efforts. The U.S. is already the U.N.’s largest donor to the tune of $12 billion, but the famously corrupt world body specifically called on Uncle Sam to invest in further research to identify best practices and develop guidelines on working with displaced and stateless LGBTQI+ persons. The U.S. government was also directed to undertake research on the intersection of health and forced displacement of LGBTQI+ persons and safer data collection methods. “The experiences of LGBTQI+ persons in displacement are not homogenous, and, as such, the best practices and policy responses to address their protection concerns and access to assistance and durable solutions will also not be homogenous,” according to the State Department, which stresses the need for the new program by revealing that most research overwhelmingly focuses on “the experiences of cisgender gay and queer men and trans women.”
The U.N. also wants the U.S. and other countries to develop and fund language-appropriate training for government employees and contractors responsible for collecting data on LGBTIQ+ displaced people and develop safe and effective tools, including respectful engagement using the correct diverse terminology dictated by SOGIESC, an umbrella term for those whose gender identity, sexual orientation, or gender expressions differ from the mainstream. The acronym stands for sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics. The leftist world body also wants the U.S. and other countries to innovate region-specific methods to expedite pathways for LGBTIQ+ displaced people in hostile host situations, noting that LGBTIQ+ forcibly displaced people often experience compounded hostility in places of protection due to criminalization of consensual same-sex relations and social stigma in asylum countries. Therefore, the U.N. is ordering “accelerated asylum procedures” for LGBTIQ+ migrants and to avoid inappropriate lines of questioning and the use of stereotypical assumptions in interviewing techniques and credibility assessments.
The U.S. has long accommodated members of this demographic by offering transgender illegal immigrants special services, including their own detention center. A few years ago, Judicial Watch reported on a New Mexico facility that offers transgender migrants hair and makeup classes, a recreation area, gym, television rooms, a lab and pharmacy. There are also meeting areas for trans detainees to consult with free legal services provided by advocacy groups. American taxpayers also furnish hormone therapy, which “is not cheap,” according to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director.
Until next week …
The post Anti-Censorship Legal Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a court hearing will be held before Judge Denise J. Casper of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Tuesday, May 9, 2023, in the civil rights lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch on behalf of Kari MacRae, a Massachusetts high school teacher who was fired in retaliation for posts on social media that predated her employment at Hanover High School (MacRae vs. Matthew Mattos and Matthew A. Ferron(No. 1:21-cv-11917).
The hearing will be held:
Date: Tuesday, May 9, 2023
Time: 3 p.m. ET
Location: Courtroom 11 (5th floor)
John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse
1 Courthouse Way, Suite 2300
Boston, MA 02210
(Judicial Watch’s court filing laying out the First Amendment retaliation issues and evidence uncovered through several months of discovery, including deposition testimony, is available here.)
MacRae, who was hired as a Hanover High School teacher on August 31, 2021, was fired over several TikTok posts that were made months prior to her hiring at the school. MacRae, who in May of 2021 was elected to the Bourne School Committee, made the posts in her personal capacity as a citizen and candidate for public office.
“The evidence is that Kari MacRae was fired in retaliation for exercising her First Amendment right to speak on issues of public concern, like critical race theory and transgenderism in schools,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “She deserves her day in court and the chance to make her case before a federal jury.”
The post Judicial Watch: Federal Hearing in Civil Rights Lawsuit for High School Teacher Fired for Preemployment Social Media Posts appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Daily Caller:
Daily Caller News Foundation reporter Megan Brock secured a victory last week after she was sued by Bucks County, Pennsylvania, in 2022 to prevent the release of documents she requested related to the county’s school reopening plans and COVID-19 restrictions.
After the court conducted an in-camera review of the records, Judge Denise M. Bowman ruled on April 28 that more than half of Brock’s requests, which were made under the state’s Right-to-Know Law (RTK), had been withheld “in bad faith.” She ordered the county to release certain documents and pay $1,500 in sanctions for each of the two lawsuits brought against Brock, the maximum allowed under RTK.
“These court decisions are tremendous victories for the ‘right to know’ of parents and citizens,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Indeed, the Court recognized the bad faith nature of the outrageous government lawsuits against our client Megan Brock for daring to ask questions about crazed covid school shutdowns.”
Brock, one of the county parents on the forefront of the fight to keep schools open during COVID-19, called the ruling a win “for every person in Bucks County, regardless of political affiliation.”
Read more here…
The post DCNF Reporter Wins Massive Legal Victory Against County That Tried To Silence Her For Requesting Public Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Breitbart:
According to records requested by Judicial Watch, Texas A&M University received nearly $500 million in grants and contracts from the Qatar regime. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton commented, “Now we know why terrorist-linked Qatar has fought us in court to hide its financial support for Texas A&M — which we just found out is nearly a half billion dollars.”
Records obtained by Judicial Watch under the Texas Public Information Act indicate that Texas A&M received $485,811,921.33 in grants and contracts from the Qatar Foundation.
Judicial Watch pointed out what appears to be discrepancies between what is listed in the gift reporting received from Texas A&M and what was reported by the school to the federal foreign gift reporting system.
“For instance, Texas A&M’s gift record for January 1, 2013 – May 22, 2018, only lists a total of $69,844.41 from the Qatar Foundation, whereas the Department of Education’s database shows a total of over $47 million for the same period,” Judicial Watch noted.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch: Texas A&M Received Almost $500 Million in Grants from Qatar appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times:
Ironically, the Freedom of Information Act lawsuits filed Monday by Judicial Watch and the National Police Association both seek the disclosure of the manifesto, journals and other documents that police say were found in the shooter’s vehicle and bedroom.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called the department’s explanation for the delay “absurd.”
“It’s the first time in history a government agency has said that they can’t release records because someone’s asking for them,” Mr. Fitton told The Washington Times. “I’ve never seen anything like it before.”
Read more here…
The post Court Hearing Set for Lawsuit over California Sec of State’s Censorship of Judicial Watch YouTube Election Integrity Video Just Before 2020 Election appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that District Court Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong will hold a hearing on Thursday, May 11, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. PT on a Motion to Dismiss brought by the California Secretary of State in the lawsuit Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Shirley Weber, in her official capacity as Secretary of State of the State of California (No. 2:22-cv-06894)
Date: Thursday, May 11, 2023
Time: 10:00 a.m. PT (1 p.m. ET)
Location: U.S. District Court, Central District of California Western Division,
350 W 1st Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012,
Courtroom 8B, Eighth Floor
The lawsuit states that the California Office of Elections Cybersecurity, which Secretary of State Shirley Weber oversees, unlawfully caused YouTube to remove Judicial Watch’s election integrity video on September 25, 2020. Specifically, Judicial Watch lawyers argue that the California Secretary of State violated Judicial Watch’s First Amendment right by:
misus[ing] her authority under [California Election Code Sec. 10.5] with the intention to interfere with [Judicial Watch’s] speech by monitoring [its] speech on social media, falsely assessing [its] speech as misleading, ignoring an express limitation on her authority while giving an overly broad interpretation to other authority, and using her close working relationship with and “dedicated pathways” at YouTube to have [Judicial Watch’s] video removed within approximately 24 hours.
At the time the complaint against Weber was filed, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said, “Smoking gun documents show California government officials, who were being advised by the Biden campaign PR operation, caused YouTube to censor a key Judicial Watch video just before the 2020 election. This egregious government censorship and election interference violated Judicial Watch’s civil rights, and our lawsuit aims to stop and expose the growing corruption of leftist government officials colluding with Big Tech allies to attack the free speech rights of Americans.”
“California government officials don’t have the right to censor any American, especially on sensitive election integrity debates just before a presidential election. California’s censorship of Judicial Watch is a violation of the First Amendment, pure and simple,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and other direct litigation, Judicial Watch continues to investigate and litigate the broad range of censorship being conducted by the Biden administration and its fellow travelers within state and local governments.
On February 28 of this year, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department Homeland Security (DHS) for records showing collusion between federal agencies and social media to censor and suppress free speech (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security(No. 1:23-cv-00552)).
Also in February 2023, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against DHS for records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) that could detail coordinated censorship activities (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security(No. 1:23-cv-00384)). “Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton explained why the lawsuit was filed: “The Elon Musk ‘Twitter Files’ are the tip of the iceberg, as the federal government ran a massive, secret censorship op against the American people. That the DHS is hiding these censorship records in violation of FOIA law shows the agency still has something to hide.”
On January 13, 2023, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for communications and records of the Surgeon General’s Communications Director’s contact with social media companies regarding COVID-19 vaccines (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:23-cv-00113)). At the time of the filing, Fitton said, “Biden’s Surgeon General is abusing his office to pressure Big Tech companies to censor Americans. This lawsuit aims to uncover the details of this government attack on the First Amendment.”
On January 11, 2023, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story (Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Justice(No. 1:23-cv-00079)). Fitton commented, “The FBI was literally paying Twitter to censor Americans just before the 2020 election! The FBI seems to have interfered in the 2020 election to help Joe Biden by encouraging Big Tech to censor Americans about the Hunter Biden laptop and other debates. And to add to the scandal, they are now covering up their misconduct.”
In November 2022, Judicial Watch is sued the DHS for all records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA), a division of DHS, and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to flag online election content for censorship and suppression.
In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch’s YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. Judicial Watch continues to post its video content on its Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
The post Court Hearing Set for Lawsuit over California Sec of State’s Censorship of Judicial Watch YouTube Election Integrity Video Just Before 2020 Election appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From RCI:
Congress and RCI are not alone in being stonewalled by Kerry’s office. Judicial Watch, a conservative government watchdog group, also filed a FOIA request for information on Kerry’s spending and staff, and they followed that up with a lawsuit last October.
“They’ve gone and created this new position, but they don’t want to tell us anything about what he’s been doing,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told RCI. “The resting state of the deep state is secrecy, and unfortunately it’s not unusual to get this obstruction and contempt for the FOIA law.”
Since February, Kerry’s office has provided Judicial Watch with small batches of documents, such as a vague organizational chart, trying to slow-walk compliance with the law, Fitton said.
Read more here…
The post Climate Envoy John Kerry’s Jet-Set Spending Is Getting Plenty of Cloud Cover appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received records from Texas A&M indicating that it received $485,811,921.33 in grants and contracts from the Qatar Foundation.
There appear to be discrepancies between what is listed in the gift reporting received from Texas A&M and what was reported by the school to the federal foreign gift reporting system. For instance, Texas A&M’s gift record for January 1, 2013 – May 22, 2018, only lists a total of $69,844.41 from the Qatar Foundation, whereas the Department of Education’s database shows a total of over $47 million for the same period.
The new information was released in a court victory last month in litigation on behalf of Judicial Watch client Zachor Legal Institute under the Texas Public Information Act. Zachor fought for information about the potential influence by the Qatar government’s funding of certain Texas A&M University programs and a Texas A&M campus in Education City, Al Rayyan, Qatar (Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development v. Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General (No. D-1-GN-18-006240)).
The previously hidden records include a document titled “Qatar Grants and Contracts” for January 1, 2013 – May 22, 2018, which lists the funds received by Texas A&M as follows:
ARAMCO $1,028,611.55
QATAR COMPUTING RESEARCH INSTITUTE $121,643.84
QATAR ENVIRONMENT & ENERGY RESEARCH $218,250.33
QATAR FOUNDATION $485,811,921.33
QATAR NATIONAL RESEARCH FUND $32,145,910.92
QATAR UNIVERSITY $226,826.03
$519,553,164.00
A second record is titled “Qatar Gifts,” which includes:
Qatar National Research Fund $39,280.82
Qatar Computing Research Institute $1,202,989.18
Aramco Services Company $100,000.00
Maersk Oil Qatar $1,536,230.88
Ooredoo $524,918.00
Qatar Biomedical Research Institute $3,000.00
Qatar Foundation $69,844.41
[$3,476,263.29]
Zachor Legal Institute is a U.S.-based advocacy group dedicated to combatting the spread of anti-Semitism. Zachor made requests under the TPIA for information about the funding or donations made to Texas A&M by the government of Qatar and agencies and subdivisions of the government of Qatar. Qatar controversially has aligned itself with Islamic terrorists and extremists which has placed it at odds with the United States, Israel and other U.S. allies in the Middle East.
Zachor began asking in 2018 for information about Qatari funding of Texas A&M research and how Texas A&M, a public university, was able to establish a degree-conferring campus in Qatar without the Texas Legislature’s permission or involvement.
In 2018, Qatar filed a lawsuit to prevent disclosure of its funding information. Judicial Watch attorneys countered in the courts that neither the Qatari government nor any of its agencies are protected by exceptions under Texas law and that federal law “expressly makes the requested information public.”
In March 2023, Judge Amy Clark Meachum ruled in favor of Judicial Watch and the Zachor Legal Institute and ordered that the documents be made public.
“Thanks to the determined and skillful work of Judicial Watch, the country now sees the extent to which foreign governments are interfering in American institutions,” said Marc Greendorfer, President of Zachor Legal Institute. “Texas A&M’s apparent sporadic and shifting compliance with federal reporting requirements concerning gifts and grants from Qatar raises many questions as to why the university seemingly failed to comply with reporting requirements and whether additional information is not being reported. Zachor will continue to pursue answers to these questions until every dollar is accounted for.”
“Now we know why terrorist-linked Qatar has fought us in court to hide its financial support for Texas A&M – which we just found out is nearly a half billion dollars,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch was assisted in this case by Jennifer S. Riggs of Riggs & Ray, P.C. in Austin, Texas.
The post Documents Show Texas A&M Appeared to Receive Almost $500 Million in Grants from Qatar Regime appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a Bucks County, PA judge ruled the county acted “in bad faith” in withholding records that are, by law, public from Megan Brock, a parent represented by Judicial Watch who was sued by Bucks County to prevent the release of documents related to COVID restrictions and the re-opening of the county’s schools that she requested under the commonwealth’s Right-to-Know Law (County of Bucks v. Megan Brock (Nos. 2022-03083 and 2022-02979)).
In each of the two lawsuits filed by Bucks County, Judge Denise M. Bowman ruled on April 28 that the county must produce records Brock had requested under the Right-to-Know Law (RTK).
Judge Bowman also ruled that the county pay sanctions in the amount of $1,500 in each of the lawsuits. This is the highest amount allowed under the RTK.
The court conducted an in-camera review of the records requested by Brock, found that more than half were not properly withheld by Bucks County, and ordered the release of several records
The court also considered evidence submitted by Brock to the Office of Open Records which consisted of records that Brock obtained from another request that should have been but were not produced in the record searches in the lawsuits. The court agreed that these evidentiary records demonstrated that Bucks County had failed to “produce documents which clearly existed, fell within the RTK Requests at issue, and were not protected from disclosure by exemption.”
“These court decisions are tremendous victories for the ‘right to know’ of parents and citizens. Indeed, the Court recognized the bad faith nature of the outrageous government lawsuits against our client Megan Brock for daring to ask questions about crazed covid school shutdowns,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
On February 7, 2022, Brock sent an RTK request asking for all electronic correspondence by Bucks Co. Director of Policy and Communications Eric Nagy with Board Vice Chair Diane Ellis-Marseglia, Board Chair Bob Harvie, former Director of the Commissioners’ Office of Public Information Larry King, Chief Clerk Gail Humphrey, and Health Department Director David Damsker from 8/10/2021 to 8/28/2021, on the buckscounty.gov domain. Also, all communications about Bucks County Health Department School Guidance.
On March 8, 2022, Brock sent an RTK request asking for a copy of an email sent to Acting Chief Operating Officer Margaret McKevitt on 8/23/2021 on the buckscounty.gov domain, which contained the final copy of the Bucks County COVID-19 Amended School Guidance, including all responses.
On July 18, 2022, Judicial Watch’s local counsel, J. Chadwick Schnee, filed answers to Bucks County’s lawsuits against Brock.
Judicial Watch was assisted by J. Chadwick Schnee of Schnee Legal Services LLC in Lititz, PA.
In July 2022, National Review profiled Brock and Jamie Walker, parents of children in Bucks County who led the fight to re-open the county’s schools during the COVDI pandemic, “and then to keep schools open and opening close to normal.” Brock and Walker “suspect county officials and two Democratic commissioners had a hand in updating the county’s guidance, and possibly overruling their own health director, a strong advocate for in-person learning. They believe Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf’s administration coerced the county into adopting its more restrictive Covid policies and its one-size-fits-all approach to school reopening.”
The post Judge Rules in Favor of Judicial Watch Client: Bucks County, PA Acted in Bad Faith in Withholding School COVID Shutdown Documents – Court Orders County to Pay $3,000 appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times:
CatholicVote Civic Action and Judicial Watch are suing the FBI and the Department of Justice to obtain the records behind the “Radical Catholics” document targeting traditional churches prepared by the bureau’s Richmond, Virginia, field office.
That intelligence report, posted online in February by a whistleblower, said “violent extremists” adhered to “radical-traditionalist Catholic ideology” and cited a list of nine “RTC hate groups” identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center, saying the groups present opportunities for “threat mitigation.”
The report drew immediate fire from Catholic leaders and Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Read more here…
The post Federal suit demands ‘Radical Catholics’ doc from FBI, Justice Department appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Breitbart:
Catholic Vote and Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on Thursday, demanding they comply with records requests related to agency actions targeting Catholics.
In February, a now-retracted leaked memo from the FBI Richmond Field Office showed the bureau was targeting Catholics, and had used information from the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center to guide the crafting of the memo. As Breitbart News reported, the memo showed the Richmond office had found that violent extremists’ “interest” in “radical-traditionalist Catholic” ideology was growing and that it therefore presented an opportunity for the FBI to engage with certain churches in an attempt to goad the churches’ leadership into serving as FBI “tripwires,” who would operate like unofficial informants to the FBI.
Catholic Vote sent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to both the FBI and DOJ on March 8, 2023 seeking access to records pertaining to Catholics and other topics related to the leaked memo.
Read more here…
The post Catholic Vote, Judicial Watch Sue FBI, DOJ for Information About Leaked Memo Targeting Catholics appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The U.S. will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars—and up to $1 million—to support Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Intersex (LGBTQI+) refugees and asylum seekers in two or more countries. The goal, according to the Biden administration, is to create global coordination, advocacy, and knowledge-sharing on protecting and assisting refugees that identify as LGBTQI+. It is worth noting that the government’s official Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) buries the real purpose of the allocation by classifying the grant as “Humanitarian Research.” The money will be disbursed by the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM). The U.S. is financing the initiative at the request of the United Nations (U.N.) to promote evidence-based decision making on priority protection, enhance tools to improve the agency’s performance and encourage other “humanitarian stakeholders” to follow recommendations.
To receive taxpayer dollars nonprofits and institutions of higher education must submit proposals that respond to several research questions involving LGBTQI+ persons, according to the grant announcement. The first one is, “what are best practices for the ethical, safe, and confidential collection, management, and reporting of data on displaced LGBTQI+ persons?” The second question asks, “what are the experiences and needs of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Queer (LGBQ) women, trans men, and intersex persons in situations of displacement and in humanitarian contexts, and what are best practices for reaching and assisting them?” That is followed by “what is the intersectionality between the health (including mental health) needs of LGBTQI+ persons and displacement?” Finally, the State Department asks potential grant recipients “what are best practices for assistance to meet these health needs?”
The U.S. was essentially directed to launch the project after a U.N. probe determined that displaced and stateless LGBTQI+ persons remain significantly under-identified and under-documented in humanitarian response efforts. The U.S. is already the U.N.’s largest donor to the tune of $12 billion, but the famously corrupt world body specifically called on Uncle Sam to invest in further research to identify best practices and develop guidelines on working with displaced and stateless LGBTQI+ persons. The U.S. government was also directed to undertake research on the intersection of health and forced displacement of LGBTQI+ persons and safer data collection methods. “The experiences of LGBTQI+ persons in displacement are not homogenous, and, as such, the best practices and policy responses to address their protection concerns and access to assistance and durable solutions will also not be homogenous,” according to the State Department, which stresses the need for the new program by revealing that most research overwhelmingly focuses on “the experiences of cisgender gay and queer men and trans women.”
The U.N. also wants the U.S. and other countries to develop and fund language-appropriate training for government employees and contractors responsible for collecting data on LGBTIQ+ displaced people and develop safe and effective tools, including respectful engagement using the correct diverse terminology dictated by SOGIESC, an umbrella term for those whose gender identity, sexual orientation, or gender expressions differ from the mainstream. The acronym stands for sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and sex characteristics. The leftist world body also wants the U.S. and other countries to innovate region-specific methods to expedite pathways for LGBTIQ+ displaced people in hostile host situations, noting that LGBTIQ+ forcibly displaced people often experience compounded hostility in places of protection due to criminalization of consensual same-sex relations and social stigma in asylum countries. Therefore, the U.N. is ordering “accelerated asylum procedures” for LGBTIQ+ migrants and to avoid inappropriate lines of questioning and the use of stereotypical assumptions in interviewing techniques and credibility assessments.
The U.S. has long accommodated members of this demographic by offering transgender illegal immigrants special services, including their own detention center. A few years ago, Judicial Watch reported on a New Mexico facility that offers transgender migrants hair and makeup classes, a recreation area, gym, television rooms, a lab and pharmacy. There are also meeting areas for trans detainees to consult with free legal services provided by advocacy groups. American taxpayers also furnish hormone therapy, which “is not cheap,” according to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director.
The post At U.N.’s Request U.S. Funds Program to Support Displaced LGBTQI+ Refugees, Asylees appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch and CatholicVote Sue FBI and Justice Department for Records of Targeting Catholics
Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit along with CatholicVote Civic Action against the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and the Department of Justice for records containing keywords and records about an FBI intelligence memo targeting ‘radical traditionalist’ Catholics.
Judicial Watch: Biden National Archives’ Hides Over 85% of Trump Raid Records
“The Biden administration’s National Archives is hiding almost every record it has about its manufactured records dispute with President Trump,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Environmental Justice: $1 Billion to Boost Equitable Access to Trees in Disadvantaged Communities
As part of its environmental justice drive, the Biden administration is spending $1 billion dollars to increase equitable access to trees and green spaces in disadvantaged urban communities around the nation. The costly initiative will increase urban tree cover, boost equitable access to nature and tackle the climate crisis, according to an announcement issued by the administration this month.
Biden Greatly Expands Program to offer Illegal Immigrants in the U.S. “Temporary” Reprieve
Besides condoning record-breaking illegal immigration (2.4 million migrants in fiscal year 2022), the Biden administration is quietly protecting hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals who for years have lived in the U.S. illegally by multiplying a program designed to offer temporary reprieve. The provisional amnesty is known as Temporary Protected Status (TPS), a humanitarian measure designed to shield undocumented aliens from deportation during emergencies.
In The News
DOJ sued for failing to comply with FOIA over anti-Catholic memo
Fox News
The Justice Department and FBI are facing a lawsuit from a Catholic lobbying group for allegedly failing to comply with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request about a memo that originated from an FBI field office that labeled Catholics as “violent extremists.”
Over Billing And Lack Of Openness Mar Ballot Printer Investigation
Arizona Daily IndependentMaricopa County taxpayers have been billed more than $91,000 so far to have former Justice Ruth McGregor investigate why several Ballot of Demand (BOD) printers performed inadequately on Election Day last November. But two of the invoices contained math errors which led to an overbilling of $1,055.
George Soros’ army of lieutenants get easy access to Biden White House
The New York PostAt least four other past or present leaders at Open Society Foundations have amassed a combined 33 private meetings and other confabs in less than two years, according to recently updated White House visitor logs.
Video Highlights
-
-
- CONFESSION! Testimony Reveals 2020 CORRUPTION! - Fauci Agency Hid These SHOCKING Records UNTIL NOW - FITTON: Biden Family “Run Like a Mafia Operation!”
-
The post Biden FBI Targets Christians – Judicial Watch SUES appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced a public records lawsuit for records about the March 27, 2023, shooting at The Covenant School in Tennessee, including the reported “manifesto” written by the female shooting suspect. The suit is against the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County in The Chancery Court for the State of Tennessee’s 20th District. Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit on behalf of retired Hamilton County Sheriff James Hammond and the Tennessee Firearms Association, Inc. (“TFA”).
On April 13, 2023, the TFA submitted two open records requests. The first request asked that the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (“MNPD”) produce copies of records or files and inspection of “the ‘manifesto’ reportedly found in the home of Audrey Elizabeth Hall on March 27, 2023.”
The second request asked that the MNPD produce copies of records or files and inspection “all email communications of MNPD officials regarding the mass shooting committed by Audrey Elizabeth Hale on March 27, 2023, as well as MNPD officials’ text messages regarding the same, and copies of the ‘manifesto’ reported left by Audrey Elizabeth Hale in her vehicle.”
In a separate request on April 17, 2023, Hammond asked that the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department for:
- All MNPD criminal police reports documenting this incident to include but not limited to:
a. Impound/evidence invoices
b. Photographs
c. Bodycam footage
d. City/County/State and/or federal coroner information
e. Suspect toxicology/lab results
f. Audio of calls for service
g. School video footage of suspect and officers
-
All MNPD Force Investigation Team (FIT) internal administrative investigations/reports regarding this incident to include but not limited to those mandated by The Manual of the Metropolitan Police Department of Nashville Davidson County, TN (the Department Manual) Title 1.130.050.
-
All MNPD communications, to include but not limited to directives, orders, memos, emails and/or letters, concerning the release of the contents and/or copies of the aforementioned “manifesto” of the deceased female shooting suspect.
-
All MNPD communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and/or the Office of the District Attorney, Nashville (20th Judicial District) regarding the designation of the aforementioned multiple shooting at a Christian School by a self-identified transgender suspect as a “hate crime.”
-
All MNPD criminal and/or field intelligence reports and/or received complaints involving the aforementioned shooting suspect (Audrey Hale) dated from January 1, 2020, to the date of your final response to this records request.
The MNPD denied all three requests citing without identify any underlying criminal case or even a potential defendant.
The Tennessee Public Records Act states: “[a]ll state, county and municipal records shall… be open for personal inspection by any citizen of this state, and those in charge of the records shall not refuse such right of inspection to any citizen, unless otherwise provided by state law.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 10-7-503(a)(2)(A). The lawsuit requests the Court allow prompt access to the requested public records.
“Tennessee authorities have cited no credible reason for hiding the killer’s ‘manifesto’ about this deadly school shooting of three young children and three school employees,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Politics shouldn’t trump transparency and the public safety. The public has an urgent right to know the details of this manifesto. That a public records lawsuit is required to try to access this key document is a scandal.”
John I. Harris III, Esq., of Schulman, LeRoy & Bennett, PC in Nashville, TN, is assisting Judicial Watch with the lawsuit.
The post Judicial Watch Announces Lawsuit Seeking Release of the “Manifesto” of The Covenant School Shooter in Tennessee appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch and CatholicVote Sue FBI and Justice Department for Records of Targeting Catholics
Biden National Archives Hides Over 85% of Trump Raid Records
Biden Greatly Expands Program to offer Illegals “Temporary” Reprieve
Judicial Watch and CatholicVote Sue FBI and Justice Department for Records of Targeting Catholics
The Biden administration is shredding the First Amendment – censoring our freedom of expression by colluding with Big Tech in a massive effort to suppress speech on social media under the pretext of removing “misinformation” and “disinformation” and “protecting national security.” And now, the Biden FBI is going after our freedom of religion – targeting Catholics who adhere to traditional beliefs on abortion and other cultural issues.
That’s why we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit along with CatholicVote Civic Action against the FBI and the Department of Justice for records containing keywords and records about an FBI intelligence memo targeting ‘radical traditionalist’ Catholics (CatholicVote Civic Action and Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Federal Bureau of Investigations and Department of Justice(No. 1:23-cv-01166)).
In February 2023, an FBI intelligence document was leaked that revealed FBI targeting ” of Catholics who adhere to traditional beliefs on abortion and other cultural issues. The Catholic News Agency reported: “The leaked document has been condemned by several federal and state officials, as well as clergy, including Bishop Barry Knestout of the Diocese of Richmond, who recently called the memo a ‘threat to religious liberty.’”
On March 8, 2023, we teamed up with CatholicVote and sent four FOIA requests to the FBI, which is a division of the Department of Justice) for:
(a) All emails, Lync messages, and text messages sent to and from the following FBI Headquarters officials: Director Christopher Wray, Deputy Director Paul Abbate, Asst. Director George P. Beach, II, General Counsel Jason Jones, Chief of Staff Jonathan Lenzner, Executive Asst. Dir. Larissa Knapp, and Asst. Dir. Timothy Langan for the period March 1, 2022, to the present referencing:
-
- “Catholics”
- “Latin Mass”
- “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics”
- “RTC”
- “Church Militant”
- “Catholic League”
- “Southern Poverty Law Center”
- “SPLC”
- “Pope Francis”
- “Vatican II”
- “Second Vatican Council”
- “Rosary”
- “FSSP”
(b) All emails, Lync messages, and text messages sent to and from the following FBI Richmond Field Office (RFO) officials: SAIC Stanley Meador, ASAIC David Lewis, ASAIC Stephen Farina, and the FBI Richmond Chief Division Counsel for the period March 1, 2022 to the present referencing:
-
- “Catholics”
- “Latin Mass”
- “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics”
- “RTC”
- “Church Militant”
- “Catholic League”
- “Southern Poverty Law Center”
- “SPLC”
- “Pope Francis”
- “Vatican II”
- “Second Vatican Council”
- “Rosary”
- “FSSP”
(c) All emails, Lync messages, and text messages sent to and from the following FBI Headquarters officials: Director Christopher Wray, Deputy Director Paul Abbate, Asst. Director George P. Beach, II, General Counsel Jason Jones, Chief of Staff Jonathan Lenzner, Executive Asst. Dir. Larissa Knapp, and Asst. Dir. Timothy Langan for the period March 1, 2022, to the present referencing:
-
- actions taken to remove the Intelligence Note from FBI systems;
- the FBI review of (1) the basis for the Intelligence Note and (2) any official FBI actions taken pursuant to the Intelligence Note
(d) All emails, Lync messages, and text messages sent to and from the following FBI Richmond Field Office (RFO) officials: SAIC Stanley Meador, ASAIC David Lewis, ASAIC Stephen Farina, and the FBI Richmond Chief Division Counsel for the period March 1, 2022, to the present referencing:
-
- actions taken to remove the Intelligence Note from FBI systems;
- the FBI review of (1) the basis for the Intelligence Note; (2) any official FBI actions taken pursuant to the Intelligence Note
Also, on March 8, 2023, we and CatholicVote sent similar FOIA requests to the U.S. Department of Justice; Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General.
“Our weaponized and corrupt government agencies have demonstrated a pattern of contempt for justice and the rule of law by prioritizing partisan ideology and agendas over the protection of the American people – in particular those with whom they disagree politically,” said CatholicVote President Brian Burch. “We are demanding transparency from our government and are determined to uncover just how high up the anti-Catholic bigotry goes.”
In a brazen attack on the First Amendment and Christians, the Biden FBI planned to treat Catholics as potential terrorists and spy on them in their churches, and now, as our new FOIA lawsuit shows, the FBI and Justice Departments are trying to cover their tracks by hiding documents about this growing scandal.
(CatholicVote.org is a community of patriotic Americans who believe that the timeless truths of the Catholic faith are good for America. It makes its mission “to inspire every Catholic in America to live out the truths of our faith in public life.”)
Biden National Archives Hides Over 85% of Trump Raid Records
The Biden administration’s National Archives is hiding almost every record it has about its manufactured records dispute with President Trump.
As of March 31, the agency has released only 1,276 pages of over 8,000 records about the unprecedented document dispute and raid on the home of former President Trump. Click here or here to review the records.
The records were released as the result of our August 2022 FOIA lawsuit filed after the National Archives and Records Administration unlawfully failed to respond to a February 2022 FOIA request (Judicial Watch v National Archives and Records Administration (No. 1:22-cv-02535)) for:
- All records regarding the referral from NARA to the Department of Justice regarding the records management procedures of former President Donald Trump (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/national-archives-asks-doj-investigate-trumps-handling-white/story?id=82781128 ). This request includes all related records of communication between any official or employee of NARA and any official or employee of the Department of Justice and/or any other branch, department, agency, or office of the federal government.
- All records regarding the retrieval of records from President Trump or any individual or entity acting on his behalf by the National Archives and Records Administration. This request includes related records of communication between any official or employee of NARA and President Trump and/or any individual or entity acting on his behalf.
The records uncovered by our lawsuit include information further confirming how the Biden White House was directly involved in the dispute by initiating “special access request” that spurred an FBI investigation of Trump’s records. Gary Stern, general counsel for the National Archives wrote to his colleagues on August 23, 2022:
And, this evening the Post just published a new story detailing an April 12, email that I sent to the Trump reps concerning the DOJ special access request for the 15 Trump boxes, along with many other details concerning the DOJ request and the overall issue. [Redacted]
“On April 12, an Archives official emailed Philbin [former White House deputy counsel Pat Philbin] and John Eisenberg, another former deputy White House counsel, to tell them the Justice Department, via the Biden White House, had made the request. The email offered the lawyers the opportunity to view the documents as well, but said the documents were too sensitive to be removed from the agency’s secure facility.”
We are in the forefront in the court battle for transparency regarding the abusive and unprecedented Biden administration raid on Trump’s home.
In August 2022, we forced the release of the raid affidavit through its court request to unseal the warrant materials used in the unprecedented raid on the home of former President Trump.
In September 2022, we filed lawsuits against the DOJ for its records and the FBI’s records about the Mar-a-Lago raid search warrant application and approval, as well as communications about the warrant between the FBI, Executive Office of the President and the Secret Service.
In October 2022, we sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the raid on Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made during the raid.
In November 2022, we sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all communications between the Secret Service and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the search warrant that precipitated the raid on former Trump’s Florida residence at Mar-a-Lago.
The Biden administration’s abuse of Trump (and the rule of law) will only expand and you can be sure Judicial Watch will stand fast for the rule of law at every turn.
Biden Greatly Expands Program to offer Illegals “Temporary” Reprieve
Regular followers of our reporting will not be at all surprised by anything the Biden administration destruction of our sovereignty and open borders. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the latest insult to U.S. citizens and the rule of law:
Besides condoning record-breaking illegal immigration (2.4 million migrants in fiscal year 2022), the Biden administration is quietly protecting hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals who for years have lived in the U.S. illegally by multiplying a program designed to offer temporary reprieve. The provisional amnesty is known as Temporary Protected Status (TPS), a humanitarian measure designed to shield undocumented aliens from deportation during emergencies. It is supposed to be a short-term solution for foreigners that do not quality as refugees but cannot immediately return home because of difficulties caused by factors such as violence, natural disasters, or political and economic instability. TPS, which is typically granted in 18-month increments, not only protects foreign nationals from deportation it also allows them to work in the U.S.
The Obama administration went crazy with TPS, renewing it for tens of thousands of Hondurans and Nicaraguans more than a decade and a half after a hurricane hit the Central American nations, prolonging it for Africans two years after originally issuing it due to Ebola, and repeatedly restoring it for tens of thousands of Haitians years after an earthquake struck the impoverished island. During its two terms the Obama administration never missed an opportunity to offer illegal immigrants reprieve, using inclement weather in the U.S., a virus, natural disasters and tainted water in an American city to extend the perk. Nationals of Yemen have been protected by both Democrats and Republicans, receiving TPS over “ongoing armed conflict” under Obama and two extensions under Trump. It is worth noting that Yemen is a hotbed of terrorism that serves as the headquarters of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).
In an apparent effort to keep its promise of rebuilding a safe, orderly and humane immigration system that Biden asserts “was gutted by the previous Administration,” the president has greatly expanded the number of immigrants who qualify for TPS, a new report reveals. Using figures obtained from the government, the report, published by a well-known nonpartisan think tank, estimates that 670,000 individuals from 16 countries are either registered for TPS or newly eligible for it. Illegal aliens from the following countries currently benefit from the temporary reprieve: Afghanistan, Cameroon, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Haiti, Honduras, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Syria, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Ukraine, Venezuela and Yemen. El Salvador leads with more than 190,000 TPS beneficiaries in the U.S. followed by Venezuela (171,550) and Haiti (105,000), the figures show.
The moment he got elected president, Biden worked to broaden the TPS program adding several countries including Afghanistan, Cameroon, Myanmar, Ukraine and Venezuela. The administration has also extended the terms of eligibility for those that were already covered by the amnesty, according to the report. The commander-in-chief has also fought to get Congress to pass a law allowing TPS recipients to receive legal residency (also known as a green card) that would eventually allow them to become American citizens. “The Biden administration’s expansions stand in contrast to the Trump administration’s efforts to end TPS for nearly all beneficiaries, which were blocked by a series of lawsuits,” the report states. “Those lawsuits are ongoing and continue to threaten the future of the TPS program and create uncertainty for its participants.”
Most illegal immigrants protected under TPS have lived in the U.S. for decades and have settled in every state with California, Florida, New York and Texas seeing the largest numbers. The humanitarian relief was approved by Congress as part of the Immigration Act of 1990 and gives the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary the authority to designate a country for TPS to offer safe haven to foreign nationals who do not qualify for asylum but claim to be fleeing a potentially dangerous situation back home. The government is required to announce 60 days before any TPS designation expires whether it will be extended. If it does not the TPS automatically extends for six months.
Until next week,
The post Biden FBI Targets the Church! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News:
The Justice Department and FBI are facing a lawsuit from a Catholic lobbying group for allegedly failing to comply with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request about a memo that originated from an FBI field office that labeled Catholics as “violent extremists.”
CatholicVote, along with Judicial Watch, filed a lawsuit on Thursday that says the groups exhausted all their options to remedy their FOIA requests with the agencies, and that after initially corresponding with the groups, the DOJ and FBI had stopped communication with the groups since April 6.
The suit follows the leak of an internal memo that was produced by the FBI’s Richmond, Virginia, field office on Jan. 23, 2023. The memo identified ‘radical-traditionalist Catholic[s]’ as potential “racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists.”
According to the complaint, the groups were requesting text and email communications between DOJ and FBI officials that included terms like “Catholics, “Latin Mass,” “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics,” “Pope Francis” and “Rosary,” among others.
Read more here…
The post DOJ sued for failing to comply with FOIA over anti-Catholic memo appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit along with CatholicVote Civic Action against the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and the Department of Justice for records containing key words and records about an FBI intelligence memo targeting ‘radical traditionalist’ Catholics (CatholicVote Civic Action and Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Federal Bureau of Investigations and Department of Justice(No. 1:23-cv-01166)).
In February 2023, an FBI intelligence document was leaked that revealed FBI targeting ” of Catholics who adhere to traditional beliefs on abortion and other cultural issues. The Catholic News Agencyreported: “The leaked document has been condemned by several federal and state officials, as well as clergy, including Bishop Barry Knestout of the Diocese of Richmond, who recently called the memo a ‘threat to religious liberty.’”
On March 8, 2023, Judicial Watch and CatholicVote sent four FOIA requests to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI, a division of the Department of Justice) for:
(a) All emails, Lync messages, and text messages sent to and from the following FBI Headquarters officials: Director Christopher Wray, Deputy Director Paul Abbate, Asst. Director George P. Beach, II, General Counsel Jason Jones, Chief of Staff Jonathan Lenzner, Executive Asst. Dir. Larissa Knapp, and Asst. Dir. Timothy Langan for the period March 1, 2022 to the present referencing:
· “Catholics”
· “Latin Mass”
· “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics”
· “RTC”
· “Church Militant”
· “Catholic League”
· “Southern Poverty Law Center”
· “SPLC”
· “Pope Francis”
· “Vatican II”
· “Second Vatican Council”
· “Rosary”
· “FSSP”
(b) All emails, Lync messages, and text messages sent to and from the following FBI Richmond Field Office (RFO) officials: SAIC Stanley Meador, ASAIC David Lewis, ASAIC Stephen Farina, and the FBI Richmond Chief Division Counsel for the period March 1, 2022 to the present referencing:
· “Catholics”
· “Latin Mass”
· “Radical-Traditionalist Catholics”
· “RTC”
· “Church Militant”
· “Catholic League”
· “Southern Poverty Law Center”
· “SPLC”
· “Pope Francis”
· “Vatican II”
· “Second Vatican Council”
· “Rosary”
· “FSSP”
(c) All emails, Lync messages, and text messages sent to and from the following FBI Headquarters officials: Director Christopher Wray, Deputy Director Paul Abbate, Asst. Director George P. Beach, II, General Counsel Jason Jones, Chief of Staff Jonathan Lenzner, Executive Asst. Dir. Larissa Knapp, and Asst. Dir. Timothy Langan for the period March 1, 2022 to the present referencing:
· actions taken to remove the Intelligence Note from FBI systems;
· the FBI review of (1) the basis for the Intelligence Note and (2) any official FBI actions taken pursuant to the Intelligence Note
(d) All emails, Lync messages, and text messages sent to and from the following FBI Richmond Field Office (RFO) officials: SAIC Stanley Meador, ASAIC David Lewis, ASAIC Stephen Farina, and the FBI Richmond Chief Division Counsel for the period March 1, 2022 to the present referencing:
· actions taken to remove the Intelligence Note from FBI systems;
· the FBI review of (1) the basis for the Intelligence Note; (2) any official FBI actions taken pursuant to the Intelligence Note
Also, on March 8, 2023, Judicial Watch and CatholicVote sent similar FOIA requests to the U.S. Department of Justice; Office of the Attorney General and Office of the Deputy Attorney General.
“Our weaponized and corrupt government agencies have demonstrated a pattern of contempt for justice and the rule of law by prioritizing partisan ideology and agendas over the protection of the American people – in particular those with whom they disagree politically,” said CatholicVote President Brian Burch. “We are demanding transparency from our government and are determined to uncover just how high up the anti-Catholic bigotry goes.”
“In a brazen attack on the First Amendment and Christians, the Biden FBI planned to treat Catholics as potential terrorists and spy on them in their churches,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And now, as our new FOIA lawsuit shows, the FBI and Justice Departments are trying to cover their tracks by hiding documents about this growing scandal.
CatholicVote.org is a community of patriotic Americans who believe that the timeless truths of the Catholic faith are good for America. It makes its mission “to inspire every Catholic in America to live out the truths of our faith in public life.”
The post Judicial Watch and CatholicVote Sue FBI and Justice Department for Records of Targeting Catholics appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced that, as of March 31, the National Archives has released only 1,276 pages of over 8,000 records about the unprecedented document dispute and raid on the home of former President Trump. Click hereor here to review the records.
The records were released as the result of Judicial Watch’s August 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed in after the National Archives and Records Administration unlawfully failed to respond to a February 2022 FOIA request (Judicial Watch v National Archives and Records Administration (No. 1:22-cv-02535)) for:
- All records regarding the referral from NARA to the Department of Justice regarding the records management procedures of former President Donald Trump (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/national-archives-asks-doj-investigate-trumps-handling-white/story?id=82781128 ). This request includes all related records of communication between any official or employee of NARA and any official or employee of the Department of Justice and/or any other branch, department, agency, or office of the federal government.
- All records regarding the retrieval of records from President Trump or any individual or entity acting on his behalf by the National Archives and Records Administration. This request includes related records of communication between any official or employee of NARA and President Trump and/or any individual or entity acting on his behalf.
The records uncovered by Judicial Watch’s lawsuit include information further confirming how the Biden White House was directly involved in the dispute by initiating “special access request” that spurred a FBI investigation of Trump’s records. Gary Stern, general counsel for the National Archives wrote to his colleagues on August 23, 2022:
And, this evening the Post just published a new story detailing an April 12, email that I sent to the Trump reps concerning the DOJ special access request for the 15 Trump boxes, along with many other details concerning the DOJ request and the overall issue. [Redacted]
“On April 12, an Archives official emailed Philbin [former White House deputy counsel Pat Philbin] and John Eisenberg, another former deputy White House counsel, to tell them the Justice Department, via the Biden White House, had made the request. The email offered the lawyers the opportunity to view the documents as well, but said the documents were too sensitive to be removed from the agency’s secure facility.”
“The Biden administration’s National Archives is hiding almost every record it has about its manufactured records dispute with President Trump,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is in the forefront in the court battle for transparency regarding the abusive and unprecedented Biden administration raid on Trump’s home.
In August 2022, Judicial Watch forced the releaseof the raid affidavit through its court request to unseal the warrant materials used in the unprecedented raid on the home of former President Trump.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch filed lawsuits against the DOJ for its records and the FBI’s records about the Mar-a-Lago raid search warrant application and approval, as well as communications about the warrant between the FBI, Executive Office of the President and the Secret Service.
In October 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the raid on Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made during the raid.
In November 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all communications between the Secret Service and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the search warrant that precipitated the raid on former Trump’s Florida residence at Mar-a-Lago.
The post Judicial Watch: Biden National Archives’ Hides Over 85% of Trump Raid Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
As part of its environmental justice drive, the Biden administration is spending $1 billion dollars to increase equitable access to trees and green spaces in disadvantaged urban communities around the nation. The costly initiative will increase urban tree cover, boost equitable access to nature and tackle the climate crisis, according to an announcement issued by the administration this month. The public funds will be disbursed to community organizations, local and state governments, universities and nonprofits that work to increase tree cover in urban spaces and expand equitable access to nature while bolstering resilience to climate impacts, the administration claims.
“This program is yet another way that the Biden-Harris Administration is investing in America and ensuring that all people, regardless of ZIP code or neighborhood, have equitable access to the benefits that trees and green spaces provide,” said U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Tom Vilsack, who served in the same position under Obama. “Whether it’s reducing heat stress or creating jobs in tree-planting and maintenance, this grant funding will support local communities and partners who are working on the ground to advance environmental justice by mitigating the impact of climate change on communities who lack tree cover in urban spaces while giving kids more safe spaces to play outdoors.” To celebrate the availability of the new urban forest funds, the administration held a tree planting ceremony in Newark, New Jersey this month.
In addition to the billion-dollar investment, the USDA Forest Service is spending another $250 million to “further local efforts to support urban communities through equitable access to trees and the benefits they provide.” The allocation is part of the president’s Justice40 Initiative to assure that 40% of the overall benefits of certain federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized, overburdened by pollution, underserved, and lack access to trees and nature. The government determines where the trees get planted with a special engine called Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, created by the Biden administration to identify communities that are experiencing the burdens of climate change, energy, health, housing, legacy pollution, transportation, water and workforce development. “These are the communities that are disadvantaged because they are overburdened and underserved,” according to the tool’s website.
Back at the celebration in Newark, administration officials justified the costly tree venture with various official statements. “Research shows that trees and green spaces improve physical and mental health outcomes and create new economic opportunities,” said USDA Undersecretary for Natural Resources and the Environment Dr. Homer Wilkes. “They also enhance community green spaces and support lasting community relationships and engagements.” The taxpayer dollars will enable the government to bring those benefits to disadvantaged communities across the nation, Wilkes says, and to support new partnerships with a diverse array of organizations. Forest Service Chief Randy Moore said that investing in these costly “urban forests” is the same as investing in the health and wellness of the underserved communities. “Equitable access to these benefits is key, as everyone deserves the opportunity to live in a healthy and sustainable environment,” according to the forest chief.
Besides the hefty allocations for urban forests, the Biden administration is also doling out $100 million in environmental justice grants, marking the largest amount ever offered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The money will “help underserved and overburdened communities across the country,” according to the EPA’s Environmental Justice website, which explains how the movement arose. It “was started by individuals, primarily people of color, who sought to address the inequity of environmental protection in their communities,” the agency writes. Just last week the president signed an executive order to revitalize the nation’s commitment to “environmental justice for all.” The document orders the creation of a new Office of Environmental Justice within the White House and the mobilization of federal agencies to confront existing and legacy barriers and injustices, among other things. It also directs the government to make “historic investments in environmental justice.”
The post Environmental Justice: $1 Billion to Boost Equitable Access to Trees in Disadvantaged Communities appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Arizona Daily Independent
Maricopa County taxpayers have been billed more than $91,000 so far to have former Justice Ruth McGregor investigate why several Ballot of Demand (BOD) printers performed inadequately on Election Day last November. But two of the invoices contained math errors which led to an overbilling of $1,055.
Mark Spencer, Southwest Projects Coordinator for Judicial Watch, noted various errors, the most serious involving McGregor’s original bill to the county for $55,901 when her 132.75 hours only added up to $55,091.
Read more here…
The post Over Billing And Lack Of Openness Mar Ballot Printer Investigation appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Besides condoning record-breaking illegal immigration (2.4 million migrants in fiscal year 2022), the Biden administration is quietly protecting hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals who for years have lived in the U.S. illegally by multiplying a program designed to offer temporary reprieve. The provisional amnesty is known as Temporary Protected Status (TPS), a humanitarian measure designed to shield undocumented aliens from deportation during emergencies. It is supposed to be a short-term solution for foreigners that do not quality as refugees but cannot immediately return home because of difficulties caused by factors such as violence, natural disasters, or political and economic instability. TPS, which is typically granted in 18-month increments, not only protects foreign nationals from deportation it also allows them to work in the U.S.
The Obama administration went crazy with TPS, renewing it for tens of thousands of Hondurans and Nicaraguans more than a decade and a half after a hurricane hit the Central American nations, prolonging it for Africans two years after originally issuing it due to Ebola, and repeatedly restoring it for tens of thousands of Haitians years after an earthquake struck the impoverished island. During its two terms the Obama administration never missed an opportunity to offer illegal immigrants reprieve, using inclement weather in the U.S., a virus, natural disasters and tainted water in an American city to extend the perk. Nationals of Yemen have been protected by both Democrats and Republicans, receiving TPS over “ongoing armed conflict” under Obama and two extensions under Trump. It is worth noting that Yemen is a hotbed of terrorism that serves as the headquarters of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP).
In an apparent effort to keep its promise of rebuilding a safe, orderly and humane immigration system that Biden asserts “was gutted by the previous Administration,” the president has greatly expanded the number of immigrants who qualify for TPS, a new report reveals. Using figures obtained from the government, the report, published by a well-known nonpartisan think tank, estimates that 670,000 individuals from 16 countries are either registered for TPS or newly eligible for it. Illegal aliens from the following countries currently benefit from the temporary reprieve: Afghanistan, Cameroon, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Haiti, Honduras, Myanmar, Nepal, Nicaragua, Syria, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Ukraine, Venezuela and Yemen. El Salvador leads with more than 190,000 TPS beneficiaries in the U.S. followed by Venezuela (171,550) and Haiti (105,000), the figures show.
The moment he got elected president, Biden worked to broaden the TPS program adding several countries including Afghanistan, Cameroon, Myanmar, Ukraine and Venezuela. The administration has also extended the terms of eligibility for those that were already covered by the amnesty, according to the report. The commander-in-chief has also fought to get Congress to pass a law allowing TPS recipients to receive legal residency (also known as a green card) that would eventually allow them to become American citizens. “The Biden administration’s expansions stand in contrast to the Trump administration’s efforts to end TPS for nearly all beneficiaries, which were blocked by a series of lawsuits,” the report states. “Those lawsuits are ongoing and continue to threaten the future of the TPS program and create uncertainty for its participants.”
Most illegal immigrants protected under TPS have lived in the U.S. for decades and have settled in every state with California, Florida, New York and Texas seeing the largest numbers. The humanitarian relief was approved by Congress as part of the Immigration Act of 1990 and gives the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary the authority to designate a country for TPS to offer safe haven to foreign nationals who do not qualify for asylum but claim to be fleeing a potentially dangerous situation back home. The government is required to announce 60 days before any TPS designation expires whether it will be extended. If it does not the TPS automatically extends for six months.
The post Biden Greatly Expands Program to offer Illegal Immigrants in the U.S. “Temporary” Reprieve appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Records Show Funding for EcoHealth/Wuhan Institute Research to Create Coronavirus ‘Mutants’
Judicial Watch announced recently it received 552 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which include the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
U.S. Dedicates Another $5.4 Million to Futile Anti-Gang Program in Central America
As part of the Biden administration’s fruitless drive to address the underlying factors of “irregular migration” the U.S. government will pour extra money into a longstanding Central American anti-gang program that has failed to put a dent in the region’s gang stronghold and the violence that has spilled north. The program is known as Gang Resistance Education And Training (GREAT) and it has been funded by the U.S. since 2010 in El Salvador, Honduras, Panama and Costa Rica to supposedly prevent youth crime, violence and gang involvement. Under the new $5.4 million grant Guatemala, a hotbed of gang violence, has been added to the list and will receive the biggest single chunk of money.
Judicial Watch: Biden Justice Department Refuses to Reveal Names of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Staff
“One can only conclude, after seeing the uproar over the anti-Trump, partisan Mueller operation, that the Garland Justice Department has something to hide about Jack Smith and his prosecutors again targeting Trump and other Republicans with unprecedented investigations,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Special Prosecutor Jack Smith isn’t above the law and the American people have the right to basic transparency and accountability.”
FBI Stonewalls JW on Legit Public Record Request Involving Chinese Police Station in NY
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) misled and stonewalled Judicial Watch on a legitimate public record request involving an illegal Chinese police station opened in New York by agents of China’s communist government. The outpost is the first in the United States operated on behalf of the Fuzhou branch of the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and was surreptitiously established in an office building in Manhattan’s Chinatown to intimidate Chinese dissidents living in this country.
In The News
George Soros’ army of lieutenants get easy access to Biden White House
The New York Post
Far-left billionaire George Soros has a legion of loyal lieutenants who’ve racked up over two dozen meetings with top officials at the White House since President Biden took office, The Post has learned.
The progressive kingmaker’s unrivaled access into the Biden administration extends well beyond his 37-year-old son Alexander, who chairs the powerful, liberal grant-making network Open Society Foundations founded by his dad, and as The Post reported on Page 1 last week, has taken on the role of a de-facto White House “ambassador” by making at least 14 visits there.
Judicial Watch Sues MD Police for Records on Illegal Protests Outside SCOTUS Justices Homes
CNS NewsThe Montgomery County Police Department in Maryland has not responded to a standard and legal Public Information Act (PIA) request for records and communications about the ongoing protests outside the homes of some Supreme Court justices. As a result, Judicial Watch has filed a PIA lawsuit against the police department in the Montgomery Circuit Court for those records.
Rubio: COVID Origins Were Likely a Lab Accident Covered Up by China
Breitbart“I’m not a scientist, but I will say this — why in fact did the NIH get, a penny a single cent from — for a Wuhan virology lab in China, our number one geopolitical foe?” host Sean Hannity said. “Number two, it sounds like they’re playing with fire when you read the actual document and the draft by Judicial Watch. And, three, you know, I believe that we were lied to from the very beginning that Anthony Fauci, the people that were telling us that this was a wet market issue and not a virology lab issue were lying to us. What do you say?”
Video Highlights
-
-
- FITTON: Biden Family “Run Like a Mafia Operation!” - Biden DOJ Refuses to Reveal Names of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Staff Targeting Trump - Bud Light and Nike MADE This TERRIBLE Decision!
-
The post NEW Fauci “Mutant” Virus Docs! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Records Show EcoHealth/Wuhan Research to Create Coronavirus ‘Mutants’
Biden Justice Department Refuses to Reveal Names of Special Counsel’s Staff
Hearing for Mother Who Requested School Board COVID Records
FBI Stonewalls Public Record Request Involving Chinese Police Station in NY
Records Show EcoHealth/Wuhan Research to Create Coronavirus ‘Mutants’
Judicial Watch uncovered smoking gun document on our government’s entanglement in coronavirus “mutant” gain-of-function research in Chinese labs.
Our team received 552 pages of records that include the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
These and other documents strongly suggest that U.S. funding in China and elsewhere for mutant virus, gain-of-function research may have been responsible for the emergence of the COVID pandemic in Wuhan. This gain-of-function scandal should be the subject of criminal investigations.
Judicial Watch obtained the records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in December 2021 for:
All reports submitted by EcoHealth Alliance to NIH or its sub-agencies related to NIH Grant No. 1R01A|110964 titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence” during the term of the grant.
Eco Health planned to sequence the spike protein from coronaviruses obtained from bats for the purpose of “creating mutants to identify how significantly each would need to evolve to use ACE2,” which is explained as “the receptor to gain entry to human cells.”
Here are the details revealed in the documents.
In the initial “Application for Federal Assistance” submitted on June 5, 2013, by EcoHealth Alliance, a section is titled “Specific Aims,” which notes the intention to create mutant bat viruses and “predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people:”
To understand the risk of zoonotic CoV [coronavirus] emergence, we propose to examine 1) the transmission dynamics of bat-CoVs across the human-wildlife interface; and 2) how this process is affected by CoV evolutionary potential, and how it might force CoV evolution. We will assess the nature and frequency of contact among animals and people in two critical human-animal interfaces: live animal markets in China and people who are highly exposed to bats in rural China.
“Specific Aim 3” discusses “Testing predictions of CoV inter-species transmission:”
We will test our models of host range (i.e. emergence potential) experimentally using reverse genetics, pseudovirus and receptor binding assays, and virus infection experiments in cell culture and humanized mice. With bat-CoVs that we’ve isolated or sequenced, and using live virus or pseudovirus infection in cells of different origin or expressing different receptor molecules, we will assess potential for each isolated virus and those with receptor binding site sequence to spill over. We will do this by sequencing the spike (or other receptor binding/fusion) protein genes from all our bat-CoVs, creating mutants to identify how significantly each would need to evolve to use ACE2, CD26/DPP4 (MERS-CoV receptor) or other potential CoV receptors.
In the continuing discussion of the aims of the research, the report states:
In vitro [outside the body] cell lines & Humanized mouse model: We have developed primary cell lines and transformed cell lines from 9 bat species using kidney, spleen, heart, brain and intestine. We have used these for virus isolation, infection assays and receptor molecule gene cloning. We also have a large number of cell lines from humans and animals that we will use for virus infectivity assays. We have obtained a letter of support from Dr Ralph Baric, who is keen to collaborate with us initially to infect his humanized mouse model with our bat SL-CoV [SARS-Like Coronavirus] that uses ACE2, and subsequently to use other CoVs that we identify …
The results will provide information whether bat-CoVs could use known bat and human ACE2, DPP4 or other known CoV receptors to enter cells, and allow us to determine critical receptor binding sites, viral host range, and to better predict the capacity of our CoVs to infect people. [Emphasis in original]
EcoHealth Alliance’s $3.3 million grant to fund a project titled “Understanding the Risk of Coronavirus Emergence” was initially to run from October 1, 2013, to September 30, 2018. The first “Project/Performance Site Location” is the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Three other Chinese sites follow: East China Normal University in Shanghai, Yunnan Institute of Endemic Disease Control and Prevention in Dali, and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Guangdong in Guangzhou.
On May 27, 2014, the NIH awarded EcoHealth Alliance $3,086,735 over five years for “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”
An EcoHealth Alliance grant application, received by the NIH on June 5, 2013, includes a list of “Senior/Key Personnel” including Shi Zhengli and Zhang Yun-Zhi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV); Peter Daszak, CEO of EcoHealth Alliance; and other Chinese scientists, including Ke Changwen of the Chinese “CDC and Prevention of Guangdong Province.”
A section of the EcoHealth Alliance application titled “EcoHealth Alliance Budget Justification” describes some of the work to be conducted by EcoHealth scientists in China:
A research scientist will be hired at 12 months time per year to provide direct assistance and oversight of field activities in China; maintain equipment and logistics; and coordinate animal and human sample shipment to the labs in China and in the US.
Once we secure IRBs [Institutional Review Boards] for human sampling in Y1 [Year 1], we will hire three medical officers from China provincial CDCs [Centers for Disease Control] as consultants to work in Guangxi, Hunan, and Fujian during Y2-Y5. These medical officers will be responsible for IRB approved human sampling as well as maintaining cold chain for storage and shipping samples.
Dr. Zhengli Shi, Senior Virologist. [Redacted] per year in Y1 -Y5. Dr. Shi will oversee the coronavirus screening for all samples collected in China. She will work with the PI [Principal Investigator], Co-Investigators, and Senior/Key Personnel to analyze data and write manuscripts. She will also coordinate data and material sharing with the co-investigators.
In a budget calculation for the year 2014-15, the Wuhan Institute of Virology as a sub-awardee of the grant was allocated to receive $128,718 in direct costs and $10,297 in indirect costs from NIH. The salaries of Shi Zhengli and a Wuhan Institute of Virology colleague Ge Xingyl are redacted from the budget. Over the five years of the grant, the Wuhan lab was to receive $749,976.
A section of the grant award titled “Wuhan Institute of Virology Budget Justification, Subaward” discusses “Other Direct Costs:”
RNA Extractions
We will be running RNA extractions for 1,000 bats per year (three sample per bat: oral, anal, and blood) in each year … Extracted RNA per animal will be pooled.
DNA Sequencing
In each year of the project, DNA sequencing will be performed on 3,200 samples at a cost of $2.91 per reaction….
Laboratory Supplies
We request support for in vitro infection experiments using pseudoviruses carrying the spike proteins (wild type or mutants) or live viruses in cell lines of different origins, binding affinity assays between the spike proteins (wild types or mutants) and different cellular receptor molecules, and humanized mouse experiments.
The Year 2 annual report for the bat coronavirus project, budget period June 1, 2016, to May 31, 2017, under “Specific Aim 3,” states:
Testing predictions of CoV inter-species transmission. The following experiments will be undertaken in Year 2:
- Humanized mice with human ACE2 receptors will be infected with WIV1 and the two rescued chimeric SARS-like coronaviruses to determine the tissue tropism and pathogenicity of bat SL-CoV.
- Isolation of novel bat coronaviruses. Live virus or pseudovirus will be used to infect cells of different origin or expressing different receptor molecules. Spillover potential for each isolated virus will be assessed.
- An infectious clone of full-length MERS-CoV [Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus] will be constructed using reverse genetic method. Using the S [spike] sequence of different MERS-related viruses identified from Chinese bats, the chimeric viruses with S gene of bat MERS-related coronaviruses and backbone of the infectious clone of MERS-CoV will be constructed to study the receptor usage and infectivity of bat MERS-related coronaviruses.
Among the “Additional Year 2 items for Specific Aim 3” are:
- The infectious clone of WIV1 was successfully constructed using reverse genetic methods;
- Two chimeric bat SARS-like coronavirus strains were constructed by replacing the S [spike] gene in the backbone of WIV1;
- Permission to import mice with human ACE2 to China was obtained, so as to conduct the experimental infections proposed in our R01 specific aims.
The annual report submitted for Year 3 of the grant project, budget period June 1, 2017, to May 31, 2018, under the heading “Specific Aim 3: Testing predictions of CoV inter-species transmission,” notes:
In Year 3, we successfully isolated Rs4874 from the single [bat] fecal sample. Using the reverse genetic system we previously developed, we constructed two chimeric viruses with the WIV1 backbone replaced with the S [spike] gene of Rs7327 and Rs4231, respectively. Vero E6 cells were respectively infected with Rs4874, WIV1-Rs4231S and WIV1-Rs7327S, and efficient virus replication was detected by immunofluorescence assay in all infections. To assess the usage of human ACE2 by the three novel SL-CoVs, we conducted virus infectivity studies using HeLa cells with or without the expression of human ACE2. All viruses replicated efficiently in the human ACE2-expressing cells.
In the Year 4 annual report, budge period June 1, 2018, to May 31, 2019, submitted to NIH by EcoHealth on September 16, 2020, in answer to the question “How Have the Results Been Disseminated to Communities of Interest,” the report details that Peter Daszak and WIV lab director Shi Zhengli briefed their findings to, among others, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Among the accomplishments listed in the Year 4 report is: “In vivo [experimentation done in a whole organism] infection of SARSr-CoVs with variants of S [spike] protein in human ACE2 (hACE2) expressing mice.”
The report also includes information about the construction of viruses of “varying pathogenicity” and testing them on humanized mice:
Using the reverse genetic methods we previously developed, infectious clones with the WIV1 [bat SARS-like coronavirus] backbone and the spike protein of SHC014, W IV16 and Rs4231, respectively, were constructed and recombinant viruses were successfully rescued. In Year 4, we performed preliminary in vivo infection of SARSr-CoVs on transgenic mice that express hACE2. Mice were infected with 105 pfu of full-length recombinant virus of W IV1 (rWIV1) and the three chimeric viruses with different spikes. Pathogenesis of the 4 SARSr-CoVs was then determined in a 2-week course. Mice challenged with rWIV1-SHC014S have experienced about 20% body weight loss by the 6th day post infection, while rWIV1 and rWIV-4231 S produced less body weight loss. In the mice infected with rWIV1 -WIV16S, no body weight loss was observed (Fig. 35a). 2 and 4 days post infection, the viral load in lung tissues of mice challenged with rWIV1-SHC014S, rWIV1-WIV16S and rWIV1-Rs4231 S reached more than 106 genome copies/g and were significantly higher than that in rWIV1-infected mice (Fig. 35b). These results demonstrate varying pathogenicity of SARSr-CoVs with different spike proteins in humanized mice.
In a revised award dated July 13, 2020, the NIH granted additional funds, including $77,750 to the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, $76,301 to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and $75,600 to the Institute of Pathogen Biology of China.
The 2020 renewal application to extend funding for the Wuhan bat research projects states that EcoHealth would not be working with “select agents” (severe threats), such as SARS-CoV, but rather with a SARSr-CoV molecular clone designated WIV1 which, while a “BSL3” (biosafety level 3) pathogen, was not considered a select agent.
The select agent research was to be conducted at Ralph Baric’s lab at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.
A section titled “P3CO Research” notes:
Importantly, we are not proposing to genetically manipulate SARS-CoV over the course of this proposal. [Emphasis in original] However, we are proposing to genetically manipulate the full length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone during the course of this proposal, which is not a select agent, has not been shown to cause human infections, and has not been shown to be transmissible between humans.
The same 2020 renewal application states: “This project is a multi-institutional collaboration led by EcoHealth Alliance, New York (Daszak, PI), which will subcontract funds to three institutions: the Wuhan Institute of Virology (Dr. Shi), the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Dr. Baric), and the Institute of Pathogen Biology (Dr. Ren).”
These documents are all an incredible confirmation of the dangerous and reckless experiments that were using your tax dollars both in China and here in the U.S. And, even worse, they are powerful circumstantial evidence that this mutant gain of function research led to the deadly pandemic. More documents are coming, but Congress and other appropriate authorities can’t act soon enough to follow up on this scandal that is deadly beyond measure.
Biden Justice Department Refuses to Reveal Names of Special Counsel’s Staff
The Department of Justice is brazenly refusing to release the names of staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office in two investigations targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.
On December 9, 2022, we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for:
All staff rosters, phone lists, or similar records depicting all employees hired by or detailed to the office of Special Counsel Jack Smith.
The Justice Department responded on April 12, stating that records responsive to our request had been located, but were being withheld “pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(A)” of FOIA:
Exemption 6 pertains to information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Exemption 7(A) pertains to records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, the release of which could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.
We can only conclude, after seeing the uproar over the anti-Trump, partisan Mueller operation, that the Garland Justice Department has something to hide about Jack Smith and his prosecutors again targeting Trump and other Republicans with unprecedented investigations. Special Prosecutor Jack Smith isn’t above the law and the American people have the right to basic transparency and accountability.
Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith in November to take over two investigations involving Trump, who is running for president in 2024.
The first investigation involves Trump’s handling of classified documents he retained at his Mar-a-Lago, Florida residence after leaving the White House in January 2021.
The second investigation regards Trump’s challenge of the 2020 presidential election results, which allegedly included a plan to submit separate slates of electors to block Congress from certifying Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.
Previous Judicial Watch and other investigations of Special Counsel Robert Muller’s investigative team highlighted anti-Trump bias and partisan hiring. FBI official Peter Strzok was secretly removed from Mueller’s team after anti-Trump and political text messages were uncovered. Through FOIA, Judicial Watch has uncovered many records regarding the Mueller team.
In May 2019, DOJ records included text messages and calendar entries of Mueller special counsel prosecutor Andrew Weissmann showing he led the hiring effort for the investigation that targeted President Trump. (Weissmann was formerly the Obama-era chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section.)
Weissman’s calendar shows that he began interviewing people for investigator jobs on the Mueller operation almost immediately after it was announced that he had joined the team in early June.
On June 5, 2017, he interviewed former Chief of the Public Corruption Unit of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York Andrew Goldstein. Goldstein was a Time magazine reporter. Goldstein contributed a combined $3,300 to Obama’s campaigns in 2008 and 2012. His wife, Julie Rawe, was a reporter and editor for Time for 13 years, until 2013. He became a lead prosecutor for Mueller.
The next day, on June 6, 2017, Weissmann had a meeting with “FARA [Foreign Agents Registration Act] counsel.”
Weissmann interviewed another prosecutor, Kyle Freeny, from the DOJ Money Laundering Section for the team on June 7, 2017. She contributed a total of $500 to Obama’s presidential campaigns and $250 to Hillary Clinton’s. She was later detailed to the Mueller investigation.
He interviewed a trial attorney who worked with him in the Criminal Fraud Section, Rush Atkinson, on June 9, 2017. Records show that Atkinson donated $200 to Clinton’s campaign in 2016. He is a registered Democrat and contributed $200 to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Atkinson also became part of the Mueller team.
Weissmann interviewed DOJ Deputy Assistant Attorney General Greg Andres for the team on June 13, 2017. Andres donated $2,700 to the campaign for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) in 2018 and $1,000 to the campaign for David Hoffman (D) in 2009. Andres is a registered Democrat. His wife, Ronnie Abrams, a U.S. district judge in Manhattan, was nominated to the bench in 2011 by Obama. He joined the Mueller team in August 2017.
Hearing for Mother Who Requested School Board COVID Records
We were in court this week on behalf of Megan Brock, a parent being sued by Bucks County, PA, to prevent the release of documents she requested under the commonwealth’s Right-to-Know Law related to COVID restrictions and the re-opening of the county’s schools.
The hearing was before Judge Denise Bowman in Doylestown, PA, in the case (County of Bucks v. Megan Brock (No. 2022-02979)).
Bucks County filed multiple suits against Brock to prevent the release of the documents after the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records found in Brock’s favor and ordered Bucks County to search for and release the documents in two Right-to-Know Law requests.
Brock sent a February 7, 2022, request asking for all electronic correspondence by Bucks Co. Director of Policy and Communications Eric Nagy with Board Vice Chair Diane Ellis-Marseglia, Board Chair Bob Harvie, former Director of the Commissioners’ Office of Public Information Larry King, Chief Clerk Gail Humphrey, and Health Department Director David Damsker from 8/10/2021 to 8/28/2021, on the buckscounty.gov domain. Also, all communications about Bucks County Health Department School Guidance.
A March 8, 2022, request asks for a copy of an email sent to Acting Chief Operating Officer Margaret McKevitt on 8/23/2021 on the buckscounty.gov domain, which contained the final copy of the Bucks County COVID-19 Amended School Guidance, including all responses.
FBI Stonewalls Public Record Request Involving Chinese Police Station in NY
The story of Chinese police stations operating in our country is coming out now, but not because the FBI is willing to talk about it. The agency knew about such a station in New York but told us it didn’t. We’re not surprised. Our Corruption Chronicles blog explains.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) misled and stonewalled Judicial Watch on a legitimate public record request involving an illegal Chinese police station opened in New York by agents of China’s communist government. The outpost is the first in the United States operated on behalf of the Fuzhou branch of the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and was surreptitiously established in an office building in Manhattan’s Chinatown to intimidate Chinese dissidents living in this country.
Back in October 2022 Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the FBI for records concerning the foreign police station which was operated by two Chinese men who live in New York, federal authorities recently confirmed. The men, 61-year-old Harry Lu Jianwang of the Bronx and 59-year-old Chen Jinping of Manhattan, were arrested this week and charged with conspiring to act as agents of the PRC government as well as obstructing justice by destroying evidence of their communications with an MPS official. “The PRC, through its repressive security apparatus, established a secret physical presence in New York City to monitor and intimidate dissidents and those critical of its government,” said Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. An assistant director of the FBI’s counterintelligence division also said this week that the case serves as a powerful reminder that China will stop at nothing to bend people to its will.
It was not the FBI’s first public acknowledgement of the illicit Chinese police station in the Big Apple. In mid-November of last year FBI Director Christopher Wray told a congressional committee that his agency wasinvestigating an unauthorized police station run by China in New York as part of a chain in major cities around the world. A Spanish-based human rights group had just disclosed that China has dozens of overseas police service stations globally and lawmakers asked Wray about it during a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing. The FBI director affirmed he was aware of the existence of the stations and that it is outrageous to think the Chinese police would attempt to set up shop in New York. He also said the Chinese station “violates sovereignty and circumvents standard judicial and law enforcement cooperation processes.”
The FBI has since recognized that it conducted a search of New York’s Chinese police station in October 2022 and that agents interviewed the defendants and seized their phones. “In reviewing the contents of these phones, FBI agents observed that communications between Lu and Chen, on the one hand, and the MPS Official, on the other, appeared to have been deleted,” according to a statement issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ). “In subsequent consensual interviews, Lu and Chen admitted to the FBI that they had deleted their communications with the MPS Official after learning about the ongoing FBI investigation, thus preventing the FBI from learning the full extent of the MPS’s directions for the overseas police station.” The feds knew that Lu had a longstanding relationship of trust with Chinese law enforcement and that he was tasked with carrying various activities including to assist the PRC government’s repressive activities in the U.S.
Nevertheless, the FBI wrongfully rejected Judicial Watch’s detailed public record request, denying the existence of any information involving the Chinese police station in Manhattan. In a November 18, 2022 response to Judicial Watch’s October filing the agency outright claims it has no records. “Based on the information you provided, we conducted a main and reference entity record search of the Central Records System (CRS) per our standard search policy,” the FBI writes in its response. “However, we were unable to identify records subject to the FOIPA that are responsive to your request. Therefore, your request is being closed.” The document is signed by Michael G. Seidel, who is identified as the section chief of the Record/Information Dissemination Section of the Information Management Division.
Like most government agencies the FBI is rarely forthcoming with records, which forces Judicial Watch to sue in federal court for information that should be available to the public under the law. The FBI even took advantage of the pandemic, using it as an excuse to withhold information by shutting down its electronic public records operations during a time when mandatory social distancing forced Americans and federal government employees to telework.
Until next week …
The post Fauci “Mutant” Viruses EXPOSED appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The New York Post:
Far-left billionaire George Soros has a legion of loyal lieutenants who’ve racked up over two dozen meetings with top officials at the White House since President Biden took office, The Post has learned.
The progressive kingmaker’s unrivaled access into the Biden administration extends well beyond his 37-year-old son Alexander, who chairs the powerful, liberal grant-making network Open Society Foundations founded by his dad, and as The Post reported on Page 1 last week, has taken on the role of a de-facto White House “ambassador” by making at least 14 visits there.
At least four other past or present leaders at Open Society Foundations have amassed a combined 33 private meetings and other confabs in less than two years, according to recently updated White House visitor logs.
Tom Perriello, executive director of the group’s United States operation, and a former Virginia congressman, scored 17 visits alone since May 2021, records show.
His latest trips include separate Dec. 15 meetings with Rachel Chiu, chief of staff for the White House’s Office of Political Strategy and Outreach, and White House Associate Director of Strategic Outreach Sabrina Bousbar; and a Dec. 2 sitdown with John Podesta, Biden’s senior advisor for clean energy innovation and implementation.
“It’s hard to tell where the Biden administration begins and the Open Society Foundations ends,” said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative Judicial Watch.
Read more here…
The post George Soros’ army of lieutenants get easy access to Biden White House appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch on Wednesday announced it had received records from the Department of Health and Human Services showing that the National Institutes of Health granting funding for experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology that sought to create mutant coronavirus variants.
Included in the documents were the initial grant application from EcoHealth Alliance and its annual reports. Those documents described work with the WIV as seeking to “predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
Included in the “specific aims” section is a discussion of “[t]esting predictions of CoV inter-species transmission.”
The group received a $3.3 million grant for its “Understanding the Risk of Coronavirus Emergence” project, which ran from October 2013 through September of 2018. In 2014, EcoHealth received almost $3.1 over five years from the NIH for “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”
Read more here…
The post NIH records show feds funded research in China to create coronavirus ‘mutants’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Breitbart:
During a segment on FNC’s “Hannity,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) acknowledged what many believe about the COVID-19 virus, which originated from a Wuhan laboratory.
“I’m not a scientist, but I will say this — why in fact did the NIH get, a penny a single cent from — for a Wuhan virology lab in China, our number one geopolitical foe?” host Sean Hannity said. “Number two, it sounds like they’re playing with fire when you read the actual document and the draft by Judicial Watch. And, three, you know, I believe that we were lied to from the very beginning that Anthony Fauci, the people that were telling us that this was a wet market issue and not a virology lab issue were lying to us. What do you say?”
“Well, we’re actually going to have more information,” Rubio said. “We’re finishing — putting the finishing touches on it. It builds on the report that was released yesterday with actually even more evidence of the fact that something was going on in China and we’re going to put this out there. We just got to get it cleared that put it out — that something was going on in China well before it was even acknowledged that there was there and that there was anything going on. And I think it adds credence to this whole lab leak theory.”
“And it’s not just a Wuhan Institute of Virology,” he continued. “Remember, there’s a second place there called the Wuhan Institute of Health, and — which is also involved in this. This is a place that’s had repeated accidents in the past, and so, I think there’s every reason to suspect that these two labs working on this kind of stuff also happen to be in the city where it began and have had accidents in the past. I think the likelihood that I agree with the FBI on this one, I agree with the Department of Energy on this one.
Read more here…
The post Rubio: COVID Origins Were Likely a Lab Accident Covered Up by China appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) misled and stonewalled Judicial Watch on a legitimate public record request involving an illegal Chinese police station opened in New York by agents of China’s communist government. The outpost is the first in the United States operated on behalf of the Fuzhou branch of the Ministry of Public Security (MPS) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and was surreptitiously established in an office building in Manhattan’s Chinatown to intimidate Chinese dissidents living in this country.
Back in October 2022 Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the FBI for records concerning the foreign police station which was operated by two Chinese men who live in New York, federal authorities recently confirmed. The men, 61-year-old Harry Lu Jianwang of the Bronx and 59-year-old Chen Jinping of Manhattan, were arrested this week and charged with conspiring to act as agents of the PRC government as well as obstructing justice by destroying evidence of their communications with an MPS official. “The PRC, through its repressive security apparatus, established a secret physical presence in New York City to monitor and intimidate dissidents and those critical of its government,” said Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. An assistant director of the FBI’s counterintelligence division also said this week that the case serves as a powerful reminder that China will stop at nothing to bend people to its will.
It was not the FBI’s first public acknowledgement of the illicit Chinese police station in the Big Apple. In mid-November of last year FBI Director Christopher Wray told a congressional committee that his agency was investigating an unauthorized police station run by China in New York as part of a chain in major cities around the world. A Spanish-based human rights group had just disclosed that China has dozens of overseas police service stations globally and lawmakers asked Wray about it during a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing. The FBI director affirmed he was aware of the existence of the stations and that it is outrageous to think the Chinese police would attempt to set up shop in New York. He also said the Chinese station “violates sovereignty and circumvents standard judicial and law enforcement cooperation processes.”
The FBI has since recognized that it conducted a search of New York’s Chinese police station in October 2022 and that agents interviewed the defendants and seized their phones. “In reviewing the contents of these phones, FBI agents observed that communications between Lu and Chen, on the one hand, and the MPS Official, on the other, appeared to have been deleted,” according to a statement issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ). “In subsequent consensual interviews, Lu and Chen admitted to the FBI that they had deleted their communications with the MPS Official after learning about the ongoing FBI investigation, thus preventing the FBI from learning the full extent of the MPS’s directions for the overseas police station.” The feds knew that Lu had a longstanding relationship of trust with Chinese law enforcement and that he was tasked with carrying various activities including to assist the PRC government’s repressive activities in the U.S.
Nevertheless, the FBI wrongfully rejected Judicial Watch’s detailed public record request, denying the existence of any information involving the Chinese police station in Manhattan. In a November 18, 2022 response to Judicial Watch’s October filing the agency outright claims it has no records. “Based on the information you provided, we conducted a main and reference entity record search of the Central Records System (CRS) per our standard search policy,” the FBI writes in its response. “However, we were unable to identify records subject to the FOIPA that are responsive to your request. Therefore, your request is being closed.” The document is signed by Michael G. Seidel, who is identified as the section chief of the Record/Information Dissemination Section of the Information Management Division.
Like most government agencies the FBI is rarely forthcoming with records, which forces Judicial Watch to sue in federal court for information that should be available to the public under the law. The FBI even took advantage of the pandemic, using it as an excuse to withhold information by shutting down its electronic public records operations during a time when mandatory social distancing forced Americans and federal government employees to telework.
The post FBI Stonewalls JW on Legit Public Record Request Involving Chinese Police Station in NY appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the Department of Justice refuses to release the names of staffers working in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office in two investigations targeting former President Donald Trump and other Americans.
On December 9, 2022, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for:
All staff rosters, phone lists, or similar records depicting all employees hired by or detailed to the office of Special Counsel Jack Smith.
The Justice Department responded on April 12, stating that records responsive to Judicial Watch’s request have been located, but are being withheld “pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(A)” of FOIA:
Exemption 6 pertains to information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Exemption 7(A) pertains to records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, the release of which could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings.
Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith in November to take over two investigations involving Trump, who is running for president in 2024.
The first investigation involves Trump’s handling of classified documents he retained at his Mar-a-Lago, Florida residence after leaving the White House in January 2021.
The second investigation regards Trump’s challenge of the 2020 presidential election results, which allegedly included a plan to submit separate slates of electors to block Congress from certifying Democrat Joe Biden’s victory.
Previous Judicial Watch and other investigations of Special Counsel Robert Muller’s investigative team highlighted anti-Trump bias and partisan hiring. FBI official Peter Strzok was secretly removed from Mueller’s team after anti-Trump and political text messages were uncovered.
“One can only conclude, after seeing the uproar over the anti-Trump, partisan Mueller operation, that the Garland Justice Department has something to hide about Jack Smith and his prosecutors again targeting Trump and other Republicans with unprecedented investigations,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Special Prosecutor Jack Smith isn’t above the law and the American people have the right to basic transparency and accountability.”
Through FOIA, Judicial Watch has uncovered many records regarding the Mueller team.
In May 2019, DOJ records included text messages and calendar entries of Mueller special counsel prosecutor Andrew Weissmann showing he led the hiring effort for the investigation that targeted President Trump. (Weissmann was formerly the Obama-era chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section.)
Weissman’s calendar shows that he began interviewing people for investigator jobs on the Mueller operation almost immediately after it was announced that he had joined the team in early June.
On June 5, 2017, he interviewed former Chief of the Public Corruption Unit of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New YorkAndrew Goldstein. Goldstein was a Time magazine reporter. Goldstein contributed a combined $3,300 to Obama’s campaigns in 2008 and 2012. His wife, Julie Rawe, was a reporter and editor for Time for 13 years, until 2013. He became a lead prosecutor for Mueller.
The next day, on June 6, 2017, Weissmann had a meeting with “FARA [Foreign Agents Registration Act] counsel.”
Weissmann interviewed another prosecutor, Kyle Freeny, from the DOJ Money Laundering Section for the team on June 7, 2017. She contributed a total of $500 to Obama’s presidential campaigns and $250 to Hillary Clinton’s. She was later detailed to the Mueller investigation.
He interviewed a trial attorney who worked with him in the Criminal Fraud Section, Rush Atkinson, on June 9, 2017. Records show that Atkinson donated $200 to Clinton’s campaign in 2016. He is a registered Democrat and contributed $200 to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Atkinson also became part of the Mueller team.
Weissmann interviewed DOJ Deputy Assistant Attorney General Greg Andres for the team on June 13, 2017. Andres donated $2,700 to the campaign for Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) in 2018 and $1,000 to the campaign for David Hoffman (D) in 2009. Andres is a registered Democrat. His wife, Ronnie Abrams, a U.S. district judge in Manhattan, was nominated to the bench in 2011 by Obama. He joined the Mueller team in August 2017.
The post Judicial Watch: Biden Justice Department Refuses to Reveal Names of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Staff appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 552 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which include the initial grant application and annual reports to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance, describing the aim of its work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China to create mutant viruses “to better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people.”
Eco Health planned to sequence the spike protein from coronaviruses obtained from bats for the purpose of “creating mutants to identify how significantly each would need to evolve to use ACE2,” which is explained as “the receptor to gain entry to human cells.”
Judicial Watch obtained the records through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request it filed in December 2021 for:
All reports submitted by EcoHealth Alliance to NIH or its sub-agencies related to NIH Grant No. 1R01A|110964 titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence” during the term of the grant.
In the initial “Application for Federal Assistance” submitted on June 5, 2013, by EcoHealth Alliance, a section is titled “Specific Aims,” which notes the intention to create mutant bat viruses and “predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect people:”
To understand the risk of zoonotic CoV [coronavirus] emergence, we propose to examine 1) the transmission dynamics of bat-CoVs across the human-wildlife interface; and 2) how this process is affected by CoV evolutionary potential, and how it might force CoV evolution. We will assess the nature and frequency of contact among animals and people in two critical human-animal interfaces: live animal markets in China and people who are highly exposed to bats in rural China.
“Specific Aim 3” discusses “Testing predictions of CoV inter-species transmission:”
We will test our models of host range (i.e. emergence potential) experimentally using reverse genetics, pseudovirus and receptor binding assays, and virus infection experiments in cell culture and humanized mice. With bat-CoVs that we’ve isolated or sequenced, and using live virus or pseudovirus infection in cells of different origin or expressing different receptor molecules, we will assess potential for each isolated virus and those with receptor binding site sequence to spill over. We will do this by sequencing the spike (or other receptor binding/fusion) protein genes from all our bat-CoVs, creating mutants to identify how significantly each would need to evolve to use ACE2, CD26/DPP4 (MERS-CoV receptor) or other potential CoV receptors.
In the continuing discussion of the aims of the research, the report states:
In vitro [outside the body] cell lines & Humanized mouse model: We have developed primary cell lines and transformed cell lines from 9 bat species using kidney, spleen, heart, brain and intestine. We have used these for virus isolation, infection assays and receptor molecule gene cloning. We also have a large number of cell lines from humans and animals that we will use for virus infectivity assays. We have obtained a letter of support from Dr Ralph Baric, who is keen to collaborate with us initially to infect his humanized mouse model with our bat SL-CoV [SARS-Like Coronavirus] that uses ACE2, and subsequently to use other CoVs that we identify …
The results will provide information whether bat-CoVs could use known bat and human ACE2, DPP4 or other known CoV receptors to enter cells, and allow us to determine critical receptor binding sites, viral host range, and to better predict the capacity of our CoVs to infect people. [Emphasis in original]
EcoHealth Alliance’s $3.3 million grant to fund a project titled “Understanding the Risk of Coronavirus Emergence” was initially to run from October 1, 2013, to September 30, 2018. The first “Project/Performance Site Location” is the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Three other Chinese sites follow: East China Normal University in Shanghai, Yunnan Institute of Endemic Disease Control and Prevention in Dali, and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention of Guangdong in Guangzhou.
On May 27, 2014, the NIH awarded EcoHealth Alliance $3,086,735 over five years for “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”
An EcoHealth Alliance grant application, received by the NIH on June 5, 2013, includes a list of “Senior/Key Personnel” including Shi Zhengli and Zhang Yun-Zhi of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV); Peter Daszak, CEO of EcoHealth Alliance; and other Chinese scientists, including Ke Changwen of the Chinese “CDC and Prevention of Guangdong Province.”
A section of the EcoHealth Alliance application titled “EcoHealth Alliance Budget Justification” describes some of the work to be conducted by EcoHealth scientists in China:
A research scientist will be hired at 12 months time per year to provide direct assistance and oversight of field activities in China; maintain equipment and logistics; and coordinate animal and human sample shipment to the labs in China and in the US.
Once we secure IRBs [Institutional Review Boards] for human sampling in Y1 [Year 1], we will hire three medical officers from China provincial CDCs [Centers for Disease Control] as consultants to work in Guangxi, Hunan, and Fujian during Y2-Y5. These medical officers will be responsible for IRB approved human sampling as well as maintaining cold chain for storage and shipping samples.
Dr. Zhengli Shi, Senior Virologist. [Redacted] per year in Y1 -Y5. Dr. Shi will oversee the coronavirus screening for all samples collected in China. She will work with the PI [Principal Investigator], Co-Investigators, and Senior/Key Personnel to analyze data and write manuscripts. She will also coordinate data and material sharing with the co-investigators.
In a budget calculation for the year 2014-15, the Wuhan Institute of Virology as a sub-awardee of the grant was allocated to receive $128,718 in direct costs and $10,297 in indirect costs from NIH. The salaries of Shi Zhengli and a Wuhan Institute of Virology colleague Ge Xingyl are redacted from the budget. Over the five years of the grant, the Wuhan lab was to receive $749,976.
A section of the grant award titled “Wuhan Institute of Virology Budget Justification, Subaward” discusses “Other Direct Costs:”
RNA Extractions
We will be running RNA extractions for 1,000 bats per year (three sample per bat: oral, anal, and blood) in each year … Extracted RNA per animal will be pooled.
DNA Sequencing
In each year of the project, DNA sequencing will be performed on 3,200 samples at a cost of $2.91 per reaction….
Laboratory Supplies
We request support for in vitro infection experiments using pseudoviruses carrying the spike proteins (wild type or mutants) or live viruses in cell lines of different origins, binding affinity assays between the spike proteins (wild types or mutants) and different cellular receptor molecules, and humanized mouse experiments.
The Year 2 annual report for the bat coronavirus project, budget period June 1, 2016, to May 31, 2017, under “Specific Aim 3,” states:
Testing predictions of CoV inter-species transmission. The following experiments will be undertaken in Year 2:
- Humanized mice with human ACE2 receptors will be infected with WIV1 and the two rescued chimeric SARS-like coronaviruses to determine the tissue tropism and pathogenicity of bat SL-CoV.
- Isolation of novel bat coronaviruses. Live virus or pseudovirus will be used to infect cells of different origin or expressing different receptor molecules. Spillover potential for each isolated virus will be assessed.
- An infectious clone of full-length MERS-CoV [Middle East Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus] will be constructed using reverse genetic method. Using the S [spike] sequence of different MERS-related viruses identified from Chinese bats, the chimeric viruses with S gene of bat MERS-related coronaviruses and backbone of the infectious clone of MERS-CoV will be constructed to study the receptor usage and infectivity of bat MERS-related coronaviruses.
Among the “Additional Year 2 items for Specific Aim 3” are:
- The infectious clone of WIV1 was successfully constructed using reverse genetic methods;
- Two chimeric bat SARS-like coronavirus strains were constructed by replacing the S [spike] gene in the backbone of WIV1;
- Permission to import mice with human ACE2 to China was obtained, so as to conduct the experimental infections proposed in our R01 specific aims.
The annual report submitted for Year 3 of the grant project, budget period June 1, 2017, to May 31, 2018, under the heading “Specific Aim 3: Testing predictions of CoV inter-species transmission,” notes:
In Year 3, we successfully isolated Rs4874 from the single [bat] fecal sample. Using the reverse genetic system we previously developed, we constructed two chimeric viruses with the WIV1 backbone replaced with the S [spike] gene of Rs7327 and Rs4231, respectively. Vero E6 cells were respectively infected with Rs4874, WIV1-Rs4231S and WIV1-Rs7327S, and efficient virus replication was detected by immunofluorescence assay in all infections. To assess the usage of human ACE2 by the three novel SL-CoVs, we conducted virus infectivity studies using HeLa cells with or without the expression of human ACE2. All viruses replicated efficiently in the human ACE2-expressing cells.
In the Year 4 annual report, budge period June 1, 2018, to May 31, 2019, submitted to NIH by EcoHealth on September 16, 2020, in answer to the question “How Have the Results Been Disseminated to Communities of Interest,” the report details that Peter Daszak and WIV lab director Shi Zhengli briefed their findings to, among others, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Among the accomplishments listed in the Year 4 report is: “In vivo [experimentation done in a whole organism] infection of SARSr-CoVs with variants of S [spike] protein in human ACE2 (hACE2) expressing mice.”
The report also includes information about the construction of viruses of “varying pathogenicity” and testing them on humanized mice:
Using the reverse genetic methods we previously developed, infectious clones with the WIV1 [bat SARS-like coronavirus] backbone and the spike protein of SHC014, W IV16 and Rs4231, respectively, were constructed and recombinant viruses were successfully rescued. In Year 4, we performed preliminary in vivo infection of SARSr-CoVs on transgenic mice that express hACE2. Mice were infected with 105 pfu of full-length recombinant virus of W IV1 (rWIV1) and the three chimeric viruses with different spikes. Pathogenesis of the 4 SARSr-CoVs was then determined in a 2-week course. Mice challenged with rWIV1-SHC014S have experienced about 20% body weight loss by the 6th day post infection, while rWIV1 and rWIV-4231 S produced less body weight loss. In the mice infected with rWIV1 -WIV16S, no body weight loss was observed (Fig. 35a). 2 and 4 days post infection, the viral load in lung tissues of mice challenged with rWIV1-SHC014S, rWIV1-WIV16S and rWIV1-Rs4231 S reached more than 106 genome copies/g and were significantly higher than that in rWIV1-infected mice (Fig. 35b). These results demonstrate varying pathogenicity of SARSr-CoVs with different spike proteins in humanized mice.
In a revised award dated July 13, 2020, the NIH granted additional funds, including $77,750 to the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, $76,301 to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and $75,600 to the Institute of Pathogen Biology of China.
The 2020 renewal application to extend funding for the Wuhan bat research projects states that EcoHealth would not be working with “select agents” (severe threats), such as SARS-CoV, but rather with a SARSr-CoV molecular clone designated WIV1 which, while a “BSL3” (biosafety level 3) pathogen, was not considered a select agent.
The select agent research was to be conducted at Ralph Baric’s lab at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.
A section titled “P3CO Research” notes:
Importantly, we are not proposing to genetically manipulate SARS-CoV over the course of this proposal. [Emphasis in original] However, we are proposing to genetically manipulate the full length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone during the course of this proposal, which is not a select agent, has not been shown to cause human infections, and has not been shown to be transmissible between humans.
The same 2020 renewal application states: “This project is a multi-institutional collaboration led by EcoHealth Alliance, New York (Daszak, PI), which will subcontract funds to three institutions: the Wuhan Institute of Virology (Dr. Shi), the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Dr. Baric), and the Institute of Pathogen Biology (Dr. Ren).”
“A review of these and other documents strongly suggest that U.S. funding in China and elsewhere for mutant virus, gain-of-function research may have been responsible for the emergence of the COVID pandemic in Wuhan,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This gain-of-function scandal should be the subject of criminal investigations.”
Through FOIA, Judicial Watch has uncovered a substantial amount of information about COVID-19 issues:
- HHS records included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat COVID-19.
- Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the COVID shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
- Judicial Watch obtained HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Heavily redacted records from the FDA regarding the COVID-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on COVID booster use and approval.
- HHS records detailed internal discussions about myocarditis and the COVID vaccine. Other documents detail adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
- Judicial Watch uncovered HHS records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration propaganda campaign to push the COVID-19 vaccine.
- HHS records revealed previously redacted locations of COVID-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
- NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc, warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records obtained from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was cancelled because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
- HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
- HHS records show that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
- Fauci emailsinclude his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
The post Judicial Watch: Records Show Funding for EcoHealth/Wuhan Institute Research to Create Coronavirus ‘Mutants’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that a court hearing will be held before Judge Denise Bowman on Thursday, April 20, 2023, in the case against Megan Brock, a parent who is being sued by Bucks County, PA, to prevent the release of documents she requested under the commonwealth’s Right-to-Know Law that are related to COVID restrictions and the re-opening of the county’s schools (County of Bucks v. Megan Brock (No. 2022-02979)).
The hearing will be held:
Date: Thursday, April 20, 2023
Time: 9:00 am ET
Location: Buck County Justice Center
100 N. Main St.
Doylestown, PA 18901
Bucks County filed multiple suits against Brock to prevent the release of the documents after the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records found in Brock’s favor and ordered Bucks County to search for and release the documents in two Right-to-Know Law requests.
Brock sent a February 7, 2022, request asking for all electronic correspondence by Bucks Co. Director of Policy and Communications Eric Nagy with Board Vice Chair Diane Ellis-Marseglia, Board Chair Bob Harvie, former Director of the Commissioners’ Office of Public Information Larry King, Chief Clerk Gail Humphrey, and Health Department Director David Damsker from 8/10/2021 to 8/28/2021, on the buckscounty.gov domain. Also, all communications about Bucks County Health Department School Guidance.
A March 8, 2022, request asks for a copy of an email sent to Acting Chief Operating Officer Margaret McKevitt on 8/23/2021 on the buckscounty.gov domain, which contained the final copy of the Bucks County COVID-19 Amended School Guidance, including all responses.
There will be press availability outside of the courthouse after the hearing.
Judicial Watch is being assisted by J. Chadwick Schnee of Schnee Legal Services LLC in Lititz, PA.
The post Judicial Watch: Hearing Announced for Mother Being Sued by Bucks County, PA, for Requesting Release of School Board COVID Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
As part of the Biden administration’s fruitless drive to address the underlying factors of “irregular migration” the U.S. government will pour extra money into a longstanding Central American anti-gang program that has failed to put a dent in the region’s gang stronghold and the violence that has spilled north. The program is known as Gang Resistance Education And Training (GREAT) and it has been funded by the U.S. since 2010 in El Salvador, Honduras, Panama and Costa Rica to supposedly prevent youth crime, violence and gang involvement. Under the new $5.4 million grant Guatemala, a hotbed of gang violence, has been added to the list and will receive the biggest single chunk of money.
After investing millions of dollars prior to this latest allotment, the U.S. government admitted it has no idea if the program is working so it spent over $2 million to study its effectiveness, though results are not yet available. GREAT also operates in schools throughout the U.S. using thousands of law enforcement officers to help immunize children in the years immediately before the prime ages for introduction into gangs and delinquent behavior. Nevertheless, there are approximately 30,000 gangs and 850,000 gang members throughout the U.S., according to the Department of Justice (DOJ). In Central America the problem is worse. Though more than a million at-risk youths have completed the U.S.-financed program in the last decade, Latin America is the world’s most violent region, according to a study published by Florida International University (FIU). The problem is so bad in El Salvador that last year the president deployed 10,000 security forces to a “gang-run capital suburb.”
Domestically GREAT is funded and overseen by the DOJ Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). In foreign countries, the program is run by the State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL), which works to keep Americans safe by countering crime, illegal drugs, and instability abroad. INL is handsomely funded by Congress and typically gets hundreds of millions of dollars for its drug-related programs. The money helps strengthen the rule of law, human rights protections, law enforcement capacity, anti-corruption activities, and other critical efforts around the globe. Besides financing GREAT, the U.S. has dedicated hundreds of millions of dollars to fighting gangs, crime and drug trafficking south of the border through the State Department’s Central American Regional Security Initiative (CARSI), which also focuses on the impossible task of gang prevention and social programming for at-risk youth.
The evidence shows that the costly taxpayer-funded anti-gang initiatives are not working in the targeted Central American countries. In fact, many of the Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) welcomed into the U.S. have gang affiliations. Back in the summer of 2014 when UACs started arriving, Homeland Security sources confirmed that many had ties to gang members in the U.S. At the time Judicial Watch reported that street gangs—including the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)—went on a recruiting frenzy at U.S. shelters housing the illegal immigrant minors and they were using Red Cross phones to communicate. The MS-13 is a feared street gang of mostly Central American illegal immigrants that’s spread throughout the U.S. and is renowned for drug distribution, murder, rape, robbery, home invasions, kidnappings, vandalism and other violent crimes. The Justice Department’s National Gang Intelligence Center (NGIC) says criminal street gangs like the MS-13 are responsible for most violent crimes in the U.S. and are the primary distributors of most illicit drugs.
American taxpayers have the right to know why their government keeps investing in a program that has for over a decade failed to meet its goal of providing at-risk youths in foreign countries the life skills to avoid delinquent behavior and violence. The most recent grant announcement keeps it vague, stating that approximately 1.4 million at risk youths “have been benefitted.” No further details are provided to support the steady flow of cash from the U.S. It appears to be in support of a Biden administration initiative called Collaborative Migration Management Strategy to address the root cause—and fund purported solutions—of irregular migration from the impoverished region. The plan was launched in 2021 to address the underlying factors leading to migration, increase humanitarian assistance to alleviate conditions, provide protection to vulnerable populations, create messaging campaigns to deter irregular migration and expand lawful pathways to protection and opportunity in the U.S. Earlier this year the administration gave El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras $260 million in humanitarian funding with the unlikely goal that the money will improve life enough to deter its citizens from coming to the U.S. illegally. Now it is claiming to put a dent in gang violence with a costly program that has proven to be futile.
The post U.S. Dedicates Another $5.4 Million to Futile Anti-Gang Program in Central America appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Sues FBI For Records on Hunter Biden Gun Scandal
“The FBI and Secret Service have both been implicated in a corrupt clean-up operation to protect Hunter Biden from the criminal consequences of his gun scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch Sues Montgomery County Police for Records about Public Disturbances Outside Homes of Supreme Court Justices after Leak of Draft Dobbs Opinion
Since the leak of the Dobbs draft opinion, leftists targeted conservative justices’ homes with protests in violation of federal law, which prohibits “interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice … with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer.” Several justices received death threats and, on June 8, 2022, a heavily armed man was arrested outside Justice Kavanaugh’s home in Bethesda, and was charged with attempted murder.
NASA Seeks Public Input to Better Support Minorities Year after Launching Equity Mission
A year after launching an extensive Equity Action Plan that gave around $2 billion to “small disadvantaged businesses,” the nation’s space agency wants to do more to advance racial equity and support underserved communities with the billions of dollars in grants and contracts it distributes annually. To complete this important mission the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is seeking input from the public on the barriers and challenges that prevent members of underserved communities from receiving funds.
HHS Launches $1.5 Million Research Center to Investigate Needs of Poor Hispanics
As part of the Biden administration’s push for governmentwide racial equity, a new research center dedicated to supporting and investigating the needs of low-income Hispanics will be launched with a $1.5 million grant from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The goal is to develop promising approaches to promote social and economic well-being among poor Hispanics and to assess current government policies and practices that contribute to disparities in access to public services, a recently published grant announcement states.
In The News
Judicial Watch Sues MD Police for Records on Illegal Protests Outside SCOTUS Justices Homes
CNS News
The Montgomery County Police Department in Maryland has not responded to a standard and legal Public Information Act (PIA) request for records and communications about the ongoing protests outside the homes of some Supreme Court justices. As a result, Judicial Watch has filed a PIA lawsuit against the police department in the Montgomery Circuit Court for those records.
Biden DHS Sued For Allegedly Stonewalling Release Of Censorship Docs
The Daily CallerGovernment watchdog Judicial Watch sued the Department Homeland Security (DHS) Wednesday for allegedly failing to disclose documents related to its censorship activities.
The lawsuit stems from an unanswered December 2022 FOIA request for communications records between Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) officials and social media platforms. The request sought information relating to activities revealed in the Twitter files, such as the “industry meetings” the FBI, DHS and other government agencies held with tech companies.
Son of George Soros scoring easy White House access, records show
New York PostA son of billionaire George Soros has quietly become a de-facto White House “ambassador,” making at least 14 visits there on behalf of the far-left kingmaker since President Joe Biden took office, records reviewed by The Post show.
Alexander Soros — a prolific Democratic fundraiser in his own right who likes to boast about his relationships with world leaders on social media — scored at least a dozen meetings with White House officials in 2022, according to recently updated White House visitor logs. Soros, 37, also participated in two other confabs there in late 2021, the records show.
Video Highlights
-
-
- New Leak Scandal! What About Hillary!! - FARRELL: Unanswered Questions on Access of Air National Guardsman Accused of Posting Classified Info - FARRELL: FedGov Agencies Colluded with Big Tech on Censorship & Shaping News
-
The post NEW Hunter Biden Gun Scandal appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues FBI For Records on Hunter Biden Gun Scandal
Judicial Watch Sues for Records About Left Intimidation of Supreme Court Justices
NASA Seeks Public Input to Better Support Minorities in Its Equity Mission
Judicial Watch Sues FBI For Records on Hunter Biden Gun Scandal
Joe Biden’s FBI and Secret Service are actively trying to keep the American people from learning the facts about how a gun owned by Hunter Biden was reportedly tossed in a grocery store trash can across the street from a high school.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for FBI records about the gun (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-00920)).
Judicial Watch sued after the FBI withheld records in response to our January 30, 2023, FOIA request for:
- All records, including investigative reports, telephone logs, witness statements, memoranda, and firearms purchase documentation, related to the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of a firearm owned by Hunter Biden discarded in a Delaware trash receptacle circa October 2018.
- All records of communications of FBI officials regarding the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of the firearm.
In a separate lawsuit, we received records from the United States Secret Service that implicate the FBI in the unusual action to help Hunter Biden.
Included in those records is a response to a February 2021 email inquiry from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident. In the response, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” Schreckinger responds: “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation.”
Also in those records is a March 2021 email from New York Post reporter Lorena Mongelli, who reached out to the Secret Service Communications Office, asking for comment on text messages on Hunter Biden’s lost laptop:
It appears the text messages were sent from Hunter Biden in which he indicates that the Secret Service did in fact respond to the Oct. 23, 2018 [gun] incident. This information contradicts your previous statement relating to the incident and we would like to know whether the Secret Service would like to respond to these new findings.
A person from the Communications Office, whose name is redacted replies: “We have received your inquiry, would you be able to provide copies of these alleged text messages for reference?”
Mongelli responds:
The Daily Mail actually posted copies of the same text messages the NY Post is referencing.
This is what one text message says:
“She stole the gun out of my trunk lock box and threw it in a garbage can full to the top at Jansens [sic]. Then told me it was my problem to deal with,” Hunter wrote.
“Then when the police the FBI the secret service came on the scene she said she took it from me because she was scared I would harm myself due to o my drug and alcohol problem and our volatile relationship and that she was afraid for the kids.”
In October 2020, The Blaze reported that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by Hallie Biden, the widow of then-presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau. In 2021, Politico reported:
Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO.
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
What all this means: the FBI and Secret Service have both been implicated in a corrupt clean-up operation to protect Hunter Biden from the criminal consequences of his gun scandal. We will keep you updated as we learn more!
Judicial Watch Sues for Records about Intimidation of Supreme Court Justices by the Left
Conservative Supreme Court justices are under assault by the extremist left with the tacit support of the Biden administration. And Judicial Watch just filed suit to expose this attack on our constitutional system of government.
We filed a Maryland Public Information Act (PIA) lawsuit for records from the Montgomery County Police Department concerning unlawful protests outside the homes of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and Chief Justice Roberts(Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Montgomery County Police Department (No. C-15-CV-23-001360)).
Judicial Watch filed the suit in Montgomery County Circuit Court after the Montgomery County Police failed to respond to a June 16, 2022, Public Information Act (PIA) request for:
All records including email communications (including emails, complete email chains, and email attachments), memoranda, draft memoranda, reports, investigative reports, incident reports and other communications maintained by the Montgomery County Police Department and/or communicated with any of the below listed agencies, or employees of those agencies concerning protests, demonstrations, marches, pickets, or gatherings at the Montgomery County dwellings of Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh.
(1) The U.S. Marshals Service (domain usdoj.gov)
(2) The Federal Bureau of Investigation (domain fbi.gov)
(3) The Department of Justice (domain justice.gov)
(4) Maryland State Police (domain maryland.gov)
(5) Maryland Attorney General’s Office (domain oag.state.md.gov)
On May 2, 2022, Politico published a leaked draft of what would soon be U.S. Supreme Court’s majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (No. 19-1392), a decision that would later overturn the court’s pro-abortion decisions Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113 (1971)) and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey (505 U.S. 833 (1992)).
After the leak, leftists targeted conservative justices’ homes with protests in violation of federal law, which prohibits “interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice … with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer.” Several justices received death threats and, on June 8, 2022, a heavily armed man was arrested outside Justice Kavanaugh’s home in Bethesda and was charged with attempted murder.
Because the violations of the protest law protecting justices has yet to be enforced, Attorney General Merrick Garland was accused during a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing of politicizing the Justice Department and prosecuting conservatives more aggressively than liberals.
For more than a year, the Montgomery County Police Department has unlawfully stonewalled our request for records and communications with the Biden administration about the dangerous and illegal protests that were trying to intimidate Supreme Court justices at their homes. So now we’re going to court.
NASA Seeks Public Input to Better Support Minorities in Its Equity Mission
Now you, too, can participate in President Biden’s “equity” mission. Our space agency isn’t looking to the stars with this one but rather to “underserved communities” – our Corruption Chronicles blog has the details on this latest critical race theory-inspired Biden program:
A year after launching an extensive Equity Action Plan that gave around $2 billion to “small disadvantaged businesses,” the nation’s space agency wants to do more to advance racial equity and support underserved communities with the billions of dollars in grants and contracts it distributes annually. To complete this important mission the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is seeking input from the public on the barriers and challenges that prevent members of underserved communities from receiving funds. The agency is explicitly “seeking for the public to provide specific feedback on the procurement, grant and cooperative agreement regulations, policies, practices, and processes that deter entities from pursuing opportunities for NASA procurements, grants, and cooperative agreements,” according to a recently published Federal Registerannouncement.
NASA will review the input and use the information to evaluate, implement, modify, expand, and streamline how it doles out money to “remove systemic inequitable barriers and challenges facing members of underserved communities,” the new Request for Information (RFI) document states. NASA’s fiscal year 2023 budget is $32.35 billion and it plans to spend a big chunk, about one-third or $10.42 billion, on the type of awards it wants to give more minorities via thousands of grants and contracts. It is not enough that under its Equity Action Plan NASA already requires contractors to submit diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility plans for contracts and that at least one quote be from a minority-owned business. When the agency published the plan about a year ago it promised to assess programs, identify systemic barriers, and engage in outreach to ensure fair and impartial access and representation for all those who seek to contribute to work in space. The areas of focus include increasing contractors from underserved communities, expanding equity in the procurement process, mitigating environmental challenges in underserved communities, and expanding access to Limited English Proficient (LEP) populations within underserved communities.
As for the new public input venture, NASA provides a list of questions as guidance. The agency asks for additional Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility (DEIA) suggestions (besides its minority contract quota) to ensure grants include members of underserved communities. It also wants ideas to investigate and ensure contractors are “diligently working to include members of underserved communities” and specifics on regulations, policies and practices that have prevented minorities from receiving awards. NASA also wants to know what resources it could provide to better assist underserved communities in identifying new opportunities and suggestions to better collaborate with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) and other Minority Serving Institutions (MSI) to advance outreach and increase the number of contracts and grants awarded to the “underserved communities.”
To clarify certain terms, the space agency offers definitions in the new announcement. It describes equity as the consistent and systematic treatment of all individuals in a fair, just, and impartial manner, including individuals who belong to communities that often have been denied such treatment, such as Black, Latino, Indigenous, Native American, other persons of color and LGBTQI+ persons. Underserved communities are defined as populations and geographic communities that have been systematically denied the opportunity to participate fully in aspects of economic, social, and civic life. Under NASA’s “journey towards equity” a key agency goal is to overcome visible and invisible systemic barriers that hinder equitable, inclusive access to government programs, according to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson. The former astronaut and Democratic Florida senator claims his agency’s new objective “seeks to further identify and remove the barriers that limit opportunity in historically underserved and underrepresented communities and anchor equity as a core component in every NASA mission to inspire a new, more inclusive generation.”
Until next week …
The post Hunter Gun Scandal Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News:
The Montgomery County Police Department in Maryland has not responded to a standard and legal Public Information Act (PIA) request for records and communications about the ongoing protests outside the homes of some Supreme Court justices. As a result, Judicial Watch has filed a PIA lawsuit against the police department in the Montgomery Circuit Court for those records.
“For more than a year, the Montgomery County Police Department has unlawfully stonewalled Judicial Watch’s request for records and communications with the Biden administration about the dangerous and illegal protests that were trying to intimidate Supreme Court justices at their homes,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch Sues MD Police for Records on Illegal Protests Outside SCOTUS Justices Homes appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Maryland Public Information Act (PIA) lawsuit for records from the Montgomery County Police Department concerning unlawful protests outside the homes of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh and Chief Justice Roberts (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Montgomery County Police Department (No. C-15-CV-23-001360)).
Judicial Watch filed suit in Montgomery County Circuit Court after the Montgomery County Police failed to respond to a June 16, 2022, Public Information Act (PIA) request for:
All records including email communications (including emails, complete email chains, and email attachments), memoranda, draft memoranda, reports, investigative reports, incident reports and other communications maintained by the Montgomery County Police Department and/or communicated with any of the below listed agencies, or employees of those agencies concerning protests, demonstrations, marches, pickets, or gatherings at the Montgomery County dwellings of Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh.
(1) The U.S. Marshals Service (domain usdoj.gov)
(2) The Federal Bureau of Investigation (domain fbi.gov)
(3) The Department of Justice (domain justice.gov)
(4) Maryland State Police (domain maryland.gov)
(5) Maryland Attorney General’s Office (domain oag.state.md.gov)
On May 2, 2022, Politico published a leaked draft what would soon be U.S. Supreme Court’s majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (No. 19-1392), a decision that would later overturn the court’s pro-abortion decisions Roe v. Wade (410 U.S. 113 (1971)) and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey (505 U.S. 833 (1992)).
Since the leak of the Dobbs draft opinion, leftists targeted conservative justices’ homes with protests in violation of federal law, which prohibits “interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice … with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer.” Several justices received death threats and, on June 8, 2022, a heavily armed man was arrested outside Justice Kavanaugh’s home in Bethesda, and was charged with attempted murder.
Because the violations of the protest law protecting justices has yet to be enforced, Attorney General Merrick Garland was accused during a recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing of politicizing the Justice Department and prosecuting conservatives more aggressively than liberals.
“For more than a year, the Montgomery County Police Department has unlawfully stonewalled Judicial Watch’s request for records and communications with the Biden administration about the dangerous and illegal protests that were trying to intimidate Supreme Court justices at their homes,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Montgomery County Police for Records about Public Disturbances Outside Homes of Supreme Court Justices after Leak of Draft Dobbs Opinion appeared first on Judicial Watch.
A year after launching an extensive Equity Action Plan that gave around $2 billion to “small disadvantaged businesses,” the nation’s space agency wants to do more to advance racial equity and support underserved communities with the billions of dollars in grants and contracts it distributes annually. To complete this important mission the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is seeking input from the public on the barriers and challenges that prevent members of underserved communities from receiving funds. The agency is explicitly “seeking for the public to provide specific feedback on the procurement, grant and cooperative agreement regulations, policies, practices, and processes that deter entities from pursuing opportunities for NASA procurements, grants, and cooperative agreements,” according to a recently published Federal Register announcement.
NASA will review the input and use the information to evaluate, implement, modify, expand, and streamline how it doles out money to “remove systemic inequitable barriers and challenges facing members of underserved communities,” the new Request for Information (RFI) document states. NASA’s fiscal year 2023 budget is $32.35 billion and it plans to spend a big chunk, about one-third or $10.42 billion, on the type of awards it wants to give more minorities via thousands of grants and contracts. It is not enough that under its Equity Action Plan NASA already requires contractors to submit diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility plans for contracts and that at least one quote be from a minority-owned business. When the agency published the plan about a year ago it promised to assess programs, identify systemic barriers, and engage in outreach to ensure fair and impartial access and representation for all those who seek to contribute to work in space. The areas of focus include increasing contractors from underserved communities, expanding equity in the procurement process, mitigating environmental challenges in underserved communities, and expanding access to Limited English Proficient (LEP) populations within underserved communities.
As for the new public input venture, NASA provides a list of questions as guidance. The agency asks for additional Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility (DEIA) suggestions (besides its minority contract quota) to ensure grants include members of underserved communities. It also wants ideas to investigate and ensure contractors are “diligently working to include members of underserved communities” and specifics on regulations, policies and practices that have prevented minorities from receiving awards. NASA also wants to know what resources it could provide to better assist underserved communities in identifying new opportunities and suggestions to better collaborate with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) and other Minority Serving Institutions (MSI) to advance outreach and increase the number of contracts and grants awarded to the “underserved communities.”
To clarify certain terms, the space agency offers definitions in the new announcement. It describes equity as the consistent and systematic treatment of all individuals in a fair, just, and impartial manner, including individuals who belong to communities that often have been denied such treatment, such as Black, Latino, Indigenous, Native American, other persons of color and LGBTQI+ persons. Underserved communities are defined as populations and geographic communities that have been systematically denied the opportunity to participate fully in aspects of economic, social, and civic life. Under NASA’s “journey towards equity” a key agency goal is to overcome visible and invisible systemic barriers that hinder equitable, inclusive access to government programs, according to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson. The former astronaut and Democratic Florida senator claims his agency’s new objective “seeks to further identify and remove the barriers that limit opportunity in historically underserved and underrepresented communities and anchor equity as a core component in every NASA mission to inspire a new, more inclusive generation.”
The post NASA Seeks Public Input to Better Support Minorities Year after Launching Equity Mission appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News:
A government watchdog organization, Judicial Watch, recently filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the FBI, seeking records about a gun owned by Hunter Biden that reportedly was thrown into a trash dumpster opposite a high school in Delaware in October 2018.
“The FBI and Secret Service have both been implicated in a corrupt clean-up operation to protect Hunter Biden from the criminal consequences of his gun scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in an April 11 press release.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch Sues FBI for Records on Hunter Biden Gun Scandal appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller:
Government watchdog Judicial Watch sued the Department Homeland Security (DHS) Wednesday for allegedly failing to disclose documents related to its censorship activities.
The lawsuit stems from an unanswered December 2022 FOIA request for communications records between Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) officials and social media platforms. The request sought information relating to activities revealed in the Twitter files, such as the “industry meetings” the FBI, DHS and other government agencies held with tech companies.
“There is an unholy conspiracy in the Biden administration to censor Americans in collusion with Big Tech,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.
“This new Judicial Watch lawsuit shows the censorship abuse is furthered by unlawful secrecy and cover-ups.”
Judicial Watch’s FOIA requests communications from CISA Director Jen Easterly, Former Director Christopher Krebs, Former Senior Cybersecurity Advisor Matt Masterson, and Senior Cybersecurity Advisor Brian Scully.
It’s not the first lawsuit Judicial Watch has filed against the DHS. They sued in November and February for records relating to the Election Integrity Partnership, which worked with CISA and helped censor information online during the 2020 election.
The group has previously filed similar FOIA lawsuits against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Read more here…
The post Biden DHS Sued For Allegedly Stonewalling Release Of Censorship Docs appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From New York Post:
A son of billionaire George Soros has quietly become a de-facto White House “ambassador,” making at least 14 visits there on behalf of the far-left kingmaker since President Joe Biden took office, records reviewed by The Post show.
Alexander Soros — a prolific Democratic fundraiser in his own right who likes to boast about his relationships with world leaders on social media — scored at least a dozen meetings with White House officials in 2022, according to recently updated White House visitor logs. Soros, 37, also participated in two other confabs there in late 2021, the records show.
Scoring 14 White House meetings in a little over a year suggests the younger Soros has “an outsize policy influence in the Biden administration” rivaling the easy access only a select few as American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten has, said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative legal watchdog group Judicial Watch.
George Soros is pursuing an “aggressive environmental agenda,” open-border initiatives, and other far-left causes dear to him, Fitton added.
Read more here…
The post Son of George Soros scoring easy White House access, records show appeared first on Judicial Watch.
As part of the Biden administration’s push for governmentwide racial equity, a new research center dedicated to supporting and investigating the needs of low-income Hispanics will be launched with a $1.5 million grant from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The goal is to develop promising approaches to promote social and economic well-being among poor Hispanics and to assess current government policies and practices that contribute to disparities in access to public services, a recently published grant announcement states.
The new center will bring together a diverse, interdisciplinary team of academic, organizational and community-based partners, according to the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), the HHS division doling out the money. Under Biden’s monstrous COVID-19 stimulus measure ACF received $47.5 billion in supplemental funding to help children and families impacted by the pandemic, which the agency asserts exacerbated historic racial injustices. ACF is also dedicated to addressing the needs of refugees and migrants. Its new center will provide leadership with culturally competent research that can inform policies concerning poor Hispanic families and educate regarding the needs and experiences of the diverse Hispanic populations throughout the nation.
The grant document offers more details: “Through a combination of research, research capacity building, and communication activities, this Center will address a range of relevant issues including, but not limited to: a) definition and measurement of significant characteristics and experiences of Hispanic individuals, families, and communities; b) identification of barriers and facilitators of service utilization by Hispanic populations; c) examination of strategies to promote the social and economic well-being of Hispanic children and families and to strengthen Hispanic families; d) evaluation of promising approaches to serving Hispanic populations.” It continues to say that the new facility will develop data and resources to execute a comprehensive communication plan that aims to improve understanding of Hispanic populations to inform policy development and programmatic responses. Childcare and early education as well as services to support self-sufficiency and economic mobility for poor Hispanic families will receive a broad focus.
Another HHS offshoot called Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation (OPRE) already supports a National Research Center on Hispanic Children & Families to better serve low-income Hispanics that receive taxpayer-funded benefits from ACF. That government conglomerate investigates the needs of poor Hispanics and focuses on poverty reduction and economic self-sufficiency, fatherhood, family structure, and family dynamics as well as early care and education. Publicly funded research materials available on the center’s website include “Understanding and Measuring Latino Racial and Ethnic Identity,” the strengths and resilience of “Latinx Families,” the costly work adjustments made by “Latino and Black Households” to accommodate childcare disruptions during the pandemic, and the Mexican heritage of most Hispanic children in the U.S. One report claims that the Biden administration’s federal stimulus “kept more than 2 million Latino and Black children out of poverty” during the pandemic. Yet another body of research conducted by the Hispanic center says that “Latino child poverty rose during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially among children in immigrant families.”
With all this valuable information already available at a government agency, American taxpayers may wonder why the administration is spending $1.5 million to launch a similar center that conducts the same type of research. Only government bureaucrats can provide the answer, but it appears that the new center will focus on identifying policies that contribute to disparities in access to services and the reduction of those disparities. One thing seems certain, the investment is part of the president’s broad effort to advance racial equity and support for underserved populations through taxpayer-funded programs, a governmentwide initiative he launched on his first day in office.
The post HHS Launches $1.5 Million Research Center to Investigate Needs of Poor Hispanics appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for FBI records about the gun owned by Hunter Biden that reportedly was thrown in a trash can behind a Delaware grocery store (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-00920)).
Judicial Watch filed suit after the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) withheld records in response to a January 30, 2023, FOIA request for:
- All records, including investigative reports, telephone logs, witness statements, memoranda, and firearms purchase documentation, related to the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of a firearm owned by Hunter Biden discarded in a Delaware trash receptacle circa October 2018.
- All records of communications of FBI officials regarding the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of the firearm.
In a separate lawsuit, Judicial Watch received records from the United States Secret Service that implicate the FBI in the unusual action to help Hunter Biden.
Included in those records is a response to a February 2021 email inquiry from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” Schreckinger responds: “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation.”
Also in those records is a March 2021 email from New York Post reporter Lorena Mongelli, who reached out to the Secret Service Communications Office, asking for comment on text messages on Hunter Biden’s lost laptop:
It appears the text messages were sent from Hunter Biden in which he indicates that the Secret Service did in fact respond to the Oct. 23, 2018 [gun] incident. This information contradicts your previous statement relating to the incident and we would like to know whether the Secret Service would like to respond to these new findings.
A person from the Communications Office, whose name is redacted replies: “We have received your inquiry, would you be able to provide copies of these alleged text messages for reference?”
Mongelli responds:
The Daily Mail actually posted copies of the same text messages the NY Post is referencing. This is what one text message says:
“She stole the gun out of my trunk lock box and threw it in a garbage can full to the top at Jansens [sic]. Then told me it was my problem to deal with,” Hunter wrote.
“Then when the police the FBI the secret service came on the scene she said she took it from me because she was scared I would harm myself due to o my drug and alcohol problem and our volatile relationship and that she was afraid for the kids.”
In October 2020, The Blaze reported that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by Hallie Biden, the widow of then-presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau. In 2021, Politico reported:
Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO.
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
“The FBI and Secret Service have both been implicated in a corrupt clean-up operation to protect Hunter Biden from the criminal consequences of his gun scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The post Judicial Watch Sues FBI For Records on Hunter Biden Gun Scandal appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
What’s Wrong with ERIC? Judicial Watch Study Details Left-Leaning Roots, Data Security Concerns, Possible Violations of Federal Law at the Electronic Registration Information Center
Republican-leaning states are bailing out of the reputedly non-partisan Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) and the media are in an uproar. National Public Radio declares that ERIC is a victim of a “far right…disinformation campaign.” The New York Times warns that ERIC is under attack from “election deniers.” The very “backbone of American elections is being upended,” says Politico.
Judicial Watch Sues Secret Service for Records on Aggression and Biting by President Biden’s Dog
The Secret Service acknowledged receipt of the request and wrote in a January 20. 2023, letter that it had found responsive records and was processing them. At the time of the complaint, however, it had not produced any of the records.
DHS Lets Trans Immigrants Pick, Change Gender on Official Forms to Avert Harassment
In the Biden administration’s latest move to accommodate the transgender population, the Homeland Security agency that oversees lawful immigration will accept the gender selection of foreign nationals on official forms even if it does not match supporting documentation. Additionally, foreigners requesting immigration benefits do not need to submit proof of gender identity when submitting a request to change genders.
Judicial Watch Sues Homeland Security for Records on Censorship Meetings with Big Tech
In testimony before the “House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government” Taibbi reported extensive collusion between Big Tech and government, at all levels – including the Biden White House, the Democratic National Committee, and federal, state and local law enforcement – all meant to stifle free speech and withhold information from the American people.
In The News
Obama State Department Emails Show Ukraine Prosecutor General Was Pitched ‘High-Level’ Access to Hillary Clinton’s Presidential Campaign
Judicial Watch
“This smoking gun email ties Hunter Biden’s Burisma’s lobbying operation to an influence-peddling operation involving the Clinton campaign during the 2016 election,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This further confirms the Obama-Biden-Deep State targeting of President Trump was to cover-up and distract from their own corruption.”
Judicial Watch Sues State Department for Records on Firing of Biden-Ukraine Prosecutor
Judicial Watch
In a widely distributed video, Joe Biden confirmed that he successfully pressured, under threat of withholding $1 billion in U.S. government aid, the Ukrainian government to fire Shokin, who had allegedly launched an investigation into Burisma, which had purportedly paid Biden’s son Hunter $50,000 a month.
Court rules in favor of releasing info on funding, Qatar’s influence over Texas A&M campus
Just the News
A Texas county court has ruled in favor of releasing information about Qatar’s potential influence over Texas A&M University through funding and by hosting one of the school’s campuses in the Gulf State.
The decision from Travis County Judge Amy Clark Meachum last week came after the non-profit watchdog Judicial Watch filed a petition on behalf of the antisemitism advocacy group Zachor Legal Institute.
Video Highlights
-
-
- FITTON: Indictment of Trump is Election Interference! - Left is Trying to Jail Trump Because He is Running for President! - ELECTON INTERFERENCE: NY Dem Politicians Plan to JAIL TRUMP!
-
The post New: Election Controversy! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News:
A government watchdog group, Judicial Watch, is suing the Justice Department and State Department for extradition records of illegal alien Saul Chavez, who ran over and killed a U.S. citizen in 2011 but was then released from the Cook County Sheriff’s Office and fled to Mexico. Chavez was extradited to the U.S. in December 2022.
“Denny McCann was killed by an illegal alien with a prior felony – and then that criminal was released and fled to Mexico as a result of Chicago’s lawless and deadly sanctuary policies,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a press release.
“And to make matters worse, the Biden administration is unlawfully hiding records about why it took over a decade to extradite from Mexico this murderous criminal,” Fitton added.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch Sues Biden Administration for Records of Illegal Alien Who Ran Over and Killed U.S. Citizen appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News:
On Twitter, critics of the Vice President slammed for getting this “loud” and several mocked her for defending the intimidating Tennessee capitol protests, when Democrats have linked conservative calls to protest to incitement of violence.
Echoing Democratic Party rhetoric about Republicans who encourage protest, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton asked, “Incitement to insurrection?”
Read more here…
The post Kamala Harris hammered for ‘loud’ defense of expelled Tennessee Democrats: ‘What’s wrong with this lady?’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
A Rigged Prosecution to Rig an Election
Judicial Watch Sues Biden Agency for Records on Censorship Meetings with Big Tech
Clean Elections Update: Judicial Watch Exposes Controversial ERIC
Judicial Watch Sues for Records on Biting by President Biden’s Dog
Who Is Alvin Bragg?
Biden Admin Lets Trans Immigrants Pick, Change Gender on Official Forms to Avert Harassment
Happy Easter!
A Rigged Prosecution to Rig an Election
What a sad day for America. And what a blow to the rule of law and our republican form of government. President Trump and the American people were abused and victimized by New York Democrat politician Alvin Bragg, who abused his office to try to jail a man he must know to be innocent. This is an indictment about nothing based on non-crimes and politics. It is a rigged prosecution to rig an election. The courts must end this malicious prosecution before the nation is irreparably damaged. In the meantime, Congress must immediately investigate Bragg’s election interference and his political attack on Trump’s civil rights. Judicial Watch has already launched a series of Freedom of Information Act inquiries into this unprecedented attack on the American way.
Judicial Watch Sues Biden Agency for Records on Censorship Meetings with Big Tech
Judicial Watch is digging ever deeper into the unprecedented effort by the Deep State to censor what Americans are reading and writing on social media – a shocking shredding of the First Amendment.
We just filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records showing cooperation between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and social media platforms to censor and suppress free speech (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:23-cv-00552)).
We sued after the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (a component of DHS) failed to respond to a December 2022 request for:
Records and communications of Jen Easterly, Director, CISA; Christopher Krebs, Former Director, CISA; Matt Masterson, Former CISA Senior Cybersecurity Advisor; and Brian Scully, CISA Senior Cybersecurity Advisor, regarding:
- CISA facilitated or hosted USG-industry meetings with Meta (@meta.com); Facebook (@facebook.com); Twitter (@twitter.com); Wikimedia Foundation (@wikimedia.org); Pinterest (@pinterest.com); LinkedIn(@linkedin.com); concerning election security;
- Election Infrastructure Subsector Government Coordinating Council Meetings;
- Election Infrastructure Subsector Government Coordinating Council Joint MDM Working Group Meetings; and
- Preparatory meetings with any employees of the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Office of the Director of National Intelligence; National Security Agency; U.S. Secret Service; concerning any of the aforementioned USG-industry meetings and/or Coordinating Council Meetings.
On December 2, 2022, journalist Matt Taibbi used the social media platform Twitter to expose the “Twitter Files,” which include multiple mentions of the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency’s censorship activities.
A December 16 tweet thread includes:
- Reports also came from different agencies. Here, an employee recommends “bouncing” content based on evidence from “DHS etc”
A supplemental tweet thread on December 18 reports:
- In July of 2020, San Francisco FBI agent Elvis Chan tells Twitter executive Yoel Roth to expect written questions from the Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF), the inter-agency group that deals with cyber threats.
- The questionnaire authors seem displeased with Twitter for implying, in a July 20th “DHS/ODNI/FBI/Industry briefing,” that “you indicated you had not observed much recent activity from official propaganda actors on your platform.”
- He then sent another note internally, saying the premise of the questions was “flawed,” because “we’ve been clear that official state propaganda is definitely a thing on Twitter.” Note the italics for emphasis.
A March 9 tweet thread includes:
- But Twitter was more like a partner to government. With other tech firms it held a regular “industry meeting” with FBI and DHS, and developed a formal system for receiving thousands of content reports from every corner of government: HHS, Treasury, NSA, even local police
- Emails from the FBI, DHS and other agencies often came with spreadsheets of hundreds or thousands of account names for review. Often, these would be deleted soon after.
- The same agencies (FBI, DHS/CISA, GEC) invite the same “experts” (Thomas Rid, Alex Stamos), funded by the same foundations (Newmark, Omidyar, Knight) trailed by the same reporters (Margaret Sullivan, Molly McKew, Brandy Zadrozny) seemingly to every conference, every panel.
Other “Twitter files” released by Elon Musk show that FBI pressure on “Russian disinformation” led to censorship:
San Francisco FBI agent Elvis Chan “[sent] 10 documents to Twitter’s then-Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth, through Teleporter, a one-way communications channel from the FBI to Twitter,” the evening before the release of the Post story.
The “Twitter files” show the FBI pushed Twitter to also censor countless Twitter users who tweeted concerns (and jokes) about election integrity just before the 2020 election.
In testimony before the “House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government” Taibbi reported extensive collusion between Big Tech and government, at all levels – including the Biden White House, the Democratic National Committee, and federal, state and local law enforcement – all meant to stifle free speech and withhold information from the American people.
In May 2022, the States of Missouri and Louisiana sued President Biden and several federal employees in their official capacities for violation of the First Amendment.
In one of the depositions in the case, Assistant Special Agent in Charge of the Cyber Branch for San Francisco Division of the FBI, Elvis Chan, testified he and fellow officials had weekly meetings with major social media companies to warn against Russian disinformation attempts ahead of the 2020 election. The lawsuit also produced Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency meeting minutes that discuss its attempts to manage information being posted by social media contributors.
The Twitter Files also mention a report titled The Long Fuse: Misinformation and the 2020 Election, which was prepared by the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), a left-leaning collective of organizations that worked with the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency on its censorship of online information during the 2020 election.
There is an unholy conspiracy in the Biden administration to censor Americans in collusion with Big Tech. This new Judicial Watch lawsuit shows the censorship abuse is furthered by unlawful secrecy and cover-ups.
As you know, we are heavily involved in countering government and Big Tech censorship. Buried within the Twitter Files are references and descriptions of meetings and communications we have been investigating through FOIA requests and lawsuits.
For example, we recently sued the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for records and communications maintained by its leadership, including Chairman Lina Khan, about Twitter and its owner Elon Musk. FTC document-demands to Twitter obtained by the House Judiciary Committee show onerous requests for all documents about Elon Musk and documents concerning Twitter’s work with journalists to disclose to the public the details about the government’s and Twitter’s censorship of American citizens. A House report titled “The Weaponization of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC): An Agency’s Overreach to Harass Elon Musk’s Twitter” details:
Twitter allowed … journalists, as part of their reporting on government censorship by proxy, to review internal communications and correspondence between Twitter employees and federal agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
[T]he FTC’s first demand in its letter sent after the initial installment of the Twitter Files did not concern what private user information may have been at risk. Instead, the FTC demanded that Twitter “[i]dentify all journalists and other members of the media to whom” Twitter has granted access to since Musk bought the company. The FTC even named some of the specific journalists – “Bari Weiss, Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger, [and] Abigail Shrier” – with whom Twitter has engaged on the Twitter Files. The FTC also demanded to know any “other members of the media to whom You have granted any type of access to the Company’s internal communications” for any reason whatsoever.
In February, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against HHS for records on pressuring Big Tech to censor “COVID misinformation,” specifically with regard to any communications made between the Surgeon General’s communications director and social media companies — Twitter, Facebook, etc. — regarding COVID-19 vaccines. The Twitter Filesreveal how the pharmaceutical industry lobbied social media over COVID vaccine content.
Also in February, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership that could detail coordinated censorship activities. One section of the Twitter Files calls the FBI “Twitter’s Subsidiary,” illustrated by an episode where Twitter, one day just prior to the 2020 election, received so many moderation (censorship) requests from the FBI that a Twitter executive congratulated staffers at the end for completing the “monumental undertaking.”
In January 2023, not long after the Twitter Files were made public, we sued the DOJ for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections and the Hunter Biden laptop story. Announcing the lawsuit, I said, “The FBI was literally paying Twitter to censor Americans just before the 2020 election … they are now covering up their misconduct.”
In November 2022, we sued the DHS for all records of communications between CISA and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which reportedly was active during the 2022 midterm elections. Among the news outlets flagged by EIP were websites for Just the News, New York Post, Fox News, Washington Examiner, The Washington Times, The Epoch Times and Breitbart. A week later, in a Senate floor speech, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) described revelations from theTwitter Files about Twitter and 2020 election interference, and other instances of Biden administration collusion with social media firms to censor and withhold information from the American people.
In September 2022, we sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for censoring a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In April 2021, we published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In May 2021, we revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
And in July 2021, we uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that revealed thatFacebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
Clean Elections Update: Judicial Watch Exposes Controversial ERIC
Judicial Watch has been looking into the controversial Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC). Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, lays out what we know in our Investigative Bulletin.
Republican-leaning states are bailing out of the reputedly non-partisan Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC), and the media are in an uproar. National Public Radio declares that ERIC is a victim of a “far right … disinformation campaign.” The New York Times warns that ERIC is under attack from “election deniers.” The very “backbone of American elections is being upended,” says Politico.
Protesting “recent misinformation,” ERIC Executive Director Shane Hamlin posted an “open letter” in March saying that ERIC “is a non-profit membership organization created by state election officials to help improve the accuracy of state voter rolls and register more eligible Americans to vote.”
Until recently, ERIC was a 32-state organization with two distinct missions: clean up dirty voter rolls and increase voter registration. But over the past year, seven states have pulled out—Alabama, Louisiana, Florida, West Virginia, Missouri, Ohio, and Iowa—citing concerns over data security and the left-wing orientation of the organization. Florida withdrew in March, saying the group had rejected proposals that “would have eliminated concerns about ERIC’s potential partisan leanings, and made the information shared with ERIC more secure.” Other “red states might soon head for the exits,” warned the Washington Post, “causing the system to collapse—and making ballot fraud harder to detect next year.”
Here at Judicial Watch, we know whereof we speak when it comes to ballot fraud, voter registration, and cleaning up dirty voter rolls. Action by the Judicial Watch election integrity team has resulted in important reforms and the removal of over two million inactive voters from voting rolls, including more than 1.2 million in Los Angeles County, 550,000 in New York City, and 240,000 in Pennsylvania. You can read more about that here.
We took a close look at ERIC and found plenty of reasons for concern.
A new Judicial Watch white paper notes that on voter roll cleanups, ERIC does not actually require that member states “remove ineligible voters from their registration rolls.” States are only required to “initiate contact” with those voters. “ERIC claims to have identified 2,498,688 registered voters who relocated across state lines, 203,210 duplicate registrations, and 65,437 deceased registered voters,” the Judicial Watch study notes. But according to an independent analysis cited in the Judicial Watch white paper, “states that do not participate in ERIC had a higher rate of identifying and removing from voter registration rolls individuals who relocated out of a jurisdiction than ERIC member states.” It’s worth noting as well that powerhouse states California and New York—hardly bastions of right-wing reaction—have never been members of ERIC.
The leadership behind ERIC also is cause for concern. The Judicial Watch white paper notes that ERIC was founded by left-leaning attorney David Becker with $157,000 in grants from the George Soros-funded Pew Charitable Trusts. Soros’s Open Society Institute lists Pew as a “donor partner.” Becker went on to found CEIR, the Center for Election Innovation and Research, but remained active with ERIC as a non-voting board member. Last month, as controversy mounted, Becker announced he would not seek reelection to ERIC’s board.
Concerns over bias come into sharper focus when considering ERIC’s other chief mission, voter registration—long a major preoccupation of the Left. “Since its inception,” reports the Judicial Watch white paper, “ERIC has been far more successful at identifying unregistered voters than duplicate or invalid registrations. The organization reports identifying more than 60 million unregistered voters since 2012.”
“CEIR works closely with ERIC in managing state voter rolls,” notes the Judicial Watch report. In September 2020, CEIR received a $70 million grant from the Zuckerberg philanthropies for “voter education programs.” Much of that money was funneled to Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, New York, and Arizona for voter mobilization activities—all (except New York) battleground states in the 2020 presidential campaign.
Research by Judicial Watch also raises concerns about data-sharing between ERIC and Becker’s Center for Election Innovation. “The large amount of sensitive data provided to ERIC by its member states and the role of the organization in maintaining voter rolls may violate a number of federal statutes,” the Judicial Watch study notes. While the Help America Vote Act secures electronic voter registration, there is “no provision in the statute that authorizes any state to outsource these obligations to a third-party entity.” The outsourcing by the states of voter registration list maintenance to ERIC may also violate the National Voter Registration Act, which protects from disclosure the identities of individuals who decline to register to vote. And the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act specifically shields from disclosure the kind of data provided to ERIC by member states to conduct list maintenance.
What’s wrong with ERIC? Add up the evidence: left-wing sponsors and affiliations, ineffective voter roll cleanup, robust voter registration efforts in swing states, sketchy data sharing practices—a “syndicate founded by leftists to manage voter registration rolls”— Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton calls it—disingenuous about its true motives and richly deserving of its coming collapse.
Judicial Watch Sues for Records on Biting by President Biden’s Dog
After we received a tip, we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for records of any incidents of aggression or biting by President Biden’s dog Commander.
We filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the U.S. Secret Service, a component of Homeland Security, failed to respond adequately to a December 28, 2022, FOIA request (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:23-cv-00612))] for:
Any records related to incidents of aggression and bites involving the Biden family dog, “Commander,” including communications between Secret Service officials in the Uniformed and Non-Uniformed Divisions involved in White House operations and the Presidential Protection Division.
The Secret Service acknowledged receipt of the request and wrote in a January 20. 2023, letter that it had found responsive records and was processing them. At the time of the complaint, however, it had not produced any of the records.
Acquired in December 2021, Commander, a pure-bred German shepherd, replaced another German shepherd, Major, which left the White House following a series of attacks on Secret Service and White House staff.
In April 2022 we released records detailing multiple attacks and damages to United States Secret Service (USSS) members by Major at both the White House and Biden’s lake home in Wilmington, DE. The documents reveal that a member of USSS who was attacked by the dog was displeased that White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki misled the press about the incident.
In August 2021, we uncovered records from the Secret Service revealing Biden’s dog Major was responsible for many more biting incidents than the Biden White House had publicly acknowledged.
One email noted that “at the current rate an Agent or Officer has been bitten every day this week (3/1-3/8) causing damage to attire or bruising/punctures to the skin.”
We already caught the Biden White House lying about their family dog attacking and injuring Secret Service and White House employees. Now it seems their new dog is also out of control and the Secret Service is hiding records about the issue.
Who Is Alvin Bragg?
Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, examines the career of Alvin Bragg, the New York district attorney who indicted Donald Trump. Here is his Investigative Bulletin report.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg last week rocketed to global celebrity with his indictment of former president Donald Trump on charges related to a 2016 hush money payment. Trump’s lawyers immediately fired back. “He did not commit any crime,” the attorneys said. “We will vigorously fight this political prosecution in court.”
And so the stage is set for what will certainly be one of the biggest legal battles of 2023 and what legions of pundits are calling a historic case—the first indictment of a former president on criminal charges. Time will tell if the Trump case will end with a bang or slink off with a whimper—the actual charges have yet to be unsealed and the guesswork by the punditocracy indicates there might be slim jurisdictional and evidentiary grounds for the case, leading a judge to throw it out—but Alvin Bragg is not unprepared to do battle.
Bragg has been keeping a low profile since news emerged of the Trump indictment, cultivating a public image of a low-key, nose-to-the-grindstone prosecutor. His record paints another story. A Heritage Foundation study labeled him a “rogue prosecutor” with “dangerous” policies. His anti-Trump bias is extreme. He has proudly noted that “I’ve sued Trump more than a hundred times,” adding “I can’t change that fact, nor would I. That was important work.”
A son of Harlem and graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, Bragg has deep roots in New York progressive politics and plenty of experience in Trump-related prosecutions. With early tours of duty at the Office of Attorney General of the State of New York, the New York City Council as chief of litigation, and the Southern District of New York as a federal prosecutor, Bragg in 2017 was appointed Chief Deputy Attorney General of New York. From there, he helped lead a lawsuit against the Trump Foundation that resulted in its closure and a $2 million fine.
Bragg ran for New York County DA in 2021 in a crowded primary field. He received a significant boost from George Soros and the political arm of Color of Change, an activist group supporting the progressive prosecutor movement. In May 2021, Color of Change endorsed Bragg and declared it would spend $1 million to support him—a game changer in the primary. A few days later, in an unmistakable signal of support, Soros donated $1 million to Color of Change.
Bragg came out on top in the primary and wiped out his Republican opponent in overwhelmingly liberal Manhattan. He was sworn in on January 1, 2022. In a nod to his progressive prosecutor constituency, Bragg appointed Meg Reiss to the powerful position of chief assistant district attorney, the number two post at the DA’s office. Reiss had held the title “Chief of Social Justice” in her previous job at the Brooklyn DA’s office.
Bragg and Reiss immediately ran into trouble. Bragg’s “Day One” memo to staff, quickly leaked to the press, was straight from the progressive prosecutor playbook. Bragg announced that he would seek to reduce pre-trial incarceration and not prosecute (or seek lower-level charges for) such crimes as fare evasion, resisting arrest, burglary, store robbery, prostitution, and marijuana. The memo was met with a storm of protest, including from some of his Democratic Party allies. By the end of the month, Bragg backtracked, dropping some of the policies aimed at violent crime but keeping parts of the Day One framework in place.
As Manhattan DA, Bragg’s pursuit of Trump continued, but not without setbacks. In February 2022, two high-level prosecutors in the DA’s office, brought in by Bragg’s predecessor Cyrus Vance Jr. specifically to investigate Trump-related matters, abruptly resigned. According to news reports, the prosecutors—Mark Pomerantz and Carey Dunne—were focused on a possible prosecution of Trump related to inflated assets, real-estate evaluations, and bank loans. Bragg was said to have grown uneasy with the case. In his letter of resignation, Pomerantz criticized Bragg for his “decision not to go forward with the grand jury presentation and not to seek criminal charges at the present time.”
Bragg persisted on other fronts, and in August he secured the conviction of the Trump Organization’s chief financial officer, Allan Weisselberg, on charges of tax fraud and falsifying business records.
In December, Bragg convicted the Trump Organization on charges related to off-the-books pay to Weisselberg and others. The charges included tax fraud and falsifying business records—a hint of what might be coming in the hush money prosecution. Trump himself was not charged in the case. A lawyer for the Trump Organization said it will “certainly” appeal the conviction.
Bragg is also in pursuit of Trump ally Steve Bannon. In September, Bragg charged Bannon with fraud and money laundering in a scheme centered around fundraising to build a wall on the southern border. A trial date has been set for November. Bannon pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The view from here: Bragg is no kamikaze. The Pomerantz-Dunne episode and the Day One Memo debacle show a willingness to cut losses when the going goes bad. But it’s also clear that the DA sees the relentless pursuit of Trump to be a winner with the only political constituency that matters to him: liberal Manhattan voters. He’ll play the case aggressively to the end, convinced it is a winner for him on his home turf, no matter what the outcome.
Biden Admin Lets Trans Immigrants Pick, Change Gender on Official Forms to Avert Harassment
Remember the bureaucracy created after 9/11 to protect us from terrorist attacks? Under the Biden administration it has gone fully woke. Our Corruption Chronicles blog provides the latest example.
In the Biden administration’s latest move to accommodate the transgender population, the Homeland Security agency that oversees lawful immigration will accept the gender selection of foreign nationals on official forms even if it does not match supporting documentation. Additionally, foreigners requesting immigration benefits do not need to submit proof of gender identity when submitting a request to change genders. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) explains in a recent policy change that “benefit requestors may self-select their gender marker (in an initial filing or a subsequent change to a prior gender selection), without the need to provide supporting documentation or to match the gender listed on their identity documents.” And that the new policy “removes the prior requirement that benefit requestors submit proof of their gender identity to change gender markers or to update their selected gender marker to match other supporting documentation.”
Since the agency’s inception over a century ago, foreign nationals seeking to enter the country legally have, among other things, been required to provide a gender marker on immigration forms and support their gender identity with documentation from their birth country. More recently, inspired by the madness surrounding transgender rights, USCIS allowed legal immigrants to change their gender marker with “documentation about their gender identity to support the requested change.” Under the new policy no documentation is required, and immigrants can change their gender at will. “Removing evidentiary requirements regarding gender markers better ensures that all secure identity documents and biographic data are accurate, particularly for noncitizens who were unable to accurately state their gender in their initial applications or who may otherwise need an update to their gender marker,” USCIS writes in the new policy document, adding that “it also removes the burden imposed by requiring that requestors have to publicly discuss or provide documentation regarding the gender listed on their identity documents in order to obtain a benefit or service.”
The administration asserts that it changed a longtime federal policy to reduce barriers to travel, employment, services, and benefits for transgender immigrants. For those questioning how exactly the so-called “barriers” are being curtailed, USCIS explains that the revamped rule eliminates delays and prevents “discrimination and harassment due to inconsistent identity documents.” The agency did not reach the decision lightly and reveals that the policy change was made “in response to stakeholder feedback as well as recent changes made by a number of state and federal agencies.” Indeed, the new USCIS policy is part of a fierce governmentwide effort launched by the Biden administration to provide special accommodations to support those who identify as transgender, even though they make up less than one percent of the American population.
This includes the U.S. Census Bureau spending $10 million to research how to best add questions about sexual orientation and gender identity on surveys. The State Department is allowing all American citizens to select an X as their gender marker on U.S. passport applications. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the first federal agency to fly a transgender pride flag above its headquarters, will soon reveal its plan to “best serve LGBTQI+ Americans” based on a comprehensive study on “Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation” conducted by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the nation’s medical research agency. HHS is also using another “groundbreaking” taxpayer-funded study on how transgender Americans want to see themselves reflected on federal identifications. The Social Security Administration is eliminating a rule requiring transgender people to provide legal or medical documentation of their identity on official records. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that enforces the nation’s workplace discrimination laws, will promote greater equity and inclusion for members of the transgender community by providing the option to select an X gender marker during the initial intake process of filing a discrimination charge. The Department of Education will update federal student aid forms to include gender identity when applying for federal financial aid, which the administration asserts will inform the agency about barriers “transgender and non-binary students face in the financial aid process.”
Happy Easter!
“Easter says you can put truth in a grave, but it won’t stay there.” ~ Clarence W. Hall
In this season Christians around the world are celebrating the resurrection of the Christ. There are no more powerful symbols of hope than the cross and the empty tomb. From me and mine, I wish you and yours all the joy of Easter! For those celebrating Passover, I wish you a Happy Passover, as well!
Until next week …
The post OUTRAGE: Trump Abused appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
Judicial Watch did not come out and say that it knew of any dog-biting by Commander.
But President Tom Fitton strongly suggested it. “Judicial Watch already caught the Biden White House lying about their family dog attacking and injuring Secret Service and White House employees,” he said. “Now it seems their new dog is also out of control and the Secret Service is hiding records about the issue.”
Read more here…
The post Biden’s new dog might also have a taste for the Secret Service appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for records of any incidents of aggression or biting by President Biden’s dog Commander.
Judicial Watch filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbiaafter the U.S. Secret Service, a component of Homeland Security, failed to respond adequately to a December 28, 2022, FOIA request (Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security(No. 1:23-cv-00612)). Based upon a tip it received, Judicial Watch is Sasking for:
- Any records related to incidents of aggression and bites involving the Biden family dog, “Commander,” including communications between Secret Service officials in the Uniformed and Non-Uniformed Divisions involved in White House operations and the Presidential Protection Division.
The Secret Service acknowledged receipt of the request and wrote in a January 20. 2023, letter that it had found responsive records and was processing them. At the time of the complaint, however, it had not produced any of the records.
Acquired in December 2021, Commander, a pure-bred German shepherd, replaced another German shepherd, Major, which left the White House following a series of attacks on Secret Service and White House staff.
In April 2022 Judicial Watch released records detailing multiple attacks and damages to United States Secret Service (USSS) members by Major at both the White House and Biden’s lake home in Wilmington, DE. The documents reveal that a member of USSS who was attacked by the dog was displeased that White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki misled the press about the incident.
In August 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Secret Service revealing Biden’s dog Major was responsible for many more biting incidents than the Biden White House had publicly acknowledged.
One email noted that “at the current rate an Agent or Officer has been bitten every day this week (3/1-3/8) causing damage to attire or bruising/punctures to the skin.”
“Judicial Watch already caught the Biden White House lying about their family dog attacking and injuring Secret Service and White House employees,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “Now it seems their new dog is also out of control and the Secret Service is hiding records about the issue.”
The post Judicial Watch Sues Secret Service for Records on Aggression and Biting by President Biden’s Dog appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Republican-leaning states are bailing out of the reputedly non-partisan Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) and the media are in an uproar. National Public Radio declares that ERIC is a victim of a “far right…disinformation campaign.” The New York Times warns that ERIC is under attack from “election deniers.” The very “backbone of American elections is being upended,” says Politico.
Protesting “recent misinformation,” ERIC Executive Director Shane Hamlin posted an “open letter” in March saying that ERIC “is a non-profit membership organization created by state election officials to help improve the accuracy of state voter rolls and register more eligible Americans to vote.”
Until recently, ERIC was a 32-state organization with two distinct missions: clean up dirty voter rolls and increase voter registration. But over the past year, seven states have pulled out—Alabama, Louisiana, Florida, West Virginia, Missouri, Ohio, and Iowa—citing concerns over data security and the left-wing orientation of the organization. Florida withdrew in March, saying the group had rejected proposals that “would have eliminated concerns about ERIC’s potential partisan leanings, and made the information shared with ERIC more secure.” Other “red states might soon head for the exits,” warned the Washington Post, “causing the system to collapse—and making ballot fraud harder to detect next year.”
Here at Judicial Watch, we know whereof we speak when it comes to ballot fraud, voter registration, and cleaning up dirty voter rolls. Action by the Judicial Watch election integrity team has resulted in important reforms and the removal of over two million inactive voters from voting rolls, including more than 1.2 million in Los Angeles County, 550,000 in New York City, and 240,000 in Pennsylvania. You can read more about that here.
We took a close look at ERIC and found plenty of reasons for concern.
A new Judicial Watch white paper notes that on voter roll cleanups, ERIC does not actually require that member states “remove ineligible voters from their registration rolls.” States are only required to “initiate contact” with those voters. “ERIC claims to have identified 2,498,688 registered voters who relocated across state lines, 203,210 duplicate registrations, and 65,437 deceased registered voters,” the JW study notes. But according to an independent analysis cited in the JW white paper, “states that do not participate in ERIC had a higher rate of identifying and removing from voter registration rolls individuals who relocated out of a jurisdiction than ERIC member states.” It’s worth noting as well that powerhouse states California and New York—hardly bastions of right-wing reaction—have never been members of ERIC.
The leadership behind ERIC also is cause for concern. The JW white paper notes that ERIC was founded by left-leaning attorney David Becker with $157,000 in grants from the George Soros-funded Pew Charitable Trusts. Soros’s Open Society Institute lists Pew as a “donor partner.” Becker went on to found CEIR, the Center for Election Innovation and Research, but remained active with ERIC as a non-voting board member. Last month, as controversy mounted, Becker announced he would not seek reelection to ERIC’s board.
Concerns over bias come into sharper focus when considering ERIC’s other chief mission, voter registration—long a major preoccupation of the Left. “Since its inception,” reports the JW white paper, “ERIC has been far more successful at identifying unregistered voters than duplicate or invalid registrations. The organization reports identifying more than 60 million unregistered voters since 2012.”
“CEIR works closely with ERIC in managing state voter rolls,” notes the JW report. In September 2020, CEIR received a $70 million grant from the Zuckerberg philanthropies for “voter education programs.” Much of that money was funneled to Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, New York, and Arizona for voter mobilization activities—all (except New York) battleground states in the 2020 presidential campaign.
Research by Judicial Watch also raises concerns about data-sharing between ERIC and Becker’s Center for Election Innovation. “The large amount of sensitive data provided to ERIC by its member states and the role of the organization in maintaining voter rolls may violate a number of federal statutes,” the JW study notes. While the Help America Vote Act secures electronic voter registration, there is “no provision in the statute that authorizes any state to outsource these obligations to a third-party entity.” The outsourcing by the states of voter registration list maintenance to ERIC may also violate the National Voter Registration Act, which protects from disclosure the identities of individuals who decline to register to vote. And the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act specifically shields from disclosure the kind of data provided to ERIC by member states to conduct list maintenance.
What’s wrong with ERIC? Add up the evidence: left-wing sponsors and affiliations, ineffective voter roll cleanup, robust voter registration efforts in swing states, sketchy data sharing practices—a “syndicate founded by leftists to manage voter registration rolls”—JW President Tom Fitton calls it—disingenuous about its true motives and richly deserving of its coming collapse.
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Additional reporting by JW Senior Investigator Sean Dunagan. Follow Micah on Twitter @micah_morrison. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post What’s Wrong with ERIC? Judicial Watch Study Details Left-Leaning Roots, Data Security Concerns, Possible Violations of Federal Law at the Electronic Registration Information Center appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News:
In an Apr. 4 statement, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said, “What a sad day for America. And what a blow to the rule of law and our republican form of government. Today, President Trump and the American people were abused and victimized by New York Democrat politician Alvin Bragg, who abused his office to try to jail a man he must know to be innocent.”
“This is an indictment about nothing based on non-crimes and politics,” said Fitton. It is a rigged prosecution to rig an election. The courts must end this malicious prosecution before the nation is irreparably damaged.”
He added, “Congress must immediately investigate Bragg’s election interference and his political attack on Trump’s civil rights. Judicial Watch has already launched a series of Freedom of Information Act inquiries into this unprecedented attack on the American way.”
Read more here…
The post Conservatives on Trump Indictment: ‘A Rigged Prosecution to Rig an Election’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In the Biden administration’s latest move to accommodate the transgender population, the Homeland Security agency that oversees lawful immigration will accept the gender selection of foreign nationals on official forms even if it does not match supporting documentation. Additionally, foreigners requesting immigration benefits do not need to submit proof of gender identity when submitting a request to change genders. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) explains in a recent policy change that “benefit requestors may self-select their gender marker (in an initial filing or a subsequent change to a prior gender selection), without the need to provide supporting documentation or to match the gender listed on their identity documents.” And that the new policy “removes the prior requirement that benefit requestors submit proof of their gender identity to change gender markers or to update their selected gender marker to match other supporting documentation.”
Since the agency’s inception over a century ago, foreign nationals seeking to enter the country legally have, among other things, been required to provide a gender marker on immigration forms and support their gender identity with documentation from their birth country. More recently, inspired by the madness surrounding transgender rights, USCIS allowed legal immigrants to change their gender marker with “documentation about their gender identity to support the requested change.” Under the new policy no documentation is required and immigrants can change their gender at will. “Removing evidentiary requirements regarding gender markers better ensures that all secure identity documents and biographic data are accurate, particularly for noncitizens who were unable to accurately state their gender in their initial applications or who may otherwise need an update to their gender marker,” USCIS writes in the new policy document, adding that “it also removes the burden imposed by requiring that requestors have to publicly discuss or provide documentation regarding the gender listed on their identity documents in order to obtain a benefit or service.”
The administration asserts that it changed a longtime federal policy to reduce barriers to travel, employment, services, and benefits for transgender immigrants. For those questioning how exactly the so-called “barriers” are being curtailed, USCIS explains that the revamped rule eliminates delays and prevents “discrimination and harassment due to inconsistent identity documents.” The agency did not reach the decision lightly and reveals that the policy change was made “in response to stakeholder feedback as well as recent changes made by a number of state and federal agencies.” Indeed, the new USCIS policy is part of a fierce governmentwide effort launched by the Biden administration to provide special accommodations to support those who identify as transgender, even though they make up less than one percent of the American population.
This includes the U.S. Census Bureau spending $10 million to research how to best add questions about sexual orientation and gender identity on surveys. The State Department is allowing all American citizens to select an X as their gender marker on U.S. passport applications. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the first federal agency to fly a transgender pride flag above its headquarters, will soon reveal its plan to “best serve LGBTQI+ Americans” based on a comprehensive study on “Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation” conducted by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the nation’s medical research agency. HHS is also using another “groundbreaking” taxpayer-funded study on how transgender Americans want to see themselves reflected on federal identifications. The Social Security Administration is eliminating a rule requiring transgender people to provide legal or medical documentation of their identity on official records. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that enforces the nation’s workplace discrimination laws, will promote greater equity and inclusion for members of the transgender community by providing the option to select an X gender marker during the initial intake process of filing a discrimination charge. The Department of Education will update federal student aid forms to include gender identity when applying for federal financial aid, which the administration asserts will inform the agency about barriers “transgender and non-binary students face in the financial aid process.”
The post DHS Lets Trans Immigrants Pick, Change Gender on Official Forms to Avert Harassment appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department Homeland Security (DHS) for records showing cooperation between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and social media platforms to censor and suppress free speech (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:23-cv-00552)).
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (a component of DHS) failed to respond to a December 2022 request for:
Records and communications of Jen Easterly, Director, CISA; Christopher Krebs, Former Director, CISA; Matt Masterson, Former CISA Senior Cybersecurity Advisor; and Brian Scully, CISA Senior Cybersecurity Advisor, regarding:
- CISA facilitated or hosted USG-industry meetings with Meta (@meta.com); Facebook (@facebook.com); Twitter (@twitter.com); Wikimedia Foundation (@wikimedia.org); Pinterest (@pinterest.com); LinkedIn (@linkedin.com); concerning election security;
- Election Infrastructure Subsector Government Coordinating Council Meetings;
- Election Infrastructure Subsector Government Coordinating Council Joint MDM Working Group Meetings; and
- Preparatory meetings with any employees of the DHS Office of Intelligence and Analysis; Federal Bureau of Investigation; Office of the Director of National Intelligence; National Security Agency; U.S. Secret Service; concerning any of the aforementioned USG-industry meetings and/or Coordinating Council Meetings.
On December 2, 2022, journalist Matt Taibbi used the social media platform Twitter to expose the “Twitter Files,” which include multiple mentions of the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency’s censorship activities.
A December 16 tweet thread includes:
37.Reports also came from different agencies. Here, an employee recommends “bouncing” content based on evidence from “DHS etc”
A supplemental tweet thread on December 18 reports:
-
In July of 2020, San Francisco FBI agent Elvis Chan tells Twitter executive Yoel Roth to expect written questions from the Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF), the inter-agency group that deals with cyber threats.
-
The questionnaire authors seem displeased with Twitter for implying, in a July 20th “DHS/ODNI/FBI/Industry briefing,” that “you indicated you had not observed much recent activity from official propaganda actors on your platform.”
-
He then sent another note internally, saying the premise of the questions was “flawed,” because “we’ve been clear that official state propaganda is definitely a thing on Twitter.” Note the italics for emphasis.
A March 9 tweet thread includes:
-
But Twitter was more like a partner to government. With other tech firms it held a regular “industry meeting” with FBI and DHS, and developed a formal system for receiving thousands of content reports from every corner of government: HHS, Treasury, NSA, even local police
-
Emails from the FBI, DHS and other agencies often came with spreadsheets of hundreds or thousands of account names for review. Often, these would be deleted soon after.
-
The same agencies (FBI, DHS/CISA, GEC) invite the same “experts” (Thomas Rid, Alex Stamos), funded by the same foundations (Newmark, Omidyar, Knight) trailed by the same reporters (Margaret Sullivan, Molly McKew, Brandy Zadrozny) seemingly to every conference, every panel.
Other “Twitter files” released by Elon Musk show that FBI pressure on “Russian disinformation” led to censorship:
San Francisco FBI agent Elvis Chan “[sent] 10 documents to Twitter’s then-Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth, through Teleporter, a one-way communications channel from the FBI to Twitter,” the evening before the release of the Post story.
The “Twitter files” show the FBI pushed Twitter to also censor countless Twitter users who tweeted concerns (and jokes) about election integrity just before the 2020 election.
In testimony before the “House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government” Taibbi reported extensive collusion between Big Tech and government, at all levels – including the Biden White House, the Democratic National Committee, and federal, state and local law enforcement – all meant to stifle free speech and withhold information from the American people.
In May 2022, the States of Missouri and Louisiana sued President Biden and several federal employees in their official capacities for violation of the First Amendment.
In one of the depositions in the case, Assistant Special Agent in Charge of the Cyber Branch for San Francisco Division of the FBI, Elvis Chan, testified he and fellow officials had weekly meetings with major social media companies to warn against Russian disinformation attempts ahead of the 2020 election. The lawsuit also produced Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency meeting minutes that discuss its attempts to manage information being posted by social media contributors.
The Twitter Files also mention a report titled The Long Fuse: Misinformation and the 2020 Election, which was prepared by the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), a left-leaning collective of organizations that worked with the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency on its censorship of online information during the 2020 election.
“There is an unholy conspiracy in the Biden administration to censor Americans in collusion with Big Tech,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This new Judicial Watch lawsuit shows the censorship abuse is furthered by unlawful secrecy and cover-ups.
Judicial Watch is heavily involved in countering government and Big Tech censorship. Buried within the Twitter Files are references and descriptions of meetings and communications Judicial Watch has been investigating through FOIA requests and lawsuits.
For example, Judicial Watch recently sued the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for records and communications maintained by its leadership, including Chairman Lina Khan, about Twitter and its owner Elon Musk. FTC document-demands to Twitter obtained by the House Judiciary Committee show onerous requests for all documents about Elon Musk and documents concerning Twitter’s work with journalists to disclose to the public the details about the government’s and Twitter’s censorship of American citizens. A House report titled “The Weaponization of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC): An Agency’s Overreach to Harass Elon Musk’s Twitter” details:
Twitter allowed … journalists, as part of their reporting on government censorship by proxy, to review internal communications and correspondence between Twitter employees and federal agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
[T]he FTC’s first demand in its letter sent after the initial installment of the Twitter Files did not concern what private user information may have been at risk. Instead, the FTC demanded that Twitter “[i]dentify all journalists and other members of the media to whom” Twitter has granted access to since Musk bought the company. The FTC even named some of the specific journalists – “Bari Weiss, Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger, [and] Abigail Shrier” – with whom Twitter has engaged on the Twitter Files. The FTC also demanded to know any “other members of the media to whom You have granted any type of access to the Company’s internal communications” for any reason whatsoever.
In February, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against HHS for records on pressuring Big Tech to censor “COVID misinformation,” specifically with regard to any communications made between the Surgeon General’s communications director and social media companies — Twitter, Facebook, etc. — regarding COVID-19 vaccines. The Twitter Files reveal how the pharmaceutical industry lobbied social media over COVID vaccine content.
Also in February, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership that could detail coordinated censorship activities. One section of the Twitter Files calls the FBI “Twitter’s Subsidiary,” illustrated by an episode where Twitter, one day just prior to the 2020 election, received so many moderation (censorship) requests from the FBI that a Twitter executive congratulated staffers at the end for completing the “monumental undertaking.”
In January 2023, not long after the Twitter Files were made public, Judicial Watch sued the DOJ for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections and the Hunter Biden laptop story. Announcing the lawsuit, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said, “The FBI was literally paying Twitter to censor Americans just before the 2020 election … they are now covering up their misconduct.”
In November 2022, Judicial Watch sued the DHS for all records of communications between CISA and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which reportedly was active during the 2022 midterm elections. Among the news outlets flagged by EIP were websites for Just the News, New York Post, Fox News, Washington Examiner, The Washington Times, The Epoch Times and Breitbart. A week later, in a Senate floor speech, Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) described revelations from the Twitter Files about Twitter and 2020 election interference, and other instances of Biden administration collusion with social media firms to censor and withhold information from the American people.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for censoring a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Homeland Security for Records on Censorship Meetings with Big Tech appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the unprecedented indictment of President Donald Trump by Democrats in New York:
What a sad day for America. And what a blow to the rule of law and our republican form of government. Today, President Trump and the American people were abused and victimized by New York Democrat politician Alvin Bragg, who abused his office to try to jail a man he must know to be innocent. This is an indictment about nothing based on non-crimes and politics. It is a rigged prosecution to rig an election. The courts must end this malicious prosecution before the nation is irreparably damaged. In the meantime, Congress must immediately investigate Bragg’s election interference and his political attack on Trump’s civil rights. Judicial Watch has already launched a series of Freedom of Information Act inquiries into this unprecedented attack on the American way.
The post Judicial Watch Statement on Trump Indictment appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The New York Post:
“All bets are off. You can expect grand jury indictments of leftist politicians like Biden, [former House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi and [Senate Majority Leader Chuck] Schumer as surely as night follows day,” said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative legal group Judicial Watch.
“You can be sure that there are prosecutors across Florida and Texas right now who are looking for a state law hook into the Biden family,” he added. “And if they’re not, they’re not doing their jobs.”
Read more here…
The post Conservatives call for charges against Biden after Trump indictment appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Victory: Colorado Agrees to Settle Lawsuit over Ineligible Voters; Agrees to Extensive Reporting and Review of Voter Roll Clean Up Efforts
Judicial Watch announced recently that Colorado’s secretary of state agreed to settle a lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. As part of its settlement Colorado will report to Judicial Watch on its yearly progress in cleaning up its rolls for the next six years. Since Judicial Watch filed its lawsuit, Colorado voter roll removals increased by 78%, from 172,379 to 306,303 per reporting period.
Who Is Alvin Bragg?
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg last week rocketed to global celebrity with his indictment of former president Donald Trump on charges related to a 2016 hush money payment. Trump’s lawyers immediately fired back. “He did not commit any crime,” the attorneys said. “We will vigorously fight this political prosecution in court.”
Judicial Watch Victory: Court Rejects Argument of Terrorist-Tied Qatar and Orders Release of Documents About Its Funding of Texas A&M
Trump is a crime victim. New York Democrats’ reckless scheme to prosecute and jail President Trump is a dangerous attack on the rule of law and a brazen attempt to rig the 2024 elections for President Biden and Democrats. Judicial Watch denounces Alvin Bragg’s corrupt attempt to make Trump a political prisoner. Congress and every responsible government official should do everything possible under the law to undo this attempt to wreck our republican form of government.
Judicial Watch Sues Biden Administration for Extradition Records of Illegal Alien Who Ran Over and Killed Brother of Judicial Watch Client in Chicago
Judicial Watch announced recently it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Justice Department and the State Department for extradition records of illegal alien Saul Chavez, who ran over and killed William “Denny” McCann, the brother of Judicial Watch client Brian McCann
In The News
House investigators follow trail of Treasury red flags on Biden clan’s lucrative foreign deals
Washington Times
Tom Fitton, president of the conservative-backed watchdog group Judicial Watch, said while a SAR is not necessarily an indication of illegal activity, he believes Mr. Comer has already demonstrated that the Biden family was involved in a money laundering scheme.
Inside the backchannel communications keeping Donald Trump in the loop on Republican investigations
CNN
“We can’t have two years of hearings and then a report,” President of Judicial Watch Tom Fitton told CNN, referring to the pressure his group has placed on Congress to act immediately on the abuses of power that he sees happening, including “censoring Americans and trying to jail those who are perceived as political opponents.”
Court rules in favor of releasing info on funding, Qatar’s influence over Texas A&M campus
Just the News
A Texas county court has ruled in favor of releasing information about Qatar’s potential influence over Texas A&M University through funding and by hosting one of the school’s campuses in the Gulf State.
The decision from Travis County Judge Amy Clark Meachum last week came after the non-profit watchdog Judicial Watch filed a petition on behalf of the antisemitism advocacy group Zachor Legal Institute.
Video Highlights
-
-
- ELECTON INTERFERENCE: NY Dem Politicians Plan to JAIL TRUMP! - FLASHBACK: “Trump is a Crime Victim!” - BOMBSHELL: Chinese Communist Cash for Biden Family
-
The post Judicial Watch Election Integrity Victory! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News:
“These documents show our military and its rising leadership are under attack from within,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a press release. “The documents confirm U.S. Air Force Academy leadership is obsessed with anti-American critical race theory and seeks to punish and smear cadets through leftist indoctrination programs.”
Read here…
The post Judicial Watch Docs: Air Force Academy Says ‘Systemic Racism Exists in Our Society,’ Must Push ‘Diversity, Inclusion’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg last week rocketed to global celebrity with his indictment of former president Donald Trump on charges related to a 2016 hush money payment. Trump’s lawyers immediately fired back. “He did not commit any crime,” the attorneys said. “We will vigorously fight this political prosecution in court.”
And so the stage is set for what will certainly be one of the biggest legal battles of 2023 and what legions of pundits are calling a historic case—the first indictment of a former president on criminal charges. Time will tell if the Trump case will end with a bang or slink off with a whimper—the actual charges have yet to be unsealed and the guesswork by the punditocracy indicates there might be slim jurisdictional and evidentiary grounds for the case, leading a judge to throw it out—but Alvin Bragg is not unprepared to do battle.
Bragg has been keeping a low profile since news emerged of the Trump indictment, cultivating a public image of a low-key, nose-to-the-grindstone prosecutor. His record paints another story. A Heritage Foundation study labeled him a “rogue prosecutor” with “dangerous” policies. His anti-Trump bias is extreme. He has proudly noted that “I’ve sued Trump more than a hundred times,” adding “I can’t change that fact, nor would I. That was important work.”
A son of Harlem and graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, Bragg has deep roots in New York progressive politics and plenty of experience in Trump-related prosecutions. With early tours of duty at the Office of Attorney General of the State of New York, the New York City Council as chief of litigation, and the Southern District of New York as a federal prosecutor, Bragg in 2017 was appointed Chief Deputy Attorney General of New York. From there, he helped lead a lawsuit against the Trump Foundation that resulted in its closure and a $2 million fine.
Bragg ran for New York County DA in 2021 in a crowded primary field. He received a significant boost from George Soros and the political arm of Color of Change, an activist group supporting the progressive prosecutor movement. In May 2021, Color of Change endorsed Bragg and declared it would spend $1 million to support him—a game changer in the primary. A few days later, in an unmistakable signal of support, Soros donated $1 million to Color of Change.
Bragg came out on top in the primary and wiped out his Republican opponent in overwhelmingly liberal Manhattan. He was sworn in on January 1, 2022. In a nod to his progressive prosecutor constituency, Bragg appointed Meg Reiss to the powerful position of chief assistant district attorney, the number two post at the DA’s office. Reiss had held the title “Chief of Social Justice” in her previous job at the Brooklyn DA’s office.
Bragg and Reiss immediately ran into trouble. Bragg’s “Day One” memo to staff, quickly leaked to the press, was straight from the progressive prosecutor playbook. Bragg announced that he would seek to reduce pre-trial incarceration and not prosecute (or seek lower-level charges for) such crimes as fare evasion, resisting arrest, burglary, store robbery, prostitution, and marijuana. The memo was met with a storm of protest, including from some of his Democratic Party allies. By the end of the month, Bragg backtracked, dropping some of the policies aimed at violent crime but keeping parts of the Day One framework in place.
As Manhattan DA, Bragg’s pursuit of Trump continued, but not without setbacks. In February 2022, two high-level prosecutors in the DA’s office, brought in by Bragg’s predecessor Cyrus Vance Jr. specifically to investigate Trump-related matters, abruptly resigned. According to news reports, the prosecutors—Mark Pomerantz and Carey Dunne—were focused on a possible prosecution of Trump related to inflated assets, real-estate evaluations, and bank loans. Bragg was said to have grown uneasy with the case. In his letter of resignation, Pomerantz criticized Bragg for his “decision not to go forward with the grand jury presentation and not to seek criminal charges at the present time.”
Bragg persisted on other fronts, and in August he secured the conviction of the Trump Organization’s chief financial officer, Allan Weisselberg, on charges of tax fraud and falsifying business records.
In December, Bragg convicted the Trump Organization on charges related to off-the-books pay to Weisselberg and others. The charges included tax fraud and falsifying business records—a hint of what might be coming in the hush money prosecution. Trump himself was not charged in the case. A lawyer for the Trump Organization said it will “certainly” appeal the conviction.
Bragg is also in pursuit of Trump ally Steve Bannon. In September, Bragg charged Bannon with fraud and money laundering in a scheme centered around fundraising to build a wall on the southern border. A trial date has been set for November. Bannon pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The view from here: Bragg is no kamikaze. The Pomerantz-Dunne episode and the Day One Memo debacle show a willingness to cut losses when the going goes bad. But it’s also clear that the DA sees the relentless pursuit of Trump to be a winner with the only political constituency that matters to him: liberal Manhattan voters. He’ll play the case aggressively to the end, convinced it is a winner for him on his home turf, no matter what the outcome.
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Follow Micah on Twitter @micah_morrison. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post Who Is Alvin Bragg? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Trump Indictment: A Brazen Attempt to Rig the 2024 Election
Judicial Watch Victory: Colorado Agrees to Settle Lawsuit over Ineligible Voters
We Continue to Seek Justice for Our Client’s Brother Killed by Illegal Immigrant
U.S. Gives Millions to Race, Ethnicity, Social Inclusion Project in Latin America
Trump Indictment: A Brazen Attempt to Rig the 2024 Election
Let’s cut to the chase. Trump is a crime victim. New York Democrats’ reckless scheme to prosecute and jail President Trump is a dangerous attack on the rule of law and a brazen attempt to rig the 2024 elections for President Biden and Democrats. We denounce Alvin Bragg’s corrupt attempt to make Trump a political prisoner. Congress and every responsible government official should do everything possible under the law to undo this attempt to wreck our republican form of government. Judicial Watch is on the case and has filed (and will file) multiple open records requests and other court actions to expose and try to stop this dangerous abuse of power.
Judicial Watch Victory: Colorado Agrees to Settle Lawsuit over Ineligible Voters
We continue our string of successes in cleaning up the nation’s voter rolls.
In the latest, Colorado’s secretary of state agreed to settle a lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. As part of its settlement, Colorado will report to us on its yearly progress in cleaning up its rolls for the next six years. Since we filed this lawsuit, Colorado voter roll removals increased by 78%, from 172,379 to 306,303 per reporting period.
We filed the lawsuit in October 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of three residents, alleging that the state had failed to clean its voter rolls as required by the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Griswold, et al. (No. 20-cv-02992)). In August 2021, the court ruled that our lawsuit could proceed. We were later joined in the suit by the American Constitution Party of Colorado and the Libertarian Party of Colorado.
Our lawsuit alleged that high registration rates and other voter roll metrics “indicate an ongoing, systemic problem with Colorado’s voter list maintenance efforts.” We sought a court order declaring that Colorado and its secretary of state violated the NVRA and ordering them to “develop and implement a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls in Colorado.”
The number of outdated registrations removed by Colorado under a key NVRA provision increased after we filed suit, from 172,379 registrations for the reporting period ending in 2018 to 306,303 registrations for the period ending in 2022—an increase of 78%. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide us with its most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years. This data is to include:
- The total number of registered and eligible voters, active voters, and inactive voters.
- The total number of address confirmation notices sent to Colorado voters pursuant to the NVRA, the number received back confirming or changing an address, and the number that were undeliverable or not returned.
- The total number of registrations addresses removed pursuant to key provisions of the NVRA.
Coming on the heels of a massive voter roll clean up in Colorado thanks to our lawsuit, this settlement agreement is a major victory for all Colorado voters. Simply put: Cleaner voter rolls mean cleaner elections.
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. Our team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys have stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
In February Los Angeles County confirmed removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit we filed in 2017.
We settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional gerrymander.
In May 2022, we sued Illinois on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to stop state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.
We expect more voter registration numbers from the various states a bit later this year so I expect we will have other voter roll clean up legal actions soon!
We Continue to Seek Justice for Our Client’s Brother Killed by Illegal Immigrant
The tragedy caused by criminal illegal aliens in our midst continues unabated.
We filed a lawsuit against the Justice Department and the State Department for extradition records of illegal alien Saul Chavez, who ran over and killed William “Denny” McCann, the brother of our client Brian McCann (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice, et al. (No. 1:23-cv-00701
Judicial Watch sued after both the Justice Department and the State Department failed to respond adequately to similar FOIA requests submitted on February 1, 2023, for access to Chavez’s extradition records.
Our legal team explained to the court:
In June 2011, Saul Chavez ran over and killed William “Denny” McCann, brother of Judicial Watch client Brian McCann. At the time, Chavez was an unlawfully present criminal alien and had just completed a two-year term of probation for a 2009 DUI conviction. Chavez was charged with felony aggravated driving under the influence but was released by the Cook County Sheriff’s Office in November 2011 despite an U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer. Chavez subsequently fled to Mexico …
Chavez was extradited from Mexico in December 2022.
We submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the State Department for Chavez’s extradition records, which include, but are not limited to, “correspondence between the Office of the Legal Adviser and the U.S. Department of Justice, state and federal authorities in the U.S.,” as well as “copies of court records of the legal proceedings” and “committal documents, such as the extradition order, affidavit of waiver, legal briefs and hearing transcript, decision memo to the Secretary of State or to his or her Deputy, and the surrender warrant.”
To date, the State Department has failed to respond – let alone produce records – to our request.
The Justice Department denied the request outright, citing, among the other reasons, the privacy interests of the criminal Chavez.
In July 2015, Brian testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in a hearing titled “Oversight of the Administration’s Misdirected Immigration Enforcement Policies: Examining the Impact on Public Safety and Honoring the Victims.” Brian McCann explained:
Denny was crossing Kedzie Avenue on a marked crosswalk four years ago and was violently struck by a drunk driver who dragged Denny under his car for a block in an attempt to flee before Denny died. The family was notified by the Chicago Police and the killer was placed into custody and charged with aggravated DUI causing death. Two days later ICE issued a detainer because the young man was an illegal alien with a prior felony. The family was assured by the Cook County prosecutor that the defendant would not be allowed to post bail and be released. Three months later the Cook County Board passed the ordinance that effectively requires the sheriff to ignore detainers. During the intervening weeks after Denny’s violent death, Cook County President Toni Preckwinkle and former mayoral candidate and Commissioner Jesus Garcia pushed for the ordinance and rammed it through on September 7, 2011. Two months later the killer made bail and absconded to Mexico.
“My family and I continue to seek justice for Denny. Now that he has been extradited from Mexico, we are one step closer. But we still want to know: What took so long? With the help of Judicial Watch, we hope to find out,” said Brian McCann.
Denny McCann was killed by an illegal alien with a prior felony – and then that criminal was released and fled to Mexico as a result of Chicago’s lawless and deadly sanctuary policies. And to make matters worse, the Biden administration is unlawfully hiding records about why it took over a decade to extradite from Mexico this murderous criminal.
During his effort to obtain justice for his brother’s violent death, we filed suit on behalf of Brian McCann against the Cook County Sheriff in April 2013, asking the court to order the sheriff’s department to carry out its legal duties under federal immigration law. Chavez had been charged with felony aggravated driving under the influence but was released by the sheriff from a Cook County jail in November 2011 despite an ICE immigration detainer. The case was dismissed by the circuit court and afterward, in March 2015, the Illinois Supreme Court declined to hear the case.
In March 2021, our taxpayer lawsuit against the San Francisco Sheriff’s sanctuary policy uncovered that over 2,400 criminal illegal aliens were released under the department’s policy on communications with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) about criminal illegal aliens in the Sheriff’s custody.
U.S. Gives Millions to Race, Ethnicity, Social Inclusion Project in Latin America
The Biden administration’s woke agenda knows no bounds as its bureaucrats look for novel ways to spend your tax dollars to pursue radical and Marxist agenda items. Here’s a recent example from our Corruption Chronicles blog.
Weeks after earmarking a million dollars to empower marginalized racial and ethnic communities in Europe, the Biden administration is spending another million on a State Department program in Latin America known as Race, Ethnicity, and Social Inclusion (RESI). The new allocation will help Brazil and Colombia “advance reforms that promote equity and equality, eliminate barriers to inclusion, and create equal access and opportunities for members of marginalized and underserved communities,” according to a grant announcement published a few days ago.
The recent European and Latin American grants appear to be the global expansion of the Biden administration’s costly, domestic effort to advance racial equity and support for underserved populations through taxpayer-funded programs. The president launched the governmentwide initiative on his first day in office with a lengthy executive order titled Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government. The 2021 document claims that “entrenched disparities” in laws, public policies, and private institutions have denied equal opportunity to individuals and communities and that the health and climate crises have exposed inequities while a “historic movement for justice has highlighted the unbearable human costs of systemic racism.” Therefore, the order states, the federal government should pursue a “comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all, including people of color and others who have been historically underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality.” It further says that “by advancing equity across the Federal Government, we can create opportunities for the improvement of communities that have been historically underserved, which benefits everyone.”
Many key federal agencies have implemented racial equity plans as per Biden’s order. The Department of Labor has dedicated $260 million to promote “equitable access” to government unemployment benefits by addressing disparities in the administration and delivery of money by race ethnicity and language proficiency. The Treasury Department named its first ever racial equity chief, a veteran La Raza official who spent a decade at the nation’s most influential open borders group. The Department of Defense (DOD) is using outrageous anti-bias materials that indoctrinate troops with anti-American and racially inflammatory training on diversity topics. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) created an equity commission to address longstanding inequities in agriculture. The nation’s medical research agency has a special minority health and health disparities division that issued a study declaring COVID-19 exacerbated preexisting resentment against racial/ethnic minorities and marginalized communities.
Last month the administration launched the initiative’s global version by dedicating a million dollars to “empower marginalized racial and ethnic communities in Europe,” focusing on people of African descent and Roma people. Among the goals is to mitigate structural racism, xenophobia, and discrimination found in institutions designed to protect and serve all people in society and ensure the fair administration of, and access to, justice for marginalized racial and ethnic communities. The U.S. also aims to counter societal discrimination and violence by advancing equity, social inclusion, and equality for all. The overseas investment is critical, according to the Biden administration, because members of marginalized racial, ethnic, and indigenous communities around the world often are disproportionately discriminated against, forced to endure high levels of violence and excruciating labor conditions in migration, are systematically denied access to justice, and continually bear the brunt of racial discrimination, xenophobia, and violence in society.
The administration’s latest allotment in Latin America will fund two programs, the Colombia Action Plan on Racial and Ethnic Equality (CAPREE) and the Brazil Joint Action Plan to Eliminate Racial and Ethnic Discrimination and Promote Equality (JAPER). CAPREE recognizes the important contributions of African-descendent and indigenous peoples and seeks to elevate recognition of their cultures in the U.S. and Colombia by implementing programs to address social barriers that affect Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities. JAPER targets racism and addresses racial health disparities, environmental justice, equal access to economic opportunities and equal access to the justice system. The initiative recognizes that Brazil and the U.S. are multi-ethnic, multi-racial democracies that celebrate the rich contributions of people of African descent and indigenous populations. Similar to the domestic initiatives, the goal in Colombia and Brazil is racial and ethnic equality as well as social inclusion.
Until next week …
The post Trump Indictment Outrage appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the unprecedented indictment of President Donald Trump by Democrats in New York:
Trump is a crime victim. New York Democrats’ reckless scheme to prosecute and jail President Trump is a dangerous attack on the rule of law and a brazen attempt to rig the 2024 elections for President Biden and Democrats. Judicial Watch denounces Alvin Bragg’s corrupt attempt to make Trump a political prisoner. Congress and every responsible government official should do everything possible under the law to undo this attempt to wreck our republican form of government.
The post Judicial Watch Statement on Indictment of President Donald Trump appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Justice Department and the State Department for extradition records of illegal alien Saul Chavez, who ran over and killed William “Denny” McCann, the brother of Judicial Watch client Brian McCann (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice, et al. (No. 1:23-cv-00701
The lawsuit was filed after both the Justice Department and the State Department failed to respond adequately to similar FOIA requests submitted on February 1, 2023, for access to Chavez’s extradition records.
Judicial Watch explained to the court:
In June 2011, Saul Chavez ran over and killed William “Denny” McCann, brother of Judicial Watch client Brian McCann. At the time, Chavez was an unlawfully present criminal alien and had just completed a two-year term of probation for a 2009 DUI conviction. Chavez was charged with felony aggravated driving under the influence but was released by the Cook County Sheriff’s Office in November 2011 despite an U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer. Chavez subsequently fled to Mexico …
Chavez was extradited from Mexico in December 2022.
Judicial Watch submitted a FOIA request to the State Department for Chavez’s extradition records, which include, but are not limited to “correspondence between the Office of the Legal Adviser and the U.S. Department of Justice, state and federal authorities in the U.S.,” as well as “copies of court records of the legal proceedings” and “committal documents, such as the extradition order, affidavit of waiver, legal briefs and hearing transcript, decision memo to the Secretary of State or to his or her Deputy, and the surrender warrant.”
To date, the State Department has failed to respond – let alone produce records – to Judicial Watch’s request.
The Justice Department denied the request outright, citing, among the other reasons, the privacy interests of the criminal Chavez.
In July 2015, Brian testified before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in a hearing titled “Oversight of the Administration’s Misdirected Immigration Enforcement Policies: Examining the Impact on Public Safety and Honoring the Victims.” Brian McCann explained:
Denny was crossing Kedzie Avenue on a marked crosswalk four years ago and was violently struck by a drunk driver who dragged Denny under his car for a block in an attempt to flee before Denny died. The family was notified by the Chicago Police and the killer was placed into custody and charged with aggravated DUI causing death. Two days later ICE issued a detainer because the young man was an illegal alien with a prior felony. The family was assured by the Cook County prosecutor that the defendant would not be allowed to post bail and be released. Three months later the Cook County Board passed the ordinance that effectively requires the sheriff to ignore detainers. During the intervening weeks after Denny’s violent death, Cook County President Toni Preckwinkle and former mayoral candidate and Commissioner Jesus Garcia pushed for the ordinance and rammed it through on September 7, 2011. Two months later the killer made bail and absconded to Mexico.
“My family and I continue to seek justice for Denny. Now that he has been extradited from Mexico, we are one step closer. But, we still want to know: what took so long? With the help of Judicial Watch, we hope to find out,” said Brian McCann.
“Denny McCann was killed by an illegal alien with a prior felony – and then that criminal was released and fled to Mexico as a result of Chicago’s lawless and deadly sanctuary policies,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And to make matters worse, the Biden administration is unlawfully hiding records about why it took over a decade to extradite from Mexico this murderous criminal.”
During his effort to obtain justice for his brother’s violent death, Judicial Watch filed suit on behalf of Brian McCann against the Cook County Sheriff in April 2013, asking the court to order the sheriff’s department to carry out its legal duties under federal immigration law. Chavez had been charged with felony aggravated driving under the influence but was released by the sheriff from a Cook County jail in November 2011 despite an ICE immigration detainer. The case was dismissed by the circuit court and afterward, in March 2015, the Illinois Supreme Court declined to hear the case.
In March 2021, Judicial Watch’s taxpayer lawsuit against the San Francisco Sheriff’s sanctuary policy uncovered that over 2,400 criminal illegal aliens were released under the department’s policy on communications with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) about criminal illegal aliens in the Sheriff’s custody.
Judicial Watch also just uncovered how, until recently, the Biden administration had been diverting 150-200 Federal Air Marshals monthly to the Mexican border to provide illegal immigrants with welfare checks, transportation, and other basic services. This practice reduced their capacity to perform their original mission of air transportation security. The Federal Air Marshal Service, which operates under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), was created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. Judicial Watch’s exposure of this security issue to the public helped force the Biden administration to returnthe Federal Air Marshals to their regular duties.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Biden Administration for Extradition Records of Illegal Alien Who Ran Over and Killed Brother of Judicial Watch Client in Chicago appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that Colorado’s secretary of state agreed to settle a lawsuit alleging that Colorado failed to remove ineligible voters from its rolls. As part of its settlement Colorado will report to Judicial Watch on its yearly progress in cleaning up its rolls for the next six years. Since Judicial Watch filed its lawsuit, Colorado voter roll removals increased by 78%, from 172,379 to 306,303 per reporting period.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in October 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on behalf of itself and three residents of Colorado, alleging that the state had failed to clean its voter rolls as required by the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Griswold, et al.(No. 20-cv-02992)). In August 2021, the court ruled that Judicial Watch’s lawsuit could proceed. Judicial Watch was later joined in its lawsuit by the American Constitution Party of Colorado and the Libertarian Party of Colorado.
The lawsuit alleged that high registration rates and other voter roll metrics “indicate an ongoing, systemic problem with Colorado’s voter list maintenance efforts.” Judicial Watch sought a court order declaring that Colorado and its secretary of state violated the NVRA and ordering them to “develop and implement a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove the registrations of ineligible registrants from the voter rolls in Colorado.”
The number of outdated registrations removed by Colorado under a key NVRA provision increased after Judicial Watch filed suit, from 172,379 registrations for the reporting period ending in 2018 to 306,303 registrations for the period ending in 2022—an increase of 78%. The settlement agreement requires Colorado to provide Judicial Watch its most recent voter roll data for each Colorado county each year for six years. This data is to include:
- The total number of registered and eligible voters, active voters, and inactive voters.
- The total number of address confirmation notices sent to Colorado voters pursuant to the NVRA, the number received back confirming or changing an address, and the number that were undeliverable or not returned.
- The total number of registrations addresses removed pursuant to key provisions of the NVRA.
“Coming on the heels of a massive voter roll clean up in Colorado thanks to our lawsuit, this settlement agreement is a major victory for all Colorado voters,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “Simply put: Cleaner voter rolls mean cleaner elections.”
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
In February Los Angeles County confirmed removal of 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit that Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
Judicial Watch settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional gerrymander.
In May 2022, Judicial Watch sued Illinois on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to stop state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.
Robert Popper, a Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
The post Judicial Watch Victory: Colorado Agrees to Settle Lawsuit over Ineligible Voters; Agrees to Extensive Reporting and Review of Voter Roll Clean Up Efforts appeared first on Judicial Watch.
It took an unprecedented immigration crisis for the Biden administration to finally propose a rule that limits the chaotic asylum free-for-all on the southern border and, not surprisingly, the left is up in arms. Under the measure to finally curb illegal immigration, migrants would be required to seek asylum or other protection in countries through which they travel. That would drastically slash illegal immigration since the majority of migrants who have applied for asylum in recent years have taken routes through various central American countries before arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border to request refuge. Not to worry, though, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) assures it will only be a temporary order to help reduce reliance by migrants on dangerous human smuggling networks, protect against extreme overcrowding in border facilities, and ensure that the processing of migrants seeking protection in the United States is done in an effective, humane, and efficient manner.
“The proposed rule would encourage migrants to avail themselves of lawful, safe, and orderly pathways into the United States, or otherwise to seek asylum or other protection in countries through which they travel, thereby reducing reliance on human smuggling networks that exploit migrants for financial gain,” according to the Federal Register announcement of the proposed rule, which is officially known as Circumvention of Lawful Pathways. “It would do so by introducing a rebuttable presumption of asylum ineligibility for certain noncitizens who neither avail themselves of a lawful, safe, and orderly pathway to the United States nor seek asylum or other protection in a country through which they travel.” The Biden administration proceeds to explain, as if the nation has not already seen the consequences of its reckless open border policies, why the law is necessary. “In the absence of such a measure, which would be implemented on a temporary basis, the number of migrants expected to travel without authorization to the United States is expected to increase significantly, to a level that risks undermining the Departments’ continued ability to safely, effectively, and humanely enforce and administer U.S. immigration law, including the asylum system, in the face of exceptionally challenging circumstances.”
As expected, the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways has ignited fury among open border groups that say the rule amounts to an unlawful asylum ban. Some of the world’s most influential and politically connected organizations are demanding that the Biden administration refrain from implementing the much-needed measure, which they assert is inhumane. All the leftist nonprofits conveniently omit the detriments of a lawless system that saw a record-breaking 2.4 million illegal immigrants apprehended along the Mexican border in fiscal year 2022. Or that Border Patrol agents arrested hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist, emphasizing the dire need to secure the famously porous border. The pro immigrant cheerleaders also fail to acknowledge that arrests of illegal immigrants inside the U.S. nearly doubled in 2022 over 2021 and tens of thousands had serious criminal histories that include multiple charges and convictions, illustrating the devastating impact of the Biden administration’s disastrous open border policies which have allowed unparalleled numbers of migrants into the country with minimal or no vetting.
One international group demands that the Circumvention of Lawful Pathways be withdrawn entirely because it would have a devastating impact on the physical and mental health of people seeking safety. “The implementation of the rule would only exacerbate humanitarian needs and unsafe conditions along the US-Mexico border and in other locations on the migration route,” according to Doctors Without Borders. “The Biden administration should instead focus on restoring full access to asylum at ports of entry, in line with US law and international obligations.” Another well-known organization, Human Rights First, claims the measure would return to persecution refugees who qualify for asylum under U.S. law and leave others in limbo without a pathway to citizenship. The group also orders the Biden administration to withdraw the “unlawful proposed rule in its entirety” and take steps to restore access to asylum. Another leftist organization, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, calls the measure an asylum transit ban that relies on transit countries that can neither ensure asylum seekers’ safety or a system that protects human rights granted under U.S. law. Not surprisingly, the group of lawyers also has “significant concerns” surrounding illegal immigrants’ “access to counsel” of the rule is implemented.
The post Open Border Groups Call Proposed Rule to Curb Illegal Immigration Unlawful Asylum Ban appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times:
“Tom Fitton, president of the conservative-backed watchdog group Judicial Watch, said while a SAR is not necessarily an indication of illegal activity, he believes Mr. Comer has already demonstrated that the Biden family was involved in a money laundering scheme
“It’s required tracking and doesn’t mean there’s fraud taking place,” Mr. Fitton said of the SARs. “But the information in it has raised additional questions about the Biden family’s relationship with the communist Chinese government.”
Read more here…
The post House investigators follow trail of Treasury red flags on Biden clan’s lucrative foreign deals appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNN:
“We can’t have two years of hearings and then a report,” President of Judicial Watch Tom Fitton told CNN, referring to the pressure his group has placed on Congress to act immediately on the abuses of power that he sees happening, including “censoring Americans and trying to jail those who are perceived as political opponents.”
Fitton said he has appreciated how House Republicans have updated the public on an “ongoing basis as opposed to just sitting on material” and added “if they don’t seem to be going in the right direction, there will be some pushback.”
Read more here…
The post Inside the backchannel communications keeping Donald Trump in the loop on Republican investigations appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Weeks after earmarking a million dollars to empower marginalized racial and ethnic communities in Europe, the Biden administration is spending another million on a State Department program in Latin America known as Race, Ethnicity, and Social Inclusion (RESI). The new allocation will help Brazil and Colombia “advance reforms that promote equity and equality, eliminate barriers to inclusion, and create equal access and opportunities for members of marginalized and underserved communities,” according to a grant announcement published a few days ago.
The recent European and Latin American grants appear to be the global expansion of the Biden administration’s costly, domestic effort to advance racial equity and support for underserved populations through taxpayer-funded programs. The president launched the governmentwide initiative on his first day in office with a lengthy executive order titled Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government. The 2021 document claims that “entrenched disparities” in laws, public policies, and private institutions have denied equal opportunity to individuals and communities and that the health and climate crises have exposed inequities while a “historic movement for justice has highlighted the unbearable human costs of systemic racism.” Therefore, the order states, the federal government should pursue a “comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all, including people of color and others who have been historically underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality.” It further says that “by advancing equity across the Federal Government, we can create opportunities for the improvement of communities that have been historically underserved, which benefits everyone.”
Many key federal agencies have implemented racial equity plans as per Biden’s order. The Department of Labor has dedicated $260 million to promote “equitable access” to government unemployment benefits by addressing disparities in the administration and delivery of money by race ethnicity and language proficiency. The Treasury Department named its first ever racial equity chief, a veteran La Raza official who spent a decade at the nation’s most influential open borders group. The Department of Defense (DOD) is using outrageous anti-bias materials that indoctrinate troops with anti-American and racially inflammatory training on diversity topics. The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) created an equity commission to address longstanding inequities in agriculture. The nation’s medical research agency has a special minority health and health disparities division that issued a study declaring COVID-19 exacerbated preexisting resentment against racial/ethnic minorities and marginalized communities.
Last month the administration launched the initiative’s global version by dedicating a million dollars to “empower marginalized racial and ethnic communities in Europe,” focusing on people of African descent and Roma people. Among the goals is to mitigate structural racism, xenophobia, and discrimination found in institutions designed to protect and serve all people in society and ensure the fair administration of, and access to, justice for marginalized racial and ethnic communities. The U.S. also aims to counter societal discrimination and violence by advancing equity, social inclusion, and equality for all. The overseas investment is critical, according to the Biden administration, because members of marginalized racial, ethnic, and indigenous communities around the world often are disproportionately discriminated against, forced to endure high levels of violence and excruciating labor conditions in migration, are systematically denied access to justice, and continually bear the brunt of racial discrimination, xenophobia, and violence in society.
The administration’s latest allotment in Latin America will fund two programs, the Colombia Action Plan on Racial and Ethnic Equality (CAPREE) and the Brazil Joint Action Plan to Eliminate Racial and Ethnic Discrimination and Promote Equality (JAPER). CAPREE recognizes the important contributions of African-descendent and indigenous peoples and seeks to elevate recognition of their cultures in the U.S. and Colombia by implementing programs to address social barriers that affect Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities. JAPER targets racism and addresses racial health disparities, environmental justice, equal access to economic opportunities and equal access to the justice system. The initiative recognizes that Brazil and the U.S. are multi-ethnic, multi-racial democracies that celebrate the rich contributions of people of African descent and indigenous populations. Similar to the domestic initiatives, the goal in Colombia and Brazil is racial and ethnic equality as well as social inclusion.
The post U.S. Funds Million-Dollar Race, Ethnicity, Social Inclusion Project in Latin America appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Records Show Air Force Academy Focus on Anti-American Critical Race Theory Training of Cadets – Academy Head Ties Cadets to Racism and Social Injustice
Judicial Watch announced recently it received 167 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Defense which show the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA) has made race and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.
College Gets Millions from U.S. to Develop Tool for Journalists to Combat Misinformation
The public university that recently got more than half a million dollars from the U.S. government to combat science misinformation in black communities is also receiving a chunk of change from American taxpayers to develop a “precision tool providing journalists with guidance against misinformation.”
Judicial Watch Victory: Court Rejects Argument of Terrorist-Tied Qatar and Orders Release of Documents About Its Funding of Texas A&M
Zachor Legal Institute is a U.S.-based advocacy group dedicated to combatting the spread of anti-Semitism. Zachor made requests under the TPIA for information about the funding or donations made to Texas A&M by the government of Qatar and agencies and subdivisions of the government of Qatar. Qatar controversially has aligned itself with Islamic terrorists and extremists which has placed it at odds with the United States, Israel and other U.S. allies in the Middle East.
U.S. to Spend $50 Million on “Post-Release Services” for Migrant Youths
As part of the red carpet rollout for illegal immigrants the Biden administration is dedicating tens of millions of dollars to provide migrant youths with a multitude of services once they are released from government shelters. This includes medical, educational, legal and an array of other services. American taxpayers will also fund detailed home studies by deploying case managers to conduct intensive in-home engagements and virtual check-ins to ensure the safety and continued support for the young migrants and the families they have been released to.
In The News
Court rules in favor of releasing info on funding, Qatar’s influence over Texas A&M campus
Just the News
A Texas county court has ruled in favor of releasing information about Qatar’s potential influence over Texas A&M University through funding and by hosting one of the school’s campuses in the Gulf State.
1.2 million inactive voters removed from Los Angeles voter rolls, more than half haven’t voted in 10 years
The Blaze
Over 1 million inactive voters have been removed from the voter rolls in Los Angeles County, California, stemming from a lawsuit filed in 2017.
In an effort to clean up voter rolls and prevent possible voter fraud, Judicial Watch, a conservative organization that promotes government transparency, sued Los Angeles County on behalf of legally registered voters.
Buzz: Millions spent, little gained, in Durham investigation, Census wants slavery category
Washington Examiner
In the latest example of how special counsels might not be worth what taxpayers spend on them, Judicial Watch has uncovered last year’s budget for Russiagate special counsel John Durham, who hasn’t made many headlines.
Video Highlights
-
-
- ELECTON INTERFERENCE: NY Dem Politicians Plan to JAIL TRUMP! - FLASHBACK: “Trump is a Crime Victim!” - BOMBSHELL: Chinese Communist Cash for Biden Family
-
The post Air Force Academy Pushes Critical Race Theory appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
A Texas county court has ruled in favor of releasing information about Qatar’s potential influence over Texas A&M University through funding and by hosting one of the school’s campuses in the Gulf State.
The decision from Travis County Judge Amy Clark Meachum last week came after the non-profit watchdog Judicial Watch filed a petition on behalf of the antisemitism advocacy group Zachor Legal Institute.
Zachor attempted to obtain information in 2018 about the campus in Qatar, which was established without the involvement of the Texas Legislature.
Qatar filed a lawsuit that year in response to prevent its funding information from being disclosed. And Texas A&M argued that publicizing the records would reveal private donor information.
Judicial Watch argued that only private donors are protected under the law, not governments or their entities.
Zachor President Marc Greendorfer thanked Judicial Watch and said: “We now look forward to receiving the records that Qatar has spent the last four-plus years blocking from public review.”
Read more here…
The post Court rules in favor of releasing info on funding, Qatar’s influence over Texas A&M campus appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Air Force Academy Pushes Critical Race Theory Training on Cadets
College Gets Millions to Develop Journalist Tool to Combat “Misinformation”
Air Force Academy Pushes Critical Race Theory Training on Cadets
With Russia and China making belligerent noises almost daily, it is not comforting to watch our military headed down the dark alley of anti-American wokeism. Yet it is happening, and we now have a clear picture of it at the Air Force Academy.
We received 167 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Defense which show that the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA) has made race and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.
The records include recommendations that the USAFA considers “Behavioral Science 362, ‘Class, Race, Gender, and Sexuality’ as a core class,” that all curriculum be reviewed for “D&I” (diversity and inclusion) topics, and that all cadets and staff be educated in “specific D&I concepts and skills in order to decrease incidents of microaggressions, unconscious bias, etc.”
We obtained the records in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit on behalf of Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. (STARRS) against the U.S. Department of Defense for Air Force Academy records regarding “systemic racism,” as well as records of critical race theory at the Academy (Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. v U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:22-cv–02894)).
In the introduction to the September 21, 2020, “U.S. Air Force Academy Internal Racial Disparity Review,” Superintendent Lt. General Jay Silveria writes:
Systemic racism exists in our society. Identity groups, whether based on race, ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or disability, have all experienced less-than-equal treatment in our nation, both historically and persisting in the present day. Ongoing events across our nation and around the world are a stark reminder that racism and social injustice continue to afflict our society. We must acknowledge that at USAFA we are not immune to these issues. What happens outside our gates also happens across our installation, and throughout the Cadet Wing. We would be naive to think otherwise, and negligent to ignore the impact of racism and injustice on our cadets, our permanent party and their families and our entire USAFA community.
Our military superiority relies on an incredibly diverse force of innovative individuals who must work cohesively as a team. There is no place in our words or actions for discrimination or racial bias of any kind, nor can we allow these behaviors to persist in the culture of our institution. A disregard for dignity and respect is corrosive to mission success, and will not be tolerated. To address these issues we must each, and as a cohesive team, look inward to continually examine ourselves and our institution for the prevalence of racism, discrimination, and injustice.
To that end, I directed what I hope will be an enduring, lasting effort to promote racial
understanding and diversity in the context of leadership. These actions included the
establishment of a Critical Conversations Working Group (CCWG), led by the Center for Character Development (CCLD), to facilitate recurring USAFA-wide critical conversations for cadets and permanent party. In addition, my Director of Staff and the Director of Equal Opportunity co-chaired an internal assessment and review for biases within our policies, processes, practices, curriculum, and artifacts. The objective of the assessment was to identify racial disparities unique to USAFA.
Under a heading “Limitations” in the “Purpose and Context” section the review states:
We must continually work to build future leaders and reinforce the principles that underpin our “Leader of Character” framework- living honorably, lifting others, and elevating performance- in the context of equal opportunity, diversity and inclusion, and respect for others. As an institution that develops officers to lead a diverse force, USAFA must instill these principles in those we teach and lead. These young men and women will ultimately shape the future culture of our military, and in turn influence the larger American society. As such, there is no place in our words and actions for discrimination or racial bias of any kind at USAFA, or in our Air and Space Forces.
Within the section titled “Diversity and Inclusion at USAFA [U.S. Air Force Academy],” under the heading “Additional Data Sources,” the review cites a 2020 Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) survey of cadets in the Class of 2024:
The survey collected information on student’s opinions on racial understanding, racial discrimination, preferential treatment (based on race/ethnicity), and other D&I (diversity & inclusion) related topics. Cursory analysis of the CL24 responses indicates:
- 16% of our incoming cadets find that helping to promote racial understanding is not
important (17% of Caucasian cadets, 15% of Minority cadets). The remainder of the
cadets responded that it was somewhat important (38%), very important (28%), or
essential (18 %). - 24% of our incoming cadets agreed that racial discrimination is no longer a major
problem in America. The remainder of the cadets disagreed with that statement. - 75% of our incoming cadets rated themselves as average or above average when
comparing themselves to the average person their own age in terms of their
understanding of others. - One question asked whether the student agrees/disagrees whether individuals from
disadvantaged social backgrounds should be given preferential treatment in college
65% of the Caucasian and 45% of the Minority cadets disagreed while 35%
of the Caucasian and 55% of the Minority cadets agreed with that statement.
Later in that section, under the heading “Equal Opportunity (USAF/EO,” the Air Force Academy’s Equal Opportunity office recommends the Academy:
Consider implementing Behavioral Science 362, ‘Class, Race, Gender, and Sexuality’ as a core class or pulling the content into shorter transition-week training opportunities spread across a cadet’s USAFA career. The material is highly regarded by cadets and graduates, and the information could be implemented on a larger scale (to include training for basics and sessions for each year group) to help cadets mature into D&I professionals for the Air Force.
In the section titled “The Way Forward,” the review introduces a “Triple Threat Group,” which was established in June 2020 “after national conversations surrounding police brutality, release of news articles addressing racial disparities in the AF discipline system, and the height of racial tension.” The review continues: “Triple Threat’s ongoing efforts align theory and considerations on how USAFA could address racial tension and unrest using a 3-tiered, ‘triple threat’ approach of Acknowledgment, Action, and Advocacy. In clarifying the need to address this issue, as well as to demonstrate the importance of these efforts, Triple Threat solicited shared stories from current cadets and graduates from the past year that captured realities and perceptions that bring awareness to the ‘Black experience” at USAFA [U.S. Air Force Academy].”
Also in that section of the review is a heading titled “Recommendations” that includes:
- Ensure Diversity and Inclusion is incorporated into USAFA [U.S. Air Force Academy] guidance and policy. [Academy’s] Diversity and Inclusion plan must be updated as a strategic document guiding D&I [diversity and inclusion] efforts across the institution.
- Expand the DF-led [dean of faculty] curriculum review to ensure all [Academy] curriculum, as identified under the Course of Instruction, is reviewed for D&I [diversity and inclusion] topics.
- Educate and train cadets and staff on more specific D&I [diversity and inclusion] concepts and skills in order to decrease incidents of microaggressions, unconscious bias, etc., and enhance retention/inclusion. In addition, we must train our leaders across the institution on how to facilitate critical conversations on racial issues within their workplaces, so all Airmen can bring their full selves to work and leaders can create more inclusive spaces. Correlated to this effort is the need to develop a more robust racial bias incident reporting system with associated accountability and rehabilitation processes to restore relationships in the event biases or microaggressions are experienced.
In the “Triple Threat Proposal,” appendix, the review calls for “Cultural Immersion Movie Nights:”
Cultural Immersion Movie Nights is an initiative we propose to be held at Arnold Hall throughout the academic semesters. This initiative will allow cadets and permanent party to learn about racism, racial discrimination and the several historical events and policies that have impacted minorities through cinema. The goal is to help inform all members at this institution of the cultural history of other races and thus bring greater unity and understanding of other groups within the Cadet Wing.
The recently obtained documents also include an August 17, 2021, email, in which the sender and recipients are redacted, that discusses required textbook readings on “prejudice and discrimination,” which includes:
Identify examples of prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination.
Describe how explicit and implicit prejudice differ.
Describe some of the social, emotional, and cognitive roots of prejudice.
The email goes on to state that Academy cadets were “asked to watch a video of the well-known ‘Brown Eyes/Blue Eyes’ demonstration.”
According to STARRS President and CEO Dr. Ronald J. Scott, Jr., Colonel, USAF, Retired, USAFA ’73: “Diversity, equity, and inclusion training stems from Marxist-inspired ideology known as critical race theory. While attractive to those who believe in justice and equal opportunity, it empowers those who hold positions of authority or influence to coerce others into compliance. This phenomenon is what C.S. Lewis wrote about when he grouped people into ‘the conditioners’ and ‘the conditioned’ in his 1940s book ‘The Abolition of Man.’”
These documents show our military and its rising leadership are under attack from within. The documents confirm U.S. Air Force Academy leadership is obsessed with anti-American critical race theory and seeks to punish and smear cadets through leftist indoctrination programs.
Our lawsuits and FOIA requests on critical race theory and other leftist extremism are extensive:
In November 2022, we separately sued the Air Force Academy for training material records on critical race theory.
In July 2022, we sued the Department of Defense for records related to the United States Naval Academy (USNA) implementing critical race theory (CRT) in the training of naval recruits.
In August, our client David Flynn, who was removed from his position as head football coach after exercising his right as a parent-citizen to raise concerns about critical race theory and Black Lives Matter propaganda in his daughter’s seventh-grade history class, settled his civil rights lawsuit against his former employers at Dedham Public Schools. As part of the settlement, the Superintendent of Dedham Public Schools, Michael Welch, acknowledged “the important and valid issues” raised by Flynn and specific changes in school policies because of Flynn’s complaint, including banning teachers from promoting Black Lives Matter to students online.
Also in August, we sued on behalf of a Minneapolis taxpayer over a teachers’ contract that provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities. The lawsuit was filed against the superintendent of the Minneapolis Public Schools, the Minneapolis Public Schools, and the Minneapolis Board of Education for violating the Equal Protection Guarantee of the Minnesota Constitution.
In June, we received records revealing critical race theory instruction at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. One training slide contains a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” [Emphasis in original]
Records produced in April 2022 from the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) show the government agency responsible for regulating credit unions required “inclusion and unconscious bias training” for the agency’s employees and contractors and offered advice on how to recognize and address alleged “microaggressions” in the workplace.
Records produced in February 2022 from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) included a PowerPoint presentation titled “Race and gender based microaggressions” that was used for training at the organization.
Two sets of records we obtained in November 2021 related to the teaching of critical race theory in Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS), Maryland’s largest school system, included a training course with information about a book titled “Antiracist Baby” that introduces the youngest readers to “the concept and power of antiracism,” and says it’s the “perfect gift” for “ages baby to age 3.”
Records from Loudoun County, VA, obtained in October 2021 revealed a coordinated effort to advance critical race theory initiatives in Loudoun County public schools despite widespread public opposition.
A training document provided to us in October 2021 by a whistleblower in the Westerly School District of Rhode Island, details how its schools are using teachers to push critical race theory in classrooms. The training course was assembled by the left-leaning Highlander Institute and cites quotes from Bettina Love, from whom the Biden administration distanced itself publicly after her statements equating “whiteness” to oppression.
Records produced in June 2021 by Wellesley Public Schools in Massachusetts confirmed the use of “affinity spaces” that divide students and staff based on race as a priority and objective of the school district’s “diversity, equity and inclusion” plan. The school district also admitted that between September 1, 2020, and May 17, 2021, it created “five distinct” segregated spaces.
Heavily redacted records we obtained in May 2021from Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) in Maryland included documents related to their $454,000 “Anti-racist system audit” and critical race theory classes. Students were taught that the phrase “Make America Great Again” was an example of “covert white supremacy.”
You can see that your Judicial Watch is second to none in trying to expose and stop the CRT menace to the American way. Thank you for your support of this essential work, as we couldn’t do it without you!
College Gets Millions to Develop Journalist Tool to Combat “Misinformation”
The Biden administration (and the Deep State under Trump) has become obsessed with censoring our speech and using our tax dollars to abuse our First Amendment rights. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the latest.
The public university that recently got more than half a million dollars from the U.S. government to combat science misinformation in black communities is also receiving a chunk of change from American taxpayers to develop a “precision tool providing journalists with guidance against misinformation.” The fact-checking engine is called Course Correct and the academics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who are creating it assert it will help journalists identify trending misinformation on social media, strategically correct false claims and test the effectiveness of corrections in real time. “Challenges of misinformation are not restricted to elections and COVID or to a particular community,” according to one of the professors working on the project. “Countering misinformation will require vigilance and adaptation.” And apparently a lot of money from the government.
Public funding will flow through the National Science Foundation (NSF), the federal agency established by Congress in 1950 to promote the progress of science, advance national health and secure national defense. In two separate grants the NSF is awarding the University of Wisconsin-Madison north of $5.7 million to develop Course Correct. The first grant, for $750,000, focuses on delivering an innovative, three-step method to identify, test, and correct real-world instances of online disinformation by using computational means such as language processing, machine learning, social network analysis and computer vision to identify posts and accounts susceptible to misinformation. “Democracy and public health in the United States rely on trust in institutions,” the grant announcement states. “Skepticism regarding the integrity of U.S. elections and hesitancy related to COVID-19 vaccines are two consequences of a decline in confidence in basic political processes and core medical institutions. Social media serve as a major source of delegitimizing information about elections and vaccines, with networks of users actively sowing doubts about election integrity and vaccine efficacy, fueling the spread of misinformation.”
The initial NSF investment will support and empower efforts by journalists, developers, and citizens to fact-check information, the grant document says. They urgently need tools that can enable testing of fact-checking stories on topics such as elections and vaccines across social media platforms like Twitter, Reddit, and Facebook, according to the science agency. In short, the project is motivated by a desire to understand and help address what the Biden administration calls “two democratic and public health crises facing the U.S.” They are described as skepticism regarding the integrity of U.S. elections and hesitancy related to COVID-19 vaccines. “Both of these crises are fueled by online misinformation,” the NSF writes in the grant document.
The bigger chunk of money—up to $5 million—will pay for professors to test and refine the new, publicly funded Course Correct, which is being promoted as a Precision Guidance Against Misinformation. Creators of the digital dashboard will partner with local, state, national and international news and fact-checking organizations to create misinformation networks and test how effective the new mechanism is in helping journalists detect and correct misinformation. The focus will be on diffusers rather than producers of misinformation and to embed the experimental program into newsrooms worldwide. “By the end of Phase II, Course Correct intends to have further developed the digital dashboard in ways that could ultimately be adopted by other end users such as public health organizations, election administration officials, and commercial outlets,” according to the NHS.
The generous allocations for the costly endeavor come on the heels of another government-funded project at the same school to meet the Biden administration’s mission of combating disinformation. Just a few months ago University of Wisconsin-Madison professors received $576,061 to fight science-related misinformation and misperceptions in black communities. The goal of that initiative is to counter inequity and mistrust in scientific information and understand science misinformation in black communities, according to the NSF. “Black American experiences can pose particular challenges for effective communication on issues related to science and medicine, and recent misinformation campaigns have increasingly sought to capitalize on beliefs underlying mistrust within Black communities to spread misinformation,” according to that grant document. The professors who received the money assert that “Black Americans continue to face oppression and medical racism.”
Until next week,
The post Military Under Attack – From Within! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 167 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Defense which show the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA) has made race and gender instruction a top priority in the training of cadets.
The records include recommendations that the USAFA considers “Behavioral Science 362, ‘Class, Race, Gender, and Sexuality’ as a core class,” that all curriculum be reviewed for “D&I” (diversity and inclusion) topics, and that all cadets and staff be educated in “specific D&I concepts and skills in order to decrease incidents of microaggressions, unconscious bias, etc.”
Judicial Watch obtained the records in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit on behalf of Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. (STARRS) against the U.S. Department of Defense for Air Force Academy records regarding “systemic racism,” as well as records of critical race theory at the Academy (Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. v U.S. Department of Defense(No. 1:22-cv–02894)).
In the introduction to the September 21, 2020, “U.S. Air Force Academy Internal Racial Disparity Review,” Superintendent Lt. General Jay Silveria writes:
Systemic racism exists in our society. Identity groups, whether based on race, ethnicity, age, gender, sexual orientation, religion, or disability, have all experienced less-than-equal treatment in our nation, both historically and persisting in the present day. Ongoing events across our nation and around the world are a stark reminder that racism and social injustice continue to afflict our society. We must acknowledge that at USAFA we are not immune to these issues. What happens outside our gates also happens across our installation, and throughout the Cadet Wing. We would be naive to think otherwise, and negligent to ignore the impact of racism and injustice on our cadets, our permanent party and their families and our entire USAFA community.
Our military superiority relies on an incredibly diverse force of innovative individuals who must
work cohesively as a team. There is no place in our words or actions for discrimination or racial
bias of any kind, nor can we allow these behaviors to persist in the culture of our institution. A
disregard for dignity and respect is corrosive to mission success, and will not be tolerated. To
address these issues we must each, and as a cohesive team, look inward to continually examine
ourselves and our institution for the prevalence of racism, discrimination, and injustice.
To that end, I directed what I hope will be an enduring, lasting effort to promote racial
understanding and diversity in the context of leadership. These actions included the
establishment of a Critical Conversations Working Group (CCWG), led by the Center for
Character Development (CCLD), to facilitate recurring USAFA-wide critical conversations for
cadets and permanent party. In addition, my Director of Staff and the Director of Equal
Opportunity co-chaired an internal assessment and review for biases within our policies,
processes, practices, curriculum, and artifacts. The objective of the assessment was to identify
racial disparities unique to USAFA.
Under a heading “Limitations” in the “Purpose and Context” section the review states:
We must continually work to build future leaders and reinforce the principles that underpin our “Leader of Character” framework- living honorably, lifting others, and elevating performance- in the context of equal opportunity, diversity and inclusion, and respect for others. As an institution that develops officers to lead a diverse force, USAFA must instill these principles in those we teach and lead. These young men and women will ultimately shape the future culture of our military, and in turn influence the larger American society. As such, there is no place in our words and actions for discrimination or racial bias of any kind at USAFA, or in our Air and Space Forces.
Within the section titled “Diversity and Inclusion at USAFA [U.S. Air Force Academy],” under the heading “Additional Data Sources,” the review cites a 2020 Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) survey of cadets in the Class of 2024:
The survey collected information on student’s opinions on racial understanding, racial discrimination, preferential treatment (based on race/ethnicity), and other D&I (diversity & inclusion) related topics. Cursory analysis of the CL24 responses indicates:
- 16% of our incoming cadets find that helping to promote racial understanding is not
important ( 17% of Caucasian cadets, 15% of Minority cadets). The remainder of the
cadets responded that it was somewhat important (38%), very important (28%), or
essential ( 18 %). - 24% of our incoming cadets agreed that racial discrimination is no longer a major
problem in America. The remainder of the cadets disagreed with that statement. - 75% of our incoming cadets rated themselves as average or above average when
comparing themselves to the average person their own age in terms of their
understanding of others. - One question asked whether the student agrees/disagrees whether individuals from
disadvantaged social backgrounds should be given preferential treatment in college
admissions. 65% of the Caucasian and 45% of the Minority cadets disagreed while 35%
of the Caucasian and 55% of the Minority cadets agreed with that statement.
Later in that section, under the heading “Equal Opportunity (USAF/EO,” the Air Force Academy’s Equal Opportunity office recommends the Academy:
Consider implementing Behavioral Science 362, ‘Class, Race, Gender, and Sexuality’ as a core class or pulling the content into shorter transition-week training opportunities spread across a cadet’s USAFA career. The material is highly regarded by cadets and graduates, and the information could be implemented on a larger scale (to include training for basics and sessions for each year group) to help cadets mature into D&I professionals for the Air Force.
In the section titled “The Way Forward,” the review introduces a “Triple Threat Group,” which was established in June 2020 “after national conversations surrounding police brutality, release of news articles addressing racial disparities in the AF discipline system, and the height of racial tension.” The review continues: “Triple Threat’s ongoing efforts align theory and considerations on how USAFA could address racial tension and unrest using a 3-tiered, ‘triple threat’ approach of Acknowledgment, Action, and Advocacy. In clarifying the need to address this issue, as well as to demonstrate the importance of these efforts, Triple Threat solicited shared stories from current cadets and graduates from the past year that captured realities and perceptions that bring awareness to the ‘Black experience” at USAFA [U.S. Air Force Academy].”
Also in that section of the review is a heading titled “Recommendations” that includes:
- Ensure Diversity and Inclusion is incorporated into USAFA [U.S. Air Force Academy] guidance and policy. [Academy’s] Diversity and Inclusion plan must be updated as a strategic document guiding D&I [diversity and inclusion] efforts across the institution.
- Expand the DF-led [dean of faculty] curriculum review to ensure all [Academy] curriculum, as identified under the Course of Instruction, is reviewed for D&I [diversity and inclusion]topics.
- Educate and train cadets and staff on more specific D&I [diversity and inclusion] concepts and skills in order to decrease incidents of microaggressions, unconscious bias, etc., and enhance retention/inclusion. In addition, we must train our leaders across the institution on how to facilitate critical conversations on racial issues within their workplaces, so all Airmen can bring their full selves to work and leaders can create more inclusive spaces. Correlated to this effort is the need to develop a more robust racial bias incident reporting system with associated accountability and rehabilitation processes to restore relationships in the event biases or microaggressions are experienced.
In the “Triple Threat Proposal,” appendix, the review calls for “Cultural Immersion Movie Nights:”
Cultural Immersion Movie Nights is an initiative we propose to be held at Arnold Hall throughout the academic semesters. This initiative will allow cadets and permanent party to learn about racism, racial discrimination and the several historical events and policies that have impacted minorities through cinema. The goal is to help inform all members at this institution of the cultural history of other races and thus bring greater unity and understanding of other groups within the Cadet Wing.
The recently obtained documents also include an August 17, 2021, email, in which the sender and recipients are redacted, that discusses required textbook readings on “prejudice and discrimination,” which includes:
Identify examples of prejudice, stereotypes, and discrimination.
Describe how explicit and implicit prejudice differ.
Describe some of the social, emotional, and cognitive roots of prejudice.
The email goes on to state that Academy cadets were “asked to watch a video of the well-known ‘Brown Eyes/Blue Eyes’ demonstration.”
According to STARRS President and CEO Dr. Ronald J. Scott, Jr., Colonel, USAF, Retired, USAFA ’73: “Diversity, equity, and inclusion training stems from Marxist-inspired ideology known as critical race theory. While attractive to those who believe in justice and equal opportunity, it empowers those who hold positions of authority or influence to coerce others into compliance. This phenomenon is what C.S. Lewis wrote about when he grouped people into ‘the conditioners’ and ‘the conditioned’ in his 1940s book ‘The Abolition of Man.’”
“These documents show our military and its rising leadership are under attack from within. The documents confirm U.S. Air Force Academy leadership is obsessed with anti-American critical race theory and seeks to punish and smear cadets through leftist indoctrination programs,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch lawsuits and FOIA requests on critical race theory and other leftist extremism are extensive:
In November 2022, Judicial Watch separately sued the Air Force Academy for training material records on critical race theory.
In July 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Department of Defense for records related to the United States Naval Academy (USNA) implementing critical race theory (CRT) in the training of naval recruits
In August, Judicial Watch’s client David Flynn, who was removed from his position as head football coach after exercising his right as a parent-citizen to raise concerns about critical race theory and Black Lives Matter propaganda in his daughter’s seventh-grade history class, settled his civil rights lawsuit against his former employers at Dedham Public Schools. As part of the settlement, the Superintendent of Dedham Public Schools, Michael Welch, acknowledged “the important and valid issues” raised by Flynn and specific changes in school policies because of Flynn’s complaint, including banning teachers from promoting Black Lives Matter to students online.
Also in August, Judicial Watch sued on behalf of a Minneapolis taxpayer over a teachers’ contract that provides discriminatory job protections to certain racial minorities. The lawsuit was filed against the superintendent of the Minneapolis Public Schools, the Minneapolis Public Schools, and the Minneapolis Board of Education for violating the Equal Protection Guarantee of the Minnesota Constitution.
In June, Judicial Watch received records revealing critical race theory instruction at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. One training slide contains a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” [Emphasis in original]
Records produced in April 2022 from the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) show the government agency responsible for regulating credit unions required “inclusion and unconscious bias training” for the agency’s employees and contractors and offered advice on how to recognize and address alleged “microaggressions” in the workplace.
Records produced in February 2022 from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) included a PowerPoint presentation titled “Race and gender based microaggressions” that was used for training at the organization.
Two sets of records obtained by Judicial Watch in November 2021 related to the teaching of critical race theory in Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS), Maryland’s largest school system, included a training course with information about a book titled “Antiracist Baby” that introduces the youngest readers to “the concept and power of antiracism,” and says it’s the “perfect gift” for “ages baby to age 3.”
Records from Loudoun County, VA, obtained in October 2021 revealed a coordinated effort to advance critical race theory initiatives in Loudoun County public schools despite widespread public opposition.
A training document provided to Judicial Watch in October 2021 by a whistleblower in the Westerly School District of Rhode Island, details how its schools are using teachers to push critical race theory in classrooms. The training course was assembled by the left-leaning Highlander Institute and cites quotes from Bettina Love, from whom the Biden administration distanced itself publicly after her statements equating “whiteness” to oppression.
Records produced in June 2021 by Wellesley Public Schools in Massachusetts confirmed the use of “affinity spaces” that divide students and staff based on race as a priority and objective of the school district’s “diversity, equity and inclusion” plan. The school district also admitted that between September 1, 2020, and May 17, 2021, it created “five distinct” segregated spaces.
Heavily redacted records obtained by Judicial watch in May 2021from Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) in Maryland included documents related to their $454,000 “Anti-racist system audit” and critical race theory classes. Students were taught that the phrase “Make America Great Again” was an example of “covert white supremacy.”
The post Judicial Watch: Records Show Air Force Academy Focus on Anti-American Critical Race Theory Training of Cadets – Academy Head Ties Cadets to Racism and Social Injustice appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Victory: Court Rejects Argument of Terrorist-Tied Qatar and Orders Release of Documents About Its Funding of Texas A&M
Judicial Watch announced a victory recently in the District Court of Texas for Travis County where it filed a petition on behalf of its client Zachor Legal Institute under the Texas Public Information Act (TPIA), seeking information about potential influence by the Qatar government’s funding of certain Texas A&M University programs and a Texas A&M campus in Education City, Al Rayyan, Qatar.
U.S. to Spend $50 Million on “Post-Release Services” for Migrant Youths
As part of the red carpet rollout for illegal immigrants the Biden administration is dedicating tens of millions of dollars to provide migrant youths with a multitude of services once they are released from government shelters. This includes medical, educational, legal and an array of other services. American taxpayers will also fund detailed home studies by deploying case managers to conduct intensive in-home engagements and virtual check-ins to ensure the safety and continued support for the young migrants and the families they have been released to.
Judicial Watch Sues Federal Trade Commission for Information on Controversial Targeting of Twitter Owner Elon Musk
Federal Trade Commission document demands to Twitter obtained by the House Judiciary Committee show onerous requests for all documents about Elon Musk and documents concerning Twitter’s work with journalists to disclose to the public the details about the government’s and Twitter’s censorship of American citizens.
Biden’s Migrant Catch-and-Release Policy Unlawful, Trump-Appointed Judge Rules
The Biden administration has turned the southwest border into a meaningless line in the sand and little more than a speedbump for aliens flooding into the country, according to a scathing federal court order blasting the president’s controversial catch-and-release policy. Known as Parole Plus Alternative to Detention (Parole+ATD) the program released over a million illegal immigrants in the U.S. in a year, supposedly tracking them with technology and other tools.
In The News
The Truth Behind ERIC, the Syndicate Founded by Leftists to Manage Voter Registration Rolls
Judicial Watch
The media is condemning officials in Republican-led states for withdrawing from a controversial data-sharing consortium that purports to help manage voter registration rolls and, not surprisingly, the news reports fail to tell the whole story. The system is known as the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) and it claims to be an efficient and cost-effective mechanism for states to maintain accurate voter rolls.
Judicial Watch: Federal Appeals Court Hears Challenge To FBI’s Withholding of Communications with Banks Regarding January 6 Disturbance
Judicial Watch
In its appeal, Judicial Watch pointed out that the lower court was mistaken when it upheld the FBI’s Glomar response (neither confirming nor denying the existence of records) because the FBI previously acknowledged the existence of the records in multiple ways. For instance, court records filed in support of a criminal case include the FBI’s statement of facts that provides the defendant’s address, which was obtained through “his Bank of America account and recent Expedia transactions.”
1.2 million inactive voters removed from Los Angeles voter rolls, more than half haven’t voted in 10 years
The Blaze
Over 1 million inactive voters have been removed from the voter rolls in Los Angeles County, California, stemming from a lawsuit filed in 2017.
In an effort to clean up voter rolls and prevent possible voter fraud, Judicial Watch, a conservative organization that promotes government transparency, sued Los Angeles County on behalf of legally registered voters.
Video Highlights
-
-
- BOMBSHELL: Chinese Communist Cash for Biden Family - FDA Pushes Abortion Drug–Judicial Watch Acts! - FLASHBACK: American University Funded by Anti-Israel Qatar – Judicial Watch Sues & Wins!
-
The post Judicial Watch Victory and more! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The public university that recently got more than half a million dollars from the U.S. government to combat science misinformation in black communities is also receiving a chunk of change from American taxpayers to develop a “precision tool providing journalists with guidance against misinformation.” The fact-checking engine is called Course Correct and the academics at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who are creating it assert it will help journalists identify trending misinformation on social media, strategically correct false claims and test the effectiveness of corrections in real time. “Challenges of misinformation are not restricted to elections and COVID or to a particular community,” according to one of the professors working on the project. “Countering misinformation will require vigilance and adaptation.” And apparently a lot of money from the government.
Public funding will flow through the National Science Foundation (NSF), the federal agency established by Congress in 1950 to promote the progress of science, advance national health and secure national defense. In two separate grants the NSF is awarding the University of Wisconsin-Madison north of $5.7 million to develop Course Correct. The first grant, for $750,000, focuses on delivering an innovative, three-step method to identify, test, and correct real-world instances of online disinformation by using computational means such as language processing, machine learning, social network analysis and computer vision to identify posts and accounts susceptible to misinformation. “Democracy and public health in the United States rely on trust in institutions,” the grant announcement states. “Skepticism regarding the integrity of U.S. elections and hesitancy related to COVID-19 vaccines are two consequences of a decline in confidence in basic political processes and core medical institutions. Social media serve as a major source of delegitimizing information about elections and vaccines, with networks of users actively sowing doubts about election integrity and vaccine efficacy, fueling the spread of misinformation.”
The initial NSF investment will support and empower efforts by journalists, developers, and citizens to fact-check information, the grant document says. They urgently need tools that can enable testing of fact-checking stories on topics such as elections and vaccines across social media platforms like Twitter, Reddit, and Facebook, according to the science agency. In short, the project is motivated by a desire to understand and help address what the Biden administration calls “two democratic and public health crises facing the U.S.” They are described as skepticism regarding the integrity of U.S. elections and hesitancy related to COVID-19 vaccines. “Both of these crises are fueled by online misinformation,” the NSF writes in the grant document.
The bigger chunk of money—up to $5 million—will pay for professors to test and refine the new, publicly funded Course Correct, which is being promoted as a Precision Guidance Against Misinformation. Creators of the digital dashboard will partner with local, state, national and international news and fact-checking organizations to create misinformation networks and test how effective the new mechanism is in helping journalists detect and correct misinformation. The focus will be on diffusers rather than producers of misinformation and to embed the experimental program into newsrooms worldwide. “By the end of Phase II, Course Correct intends to have further developed the digital dashboard in ways that could ultimately be adopted by other end users such as public health organizations, election administration officials, and commercial outlets,” according to the NHS.
The generous allocations for the costly endeavor come on the heels of another government-funded project at the same school to meet the Biden administration’s mission of combating disinformation. Just a few months ago University of Wisconsin-Madison professors received $576,061 to fight science-related misinformation and misperceptions in black communities. The goal of that initiative is to counter inequity and mistrust in scientific information and understand science misinformation in black communities, according to the NSF. “Black American experiences can pose particular challenges for effective communication on issues related to science and medicine, and recent misinformation campaigns have increasingly sought to capitalize on beliefs underlying mistrust within Black communities to spread misinformation,” according to that grant document. The professors who received the money assert that “Black Americans continue to face oppression and medical racism.”
The post College Gets Millions from U.S. to Develop Tool for Journalists to Combat Misinformation appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Court Orders Release of Qatar Documents About Funding Texas A&M
Judicial Watch Sues FTC for Information on Targeting of Twitter Owner Elon Musk
Biden’s Migrant Policy Creates “Meaningless Line in the Sand,” Judge Declares
Court Orders Release of Qatar Documents About Funding Texas A&M
The nation of Qatar has aligned itself with Islamic terrorists and extremists, which has placed it at odds with the United States, Israel and other U.S. allies in the Middle East.
Nevertheless, it managed to establish financial ties with an American university, and we’re helping to reveal the details.
We filed a petition in the District Court of Texas for Travis County on behalf of Zachor Legal Institute under the Texas Public Information Act (TPIA), seeking information about potential influence of the Qatar government’s funding of certain Texas A&M University programs and a Texas A&M campus in Education City, Al Rayyan, Qatar (Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development v. Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General (No. D-1-GN-18-006240)).
Now the court has sided with us, ordering the release of the pertinent documents.
The court was right to reject the arguments of Qatar that sought to hide information about the foreign government’s funding of Texas A& M. This case has been a multi-year court battle against a foreign government entity tied to Islamist terrorism – so this latest victory is sweet.
Zachor Legal Institute is a U.S.-based advocacy group dedicated to combatting the spread of anti-Semitism. Zachor made requests under the TPIA for information about the funding or donations made to Texas A&M by the government of Qatar and agencies and subdivisions of the government of Qatar.
Zachor’s initially pursued information related to the funding of the Texas A&M campus in Qatar in 2018. Zachor sought to determine how Texas A&M was able to establish a degree-conferring campus in Qatar without the Texas legislature’s permission or involvement.
In 2018, Qatar filed a lawsuit to prevent disclosure of its funding information. We countered with the argument that neither the Qatari government nor any of its agencies are protected by exceptions under Texas law and that federal law “expressly makes the requested information public.”
Texas A&M claimed making the records public would reveal confidential donor information. We countered this argument by pointing out the law only protects private donors, not donations from a foreign government body, specifically the Qatar Foundation. The Qatar Foundation “was created by the Emir of Qatar, is Chaired by his consort, and is sponsored and supported by the government of Qatar, a monarchy. At no point did the Qatar Foundation demonstrate that it is not an agency or subdivision of the government of Qatar.”
After reviewing the briefing, the arguments, and the evidence, including the documents submitted by the Qatar Foundation, Judge Amy Clark Meachum ruled in favor of Judicial Watch and the Zachor Legal Institute and ordered that the documents be made public.
“Zachor Legal Institute is grateful for the incredible support and skill of the entire Judicial Watch team,” said Marc Greendorfer, President of Zachor Legal Institute. “We now look forward to receiving the records that Qatar has spent the last four-plus years blocking from public review. While Qatari agents have a history of refusing to comply with lawful orders in the United States, such as Al Jazeera’s continuing refusal to comply with the Department of Justice’s 2020 order to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, we will not stop our inquiries into what Qatar is doing in the United States. We hope that Qatar will end its interference with American institutions now that Judicial Watch has once again compelled transparency in government.”
Judicial Watch Sues FTC for Information on Targeting of Twitter Owner Elon Musk
Lina Khan, nominated to lead the Federal Trade Commission by President Biden in March 2021, has gone on the attack with others on the Left against Twitter and its new chairman Elon Musk.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for records and communications maintained by its leadership, including Chairman Lina Khan, about Twitter and its owner Elon Musk (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission (1:23-cv-00692 (ABJ)).
We sued after the Federal Trade Commission failed to respond to a November 14, 2022, FOIA request for:
Records and communications maintained by Lina Khan, Chairperson, U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) including memoranda, reports, briefings, hand-written notes, email communications, email chains, email attachments and other forms of records or communications exchanged regarding or referring to Mr. Elon Musk, CEO, Twitter, or the company Twitter with the below named individuals:
(a) Commissioner Noah Joshua Phillips
(b) Commissioner Christine S. Wilson
(c) Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter
(d) Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya
Federal Trade Commission document demands to Twitter obtained by the House Judiciary Committee show onerous requests for all documents about Elon Musk and documents concerning Twitter’s work with journalists to disclose to the public the details about the government’s and Twitter’s censorship of American citizens. A House report titled “The Weaponization of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC): An Agency’s Overreach to Harass Elon Musk’s Twitter” details:
Twitter allowed … journalists, as part of their reporting on government censorship by proxy, to review internal communications and correspondence between Twitter employees and federal agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
[T]he FTC’s first demand in its letter sent after the initial installment of the Twitter Files did not concern what private user information may have been at risk. Instead, the FTC demanded that Twitter “[i]dentify all journalists and other members of the media to whom” Twitter has granted access to since Musk bought the company. The FTC even named some of the specific journalists— “Bari Weiss, Matt Taibbi, Michael Shellenberger, [and] Abigail Shrier”—with whom Twitter has engaged on the Twitter Files. The FTC also demanded to know any “other members of the media to whom You have granted any type of access to the Company’s internal communications” for any reason whatsoever.
On November 10, the FTC sent two demand letters asking for voluminous information about Twitter’s personnel actions—terminations and resignations—and about the Twitter Blue service. To date, the FTC has submitted nearly 60 requests related to Twitter Blue. Some of the FTC’s demands about Twitter Blue—such as when the service was “first conceived”—appear to serve little purpose other than to pile on to the already burdensome requests. One such demand came just two days after Twitter reactivated President Trump’s account. In this letter, the FTC demanded nearly twenty additional categories of information about Twitter Blue.
The Biden FTC is abusing power to retaliate against Elon Musk for supporting free speech on Twitter. And now, as our lawsuit shows, the FTC is trying to cover up this attempt to silence and punish Musk.
We are heavily involved in countering government and Big Tech censorship.
In February we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership that could detail coordinated censorship activities.
In a separate lawsuit, we are suing the DHS for all records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was reportedly active during the 2022 midterm elections. Among the news outlets flagged by EIP were websites for Just the News, New York Post, Fox News, Washington Examiner, The Washington Times, The Epoch Times and Breitbart.
We recently sued the DOJ for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story.
In September 2022, we sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for censoring a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In April 2021, we published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In May 2021, we revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In July 2021, we uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.)
Biden’s Migrant Policy Creates ‘Meaningless Line in the Sand,’ Judge Declares
By Biden’s design, we effectively have no border with Mexico. It’s little more than a “speedbump,” a federal judge says. Yet another federal lawsuit further reveals the Biden administration is breaking the law on immigration, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
The Biden administration has turned the southwest border into a meaningless line in the sand and little more than a speedbump for aliens flooding into the country, according to a scathing federal court order blasting the president’s controversial catch-and-release policy. Known as Parole Plus Alternative to Detention (Parole+ATD) the program released over a million illegal immigrants in the U.S. in a year, supposedly tracking them with technology and other tools. Florida officials filed a lawsuit in 2021, accusing the Biden administration of violating immigration laws with policies that freed illegal aliens from detention after entering the country via the Mexican border. The state alleged that releasing illegal immigrants impacts it because about 100,000 ended up in Florida, increasing healthcare, education, and criminal justice costs.
A federal judge agreed with officials in the Sunshine State, ruling this month that the Biden administration is responsible for the southwest border crisis and that it is to blame for the influx of migrants. In his 109-page order the judge, T. Kent Wetherell of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, writes this: “Defendants have effectively turned the Southwest Border into a meaningless line in the sand and little more than a speedbump for aliens flooding into the country by prioritizing “alternatives to detention” over actual detention and by releasing more than a million aliens into the country—on “parole” or pursuant to the exercise of “prosecutorial discretion” under a wholly inapplicable statute—without even initiating removal proceedings.” Rejecting the government’s rationale for the outrageous policy, the Trump-appointed jurist likens it to “a child who kills his parents and then seeks pity for being an orphan.”
The lashing continues in the lengthy decision, which was delivered after a weeklong trial in January. Biden’s open border policies are akin to posting a flashing “come in, we’re open sign on the Southern border,” Judge Wetherell writes. “The unprecedented ‘surge’ of aliens that started arriving at the Southwest border almost immediately after President Biden took office and that has continued unabated over the past two years was a predictable consequence of these actions.” The judge cites Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz’s testimony revealing that the current surge in migrants differs from prior surges he has seen over his lengthy career in that most of the border crossers are turning themselves in to federal agents rather than trying to escape. “It is reasonable to infer (and just plain common sense) that aliens are doing this because they are aware that they will be expeditiously processed and released into the country,” the order states, adding that “indeed, on this point, Chief Ortiz credibly opined based on his experience that the aliens are likely turning themselves in because they think they’re going to be released.”
Ruling that Biden’s catch-and-release policy is unlawful, Judge Wetherell gives the administration seven days to comply with federal immigration law. Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody, who filed the lawsuit, said the ruling affirms what we have known all along, that Biden is responsible for the border crisis and his unlawful immigration policies make the U.S. less safe. “A federal judge is now ordering Biden to follow the law,” Moody said in a statement, adding that “his administration should immediately begin securing the border to protect the American people.” A former state judge and federal prosecutor who tried drug, firearm, and fraud crimes, Moody and her legal team presented the court with evidence that the Biden administration purposely reduced Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) holding capacity and narrowed removal pathways to force the release of hundreds of thousands of migrants into the U.S.
Besides recently being ruled illegal by a federal court, a former senior advisor at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) says the ATD program has proven to be a “costly failure” and thousands of illegal aliens disappear from monitoring every year. “The goal should be to quickly determine whether these individuals have a valid case, and if not, to quickly deport them,” the former DHS advisor, Jon Feere, says in a news article. In the same story former acting ICE director Ron Vitiello says that ATD is popular among the left and sounds great, but the reality is illegal immigrants in the program will likely never be deported.
Until next week …
The post Court Victory in Texas! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced a victory today in the District Court of Texas for Travis County where it filed a petition on behalf of its client Zachor Legal Institute under the Texas Public Information Act (TPIA), seeking information about potential influence by the Qatar government’s funding of certain Texas A&M University programs and a Texas A&M campus in Education City, Al Rayyan, Qatar (Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development v. Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General (No. D-1-GN-18-006240)).
Zachor Legal Institute is a U.S.-based advocacy group dedicated to combatting the spread of anti-Semitism. Zachor made requests under the TPIA for information about the funding or donations made to Texas A&M by the government of Qatar and agencies and subdivisions of the government of Qatar. Qatar controversially has aligned itself with Islamic terrorists and extremists which has placed it at odds with the United States, Israel and other U.S. allies in the Middle East.
Zachor’s initially pursued information related to the funding of the Texas A&M campus in Qatar in 2018. Zachor’s sought to determine how Texas A&M was able to establish a degree-conferring campus in Qatar without the Texas Legislature’s permission or involvement.
In 2018, Qatar filed a lawsuit to prevent disclosure of its funding information. Judicial Watch countered with the argument that neither the Qatari government nor any of its agencies are protected by exceptions under Texas law and that federal law “expressly makes the requested information public.”
Texas A&M claimed making the records public would reveal confidential donor information. Judicial Watch countered this argument by pointing out the law only protects private donors, not donations from a foreign government body, specifically the Qatar Foundation. The Qatar Foundation “was created by the Emir of Qatar, is Chaired by his consort, and is sponsored and supported by the government of Qatar, a monarchy. At no point did the Qatar Foundation demonstrate that it is not an agency or subdivision of the government of Qatar.”
After reviewing the briefing, the arguments, and the evidence, including the documents submitted by the Qatar Foundation, Judge Amy Clark Meachum ruled in favor of Judicial Watch and the Zachor Legal Institute and ordered that the documents be made public.
“The court was right to reject the arguments of Qatar that sought to hide information about the foreign government’s funding of Texas A& M,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This case has been a multi-year court battle against a foreign government entity tied to Islamist terrorism – so this latest victory is sweet.”
“Zachor Legal Institute is grateful for the incredible support and skill of the entire Judicial Watch team,” said Marc Greendorfer, President of Zachor Legal Institute. “We now look forward to receiving the records that Qatar has spent the last four-plus years blocking from public review. While Qatari agents have a history of refusing to comply with lawful orders in the United States, such as Al Jazeera’s continuing refusal to comply with the Department of Justice’s 2020 order to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, we will not stop our inquiries into what Qatar is doing in the United States. We hope that Qatar will end its interference with American institutions now that Judicial Watch has once again compelled transparency in government.”
Judicial Watch was assisted in this case by Jennifer S. Riggs of Riggs & Ray, P.C. in Austin, Texas.
The post Judicial Watch Victory: Court Rejects Argument of Terrorist-Tied Qatar and Orders Release of Documents About Its Funding of Texas A&M appeared first on Judicial Watch.
As part of the red carpet rollout for illegal immigrants the Biden administration is dedicating tens of millions of dollars to provide migrant youths with a multitude of services once they are released from government shelters. This includes medical, educational, legal and an array of other services. American taxpayers will also fund detailed home studies by deploying case managers to conduct intensive in-home engagements and virtual check-ins to ensure the safety and continued support for the young migrants and the families they have been released to. On its face the program for migrant youth—officially labeled Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) by the government—appears to be superior to the system that manages hundreds of thousands of U.S. children in similar situations, such as foster care.
Private and public educational institutions, small businesses, city and county governments, tribal organizations as well as nonprofits will receive government funding to assure UAC are well taken care off. The money will flow through the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), which is charged with caring for illegal aliens under the age of 18. In a recent grant announcement the agency’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) reveals that it will allocate $50 million—and possibly up to $300 million—for the Home Study (HS) and Post-Release Services (PRS) for unaccompanied children. “PRS providers will be charged with a scope of services that includes three levels – virtual check-ins, case management services, and intensive in-home engagements,” the grant document states. “ORR provides Home Studies and PRS nationwide and needs HS/PRS providers to serve both high-need and remote locations where sponsors of unaccompanied children reside.” The agency encourages providers located in or near geographic areas where UAC are commonly unified with sponsors to apply.
HHS has spent a fortune to care for the onslaught of mostly Central American youths that have crossed into the U.S. through the Mexican border. Typically those under 18 are welcomed with open arms and hundreds of thousands have entered the country in the last few years. HHS spends billions of dollars annually to house, medically treat, entertain, and school UAC and the agency funds and oversees dozens of state-licensed care facilities to house the young migrants when they arrive in the U.S. As of January 27, 2023, there are approximately 7,565 UAC in HHS care, according to the latest agency figures. In fiscal year 2021 ORR housed an unprecedented 122,731 UAC. In fiscal year 2022, a record 149,000 UAC were apprehended by federal agents. The overwhelming majority of UAC in U.S. custody, approximately 72%, are over 14 years of age and 66% are male. Nearly half (47%) came from Guatemala, 32% from Honduras, 13% from El Salvador and 8% from other countries.
Since illegal immigrant minors are almost always allowed to remain in the U.S. and are quickly disbursed to a government-funded shelter upon arrival at the border, security screening is dismal. The flawed system has allowed hardcore criminals and violent gangbangers to slip through. For instance, a teenage Salvadoran gang member recently arrested for the murder of a Maryland woman came to the U.S. as a UAC. A few years ago two UAC were charged with raping a 14-year-old girl in the bathroom of a Maryland public high school. The illegal immigrants were both charged with first-degree rape and two counts of first-degree sexual offense. Both were in the ninth grade like their victim. One came from El Salvador and the other from Guatemala. A year earlier two UAC, both 17, from Central America executed a Massachusetts man by shooting him in the head shortly after being welcomed into the U.S. by the Obama administration. Both had ties to the notoriously violent street gang Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), authorities disclosed at the time. The media described the violent gangbangers as “baby-faced boys.”
Shortly after the first batch of UAC arrived in mid-2014, Judicial Watch reported that many had ties to gang members in the U.S., specifically MS-13. Homeland Security sources directly involved with the border crisis told Judicial Watch that street gangs, including MS-13, went on a recruiting frenzy at U.S. shelters housing the migrant youths and Red Cross phones were used to communicate. The MS-13 is a feared street gang of mostly Central American illegal immigrants that has spread throughout the U.S. and is renowned for drug distribution, murder, rape, robbery, home invasions, kidnappings, vandalism, and other violent crimes. The Justice Department’s National Gang Intelligence Center (NGIC) says criminal street gangs like the MS-13 are responsible for most violent crimes in the U.S. and are the primary distributors of most illicit drugs.
The post U.S. to Spend $50 Million on “Post-Release Services” for Migrant Youths appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for communications of its chair, Lina Khan, regarding Twitter and Twitter’s owner Elon Musk (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission (1:23-cv-00692 (ABJ))
Judicial Watch sued after the Federal Trade Commission failed to respond to a November 14, 2022, FOIA request for:
Records and communications maintained by Lina Khan, Chairperson, U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) including memoranda, reports, briefings, hand-written notes, email communications, email chains, email attachments and other form of records or communications exchanged regarding or referring to Mr. Elon Musk, CEO, Twitter, or the company Twitter with the below named individuals:
(a) Commissioner Noah Joshua Phillips
(b) Commissioner Christine S. Wilson
(c) Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter
(d) Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya
Khan, nominated by President Biden in March 2021, has reportedly been aggressive in investigating Twitter after its purchase by Elon Musk in October 2022. According to the New York Post:
The Federal Trade Commission has asked Twitter to turn over internal communications related to owner Elon Musk, detailed information about layoffs and other business decisions as part of an investigation into the social media company, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday citing documents.
The FTC, chaired by Lina Khan, sent 12 letters to Twitter and its lawyers since Musk’s takeover in October. It also asked the company to “identify all journalists” who were granted access to company records and to provide information about the launch of the revamped Twitter Blue subscription service, the report said.
The Wall Street Journal reported that the Federal Trade Commission’s letters to Twitter “were obtained by the Republican-led House Judiciary Committee, which published excerpts of them Tuesday in a staff report about the FTC’s investigation.”
“The leftists now running the Biden administration don’t hesitate to use the power of the state to silence their critics,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. “And we will use the power of the courts to expose them.”
Judicial Watch is heavily involved in countering government and big tech censorship.
In February it filed a FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership that could detail coordinated censorship activities.
In a separate lawsuit, Judicial Watch is suing the DHS for all records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was reportedly active during the 2022 midterm elections. Among the news outlets flagged by EIP were websites for Just the News, New York Post, Fox News, Washington Examiner, The Washington Times, The Epoch Times and Breitbart.
Judicial Watch recently sued the DOJ for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for censoring a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Federal Trade Commission for Communications about Twitter Owner Elon Musk appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration has turned the southwest border into a meaningless line in the sand and little more than a speedbump for aliens flooding into the country, according to a scathing federal court order blasting the president’s controversial catch-and-release policy. Known as Parole Plus Alternative to Detention (Parole+ATD) the program released over a million illegal immigrants in the U.S. in a year, supposedly tracking them with technology and other tools. Florida officials filed a lawsuit in 2021, accusing the Biden administration of violating immigration laws with policies that freed illegal aliens from detention after entering the country via the Mexican border. The state alleged that releasing illegal immigrants impacts it because about 100,000 ended up in Florida, increasing healthcare, education, and criminal justice costs.
A federal judge agreed with officials in the Sunshine State, ruling this month that the Biden administration is responsible for the southwest border crisis and that it is to blame for the influx of migrants. In his 109-page order the judge, T. Kent Wetherell of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida, writes this: “Defendants have effectively turned the Southwest Border into a meaningless line in the sand and little more than a speedbump for aliens flooding into the country by prioritizing “alternatives to detention” over actual detention and by releasing more than a million aliens into the country—on “parole” or pursuant to the exercise of “prosecutorial discretion” under a wholly inapplicable statute—without even initiating removal proceedings.” Rejecting the government’s rationale for the outrageous policy, the Trump-appointed jurist likens it to “a child who kills his parents and then seeks pity for being an orphan.”
The lashing continues in the lengthy decision, which was delivered after a weeklong trial in January. Biden’s open border policies are akin to posting a flashing “come in, we’re open sign on the Southern border,” Judge Wetherell writes. “The unprecedented ‘surge’ of aliens that started arriving at the Southwest border almost immediately after President Biden took office and that has continued unabated over the past two years was a predictable consequence of these actions.” The judge cites Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz’s testimony revealing that the current surge in migrants differs from prior surges he has seen over his lengthy career in that most of the border crossers are turning themselves in to federal agents rather than trying to escape. “It is reasonable to infer (and just plain common sense) that aliens are doing this because they are aware that they will be expeditiously processed and released into the country,” the order states, adding that “indeed, on this point, Chief Ortiz credibly opined based on his experience that the aliens are likely turning themselves in because they think they’re going to be released.”
Ruling that Biden’s catch-and-release policy is unlawful, Judge Wetherell gives the administration seven days to comply with federal immigration law. Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody, who filed the lawsuit, said the ruling affirms what we have known all along, that Biden is responsible for the border crisis and his unlawful immigration policies make the U.S. less safe. “A federal judge is now ordering Biden to follow the law,” Moody said in a statement, adding that “his administration should immediately begin securing the border to protect the American people.” A former state judge and federal prosecutor who tried drug, firearm, and fraud crimes, Moody and her legal team presented the court with evidence that the Biden administration purposely reduced Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) holding capacity and narrowed removal pathways to force the release of hundreds of thousands of migrants into the U.S.
Besides recently being ruled illegal by a federal court, a former senior advisor at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) says the ATD program has proven to be a “costly failure” and thousands of illegal aliens disappear from monitoring every year. “The goal should be to quickly determine whether these individuals have a valid case, and if not, to quickly deport them,” the former DHS advisor, Jon Feere, says in a news article. In the same story former acting ICE director Ron Vitiello says that ATD is popular among the left and sounds great, but the reality is illegal immigrants in the program will likely never be deported.
The post Biden’s Migrant Catch-and-Release Policy Unlawful, Trump-Appointed Judge Rules appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Times:
It’s an oldie but a goodie for our Federal Reserve chairman. In one of his recent lectures at George Washington University (GWU), Ben S. Bernanke made the self-congratulatory assertion that the “forceful policy response” led by the Federal Reserve in 2008 helped avoid a more serious economic downturn.
This rhetoric is nothing new. Mr. Bernanke has made similar remarks in the past. As he confided in one interview, “I was not going to be the Federal Reserve chairman who presided over the second Great Depression.” It is clear that like Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, who recently trumpeted the fourth anniversary of his role in the Bear Stearns bailout, Mr. Bernanke is aggressively using the GWU lectures to shape his legacy before he steps down.
Read more here…
The post MCKINLEY AND FITTON: Bernanke’s fairy tale recession story for kids appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Federal Appeals Court Hears Challenge To FBI’s Withholding of Communications with Banks Regarding January 6 Disturbance
Judicial Watch announced recently that a court hearing was held (audio) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit on Friday, March 10, 2023, in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records of communication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transactions made by people in DC, Maryland and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021
Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Allows Lawsuit to Go Forward over Magistrate’s Firing for Comments on Released Rapist’s Murder of His Victim
“Simply put, Ms. Fuller embarrassed Virginia officials over their deadly soft-on-crime bail policies. As the court noted, our client commented on a serious public safety matter of widespread public interest,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The lawsuit will now proceed to discovery and we hope, ultimately, to trial.”
The Truth Behind ERIC, the Syndicate Founded by Leftists to Manage Voter Registration Rolls
The media is condemning officials in Republican-led states for withdrawing from a controversial data-sharing consortium that purports to help manage voter registration rolls and, not surprisingly, the news reports fail to tell the whole story. The system is known as the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) and it claims to be an efficient and cost-effective mechanism for states to maintain accurate voter rolls. ERIC is a nonprofit that was formed by leftist operatives in 2012 and, until recently, had more than 30 member states. It claims that its sole mission is assisting states to improve the accuracy of America’s voter rolls and increase access to voter registration for all eligible voters.
Judicial Watch Files Brief in Support of Legal Challenge to Safety of Abortion Drug
Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in support of Texas-based Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM) in its lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration over the FDA’s approval of the controversial abortion drug Mifeprex(Mifepristone, formerly known as RU-486). In its brief, Judicial Watch describes the FDA’s approval process as “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion and not in accordance with the law.”
In The News
1.2 million inactive voters removed from Los Angeles voter rolls, more than half haven’t voted in 10 years
The Blaze
Over 1 million inactive voters have been removed from the voter rolls in Los Angeles County, California, stemming from a lawsuit filed in 2017.
In an effort to clean up voter rolls and prevent possible voter fraud, Judicial Watch, a conservative organization that promotes government transparency, sued Los Angeles County on behalf of legally registered voters.
Tom Fitton: conservatives must stop the “assault” on children and freedom of speech
Just the News
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, urged conservatives at CPAC 2023 to reject the “demonic assault” on the “bodies and minds” of American children. He then condemned online censorship and the effort to include critical race theory in school curriculum.
DHS Invites Communist State Sponsor of Terrorism to Tour U.S. Maritime Security Facilities
Judicial Watch
As if the Mexican border crisis were not sufficiently compromising national security, the Biden administration invited officials from a communist country that appears on the government’s list of state terrorism sponsors to tour sensitive U.S. maritime security facilities. The bizarre secret jaunt was scheduled last week to grant a delegation from Cuba’s Border Guard and Ministry of Foreign Affairs access to the nation’s Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington D.C. as well as port facilities in Wilmington, North Carolina.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Jan 6 Vids Released to Tucker Carlson! MORE Transparency Needed! - Obama knew! Clinton knew! Biden knew! Trump is Innocent and is a Crime Victim! - East Palestine Train Derailment: Biden Admin’s “Tone-Deaf” Response a “Disaster!”
-
The post More Abusive FBI Spying? Court Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Allows Lawsuit to Go Forward over Magistrate’s Firing for Comments on Released Rapist’s Murder of His Victim
Court Hears Our Appeal Regarding FBI’s January 6 Communications with Banks
Judicial Watch Files Brief in Support of Legal Challenge to Abortion Drug
DHS Invites State Sponsor of Terrorism to Tour U.S. Maritime Security Facilities
Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Allows Lawsuit to Go Forward over Magistrate’s Firing for Comments on Released Rapist’s Murder of His Victim
Judicial Watch had a major First Amendment court win in an important case involving life and death.
A federal judge ruled that our lawsuit can go forward on behalf of former Virginia Magistrate Elizabeth Fuller against officials in the Office of the Executive Secretary of Magistrate Services for firing Fuller in violation of her First Amendment rights.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, came in the lawsuit we filed in March 2022 (Elizabeth Fuller v. Karl R. Hade, et al. (No. 1:22-cv-00218)).
On October 19, 2021, Fuller was fired from her position as magistrate after commenting to the Alexandria Times as part of a discussion about the publicly available outcome of her own 2020 complaint against a bondsman named Man Nguyen.
The judge’s order states that the court “finds that [Fuller] has sufficiently alleged a First Amendment violation to survive a motion to dismiss.”
[Fuller’s] comments to the Alexandria Times facially concern a matter of public interest. [Fuller’s] comments concerned the murder of Ms. Dominguez, which had received media attention and “fueled public debate about lenient law enforcement and bail practices in the Commonwealth of Virginia and nationwide.” Ms. Dominguez’s murder was even discussed by then-Virginia Delegate, now Virginia Attorney General, Jason Miyares during a floor debate on bail reform in the Virginia General Assembly. In her comments to the Alexandria Times, [Fuller] appeared to express her discontentment with the actions of Bouaichi, Nguyen, and the Circuit Court Judge, and her belief that Ms. Dominguez’s death was “entirely preventable if anybody in the process had been doing their job effectively.”
On or about January 13, 2020, Ibrahm Elkahi Bouaichi was arrested and indicted by a grand jury for burglary with the intent to commit murder, abduction, sodomy, strangulation, and rape of Karla Elizabeth Dominguez Gonzalez. Notwithstanding the seriousness of these charges, the Alexandria Circuit Court released Bouaichi on a $25,000 bond in April 2020. Less than four months after his release on bail, Bouaichi, on July 29, 2020, reportedly drove to Ms. Dominguez’ residence in Alexandria, Virginia and shot and killed her outside her apartment complex.
We pointed out in our initial complaint:
In the immediate days following the news reports about Ms. Dominguez’ murder, [Fuller] learned from a police officer in the citizen lobby of the magistrate’s office that the vehicle and gun reportedly used by Bouaichi to murder Ms. Dominquez belonged to the surety bail bondsman, Man Nguyen, who posted the $25,000 bond for Bouaichi’s release in April 2020. On information and belief, bondsman Nguyen and the officer struck casual conversation while they were waiting in the citizens lobby when Nguyen said it was his gun and car that Bouaichi used to murder Ms. Dominguez, and that he had let Bouaichi stay at his house while he was away on vacation. The officer subsequently relayed the information to Plaintiff as part of casual conversation among friendly colleagues, outside any hearing or proceeding.
On August 6, 2020, Fuller, in her personal capacity, filed a complaint with the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, alleging that Nguyen violated rules and regulations of his licensure as a surety bail bondsman. On September 1, 2020, Nguyen’s surety bail bond license was suspended and revoked as a result. Fuller understood that this concluded the matter.
More than a year later, the Alexandria Times disclosed the contents of Fuller’s complaint and other information obtained through a third party’s Freedom of Information Act request regarding Nguyen’s involvement and subsequently approached Fuller for comment about the complaint in October 2021. Fuller commented as follows:
- Nguyen came to work in the days following the murder, nearly boasting and joking about the fact that the gun and car belonged to him and that Bouaichi had stayed at his home.
- “[Bondsman Nguyen] was telling this officer about what happened and almost bragging about it. The officer said to me, ‘You will never believe what he just said to me.’” “So I said, ‘I’ve got to do something about it.’”
Five days after this story was published on October 7, Fuller was placed on administrative leave, and she was fired on October 19, 2021 for violating Canon 3, Section B(6), which states: “[a] magistrate shall abstain from public comment about a pending, impending or concluded proceeding in any court or magistrate’s office.”
In early November 2021, Fuller filed a grievance appealing her termination and asked for reinstatement, which was denied.
We argue that Fuller’s firing was retaliation for protected speech and that the judicial canon used to justify her firing doesn’t apply to comments made about a public filing made in her personal capacity:
At all relevant times, [Fuller] was engaged in constitutionally protected speech when she made the comments to the Alexandria Times, which undeniably addressed matters of public concern.
[Fuller] enjoys the right to freedom of speech, as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. This includes the right to comment to the Alexandria Times on [Fuller’s] public complaint filed in her personal capacity about the misconduct of a bondsman and its outcome, and the system’s failure to protect a rape victim.
Simply put, Ms. Fuller embarrassed Virginia officials over their deadly soft-on-crime bail policies. As the court noted, our client commented on a serious public safety matter of widespread public interest. The lawsuit will now proceed to discovery and we hope, ultimately, to trial.
“I am so proud that Judicial Watch was so gracious to represent me before the federal court to secure this important victory for my First Amendment rights. This ultimately is not simply about whether or not I have a job, but about an innocent rape victim who unjustly and needlessly lost her life. It gives me hope that her story continues to be heard through this case independent of the outcome,” Fuller said.
Court Hears Our Appeal Regarding FBI’s January 6 Communications with Banks
As the actions of the government on January 6, 2021, come under increasing scrutiny, we are pursuing what appears to be an unprecedented abuse of the financial privacy of thousands of Americans by the FBI.
A hearing was held (audio) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit on Friday, March 10, 2023, in our FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice for records of communication between the FBI and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transactions made by people in DC, Maryland and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021(Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:21-cv-01216)).
The appeal was heard by a three-judge panel: Circuit Judge Wilkins, and Senior Circuit Judges Rogers and Tatel. An audio of this morning’s hearing can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/live/Hfa6qg4SEyA
We filed the appeal in November 2022, challenging a U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decision allowing the FBI to withhold records of communication between the FBI and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of the financial transaction records.
We asked for:
All records of communication between the FBI and any financial institution, including but not limited to Bank of America, Citibank, Chase Manhattan Bank, Discover, and/or American Express, in which the FBI sought transaction data for those financial institutions’ debit and credit card account holders who made purchases in Washington, DC, Maryland and/or Virginia on January 5, 2021, and/or January 6, 2021.
In our brief we argued:
This appeal arises from what appears to be an unprecedented abuse of the financial privacy of thousands of Americans. Substantial and compelling evidence demonstrates that the FBI sought and received records from financial institutions of anyone who used a credit card or engaged in other transactions in the Washington, D.C. area on January 5 or 6, 2021. This would include many thousands of persons living in the Washington, DC area, including possibly members of this Court.
In our appeal, we pointed out that the lower court was mistaken when it upheld the FBI’s Glomar response (neither confirming nor denying the existence of records) because the FBI previously acknowledged the existence of the records in multiple ways. For instance, court records filed in support of a criminal case include the FBI’s statement of facts that provides the defendant’s address, which was obtained through “his Bank of America account and recent Expedia transactions.”
In another case, the FBI “confirmed that it obtained records from PNC Bank and discusses in detail the multiple ways that it used the financial data.”
Additionally, “financial records obtained from JP Morgan Chase bank corroborate [the defendant] used a credit card issued in his name to purchase gas and food en route to Washington, DC …”
We cited two additional cases where the FBI describes in publicly available court records its use of financial records in the January 6 investigation.
We concluded:
[Judicial Watch] more than adequately demonstrated that the FBI may have sought and received records from financial institutions of anyone who used a credit card or engaged in other transactions in the Washington, DC area on January 5 or 6. If so, this would be an unprecedented abuse of the financial privacy of thousands of Americans. [Judicial Watch’s] FOIA request to investigate this should not be blocked by a meritless Glomar response.
We will be sure to update you when the appeals court rules.
Judicial Watch Files Brief in Support of Legal Challenge to Abortion Drug
Judicial Watch filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in support of Texas-based Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM) in its lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration over the FDA’s approval of the controversial abortion drug Mifeprex (Mifepristone, formerly known as RU-486). In our brief, we describe the FDA’s approval process as “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion and not in accordance with the law.”
We filed the brief in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Amarillo Division in the case of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (No. 2:22-cv-00223-z).
Judicial Watch points out the Clinton administration’s use of political pressure to force the drug through the approval process:
The evidence uncovered of [the FDA’s] true motivation for their decision to approve Mifeprex is eye-opening and shows the [Clinton] administration and FDA applying political pressure on not only international corporations, but on international governments – all for a drug to kill prenatal human beings. The evidence also shows the intricate political and corporate machinations spent in the service of promoting a drug that has nothing to do with women’s health. [The FDA] pressured both Roussel, a French company, and Hoechst AG, the German pharmaceutical company and majority shareholder of Roussel, to bring the abortion pill to the U.S.
In a November 15, 1993 letter from Donna Shalala, HHS Secretary to the White House, she states that “Dr. Kessler [FDA Commissioner] and I have taken steps to persuade Roussel Uclef and Hoechst to change their position.”
The [Clinton administration] and the FDA were willing to place political pressure on two foreign governments [France and Germany] to accomplish the task of approving an abortion pill. This was not a life-saving medication or a drug that cured cancer. This was a drug which was being sought for one purpose and one purpose alone: the intentional death of prenatal humans. And for what reason? The ability to satisfy a financially and politically powerful group of abortion advocates.
Our brief explains that the FDA improperly weakened safety restrictions regarding Mifeprex over the years:
In a congressional hearing after the 2000 approval of Mifeprex, the FDA asserted that it chose to approve mifepristone [and] to maintain more stringent safety restrictions on the drug…. This included the requirement that the drug be administered “by or under the supervision of a physician” who met several qualifications.
[H]istory shows that in the first decade of post-approval use, the FDA increased Mifeprex safety requirements. [Emphasis in original] … Yet, despite these very public safety concerns, the [Obama] FDA significantly revised the Mifeprex labeling and REMS in 2016 and reduced the safety requirements. [Emphasis in original] These changes included significantly altered dosage, removal of the follow-up medical visit, removal of the requirement to take the drug in a doctor’s office, and expansion of the use through 70 days gestation. Also of significance and concern, the FDA modified the REMS [Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy] to require reporting of only deaths attributable to the drug. No longer would hospitalizations, transfusions, or other serious adverse events need to be reported.
In 2021, using the COVID-19 pandemic as a tool, abortion proponents, led by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists “(ACOG”), sued the FDA to dispense with the REMS in-person medical visit as a prerequisite for obtaining Mifeprex and permit the drug to be mailed…. With the pandemic declared over by President Biden on September 18, 2022, the foundation of concern for in-person medical visits should have ended. Instead, the FDA maintained its temporary suspension and continued permitting Mifeprex to be mailed. Then on December 16, 2022, the [Biden] FDA permanently removed the [Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy] requirement for any in-person medical visits.
Our brief alleges that the FDA, in approving Mifeprex, did not demonstrate as required under law, (1) pregnancy was a “serious or life-threatening illness” or a “disease,” and (2) that the drug “provided a meaningful therapeutic benefit to patients over existing treatments.”
The chemical abortion drug would never have been approved but for pro-abortion politics. Pregnant mothers and their unborn children will continue to be harmed and maimed unless the courts require the FDA to follow the law.
In an effort to appease pro-abortion activists, the Clinton FDA hastily approved the abortion pill on September 28, 2000. We immediately filed a FOIA request and then battled the government in court to force the release of documents pertaining to the decision to approve the drug. We successfully obtained over 9,000 pages of records and then fought the agency over withheld records.
In May 2006, we released a special report containing documents that shed light on the Clinton administration’s push to get the abortion drug to market in the United States.
In 2007, we received 175 pages of documents pertaining to the abortion pill RU-486 that had previously been withheld by the FDA. According to the records, the China-based Hua Lian Pharmaceutical Company manufactured RU-486 at the time of approval. This seems to be the first official document confirming that the abortion drug had been manufactured in China. The records also indicated the extent to which the pro-abortion lobby was involved in the approval process. For example, one of the trials used by the FDA to justify its decision was conducted by Dr. Suzanne Poppema, president of the National Abortion Federation. Another trial was performed by Dr. Daniel Mishell, a senior scientist for RU-486’s then-patent holder, the Population Council.
In October 2022, we also sued HHS for records regarding drug stability test results, new drug applications and related materials of the abortion drug Mifeprex well as requests for reviews and assessments of the manufacturing facilities DANCO and GenBio where the abortion pills are produced.
We will report back to you as court events warrant!
DHS Invites State Sponsor of Terrorism to Tour U.S. Maritime Security Facilities
Here’s a jaw-dropping acknowledgement that Biden administration has placed ideology over national security.. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports that Cuban officials were granted special access to sensitive facilities:
As if the Mexican border crisis were not sufficiently compromising national security, the Biden administration invited officials from a communist country that appears on the government’s list of state terrorism sponsors to tour sensitive U.S. maritime security facilities. The bizarre secret jaunt was scheduled last week to grant a delegation from Cuba’s Border Guard and Ministry of Foreign Affairs access to the nation’s Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington D.C. as well as port facilities in Wilmington, North Carolina. Cuba appears on the State Department list of terrorist nations along with Syria, Iran, and North Korea. Cuba has a long history of providing advice, safe haven, communications, training, and financial support to guerrilla groups and individual terrorists, according to the State Department. Furthermore, Cuba maintains close and collaborative ties with designated state sponsors of terror such as Iran and North Korea and the communist island harbors multiple fugitives who committed or supported acts of terrorism in the United States.
It makes no sense for any administration, Democrat or Republican, to grant an adversary with a history like Cuba’s access to essential Homeland Security facilities, especially at a time when the country is getting slammed with unknown foreigners entering illegally in droves. Apparently, the excursion was part of the International Port Security Program, which seeks to reduce risk to U.S. maritime interests, including American ports and ships, and facilitate secure maritime trade globally in partnership with global maritime trading partners. “Through international port visits, the discussion and sharing of port security best practices and the development of mutual interests in securing ships coming to the United States enhance both U.S. port security and the security of the global maritime transportation system,” according to the U.S. Coast Guard’s description of the program.
However, none of that should apply to Cuba, which also harbors dozens of fugitives and terrorists from American justice. Among them is Joanne Chesimard, who appears on the FBI’s most wanted terrorist list and is also known by her Black Panther name of Assata Shakur. Chesimard was sentenced to life in prison after being convicted by a jury of the 1979 murder of a New Jersey State Trooper. With the help of fellow cult members, she escaped from jail and fled to Cuba. Chesimard is among the targets of bipartisan legislation introduced last year to force Cuba’s communist government to extradite more than 70 fugitives receiving safe haven on the island. “It is unacceptable that the Cuban regime continues to harbor criminals responsible for committing heinous acts in the United States, including terrorist bombings, murdering American police officers, hijacking planes, and trafficking arms,” said Democrat Bob Menedez, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, when the bill was introduced. The veteran lawmaker added that “the families of the victims of these fugitives, including many in my home state of New Jersey, have spent decades unable to find closure and see justice done as a direct result of the Cuban regime’s actions.”
Thanks to his Republican Senate colleague, Marco Rubio of Florida, the recent Coast Guard tour was cut short and the Cuban delegation only visited port facilities in North Carolina. In a letter to the president Rubio demanded that the visit be canceled and that Biden provide an explanation for sharing the nation’s security protocols with a foreign adversary. The senator reminds the commander-in-chief that Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism for its broken commitments to cooperate with U.S. counter-terrorism efforts and its continued support of the Maduro narco-regime in Venezuela, Revolutionary Armed Forces of Cuba (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) in Colombia. “Both of these foreign terrorist organizations carry out attacks against civilians and engage in narcotics trafficking that bring cocaine, fentanyl and other drugs to our shores,” Rubio writes. “It is unconscionable that you would allow security operatives from Cuba – a State Sponsor of Terrorism that actively cooperates with narcotics traffickers, China, Russia, and Iran – the opportunity to access sensitive national security installations and maritime security protocols.”
Until next week,
The post Court Victory for Whistleblower! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that a court hearing was held (audio) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit on Friday, March 10, 2023, in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records of communication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transactions made by people in DC, Maryland and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021(Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice(No. 1:21-cv-01216)).
The appeal was heard by a three-judge panel: Circuit Judge Wilkins, and Senior Circuit Judges Rogers and Tatel. An audio of this morning’s hearing can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/live/Hfa6qg4SEyA
Judicial Watch filed its appeal in November 2022, challenging a U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decision allowing the FBI to withhold records of communication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of the financial transaction records.
Judicial Watch asked for:
All records of communication between the FBI and any financial institution, including but not limited to Bank of America, Citibank, Chase Manhattan Bank, Discover, and/or American Express, in which the FBI sought transaction data for those financial institutions’ debit and credit card account holders who made purchases in Washington, DC, Maryland and/or Virginia on January 5, 2021, and/or January 6, 2021.
In its appellate brief, Judicial Watch argued:
This appeal arises from what appears to be an unprecedented abuse of the financial privacy of thousands of Americans. Substantial and compelling evidence demonstrates that the FBI sought and received records from financial institutions of anyone who used a credit card or engaged in other transactions in the Washington, D.C. area on January 5 or 6, 2021. This would include many thousands of persons living in the Washington, DC area, including possibly members of this Court.
In its appeal, Judicial Watch pointed out that the lower court was mistaken when it upheld the FBI’s Glomar response (neither confirming nor denying the existence of records) because the FBI previously acknowledged the existence of the records in multiple ways. For instance, court records filed in support of a criminal case include the FBI’s statement of facts that provides the defendant’s address, which was obtained through “his Bank of America account and recent Expedia transactions.”
In another case, the FBI “confirmed that it obtained records from PNC Bank and discusses in detail the multiple ways that it used the financial data.”
Additionally, “financial records obtained from JP Morgan Chase bank corroborate [the defendant] used a credit card issued in his name to purchase gas and food en route to Washington, DC …”
Judicial Watch cited two additional cases where the FBI describes in publicly available court records its use of financial records in the January 6 investigation.
Judicial Watch concluded:
[Judicial Watch] more than adequately demonstrated that the FBI may have sought and received records from financial institutions of anyone who used a credit card or engaged in other transactions in the Washington, DC area on January 5 or 6. If so, this would be an unprecedented abuse of the financial privacy of thousands of Americans. [Judicial Watch’s] FOIA request to investigate this should not be blocked by a meritless Glomar response.
The post Judicial Watch: Federal Appeals Court Hears Challenge To FBI’s Withholding of Communications with Banks Regarding January 6 Disturbance appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Blaze:
Over 1 million inactive voters have been removed from the voter rolls in Los Angeles County, California, stemming from a lawsuit filed in 2017.
In an effort to clean up voter rolls and prevent possible voter fraud, Judicial Watch, a conservative organization that promotes government transparency, sued Los Angeles County on behalf of legally registered voters.
In 2019, a settlement required “Los Angeles County [to send] almost 1.6 million address confirmation notices in 2019 to voters listed as ‘inactive’ on its voter rolls,” which resulted in nearly 1.5 million inactive registered names to be removed from the rolls.
Judicial Watch announced that the number of removals for 2022 stands at 1,207,613 and that over 634,000 of the inactive voters have not voted in at least 10 years.
“This long overdue voter roll clean-up of 1.2 million registrations in Los Angeles County is a historic victory and means California elections are less at risk for fraud,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Read more here…
The post 1.2 million inactive voters removed from Los Angeles voter rolls, more than half haven’t voted in 10 years appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, urged conservatives at CPAC 2023 to reject the “demonic assault” on the “bodies and minds” of American children. He then condemned online censorship and the effort to include critical race theory in school curriculum.
Read more here…
The post Tom Fitton: conservatives must stop the “assault” on children and freedom of speech appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Washington Examiner:
In the latest example of how special counsels might not be worth what taxpayers spend on them, Judicial Watch has uncovered last year’s budget for Russiagate special counsel John Durham, who hasn’t made many headlines.
The public watchdog just revealed information it received from the Department of Justice. This is what they told us:
- The supplemental response includes an unredacted June 30, 2021, memo from former Assistant Attorney General Lee Lofthus to Attorney General [Merrick] Garland with the subject line “Fiscal Year 2022 Special Counsel’s Office Budget Request,” showing a previously withheld estimated budget of $8,627,629.
- Attached is the John Durham Special Counsel Office Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 budget plan. The Justice Management Division has completed its review under 28 C.F.R. 600.8(a)(1). The FY 2022 budget estimate is $4,463,525 which, after Office of Management and Budget technical adjustments for the mandatory sequester, totals $4,209,104 in available operational funds.
- In a line-item breakout of costs for FY 2022 attached to the memo, DOJ has now released figures indicating that total income paid to “Full Time Permanent” personnel, including benefits, was $1,874,193. Non-reimbursable costs totaled $2,334,911, for costs such as travel ($457,207), rent ($306,350), and “Other Contractual Services” ($1,297,054). The budget also indicates there was one direct position, 11 “Reimbursable Detailees” and three “Non-Reimbursable Investigative Staff,” for a total of 15 personnel.
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said, “Special counsel Durham has spent millions in tax dollars to investigate the worst government corruption scandal in American history, the abuse of Trump, to little good end.”
Read more here…
The post Buzz: Millions spent, little gained, in Durham investigation, Census wants slavery category appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The media is condemning officials in Republican-led states for withdrawing from a controversial data-sharing consortium that purports to help manage voter registration rolls and, not surprisingly, the news reports fail to tell the whole story. The system is known as the Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) and it claims to be an efficient and cost-effective mechanism for states to maintain accurate voter rolls. ERIC is a nonprofit that was formed by leftist operatives in 2012 and, until recently, had more than 30 member states. It claims that its sole mission is assisting states to improve the accuracy of America’s voter rolls and increase access to voter registration for all eligible voters.
The reality is much different and Judicial Watch offers compelling information deliberately omitted by the media in a White Paper released this week. The document presents facts that directly contradict recent news coverage attacking Republican-led states—including Florida, West Virginia, and Missouri—for cutting ties with ERIC. The New York Times expresses fervent support for ERIC, writing that the nonprofit “has faced intensifying attacks from election deniers and right-wing media.” National Public Radio proclaims that “the far right is now running a disinformation campaign against one of the best tools that states have to detect and prevent voter fraud.” The headline of a recent Washington Post story reads: “Election deniers take aim at group that helps states maintain voter rolls.” The list of media critics is extensive and ranges from national outlets to small town newspapers.
The fact is that ERIC has been far more successful at identifying unregistered voters than duplicate or invalid registrations, according to research conducted by Judicial Watch. The organization reports identifying more than 60 million unregistered voters since 2012. That is not to say that it has not been effective at identifying many potentially improper or invalid voter registrations. However, certain aspects of its operations are incredibly dubious. For instance, ERIC was founded by the liberal Pew Charitable Trusts, potentially with funding that originated from leftist billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations (OSF) network. Its founder, who remains influential within the organization, has a history of leftwing activism and unethical conduct. ERIC also shares the vast amount of sensitive personal data it receives from member states with another liberal nonprofit, the Center for Election Innovation and Research, a key player in the Zuckerbucks scandal in which private entities donated millions of dollars to fund government vote counts in the 2020 elections.
Records obtained by Judicial Watch show that ERIC is far more effective at swelling voter registration rolls than at keeping them clean. Our research also determined that the large amount of sensitive data provided to ERIC by member states and the organization’s role in maintaining voter rolls may violate a number of federal statutes. Among them are the Help America Vote Act, National Voter Registration Act and Driver’s Privacy Protection Act. The first statute provides states the authority and obligation to create and maintain electronic voter registration files but includes no provision that authorizes any state to outsource these obligations to a third party like ERIC. The outsourcing of voter registration list maintenance to ERIC may also violate the National Voter Registration Act, which protects from disclosure the identities of individuals who decline to register to vote. Finally, the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act specifically shields from disclosure the kind of data provided to ERIC by member states to conduct list maintenance.
These types of privacy concerns were among the reasons Florida officials recently severed ties with ERIC. “Withdrawing from ERIC will ensure the data privacy of Florida voters is protected,” according to an announcement issued by the Florida Department of State this week. In the press release Florida Secretary of State Cord Byrd explains that he has an obligation to protect the personal information of Florida’s citizens, which ERIC requires the state to share. “Florida has tried to back reforms to increase protections, but these protections were refused,” Byrd said. “Therefore, we have lost confidence in ERIC.” Missouri Secretary of State John Ashcroft reveals that ERIC “allows for a hyper-partisan individual to be an ex-officio non-voting member on its governance board.” He also opposes ERIC’s focus on adding names to voter rolls by requiring a solicitation to individuals who already had an opportunity to register and made the conscious decision not to.
The post The Truth Behind ERIC, the Syndicate Founded by Leftists to Manage Voter Registration Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that a federal judge ruled that its lawsuit can go forward on behalf of former Virginia Magistrate Elizabeth Fuller against officials in the Office of the Executive Secretary of Magistrate Services for firing Fuller in violation of her First Amendment rights.
The ruling by U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division, came in the lawsuit filed in March 2022 by Judicial Watch (Elizabeth Fuller v. Karl R. Hade, et al. (No. 1:22-cv-00218)).
On October 19, 2021, Fuller was fired from her position as magistrate after commenting to the Alexandria Times as part of a discussion about the publicly available outcome of her own 2020 complaint against a bondsman named Man Nguyen.
The judge’s order states that the court “finds that [Fuller] has sufficiently alleged a First Amendment violation to survive a motion to dismiss.”
[Fuller’s] comments to the Alexandria Times facially concern a matter of public interest. [Fuller’s] comments concerned the murder of Ms. Dominguez, which had received media attention and “fueled public debate about lenient law enforcement and bail practices in the Commonwealth of Virginia and nationwide.” Ms. Dominguez’s murder was even discussed by then-Virginia Delegate, now Virginia Attorney General, Jason Miyares during a floor debate on bail reform in the Virginia General Assembly. In her comments to the Alexandria Times, [Fuller] appeared to express her discontentment with the actions of Bouaichi, Nguyen, and the Circuit Court Judge, and her belief that Ms. Dominguez’s death was “entirely preventable if anybody in the process had been doing their job effectively.”
On or about January 13, 2020, Ibrahm Elkahi Bouaichi was arrested and indicted by a grand jury for burglary with the intent to commit murder, abduction, sodomy, strangulation, and rape of Karla Elizabeth Dominguez Gonzalez. Notwithstanding the seriousness of these charges, the Alexandria Circuit Court released Bouaichi on a $25,000 bond in April 2020. Less than four months after his release on bail, Bouaichi, on July 29, 2020, reportedly drove to Ms. Dominguez’ residence in Alexandria, Virginia and shot and killed her outside her apartment complex.
Judicial Watch pointed out in its initial complaint:
In the immediate days following the news reports about Ms. Dominguez’ murder, [Fuller] learned from a police officer in the citizen lobby of the magistrate’s office that the vehicle and gun reportedly used by Bouaichi to murder Ms. Dominquez belonged to the surety bail bondsman, Man Nguyen, who posted the $25,000 bond for Bouaichi’s release in April 2020. On information and belief, bondsman Nguyen and the officer struck casual conversation while they were waiting in the citizens lobby when Nguyen said it was his gun and car that Bouaichi used to murder Ms. Dominguez, and that he had let Bouaichi stay at his house while he was away on vacation. The officer subsequently relayed the information to Plaintiff as part of casual conversation among friendly colleagues, outside any hearing or proceeding.
On August 6, 2020, Fuller, in her personal capacity, filed a complaint with the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, alleging that Nguyen violated rules and regulations of his licensure as a surety bail bondsman. On September 1, 2020, Nguyen’s surety bail bond license was suspended and revoked as a result. Fuller understood that this concluded the matter.
More than a year later, the Alexandria Times disclosed the contents of Fuller’s complaint and other information obtained through a third party’s Freedom of Information Act request regarding Nguyen’s involvement and subsequently approached Fuller for comment about the complaint in October 2021. Fuller commented as follows:
- Nguyen came to work in the days following the murder, nearly boasting and joking about the fact that the gun and car belonged to him and that Bouaichi had stayed at his home.
- “[Bondsman Nguyen] was telling this officer about what happened and almost bragging about it. The officer said to me, ‘You will never believe what he just said to me.’” “So I said, ‘I’ve got to do something about it.’”
Five days after this story was published on October 7, Fuller was placed on administrative leave, and she was fired on October 19, 2021 for violating Canon 3, Section B(6), which states: “[a] magistrate shall abstain from public comment about a pending, impending or concluded proceeding in any court or magistrate’s office.”
In early November 2021, Fuller filed a grievance appealing her termination and asked for reinstatement, which was denied.
Judicial Watch argues that Fuller’s firing was retaliation for protected speech and that the judicial canon used to justify her firing doesn’t apply to comments made about a public filing made in her personal capacity:
At all relevant times, [Fuller] was engaged in constitutionally protected speech when she made the comments to the Alexandria Times, which undeniably addressed matters of public concern.
[Fuller] enjoys the right to freedom of speech, as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. This includes the right to comment to the Alexandria Times on [Fuller’s] public complaint filed in her personal capacity about the misconduct of a bondsman and its outcome, and the system’s failure to protect a rape victim.
“Simply put, Ms. Fuller embarrassed Virginia officials over their deadly soft-on-crime bail policies. As the court noted, our client commented on a serious public safety matter of widespread public interest,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The lawsuit will now proceed to discovery and we hope, ultimately, to trial.”
“I am so proud that Judicial Watch was so gracious to represent me before the federal court to secure this important victory for my First Amendment rights. This ultimately is not simply about whether or not I have a job, but about an innocent rape victim who unjustly and needlessly lost her life. It gives me hope that her story continues to be heard through this case independent of the outcome,” stated Liz Fuller.
The post Judicial Watch Victory: Federal Court Allows Lawsuit to Go Forward over Magistrate’s Firing for Comments on Released Rapist’s Murder of His Victim appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed an amicus curiae(friend of the court)brief in support of Texas-based Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (AHM) in its lawsuit against the Food and Drug Administration over the FDA’s approval of the controversial abortion drug Mifeprex(Mifepristone, formerly known as RU-486). In its brief, Judicial Watch describes the FDA’s approval process as “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion and not in accordance with the law.”
Judicial Watch filed the brief in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas Amarillo Division in the case of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (No. 2:22-cv-00223-z).
Judicial Watch points out the Clinton administration’s use of political pressure to force the drug through the approval process:
The evidence uncovered of [the FDA’s] true motivation for their decision to approve Mifeprex is eye-opening and shows the [Clinton] administration and FDA applying political pressure on not only international corporations, but on international governments – all for a drug to kill prenatal human beings. The evidence also shows the intricate political and corporate machinations spent in the service of promoting a drug that has nothing to do with women’s health. [The FDA] pressured both Roussel, a French company, and Hoechst AG, the German pharmaceutical company and majority shareholder of Roussel, to bring the abortion pill to the U.S.
In a November 15, 1993 letter from Donna Shalala, HHS Secretary to the White House, she states that “Dr.Kessler [FDA Commissioner] and I have taken steps to persuade Roussel Uclef and Hoechst to change their position.”
The [Clinton administration] and the FDA were willing to place political pressure on two foreign governments [France and Germany] to accomplish the task of approving an abortion pill. This was not a life-saving medication or a drug that cured cancer. This was a drug which was being sought for one purpose and one purpose alone: the intentional death of prenatal humans. And for what reason? The ability to satisfy a financially and politically powerful group of abortion advocates.
Judicial Watch explains that the FDA improperly weakened safety restrictions regarding Mifeprex over the years:
In a congressional hearing after the 2000 approval of Mifeprex, the FDA asserted that it chose to approve mifepristone [and] to maintain more stringent safety restrictions on the drug…. This included the requirement that the drug be administered “by or under the supervision of a physician” who met several qualifications.
[H]istory shows that in the first decade of post-approval use, the FDA increased Mifeprex safety requirements. [Emphasis in original] … Yet, despite these very public safety concerns, the [Obama] FDA significantly revised the Mifeprex labeling and REMS in 2016 and reducedthe safety requirements. [Emphasis in original] These changes included significantly altered dosage, removal of the follow-up medical visit, removal of the requirement to take the drug in a doctor’s office, and expansion of the use through 70 days gestation. Also of significance and concern, the FDA modified the REMS [Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy] to require reporting of only deaths attributable to the drug. No longer would hospitalizations, transfusions, or other serious adverse events need to be reported.
In 2021, using the COVID-19 pandemic as a tool, abortion proponents, led by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists “(ACOG”), sued the FDA to dispense with the REMS in-person medical visit as a prerequisite for obtaining Mifeprex and permit the drug to be mailed…. With the pandemic declared over by President Biden on September 18, 2022, the foundation of concern for in-person medical visits should have ended. Instead, the FDA maintained its temporary suspension and continued permitting Mifeprex to be mailed. Then on December 16, 2022, the [Biden] FDA permanently removed the [Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy] requirement for any in-person medical visits.
Judicial Watch’s brief alleges that the FDA, in approving Mifeprex, did not demonstrate as required under law, (1) pregnancy was a “serious or life-threatening illness” or a “disease,” and (2) that the drug “provided a meaningful therapeutic benefit to patients over existing treatments.”
“The chemical abortion drug would never have been approved but for pro-abortion politics. Pregnant mothers and their unborn children will continue to be harmed and maimed unless the courts require the FDA to follow the law,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
In an effort to appease pro-abortion activists, the Clinton FDA hastily approved the abortion pill on September 28, 2000. Judicial Watch immediately filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request and then battled the government in court to force the release of documents pertaining to the decision to approve the drug. Judicial Watch successfully obtained over 9,000 pages of records and then fought the agency over withheld records.
In May 2006, Judicial Watch released a special report containing documents that shed light on the Clinton administration’s push to get the abortion drug to market in the United States.
In 2007, Judicial Watch received 175 pages of documents pertaining to the abortion pill RU-486 that had previously been withheld by the FDA. According to the records, the China-based Hua Lian Pharmaceutical Company manufactured RU-486 at the time of approval. This seems to be the first official document confirming that the abortion drug had been manufactured in China. The records also indicated the extent to which the pro-abortion lobby was involved in the approval process. For example, one of the trials used by the FDA to justify its decision was conducted by Dr. Suzanne Poppema, president of the National Abortion Federation. Another trial was performed by Dr. Daniel Mishell, a senior scientist for RU-486’s then-patent holder, the Population Council.
In October 2022, Judicial Watch also sued HHS for records regarding drug stability test results, new drug applications and related materials of the abortion drug Mifeprex well as requests for reviews and assessments of the manufacturing facilities DANCO and GenBio where the abortion pills are produced.
The post Judicial Watch Files Brief in Support of Legal Challenge to Safety of Abortion Drug appeared first on Judicial Watch.
As if the Mexican border crisis were not sufficiently compromising national security, the Biden administration invited officials from a communist country that appears on the government’s list of state terrorism sponsors to tour sensitive U.S. maritime security facilities. The bizarre secret jaunt was scheduled last week to grant a delegation from Cuba’s Border Guard and Ministry of Foreign Affairs access to the nation’s Coast Guard Headquarters in Washington D.C. as well as port facilities in Wilmington, North Carolina. Cuba appears on the State Department list of terrorist nations along with Syria, Iran, and North Korea. Cuba has a long history of providing advice, safe haven, communications, training, and financial support to guerrilla groups and individual terrorists, according to the State Department. Furthermore, Cuba maintains close and collaborative ties with designated state sponsors of terror such as Iran and North Korea and the communist island harbors multiple fugitives who committed or supported acts of terrorism in the United States.
It makes no sense for any administration, Democrat or Republican, to grant an adversary with a history like Cuba’s access to essential Homeland Security facilities, especially at a time when the country is getting slammed with unknown foreigners entering illegally in droves. Apparently, the excursion was part of the International Port Security Program, which seeks to reduce risk to U.S. maritime interests, including American ports and ships, and facilitate secure maritime trade globally in partnership with global maritime trading partners. “Through international port visits, the discussion and sharing of port security best practices and the development of mutual interests in securing ships coming to the United States enhance both U.S. port security and the security of the global maritime transportation system,” according to the U.S. Coast Guard’s description of the program.
However, none of that should apply to Cuba, which also harbors dozens of fugitives and terrorists from American justice. Among them is Joanne Chesimard, who appears on the FBI’s most wanted terrorist list and is also known by her Black Panther name of Assata Shakur. Chesimard was sentenced to life in prison after being convicted by a jury of the 1979 murder of a New Jersey State Trooper. With the help of fellow cult members, she escaped from jail and fled to Cuba. Chesimard is among the targets of bipartisan legislation introduced last year to force Cuba’s communist government to extradite more than 70 fugitives receiving safe haven on the island. “It is unacceptable that the Cuban regime continues to harbor criminals responsible for committing heinous acts in the United States, including terrorist bombings, murdering American police officers, hijacking planes, and trafficking arms,” said Democrat Bob Menedez, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, when the bill was introduced. The veteran lawmaker added that “the families of the victims of these fugitives, including many in my home state of New Jersey, have spent decades unable to find closure and see justice done as a direct result of the Cuban regime’s actions.”
Thanks to his Republican Senate colleague, Marco Rubio of Florida, the recent Coast Guard tour was cut short and the Cuban delegation only visited port facilities in North Carolina. In a letter to the president Rubio demanded that the visit be canceled and that Biden provide an explanation for sharing the nation’s security protocols with a foreign adversary. The senator reminds the commander-in-chief that Cuba is a state sponsor of terrorism for its broken commitments to cooperate with U.S. counter-terrorism efforts and its continued support of the Maduro narco-regime in Venezuela, Revolutionary Armed Forces of Cuba (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN) in Colombia. “Both of these foreign terrorist organizations carry out attacks against civilians and engage in narcotics trafficking that bring cocaine, fentanyl and other drugs to our shores,” Rubio writes. “It is unconscionable that you would allow security operatives from Cuba – a State Sponsor of Terrorism that actively cooperates with narcotics traffickers, China, Russia, and Iran – the opportunity to access sensitive national security installations and maritime security protocols.”
The post DHS Invites Communist State Sponsor of Terrorism to Tour U.S. Maritime Security Facilities appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Former NIH Director Francis Collins Emails Reveal British Physicians and Scientists Group Recommended Ivermectin for Preventions and Treatment of COVID-19
Judicial Watch announced recently that it received 254 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) this included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins regarding a British group’s recommendations on the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat COVID-19.
Arizona County Sees 377% Surge in Human Smuggling, 610% Hike in Fentanyl Under Biden
The situation along the southwest border has deteriorated so badly under President Joe Biden that in the last two years an Arizona county about an hour drive from Mexico has seen a breathtaking 377% increase in human smuggling and trafficking incidents and a shocking 610% rise in fentanyl pills seized by local law enforcement officers. Closer to the southern border a small Arizona town a stone’s throw from Los Algodones, Mexico saw three times its population cross into its municipality illegally last year, overwhelming the city’s only hospital.
Judicial Watch: Justice Department Records Show Special Counsel Durham’s FY 2022 Budget over $8.5 Million
Judicial Watch announced today that after 16 months, it has finally received 3 pages of budget records from the U.S Department of Justice (DOJ) concerning the operations of the Office of Special Counsel John Durham that show its fiscal year 2022 budget was over $8.5 million.
U.S. Gives Central America $260 Mil in Humanitarian Aid in Failed Effort to Curb “Irregular Migration”
In a fruitless effort to curb “irregular migration” from Central America the Biden administration is sending the region hundreds of millions of dollars in humanitarian funding with the unlikely goal that the money will improve life enough to deter its citizens from coming to the United States illegally. So far, the plan has failed miserably. Uncle Sam’s hefty checks have not stopped mobs from three targeted countries known as the northern triangle—El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—from migrating to the U.S. via the southwest border.
In The News
Watchdog: 1.2 Million Inactive Voters Removed from Los Angeles Voter Rolls
Breitbart
More than 1.2 million registrants have been removed from the voter rolls in Los Angeles County, California, since 2022 as part of a settlement agreement with Judicial Watch, according to the watchdog group.
Judicial Watch: Federal Court Hearing Scheduled in Lawsuit Seeking Details of Meeting Between DOJ Lawyers and AP Reporters Regarding Trump Associate Paul Manafort
Judicial Watch
Judicial Watch recently announced that a court hearing will be held before U.S. District Court Carl J. Nichols on Thursday, March 9, 2023, in the Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records of a meeting set up by then-Chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section Andrew Weissmann between the DOJ, FBI and reporters from The Associated Press (AP), in which Weissmann allegedly provided guidance to reporters investigating Paul Manafort, and which may have led to the raid of Manafort’s storage locker
Judicial Watch Sues DHS for Records on Election Censorship
Judicial Watch
“The Elon Musk ‘Twitter Files’ are the tip of the iceberg, as the federal government ran a massive, secret censorship op against the American people,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “That the DHS is hiding these censorship records in violation of FOIA law shows the agency still has something to hide.”
Video Highlights
-
-
- Biden SUPPORTS Gain of Function Research! - Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene w/ Judicial Watch @ CPAC 2023 - Biden Caught Red-Handed Censoring Americans – Judicial Watch Sues!
-
The post Ivermectin Cover-up? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Takes Lead at Conservative Political Action Conference
Emails Reveal British Physicians Recommended Ivermectin for COVID-19
Special Counsel Durham’s FY 2022 Budget Was Over $8.5 Million
Hearing Scheduled in Suit Over Meeting Between DOJ Lawyers and Reporters
Judicial Watch Takes Lead at Conservative Political Action Conference
Judicial Watch is participating as a Supporting Sponsor of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), being held through tomorrow at the Gaylord National Harbor in Maryland. I am scheduled to speak on the main stage on Saturday.
You can watch the broadcast live at www.judicialwatch.org/cpac. You can also visit our Facebook page or YouTube page.
CPAC brings together thousands of people and the leading conservative organizations and speakers engaged with conservative thought. Regularly seen on C-SPAN and other national news networks, CPAC has been the premier event for any major elected official or public personality seeking to discuss issues of the day with conservatives. From presidents of the United States to college student leaders, CPAC has become the place to find our nation’s current and future leaders.
Emails Reveal British Physicians Recommended Ivermectin for COVID-19
One of the many controversies surrounding our government’s response to COVID-19 involves the drug Ivermectin, an anti-parasite medication whose antiviral activity has made of interest for those seeking treatment and prevention of Covid. The controversy around the drug is at the center of 254 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) this included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins regarding a British group’s recommendations on the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat COVID-19.
We obtained the records as the result of our August 2021 FOIA lawsuit for Collins’ emails filed after the HHS failed to respond to a June 8, 2021, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:21-cv-02302)).
In February 2021, a leading British physician and World Council for Health co-founder Dr. Tess Lawrie,who is director and founder of a doctors’ organization called the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development Group (BIRD), emailed 31 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials, including the Director of the Offfice of New Drugs in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Peter Stein; Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks; and then-Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock; and copying several leading foreign medical figures, with an email titled “URGENT: The BIRD meeting and recommendation on covid-19 prevention and treatment.” She attached a document titled “Draft BIRD Proceedings 25-02-2021 v.1.4.pdf.”
While the document attached to the email is completely redacted, Lawrie’s cover letter states: “BIRD panel conclusions are that Ivermectin should be approved immediately for prevention and treatment of covid-19:”
The British Ivermectin Recommendation Development Panel recommends ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of covid-19 to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with covid-19 infection and to prevent covid-19 infection among those at higher risk. [Emphasis in original]
The BIRD Steering Group has taken heed of the WHO statement on ‘Developing global norms for sharing data and results during public health emergencies’ that states that ‘public disclosure of information of relevance to public health emergencies should not be delayed’, and also notes the ‘very great risks’ that can occur from ‘withholding data and results arising from analyses’. We are, therefore, sharing this evidence-to decision framework within just a few days of the BIRD meeting to avoid delay.
Further, due to the urgency related to the communication and dissemination of this recommendation that is aimed at saving thousands of lives daily, please forgive the limitations of the draft proceedings document attached. Information on the process and methods can be found among the annexes. An Executive Summary is being finalised and will be available on Monday.
Later that day, Woodcock forwards Lawrie’s email and attachment to then-NIH Director Francis Collins, NIAID Director Anthony Fauci, Operation Warp Speed director David Kessler and several other HHS officials, with a comment that is entirely redacted.
It is quite telling that, rather than educate the public about their rejection of the Ivermectin-use recommendation, the FDA, NIH, and Fauci’s former agency have blacked out their responses in these documents.
Through a separate lawsuit, in July 2022, we uncovered FDA records regarding COVID booster vaccines research that show top officials being pressured by “companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense”
Those records included an August 25, 2021, email from the former director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review Marion Gruber to her boss, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Director Peter Marks:
Over the last couple of days, Janssen has bombarded us with emails regarding their booster dose studies.
I am also very concerned that companies (such as Pfizer and Janssen) are trying to put pressure on OVRR [Office of Vaccines Research and Review] by way of PR [public relations]. We need to be given time to consider their data and cannot be pushed by these companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense (e.g., Sep 20)…. It appears that at least Pfizer’s data will not be aligned with this approach and the ‘n’ [test numbers] they have is grossly insufficient. Obviously, we have to review the data but we have taken a peak and have serious concerns.
Lastly, and this is my personal opinion, data we have seen so far from various companies (Pfizer, Janssen, Moderna) appear to suggest that boosters are not needed.
Through FOIA requests and lawsuits,we have uncovered an incredible amount of information about COVID-19 issues:
- Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the COVID shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
- We obtained HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Heavily redacted records from the FDA regarding the COVID-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on COVID booster use and approval.
- HHS records detailed internal discussions about myocarditis and the COVID vaccine. Other documents detail adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
- We uncovered HHS records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration propaganda campaign to push the COVID-19 vaccine.
- HHS records revealed previously redacted locations of COVID-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
- NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), James W. Le Duc, warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records obtained from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was cancelled because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
- HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
- HHS records show that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
- Fauci emails include his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
And more is coming, so check back with Judicial Watch often!
Special Counsel Durham’s FY 2022 Budget Was Over $8.5 Million
After waiting for 16 months, we finally received 3 pages of budget records from the Justice Department concerning the operations of the Office of Special Counsel John Durham that show its fiscal year 2022 budget was over $8.5 million.
And we have to wonder: What exactly did we get for our money?
The document production comes in our March 2022 FOIA lawsuit filed after the DOJ failed to respond to an August 2021, request for records of communication between Special Counsel John Durham and Attorney General Merrick Garland, and all budget records related to the operations of the office of Special Counsel (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:22-cv-00734)).
Durham was appointed to serve as Special Counsel for the Department of Justice on October 19, 2020:
The Special Counsel is authorized to investigate whether any federal official, employee, or any other person or entity violated the law in connection with the intelligence, counter-intelligence, or law-enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns, individuals associated with those campaigns, and individuals associated with the administration of President Donald J. Trump, including but not limited to Crossfire Hurricane and the investigation of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, Ill.
The Department of Justice initially produced budget records responsive to our lawsuit on June 3, 2022, but redacted the actual budget numbers. We challenged the withheld information, and the DOJ now has re-released the documents withoutthe redactions.
The supplemental response includes an unredacted June 30, 2021, memo from Assistant Attorney General Lee Lofthus to Attorney General Garland with the subject line “Fiscal Year 2022 Special Counsel’s Office Budget Request,” showing a previously withheld estimated budget of $8,627,629.
Attached is the John Durham Special Counsel Office Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 budget plan. The Justice Management Division has completed its review under 28 C.F.R. 600.8(a)(1). The FY 2022 budget estimate is $4,463,525 which, after Office of Management and Budget technical adjustments for the mandatory sequester, totals $4,209,104 in available operational funds.
In a line-item breakout of costs for FY 2022 attached to the memo, DOJ has now released figures indicating that total income paid to “Full Time Permanent” personnel, including benefits, was $1,874,193. Non-reimbursable costs totaled $2,334,911, for costs such as travel ($457,207), rent ($306,350), and “Other Contractual Services” ($1,297,054). The budget also indicates there was one direct position, 11 “Reimbursable Detailees” and three “Non-Reimbursable Investigative Staff,” for a total of 15 personnel. [Emphasis supplied for previously redacted numbers]
Special Counsel Durham has spent millions in tax dollars to investigate the worst government corruption scandal in American history – the abuse of Trump – to little good end. That we had to file a federal lawsuit to get basic budget information about this historic investigation speaks volumes. And that the Garland DOJ is still hiding documents adds to the scandal.
Hearing Scheduled in Suit Over Meeting Between DOJ Lawyers and Reporters
A court hearing will be held before U.S. District Court Carl J. Nichols on Thursday, March 9, 2023, in our FOIA lawsuitagainst the Justice Department for records of a meeting set up by then-Chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section Andrew Weissmann between the DOJ, FBI and reporters from The Associated Press (AP), in which Weissmann allegedly provided guidance to reporters investigating Paul Manafort, and which may have led to the raid of Manafort’s storage locker (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00879)).
In October 2019, we made public two productions of documents from the FBI – 28 pages and 38 pages – about an April 11, 2017, “off-the-record” meeting set up by Weissmann between the DOJ, the FBI and The Associated Press in which AP reporters reportedly provided information on Manafort, including the numeric code to Manafort’s storage locker.
But we also explained to the court that the search for attorney Shreve Ariail’s records remains at issue. At the time Ariail was assistant U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York. He subsequently became deputy general counsel for litigation and investigations at the CIA and is now in private practice. Ariail was among the three U.S. attorneys who attended and emailed about the meeting with at least one AP reporter and Andrew Weissmann. (Weissmann was hired to work on Robert Mueller’s special counsel operation against President Trump. Weissman then reportedly spearheaded the subsequent investigation and prosecution of Manafort.)
The DOJ refused to search Ariail’s records until it was ordered to do so by the court in March 2022. During this process, new information came to light that casts doubt on the DOJ’s obligation to retain Ariail’s records during our pending lawsuit.
We contend that the DOJ’s response about its retention of Ariail’s records raises critical questions about potential deletion of records that require the court’s immediate attention.
Until next week,
The post Ivermectin Cover-up? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, D.C.) Judicial Watch announced today that it received 254 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) this included emails of then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis Collins regarding a British group’s recommendations on the use of Ivermectin to prevent and treat COVID-19.
Judicial Watch obtained the records as the result of an August 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuitfor Collins’ emails filed after the HHS failed to respond to a June 8, 2021, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:21-cv-02302)).
In February 2021, a leading British physician and World Council for Health co-founder Dr. Tess Lawrie,who is director and founder of a doctors’ organization called the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development Group (BIRD), emailed31 Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officials, including the Director of the Offfice of New Drugs in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research Peter Stein; Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks; and then-Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock; and copying several leading foreign medical figures, with an email titled “URGENT: The BIRD meeting and recommendation on covid-19 prevention and treatment.” She attached a document titled “Draft BIRD Proceedings 25-02-2021 v.1.4.pdf.”
While the document attached to the email is completely redacted, Lawrie’s cover letter states: “BIRD panel conclusions are that Ivermectin should be approved immediately for prevention and treatment of covid-19:”
The British Ivermectin Recommendation Development Panel recommends ivermectin for the prevention and treatment of covid-19 to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with covid-19 infection and to prevent covid-19 infection among those at higher risk. [Emphasis in original]
The BIRD Steering Group has taken heed of the WHO statement on ‘Developing global norms for sharing data and results during public health emergencies’ that states that ‘public disclosure of information of relevance to public health emergencies should not be delayed’, and also notes the ‘very great risks’ that can occur from ‘withholding data and results arising from analyses’. We are, therefore, sharing this evidence-to decision framework within just a few days of the BIRD meeting to avoid delay.
Further, due to the urgency related to the communication and dissemination of this recommendation that is aimed at saving thousands of lives daily, please forgive the limitations of the draft proceedings document attached. Information on the process and methods can be found among the annexes. An Executive Summary is being finalised and will be available on Monday.
Later that day, Woodcock forwards Lawrie’s email and attachment to then-NIH Director Francis Collins, NIAID Director Anthony Fauci, Operation Warp Speed director David Kessler and several other HHS officials, with a comment that is entirely redacted.
“Rather than educate the public about the supposed reasons for their rejection of the Ivermectin-use recommendation, the FDA, NIH, and Fauci’s former agency have blacked out their responses in these documents,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Through a separate lawsuit, in July 2022, Judicial Watch uncovered FDA records regarding COVID booster vaccines research that show top officials being pressured by “companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense”
Those records included an August 25, 2021, email from the former director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review Marion Gruber to her boss, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Director Peter Marks:
Over the last couple of days, Janssen has bombarded us with emails regarding their booster dose studies.
I am also very concerned that companies (such as Pfizer and Janssen) are trying to put pressure on OVRR [Office of Vaccines Research and Review] by way of PR [public relations]. We need to be given time to consider their data and cannot be pushed by these companies and, for that matter the Administration, who try to impose timeless [sic] that make no sense (e.g., Sep 20)…. It appears that at least Pfizer’s data will not be aligned with this approach and the ‘n’ [test numbers] they have is grossly insufficient. Obviously, we have to review the data but we have taken a peak and have serious concerns.
Lastly, and this is my personal opinion, data we have seen so far from various companies (Pfizer, Janssen, Moderna) appear to suggest that boosters are not needed.
Through FOIA requests and lawsuits, Judicial Watch has uncovered a substantial amount of information about COVID-19 issues:
- Heavily redacted HHS records showed that just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine a discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the COVID shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
- Judicial Watch obtained HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, which indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- Heavily redacted records from the FDA regarding the COVID-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on COVID booster use and approval.
- HHS records detailed internal discussions about myocarditis and the COVID vaccine. Other documents detail adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
- Judicial Watch uncovered HHS records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration propaganda campaign to push the COVID-19 vaccine.
- HHS records revealed previously redacted locations of COVID-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
- NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc, warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records obtained from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was cancelled because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
- HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
- HHS records show that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
- Fauci emailsinclude his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
The post Judicial Watch: Former NIH Director Francis Collins Emails Reveal British Physicians and Scientists Group Recommended Ivermectin for Preventions and Treatment of COVID-19 appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The situation along the southwest border has deteriorated so badly under President Joe Biden that in the last two years an Arizona county about an hour drive from Mexico has seen a breathtaking 377% increase in human smuggling and trafficking incidents and a shocking 610% rise in fentanyl pills seized by local law enforcement officers. Closer to the southern border a small Arizona town a stone’s throw from Los Algodones, Mexico saw three times its population cross into its municipality illegally last year, overwhelming the city’s only hospital.
The Pinal County Sheriff and the president of Yuma Regional Medical Center offered the chilling information this week during a congressional hearing focusing on immigration since Biden took office. Held by the House Homeland Security Committee, the session occurred just days after the nation heard alarming testimony form Border Patrol sector chiefs during a separate conference held by the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability. In that hearing Rio Grande Valley Chief Gloria Chavez revealed cartels use drones to track federal agents and that in her Texas sector alone more than 10,000 drone incursions and 25,000 drone sightings occurred in a year. “The adversaries have 17 times the number of drones, twice the amount of flight hours and unlimited funding to grow their operations,” Chavez told federal lawmakers. Tucson sector Chief John Modlin said the border crisis has gone from “what I would describe as unprecedented to a point where I don’t have the correct adjective.” Last year his Arizona sector seized about 700 pounds of fentanyl, which is well over three million pills.
American border towns have been devastated by the illegal immigration crisis and the problem is spilling over into distant regions that typically do not see the kind of activity associated with border crimes. The president of Yuma Regional Medical Center, Dr. Robert Trenschel, said before the congressional hearing this week that his facility is overwhelmed. “Yuma is only a population of 100,000 people, and we’ve had 300,000 people cross the border in a year, and we’re the only hospital they go to,” Trenschel said. “So they come to us and that’s impacted our hospital significantly and disproportionately.” The hospital chief testified that many migrants come with significant diseases that require costly treatments like dialysis, cardiac catheterization and surgery. “Many are very sick,” he said. “They have long term complications of chronic disease that have not been cared for. Some end up in the ICU for 60 days or more. One of the largest cohorts we have seen are maternity patients who present with little or no prenatal care. These higher risk pregnancies and births result in higher complication rates and longer hospital stays. Due to a lack of pre-natal care, many of these babies require a stay in our Neonatal Intensive Care Unit—some for a month or more at a time.” Of course, American taxpayers are picking up the tab for the costly medical care.
Further from the Mexican border in central Arizona’s Pinal County, the area’s top law enforcement official says a high percentage of the drugs and human smuggling plaguing the U.S. pass through his jurisdiction enroute to Phoenix and the rest of the country. The elected sheriff, Mark Lamb, testified that over the last two years human smuggling/trafficking incidents in his county have increased 377% and vehicle pursuits related to human smuggling are up 461%. “If it’s not humans being trafficked, it’s drugs,” Lamb said. “The number of fentanyl pills my deputies have seized along this same route since 2020 is up 610%.” The veteran cop also told lawmakers that most of the migrants his agency encounters, those who got away from the Border Patrol, are being trafficked by the cartels. “They are adult military aged men wearing camouflage clothes, carpet shoes, carrying backpacks and often times drugs,” Lamb said. “They have eluded Border Patrol by walking through the desert for several days and have no intentions of giving up. Many of them have been deported before, have criminal records or work directly for the cartels. Their goal is to enter our country undetected and illegally.”
During the lengthy hearing the sheriff also expressed frustration at media and Biden administration claims that there is not a crisis at the southern border and the lie that the area is secure. “Clearly, our statistics tell a different story,” Lamb said. “And that story is that the border is not secure.”
The post Arizona County Sees 377% Surge in Human Smuggling, 610% Hike in Fentanyl Under Biden appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that after 16 months, it has finally received 3 pages of budget records from the U.S Department of Justice (DOJ) concerning the operations of the Office of Special Counsel John Durham that show its fiscal year 2022 budget was over $8.5 million.
The document production comes in the March 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch after the DOJ failed to respond to an August 2021, request for records of communication between Special Counsel John Durham and Attorney General Merrick Garland, and all budget records related to the operations of the office of Special Counsel (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:22-cv-00734)).
Durham was appointed to serve as Special Counsel for the Department of Justice on October 19, 2020:
The Special Counsel is authorized to investigate whether any federal official, employee, or any other person or entity violated the law in connection with the intelligence, counter-intelligence, or law-enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns, individuals associated with those campaigns, and individuals associated with the administration of President Donald J. Trump, including but not limited to Crossfire Hurricane and the investigation of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, Ill.
The Department of Justice initially produced budget records responsive to the Judicial Watch lawsuit on June 3, 2022, but redacted the actual budget numbers. Judicial Watch challenged the withheld information, and the DOJ now has re-released the documents without the redactions.
The supplemental response includes an unredacted June 30, 2021, memo from Assistant Attorney General Lee Lofthus to Attorney General Garland with the subject line “Fiscal Year 2022 Special Counsel’s Office Budget Request,” showing a previously withheld estimated budget of $8,627,629.
Attached is the John Durham Special Counsel Office Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 budget plan. The Justice Management Division has completed its review under 28 C.F.R. 600.8(a)(1). The FY 2022 budget estimate is $4,463,525 which, after Office of Management and Budget technical adjustments for the mandatory sequester, totals $4,209,104 in available operational funds. [Emphasis supplied for previously redacted numbers]
In a line-item breakout of costs for FY 2022 attached to the memo, DOJ has now released figures indicating that total income paid to “Full Time Permanent” personnel, including benefits, was $1,874,193. Non-reimbursable costs totaled $2,334,911, for costs such as travel ($457,207), rent ($306,350), and “Other Contractual Services” ($1,297,054). The budget also indicates there was one direct position, 11 “Reimbursable Detailees” and three “Non-Reimbursable Investigative Staff,” for a total of 15 personnel. [Emphasis supplied for previously redacted numbers]
“Special Counsel Durham has spent millions in tax dollars to investigate the worst government corruption scandal in American history – the abuse of Trump – to little good end,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “That we had to file a federal lawsuit to get basic budget information about this historic investigation speaks volumes. And that the Garland DOJ is still hiding documents adds to the scandal.”
The post Judicial Watch: Justice Department Records Show Special Counsel Durham’s FY 2022 Budget over $8.5 Million appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced its participation as a Supporting Sponsor of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), March 1-4, at the Gaylord National Harbor. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton is scheduled to speak at CPAC on the main stage Saturday, March 4.
Viewers can watch the broadcast live Thursday – Saturday at www.judicialwatch.org/cpac. They can also visit the Judicial Watch Facebook pageor YouTubepage.
About Judicial Watch Inc.: Judicial Watch is a conservative, nonpartisan educational foundation that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. The motto of Judicial Watch is “Because no one is above the law!” To this end, Judicial Watch uses the open records or freedom of information laws and other tools to investigate and uncover misconduct by government officials and litigation to hold to account politicians and public officials who engage in corrupt activities. Judicial Watch does not endorse or oppose candidates for public office.
About CPAC: CPAC is back in DC this year. CPAC brings together thousands of attendees and the leading conservative organizations and speakers impacting conservative thought in the nation. Regularly seen on C-SPAN and other national news networks, CPAC has been the premier event for any major elected official or public personality seeking to discuss issues of the day with conservatives. From presidents of the United States to college student leaders, CPAC has become the place to find our nation’s current and future leaders.
Visit www.judicialwatch.org.
*CPAC’s schedule is subject to change without notice.
The post Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton to be Featured at Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In a fruitless effort to curb “irregular migration” from Central America the Biden administration is sending the region hundreds of millions of dollars in humanitarian funding with the unlikely goal that the money will improve life enough to deter its citizens from coming to the United States illegally. So far, the plan has failed miserably. Uncle Sam’s hefty checks have not stopped mobs from three targeted countries known as the northern triangle—El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—from migrating to the U.S. via the southwest border.
As the American aid keeps flowing south, a record-breaking number of illegal aliens are crossing into the country through Mexico, demonstrating that President Joe Biden’s pricey initiative to address the root cause of irregular migration from the impoverished region is a waste of taxpayer dollars. Known as Collaborative Migration Management Strategy, the administration launched the plan in 2021 to address the underlying factors leading to migration, increase humanitarian assistance to alleviate conditions in the region, provide protection to vulnerable populations, create messaging campaigns to deter irregular migration, reintegrate returned migrants, expand lawful pathways to protection and opportunity in the U.S. and enhance asylum processing at the southwest border. All individuals should be able to find safety and achieve a stable and dignified life within their own country, Biden’s migration strategy says. “When that is not the case, asylum and other legal migration pathways should be readily available to those who need them,” according to the document.
As part of that broad campaign to curb migration from the three Central American nations, the administration has doled out more than $260 million in humanitarian funding since April 2021. The latest allotment of $42.5 million was announced just days ago. “The new assistance will support programs that reduce food insecurity for the most vulnerable, support survivors and those at risk of gender-based violence and children in need of protection, help households to restore their livelihoods, and provide safe drinking water for poor families,” the government writes in the announcement released this month. In the document the administration further explains that besides coping with natural hazards, all three countries are suffering from large-scale displacements, increasing food prices, and chronic protection challenges. “The United States remains committed to providing lifesaving aid to help the people of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras,” the administration assures.
The generous humanitarian aid has done little to reduce illegal immigration into the U.S. through the southwest border, government figures show. In fiscal year 2022 a record 2.4 million illegal aliens entered the country through Mexico, a major increase from an already high of 1.73 million in 2021. More than half a million of the 2022 migrants were nationals of the northern triangle, illustrating the ineffectiveness of Biden’s multi-million-dollar plan. They included 228,000 Guatemalans, 199,000 Hondurans, and 93,000 Salvadorans. It is worth noting that the region is not exactly sending its finest citizens. In 2021 Judicial Watch reported that most of the illegal aliens arrested by the U.S. that year came from Mexico followed by Honduras (309,000), Guatemala (279,000) and El Salvador (96,000). In 2022 Border Patrol agents apprehended hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) which was formed by Salvadoran immigrants—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist. Federal agents also confiscated thousands of pounds of drugs, mainly methamphetamine.
Under Biden there is little hope for improvement in the illegal immigration crisis that has gripped the nation since he moved into the White House. Afterall, when the president deployed Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to the Mexican border to address the situation and supposedly reassure Americans, Mayorkas secretly met with influential leftist groups that advocate for open borders. They included nonprofits funded by leftwing billionaire George Soros and another operated by a former Hillary Clinton and Obama advisor. Judicial Watch obtained records of the covert meetings which were incredibly revealing about the administration’s anemic enforcement priorities. Read about it here.
The post U.S. Gives Central America $260 Mil in Humanitarian Aid in Failed Effort to Curb “Irregular Migration” appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Breitbart:
More than 1.2 million registrants have been removed from the voter rolls in Los Angeles County, California, since 2022 as part of a settlement agreement with Judicial Watch, according to the watchdog group.
In 2019, as Breitbart News reported at the time, Judicial Watch signed a settlement agreement with Los Angeles County officials after suing them for allegedly failing to maintain the county’s voter rolls under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA).
Read more here…
The post Watchdog: 1.2 Million Inactive Voters Removed from Los Angeles Voter Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Los Angeles County Confirms Removal of 1.2 Million Ineligible Voters From Rolls as Part of Lawsuit Settlement
Judicial Watch announced recently that Los Angeles County removed 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017.
Judicial Watch Sues DHS for Records on Election Censorship
“The Elon Musk ‘Twitter Files’ are the tip of the iceberg, as the federal government ran a massive, secret censorship op against the American people,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “That the DHS is hiding these censorship records in violation of FOIA law shows the agency still has something to hide.”
Biden Issues Second Executive Order to “Further” Advance Governmentwide Racial Equity
Although the U.S. has already implemented a governmentwide plan to advance racial equity and support underserved communities under a 2021 Biden executive order, the president has issued a second directive to strong arm federal agencies into launching more initiatives that will further tax Americans.
Texas Border Operation Catches 348,000 Illegal Immigrants, 361 million Lethal Fentanyl Doses
In the absence of adequate federal enforcement a Texas border security initiative heavily criticized by Democrats and the media has apprehended hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants—including thousands of criminals—and seized millions of lethal doses of fentanyl. Known as Operation Lone Star, the project was launched by Governor Greg Abbott in March 2021 as the illegal immigration crisis gripped his border state.
In The News
Lawsuit Forces Los Angeles County To Remove 1.2 Million Ineligible Voters From Rolls
The Federalist
Los Angeles County, California confirmed it had removed 1.2 million ineligible voters from its rolls thanks to a settlement with the conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch, the group announced Friday. Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in 2017 on behalf of itself and four registered voters in Los Angeles County. Election Integrity Project California, Inc., another public interest group, was also a part of the lawsuit.
EXCLUSIVE: ‘Maybe we were asked for a favor?’ Secret Service accused of a ‘cover-up’ over its alleged involvement in police probe when Hunter Biden’s lover Hallie dropped his handgun in a trash can near a school in 2018
Daily Mail
The Secret Service has been accused of a ‘cover-up’ over its alleged involvement in a police investigation when Hunter Biden‘s lover dumped his gun in a trash can near a school in 2018.
Judicial Watch Sues DoD for Records on Biden’s Use of Marines as ‘Props’ at Controversial Campaign Speech
CNS News
Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Defense Department because it has failed to produce legally requested communications concerning President Joe Biden’s Sept. 1 campaign speech in Philadelphia, where he positioned two U.S. Marines to stand behind him as he lectured that “MAGA Republicans” are threatening the “very foundations of our Republic.”
Video Highlights
-
-
- BREAKING: Jan 6 Vids to Be Released! - Court Martial General Milley? - NEW: @JudicialWatch Exposes Secret Agreement Tied to Vaccine Side Effects
-
The post Massive Voter Roll Clean Up In LA County! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that a court hearing will be held before U.S. District Court Carl J. Nichols on Thursday, March 9, 2023, in the Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice for records of a meeting set up by then-Chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section Andrew Weissmann between the DOJ, FBI and reporters from The Associated Press (AP), in which Weissmann allegedly provided guidance to reporters investigating Paul Manafort, and which may have led to the raid of Manafort’s storage locker (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00879)).
The hearing will be held:
Date: Thursday, March 9, 2023
Time: 1 pm ET
Location: E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse
333 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Judicial Watch has explained to the court that the search for attorney Shreve Ariail’s records remains at issue. At the time Ariail was assistant U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York. He subsequently became deputy general counsel for litigation and investigations at the CIA, and is now in private practice. Ariail was among the three U.S. attorneys who attended and emailed about the meeting with at least one AP reporter and Andrew Weissmann. (Weissmann was hired to work on Robert Mueller’s special counsel operation against President Trump. Weissman then reportedly spearheaded the subsequent investigation and prosecution of Manafort.) The DOJ refused to search Ariail’s records until it was ordered to do so by the court in March 2022. During this process, new information has come to light that casts doubt on the DOJ’s obligation to retain Ariail’s records during Judicial Watch’s pending lawsuit.
Judicial Watch contends that the DOJ’s response about its retention of Ariail’s records raises critical questions about potential deletion of records that require the court’s immediate attention.
In October 2019, Judicial Watch made public two productions of documents from the FBI – 28 pages and 38 pages – about an April 11, 2017, “off-the-record” meeting set up by then-Chief of the Justice Department’s Criminal Fraud Section Andrew Weissmann, between the DOJ, the FBI and The Associated Press in which AP reporters reportedly provided information on Manafort, including the numeric code to Manafort’s storage locker.
The post Judicial Watch: Federal Court Hearing Scheduled in Lawsuit Seeking Details of Meeting Between DOJ Lawyers and AP Reporters Regarding Trump Associate Paul Manafort appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Federalist:
Los Angeles County, California confirmed it had removed 1.2 million ineligible voters from its rolls thanks to a settlement with the conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch, the group announced Friday. Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit in 2017 on behalf of itself and four registered voters in Los Angeles County. Election Integrity Project California, Inc., another public interest group, was also a part of the lawsuit.
Under the agreement, Los Angeles had to send 1.6 million address confirmation notices to voters listed “inactive” on its voter rolls. According to the National Voter Registration Act — which requires states to maintain accurate voter rolls — states and counties must remove from their voting rolls voters who do not respond to such mailers and do not vote in the next two federal elections.
Read more here…
The post Lawsuit Forces Los Angeles County To Remove 1.2 Million Ineligible Voters From Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
LA County Removes 1.2 million Ineligible Voters in Judicial Watch Lawsuit Settlement
Judicial Watch Sues DHS for Records on Election Censorship
Biden Issues Second Order to “Further” Advance Governmentwide Racial Equity
LA County Removes 1.2 million Ineligible Voters in Judicial Watch Lawsuit Settlement
Good news for voters and elections in California. Los Angeles County removed 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit we filed in 2017 (Judicial Watch, Inc., et al. v. Dean C. Logan, et al. (No. 2:17-cv-08948)).
We sued on behalf of four lawfully registered voters in Los Angeles County and the Election Integrity Project California, Inc., a public interest group involved in monitoring California’s voter rolls.
Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Los Angeles County sent almost 1.6 million address confirmation notices in 2019 to voters listed as “inactive” on its voter rolls. Under the federal National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), voters who do not respond to the notices and who do not vote in the following two federal elections must be removed from the voter rolls. The settlement also required an update to the state’s online NVRA manual to make it clear that ineligible names must be removed and to notify each California county that they are obliged to do this.
In the most recent of a series of progress reports to us, Los Angeles County confirmed that 1,207,613 ineligible and inactive voters were recently removed from the rolls. Los Angeles County confirmed last year that more than 634,000 of its inactive voters hadn’t voted in at least 10 years.
We previously detailed that Los Angeles County had allowed more than 20% of its registered voters to become inactive without removing them from the voter list.
This long overdue voter roll clean-up is a historic victory and means California elections are less at risk for fraud. Building on this success, we will continue our lawsuits and activism to clean up voter rolls and to promote and protect cleaner elections.
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. We have assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who have stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
We recently settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional gerrymander.
In May 2022, we sued Illinois on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to stop state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.
Robert Popper, Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads our election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
Judicial Watch Sues DHS for Records on Election Censorship
We’re back in court in our continuing quest to unearth the federal government’s election-related censorship. The more we learn, the more concerning it becomes.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) that could detail coordinated censorship activities (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:23-cv-00384)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA), a component of the Department of Homeland Security, failed to comply with an October 27, 2022, FOIA request for:
- All emails, direct messages, task management alerts, or other records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership sent via the Atlassian Jira platform between any official or employee of the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency and any member, officer, employee, or representative of any of the following:
- The Election Integrity Partnership
- The University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public
- Stanford University’s Internet Observatory
- The Center for Internet Security
- The Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing & Analysis Center
- The National Association of Secretaries of State
- The National Association of State Election Directors
- Graphika
- The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensics Research Laboratory
- Any social media company
- All memoranda of understanding, guidelines, or similar records related to the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency’s use of the Atlassian Jira platform for work related to the Election Integrity Partnership.
Based on representations from the Election Integrity Partnership (see here and here), the federal government, social media companies, the EIP, the Center for Internet Security (a non-profit organization funded partly by DHS and the Defense Department) and numerous other leftist groups communicated privately via the Atlassian software platform called Jira.
In a February 8, 2023, hearing by the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) revealed informationabout federal agencies, social media companies, nonprofits and other organizations communicating “their version of misinformation using Jira.” Luna pointed out to Yoel Roth, then-Twitter’s head of trust and safety who helped suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story:
On this chart, I want to annotate that the Department of Homeland Security, which has a following branches, cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency, also known as CISA Countering Foreign Intelligence Task Force … [were] used against the American people. The Election Partnership Institute or Election Integrity Partnership, EIP, which includes the following, Stanford Internet Observatory, University of Washington Center for Informed Public, Graphika and Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab. And potentially according to what we found on the final report by EIP, the DNC, the Center for Internet Security, CISA- a nonprofit funded by DHS, the National Association of Secretaries of State, also known as NASS and the National Association of State Election Directors, NASED.
And in this case, because there are other social media companies involved, Twitter, what do all of these groups though, have in common? And I’m going to refresh your memory. They were all communicating on a private cloud server known as Jira. Now, the screenshot behind screenshot behind me, which is an example of one of thousands shows on November 3rd, 2020, that you, Mr. Roth, a Twitter employee, were exchanging communications on Jira, a private cloud server with CISA, NASS, NASED, and Alex Stamos, who now works at Stanford and is a former security of security officer at Facebook to remove a posting. Do you now remember communicating on a private cloud server to remove a posting? Yes or no?
Well, I’m going to tell you right now that you did and we have proof of it.
The Elon Musk ‘Twitter Files’ are the tip of the iceberg, as the federal government ran a massive, secret censorship op against the American people. That the DHS is hiding these censorship records in violation of FOIA law shows the agency still has something to hide.
We have been quite active in exposing unlawful election interference.
We are suing the DHS for all records of communications between the CISA and the EIP, which was reportedly active during the 2022 midterm elections. Among the news outlets flagged by EIP were websites for Just the News, New York Post, Fox News, Washington Examiner, The Washington Times, The Epoch Times and Breitbart.
We recently sued the DOJ for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story.
In September 2022, we sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch’s YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview with me. We continue to post our videos on its Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In April 2021, we published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In May 2021, we revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In July 2021, we uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
Biden Issues Second Order to ‘Further’ Advance Governmentwide Racial Equity
The Left’s use of the word “equity,” meaning equal outcomes for different groups, is reminiscent of Karl Marx’s “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” And Marxist “equity” is the official policy of the Biden administration, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
Although the U.S. has already implemented a governmentwide plan to advance racial equity and support underserved communities under a 2021 Biden executive order, the president has issued a second directive to strong arm federal agencies into launching more initiatives that will further tax Americans. Under the recently issued mandate government agencies have 30 days to establish an “Agency Equity Team” and conduct proactive engagement with members of underserved communities through culturally and linguistically appropriate listening sessions. Biden is also creating a White House Steering Committee on Equity composed of senior officials who will coordinate the government’s sweeping efforts to promote his leftist agenda.
“By advancing equity, the Federal Government can support and empower all Americans, including the many communities in America that have been underserved, discriminated against, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality,” Biden writes in the new document, adding that “equitability” will rebuild trust in government. “This order builds upon my previous equity-related Executive Orders by extending and strengthening equity-advancing requirements for agencies, and it positions agencies to deliver better outcomes for the American people,” according to the president. As examples the commander-in-chief offers building a strong, fair, and inclusive workforce and economy, investing in communities where federal policies have historically impeded equal opportunity, mitigating economic displacement, rooting out discrimination in the housing market, advancing equity in health, environmental justice and ending “unjust disparities” in the nation’s criminal justice system.
Additionally, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will update directives to “support equitable decision-making, promote equitable deployment of financial and technical assistance, and assist agencies in advancing equity, as appropriate and wherever possible,” the new executive order says. This is important because OMB plays a pivotal role in government by developing and executing the federal budget, overseeing federal agencies and executive branch operations, and coordinating all significant federal regulations. The new order also includes a blueprint to make equity part of the official federal budget process and specifically prevent discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation. “My Administration has embedded a focus on equity into the fabric of Federal policymaking and service delivery,” Biden writes, bragging that his presidency is the most diverse in our nation’s history.
This month’s executive order is part of a robust movement by the administration to incorporate racial equity across all federal agencies. The president launched the plan on his first day in office with the lengthy executive order to advance racial equity and support for underserved communities through the government. The 2021 document claims that “entrenched disparities” in laws, public policies, and private institutions have denied equal opportunity to individuals and communities and that the health and climate crises have exposed inequities while a “historic movement for justice has highlighted the unbearable human costs of systemic racism.” Therefore, the original order states, the federal government should pursue a “comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all, including people of color and others who have been historically underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality.” It further says that “by advancing equity across the Federal Government, we can create opportunities for the improvement of communities that have been historically underserved, which benefits everyone.”
Many key federal agencies have taken major steps to implement racial equity plans as per Biden’s first mandate. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has formulated a strategy to “advance equity for marginalized and underserved communities” that, among other things, directs federal prosecutors to ignore maximum sentencing under the law to “avoid unwarranted disparities.” The Department of Labor has dedicated $260 million to promote “equitable access” to government unemployment benefits by addressing disparities in the administration and delivery of money by race ethnicity and language proficiency. The Treasury Department named its first ever racial equity chief, a veteran La Raza official who spent a decade at the nation’s most influential open borders group. The Department of Defense (DOD) is using outrageous anti-bias materials that indoctrinate troops with anti-American and racially inflammatory training on diversity topics. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) created an equity commission to address longstanding inequities in agriculture. The nation’s medical research agency has a special minority health and health disparities division that issued a study declaring COVID-19 exacerbated preexisting resentment against racial/ethnic minorities and marginalized communities.
Until next week …
The post Massive Voter Roll Clean Up in LA! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) that could detail coordinated censorship activities (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security(No. 1:23-cv-00384)).
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (a component of the Department of Homeland Security) failed to comply with an October 27, 2022, FOIA request for:
- All emails, direct messages, task management alerts, or other records of communication related to the work of the Election Integrity Partnership sent via the Atlassian Jira platform between any official or employee of the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency and any member, officer, employee, or representative of any of the following:
· The Election Integrity Partnership
· The University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public
· Stanford University’s Internet Observatory
· The Center for Internet Security
· The Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing & Analysis Center
· The National Association of Secretaries of State
· The National Association of State Election Directors
· Graphika
· The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensics Research Laboratory
· Any social media company
- All memoranda of understanding, guidelines, or similar records related to the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency’s use of the Atlassian Jira platform for work related to the Election Integrity Partnership.
Based on representations from the Election Integrity Partnership (see here and here), the federal government, social media companies, the EIP, the Center for Internet Security (a non-profit organization funded partly by DHS and the Defense Department) and numerous other leftist groups communicated privately via the Atlassian software platform called Jira.
In a February 8, 2023, hearing by the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) revealed information about federal agencies, social media companies, nonprofits and other organizations communicating “their version of misinformation using Jira.” Luna pointed out to Yoel Roth, then-Twitter’s head of trust and safety who helped suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story:
On this chart, I want to annotate that the Department of Homeland Security, which has a following branches, cybersecurity and infrastructure security agency, also known as CISA Countering Foreign Intelligence Task Force … [were] used against the American people. The Election Partnership Institute or Election Integrity Partnership, EIP, which includes the following, Stanford Internet Observatory, University of Washington Center for Informed Public, Graphika and Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab. And potentially according to what we found on the final report by EIP, the DNC, the Center for Internet Security, CISA- a nonprofit funded by DHS, the National Association of Secretaries of State, also known as NASS and the National Association of State Election Directors, NASED.
And in this case, because there are other social media companies involved, Twitter, what do all of these groups though, have in common? And I’m going to refresh your memory. They were all communicating on a private cloud server known as Jira. Now, the screenshot behind screenshot behind me, which is an example of one of thousands shows on November 3rd, 2020, that you, Mr. Roth, a Twitter employee, were exchanging communications on Jira, a private cloud server with CISA, NASS, NASED, and Alex Stamos, who now works at Stanford and is a former security of security officer at Facebook to remove a posting. Do you now remember communicating on a private cloud server to remove a posting? Yes or no?
Well, I’m going to tell you right now that you did and we have proof of it.
“The Elon Musk ‘Twitter Files’ are the tip of the iceberg, as the federal government ran a massive, secret censorship op against the American people,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “That the DHS is hiding these censorship records in violation of FOIA law shows the agency still has something to hide.”
In a separate lawsuit, Judicial Watch is suing the DHS for all records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was reportedly active during the 2022 midterm elections. Among the news outlets flagged by EIP were websites for Just the News, New York Post, Fox News, Washington Examiner, The Washington Times, The Epoch Times and Breitbart.
Judicial Watch recently sued the DOJ for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch’s YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. Judicial Watch continues to post its video content on its Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
The post Judicial Watch Sues DHS for Records on Election Censorship appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that Los Angeles County removed 1,207,613 ineligible voters from its rolls since last year under the terms of a settlement agreement in a federal lawsuit Judicial Watch filed in 2017 (Judicial Watch, Inc., et al. v. Dean C. Logan, et al. (No. 2:17-cv-08948)). Judicial Watch sued on its own behalf and on behalf of four lawfully registered voters in Los Angeles County and the Election Integrity Project California, Inc., a public interest group involved in monitoring California’s voter rolls.
Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Los Angeles County sent almost 1.6 million address confirmation notices in 2019 to voters listed as “inactive” on its voter rolls. Under the federal National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), voters who do not respond to the notices and who do not vote in the following two federal elections must be removed from the voter rolls. The settlement also required an update to the state’s online NVRA manual to make it clear that ineligible names must be removed and to notify each California county that they are obliged to do this.
In the most recent of a series of progress reports to Judicial Watch, Los Angeles County confirmed that a total of 1,207,613 ineligible and inactive voters were recently removed from the rolls. Los Angeles County confirmed last year that over 634,000 of its inactive voters hadn’t voted in at least 10 years.
Judicial Watch previously detailed that Los Angeles County had allowed more than 20% of its registered voters to become inactive without removing them from the voter list.
“This long overdue voter roll clean-up of 1.2 million registrations in Los Angeles County is a historic victory and means California elections are less at risk for fraud,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Building on this success, Judicial Watch will continue its lawsuits and activism to clean up voter rolls and to promote and protect cleaner elections.”
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
Judicial Watch recently settled federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists.
Kentucky also removed hundreds of thousands of old registrations after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 inactive registrations from its voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to the Democratic state legislature’s “extreme” congressional gerrymander.
In May 2022, Judicial Watch sued Illinois on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to stop state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.
Robert Popper, Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
The post Judicial Watch: Los Angeles County Confirms Removal of 1.2 Million Ineligible Voters From Rolls as Part of Lawsuit Settlement appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Although the U.S. has already implemented a governmentwide plan to advance racial equity and support underserved communities under a 2021 Biden executive order, the president has issued a second directive to strong arm federal agencies into launching more initiatives that will further tax Americans. Under the recently issued mandate government agencies have 30 days to establish an “Agency Equity Team” and conduct proactive engagement with members of underserved communities through culturally and linguistically appropriate listening sessions. Biden is also creating a White House Steering Committee on Equity composed of senior officials who will coordinate the government’s sweeping efforts to promote his leftist agenda.
“By advancing equity, the Federal Government can support and empower all Americans, including the many communities in America that have been underserved, discriminated against, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality,” Biden writes in the new document, adding that “equitability” will rebuild trust in government. “This order builds upon my previous equity-related Executive Orders by extending and strengthening equity-advancing requirements for agencies, and it positions agencies to deliver better outcomes for the American people,” according to the president. As examples the commander-in-chief offers building a strong, fair, and inclusive workforce and economy, investing in communities where federal policies have historically impeded equal opportunity, mitigating economic displacement, rooting out discrimination in the housing market, advancing equity in health, environmental justice and ending “unjust disparities” in the nation’s criminal justice system.
Additionally, the director of the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will update directives to “support equitable decision-making, promote equitable deployment of financial and technical assistance, and assist agencies in advancing equity, as appropriate and wherever possible,” the new executive order says. This is important because OMB plays a pivotal role in government by developing and executing the federal budget, overseeing federal agencies and executive branch operations, and coordinating all significant federal regulations. The new order also includes a blueprint to make equity part of the official federal budget process and specifically prevent discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation. “My Administration has embedded a focus on equity into the fabric of Federal policymaking and service delivery,” Biden writes, bragging that his presidency is the most diverse in our nation’s history.
This month’s executive order is part of a robust movement by the administration to incorporate racial equity across all federal agencies. The president launched the plan on his first day in office with the lengthy executive order to advance racial equity and support for underserved communities through the government. The 2021 document claims that “entrenched disparities” in laws, public policies, and private institutions have denied equal opportunity to individuals and communities and that the health and climate crises have exposed inequities while a “historic movement for justice has highlighted the unbearable human costs of systemic racism.” Therefore, the original order states, the federal government should pursue a “comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all, including people of color and others who have been historically underserved, marginalized, and adversely affected by persistent poverty and inequality.” It further says that “by advancing equity across the Federal Government, we can create opportunities for the improvement of communities that have been historically underserved, which benefits everyone.”
Many key federal agencies have taken major steps to implement racial equity plans as per Biden’s first mandate. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has formulated a strategy to “advance equity for marginalized and underserved communities” that, among other things, directs federal prosecutors to ignore maximum sentencing under the law to “avoid unwarranted disparities.” The Department of Labor has dedicated $260 million to promote “equitable access” to government unemployment benefits by addressing disparities in the administration and delivery of money by race ethnicity and language proficiency. The Treasury Department named its first ever racial equity chief, a veteran La Raza official who spent a decade at the nation’s most influential open borders group. The Department of Defense (DOD) is using outrageous anti-bias materials that indoctrinate troops with anti-American and racially inflammatory training on diversity topics. The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) created an equity commission to address longstanding inequities in agriculture. The nation’s medical research agency has a special minority health and health disparities division that issued a study declaring COVID-19 exacerbated preexisting resentment against racial/ethnic minorities and marginalized communities.
The post Biden Issues Second Executive Order to “Further” Advance Governmentwide Racial Equity appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Trump Vindicated: Media Elite Turn on “Russiagate” Coverage
The entire mad media Russia mess of the Trump presidency—the furious coverage of the salacious Steele Dossier, the Mueller special counsel probe, the presidential tweets and bombast, the FBI inquiries, Congressional inquiries, inspector general inquiries, the sinister suggestions of collusion and corruption, treason and betrayal, prostitutes and pay offs, the small fish hauled in and then tossed aside—Flynn, Page, Papadopoulos, Kilimnik, Manafort, Mifsud, Millian, Bannon, Stone—“which office do I go to, to get my reputation back,” former Labor Secretary Ray Donovan famously asked in an earlier scandal—the white-hot spectacle has faded from the news cycle. The circus has left town.
Texas Border Operation Catches 348,000 Illegal Immigrants, 361 million Lethal Fentanyl Doses
In the absence of adequate federal enforcement a Texas border security initiative heavily criticized by Democrats and the media has apprehended hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants—including thousands of criminals—and seized millions of lethal doses of fentanyl. Known as Operation Lone Star, the project was launched by Governor Greg Abbott in March 2021 as the illegal immigration crisis gripped his border state.
D.C. Public Schools Overhaul Social Studies with CRT, Anti-Americanism, Leftist Propaganda
To address perceptions of white, Western bias in curricula public schools surrounding the nation’s capital are revamping social studies courses for all students with critical race theory (CRT), anti-Americanism, and a multitude of leftist propaganda. The new District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS) Social Studies Standards include teaching kindergartners about gender identity, second graders about same-sex relationships and gender fluidity in civilizations, fifth graders about queer culture and sixth graders about harmful border policies and how racism, privilege and bias affect the distribution of resources.
Judicial Watch: Secret Service Official: ‘Maybe We Were Asked for A Favor?’ in Investigation of Hunter Biden’s Gun
Judicial Watch announced recently that it received 487 pages of records from the United States Secret Service (USSS) related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware in October 2018. The records show agency officials discussing media reports of its alleged involvement with one finding it “odd” that the Secret Service was involved in the investigation when Joe and Hunter Biden were not receiving Secret Service protection at the time. Another official responds: “Maybe we were asked for a favor?”
In The News
EXCLUSIVE: ‘Maybe we were asked for a favor?’ Secret Service accused of a ‘cover-up’ over its alleged involvement in police probe when Hunter Biden’s lover Hallie dropped his handgun in a trash can near a school in 2018
The Daily Mail
The Secret Service has been accused of a ‘cover-up’ over its alleged involvement in a police investigation when Hunter Biden‘s lover dumped his gun in a trash can near a school in 2018.
Judicial Watch Sues HHS for Records on Pressuring Big Tech to Censor ‘COVID Misinformation’
CNS News
The government watchdog group Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to obtain any communications made between the Surgeon General’s communications director and social media companies — Twitter, Facebook, etc. — regarding COVID-19 vaccines.
Judicial Watch Sues DoD for Records on Biden’s Use of Marines as ‘Props’ at Controversial Campaign Speech
CNS News
Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Defense Department because it has failed to produce legally requested communications concerning President Joe Biden’s Sept. 1 campaign speech in Philadelphia, where he positioned two U.S. Marines to stand behind him as he lectured that “MAGA Republicans” are threatening the “very foundations of our Republic.”
Video Highlights
-
-
- NEW: @JudicialWatch Exposes Secret Agreement Tied to Vaccine Side Effects - FLASHBACK: EVERYONE in Washington DC Knew There Was No Trump/Russia Collusion! - Biden DOJ Harassing Trump and Pence
-
The post Trump Vindicated! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Trump Vindicated: Media Elite Turn on “Russiagate” Coverage
D.C. Schools Set to Push CRT, Anti-Americanism, Leftist Propaganda
Texas Border Operation Catches 348,000 Illegals, 361 million Fentanyl Doses
Trump Vindicated: Media Elite Turn on “Russiagate” Coverage
Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, reviews in Investigative Bulletin the work of two distinguished journalists who look back at the terrible failure of the press that didn’t so much as report on President Trump as try to prosecute him.
The entire mad media Russia mess of the Trump presidency—the furious coverage of the salacious Steele Dossier, the Mueller special counsel probe, the presidential tweets and bombast, the FBI inquiries, Congressional inquiries, inspector general inquiries, the sinister suggestions of collusion and corruption, treason and betrayal, prostitutes and pay offs, the small fish hauled in and then tossed aside—Flynn, Page, Papadopoulos, Kilimnik, Manafort, Mifsud, Millian, Bannon, Stone—“which office do I go to, to get my reputation back,” former Labor Secretary Ray Donovan famously asked in an earlier scandal—the white-hot spectacle has faded from the news cycle. The circus has left town.
Years too late to have any real-time impact, it now appears that a reckoning has begun to arrive. Close observers of the media landscape may have noticed a shift when Bob Woodward, the most famous name in American journalism, began reminding readers of his opinion of the Steele Dossier. The dossier is the Rosetta Stone of Trump era reporting. Published to an immediate media frenzy in January 2017, the dossier was a compilation of grotesque rumors and allegations against the newly elected president—purportedly the work of a skilled Western intelligence asset, but in reality, as would emerge much later, the product of Trump’s political enemies.
In The Trump Tapes, an audio book of Trump-Woodward interviews published in November, Woodward repeatedly reminds Trump that he called the Steele Dossier a “garbage document” on Fox News as far back as 2017, and that Trump tweeted a thank you.
Woodward went further with his Washington Post colleagues, reports former New York Times investigative journalist Jeff Gerth in a monumental takedown of media coverage of Trump, “The Press Versus the President.” After the Fox News appearance, Woodward told Gerth in an interview, he “reached out to people who covered this” at the Post to express his concerns. Reporters at the Post ignored him, Woodward said. “To be honest, there was a lack of curiosity on the part of people at the Post about what I had said, why I said this.”
Gerth, like Woodward, is very much a figure of the media elite, a storied and widely respected investigative reporter. “The Press Versus the President” appears in a leading industry publication, the Columbia Journalism Review. Few news organizations “have reckoned seriously with what transpired between the press and the presidency,” Gerth writes. His 24,000 word, four part report, goes a long way to correcting the record. It likely will remain a landmark study of media malfeasance for decades to come.
Gerth focuses on the Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal—still the standard setters across the journalistic spectrum. At the root of the problem in the Trump era, Gerth writes, “was an undeclared war between an entrenched media and a new kind of disruptive presidency.”
Gerth sets important context for understanding this war. He notes that it was Hillary Clinton, not Trump, who began the campaign “facing scrutiny over Russia ties.” He details the financing and evolution of the Steele Dossier as a product of Clinton allies and hired guns, and the media’s long love affair (with a few notable dissents) with the document. He reminds us that the Steele Dossier exploded on to the media scene after Trump won the election but before he was inaugurated—setting in motion a chain of events that embittered the new president toward the press and touching off dreams of a new Watergate among legions of ambitious reporters. He gets the former president and others on the record in interviews that offer revealing glimpses into the psychological dynamics at work on both sides of the war.
The president-elect was blindsided by the Steele Dossier. “Trump, unaware of the coming tornado, including the most salacious contents of the dossier, set out to make peace with the press [after the election]. He made the rounds of news organizations, meeting with broadcast anchors, editors at Conde Nast, magazines, and the Times.” At the end of the Times meeting, Gerth notes, he called the paper a “world jewel” and added, “I hope we can get along.”
After the emergence of the Steele Dossier and a tsunami of Russia-related stories, the new president abandoned hope of getting along the media. “I realized early on I had two jobs,” Trump told Gerth in an interview after he left the presidency. “The first was to run the country, and the second was survival. I had to survive: the stories were unbelievably fake.”
Fake—but deadly serious. A special counsel probe, led by Robert Mueller, was quickly triggered and Congress began to investigate. The Mueller probe loomed over Trump for two years—a mortal threat to his presidency. The probe, Gerth notes, “issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, interviewed 500 witnesses, and generated enormous interest. There were 533,000 news articles published involving Russia and Trump or Mueller…. The articles led to 245 million interactions on social media.”
In the end, Trump was cleared of wrongdoing. In a lengthy report, Mueller wrote: “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government.”
No collusion. No conspiracy. Trump tweeted that the Mueller Report was a “complete and total exoneration.” But the media did not quit—or for the most part even pause for reflection.
The Mueller Report noted “multiple links between Trump Campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government,” and ten episodes of possible obstruction of justice. Gerth notes that “the media, having already learned there was no overarching conspiracy, fleshed out the new details, including the more than hundred ‘links’cited by Mueller.”
Gerth is perhaps at his best examining these small fish and their fate at the hands of the FBI, Mueller, and the media. One example is Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian-Ukrainian political consultant tied to former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort. The Mueller Report, Gerth notes, said the FBI assessed Kilimnik “to have ties to Russian intelligence.” Manafort met with Kilimnik in August 2016 and shared campaign polling data with him. Sharing polling data apparently is a serious crime to the FBI—or so Mueller’s prosecutors believed. A later Senate Intelligence Committee Report called the Manafort-Kilimnik meeting as the “single most important direct tie” between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence.
“But the evidence of Kilimnik’s Kremlin ties is far from certain,” Gerth notes. The “only known official inquiry, by Ukraine in 2016, didn’t result in charges. And some recently surfaced documents suggest that Kilimnik in fact was a “sensitive source” for the U.S. State Department.
Other once-promising villains in the media narrative of Trumpian wrongdoing, including Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, and Michael Flynn, get similar treatment from Gerth. And he offers a sharp analysis of what went wrong between the press and the president.
His main conclusion? Journalism’s “primary missions” of “informing the public and holding powerful interests accountable” have been undermined by an “erosion of journalistic norms and the media’s own lack of transparency about its work.” The U.S. media failed “to report facts that ran counter to prevailing narrative;” failed to seek comments from people who were “the subject of serious criticism;” failed to put reasonable limits on the use of anonymous sources; and failed to take a close look at their own behavior and motives.
And what of the president himself? The media’s failings were many, but Gerth also suggests that Trump’s towering self-confidence and love of showmanship contributed to his poisoned relationship with the press.
“At times,” Gerth notes, “Trump seemed to be almost toying with the press, offering spontaneous answers to questions about Russia that seemed to point to darker narratives.”
“I’ll often sit down with hostile press,” Trump told Gerth, “just to see if it’s possible to get them to write the truth. It almost never works.”
D.C. Schools Set to Push CRT, Anti-Americanism, Leftist Propaganda
Public schools in your nation’s capital don’t know how to teach reading, writing and arithmetic, as tests show, but they excel at developing Marxist-laden propaganda, a disturbing prospect for the future of their young charges. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the details.To address perceptions of white, Western bias in curricula, public schools surrounding the nation’s capital are revamping social studies courses for all students with critical race theory (CRT), anti-Americanism, and a multitude of leftist propaganda. The new District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS) Social Studies Standardsinclude teaching kindergartners about gender identity, second graders about same-sex relationships and gender fluidity in civilizations, fifth graders about queer culture and sixth graders about harmful border policies and how racism, privilege and bias affect the distribution of resources.
Ranked among the nation’s lowest performing public school districts, the Washington D.C. system has an enrollment of around 50,000 students that attend 118 campuses, 70 of them elementary schools. DCPS is well known for having among the country’s lowest math, reading and standardized test scores as well as a high dropout rate. A few years ago the DC State Board of Education revealed in a study that the DCPS teacher turnover rate is much higher than the national average and also exceeds the turnover rate of other comparable American cities, including New York, Chicago and Milwaukee. Nearly 20% of DCPS teachers leave each year and 55% quit after five years. Additionally, most schools do not keep a principal for more than five years.
This information is especially relevant because the beleaguered district dedicated precious resources to transform its social studies curriculum with highly questionable material rather than improve in areas it has long failed in. The DC State Board of Education began the overhaul in 2019 to “promote more culturally relevant instruction for students in the nation’s capital,” a local news outlet reported at the time. In the article education officials said the goal is to “address perceptions of white, Western bias in curricula.” According to the DCPS manager for social studies content teachers and students complained that the district’s standards are “not culturally relevant, sustaining or affirming” because the dominant narrative features Western European powers and the decisions of white Americans while the experiences of marginalized people continue to be diminished. “All of our students deserve to see their own cultural, racial and social backgrounds reflected in the curriculum,” said the DCPS official, Lindsay McCrea.
Here is a closer look at some of the changes that will be implemented in the effort to give marginalized people a more equal playing field with Western European powers and white Americans. Besides gender identity, kindergartners will learn to understand their racial, ethnic and religious identities. In first grade kids will identify a leader who has made their community more just and inclusive. Second graders will analyze the daily lives of different individuals in ancient societies including histories of same-sex relationships and gender fluidity in civilizations. In third grade D.C. students will be taught the importance of “affirming spaces,” which are described as safe places for people to express their identities. By fifth grade kids will analyze the rise of Black art, businesses, and queer culture.
On to middle school, the new sixth-grade curriculum includes a section describing the purpose, creation, evolution, and impact of international borders and has students evaluate who benefits and who is harmed by border policies. Students will also evaluate the extent wo which racism, privilege and bias have impacted global resource distribution and how resource distribution has influenced racism and imperialism. By seventh grade, students are introduced to the (evil) “European colonizer” and they will scrutinize how liberty, freedom and democracy were applied to different Americans on the basis of religion, socioeconomic status or class, race, and gender. Eighth graders will learn how protest can lead to change and they will investigate how media and social media can shape the way the public understands an issue.
The high school courses will include “Eurocentrism” and its lasting impact on people of color as well as the effects of colonization on Indigenous people. Classes will also focus on the invention of race as a social construct and how primarily white men fought for their rights while simultaneously oppressing others such as women, Black, Indigenous, and other people of color. Finally, high school seniors will go out learning about the shortcomings of democracy in the U.S. and ways that Black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) as well as queer youth are impacting change.
Texas Border Operation Catches 348,000 Illegals, 361 million Fentanyl Doses
If President Biden won’t defend the border, and he hasn’t, then states must, and Texas has. A state special border task force has had no small success in sweeping up criminals and drugs. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
In the absence of adequate federal enforcement, a Texas border security initiative heavily criticized by Democrats and the media has apprehended hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants—including thousands of criminals—and seized millions of lethal doses of fentanyl. Known as Operation Lone Star, the project was launched by Governor Greg Abbott in March 2021 as the illegal immigration crisis gripped his border state. Essentially the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Texas National Guard are picking up the slack for the federal government, which is charged with protecting the famously porous southern border.
Texas had to take charge to combat the smuggling of people and drugs, the governor’s office wrote in the 2021 press release announcing Operation Lone Star, which integrates DPS with the Texas National Guard and deploys air, ground, marine and tactical border security assets to high threat areas to prevent Mexican cartels and other criminal elements from smuggling drugs and humans into the state. “The crisis at our southern border continues to escalate because of Biden Administration policies that refuse to secure the border and invite illegal immigration,” Abbott said at the time. The governor’s office assures that the operation continues to fill the “dangerous gaps left by the Biden Administration’s refusal to secure the border.” Every arrested individual and every ounce of drugs seized by Operation Lone Star would have otherwise made their way into communities across the nation due to the president’s open border policies, Texas officials point out.
The most recent figures, released just days ago, show that Operation Lone Star is succeeding despite detractors on the left. Since the multi-agency effort was launched more than 348,000 illegal immigrants have been apprehended and over 24,000 criminals have been arrested. DPS has also seized a startling number of drugs, over 361 million lethal doses of fentanyl. “Texas has also bused more than 9,100 migrants to our nation’s capital since April, over 5,200 migrants to New York City since August 5, more than 1,500 migrants to Chicago since August 31, and more than 890 migrants to Philadelphia since November 15,” the state announcement reveals. The document offers specific Operation Lone Star cases that prevented the smuggling of drugs, weapons, and humans into Texas.
The crisis along the southwest border is unprecedented and has created a tremendous threat to national security. The latest government stats show a drop in monthly illegal immigrant crossings that carries little weight since it is a decrease from the record-highs that have prevailed during the Biden administration. The stats show that U.S. Border Patrol agents apprehended 128,000 illegal immigrants in January 2023 and federal agents at crossing ports prevented an additional 28,000 migrants from entering the country. Considering illegal immigration records have been shattered under Biden, the latest monthly figure is not bad. In his first year as president, federal agents apprehended 1,659,206 illegal immigrants at the southwest border, breaking the previous high of 1,643,679 in 2000. To put things in perspective, during Donald Trump’s last year as president federal agents arrested 400,651 illegal aliens along the Mexican border.
But as the Biden presidency progresses, the crisis worsens. Fiscal year 2022 also started with a bang, a 137% increase in the first quarter over the final quarter of 2021. By the end of 2022, the Border Patrol arrested a record-breaking 2.4 million migrants, up from an already shocking high of 1.7 million in 2021. Among the apprehended were hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist. Federal agents also confiscated thousands of pounds of drugs, mainly methamphetamine. The unprecedented numbers depict a chaotic Mexican border region rife with lawlessness that has inevitably seeped north into many parts of the United States. At least Texans have Operation Lone Star to help compensate for the federal government’s ongoing failures.
Until next week …
The post Trump Victimized by Media appeared first on Judicial Watch.
To address perceptions of white, Western bias in curricula public schools surrounding the nation’s capital are revamping social studies courses for all students with critical race theory (CRT), anti-Americanism, and a multitude of leftist propaganda. The new District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS) Social Studies Standards include teaching kindergartners about gender identity, second graders about same-sex relationships and gender fluidity in civilizations, fifth graders about queer culture and sixth graders about harmful border policies and how racism, privilege and bias affect the distribution of resources.
Ranked among the nation’s lowest performing public school districts, the Washington D.C. system has an enrollment of around 50,000 students that attend 118 campuses, 70 of them elementary schools. DCPS is well known for having among the country’s lowest math, reading and standardized test scores as well as a high dropout rate. A few years ago the DC State Board of Education revealed in a study that the DCPS teacher turnover rate is much higher than the national average and also exceeds the turnover rate of other comparable American cities, including New York, Chicago and Milwaukee. Nearly 20% of DCPS teachers leave each year and 55% quit after five years. Additionally, most schools do not keep a principal for more than five years.
This information is especially relevant because the beleaguered district dedicated precious resources to transform its social studies curriculum with highly questionable material rather than improve in areas it has long failed in. The DC State Board of Education began the overhaul in 2019 to “promote more culturally relevant instruction for students in the nation’s capital,” a local news outlet reported at the time. In the article education officials said the goal is to “address perceptions of white, Western bias in curricula.” According to the DCPS manager for social studies content teachers and students complained that the district’s standards are “not culturally relevant, sustaining or affirming” because the dominant narrative features Western European powers and the decisions of white Americans while the experiences of marginalized people continue to be diminished. “All of our students deserve to see their own cultural, racial and social backgrounds reflected in the curriculum,” said the DCPS official, Lindsay McCrea.
Here is a closer look at some of the changes that will be implemented in the effort to give marginalized people a more equal playing field with Western European powers and white Americans. Besides gender identity, kindergartners will learn to understand their racial, ethnic and religious identities. In first grade kids will identify a leader who has made their community more just and inclusive. Second graders will analyze the daily lives of different individuals in ancient societies including histories of same-sex relationships and gender fluidity in civilizations. In third grade D.C. students will be taught the importance of “affirming spaces,” which are described as safe places for people to express their identities. By fifth grade kids will analyze the rise of Black art, businesses, and queer culture.
On to middle school, the new sixth-grade curriculum includes a section describing the purpose, creation, evolution, and impact of international borders and has students evaluate who benefits and who is harmed by border policies. Students will also evaluate the extent wo which racism, privilege and bias have impacted global resource distribution and how resource distribution has influenced racism and imperialism. By seventh grade, students are introduced to the (evil) “European colonizer” and they will scrutinize how liberty, freedom and democracy were applied to different Americans on the basis of religion, socioeconomic status or class, race, and gender. Eighth graders will learn how protest can lead to change and they will investigate how media and social media can shape the way the public understands an issue.
The high school courses will include “Eurocentrism” and its lasting impact on people of color as well as the effects of colonization on Indigenous people. Classes will also focus on the invention of race as a social construct and how primarily white men fought for their rights while simultaneously oppressing others such as women, Black, Indigenous, and other people of color. Finally, high school seniors will go out learning about the shortcomings of democracy in the U.S. and ways that Black, Indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) as well as queer youth are impacting change.
The post D.C. Public Schools Overhaul Social Studies with CRT, Anti-Americanism, Leftist Propaganda appeared first on Judicial Watch.
In the absence of adequate federal enforcement a Texas border security initiative heavily criticized by Democrats and the media has apprehended hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants—including thousands of criminals—and seized millions of lethal doses of fentanyl. Known as Operation Lone Star, the project was launched by Governor Greg Abbott in March 2021 as the illegal immigration crisis gripped his border state. Essentially the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Texas National Guard are picking up the slack for the federal government, which is charged with protecting the famously porous southern border.
Texas had to take charge to combat the smuggling of people and drugs, the governor’s office wrote in the 2021 press release announcing Operation Lone Star, which integrates DPS with the Texas National Guard and deploys air, ground, marine and tactical border security assets to high threat areas to prevent Mexican cartels and other criminal elements from smuggling drugs and humans into the state. “The crisis at our southern border continues to escalate because of Biden Administration policies that refuse to secure the border and invite illegal immigration,” Abbott said at the time. The governor’s office assures that the operation continues to fill the “dangerous gaps left by the Biden Administration’s refusal to secure the border.” Every arrested individual and every ounce of drugs seized by Operation Lone Star would have otherwise made their way into communities across the nation due to the president’s open border policies, Texas officials point out.
The most recent figures, released just days ago, show that Operation Lone Star is succeeding despite detractors on the left. Since the multi-agency effort was launched more than 348,000 illegal immigrants have been apprehended and over 24,000 criminals have been arrested. DPS has also seized a startling number of drugs, over 361 million lethal doses of fentanyl. “Texas has also bused more than 9,100 migrants to our nation’s capital since April, over 5,200 migrants to New York City since August 5, more than 1,500 migrants to Chicago since August 31, and more than 890 migrants to Philadelphia since November 15,” the state announcement reveals. The document offers specific Operation Lone Star cases that prevented the smuggling of drugs, weapons, and humans into Texas.
The crisis along the southwest border is unprecedented and has created a tremendous threat to national security. The latest government stats show a drop in monthly illegal immigrant crossings that carries little weight since it is a decrease from the record-highs that have prevailed during the Biden administration. The stats show that U.S. Border Patrol agents apprehended 128,000 illegal immigrants in January 2023 and federal agents at crossing ports prevented an additional 28,000 migrants from entering the country. Considering illegal immigration records have been shattered under Biden, the latest monthly figure is not bad. In his first year as president, federal agents apprehended 1,659,206 illegal immigrants at the southwest border, breaking the previous high of 1,643,679 in 2000. To put things in perspective, during Donald Trump’s last year as president federal agents arrested 400,651 illegal aliens along the Mexican border.
But as the Biden presidency progresses, the crisis worsens. Fiscal year 2022 also started with a bang, a 137% increase in the first quarter over the final quarter of 2021. By the end of 2022, the Border Patrol arrested a record-breaking 2.4 million migrants, up from an already shocking high of 1.7 million in 2021. Among the apprehended were hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist. Federal agents also confiscated thousands of pounds of drugs, mainly methamphetamine. The unprecedented numbers depict a chaotic Mexican border region rife with lawlessness that has inevitably seeped north into many parts of the United States. At least Texans have Operation Lone Star to help compensate for the federal government’s ongoing failures.
The post Texas Border Operation Catches 348,000 Illegal Immigrants, 361 million Lethal Fentanyl Doses appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The entire mad media Russia mess of the Trump presidency—the furious coverage of the salacious Steele Dossier, the Mueller special counsel probe, the presidential tweets and bombast, the FBI inquiries, Congressional inquiries, inspector general inquiries, the sinister suggestions of collusion and corruption, treason and betrayal, prostitutes and pay offs, the small fish hauled in and then tossed aside—Flynn, Page, Papadopoulos, Kilimnik, Manafort, Mifsud, Millian, Bannon, Stone—“which office do I go to, to get my reputation back,” former Labor Secretary Ray Donovan famously asked in an earlier scandal—the white-hot spectacle has faded from the news cycle. The circus has left town.
Years too late to have any real-time impact, it now appears that a reckoning has begun to arrive. Close observers of the media landscape may have noticed a shift when Bob Woodward, the most famous name in American journalism, began reminding readers of his opinion of the Steele Dossier. The dossier is the Rosetta Stone of Trump era reporting. Published to an immediate media frenzy in January 2017, the dossier was a compilation of grotesque rumors and allegations against the newly elected president—purportedly the work of a skilled Western intelligence asset, but in reality, as would emerge much later, the product of Trump’s political enemies.
In The Trump Tapes, an audio book of Trump-Woodward interviews published in November, Woodward repeatedly reminds Trump that he called the Steele Dossier a “garbage document” on Fox News as far back as 2017, and that Trump tweeted a thank you.
Woodward went further with his Washington Post colleagues, reports former New York Times investigative journalist Jeff Gerth in a monumental takedown of media coverage of Trump, “The Press Versus the President.” After the Fox News appearance, Woodward told Gerth in an interview, he “reached out to people who covered this” at the Post to express his concerns. Reporters at the Post ignored him, Woodward said. “To be honest, there was a lack of curiosity on the part of people at the Post about what I had said, why I said this.”
Gerth, like Woodward, is very much a figure of the media elite, a storied and widely respected investigative reporter. “The Press Versus the President” appears in a leading industry publication, the Columbia Journalism Review. Few news organizations “have reckoned seriously with what transpired between the press and the presidency,” Gerth writes. His 24,000 word, four part report goes a long way to correcting the record. It likely will remain a landmark study of media malfeasance for decades to come.
Gerth focuses on the Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal—still the standard setters across the journalistic spectrum. At the root of the problem in the Trump era, Gerth writes, “was an undeclared war between an entrenched media and a new kind of disruptive presidency.”
Gerth sets important context for understanding this war. He notes that it was Hillary Clinton, not Trump, who began the campaign “facing scrutiny over Russia ties.” He details the financing and evolution of the Steele Dossier as a product of Clinton allies and hired guns, and the media’s long love affair (with a few notable dissents) with the document. He reminds us that the Steele Dossier exploded on to the media scene after Trump won the election but before he was inaugurated—setting in motion a chain of events that embittered the new president toward the press and touching off dreams of a new Watergate among legions of ambitious reporters. He gets the former president and others on the record in interviews that offer revealing glimpses into the psychological dynamics at work on both sides of the war.
The president-elect was blindsided by the Steele Dossier. “Trump, unaware of the coming tornado, including the most salacious contents of the dossier, set out to make peace with the press [after the election]. He made the rounds of news organizations, meeting with broadcast anchors, editors at Conde Nast, magazines, and the Times.” At the end of the Times meeting, Gerth notes, he called the paper a “world jewel” and added, “I hope we can get along.”
After the emergence of the Steele Dossier and a tsunami of Russia-related stories, the new president abandoned hope of getting along the media. “I realized early on I had two jobs,” Trump told Gerth in an interview after he left the presidency. “The first was to run the country, and the second was survival. I had to survive: the stories were unbelievably fake.”
Fake—but deadly serious. A special counsel probe, led by Robert Mueller, was quickly trigged and Congress began to investigate. The Mueller probe loomed over Trump for two years—a mortal threat to his presidency. The probe, Gerth notes, “issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, interviewed 500 witnesses, and generated enormous interest. There were 533,000 news articles published involving Russia and Trump or Mueller…. The articles led to 245 million interactions on social media.”
In the end, Trump was cleared of wrongdoing. In a lengthy report, Mueller wrote: “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government.”
No collusion. No conspiracy. Trump tweeted that the Mueller Report was a “complete and total exoneration.” But the media did not quit—or for the most part even pause for reflection.
The Mueller Report noted “multiple links between Trump Campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government,” and ten episodes of possible obstruction of justice. Gerth notes that “the media, having already learned there was no overarching conspiracy, fleshed out the new details, including the more than hundred ‘links’ cited by Mueller.”
Gerth is perhaps at his best examining these small fish and their fate at the hands of the FBI, Mueller, and the media. One example is Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian-Ukrainian political consultant tied to former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort. The Mueller Report, Gerth notes, said the FBI assessed Kilimnik “to have ties to Russian intelligence.” Manafort met with Kilimnik in August 2016 and shared campaign polling data with him. Sharing polling data apparently is a serious crime to the FBI—or so Mueller’s prosecutors believed. A later Senate Intelligence Committee Report called the Manafort-Kilimnik meeting as the “single most important direct tie” between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence.
“But the evidence of Kilimnik’s Kremlin ties is far from certain,” Gerth notes. The “only known official inquiry, by Ukraine in 2016, didn’t result in charges. And some recently surfaced documents suggest that Kilimnik in fact was a “sensitive source” for the U.S. State Department.
Other once-promising villains in the media narrative of Trumpian wrongdoing, including Carter Page, George Papadopoulos, and Michael Flynn, get similar treatment from Gerth. And he offers a sharp analysis of what went wrong between the press and the president.
His main conclusion? Journalism’s “primary missions” of “informing the public and holding powerful interests accountable” have been undermined by an “erosion of journalistic norms and the media’s own lack of transparency about its work.” The U.S. media failed “to report facts that ran counter to prevailing narrative;” failed to seek comments from people who were “the subject of serious criticism;” failed to put reasonable limits on the use of anonymous sources; and failed to take a close look at their own behavior and motives.
And what of the president himself? The media’s failings were many, but Gerth also suggests that Trump’s towering self-confidence and love of showmanship contributed to his poisoned relationship with the press.
“At times,” Gerth notes, “Trump seemed to be almost toying with the press, offering spontaneous answers to questions about Russia that seemed to point to darker narratives.”
“I’ll often sit down with hostile press,” Trump told Gerth, “just to see if it’s possible to get them to write the truth. It almost never works.”
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Follow him on Twitter @micah_morrison. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post Trump Vindicated: Media Elite Turn on “Russiagate” Coverage appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Secret Service Official: ‘Maybe We Were Asked for A Favor?’ in Investigation of Hunter Biden’s Gun
Judicial Watch announced recently that it received 487 pages of records from the United States Secret Service (USSS) related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware in October 2018. The records show agency officials discussing media reports of its alleged involvement with one finding it “odd” that the Secret Service was involved in the investigation when Joe and Hunter Biden were not receiving Secret Service protection at the time. Another official responds: “Maybe we were asked for a favor?”
Judicial Watch: Records Show U.S. and UK ‘Confidentiality Agreement’ Tied to Vaccine Adverse Events
“It again took a lawsuit for the Biden administration to hand over, albeit heavily redacted, information regarding the safety of the COVID vaccines that the public has every right to know,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This disturbing batch of new documents have uncovered a secret confidentiality agreement tied to COVID vaccine safety issues and emails that raise new questions about the vaccines and pregnancy.”
Judicial Watch Sues Pentagon on Use of Marines for Biden Campaign Speech Attacking Americans
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the Department of Defense failed to comply with an October 31, 2022, FOIA request for all communications within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Navy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Commandant of Marine Corps – and those shared with the White House Military Office and Office of the President – regarding Marines standing behind the President during his September 1, 2022, speech in Philadelphia.
U.S. will Pay $1 Mil to Empower Marginalized Racial, Ethnic Communities in Europe
The Biden administration’s costly, governmentwide effort to advance racial equity and support the nation’s underserved population through taxpayer-funded programs is going global. The administration recently disclosed that it is dedicating a million dollars to “empower marginalized racial and ethnic communities in Europe,” though details of how this will be accomplished remain ambiguous. What is clear is that the soon-to-be empowered minority Europeans are to include people of African descent and Roma people, according to the recently published grant announcement.
In The News
EXCLUSIVE: ‘Maybe we were asked for a favor?’ Secret Service accused of a ‘cover-up’ over its alleged involvement in police probe when Hunter Biden’s lover Hallie dropped his handgun in a trash can near a school in 2018
The Daily Mail
The Secret Service has been accused of a ‘cover-up’ over its alleged involvement in a police investigation when Hunter Biden‘s lover dumped his gun in a trash can near a school in 2018.
Judicial Watch, a justice watchdog nonprofit, announced on Friday that it received 487 pages of Secret Service (USSS) records over the incident, and says the documents cast further doubt over the agency’s claims that it was not involved.
Judicial Watch Sues DoD for Records on Biden’s Use of Marines as ‘Props’ at Controversial Campaign Speech
CNS News
Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Defense Department because it has failed to produce legally requested communications concerning President Joe Biden’s Sept. 1 campaign speech in Philadelphia, where he positioned two U.S. Marines to stand behind him as he lectured that “MAGA Republicans” are threatening the “very foundations of our Republic.”
Judicial Watch Sues HHS for Records on Pressuring Big Tech to Censor ‘COVID Misinformation’
CNS News
The government watchdog group Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to obtain any communications made between the Surgeon General’s communications director and social media companies — Twitter, Facebook, etc. — regarding COVID-19 vaccines.
Video Highlights
-
-
- FITTON: Connection Between Biden Corruption and Chinese Balloon Issue! - Biden Hiding Classified Documents at the University of Delaware?! - If There was an Insurrectionist in the House Abusing Power to Overturn an Election, it’s Adam Schiff
-
The post Secret Service “Favor” for Hunter Biden? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Daily Mail:
The Secret Service has been accused of a ‘cover-up’ over its alleged involvement in a police investigation when Hunter Biden‘s lover dumped his gun in a trash can near a school in 2018.
Judicial Watch, a justice watchdog nonprofit, announced on Friday that it received 487 pages of Secret Service (USSS) records over the incident, and says the documents cast further doubt over the agency’s claims that it was not involved.
Hunter’s lover and brother’s widow, Hallie Biden, left his .38 handgun at the top of a trash can at Jansens supermarket in Wilmington, Delaware in October 2018, sparking a police probe.
Read more here…
The post EXCLUSIVE: ‘Maybe we were asked for a favor?’ Secret Service accused of a ‘cover-up’ over its alleged involvement in police probe when Hunter Biden’s lover Hallie dropped his handgun in a trash can near a school in 2018 appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Secret Service Official on Hunter: ‘Maybe We Were Asked for A Favor?’
U.S. and UK Health Administrators Had a ‘Confidentiality Agreement’ Tied to Vaccine Adverse Events
Judicial Watch Sues the Defense Department for Using Marines for Biden Speech Attacking American
Secret Service Official on Hunter: ‘Maybe We Were Asked for A Favor?’
As you know, we are investigating whether and how the Secret Service intervened for Hunter Biden in an incident involving a gun he allegedly owned. Here’s the latest.
We received records from the Secret Service related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware in October 2018.
These new records suggest that one can’t take at face value the Secret Service’s denial that it wasn’t involved in the Hunter Biden gun cover-up.
The records show agency officials discussing media reports of its alleged involvement, with one finding it “odd” that the Secret Service was involved in the investigation when Joe and Hunter Biden were not receiving Secret Service protection at the time. Another official responds: “Maybe we were asked for a favor?”
The records show the agency alerted the Biden White House and crafted a public statement insisting it had “no involvement in this alleged incident” and refusing to provide any additional clarification to media inquiries.
In September 2022, we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records or communications about the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of a firearm owned by Hunter Biden found in a Delaware dumpster in October 2018 (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:22-cv-02841)).
We reported in December 2022 that the Secret Service repeatedly changed its position about whether it is in possession of records related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun.
The newly obtained records show that on October 29, 2020, a person whose name is redacted emails a Secret Service official in the “PID” (Protective Intelligence and Assessment Division) with a link to a Blaze article published earlier that day, reporting that Hallie Biden had taken a handgun owned by Hunter Biden in October 2018 and thrown it into a supermarket trash bin. The official then forwards the article to another official in the PID.
An official whose name is redacted later comments in this chain: “Oh dear…”
After being forwarded the same Blaze article, an unidentified Protective Intelligence Research Specialist responds to his colleagues: “It’s kind of odd that we were involved in the missing gun investigation when neither Hunter or Joe were even receiving USSS [Secret Service] protection at the time? Hmmm.” Another official replies: “Maybe we were asked for a favor?”
Senior Secret Service officials, whose names were disclosed in the records, were also notified of The Blaze article on November 2, 2020. They include James Henry, then-Special Agent in Charge of the Philadelphia Field Office; Michael D’Ambrosio, Assistant Director of the U.S. Secret Service in charge of oversight of all Secret Service domestic and foreign Secret Service offices; Steven Stanford, then-Deputy Assistant Director; Leonza Newsome III, then-Deputy Director; and Douglas Henderson, Deputy Assistant Director, Office of Investigations.
After The Blaze article was forwarded by James Henry to a colleague in the Wilmington, DE, office, whose name is redacted, the colleague responds to Henry: “Digging in now. There is more information but I don’t have it yet.”
In response to a February 24, 2021, email inquiry from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” Schreckinger responds: “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation.”
The Communications Office then drafts and distributes internally a proposed response labeled “Draft/Predecisional/Draft.”
Under the subheading “Internal Background:”
The RAIC [Resident Agent in Charge] of the Wilmington Resident Office reported that all agents in his office denied any involvement. The Politico reporter refused to provide any details on the source of the information or that he was in possession of any official document, where we were identified. The statement has been drafted to address any implication that anyone from the service was involved in this incident.
Under the subheading “Draft for Release:”
Statement from the U.S. Secret Service
US Secret Service records confirm that the agency did not provide protection to any member of the Biden family in 2018, and that the Secret Service had no involvement in this alleged incident.
Later that day, Secret Service Director of Communications Catherine Milhoan forwards the draft response for the Politicoreporter to Biden White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki and White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield: “Kate/Jen, Good afternoon. For your awareness. We will be releasing the statement at 4 p.m.” Milhoan then sent the draft to other USSS [Secret Service] officials, writing, “For your awareness … as part of our standard ops here at the USSS … WH Comms also has awareness of the query and our anticipated response.”
Milhoan then emails several senior Secret Service officials: “Thanks all. DHS OPA [Department of Homeland Security Office of Public Affairs] and WH Comms are tracking as well.”
After receiving the statement, the reporter replies to the Communications Office, “Just to clarify. Did Secret Service agents ever visit StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and request records related to Hunter Biden?” A Secret Service official whose name is redacted replies, “Ben, To reiterate, the Secret Service had no involvement in this alleged incident.”
In a separate email on February 24, 2021, the Special Agent in Charge of the Presidential Protection Division, David Cho, emails six officials in the White House, including “JOD” [likely Jen O’Malley Dillon], “Just wanted to provide for awareness. Jen Psaki and Kate Bedingfield were notified by our CMR [Communications and Media Relations] on the below inquiry. Our response is also stated. In summary – no records of the event ever occurring. Please advise if you have any questions.”
On March 2, 2021, the Politico reporter follows up with additional questions to the Secret Service media office, which sets off further internal Secret Service exchanges. Schrecklinger asks:
I just wanted to follow up with another couple of questions:
Did Secret Service agents in Delaware do any work related to President Biden in the period between when his status as a protectee expired after his vice presidency and when it resumed during his most recent presidential campaign?
For example, during this period, were Secret Service agents ever in touch with the Delaware State Police to arrange police details for Biden?
An official in the communications office whose name is redacted then forwards the follow-up questions to an official in the Wilmington, DE, office, whose name is also redacted: “Can you give me a call on the below questions.”
Wilmington official replies, “I’ll give you a call in about an hour.” The Wilmington official then forwards the email exchange to James Henry, former SAC of the Philadelphia Field Office: “FYSA [For Your Situational Awareness].”
On March 10, 2021, the reporter follows up again with the Secret Service about their failure to respond to his follow-up questions of March 2, writing, “Circling back on this. I spoke to someone on your team about this last week and they said they would get me a statement by the end of the day, but I haven’t seen anything land. If you all want to weigh in on this, please get back to me by the end of the day today.” An official in the Secret Service Communications Office responds, “Ben, we have no additional information to provide for this request.”
On March 25, 2021 Special Agent in Charge Benjamin Kramer, emails then-Secret Service Assistant Director of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs (IGL), Jeremy Sheridan, a copy of the March 25 Politico article about Hunter Biden’s gun and cited the Secret Service statement in the article:
On Oct. 23, 2018, President Joe Biden’s son Hunter and daughter in law Hallie were involved in a bizarre incident in which Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime …
Arriving on the scene, Delaware State Police retrieved security camera footage from the store …
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation also responded to the scene, according to people familiar with the situation. At the time, the FBI was monitoring Hunter Biden as part of an investigation that remains ongoing and that currently focuses on his taxes. The FBI declined to comment.
A Secret Service spokesperson said the agency has no record of involvement in the incident: “U.S. Secret Service records confirm that the agency did not provide protection to any member of the Biden family in 2018, and that the Secret Service had no involvement in this alleged incident.”
Kramer then asks Sheridan, “Confirming this is comment we can relay if inquiries are made from Hill counterparts or if anything further needs to be discussed (?).” Sheridan replied, “Yes, the comment as provided in the article is our response to any inquiries.”
On March 25, 2021, Milhoan forwards the Politico article to several senior Secret Service officials: “For your awareness … the article is total BS as we all know. Leadership is aware and I will let you know if CMR [Office of Communications and Media Relations] receives any queries.”
On March 26, 2021, New York Post reporter Lorena Mongelli reaches out to the Secret Service Communications Office, asking for comment on text messages on Hunter Biden’s lost laptop:
It appears the text messages were sent from Hunter Biden in which he indicates that the Secret Service did in fact respond to the Oct. 23, 2018 [gun] incident. This information contradicts your previous statement relating to the incident and we would like to know whether the Secret Service would like to respond to these new findings.
A person from the Communications Office, whose name is redacted replies: “We have received your inquiry, would you be able to provide copies of these alleged text messages for reference?”
Mongelli responds:
The Daily Mail actually posted copies of the same text messages the NY Post is referencing.
This is what one text message says:
“She stole the gun out of my trunk lock box and threw it in a garbage can full to the top at Jansens [sic]. Then told me it was my problem to deal with,” Hunter wrote.
“Then when the police the FBI the secret service came on the scene she said she took it from me because she was scared I would harm myself due to o my drug and alcohol problem and our volatile relationship and that she was afraid for the kids.”
You can view images of the messages here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9403757/Texts-Hunter-Biden-therapist-Hallie-Biden-leaving-gun-trashcan.html
In October 2020, The Blaze reported that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by Hallie Biden, the widow of then-presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau. In 2021, Politico reported:
Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO.
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
The Secret Service initially responded to our FOIA request in this case on April 2, 2021, stating that it had located potentially responsive records and would process them in accordance with FOIA. Then, on October 13, 2022, the Secret Service said that the April 2021 response was sent in error and that it did not have any records responsive to the FOIA request.
Through FOIA, we have uncovered significant information about Hunter Biden, who served on the board of directors for Ukrainian energy firm Burisma Holdings despite having no previous experience in the energy industry.
In October 2022, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
In December 2020, we received records from the State Department tying Hunter Biden’s Burisma Holdings’ lobbying operation to an influence-peddling operation involving the Clinton campaign during the 2016 election. Also uncovered were State Department records showing that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch had specifically warned in 2017 about corruption allegations against Burisma Holdings.
In October 2020, State Department records that included a briefing checklist of a February 22, 2019, meeting in Kyiv between then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Sally Painter, co-founder and chief operating officer of Blue Star Strategies, a Democratic lobbying firm which was hired by Burisma Holdings to combat corruption allegations. The briefing checklist notes that Painter also planned to meet with Foreign Commercial Service (FCS) Officer Martin Claessens “regarding the Burisma Group energy company.” (Painter was implicated in the Clinton-era fundraisingscandalexposed by Judicial Watch that involved the alleged sale of seats on Commerce Department trade missions to Democratic National Committee donors.)
In September 2020, State Department records include a January 17, 2017, email from George Kent, the Obama administration’s deputy assistant secretary of state in charge of Ukraine policy, which was copied to then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, highlighting Russia-linked media “trolling” Joe Biden over “his son’s business.” An email was sent four days prior to the inauguration of President Donald Trump to a redacted recipient and CCd to Yovanovitch with the subject line “medvedchuk-linked vesti trolls Biden.” Kent writes: “Burisma – gift that keeps on giving. (With medvedchuk affiliated Vesti pushing the troll like storyline on visit day)”
In June 2020, U.S. Secret Service records showed that, for the first five and a half years of the Obama administration, Hunter Biden traveled extensively while receiving a Secret Service protective detail. During the time period of the records provided, Hunter Biden took 411 separate domestic and international flights, including to 29 different foreign countries. He visited China five times.
We are also suing the DHS for Secret Service records on Hunter Biden’s travel and security costs, and suing the State Department for messages sent through the SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolkit) system that mention Hunter Biden.
U.S. and UK Health Administrators Had a ‘Confidentiality Agreement’ Tied to Vaccine Adverse Events
We continue to find out more about concerns at the highest levels regarding the COVID-19 vaccine.
We received records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that show a discussion between U.S. and UK health regulators that occurred just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine regarding “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
We obtained the records a FOIA lawsuit against HHS (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services(No. 1:22-cv-00660)) after the FDA, which is an agency of HHS, failed to respond to an August 30, 2021, FOIA request for:
All emails sent to and from members of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee regarding adverse events, deaths and/or injuries caused by investigatory vaccines for the prevention or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 and/or COVID-19 currently produced by Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and/or Johnson & Johnson.
The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) is the U.S. government’s central advisory body, along with Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), advising whether to approve COVID vaccines.
A lengthy, heavily redacted December 2020 email exchange shows U.S. and UK health officials placing a heavy emphasis on their “mutual confidentiality agreement” in a discussion regarding “anaphylactoid reactions” to the COVID vaccine.
The exchange is initiated by Jonathan Mogford, policy director of the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency and is sent to Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock as well as Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). The subject line and body of the email are fully redacted under FOIA Exemption B3 (relating to statutory prohibitions).
As background, Mogford includes information on “two cases of anaphylactoid reactions in individuals with a strong past history of allergic reactions….” Marks replies to Mogford: “It would be very helpful if our Office of Vaccines could receive additional details [redacted] from MHRA [UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency] under the terms of our mutual confidentiality agreement.” Mogford later replies, “… attached are [redacted] hope that’s helpful in the meantime. If I can just remind – information shared under our confidentiality agreement.”
Marion Gruber, then head of the Office of Vaccines Research and Review (OVRR), replies to Mogford, “Thank you so much for this information. Our emails crossed. If possible, would be available for a t-con [teleconference] today?” The exchange concludes with OVRR Deputy Director Phil Krause advising UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency official Jamie Convisser, “Your summary is correct. I’m cc:ing Amanda Cohn at CDC who can provide the most up-to-date details about [redacted]. Obviously, [redacted], not all of this is public so please hold these details confidential.” Cohn then replies to Mogford, and includes an attachment titled “Anaphylaxis CLARK Dec 19 2020 Final”. She writes, “I am adding my colleagues Tom Clark and Stacey Martin, we are happy to share more information with you. Attached are slides that were presented at a public meeting on Saturday. [Redacted].”
The FDA issued its Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine for individuals 16 years of age and older on December 11, 2020.
On May 14, 2021, the CDC’s Dr. Amanda Cohn emailed Office of Vaccines Research and Review Director Marion Gruber and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks with the subject line “Coadministration of COVID-19 Vaccines with Other Vaccines During Pregnancy.”
Gruber writes, “I am fine with this language.” Marks then responds to Cohn and her CDC colleague, Sarah Mbaeyi, “I can live with this too. Please let me know if you want to connect about the adverse event issue later today. Seems like work is still ongoing, but let me know. Thanks.” Cohn replies, “We have a meeting with Rochelle [presumably CDC Director Rochelle Walensky] at 3:30 about if we should say anything or wait until we have more definitive information. I will let you know where we land. I’m not sure there is a right answer.”
It again took a lawsuit for the Biden administration to hand over, albeit heavily redacted, information regarding the safety of the COVID vaccines that the public has every right to know. This disturbing batch of new documents has uncovered a secret confidentiality agreement tied to COVID vaccine safety issues and emails that raise new questions about the vaccines and pregnancy.
We are pursuing challenges against the agency’s redactions under FOIA.
In a previous production from this FOIA lawsuit, we received 1,081 pages of records from HHS detailing internal discussions about myocarditis and the COVID vaccine. Other documents detailed adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
Through FOIA, we have uncovered a substantial amount of information about COVID-19 issues:
- HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also reveal Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- FDA records detailed pressure for COVID-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
- NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high-level commitment from China.”
- HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
- HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
- University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines showed a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) revealed safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
- HHS records included emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19.
- HHS records showed that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
- Fauci emails included his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
Judicial Watch Sues the Defense Department for Using Marines for Biden Speech Attacking American
It was one of the more bizarre pieces of political theater of our time – our president, flanked by two marines, standing before a red-drenched background gave a divisive speech, condemning supporters of President Trump.
Speaking on September 1, Biden claimed Trump supporters “represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.” Biden was widely criticized for using the Marines as props during the political speech in which he also called “MAGA Republicans” a threat to democracy.
The Defense Department isn’t eager to explain itself here, so we are in court to get the details of this misuse of our military.
We filed our Freedom of Information Ace (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Defense for records about the use of U.S. Marines for President Joe Biden’s controversial September 1, 2022, campaign speech in Philadelphia (Judicial Watch vs. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:23-cv-00213)).
We sued after the Department of Defense failed to comply with our October 31, 2022, FOIA request for all communications within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Navy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Commandant of Marine Corps – and those shared with the White House Military Office and Office of the President – regarding Marines standing behind the President during his September 1, 2022, speech in Philadelphia.
Biden’s infamous “Red Speech,” which included the abuse of our Marines in its totalitarian imagery, painted a target on Trump and tens of millions of Americans for political suppression and worse. And, to make matters worse, the Pentagon is violating federal law by hiding records about Biden’s misuse of our military in his attempt to intimidate Americans.
Until next week …
The post Hunter Biden Gun Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 487 pages of records from the United States Secret Service (USSS) related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware in October 2018. The records show agency officials discussing media reports of its alleged involvement with one finding it “odd” that the Secret Service was involved in the investigation when Joe and Hunter Biden were not receiving Secret Service protection at the time. Another official responds: “Maybe we were asked for a favor?”
The records show the agency alerted the Biden White House and crafted a public statement insisting it had “no involvement in this alleged incident” and refusing to provide any additional clarification to media inquiries.
Judicial Watch is investigating whether and how the Secret Service intervened for Hunter Biden in an incident involving a gun allegedly owned by him. In September 2022, Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records or communications about the reported purchase, possession, and disposal of a firearm owned by Hunter Biden found in a Delaware dumpster in October 2018 (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:22-cv-02841)).
Judicial Watch reported in December 2022 that the Secret Service repeatedly changed its position about whether it is in possession of records related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun.
On October 29, 2020, a person whose name is redacted emails a Secret Service official in the “PID” (Protective Intelligence and Assessment Division) with a link to a Blaze article published earlier that day, reporting that Hallie Biden had taken a handgun owned by Hunter Biden in October 2018 and thrown it into a supermarket trash bin. The official then forwards the article to another official in the PID.
An official whose name is redacted later comments in this chain: “Oh dear…”
After being forwarded the same Blaze article, an unidentified Protective Intelligence Research Specialist responds to his colleagues: “It’s kind of odd that we were involved in the missing gun investigation when neither Hunter or Joe were even receiving USSS [Secret Service] protection at the time? Hmmm.” Another official replies: “Maybe we were asked for a favor?”
Senior Secret Service officials, whose names were disclosed in the records, were also notified of The Blaze article on November 2, 2020, including James Henry, then-Special Agent in Charge of the Philadelphia Field Office; Michael D’Ambrosio, Assistant Director of the U.S. Secret Service in charge of oversight of all Secret Service domestic and foreign Secret Service offices; Steven Stanford, then-Deputy Assistant Director; Leonza Newsome III, then-Deputy Director; and Douglas Henderson, Deputy Assistant Director, Office of Investigations.
After The Blaze article was forwarded by James Henry to a colleague in the Wilmington, DE, office, whose name is redacted, the colleague responds to Henry: “Digging in now. There is more information but I don’t have it yet.”
In response to a February 24, 2021, email inquiry from Politico reporter Ben Schreckinger regarding the Secret Service’s involvement in the investigation of the Hunter Biden gun incident, the Communications Department asks for “more information or documentation.” Schreckinger responds: “Sure thing. Agents visited StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and asked to take possession of the paperwork Hunter had filled out to purchase a gun there. The FBI also had some involvement in the investigation.”
The Communications Office then drafts and distributes internally a proposed response labeled “Draft/Predecisional/Draft.”
Under the subheading “Internal Background:”
The RAIC [Resident Agent in Charge] of the Wilmington Resident Office reported that all agents in his office denied any involvement. The Politico reporter refused to provide any details on the source of the information or that he was in possession of any official document, where we were identified. The statement has been drafted to address any implication that anyone from the service was involved in this incident.
Under the subheading “Draft for Release:”
Statement from the U.S. Secret Service
US Secret Service records confirm that the agency did not provide protection to any member of the Biden family in 2018, and that the Secret Service had no involvement in this alleged incident.
Later that day, Secret Service Director of Communications Catherine Milhoan forwards the draft response for the Politico reporter to Biden White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki and White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield: “Kate/Jen, Good afternoon. For your awareness. We will be releasing the statement at 4 p.m.” Milhoan then sent the draft to other USSS [Secret Service] officials, writing, “For your awareness … as part of our standard ops here at the USSS … WH Comms also has awareness of the query and our anticipated response.”
Milhoan then emails several senior Secret Service officials: “Thanks all. DHS OPA [Department of Homeland Security Office of Public Affairs] and WH Comms are tracking as well.”
After receiving the statement the reporter replies to the Communications Office, “Just to clarify. Did Secret Service agents ever visit StarQuest Shooters & Survival Supply and request records related to Hunter Biden?” A Secret Service official whose name is redacted replies, “Ben, To reiterate, the Secret Service had no involvement in this alleged incident.”
In a separate email on February 24, 2021, the Special Agent in Charge of the Presidential Protection Division, David Cho, emails six officials in the White House, including “JOD” [likely Jen O’Malley Dillon], “Just wanted to provide for awareness. Jen Psaki and Kate Bedingfield were notified by our CMR [Communications and Media Relations] on the below inquiry. Our response is also stated. In summary – no records of the event ever occurring. Please advise if you have any questions.”
On March 2, 2021, the Politico reporter follows up with additional questions to the Secret Service media office, which sets off further internal Secret Service exchanges. Schrecklinger asks:
I just wanted to follow up with another couple of questions:
Did Secret Service agents in Delaware do any work related to President Biden in the period between when his status as a protectee expired after his vice presidency and when it resumed during his most recent presidential campaign?
For example, during this period, were Secret Service agents ever in touch with the Delaware State Police to arrange police details for Biden?
An official in the communications office whose name is redacted then forwards the follow-up questions to an official in the Wilmington, DE, office, whose name is also redacted: “Can you give me a call on the below questions.”
Wilmington official replies, “I’ll give you a call in about an hour.” The Wilmington official then forwards the email exchange to James Henry, former SAC of the Philadelphia Field Office: “FYSA [For Your Situational Awareness].”
On March 10, 2021, the reporter follows up again with the Secret Service about their failure to respond to his follow-up questions of March 2, writing, “Circling back on this. I spoke to someone on your team about this last week and they said they would get me a statement by the end of the day, but I haven’t seen anything land. If you all want to weigh in on this, please get back to me by the end of the day today.” An official in the Secret Service Communications Office responds, “Ben, we have no additional information to provide for this request.”
On March 25, 2021 Special Agent in Charge Benjamin Kramer, emails then-Secret Service Assistant Director of Intergovernmental and Legislative Affairs (IGL), Jeremy Sheridan, a copy of the March 25 Politico article about Hunter Biden’s gun and cited the Secret Service statement in the article:
On Oct. 23, 2018, President Joe Biden’s son Hunter and daughter in law Hallie were involved in a bizarre incident in which Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime …
Arriving on the scene, Delaware State Police retrieved security camera footage from the store …
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation also responded to the scene, according to people familiar with the situation. At the time, the FBI was monitoring Hunter Biden as part of an investigation that remains ongoing and that currently focuses on his taxes. The FBI declined to comment.
A Secret Service spokesperson said the agency has no record of involvement in the incident: “U.S. Secret Service records confirm that the agency did not provide protection to any member of the Biden family in 2018, and that the Secret Service had no involvement in this alleged incident.”
Kramer then asks Sheridan, “Confirming this is comment we can relay if inquiries are made from Hill counterparts or if anything further needs to be discussed (?).” Sheridan replied, “Yes, the comment as provided in the article is our response to any inquiries.”
On March 25, 2021, Milhoan forwards the Politico article to several senior Secret Service officials: “For your awareness … the article is total BS as we all know. Leadership is aware and I will let you know if CMR [Office of Communications and Media Relations] receives any queries.”
On March 26, 2021, New York Post reporter Lorena Mongelli reaches out to the Secret Service Communications Office, asking for comment on text messages on Hunter Biden’s lost laptop:
It appears the text messages were sent from Hunter Biden in which he indicates that the Secret Service did in fact respond to the Oct. 23, 2018 [gun] incident. This information contradicts your previous statement relating to the incident and we would like to know whether the Secret Service would like to respond to these new findings.
A person from the Communications Office, whose name is redacted replies: “We have received your inquiry, would you be able to provide copies of these alleged text messages for reference?”
Mongelli responds:
The Daily Mail actually posted copies of the same text messages the NY Post is referencing.
This is what one text message says:
“She stole the gun out of my trunk lock box and threw it in a garbage can full to the top at Jansens [sic]. Then told me it was my problem to deal with,” Hunter wrote.
“Then when the police the FBI the secret service came on the scene she said she took it from me because she was scared I would harm myself due to o my drug and alcohol problem and our volatile relationship and that she was afraid for the kids.”
You can view images of the messages here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9403757/Texts-Hunter-Biden-therapist-Hallie-Biden-leaving-gun-trashcan.html
“These new documents suggest that one can’t take at face value the Secret Service’s denial that it wasn’t involved in the Hunter Biden gun cover-up,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
In October 2020, The Blaze reported that in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken by Hallie Biden, the widow of then-presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau. In 2021, Politico reported:
Hallie took Hunter’s gun and threw it in a trash can behind a grocery store, only to return later to find it gone.
Delaware police began investigating, concerned that the trash can was across from a high school and that the missing gun could be used in a crime, according to law enforcement officials and a copy of the police report obtained by POLITICO.
But a curious thing happened at the time: Secret Service agents approached the owner of the store where Hunter bought the gun and asked to take the paperwork involving the sale, according to two people, one of whom has firsthand knowledge of the episode and the other was briefed by a Secret Service agent after the fact.
The Secret Service initially responded to Judicial Watch’s FOIA request in this case on April 2, 2021, stating that it had located potentially responsive records and would process them in accordance with FOIA. Then, on October 13, 2022, the Secret Service said that the April 2021 response was sent in error and that it did not have any records responsive to the FOIA request.
Through FOIA, Judicial Watch has uncovered significant information about Hunter Biden, who served on the board of directors for Ukrainian energy firm Burisma Holdings despite having no previous experience in the energy industry.
In October 2022, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August 6, 2020, briefing provided to members of the U.S. Senate. Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) raised concerns that the briefing was intended to undermine the senators’ investigation of Hunter Biden.
In December 2020, Judicial Watch received records from the State Department tying Hunter Biden’s Burisma Holdings’ lobbying operation to an influence-peddling operation involving the Clinton campaign during the 2016 election. Also uncovered were State Department records showing that former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch had specifically warned in 2017 about corruption allegations against Burisma Holdings.
In October 2020, State Department records that included a briefing checklist of a February 22, 2019, meeting in Kyiv between then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch and Sally Painter, co-founder and chief operating officer of Blue Star Strategies, a Democratic lobbying firm which was hired by Burisma Holdings to combat corruption allegations. The briefing checklist notes that Painter also planned to meet with Foreign Commercial Service (FCS) Officer Martin Claessens “regarding the Burisma Group energy company.” (Painter was implicated in the Clinton-era fundraisingscandal exposed by Judicial Watch that involved the alleged sale of seats on Commerce Department trade missions to Democratic National Committee donors.)
In September 2020, State Department records include a January 17, 2017, email from George Kent, the Obama administration’s deputy assistant secretary of state in charge of Ukraine policy, which was copied to then-U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, highlighting Russia-linked media “trolling” Joe Biden over “his son’s business.” Anemail was sent four days prior to the inauguration of President Donald Trump to a redacted recipient and CCd to Yovanovitch with the subject line “medvedchuk-linked vesti trolls Biden.” Kent writes: “Burisma – gift that keeps on giving. (With medvedchuk affiliated Vesti pushing the troll like storyline on visit day)”
In June 2020, U.S. Secret Service records showed that, for the first five and a half years of the Obama administration, Hunter Biden traveled extensively while receiving a Secret Service protective detail. During the time period of the records provided, Hunter Biden took 411 separate domestic and international flights, including to 29 different foreign countries. He visited China five times.
Judicial Watch is also suing the DHS for Secret Service records on Hunter Biden’s travel and security costs, and suing the State Department for messages sent through the SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolkit) system that mention Hunter Biden.
The post Judicial Watch: Secret Service Official: ‘Maybe We Were Asked for A Favor?’ in Investigation of Hunter Biden’s Gun appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 57 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that show, just two days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, a discussion between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding the COVID shot and “anaphylaxis” with the regulators emphasizing their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
Judicial Watch obtained the records through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against HHS (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-00660)) after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is an agency of HHS, failed to respond to an August 30, 2021, FOIA request for:
All emails sent to and from members of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee regarding adverse events, deaths and/or injuries caused by investigatory vaccines for the prevention or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 and/or COVID-19 currently produced by Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and/or Johnson & Johnson.
The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) is the U.S. Government’s central advisory body, along with Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), advising whether to approve COVID vaccines.
A lengthy, heavily redacted December 2020 email exchange shows U.S. and UK health officials placing a heavy emphasis on their “mutual confidentiality agreement” in a discussion regarding “anaphylactoid reactions” to the COVID vaccine.
The exchange is initiated by Jonathan Mogford, policy director of the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency and is sent to Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock as well as Peter Marks, director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). The subject line and body of the email are fully redacted under FOIA Exemption B3 (relating to statutory prohibitions).
As background, Mogford includes information on “two cases of anaphylactoid reactions in individuals with a strong past history of allergic reactions….” Marks replies to Mogford: “It would be very helpful if our Office of Vaccines could receive additional details [redacted] from MHRA [UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency] under the terms of our mutual confidentiality agreement.” Mogford later replies, “… attached are [redacted] hope that’s helpful in the meantime. If I can just remind – information shared under our confidentiality agreement.”
Marion Gruber, head of the Office of Vaccines Research and Review (OVRR), then replies to Mogford, “Thank you so much for this information. Our emails crossed. If possible, would be available for a t-con [teleconference] today?” The exchange concludes with OVRR Deputy Director Phil Krause advising UK Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency official Jamie Convisser, “Your summary is correct. I’m cc:ing Amanda Cohn at CDC who can provide the most up-to-date details about [redacted]. Obviously, [redacted], not all of this is public so please hold these details confidential.” Cohn then replies to Mogford, and includes an attachment titled “Anaphylaxis CLARK Dec 19 2020 Final”. She writes, “I am adding my colleagues Tom Clark and Stacey Martin, we are happy to share more information with you. Attached are slides that were presented at a public meeting on Saturday. [Redacted].”
The FDA issued its Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine for individuals 16 years of age and older on December 11, 2020.
On May 14, 2021, the CDC’s Dr. Amanda Cohn emailed Office of Vaccines Research and Review Director Marion Gruber and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks with the subject line “Coadministration of COVID-19 Vaccines with Other Vaccines During Pregnancy.”
Gruber writes, “I am fine with this language.” Marks then responds to Cohn and her CDC colleague, Sarah Mbaeyi, “I can live with this too. Please let me know if you want to connect about the adverse event issue later today. Seems like work is still ongoing, but let me know. Thanks.” Cohn replies, “We have a meeting with Rochelle [presumably CDC Director Rochelle Walensky] at 3:30 about if we should say anything or wait until we have more definitive information. I will let you know where we land. I’m not sure there is a right answer.”
“It again took a lawsuit for the Biden administration to hand over, albeit heavily redacted, information regarding the safety of the COVID vaccines that the public has every right to know,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This disturbing batch of new documents have uncovered a secret confidentiality agreement tied to COVID vaccine safety issues and emails that raise new questions about the vaccines and pregnancy.”
Judicial Watch is pursuing challenges against the agency’s redactions under FOIA.
In a previous production from this FOIA lawsuit, Judicial Watch received 1,081 pages of records from HHS detailing internal discussions about myocarditis and the COVID vaccine. Other documents detailed adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
Through FOIA, Judicial Watch has uncovered a substantial amount of information about COVID-19 issues:
- HHS records regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also reveal Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- FDA records detailed pressure for COVID-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
- NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
- HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
- University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines showed a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) revealed safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
- HHS records included emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19.
- HHS records showed that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
- Fauci emails included his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
The post Judicial Watch: Records Show U.S. and UK ‘Confidentiality Agreement’ Tied to Vaccine Adverse Events appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News:
Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Defense Department because it has failed to produce legally requested communications concerning President Joe Biden’s Sept. 1 campaign speech in Philadelphia, where he positioned two U.S. Marines to stand behind him as he lectured that “MAGA Republicans” are threatening the “very foundations of our Republic.”
In a press release, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said, “Biden’s infamous ‘Red Speech,’ which included the abuse of our Marines in its totalitarian imagery, painted a target on Trump and tens of millions of Americans for political suppression and worse.”
“And, to make matters worse, the Pentagon is violating federal law by hiding records about Biden’s misuse of our military in his attempt to intimidate Americans,” Fitton added.
Read here…
The post Judicial Watch Sues DoD for Records on Biden’s Use of Marines as ‘Props’ at Controversial Campaign Speech appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Defense for records about the use of U.S. Marines for President Joe Biden’s controversial September 1, 2022, campaign speech in Philadelphia (Judicial Watch vs. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:23-cv-00213)).
Biden was widely criticized for using the Marines as props during a political speech in which he called “MAGA Republicans” a threat to democracy.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the Department of Defense failed to comply with an October 31, 2022, FOIA request for all communications within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Navy, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Commandant of Marine Corps – and those shared with the White House Military Office and Office of the President – regarding Marines standing behind the President during his September 1, 2022, speech in Philadelphia.
Speaking on September 1 in front of a red backdrop and flanked by two Marines, Biden claimed Trump supporters “represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.”
“Biden’s infamous ‘Red Speech,’ which included the abuse of our Marines in its totalitarian imagery, painted a target on Trump and tens of millions of Americans for political suppression and worse,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And, to make matters worse, the Pentagon is violating federal law by hiding records about Biden’s misuse of our military in his attempt to intimidate Americans.”
The post Judicial Watch Sues Pentagon on Use of Marines for Biden Campaign Speech Attacking Americans appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News:
The government watchdog group Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to obtain any communications made between the Surgeon General’s communications director and social media companies — Twitter, Facebook, etc. — regarding COVID-19 vaccines.
During the COVID pandemic, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy called on social media companies to censor free speech about the virus and vaccines, claiming such speech was “misinformation.”
“Biden’s Surgeon General is abusing his office to pressure Big Tech companies to censor Americans,” saidJudicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This lawsuit aims to uncover the details of this government attack on the First Amendment.”
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch Sues HHS for Records on Pressuring Big Tech to Censor ‘COVID Misinformation’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Huge Stash of Joe Biden Papers Still Hidden at the University of Delaware
U.S. Gives Haiti Another $56.5 Million After Billions in Aid Disappear
Huge Stash of Joe Biden Papers Still Hidden at the University of Delaware
In all the news of classified documents at Joe Biden’s homes and elsewhere, one huge pile of documents has been mostly overlooked by everyone – but not us.
We’ve been fighting in court with the University of Delaware for more than two years for access to Biden’s Senate papers housed there.
Here’s the latest.
We filed a reply brief on behalf of the Daily Caller News Foundation in the Supreme Court of Delaware in our appeal of a lower court decision blocking access to Joe Biden’s senate papers. We’re asking for limited discovery, including, at a minimum, deposing a university representative.
In July 2020 we filed a Delaware Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit after the university denied our April 2020 requests for all of Biden’s Senate records and for records about the preservation and any proposed release of the records, including communications with Biden or his representatives (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. University of Delaware, (No. N20A-07-001)).
Earlier this month we filed an appeal brief with the Delaware Supreme Court after the Superior Court sided with the university, finding that the university had met its burden of performing an adequate search for the requested records. That opinion came after the university had submitted a second affidavit from the university’s FOIA official stating that no state funds had been spent on maintaining the documents.
In our Supreme Court filing, we argue:
Despite FOIA’s acknowledgment that “public entities, as instruments of government, should not have the power to decide what is good for the public to know,” over the multi-year course of this FOIA proceeding, the University’s efforts to satisfy its statutory burden of proof have been parceled out piecemeal, in minuscule increments, and only in response to court orders, entered after briefing by Appellants. When the shortcomings of the University’s effort are noted in briefing, the University calls “foul.” The University’s umbrage at these proceedings is misplaced. To date, the FOIA Coordinator’s efforts (and her recollections of what steps she took) remain untested by cross examination. Appellants have every right to challenge what they believe has been a lackluster effort by the University to satisfy its statutory burden.
Separately, in a January 26, 2023, letter to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Delaware attorney Ted A. Kittila, who serves as our local counsel, details:
Based on what we have learned, there are 1,850 boxes of documents and 415 gigabytes of electronic records. [Emphasis in original] To place this in perspective, we have described the amount of boxes alone as filling approximately two tractor trailer trucks.
[W]here are the funds coming from to house and archive the Biden Records? We have heard rumors that comments on a draft of the Gift Agreement may have been located on the Hunter Biden laptop, raising further questions: why would Hunter Biden be commenting on the donation of the Biden Records, and what was his role with respect to the donation?
In our view, the United States House of Representatives would have the power to subpoena all of these documents. Unlike an effort to obtain public disclosure of documents under FOIA, a subpoena would have the power to compel the release of these documents. We believe that given President Biden’s alleged mishandling of documents, it is imperative for the House to review the Biden Records to determine that no classified materials are in the collection, especially given the fact that we do not even know if the person or persons reviewing these documents have security clearance. The House should also be interested in who has funded what is obviously a substantial donation. With the Gift Agreement out of reach, this remains an unanswered concern. Finally, the House should have particular interest in who has had access to the Biden Documents. Even if we were able to obtain access to the Biden Records, we have no idea if there have been documents removed during the course of the Delaware litigation.
“The University of Delaware’s conduct throughout this case totally reeks,” said DCNF Managing Editor Michael Bastasch. “The American people have a right to know what’s in President Biden’s Senate records and why the university is stonewalling our legitimate records request.”
Congress should follow our lead and immediately move to subpoena, secure, and examine the trove of secret Biden Senate records held at the University of Delaware. We will continue fighting in court to overcome the university’s desperate secrecy over its deal with Biden to keep these records away from the American people.
U.S. Gives Haiti Another $56.5 Million After Billions in Aid Disappear
While American taxpayers were watching billions of dollars flow into Ukraine with little accountability, the same has been happening in Haiti with far less attention. This desperate nation is an object lesson in showering money with little result. Our Corruption Chronicles blog elaborates.
Despite well-documented fraud and waste in the U.S. government’s costly and ineffective Haiti recovery campaign, American taxpayer dollars keep flowing to the poverty-stricken Caribbean island with no oversight. This month the Biden administration revealed it is dedicating an additional $56.5 million to the failed initiative, explaining that the money is “for the people of Haiti in response to the country’s humanitarian crisis and cholera epidemic.” The announcement says Haiti’s alarming levels of gang violence have prevented people from accessing food, fuel water and other basic supplies but fails to reveal how this latest allocation will change that.
This has been going on for many years and billions in U.S. assistance—with billions more from the international community—has made little difference. Since the 2010 earthquake Uncle Sam alone has provided Haiti with over$5.6 billion to help the nation bounce back but more than a decade later that has not materialized, and no one really knows what happened to the money. The funds were supposed to provide Haiti with “life-saving post-disaster relief as well as longer-term recovery, reconstruction, and development programs,” according to the State Department, which confirms that after the 2021 earthquake the U.S. “again mobilized a whole-of-government effort to provide immediate assistance at the Haitian government’s request.” Haiti’s reconstruction and development will continue for many years, the State Department predicts, adding that since 2021 it has doled out a whopping $278 million in humanitarian and health assistance for Haiti.
The money keeps flowing despite systemic lapses in the programs it funds. For instance, a costly initiative a to build housing failed miserably after the U.S. spent $90 million and tens of thousands of Haitians remain homeless a decade later. The Clinton Foundation and Clinton Bush Haiti Fund also came up with some $88 million for earthquake recovery but Haiti remains a disaster, the poorest country in the western hemisphere. Even before the tremor a federal audit revealed that hundreds of millions of American taxpayer dollars were wasted on reckless Haitian projects with the single largest chunk—$170.3 million—going to a failed port and power plant adventure heavily promoted by Bill and Hillary Clinton. The Clinton-backed power and port venture is the biggest and most expensive failure mentioned in the probe, which was ordered by a Florida congresswoman who at the time confirmed a “troubling lack of progress and accountability” in Haiti reconstruction projects. All these years later many Haitians still live in deplorable, shanty town tent cities and a never-ending epidemic of cholera keeps claiming lives.
American taxpayers have the right to ask where all that money went and why their government does not have a process in place to assure resources are properly used to actually help the Haitian people. One national news reportpointed out years ago the disconnect between the massive amount of private and public aid and the poverty, disease and homelessness that still plague the country. More recently, the nation’s biggest mainstream newspaper published an article asking why Haiti still despairs after billions in foreign aid. “Since a powerful earthquake devastated the country in 2010, foreign aid seems only to have helped perpetuate some of the country’s biggest troubles,” the story reads, adding that Haiti’s institutions have become further hollowed after the international community—including the U.S., of course—pumped $13 billion of aid into the country. A researcher at a Washington D.C. think tank is quoted in the story saying that spending billions on so-called nation-building in Haiti has not worked and has contributed to the state’s erosion.
Evidently, this will not stop the government from sending more money. Even the Trump administration requested $145.5 million for aid to Haiti during its last year in office. Like many of the awards before it, the Biden administration claims that the most recent $56.5 million allocation will help “meet urgent humanitarian needs” of people across Haiti by providing food assistance, medical supplies, access to safe water and better healthcare. “The United States continues to stand with the people of Haiti during this challenging time,” the recent grant announcement says.
Until next week,
The post Biden Docs Scandal Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration’s costly, governmentwide effort to advance racial equity and support the nation’s underserved population through taxpayer-funded programs is going global. The administration recently disclosed that it is dedicating a million dollars to “empower marginalized racial and ethnic communities in Europe,” though details of how this will be accomplished remain ambiguous. What is clear is that the soon-to-be empowered minority Europeans are to include people of African descent and Roma people, according to the recently published grant announcement.
Among the goals is to mitigate structural racism, xenophobia, and discrimination found in institutions designed to protect and serve all people in society and ensure the fair administration of, and access to, justice for marginalized racial and ethnic communities. The grant also aims to counter societal discrimination and violence by advancing equity, social inclusion, and equality for all. The agency doling out the money, a State Department offshoot known as the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL), justifies funding the program by claiming that members of marginalized racial, ethnic, and indigenous communities around the world often are disproportionately discriminated against, forced to endure high levels of violence and excruciating labor conditions in migration, are systematically denied access to justice, and continually bear the brunt of racial discrimination, xenophobia, and violence in society.
“DRL has a longstanding commitment to empowering underrepresented and underserved racial and ethnic communities and to upholding the dignity of people who are systematically denied their human rights and fundamental freedoms,” the State Department writes in its grant document. “DRL acknowledges the legacy—and suffering of millions of people as a result—of slavery and colonization, which perpetuates and worsens inequality today. DRL supports the mandate of the Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice to protect and advance the human rights of people belonging to marginalized racial and ethnic communities and to combat systemic racism, discrimination, and xenophobia around the world.”
Uncle Sam’s new million-dollar European endeavor will focus on three objectives, according to the State Department. They include support for civil society groups working with marginalized racial and ethnic communities, raising awareness of the challenges and opportunities for members of the discriminated communities by combatting structural racism, discrimination and xenophobia as well as advancing the objectives of a United Nation’s initiative that focuses on people of African descent. The words structural racism, xenophobia and intolerance appear repeatedly throughout the government’s 25-page grant document. The announcement also mentions President Joe Biden’s January, 2021 Executive Order titled Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government to further support its European project. “In accordance [with the Executive Order], programs should implement strategies for integration and inclusion of individuals/organizations/beneficiaries that can bring perspectives based on their religion, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, sex characteristics, national origin, age, genetic information, marital status, parental status, pregnancy, political affiliation, or veteran’s status.”
Back home in the U.S., many key federal agencies have implemented racial equity plans as per Biden’s order. The Department of Labor has dedicated $260 million to promote “equitable access” to government unemployment benefits by addressing disparities in the administration and delivery of money by race ethnicity and language proficiency. The Treasury Department named its first ever racial equity chief, a veteran La Raza official who spent a decade at the nation’s most influential open borders group. The Department of Defense (DOD) is using outrageous anti-bias materials that indoctrinate troops with anti-American and racially inflammatory training on diversity topics. The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) created an equity commission to address longstanding inequities in agriculture. The nation’s medical research agency has a special minority health and health disparities division that issued a study declaring COVID-19 exacerbated preexisting resentment against racial/ethnic minorities and marginalized communities.
The post U.S. will Pay $1 Mil to Empower Marginalized Racial, Ethnic Communities in Europe appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Washington Times:
Mr. Schiff announced Thursday that he will seek the Democratic nomination for Senate, pitting him against six-term incumbent and fellow Democrat Dianne Feinstein. Afterward, critics didn’t attack just his liberal House voting record. They also tore into Mr. Schiff’s claims over the past seven years that were central to his effort to bring down President Trump and other Republicans who tried to defend him.
“If you’re looking for who has the most responsibility for putting out into the public domain the falsehood that Trump and conservatives colluded with Russia to try to steal an election, it’s Schiff,” said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative Judicial Watch.
Read more here…
The post Long trail of falsehoods, fabrications and lies follows Schiff into California Senate race appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From BizPac Review:
President Joe Biden made it official on Friday that White House chief of staff Ron Klain will step down next week, and announced that Jeff Zients, who ran Biden’s Covid-19 response operation, will replace Klain — Zients, a former Bain Capital consultant who served under Barack Obama, being known for declaring in 2021 that unvaccinated Americans were “looking at a winter of severe illness and death.”
“I’m confident that Jeff will continue Ron’s example of smart, steady leadership, as we continue to work hard every day for the people we were sent here to serve,” Biden said in a written statement.
A copy of Klain’s resignation letter was circulated online, saying his “journey” has been “the honor of a lifetime” while claiming that he had the opportunity “to work with the most talented, diverse, determined, and collegial White House staff ever.”Tom Fitton, the founder of Judicial Watch, tweeted last week that Zients may have “violated civil rights laws and US Constitution in leading Biden WH operation to censor Americans through Big Tech on Covid issue.” Robert F. Kennedy Jr. called Biden’s new chief of staff an “inept corporate profiteer.”
Tom Fitton, the founder of Judicial Watch, tweeted last week that Zients may have “violated civil rights laws and US Constitution in leading Biden WH operation to censor Americans through Big Tech on Covid issue.” Robert F. Kennedy Jr. called Biden’s new chief of staff an “inept corporate profiteer.”
Read more here…
The post Obama signs off on Klain’s official departure, Biden taps controversial new chief-of-staff appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News:
Judge Charnelle Bjelkengren, a Biden judicial nominee for U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, went viral on Twitter for her failure to recall basic U.S. Constitution knowledge on Thursday.
The Senate Judiciary Committee met for a confirmation hearing earlier that morning when Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., began his time asking Bjelkengren about different parts of the U.S. Constitution.
“Tell me what Article V of the Constitution does,” Kennedy requested.
“To be fair, Article V might be tough to recall on the spot. But difficult to excuse this judicial nominee’s drawing a blank on Article II,” Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton agreed.
Read more here…
The post Biden judicial nominee ridiculed after failing to recall parts of the Constitution: ‘Hoo boy this is bad’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Newsmax:
There could be several legal issues at play with Newsmax being dropped from DirecTV’s satellite and streaming platforms, including whether AT&T and DirecTV are lying about their reasons for dropping the network, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton says.
“I’m not a lawyer, but some of the legal issues that pop up to me, as a layman who has been looking at this for a long time, are AT&T and DirecTV lying?” Fitton said on Newsmax’s “Greg Kelly Reports” on Wednesday. “Are they suggesting there is a credible business reason for this as opposed to an arbitrary political reason for cutting off Newsmax?”
He added that he’s known Newsmax CEO Christopher Ruddy for years as a “smart businessman,” so if there was a deal to be had with DirecTV, it would have been reached.
AT&T’s DirecTV cut Newsmax’s signal at midnight Tuesday, stopping its more than 13 million customers on the satellite service, DirecTV Stream, and U-Verse from accessing the network.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch’s Fitton to Newsmax: DirecTV’s Move Brings Legal Questions appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News:
Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Justice Department for records of communications between the FBI and social media sites regarding the Hunter Biden laptop story and foreign influence in elections.
The latest suit by the conservative watchdog group came after they say the FBI failed to respond fully to a previous FOIA request in August for all records between FBI personnel and employees of Meta, Twitter, and other Big Tech companies.
The August request sought communications concerning Biden’s laptop, the news media’s reporting on the laptop, and “the threat of disinformation disseminated by foreign actors related to any U.S. election.”
According to a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia earlier this month, the FBI acknowledged receipt of the original FOIA request in September but since then has provided no further information. The court filing noted the FBI had until Sept. 26 to make a final determination on whether to comply with the request, notify Judicial Watch of the agency’s decision, and produce the requested records or demonstrate that the requested records are exempt.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch files lawsuit against DOJ for docs on Big Tech censorship, Hunter Biden laptop story appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a reply brief on behalf of the Daily Caller News Foundation and itself in the Supreme Court of Delaware asking for limited discovery, including, at a minimum, deposing a university representative.
In July 2020 Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation filed a Delaware Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit after the university denied their April 2020 requests for all of Biden’s Senate records and for records about the preservation and any proposed release of the records, including communications with Biden or his representatives (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. University of Delaware, (No. N20A-07-001)).
Earlier this month Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation filed an appeal brief with the Delaware Supreme Court after the Superior Court sided with the university, finding that the university had met its burden of performing an adequate search for the requested records. That opinion came after the university had submitted a second affidavit from the university’s FOIA official stating that no state funds had been spent on maintaining the documents.
In its Delaware Supreme Court filing, Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation argue:
Despite FOIA’s acknowledgement that “public entities, as instruments of government, should not have the power to decide what is good for the public to know,” over the multi-year course of this FOIA proceeding, the University’s efforts to satisfy its statutory burden of proof have been parceled out piecemeal, in miniscule increments, and only in response to court orders, entered after briefing by Appellants. When the shortcomings of the University’s effort are noted in briefing, the University calls “foul.” The University’s umbrage at these proceedings is misplaced. To date, the FOIA Coordinator’s efforts (and her recollections of what steps she took) remain untested by cross examination. Appellants have every right to challenge what they believe has been a lackluster effort by the University to satisfy its statutory burden.
Separately, in a January26, 2023, letter to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Delaware attorney Ted A. Kittila (who also serves as Judicial Watch’s local counsel) details:
Based on what we have learned, there are 1,850 boxes of documents and 415 gigabytes of electronic records. [Emphasis in original] To place this in perspective, we have described the amount of boxes alone as filling approximately two tractor trailer trucks.
[W]here are the funds coming from to house and archive the Biden Records? We have heard rumors that comments on a draft of the Gift Agreement may have been located on the Hunter Biden laptop, raising further questions: why would Hunter Biden be commenting on the donation of the Biden Records, and what was his role with respect to the donation?
In our view, the United States House of Representatives would have the power to subpoena all of these documents. Unlike an effort to obtain public disclosure of documents under FOIA, a subpoena would have the power to compel the release of these documents. We believe that given President Biden’s alleged mishandling of documents, it is imperative for the House to review the Biden Records to determine that no classified materials are in the collection, especially given the fact that we do not even know if the person or persons reviewing these documents have security clearance. The House should also be interested in who has funded what is obviously a substantial donation. With the Gift Agreement out of reach, this remains an unanswered concern. Finally, the House should have particular interest in who has had access to the Biden Documents. Even if we were able to obtain access to the Biden Records, we have no idea if there have been documents removed during the course of the Delaware litigation.
“The University of Delaware’s conduct throughout this case totally reeks,” said DCNF Managing Editor Michael Bastasch. “The American people have a right to know what’s in President Biden’s Senate records and why the university is stonewalling our legitimate records request.”
“Congress should follow Judicial Watch’s lead and immediately move to subpoena, secure and examine the trove of secret Biden Senate records being held in the University of Delaware,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch, in the meantime, will continue fighting in court to overcome the university’s desperate secrecy over its deal with Biden to keep these records away from the American people.”
Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation are being represented by Delaware lawyers Ted Kittila and Bill Green of Halloran Farkas + Kittila LLP.
The post Judicial Watch Continues to Push in Court for Testimony on Secret University of Delaware Deal with Joe Biden to Hide Senate Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Despite well-documented fraud and waste in the U.S. government’s costly and ineffective Haiti recovery campaign, American taxpayer dollars keep flowing to the poverty-stricken Caribbean island with no oversight. This month the Biden administration revealed it is dedicating an additional $56.5 million to the failed initiative, explaining that the money is “for the people of Haiti in response to the country’s humanitarian crisis and cholera epidemic.” The announcement says Haiti’s alarming levels of gang violence have prevented people from accessing food, fuel water and other basic supplies but fails to reveal how this latest allocation will change that.
This has been going on for many years and billions in U.S. assistance—with billions more from the international community—has made little difference. Since the 2010 earthquake Uncle Sam alone has provided Haiti with over $5.6 billion to help the nation bounce back but more than a decade later that has not materialized and no one really knows what happened to the money. The funds were supposed to provide Haiti with “life-saving post-disaster relief as well as longer-term recovery, reconstruction, and development programs,” according to the State Department, which confirms that after the 2021 earthquake the U.S. “again mobilized a whole-of-government effort to provide immediate assistance at the Haitian government’s request.” Haiti’s reconstruction and development will continue for many years, the State Department predicts, adding that since 2021 it has doled out a whopping $278 million in humanitarian and health assistance for Haiti.
The money keeps flowing despite systemic lapses in the programs it funds. For instance, a costly initiative a to build housing failed miserably after the U.S. spent $90 million and tens of thousands of Haitians remain homeless a decade later. The Clinton Foundation and Clinton Bush Haiti Fund also came up with some $88 million for earthquake recovery but Haiti remains a disaster, the poorest country in the western hemisphere. Even before the tremor a federal audit revealed that hundreds of millions of American taxpayer dollars were wasted on reckless Haitian projects with the single largest chunk—$170.3 million—going to a failed port and power plant adventure heavily promoted by Bill and Hillary Clinton. The Clinton-backed power and port venture is the biggest and most expensive failure mentioned in the probe, which was ordered by a Florida congresswoman who at the time confirmed a “troubling lack of progress and accountability” in Haiti reconstruction projects. All these years later many Haitians still live in deplorable, shanty town tent cities and a never-ending epidemic of cholera keeps claiming lives.
American taxpayers have the right to ask where all that money went and why their government does not have a process in place to assure resources are properly used to actually help the Haitian people. One national news report pointed out years ago the disconnect between the massive amount of private and public aid and the poverty, disease and homelessness that still plague the country. More recently, the nation’s biggest mainstream newspaper published an article asking why Haiti still despairs after billions in foreign aid. “Since a powerful earthquake devastated the country in 2010, foreign aid seems only to have helped perpetuate some of the country’s biggest troubles,” the story reads, adding that Haiti’s institutions have become further hollowed after the international community—including the U.S., of course—pumped $13 billion of aid into the country. A researcher at a Washington D.C. think tank is quoted in the story saying that spending billions on so-called nation-building in Haiti has not worked and has contributed to the state’s erosion.
Evidently, this will not stop the government from sending more money. Even the Trump administration requested $145.5 million for aid to Haiti during its last year in office. Like many of the awards before it, the Biden administration claims that the most recent $56.5 million allocation will help “meet urgent humanitarian needs” of people across Haiti by providing food assistance, medical supplies, access to safe water and better healthcare. “The United States continues to stand with the people of Haiti during this challenging time,” the recent grant announcement says.
The post U.S. Gives Haiti Another $56.5 Mil in Humanitarian Relief after Billions in Aid Disappear appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Sues Health and Human Services for Surgeon General Office Contact with Big Tech about COVID Vaccines
Judicial Watch announced recently it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for communications and records of the Surgeon General’s Communications Director’s contact with social media companies regarding COVID-19 vaccines.
Judicial Watch: Lawsuit Forces Release of Justice Department Records on Raid on Project Veritas’s James O’Keefe’s Home
Judicial Watch announced that it received 11 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S Department of Justice concerning communications of The New York Times to officials in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), showing the Times was tipped off about the November 6, 2021, FBI raids on the homes of Project Veritas founder/CEO James O’Keefe and then-Project Veritas journalists.
Salvadoran Gang Member Charged with Murder Entered U.S. as Unaccompanied Minor
The teenage gang member recently arrested for the murder of a Maryland woman came to the U.S. under a special program that welcomes illegal immigrants under the age of 18 and provides them with a multitude of taxpayer benefits. The government refers to them as Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) and hundreds of thousands have entered the country in the last few years.
DHS Stops Sending Air Marshals on Migrant Welfare Missions along Mexican Border
Thanks to pressure from the Air Marshal National Council and Judicial Watch’s reporting, the Biden administration will stop sending Federal Air Marshals (FAM) to the Mexican border to provide illegal immigrants with welfare checks, transportation, and other basic services. The reckless practice left aircraft at risk by sending 150-200 FAM monthly to the southern border to help deal with “a surge in irregular migration.”
In The News
Secret Service doesn’t record visitors at Biden’s ‘weekend White House’ where classified docs were found
The New York Post
“If the Secret Service is doing its job, there has to be visitor records,” Tom Fitton, president of conservative transparency group Judicial Watch, told The Post in October. “If there aren’t any records, the scandal is much bigger than just a lack of transparency.”
‘Twitter Files’ part 7 unveils the FBI’s involvement in the Hunter Biden laptop scandal
Fox News
The latest suit by the conservative watchdog group came after they say the FBI failed to respond fully to a previous FOIA request in August for all records between FBI personnel and employees of Meta, Twitter, and other Big Tech companies.
‘Raises Disturbing Questions’: Judicial Watch Gets Records Moderna Gave to FDA About Its COVID Vaccine
Townhall
The data was released as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, which was filed in September 2021 after the FDA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases did not respond to an earlier FOIA request.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Project Veritas/James O’Keefe Under Deep State Attack! - More Biden Crimes!? - BREAKING: Security Cam Footage of David DePape Breaking into Paul Pelosi’s Home
-
The post Judicial Watch Sues On Biden Agency Censorship Docs appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Lawsuit Forces Release of Records on Raid of Project Veritas’s O’Keefe’s Home
Judicial Watch Sues FBI Over Censorship of Hunter Biden Laptop Story
Judicial Watch Sues for Surgeon General Contact with Big Tech about Vaccines
DHS Recalls Air Marshals on Migrant Welfare Missions along Mexican Border
Judicial Watch Lawsuit Forces Release of Records on Raid of Project Veritas’s O’Keefe’s Home
Journalist group, Project Veritas, investigates corruption and dishonesty in public and private institutions. James O’Keefe is CEO and Chairman of the Board.
He and the organization apparently stepped on some highly sensitive toes in Washington, and Washington reacted with an abusive raid of his home.
We received 11 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S Department of Justice concerning communications of The New York Times to officials in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), showing the Times was tipped off about the November 6, 2021, FBI raids on the homes of Project Veritas founder/CEO James O’Keefe and then-Project Veritas journalists.
Seven pages of records are redacted in large part and three pages are withheld entirely, which the agency claims are “not part of the responsive record.”
The records were produced in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit we filed in September 2022 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the agency failed to respond to a March 29, 2022, FOIA request (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No.1:22-cv-02652)).
Our lawsuit seeks all records of government and non-government communications between officials in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York and representatives of the New York Times regarding Project Veritas, James O’Keefe, Ashley Biden and others.
The records reveal that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York was in contact with New York Times reporters, including William K. Rashbaum (referred to in the email chains as “Willy”) and Ben Protess, before, during, and after the raids on the homes of O’Keefe and then-Project Veritas reporters.
The records include a November 4, 2021, email chain labeled “Search in Mamaroneck re [redacted] diary?”, from James Margolin, former Chief Public Information Officer of SDNY to Nicholas Biase, former senior public affairs officer for SDNY, and an individual whose name is redacted. Margolin states that “Willy” from the Times has information about the search warrants and investigation seemingly about Ashley Biden’s diary:
Willy Rashbaum from the Times just called and says they know or believe that a search warrant is being conducted in Mamaroneck this morning at a location that is either the residence of Eric Cochrane (sp?) — who may or may not be a whistle-blower — or a Project Veritas office. He believes this is in connection with a Florida investigation into whether Project Veritas stole, or purchased a stolen, diary belonging to [redacted].
Margolin later includes redacted details about “two searches” regarding the homes of James O’Keefe and then-Project Veritas journalist Spencer Meads.
Margolin later states: “Times now believes it’s not ‘a Florida investigation’ but an SDNY investigation, ‘and it involves more than just the diary’ (no elaboration on that).”
In a November 6, 2021, email with the subject line ““Re: O’Keefe (arrest?)” from Margolin to Biase and others, Margolin states, “The Times hears O’Keefe was arrested this morning.” The rest of the body of the email is redacted as “not part of the responsive record.”
In response, Biase thanks Margolin and writes: “The Times has his neighbor on record (who they suspect may not be entirely truthful) saying that FBI were banging on O’Keefe’s door with guns (or at least one agent with a gun) drawn.”
On November 24, 2021, Margolin emails a redacted individual and Biase with the subject line “Veritas,” stating that “Willy” (William K. Rashbaum of Times) informed Margolin the Times was doing another story about Project Veritas, and “they’re pretty certain subpoenas went to [redacted].” Margolin explains that Willy asked him for “a wave-off if” the information was wrong, adding “I [Margolin] made no promises.”
Biase writes on November 30, 2021, in the heavily redacted email chain that Biase had spoken with NYT reporters“Willy” and Ben Protess, and “neither mentioned it. Maybe Jim?” The rest of the body of the email is redacted as “not part of the responsive record.”
The New York Times was obviously tipped off about the unprecedented raid on the home of James O’Keefe and other Project Veritas journalists. And these new Justice Department records raise more questions than answers about how that happened.
Judicial Watch Sues FBI over Censorship of Hunter Biden Laptop Story
The FBI has become a political enforcement arm of the Biden Administration and the Biden family. We’re going to court to interrupt the corruption.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit against the Justice Department for records of communications between the FBI and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story (Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:23-cv-00079)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the FBI failed to respond fully to an August 28, 2022, FOIA request for:
- All alerts, notifications, advisories, foreign threat indicators, or similar records provided by any official or employee of the FBI to any officer or employee of Meta (formerly Facebook), Twitter, or any other social media company regarding the threat of disinformation disseminated by foreign actors related to any U.S. election.
- All records of communication between any official or employee of the FBI and any officer or employee of Meta, Twitter, or any other social media company regarding the laptop reportedly used by Hunter Biden, any news media reporting regarding the laptop and/or its contents, and/or the provenance of any information contained in any such reporting.
In October 2020, in the run-up to the presidential election, the New York Post was able to confirm that Hunter Biden’s laptop, which was abandoned at a Delaware computer shop, contained embarrassing and possibly incriminating information about the Biden family. The Post’s story was censored by Twitter and other social media platforms despite its accuracy. Recent “Twitter files” released by Elon Musk show that FBI pressure on “Russian disinformation” led to the censorship:
San Francisco FBI agent Elvis Chan “[sent] 10 documents to Twitter’s then-Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth, through Teleporter, a one-way communications channel from the FBI to Twitter,” the evening before the release of the Post story.
Other “Twitter files” show the FBI pushed Twitter to also censor countless Twitter users who tweeted concerns (and jokes) about election integrity just before the 2020 election.
The FBI was literally paying Twitter to censor Americans just before the 2020 election! The FBI seems to have interfered in the 2020 election to help Joe Biden by encouraging Big Tech to censor Americans about the Hunter Biden laptop and other debates. And to add to the scandal, they are now covering up their misconduct.
We have a comprehensive investigation and litigation project to expose and stop Big Government-Big Tech censorship. We sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA), a division of DHS, and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to flag online election content for censorship and suppression.
In September 2022, we sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch’s YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview with me. Judicial Watch continues to post it’s video content on its Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In April 2021, we published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In May 2021, we revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies, Twitter and Facebook, to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In July 2021, we uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
And, as you can see below, we’re just ramping up!
Judicial Watch Sues for Surgeon General Contact with Big Tech about Vaccines
In the Biden administration’s zeal to push the COVID-19 vaccines, it turned it’s Surgeon General into an anti-constitutional tyrant.
We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for communications and records of the Surgeon General’s Communications Director’s contact with social media companies regarding COVID-19 vaccines (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:23-cv-00113)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after HHS failed to respond adequately to a March 3, 2022, FOIA request for:
All records, including, but not limited to, electronic mail, texts, memoranda, and handwritten notes, of, regarding, referring, or relating to any efforts of Alexandria Phillips, Communications Director, Office of the Surgeon General, to contact any employee of Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, Reddit, YouTube, LinkedIn, Tumblr, and Pinterest concerning COVID-19 vaccines.
In 2021, the U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued a report titled “Confronting Health Misinformation” to “slow the spread of health misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond,” which called for censorship of speech about the vaccines and other COVID controversies:
Prioritize early detection of misinformation “super-spreaders” and repeat offenders. Impose clear consequences for accounts that repeatedly violate platform policies.
On March 3, 2022, Murthy demanded that the tech companies turn over information about individuals who spread COVID-19 misinformation:
In a formal notice, Murthy requested major tech platforms submit information about the prevalence and scale of COVID-19 misinformation on their sites, from social networks, search engines, crowdsourced platforms, e-commerce platforms and instant messaging systems.
Biden’s Surgeon General is abusing his office to pressure Big Tech companies to censor Americans. This lawsuit aims to uncover the details of this government attack on the First Amendment.
DHS Recalls Air Marshals on Migrant Welfare Missions along Mexican Border
The Biden administration dishonestly refers to its border crisis as “a surge in irregular migration.” To cope with the mess it created, it began to pull Federal Air Marshals away from their basic duties. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the latest update on the result of our pressure.
Thanks to pressure from the Air Marshal National Council and Judicial Watch’s reporting, the Biden administration will stop sending Federal Air Marshals (FAM) to the Mexican border to provide illegal immigrants with welfare checks, transportation, and other basic services. The reckless practice left aircraft at risk by sending 150-200 FAM monthly to the southern border to help deal with “a surge in irregular migration.” Judicial Watch was the first to report on the deployments in late October when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sent an electronic memorandum to the highly skilled law enforcement officers informing them of the assignments, which consisted of 21-day rotations that could be extended for up to 120 days.
Judicial Watch obtained a copy of the directive from various recipients at the agency, which operates under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. FAM are charged with protecting commercial passenger flights by deterring and countering the risk of terrorist activity, yet they were plucked from their duties to babysit illegal aliens. “The nation is experiencing a surge in irregular migration along the Southwest Border (SWB),” the October notice to FAM officers read. “The unprecedented volume of Noncitizen Migrants (NCMs) currently apprehended mandates immediate further action to protect the life and safety of federal personnel and noncitizens in CBP [Customs and Border Protection] custody.”
The first wave of air marshals was dispatched to El Paso, Texas and Yuma, Arizona on October 30 for an October 31 start. Thirty officers and a supervisor went to El Paso, 15 officers and a supervisor to Yuma. Here is the important work that the specially trained law enforcement officers were doing on the southern border rather than their critical duty of protecting commercial planes flagged for terrorist threats. “Hospital Watch, Transportation, Law Enforcement Searches, Entry Control, Security at CBP Facilities and Welfare Checks.” In a formal complaintto the DHS Inspector General, the Air Marshal National Council, which represents thousands of FAM nationwide, accused TSA Administrator David Pekoske and FAM Director Tirrell Stevenson of violating federal law and overstepping their authority by assigning air marshals to assist the U.S. Border Patrol with the illegal immigration crisis. The complaint also accused Homeland Security leaders of fraud, waste, and abuse of authority.
Earlier this month when an intelligence alert disclosed that Al Qaeda is planning attacks in the U.S. involving planes, the Air Marshal National Council fired off a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as well as Pekoske and Stevenson reminding them that deploying FAM to the southern border to perform humanitarian work is reckless and putting the nation at extreme risk. Judicial Watch published a story about the threat after obtaining a copy from government sources of the intelligence alert, which was delivered on December 31, 2022, at 12:23:52 Greenwich Mean Time. The caption of the widely circulated warning reads: “Al-Qaeda says upcoming attacks on US, possibly involving planes, will use new techniques and tactics.”
It appears that the combined efforts of Judicial Watch and the Air Marshal National Council have squeezed the Biden administration to end the controversial border missions. A memo dispersed to FAM just days ago says that all future deployments to the southwest border (SWB) have been suspended until further notice. “Wave #5 will continue their deployment until January 27th and then travel home as planned on January 28th,” according to the notice provided to Judicial Watch by various government sources. “Wave #6 will NOT DEPLOY as planned on January 25th.” The missive directs FAM to cancel travel and informs officers that hotel and car rental reservations will be cancelled by the agency. Air marshals nationwide are thrilled that they can return to their critical mission of securing the nation’s transportation system and David Londo, president of the Air Marshal National Council, said “it looks like we won.”
Until next week …
The post Judicial Watch Sues FBI appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for communications and records of the Surgeon General’s Communications Director’s contact with social media companies regarding COVID-19 vaccines (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services(No. 1:23-cv-00113)).
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after HHS failed to respond adequately to a March 3, 2022, FOIA request for:
All records, including, but not limited to, electronic mail, texts, memoranda, and handwritten notes, of, regarding, referring, or relating to any efforts of Alexandria Phillips, Communications Director, Office of the Surgeon General, to contact any employee of Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, Reddit, YouTube, LinkedIn, Tumblr, and Pinterest concerning COVID-19 vaccines.
In 2021, the U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued a report titled “Confronting Health Misinformation” to “slow the spread of health misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond,” which called for censorship of speech about the vaccines and other COVID controversies:
Prioritize early detection of misinformation “super-spreaders” and repeat offenders. Impose clear consequences for accounts that repeatedly violate platform policies.
On March 3, 2022, Murthy demanded that the tech companies turn over information about individuals who spread COVID-19 misinformation:
In a formal notice, Murthy requested major tech platforms submit information about the prevalence and scale of COVID-19 misinformation on their sites, from social networks, search engines, crowdsourced platforms, e-commerce platforms and instant messaging systems.
“Biden’s Surgeon General is abusing his office to pressure Big Tech companies to censor Americans,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch. “This lawsuit aims to uncover the details of this government attack on the First Amendment.”
Judicial Watch recently filed suit for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for all records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency , a division of DHS, and the Election Integrity Partnership , which was created to flag online election content for censorship and suppression.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In July 2021 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) records showed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Health and Human Services for Surgeon General Office Contact with Big Tech about COVID Vaccines appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 11 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S Department of Justice concerning communications of The New York Times to officials in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), showing the Times was tipped off about the November 6, 2021, FBI raids on the homes of Project Veritas founder/CEO James O’Keefe and then-Project Veritas journalists.
Seven pages of records are redacted in large part and three pages withheld entirely, which the agency claims are “not part of the responsive record.”
The records were produced in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed in September 2022 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the agency failed to respond to a March 29, 2022, FOIA request (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Justice (No.1:22-cv-02652)). The Judicial Watch lawsuit seeks all records of government and non-government communications between officials in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York and representatives of the New York Times regarding Project Veritas, James O’Keefe, Ashley Biden and others.
The records reveal that the U.S. Attorneys’ Office for the Southern District of New York was in contact with New York Times reporters, including William K. Rashbaum (referred to in the email chains as “Willy”) and Ben Protess, before, during, and after the raids on the homes of O’Keefe and then-Project Veritas reporters.
The records include a November 4, 2021, email chain labeled “Search in Mamaroneck re [redacted] diary?”, from James Margolin, former Chief Public Information Officer of SDNY to Nicholas Biase, former senior public affairs office for SDNY, and an individual whose name is redacted. Margolin states that “Willy” from the Times has information about the search warrants and investigation seemingly about Ashley Biden’s diary:
Willy Rashbaum from the Times just called and says they know or believe that a search warrant is being conducted in Mamaroneck this morning at a location that is either the residence of Eric Cochrane (sp?) — who may or may not be a whistle-blower — or a Project Veritas office. He believes this is in connection with a Florida investigation into whether Project Veritas stole, or purchased a stolen, diary belonging to [redacted].
Margolin later includes redacted details about “two searches” regarding the homes of James O’Keefe and then-Project Veritas journalist Spencer Meads.
Margolin later states: “Times now believes it’s not ‘a Florida investigation’ but an SDNY investigation, ‘and it involves more than just the diary’ (no elaboration on that).”
In a November 6, 2021, email with the subject line ““Re: O’Keefe (arrest?)” from Margolin to Biase and others, Margolin states, “The Times hears O’Keefe was arrested this morning.” The rest of the body of the email is redacted as “not part of the responsive record.”
In response Biase thanks Margolin and writes: “The Times has his neighbor on record (who they suspect may not be entirely truthful) saying that FBI were banging on O’Keefe’s door with guns (or at least one agent with a gun) drawn.”
On November 24, 2021, Margolin emails a redacted individual and Biase with the subject line “Veritas,” stating that “Willy” (William K. Rashbaum of Times) informed Margolin the Times was doing another story about Project Veritas, and “they’re pretty certain subpoenas went to [redacted].” Margolin explains that Willy asked him for “a wave-off if” the information was wrong, adding “I [Margolin] made no promises.”
Biase writes on November 30, 2021, in the heavily redacted email chain that Biase had spoken with NYTreporters “Willy” and Ben Protess, and “neither mentioned it. Maybe Jim?” The rest of the body of the email is redacted as “not part of the responsive record.”
“The New York Times was obviously tipped off about the unprecedented raid on the home of James O’Keefe and other Project Veritas journalists. And these new Justice Department records raise more questions than answers about how that happened,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch has actively investigated and litigated FOIA requests to gather information concerning the government’s treatment of Project Veritas.
In April 2022, Judicial Watch filed three FOIA lawsuits against DOJ and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for communications about Project Veritas among Pfizer, the New York Timesand other outside groups.
The post Judicial Watch: Lawsuit Forces Release of Justice Department Records on Raid on Project Veritas’s James O’Keefe’s Home appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The teenage gang member recently arrested for the murder of a Maryland woman came to the U.S. under a special program that welcomes illegal immigrants under the age of 18 and provides them with a multitude of taxpayer benefits. The government refers to them as Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) and hundreds of thousands have entered the country in the last few years. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is charged with caring for them and the agency spends millions of dollars annually to house, medically treat, entertain, and school UAC who come mainly from Central America. Under U.S. law illegal immigrant minors are almost always allowed to remain in the country and are quickly disbursed to a government-funded shelter upon arrival at the border. In fiscal year 2022, a record 149,000 UAC were apprehended by federal agents, according to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) figures.
Underage migrants without an adult usually possess a ticket into the U.S. via the Mexican border and this disturbing case illustrates the profound consequences of such a reckless program. Over the summer a 20-year-old woman was raped and murdered by a member of the notoriously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) street gang, according to a Baltimore news report. DNA evidence collected at the crime scene led police to a 17-year-old from El Salvador and detectives confirm the perpetrator is an illegal immigrant and a member of MS-13. This week the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the Washington D.C. think tank devoted to the research of U.S. immigration policy, revealed that the illegal immigrant gangbanger was allowed into the country by the Biden administration as a UAC. He committed the heinous crime “only months after being released into the United States,” CIS confirms. The group is calling for an investigation into the government’s release of the dangerous individual.
The overwhelming majority of UAC are not really children but rather young adults in their teens and some have criminal histories. Government figures show that approximately 72% of UAC in custody are over 14 years of age and 66% are male. Nearly half (47%) of the underage migrants come from Guatemala, 32% from Honduras,13% from El Salvador and 8% from other countries. As of January 20, 2023, there are about 6,862 UAC in government care. The goal is to identify a sponsor in the U.S. and release the minor as soon as possible. The Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which operates under HHS, claims it vets sponsors thoroughly and conducts criminal checks before releasing UAC to their custody. It is unclear who the agency released this young gang member to or what the vetting process uncovered. What is certain is that the agency makes “all efforts” to release UAC “as quickly as possible.”
This is hardly the first time a UAC commits a violent crime after entering the U.S. through the Mexican border. A few years ago two UAC were charged with raping a 14-year-old girl in the bathroom of a Maryland public high school. The illegal immigrants were both charged with first-degree rape and two counts of first-degree sexual offense. Both were in the ninth grade like their victim. One came from El Salvador and the other from Guatemala. A year earlier two UAC, both 17, from Central America executed a Massachusetts man by shooting him in the head shortly after being welcomed into the U.S. by the Obama administration. Both had ties to MS-13, authorities disclosed at the time. The media described the violent gangbangers as “baby-faced boys.”
Shortly after the first batch of UAC arrived in mid-2014, Judicial Watch reported that many had ties to gang members in the U.S., specifically MS-13. Homeland Security sources directly involved with the UAC crisis told Judicial Watch that street gangs, including MS-13, went on a recruiting frenzy at U.S. shelters housing the illegal alien minors and they used Red Cross phones to communicate. The MS-13 is a feared street gang of mostly Central American illegal immigrants that has spread throughout the U.S. and is renowned for drug distribution, murder, rape, robbery, home invasions, kidnappings, vandalism, and other violent crimes. The Justice Department’s National Gang Intelligence Center (NGIC) says criminal street gangs like the MS-13 are responsible for the majority of violent crimes in the U.S. and are the primary distributors of most illicit drugs.
The post Salvadoran Gang Member Charged with Murder Entered U.S. as Unaccompanied Minor appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News:
Judicial Watch has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Justice Department for records of communications between the FBI and social media sites regarding the Hunter Biden laptop story and foreign influence in elections.
The latest suit by the conservative watchdog group came after they say the FBI failed to respond fully to a previous FOIA request in August for all records between FBI personnel and employees of Meta, Twitter, and other Big Tech companies.
The August request sought communications concerning Biden’s laptop, the news media’s reporting on the laptop, and “the threat of disinformation disseminated by foreign actors related to any U.S. election.”
Read more here…
The post ‘Twitter Files’ part 7 unveils the FBI’s involvement in the Hunter Biden laptop scandal appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Asks Delaware Supreme Court for Limited Discovery to Depose a U Del Representative over Biden Senate Papers
Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed an appeal brief with the Delaware Supreme Court on behalf of itself and the Daily Caller News Foundation, asking it to overturn a lower court’s decision blocking release of records about the U.S. Senate records of President Joe Biden housed at the University of Delaware.
President Donald J. Trump Presented Keynote Address to Judicial Watch Roundtable Event in Miami, Florida
Judicial Watch, the government watchdog group, announced recently that President Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States, made a keynote address to Judicial Watch’s Annual Roundtable, a private event, which was held at the Trump National Doral in Miami, FL, on the evening of Thursday, January 19.
Judicial Watch Sues for NIH Communications on Fetal Organ Harvesting
“We have already established collusion between the University of Pittsburgh and the NIH over the fetal organ ‘chop shop’ in the University of Pittsburgh paid for with federal tax dollars,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Biden administration turned the spigot back on for taxpayer funding of this barbarism, and we want the details.”
U.S. Drops $4.5 Mil on Culturally Appropriate Program to Help Asians Quit Smoking
The U.S. government is dedicating $4.5 million to enhance a “linguistically and culturally appropriate” program to help Asians quit smoking. It is known as the national Asian language quitline and provides cessation counseling, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), and in-language materials for tobacco users who speak Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese (CKV). The cash will flow through a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) offshoot called Office on Smoking and Health. With an annual budget of nearly $10 billion, the CDC is the federal agency responsible for protecting public health. It operates under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and claims to work around the clock to protect America from health, safety, and security threats whether diseases start at home or abroad.
In The News
Trump’s campaign ‘kicking into overdrive’ after months of inaction
Washington Examiner
Former President Donald Trump is taking the training wheels off his third presidential campaign weeks after criticism said that he was not taking his third White House bid seriously.
Secret Service doesn’t record visitors at Biden’s ‘weekend White House’ where classified docs were found
New York Post
“If the Secret Service is doing its job, there has to be visitor records,” Tom Fitton, president of conservative transparency group Judicial Watch, told The Post in October. “If there aren’t any records, the scandal is much bigger than just a lack of transparency.”
‘Raises Disturbing Questions’: Judicial Watch Gets Records Moderna Gave to FDA About Its COVID Vaccine
Townhall
Among the records is a “nonclinical overview” from Moderna showing a statistically significant number of rats from mothers who were given the vaccine born with skeletal deformations.
Video Highlights
-
-
- FITTON: Hunter Biden Using Joe Biden’s Classified Documents? - Bill Clinton Protected While Trump Targeted! - VICTORY FOR LIFE–Roe v. Wade OVERTURNED!
-
The post BIDEN CRIMES?! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Thanks to pressure from the Air Marshal National Council and Judicial Watch’s reporting, the Biden administration will stop sending Federal Air Marshals (FAM) to the Mexican border to provide illegal immigrants with welfare checks, transportation, and other basic services. The reckless practice left aircraft at risk by sending 150-200 FAM monthly to the southern border to help deal with “a surge in irregular migration.” Judicial Watch was the first to report on the deployments in late October when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sent an electronic memorandum to the highly skilled law enforcement officers informing them of the assignments, which consisted of 21-day rotations that could be extended for up to 120 days.
Judicial Watch obtained a copy of the directive from various recipients at the agency, which operates under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. FAM are charged with protecting commercial passenger flights by deterring and countering the risk of terrorist activity, yet they were plucked from their duties to babysit illegal aliens. “The nation is experiencing a surge in irregular migration along the Southwest Border (SWB),” the October notice to FAM officers read. “The unprecedented volume of Noncitizen Migrants (NCMs) currently apprehended mandates immediate further action to protect the life and safety of federal personnel and noncitizens in CBP [Customs and Border Protection] custody.”
The first wave of air marshals was dispatched to El Paso, Texas and Yuma, Arizona on October 30 for an October 31 start. Thirty officers and a supervisor went to El Paso, 15 officers and a supervisor to Yuma. Here is the important work that the specially trained law enforcement officers were doing on the southern border rather than their critical duty of protecting commercial planes flagged for terrorist threats. “Hospital Watch, Transportation, Law Enforcement Searches, Entry Control, Security at CBP Facilities and Welfare Checks.” In a formal complaint to the DHS Inspector General, the Air Marshal National Council, which represents thousands of FAM nationwide, accused TSA Administrator David Pekoske and FAM Director Tirrell Stevenson of violating federal law and overstepping their authority by assigning air marshals to assist the U.S. Border Patrol with the illegal immigration crisis. The complaint also accused Homeland Security leaders of fraud, waste, and abuse of authority.
Earlier this month when an intelligence alert disclosed that Al Qaeda is planning attacks in the U.S. involving planes, the Air Marshal National Council fired off a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as well as Pekoske and Stevenson reminding them that deploying FAM to the southern border to perform humanitarian work is reckless and putting the nation at extreme risk. Judicial Watch published a story about the threat after obtaining a copy from government sources of the intelligence alert, which was delivered on December 31, 2022, at 12:23:52 Greenwich Mean Time. The caption of the widely circulated warning reads: “Al-Qaeda says upcoming attacks on US, possibly involving planes, will use new techniques and tactics.”
It appears that the combined efforts of Judicial Watch and the Air Marshal National Council have squeezed the Biden administration to end the controversial border missions. A memo dispersed to FAM just days ago says that all future deployments to the southwest border (SWB) have been suspended until further notice. “Wave #5 will continue their deployment until January 27th and then travel home as planned on January 28th,” according to the notice provided to Judicial Watch by various government sources. “Wave #6 will NOT DEPLOY as planned on January 25th.” The missive directs FAM to cancel travel and informs officers that hotel and car rental reservations will be cancelled by the agency. Air marshals nationwide are thrilled that they can return to their critical mission of securing the nation’s transportation system and David Londo, president of the Air Marshal National Council, said “it looks like we won.”
The post DHS Stops Sending Air Marshals on Migrant Welfare Missions along Mexican Border appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story (Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Justice(No. 1:23-cv-00079)).
Judicial Watch filed the suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the FBI failed to respond fully to an August 28, 2022, FOIA request for:
- All alerts, notifications, advisories, foreign threat indicators, or similar records provided by any official or employee of the FBI to any officer or employee of Meta (formerly Facebook), Twitter, or any other social media company regarding the threat of disinformation disseminated by foreign actors related to any U.S. election.
- All records of communication between any official or employee of the FBI and any officer or employee of Meta, Twitter, or any other social media company regarding the laptop reportedly used by Hunter Biden, any news media reporting regarding the laptop and/or its contents, and/or the provenance of any information contained in any such reporting.
In October 2020, in the run-up to the presidential election, the New York Post was able to confirm that Hunter Biden’s laptop, which was abandoned at a Delaware computer shop, contained embarrassing and possibly incriminating information about the Biden family. The Post story was censored by Twitter and other social media platforms despite its accuracy. Recent “Twitter files” released by Elon Musk show that FBI pressure on “Russian disinformation” led to the censorship:
San Francisco FBI agent Elvis Chan “[sent] 10 documents to Twitter’s then-Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth, through Teleporter, a one-way communications channel from the FBI to Twitter,” the evening before the release of the Post story.
Other “Twitter files” show the FBI pushed Twitter to also censor countless Twitter users who tweeted concerns (and jokes) about election integrity just before the 2020 election.
“The FBI was literally paying Twitter to censor Americans just before the 2020 election!” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The FBI seems to have interfered in the 2020 election to help Joe Biden by encouraging Big Tech to censor Americans about the Hunter Biden laptop and other debates. And to add to the scandal, they are now covering up their misconduct.”
Through FOIA Judicial Watch is investigating other instances of censorship.
Judicial Watch is suing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA), a division of DHS, and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to flag online election content for censorship and suppression.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch’s YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. Judicial Watch continues to post its video content on its Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
The post Judicial Watch Files Lawsuit for FBI Documents on Big Tech Censorship of Hunter Biden Laptop Story appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
Former President Donald Trump is taking the training wheels off his third presidential campaign weeks after criticism said that he was not taking his third White House bid seriously.
Trump rounded out 2022 by becoming the first top-tier candidate to throw his hat into the 2024 ring, but since announcing on Nov. 15, he only delivered one speech, a virtual address to the Republican Jewish Coalition’s annual conference, and held exactly zero public events.
Still, in the past week alone, Trump has previewed multiple campaign events to be held in January and early February, including an “intimate” campaign gathering in Columbia, South Carolina, on Jan. 28. Trump also delivered the keynote address at Judicial Watch’s annual roundtable Thursday and will do the same at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Virginia in March.
Read here…
The post Trump’s campaign ‘kicking into overdrive’ after months of inaction appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The New York Post:
The Secret Service said Monday it does not track who comes and goes from President Biden’s Delaware residence where classified documents were improperly stored — despite the 80-year-old commander-in-chief using the home as a weekend White House.
Since taking office in January 2021, Biden has made 52 trips to the Wilmington house, spending all or part of 164 days there, according to a tally by The Post.
“If the Secret Service is doing its job, there has to be visitor records,” Tom Fitton, president of conservative transparency group Judicial Watch, told The Post in October. “If there aren’t any records, the scandal is much bigger than just a lack of transparency.”
Transparency groups have fought for presidential visitor logs with mixed success, incurring notable defeats in federal appeals courts based in Washington and New York.
Read more here…
The post Secret Service doesn’t record visitors at Biden’s ‘weekend White House’ where classified docs were found appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Townhall:
Judicial Watch said Friday it received nearly 700 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services on the data Moderna submitted to the Food and Drug Administration about its COVID-19 vaccine.
The data was released as part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, which was filed in September 2021 after the FDA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases did not respond to an earlier FOIA request.
Among the records is a “nonclinical overview” from Moderna showing a statistically significant number of rats from mothers who were given the vaccine born with skeletal deformations.
Read more here…
The post ‘Raises Disturbing Questions’: Judicial Watch Gets Records Moderna Gave to FDA About Its COVID Vaccine appeared first on Judicial Watch.
President Trump Gives Keynote Address at Judicial Watch Roundtable
ICE Arrests Double in 2022; Thousands with Multiple Convictions, Terrorists, Gang Members
Al Qaeda Plans Plane Attacks as Air Marshals are Assigned to Mexican Border
President Trump Gives Keynote Address at Judicial Watch Roundtable
President Donald J. Trump, the 45th president of the United States, delivered the keynote address last night at our 6thJudicial Watch Annual Roundtable, a private event, which was held at the Trump National Doral in Miami, FL.
President Trump engaged in a historic battle against government corruption and abuse, a battle that continues to this day. We are honored that he addressed and educated our supporters about the ongoing rule of law crisis that so threatens our Republic.
The Roundtable also featured important discussions on the election integrity crisis, the border crisis, the Left/government/Big Tech attack on free speech, the January 6 political prisoners, Biden corruption and more!
ICE Arrests Double in 2022; Thousands with Multiple Convictions, Terrorists, Gang Members
Our southern border has become more of a sieve than a barrier to criminal elements crossing into our country since Joe Biden took office. Disturbingly, terrorists and gang members are among the criminal elements who are brazenly entering the United States. Earlier this month our Corruption Chronicles reported on the ongoing influx:
Arrests of illegal immigrants inside the United States nearly doubled last year over 2021 and tens of thousands had serious criminal histories that include multiple charges and convictions, according to a recently published Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) report. The 80-page document, which contains fiscal year 2022 figures, helps illustrate the devastating impact of the Biden administration’s reckless open border policies which have allowed record-breaking numbers of migrants into the country with minimal or no vetting. This has made ICE’s task overwhelming as the Homeland Security agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws to preserve national security and public safety.
In 2022 ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) apprehended 142,750 illegal aliens in the U.S., nearly doubling the number of arrests it made in 2021, government figures included in the report show. Over 46,000 had a criminal history and an average of 4.3 charges and convictions, including more than 20,000 charges or convictions for assault, 5,500 for weapons crimes, 1,500 for homicide-related offenses, and 1,100 for kidnapping. The agency also removed 2,667 gang members last year, 55 terrorists, seven human rights violators and 74 foreign fugitives wanted by their government for serious crimes such as homicide, rape, terrorism, and kidnapping. In a press release announcing the year-end report ICE writes that the document showcases how the agency has responded to “increasingly complex transnational security threats.”
The language downplays the magnitude of the epic illegal immigration crisis that is gripping the nation and appears to be worsening. Fiscal year 2022 was a record-breaker for illegal immigration along the Mexican border. Besides arresting 2.4 million migrants (up from 1.73 million in 2021), Border Patrol agents apprehended hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist. Federal agents also confiscated thousands of pounds of drugs, mainly methamphetamine. The alarming stats, released a few months ago, depict a chaotic Mexican border region rife with lawlessness that is inevitably seeping north. Keep in mind, the recently released ICE figures include those already inside the U.S., probably living in unsuspecting communities throughout the nation. ICE Acting Director Tae Johnson calls it “complex cross-border and domestic threats.”
The agency also conducted 72,177 removals last year to more than 150 countries worldwide, approximately half of them on charter flights. This includes 256 private, American taxpayer-funded flights to Guatemala, 220 to Honduras, 125 to Haiti and 120 to El Salvador. “Removed noncitizens had a total of 183,251 charges and convictions associated with them, for an average of 4.2 charges and convictions per person,” the report states. This includes 17,336 charges or convictions for assault, 7,370 for sex offenses and sexual assault, 4,711 for weapons crimes, 1,315 for homicide-related offenses, and 953 for kidnapping. “Removal management is a complex process that requires careful planning and coordination with a wide range of domestic and foreign partners and utilizes significant ERO resources,” the report says. “After a noncitizen receives a final order of removal and ERO has coordinated with necessary partners, ICE arranges their removal via a chartered flight, commercial flight, or land transport (for removals to a contiguous country).”
Last year ERO also issued 78,829 detainers for illegal immigrants arrested by local police for state crimes. The offenses include 26,186 assaults, 8,450 sex crimes, 2,934 robberies, 1,911 kidnappings and 1,751 homicides. The year-end report also reveals that an ICE subcomponent known as Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) conducted over 36,000 arrests and identified or assisted 1,170 victims of child exploitation as well as 765 victims of human trafficking. The division also set a record for seized currency and assets of more than $5 billion, an increase of about $4 billion from the previous year. HSI also seized 330 firearms, 43,466 rounds of ammunition and 92,055 pounds of narcotics from Mexican drug cartels, which are officially called Transnational Criminal Organization (TCO) by the U.S. government.
Al Qaeda Plans Plane Attacks as Air Marshals are Assigned to Mexican Border
It’s no surprise that al Qaeda remains threat to U.S. security. While the Biden administration effectively leaves the door wide open, our Corruption Chronicles reports on how Biden’s resulting, haphazard shift of federal law enforcement is disrupting protection measures against terrorism:
While the nation’s Federal Air Marshals (FAM) are busy on the Mexican border providing illegal immigrants with welfare checks, transportation, and other basic services, Al Qaeda is planning attacks in the U.S. involving planes, according to high-level Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sources. Judicial Watch obtained from government sources a copy of the new intelligence alert, which was delivered on December 31, 2022, at 12:23:52 Greenwich Mean Time. The caption of the widely circulated warning reads: “Al-Qaeda says upcoming attacks on US, possibly involving planes, will use new techniques and tactics.”
The threat could not come at a worse time, as the Biden administration leaves aircraft at risk by sending 150-200 FAM monthly to the southern border to help deal with what it calls “a surge in irregular migration.” The deployments will continue indefinitely, according to multiple FAM sources, and the specially trained aviation security specialists are outraged. The agency works under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which was created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. FAM is charged with protecting commercial passenger flights by deterring and countering the risk of terrorist activity. Nevertheless, in late October, the Biden administration began deploying the highly trained law enforcement officers to busy Border Patrol sectors to help with hospital watch, transportation, security and welfare checks at migrant facilities.
Days later the Air Marshal National Council, which represents thousands of FAM nationwide, accused TSA Administrator David Pekoske and FAM Director Tirrell Stevenson of violating federal law and overstepping their authority by assigning air marshals to assist the U.S. Border Patrol with the illegal immigration crisis. In a formal complaint to the DHS Inspector General, the group also accused the Homeland Security leaders of fraud, waste, and abuse of authority. Sending air marshals to El Paso, Texas, San Diego, California, Laredo, Texas, McAllen, Texas, Tucson, Arizona and Yuma, Arizona to transport illegal immigrants and conduct welfare checks has no relation to TSA’s core mission of transportation security, the complaint states. “The statute does not give the Administrator any authority to deploy TSA or FAM employees to the southern border to perform non transportation security related matters,” the complaint to the DHS IG says. “Further, under section (g) the statute describes what the Administrators authority is if an emergency, as defined by the Secretary of Homeland Security, is declared.” The act makes clear that the legislative intent is to only allow TSA to exercise authority and deploy its assets for transportation security, the report to the DHS watchdog confirms.
Hours after learning about the latest Al Qaeda threat, the Air Marshal National Council fired off a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as well as Pekoske and Stevenson reminding them that deploying FAM to the southern border to perform humanitarian work is reckless and putting the nation at extreme risk. “We are once again requesting you immediately stop these dangerous and unnecessary deployments and let our FAMs do what the American taxpayers pay them to do, protect and defend our transportation system,” the letter reads. “We have to ask how can you justify sending FAMs to the border in huge numbers, when the border is in your words secure, and there is no emergency? Yet we have major security incidents happening right now affecting our aviation security.”
Sonya Hightower-LaBosco, a retired FAM who serves as executive director of the Air Marshal National Council, confirmed that FAM are still being pulled off flights at a rate of about 200 a month to serve illegal immigrants at stations along the Mexican border. “They are making sandwiches for them and driving them around like Uber or picking up supplies,” Hightower-LaBosco told Judicial Watch on New Year’s Day. The head of the council, David Londo, called the redeployment of air marshals to the southern border “insane” considering the latest aviation threat from Al Qaeda. “Either they don’t care about aviation security, or they really think it is secure,” Londo said.
Until next week
The post Trump Speaks To Judicial Watch! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch, the government watchdog group, today announced that President Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States, will make a keynote address to Judicial Watch’s Annual Roundtable, a private event, which is being held at the Trump National Doral in Miami, FL, on the evening of Thursday, January 19.
“President Trump engaged in a historic battle against government corruption and abuse, a battle which continues to this day,” stated Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch president. “We are honored he will address and educate Judicial Watch’s supporters about the ongoing rule of law crisis that so threatens our Republic.”
Judicial Watch is a conservative, nonpartisan educational organization that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics, and the law.
Judicial Watch is America’s the largest and most effective government watchdog group and is the nation’s leading open records litigator.
Visit www.judicialwatch.org
The post President Donald J. Trump to Present Keynote Address to Judicial Watch Roundtable Event in Miami, Florida appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Asks for Discovery Concerning President Biden’s Senate Papers
Judicial Watch Sues Pentagon Records About Key Medical Database
Judicial Watch Sues for NIH Communications on Fetal Organ Harvesting
$4.5 Million for Culturally Appropriate Program to Help Asians Quit Smoking
Judicial Watch’s Guide to Congressional Investigations
Judicial Watch Asks for Discovery Concerning President Biden’s Senate Papers
The University of Delaware seems to be in full cover-up mode for President Biden. Here’s the latest.
Our legal team filed an appeal brief with the Delaware Supreme Court, on behalf of Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation (DCNF), asking it to overturn a lower court’s decision blocking the release of the U.S. Senate records of President Joe Biden housed at the University of Delaware.
Biden’s papers include more than 1,850 boxes of archival records from his 36-year Senate career.
In July 2020 we and the DCNF filed a Delaware FOIA lawsuit after the university denied our April 2020 requests for all of Biden’s Senate records and for records about the preservation and any proposed release of the records, including communications with Biden or his representatives (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. University of Delaware, No. N20A-07-001 MMJ (Del. Super.)).
In our appeal brief we ask the court to review a Superior Court opinion issued in October 2022 that found the university had met its burden of performing an adequate search for the requested records. The opinion came after the university had submitted a second affidavit from the university’s FOIA official stating that no state funds had been spent on maintaining the documents.
We argue:
The Opinion should be reversed. The Supplemented Affidavit is nothing more than a document filled with stale hearsay and vague [assertions without proof] which at best shows that the University did not engage in a diligent effort, as required by law, to review Appellants’ Requests. Appellants identified the deficiencies and asked to vet the assertions themselves. The Superior Court, however, simply granted the University “do overs.” Even after multiple attempts, the University has still not carried its burden to prove that the requested records are not subject to FOIA.
Despite two attempts on remand, the University still has not satisfied its burden to create a record from which the Superior Court can determine whether the University performed an adequate search for responsive documents.
We are asking the Supreme Court to overturn the lower court’s ruling and allow us limited discovery “to include at [a] minimum, a deposition of a representative of the University and production of documents … Alternatively, the Court should remand this case with instructions to order the turnover of the requested documents since the University has had more than adequate opportunity to satisfy its burden.”
The University of Delaware has been sitting on Biden’s Senate records for more than 10 years and is desperate to avoid any scrutiny of its secret deal with Biden to hide these records. The latest revelations about Biden’s handling of ‘classified’ records raise even more questions about what Biden is hiding.
“On day one, the White House said President Biden was committed to bringing ‘transparency and truth back to government.’ Apparently, the University of Delaware didn’t get the memo,” Daily Caller News Foundation Managing Editor Michael Bastasch. “It’s shocking they’ve spent years fighting to keep these records hidden from the American people. Hopefully, the Delaware Supreme Court ends the University’s stonewalling.”
Judicial Watch Sues Pentagon Records About Key Medical Database
The Defense Department seems to have something to hide about a key database that could provide insight on issues related to the COVID-19 vaccines.
Undeterred, we sued the U.S. Department of Defense for records and communications relating to the data contained in the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:22-cv-03043)).
The Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch’s Defense Medical Epidemiology Database is a web-based tool designed to provide access to:
[A] subset of data contained within the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS). DMSS contains up-to-date and historical data on diseases and medical events (e.g., hospitalizations, ambulatory visits, reportable diseases, etc.) … The DMED application provides a user-friendly interface to perform queries regarding disease and injury rates and relative burdens of disease in active component populations.
The purpose of DMED is to standardize the epidemiologic methodology used to collect, integrate and analyze active component service member personnel and medical event data …
In February 2021, the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), sent a letter to Department of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin highlighting reports from three whistleblowers about injuries to servicemen and women potentially related to the COVID-19 vaccines:
Based on data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), Thomas Renz, an attorney who is representing three Department of Defense whistleblowers, reported that these whistleblowers found a significant increase in registered diagnoses on DMED for miscarriages, cancer, and many other medical conditions in 2021 compared to a five-year average from 2016-2020. For example, at the roundtable Renz stated that registered diagnoses for neurological issues increased 10 times from a five-year average of 82,000 to 863,000 in 2021.
We sued after the Office of the Secretary of Defense failed to respond to our February 16, 2022, FOIA request for:
- All emails sent to and from Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin (on his official government/military email accounts or non-government email account, in his own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All emails sent to and from Deputy Secretary of Defense Katheen H. Hicks (on her official government/military email accounts or non-government email accounts, in her own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All emails sent to and from Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley
(on his official government/military email accounts or non-government email accounts, in his own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All emails sent to and from Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Hyten (on his official government/military email accounts or non-government email accounts, in his own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All emails sent to and from Defense Department Public Affairs Officer Major Charlie Dietz (on his official government/military email accounts or non-government email accounts, in his own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All reports, memoranda, studies, analyses, directive, and electronic communications produced by or sent to and from officials who maintain the Defense Medical Epidemiology Data base relating to the accuracy of or changes to be made to data contained in the Defense Medical Epidemiology Data base.
The data from Defense Medical Epidemiology Database showing “skyrocketing levels of disease among military personnel,” also were publicized through an image shared on Facebook:
Percentage Increase Over the Average of the Last Five Years: Heart attacks 269%, Cancer 300%, Pericarditis 175%, Myocarditis 285%, Pulmonary Embolisms 467%, Cerebral Infarction 393%, Bell’s Palsy 319%, Guillain-Barre 250%, Immunodeficiencies 275%, Menstrual Irregularity 476%, Multiple Sclerosis 487%, Miscarriage 306%, HIV 590%, Chest Pain 1,529%, Labored Breathing 905%, Neurological Issues 1052%.
Responding to these concerns, an unnamed Defense Department source told Reuters:
The calculations, based on figures from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, are incorrect. Last year’s apparent sharp increases were caused by underreporting for the years 2016-2020. A spokesperson for the Department of Defense told Reuters that due to “data corruption,” the platform showed only a “fraction” of the actual medical diagnoses registered in that period.
The covid vaccines were until recently mandated by the Pentagon, so the cover-up of information that could reflect on the vaccines’ safety is particularly outrageous.
Judicial Watch Sues for NIH Communications on Fetal Organ Harvesting
On April 16, 2021, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) sent out a notice informing the extramural research community (researchers outside NIH from across the United States and in some foreign countries who have been awarded grants through the NIH grant program) that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) was reversing the Trump Administration’s limits on fetal tissue research.
The notice stated: “All research applications for NIH grants and contracts proposing the use of human fetal tissue from elective abortions will be reviewed by an Ethics Advisory Board.” Accordingly, the notice said, “HHS/NIH will not convene another NIH Human Fetal Tissue Research Ethics Advisory Board.”
We have already established collusion between the University of Pittsburgh and the NIH over the fetal organ ‘chop shop’ in the University of Pittsburgh paid for with federal tax dollars. The Biden administration turned the spigot back on for taxpayer funding of this barbarism, and we want the details.
So we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the HHS for records of communications of the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) Office of Extramural Research about the use of human fetal organs (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-03051)).
We sued after HHS failed respond to a July 15, 2022, FOIA request to the National Institutes for Health (a component of HHS) for:
All communications concerning human fetal tissue between the Office of Extramural Research and any of the following entities: (1) University of Pittsburgh (Pitt), (2) University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, (3) the National Abortion Federation and (4) any Planned Parenthood entity.
In February 2020, NIH records showed that the agency paid thousands of dollars to a California-based firm to purchase organs from aborted human fetuses to create “humanized mice” for HIV research.
In June 2020, FDA records showed that between 2012 and 2018 the FDA entered into eight contracts worth $96,370 with Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR) to acquire “fresh and never frozen” tissue from 1st and 2nd trimester aborted fetuses for use in creating “humanized mice” for ongoing research.
In April 2021, FDA records detailed the agency spent tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars to buy human fetal tissue from California-based Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR). The tissue was used in creating “humanized mice” to test “biologic drug products,” and wanted “fresh; shipped on wet ice” fetal organs.
In August 2021, Judicial Watch and the Center for Medical Progress through a separate FOIA lawsuit uncovered HHS documents that revealed nearly $3 million in federal funds were spent on the University of Pittsburgh’s quest to become a “Tissue Hub” for human fetal tissue ranging from 6 to 42 weeks gestation.
In September 2021, we uncovered records and communications from the FDA involving “humanized mice” research with human fetal heads, organs and tissue, including communications and contracts with human fetal tissue provider Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR). Most of the records are communications and related attachments between Perrin Larton, a procurement manager for ABR, and research veterinary medical officer Dr. Kristina Howard of the FDA.
In April 2022, we uncovered records revealing that the Associate Senior Vice Chancellor for Science Strategy and Planning in the Health Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh, Dr. Jeremy Berg, contacted then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Francis Collins, requesting help to combat, “efforts to undermine important science using fetal tissue.” Additionally, the records included a scientific report containing information about grafting human scalp and other tissues onto mice.
$4.5 Million for Culturally Appropriate Program to Help Asians Quit Smoking
Here’s another corrosive way bureaucrats have decided to spend your hard-earned tax dollars, as reported by our Corruption Chronicles blog.
The U.S. government is dedicating $4.5 million to enhance a “linguistically and culturally appropriate” program to help Asians quit smoking. It is known as the national Asian language quitline and provides cessation counseling, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), and in-language materials for tobacco users who speak Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese (CKV). The cash will flow through a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) offshoot called Office on Smoking and Health. With an annual budget of nearly $10 billion, the CDC is the federal agency responsible for protecting public health. It operates under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and claims to work around the clock to protect America from health, safety, and security threats whether diseases start at home or abroad.
In its grant announcement the agency writes that telephone-based quitlines increase quit rates among individuals who use commercial tobacco and are trying to stop. They are also effective in reaching and supporting diverse and low-income populations, according to the CDC. “Limited capacity to provide linguistically and culturally appropriate quitline services may create barriers that contribute to tobacco-related disparities, especially among various subgroups of Asians that speak Chinese (including Cantonese and Mandarin), Korean, and Vietnamese languages (CKV),” the agency writes in the recently published Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), adding that less than half of Asians of CKV descent in the United States report speaking English “very well.”
That poses a public health challenge, the CDC claims, because limited English proficiency reduces access to evidence-based health services. “Since many CKV speakers in the United States come from countries with very high smoking rates among men (up to 50%), providing culturally and linguistically appropriate care is a step towards equitable and effective care,” according to the agency. The millions of American taxpayer dollars will go to one lucky organization that will “operate and promote a linguistically and culturally appropriate nationwide quitline service for individuals who use commercial tobacco products and who predominantly speak CKV languages,” the CDC reveals. The agency explains that it is more efficient to provide a national Asian language quitline rather than rely on states to provide the services.
It is not clear how the agency came to that conclusion considering that a national government-funded Asian Smokers’ Quitline (ASQ) that has served CKV-speaking populations since 2012 has enrolled just 19,000 callers in more than a decade. That information is embedded deep in the grant announcement which is more than 50 pages and states that the CDC will provide continued support for a national Asian language quitline. With the new multi-million-dollar allocation the agency expects better outcomes such as increased use and reach of evidence-based and culturally appropriate quit support services among CKV-speaking people. That includes counseling, medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and digital technologies. The agency also expects “increased successful cessation at greater than 6 months among CKV-speaking people who use commercial tobacco,” according to the grant document.
Tobacco-related disparities are created by a complex mix of factors including social determinants of health, tobacco industry influence and environmental conditions, the CDC writes. Social determinants of health are the conditions in the environments where people are born, live, learn, work, play, worship, and age that affect a wide range of health, functioning, and quality-of-life outcomes and risks. The disparities can affect populations based on factors such as race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender identity, income, and employment status.
In the last few years, the government has spent vast amounts of taxpayer dollars to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate services to a variety of groups. Recent examples include $66.5 million to strengthen COVID-19 vaccine confidence among racial and ethnic minority groups by providing culturally appropriate information, education and outreach involving the shots. Uncle Sam also recently spent $125 million to provide illegal immigrant minors, known as Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC), with a multitude of services in the private sector including medical care, special housing arrangements for delinquent, pregnant and gang-affiliated teens as well as long-term counseling. The services were guaranteed by the government to be “culturally and linguistically-appropriate to the unique need of each individual.”
Judicial Watch’s Guide to Congressional Investigations
Can we expect any serious investigation of Biden administration wrongdoing now that the Republicans control the House of Representatives? Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, provides a rundown in Investigative Bulletin of the House’s investigative agenda:
The new House of Representatives was sworn in early Saturday morning after Kevin McCarthy was elected Speaker on the fifteenth ballot. The House GOP leadership promises an ambitious agenda of investigations, including a special committee on the weaponization of federal agencies, but history is not reassuring. Will the House probes bring real progress—important new information, defunding of bad actors, sunlight on wrongdoing, indictment referrals, impeachment if warranted—or two years of fruitless bickering over documents and testimony?
At Judicial Watch, we run our own investigations and have been holding government officials, Democrat and Republican, accountable for nearly three decades, but we’ll be closely watching the House probes. Republican staff on the House Judiciary Committee earlier released a “road map” to the new investigative agenda, and over at the Senate, ranking Judiciary Committee member Charles Grassley has been digging deep into FBI corruption, releasing letters outlining serious allegations of wrongdoing. We’ve reviewed all the documents and talked to our sources. Here’s our guide to the new Congressional investigations.
Who Is Jack Smith?
No case is likely to dominate the 2023 headlines more than the investigation of former president Donald Trump by new special counsel Jack Smith. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith, a career federal prosecutor, to lead a probe into Trump’s conduct surrounding the events of January 6, 2021, as well as a separate probe of the storage of presidential documents at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. Trump has denied wrongdoing in both cases. Notably, any decision to indict rests with the attorney general, not the special counsel.
The Trump affair screams for Congressional oversight—and apparently will get it. Even before the appointment of Smith, the House investigative road map signaled concerns about an “unprecedented raid on a former president’s home” to seize documents. The roadmap noted that Trump had cooperated with government officials seeking documents before the raid; that “the Biden Justice Department has provided limited justification for this unprecedented action;” and that Justice and the FBI “have failed to sufficiently comply” with Congressional requests for documents related to the raid. Congress will want to take a look as well at the belated disclosure ofclassified documents found at a Joe Biden office in the days before the 2022 midterm elections.
Smith’s unusual career—a path that took him from the office of the Manhattan District Attorney to federal postings in Brooklyn, Washington, Tennessee, and the Hague—is also worth a closer look. From 2010 to 2015, he headed the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section and was at the center of several controversial issues. Among them: the IRS scandal.
In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Smith’s Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Government officials were looking to step up a probe into requests for tax-exemption from organizations with conservative sounding names like “Tea Party” and other “political sounding names,” according to a later report by the Treasury Department’s inspector general. Smith appears to have been a key player in this attempt to silence conservative voices.
According to the documents obtained by Judicial Watch, Smith directed the head of the Justice Department’s Election Crimes Branch, Richard Pilger, to meet with the director of the IRS’s Tax-Exempt Organizations division, Lois Lerner. In one email obtained by Judicial Watch, Lerner discusses an idea that the Justice Department could build “false-statement cases” against tax-exempt conservative groups.
Judicial Watch later obtained additional documents detailing a planning meeting between Justice Department, FBI and IRS officials about possible criminal prosecutions. Thanks to Judicial Watch disclosures, House investigators discovered that the IRS improperly turned over confidential tax records of non-profit organizations to the FBI—sparking a public uproar and forcing the return of the records to the IRS. Read more about the case here and here.
Biden Family Corruption
The other headline-grabbing case in the House roadmap are allegations of corruption involving President Biden’s son, Hunter, and other family members—possibly even the president himself. The House report puts aside the sensational aspects of the Hunter Biden saga—the crack cocaine use, the heavy drinking and hookers, the controversy over a suddenly surfaced laptop computer, a gun, a seemingly endless parade of incriminating, embarrassing, or outright disgusting personal photographs from the laptop—and focuses on the sober case.
Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act litigators are pressing for additional information about the Secret Service’s handling of the Hunter Biden gun case, Biden business dealings, and possible FBI obstruction of a Senate inquiry into Biden business dealings.
“Mounting evidence from the last two years,” the House roadmap notes, “shows that Hunter Biden, son of President Biden, has received preferential treatment from federal law enforcement, who seem to have turned a blind eye to potential national security threats presented by his business dealings with Chinese, Russian, and other foreign nationals.”
The roadmap notes the September 2020 release of an investigative report by Senator Chuck Grassley. That report noted “potential criminal activity relating to transactions among and between Hunter Biden, his family, and his associates with Ukrainian, Russian, Kazakh, and Chinese nationals.” One Hunter Biden business associate charges that Joe Biden was slated for a payoff in 2017. Congress will want to hear from the Biden business partner alleging a payoff of the president and take a close look at the evidence.
The Grassley letters outline an apparent campaign of stonewalling and coverup by the FBI and others in response to Congressional inquiries in the Hunter Biden case. The letters, cited at length in the House roadmap, also note the role of several senior FBI officials and Richard Pilger—the Justice Department Election Crimes Branch chief involved in the earlier IRS scandal—in opening investigations into “the Trump campaign and individuals linked to the 2020 elections.” FBI whistleblowers told Grassley that there was a “double standard” in opening investigations that appeared “to benefit the political aims and objectives of a select few Justice Department and FBI officials.”
Those are serious charges. Congressional investigators will have to steer around numerous roadblocks, including a criminal inquiry into Hunter Biden by U.S. Attorney David Weiss, the top federal prosecutor in Delaware. Fox News has reported that Attorney General Garland—Weiss’s boss—has taken a “hands-off approach” to the Hunter Biden case and is “leaving charging decisions up to Weiss,” a Trump appointee. But Congress may want a look at the Garland connection as well.
FBI Corruption: Faking a Rise in Domestic Violent Extremism?
The House roadmap reports that whistleblowers have come forward with claims that “the FBI is manipulating data about domestic violent extremism to support the Biden Administration’s political agenda.” According to the roadmap, the FBI “is pressuring agents to reclassify cases as domestic violent extremism (DVE)” and allegedly “manufacturing DVE cases where they may not otherwise exist and even manipulating its case categorization system to feign a national problem.”
That’s a grave charge. The issue traces back to the events of January 6, 2021, Congressional investigators say. According to the roadmap, whistleblowers have come forward “with information about how the FBI manipulated the manner in which it categorized January 6-related investigations to create a misleading narrative that domestic terrorism is organically surging around the country.”
According to FBI whistleblowers, FBI field offices around the country have been directed by the powerful FBI Washington Field Office to open cases against individuals who were at Capitol on January 6. But no work is actually done in the field, according to the whistleblowers. Rather, the entire January 6 investigation is run from the Washington office.
The upshot? Notes the roadmap: the “FBI’s case categorization creates the illusion that FBI field offices around the country are investigating a groundswell of domestic terrorism cases, giving the impression that [domestic violent extremism, or DVE] is present in jurisdictions across the nation. In reality, however, the cases all stem from the same related investigation concerning the actions at the Capitol on January 6. Such an artificial case categorization scheme allows FBI leadership to misleadingly point to ‘significant’ increases in DVE nationwide.”
FBI Corruption: Targeting School Boards & Parents
In October, as controversy about Covid masking and the influence of hard-left Critical Race Theory in education rippled through school board meetings across the country, Attorney General Garland issued a memorandum directing the Justice Department and FBI to target local school boards and parents. The FBI would address a purported “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence” against school boards.
Following a national outcry about Justice Department overreach, Garland publicly backpedaled, but did not rescind or disavow the memorandum. In fact, the FBI quickly doubled down. The House road map notes that soon after the Garland memorandum, the FBI established “a new ‘threat tag’ created to apply to school board investigations.” The new “EDUOFFICIALS” threat tag, officials directed, was to be applied to all “investigations and assessments of threats specifically against school board administrators, board members, teachers, and staff,” according to an email obtained by House investigative staff.
Critics charge that the Justice and the FBI has gone too far, chilling legitimate dissent over issues such as Covid masks and Critical Race Theory. Imagine speaking up at your local school board meeting and getting a visit from the FBI. The roadmap claims that “information from whistleblowers show that the FBI has opened investigations with the EDUOFFICIALS threat tag in almost every region of the country and relating to all types of educational settings.”
Big Brother, Big Tech
House leaders are also calling for close looks at the FBI’s relationship with Big Tech powerhouses like Facebook and Twitter. The House roadmap says evidence “shows that the FBI is helping censor conservative viewpoints” on Big Tech platforms. Whistleblower information provided to House investigators “suggests that the FBI and Facebook have a so-called ‘special relationship’ that may threaten constitutional protections and lead to partisan efforts.” Whistleblower allegations suggest that the special FBI relationship includes “Facebook voluntarily sending information that may relate to citizens’ private political speech.”
Elon Musk’s recent “Twitter Files” disclosures have increased pressure for congressional scrutiny of the relationship between government entities and Big Tech. The Twitter disclosures outlined apparent government interference with free speech, suppression of conservative voices, improper banning of then-President Trump from the platform, and censorship of New York Post reporting on the Hunter Biden scandal. Incoming House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan told the Wall Street Journal that the Twitter Files showed the “collusion between big government, big tech and big media” was “worse than we thought.” Jordan and incoming House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer are expected to launch hearings exploring the Twitter Files revelations.
The Border Crisis
It’s not in the road map, but the other House investigations worth noting are upcoming probes into the crisis on the southern border. House leaders have said they will support investigations by the House Judiciary and House Oversight committees into border issues, including a possible impeachment inquiry into Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
The southern border is under tremendous strain. More than two million illegal immigrants were arrested in border crossings in 2022 up to October, a record number—and that’s just the ones that got caught. More than 800 died making the dangerous crossing in the same time period. Mexican drug cartels pound the border in an unceasing drug war. The latest cartel gambit? A plague of fentanyl on both sides of the border.
House investigators want to hear from Mayorkas and other top Homeland Security officials on a wide range of issues, including the unprecedented surge of illegal aliens, the failure of border policing and border security technology, the impact of President Trump’s wall and other Trump-era policies, the influence of drug cartels and drug smuggling, and the entry into the U.S. of violent criminals and terrorists.
We’ll have more on the House investigations in the coming months. And the independent Judicial Watch investigations will continue. Stay tuned.
Until next week,
The post Biden Document Secrets appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Washington Examiner:
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told Secrets he was surprised that Byrd was housed at the base at taxpayer expense.
“How in Lord’s name does the Defense Department get involved in providing security?” he said. “So now the Defense Department is at the beck and call to help manage someone involved in a police shooting? It’s crazy.”
Fitton released 31 pages of documents in the latest release of Jan. 6-related information the watchdog group has uncovered.
Read more here…
The post Ashli Babbitt’s shooter housed at Andrews for six months appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed an appeal brief with the Delaware Supreme Court on behalf of itself and the Daily Caller News Foundation, asking it to overturn a lower court’s decision blocking release of records about the U.S. Senate records of President Joe Biden housed at the University of Delaware.
Biden’s papers include more than 1,850 boxes of archival records from his 36-year Senate career.
In July 2020 Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation filed a Delaware Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit after the university denied their April 2020 requests for all of Biden’s Senate records and for records about the preservation and any proposed release of the records, including communications with Biden or his representatives (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. University of Delaware, No. N20A-07-001 MMJ (Del. Super.)).
In its appeal brief Judicial Watch asks the court to review a Superior Court opinion issued in October 2022 that found the university had met its burden of performing an adequate search for the requested records. The opinion came after the university had submitted a second affidavit from the university’s FOIA official stating that no state funds had been spent on maintaining the documents.
Judicial Watch argues:
The Opinion should be reversed. The Supplemented Affidavit is nothing more than a document filled with stale hearsay and vague [assertions without proof] which at best shows that the University did not engage in a diligent effort, as required by law, to review Appellants’ Requests. Appellants identified the deficiencies and asked to vet the assertions themselves. The Superior Court, however, simply granted the University “do overs.” Even after multiple attempts, the University has still not carried its burden to prove that the requested records are not subject to FOIA.
Despite two attempts on remand, the University still has not satisfied its burden to create a record from which the Superior Court can determine whether the University performed an adequate search for responsive documents.
Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation ask the Supreme Court to overturn the lower court’s ruling and allow the appellants limited discovery “to include at [a] minimum, a deposition of a representative of the University and production of documents … Alternatively, the Court should remand this case with instructions to order the turnover of the requested documents since the University has had more than adequate opportunity to satisfy its burden.”
“The University of Delaware has been sitting on Biden’s Senate records for more than 10 years and is desperate to avoid any scrutiny of its secret deal with Biden to hide these records,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The latest revelations about Biden’s handling of ‘classified’ records raise even more questions about what Biden is hiding.”
“On day one, the White House said President Biden was committed to bringing ‘transparency and truth back to government.’ Apparently, the University of Delaware didn’t get the memo,” Daily Caller News Foundation Managing Editor Michael Bastasch. “It’s shocking they’ve spent years fighting to keep these records hidden from the American people. Hopefully, the Delaware Supreme Court ends the University’s stonewalling.”
Judicial Watch and the Daily Caller News Foundation are being represented by Delaware lawyers Ted Kittila and Bill Green of Halloran Farkas + Kittila LLP.
The post Judicial Watch Asks Delaware Supreme Court for Limited Discovery to Depose a U Del Representative over Biden Senate Papers appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The U.S. government is dedicating $4.5 million to enhance a “linguistically and culturally appropriate” program to help Asians quit smoking. It is known as the national Asian language quitline and provides cessation counseling, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), and in-language materials for tobacco users who speak Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese (CKV). The cash will flow through a Centers for Disease Control (CDC) offshoot called Office on Smoking and Health. With an annual budget of nearly $10 billion, the CDC is the federal agency responsible for protecting public health. It operates under the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and claims to work around the clock to protect America from health, safety, and security threats whether diseases start at home or abroad.
In its grant announcement the agency writes that telephone-based quitlines increase quit rates among individuals who use commercial tobacco and are trying to stop. They are also effective in reaching and supporting diverse and low-income populations, according to the CDC. “Limited capacity to provide linguistically and culturally appropriate quitline services may create barriers that contribute to tobacco-related disparities, especially among various subgroups of Asians that speak Chinese (including Cantonese and Mandarin), Korean, and Vietnamese languages (CKV),” the agency writes in the recently published Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), adding that less than half of Asians of CKV descent in the United States report speaking English “very well.”
That poses a public health challenge, the CDC claims, because limited English proficiency reduces access to evidence-based health services. “Since many CKV speakers in the United States come from countries with very high smoking rates among men (up to 50%), providing culturally and linguistically appropriate care is a step towards equitable and effective care,” according to the agency. The millions of American taxpayer dollars will go to one lucky organization that will “operate and promote a linguistically and culturally appropriate nationwide quitline service for individuals who use commercial tobacco products and who predominantly speak CKV languages,” the CDC reveals. The agency explains that it is more efficient to provide a national Asian language quitline rather than rely on states to provide the services.
It is not clear how the agency came to that conclusion considering that a national government-funded Asian Smokers’ Quitline (ASQ) that has served CKV-speaking populations since 2012 has enrolled just 19,000 callers in more than a decade. That information is embedded deep in the grant announcement which is more than 50 pages and states that the CDC will provide continued support for a national Asian language quitline. With the new multi-million-dollar allocation the agency expects better outcomes such as increased use and reach of evidence-based and culturally appropriate quit support services among CKV-speaking people. That includes counseling, medications approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and digital technologies. The agency also expects “increased successful cessation at greater than 6 months among CKV-speaking people who use commercial tobacco,” according to the grant document.
Tobacco-related disparities are created by a complex mix of factors including social determinants of health, tobacco industry influence and environmental conditions, the CDC writes. Social determinants of health are the conditions in the environments where people are born, live, learn, work, play, worship, and age that affect a wide range of health, functioning, and quality-of-life outcomes and risks. The disparities can affect populations based on factors such as race, ethnicity, sexual orientation and gender identity, income, and employment status.
In the last few years, the government has spent vast amounts of taxpayer dollars to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate services to a variety of groups. Recent examples include $66.5 million to strengthen COVID-19 vaccine confidence among racial and ethnic minority groups by providing culturally appropriate information, education and outreach involving the shots. Uncle Sam also recently spent $125 million to provide illegal immigrant minors, known as Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC), with a multitude of services in the private sector including medical care, special housing arrangements for delinquent, pregnant and gang-affiliated teens as well as long-term counseling. The services were guaranteed by the government to be “culturally and linguistically-appropriate to the unique need of each individual.”
The post U.S. Drops $4.5 Mil on Culturally Appropriate Program to Help Asians Quit Smoking appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Mail:
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton told DailyMail.com that probing Trump and Biden over presidential records does not make sense, but should be treated the same.
‘They created this legal controversy to target Trump and now Trump and Biden are in the same legal boat,’ Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton told DailyMail.com.
‘How did the records get to that office space? Why were lawyers packing for him? That’s unusual. Who had access to these classified records?’
He added, ‘The other big issue is, why was this hidden from American voters just before the election?’
Read more here…
The post Biden smiles and ignores more questions about classified documents appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records of communications of the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) Office of Extramural Research about the use of human fetal organs (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-03051)).
The lawsuit was filed after HHS failed respond to a July 15, 2022, FOIA request by Judicial Watch to the National Institutes for Health (a component of HHS) for:
All communications concerning human fetal tissue between the Office of Extramural Research and any of the following entities: (1) University of Pittsburgh (Pitt), (2) University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, (3) the National Abortion Federation and (4) any Planned Parenthood entity.
On April 16, 2021, NIH sent out a notice informing the extramural research community (researchers outside NIH from across the United States and in some foreign countries who have been awarded grants through the NIH grant program) that HHS was reversing the Trump administration’s limits on fetal tissue research, stating: “all research applications for NIH grants and contracts proposing the use of human fetal tissue from elective abortions will be reviewed by an Ethics Advisory Board.” Accordingly, the notice said, “HHS/NIH will not convene another NIH Human Fetal Tissue Research Ethics Advisory Board.”
“We have already established collusion between the University of Pittsburgh and the NIH over the fetal organ ‘chop shop’ in the University of Pittsburgh paid for with federal tax dollars,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Biden administration turned the spigot back on for taxpayer funding of this barbarism, and we want the details.”
In February 2020, NIH records showed that the agency paid thousands of dollars to a California-based firm to purchase organs from aborted human fetuses to create “humanized mice” for HIV research.
In June 2020, FDA records showed that between 2012 and 2018 the FDA entered into eight contracts worth $96,370 with Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR) to acquire “fresh and never frozen” tissue from 1st and 2nd trimester aborted fetuses for use in creating “humanized mice” for ongoing research.
In April 2021, FDA records detailed the agency spent tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars to buy human fetal tissue from California-based Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR). The tissue was used in creating “humanized mice” to test “biologic drug products,” and wanted “fresh; shipped on wet ice” fetal organs.
In August 2021, Judicial Watch and the Center for Medical Progress through a separate FOIA lawsuituncovered HHS documents that revealed nearly $3 million in federal funds were spent on the University of Pittsburgh’s quest to become a “Tissue Hub” for human fetal tissue ranging from 6 to 42 weeks gestation.
In September 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records and communications from the FDA involving “humanized mice” research with human fetal heads, organs and tissue, including communications and contracts with human fetal tissue provider Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR). Most of the records are communications and related attachments between Perrin Larton, a procurement manager for ABR, and research veterinary medical officer Dr. Kristina Howard of the FDA.
In April 2022, Judicial Watch uncovered records revealing that the Associate Senior Vice Chancellor for Science Strategy and Planning in the Health Sciences at the University of Pittsburgh, Dr. Jeremy Berg, contacted then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Francis Collins, requesting help to combat, “efforts to undermine important science using fetal tissue.” Additionally, the records included a scientific report containing information about grafting human scalp and other tissues onto mice.
The post Judicial Watch Sues for NIH Communications on Fetal Organ Harvesting appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The new House of Representatives was sworn in early Saturday morning after Kevin McCarthy was elected Speaker on the fifteenth ballot. The House GOP leadership promises an ambitious agenda of investigations, including a special committee on the weaponization of federal agencies, but history is not reassuring. Will the House probes bring real progress—important new information, defunding of bad actors, sunlight on wrongdoing, indictment referrals, impeachment if warranted—or two years of fruitless bickering over documents and testimony?
At Judicial Watch, we run our own investigations and have been holding government officials, Democrat and Republican, accountable for nearly three decades, but we’ll be closely watching the House probes. Republican staff on the House Judiciary Committee earlier released a “road map” to the new investigative agenda, and over at the Senate, ranking Judiciary Committee member Charles Grassley has been digging deep into FBI corruption, releasing letters outlining serious allegations of wrongdoing. We’ve reviewed all the documents and talked to our sources. Here’s our guide to the new Congressional investigations.
Who Is Jack Smith?
No case is likely to dominate the 2023 headlines more than the investigation of former president Donald Trump by new special counsel Jack Smith. Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith, a career federal prosecutor, to lead a probe into Trump’s conduct surrounding the events of January 6, 2021, as well as a separate probe of the storage of presidential documents at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. Trump has denied wrongdoing in both cases. Notably, any decision to indict rests with the attorney general, not the special counsel.
The Trump affair screams for Congressional oversight—and apparently will get it. Even before the appointment of Smith, the House investigative road map signaled concerns about an “unprecedented raid on a former president’s home” to seize documents. The roadmap noted that Trump had cooperated with government officials seeking documents before the raid; that “the Biden Justice Department has provided limited justification for this unprecedented action;” and that Justice and the FBI “have failed to sufficiently comply” with Congressional requests for documents related to the raid. Congress will want to take a look as well at the belated disclosure of classified documents found at a Joe Biden office in the days before the 2022 midterm elections.
Smith’s unusual career—a path that took him from the office of the Manhattan District Attorney to federal postings in Brooklyn, Washington, Tennessee, and the Hague—is also worth a closer look. From 2010 to 2015, he headed the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section and was at the center of several controversial issues. Among them: the IRS scandal.
In 2014, a Judicial Watch investigation revealed that top IRS officials had been in communication with Smith’s Public Integrity Section about a plan to launch criminal investigations into conservative tax-exempt groups. Government officials were looking to step up a probe into requests for tax-exemption from organizations with conservative sounding names like “Tea Party” and other “political sounding names,” according to a later report by the Treasury Department’s inspector general. Smith appears to have been a key player in this attempt to silence conservative voices.
According to the documents obtained by Judicial Watch, Smith directed the head of the Justice Department’s Election Crimes Branch, Richard Pilger, to meet with the director of the IRS’s Tax-Exempt Organizations division, Lois Lerner. In one email obtained by Judicial Watch, Lerner discusses an idea that the Justice Department could build “false-statement cases” against tax-exempt conservative groups.
Judicial Watch later obtained additional documents detailing a planning meeting between Justice Department, FBI and IRS officials about possible criminal prosecutions. Thanks to Judicial Watch disclosures, House investigators discovered that the IRS improperly turned over confidential tax records of non-profit organizations to the FBI—sparking a public uproar and forcing the return of the records to the IRS. Read more about the case here and here.
Biden Family Corruption
The other headline-grabbing case in the House roadmap are allegations of corruption involving President Biden’s son, Hunter, and other family members—possibly even the president himself. The House report puts aside the sensational aspects of the Hunter Biden saga—the crack cocaine use, the heavy drinking and hookers, the controversy over a suddenly surfaced laptop computer, a gun, a seemingly endless parade of incriminating, embarrassing, or outright disgusting personal photographs from the laptop—and focuses on the sober case.
Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act litigators are pressing for additional information about the Secret Service’s handling of the Hunter Biden gun case, Biden business dealings, and possible FBI obstruction of a Senate inquiry into Biden business dealings.
“Mounting evidence from the last two years,” the House roadmap notes, “shows that Hunter Biden, son of President Biden, has received preferential treatment from federal law enforcement, who seem to have turned a blind eye to potential national security threats presented by his business dealings with Chinese, Russian, and other foreign nationals.”
The roadmap notes the September 2020 release of an investigative report by Senator Chuck Grassley. That report noted “potential criminal activity relating to transactions among and between Hunter Biden, his family, and his associates with Ukrainian, Russian, Kazakh, and Chinese nationals.” One Hunter Biden business associate charges that Joe Biden was slated for a payoff in 2017. Congress will want to hear from the Biden business partner alleging a payoff of the president and take a close look at the evidence.
The Grassley letters outline an apparent campaign of stonewalling and coverup by the FBI and others in response to Congressional inquiries in the Hunter Biden case. The letters, cited at length in the House roadmap, also note the role of several senior FBI officials and Richard Pilger—the Justice Department Election Crimes Branch chief involved in the earlier IRS scandal—in opening investigations into “the Trump campaign and individuals linked to the 2020 elections.” FBI whistleblowers told Grassley that there was a “double standard” in opening investigations that appeared “to benefit the political aims and objectives of a select few Justice Department and FBI officials.”
Those are serious charges. Congressional investigators will have to steer around numerous roadblocks, including a criminal inquiry into Hunter Biden by U.S. Attorney David Weiss, the top federal prosecutor in Delaware. Fox News has reported that Attorney General Garland—Weiss’s boss—has taken a “hands-off approach” to the Hunter Biden case and is “leaving charging decisions up to Weiss,” a Trump appointee. But Congress may want a look at the Garland connection as well.
FBI Corruption: Faking a Rise in Domestic Violent Extremism?
The House roadmap reports that whistleblowers have come forward with claims that “the FBI is manipulating data about domestic violent extremism to support the Biden Administration’s political agenda.” According to the roadmap, the FBI “is pressuring agents to reclassify cases as domestic violent extremism (DVE)” and allegedly “manufacturing DVE cases where they may not otherwise exist and even manipulating its case categorization system to feign a national problem.”
That’s a grave charge. The issue traces back to the events of January 6, 2021, Congressional investigators say. According to the roadmap, whistleblowers have come forward “with information about how the FBI manipulated the manner in which it categorized January 6-related investigations to create a misleading narrative that domestic terrorism is organically surging around the country.”
According to FBI whistleblowers, FBI field offices around the country have been directed by the powerful FBI Washington Field Office to open cases against individuals who were at Capitol on January 6. But no work is actually done in the field, according to the whistleblowers. Rather, the entire January 6 investigation is run from the Washington office.
The upshot? Notes the roadmap: the “FBI’s case categorization creates the illusion that FBI field offices around the country are investigating a groundswell of domestic terrorism cases, giving the impression that [domestic violent extremism, or DVE] is present in jurisdictions across the nation. In reality, however, the cases all stem from the same related investigation concerning the actions at the Capitol on January 6. Such an artificial case categorization scheme allows FBI leadership to misleadingly point to ‘significant’ increases in DVE nationwide.”
FBI Corruption: Targeting School Boards & Parents
In October, as controversy about Covid masking and the influence of hard-left Critical Race Theory in education rippled through school board meetings across the country, Attorney General Garland issued a memorandum directing the Justice Department and FBI to target local school boards and parents. The FBI would address a purported “disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence” against school boards.
Following a national outcry about Justice Department overreach, Garland publicly backpedaled, but did not rescind or disavow the memorandum. In fact, the FBI quickly doubled down. The House road map notes that soon after the Garland memorandum, the FBI established “a new ‘threat tag’ created to apply to school board investigations.” The new “EDUOFFICIALS” threat tag, officials directed, was to be applied to all “investigations and assessments of threats specifically against school board administrators, board members, teachers, and staff,” according to an email obtained by House investigative staff.
Critics charge that the Justice and the FBI has gone too far, chilling legitimate dissent over issues such as Covid masks and Critical Race Theory. Imagine speaking up at your local school board meeting and getting a visit from the FBI. The roadmap claims that “information from whistleblowers show that the FBI has opened investigations with the EDUOFFICIALS threat tag in almost every region of the country and relating to all types of educational settings.”
Big Brother, Big Tech
House leaders are also calling for close looks at the FBI’s relationship with Big Tech powerhouses like Facebook and Twitter. The House roadmap says evidence “shows that the FBI is helping censor conservative viewpoints” on Big Tech platforms. Whistleblower information provided to House investigators “suggests that the FBI and Facebook have a so-called ‘special relationship’ that may threaten constitutional protections and lead to partisan efforts.” Whistleblower allegations suggest that the special FBI relationship includes “Facebook voluntarily sending information that may relate to citizens’ private political speech.”
Elon Musk’s recent “Twitter Files” disclosures have increased pressure for congressional scrutiny of the relationship between government entities and Big Tech. The Twitter disclosures outlined apparent government interference with free speech, suppression of conservative voices, improper banning of then-President Trump from the platform, and censorship of New York Post reporting on the Hunter Biden scandal. Incoming House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan told the Wall Street Journal that the Twitter Files showed the “collusion between big government, big tech and big media” was “worse than we thought.” Jordan and incoming House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer are expected to launch hearings exploring the Twitter Files revelations.
The Border Crisis
It’s not in the road map, but the other House investigations worth noting are upcoming probes into the crisis on the southern border. House leaders have said they will support investigations by the House Judiciary and House Oversight committees into border issues, including a possible impeachment inquiry into Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.
The southern border is under tremendous strain. More than two million illegal immigrants were arrested in border crossings in 2022 up to October, a record number—and that’s just the ones that got caught. More than 800 died making the dangerous crossing in the same time period. Mexican drug cartels pound the border in an unceasing drug war. The latest cartel gambit? A plague of fentanyl on both sides of the border.
House investigators want to hear from Mayorkas and other top Homeland Security officials on a wide range of issues, including the unprecedented surge of illegal aliens, the failure of border policing and border security technology, the impact of President Trump’s wall and other Trump-era policies, the influence of drug cartels and drug smuggling, and the entry into the U.S. of violent criminals and terrorists.
We’ll have more on the House investigations in the coming months. And the independent Judicial Watch investigations will continue. Stay tuned.
Micah Morrison is chief investigative reporter for Judicial Watch. Follow him on Twitter @micah_morrison. Tips: mmorrison@judicialwatch.org
Investigative Bulletin is published by Judicial Watch. Reprints and media inquiries: jfarrell@judicialwatch.org
The post Judicial Watch’s Guide to Congressional Investigations appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for records and communications relating to the data contained in the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:22-cv-03043)).
The Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch’s Defense Medical Epidemiology Database is a web-based tool designed to provide access to:
[A] subset of data contained within the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS). DMSS contains up-to-date and historical data on diseases and medical events (e.g., hospitalizations, ambulatory visits, reportable diseases, etc.) … The DMED application provides a user-friendly interface to perform queries regarding disease and injury rates and relative burdens of disease in active component populations.
The purpose of DMED is to standardize the epidemiologic methodology used to collect, integrate and analyze active component service member personnel and medical event data …
In February 2021, the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI), sent a letter to Department of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin highlighting reports from three whistleblowers about injuries to servicemen and women potentially related to the COVID-19 vaccines:
Based on data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), Thomas Renz, an attorney who is representing three Department of Defense whistleblowers, reported that these whistleblowers found a significant increase in registered diagnoses on DMED for miscarriages, cancer, and many other medical conditions in 2021 compared to a five-year average from 2016-2020. For example, at the roundtable Renz stated that registered diagnoses for neurological issues increased 10 times from a five-year average of 82,000 to 863,000 in 2021.
The lawsuit was filed after the Office of the Secretary of Defense failed to respond to a February 16, 2022, FOIA request by Judicial Watch for:
- All emails sent to and from Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin (on his official government/military email accounts or non-government email account, in his own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All emails sent to and from Deputy Secretary of Defense Katheen H. Hicks (on her official government/military email accounts or non-government email accounts, in her own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All emails sent to and from Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley (on his official government/military email accounts or non-government email accounts, in his own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All emails sent to and from Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Hyten (on his official government/military email accounts or non-government email accounts, in his own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All emails sent to and from Defense Department Public Affairs Officer Major Charlie Dietz (on his official government/military email accounts or non-government email accounts, in his own name or using an alias) relating to the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, DMED, Sen. Ron Johnson, and/or vaccines.
- All reports, memoranda, studies, analyses, directive, and electronic communications produced by or sent to and from officials who maintain the Defense Medical Epidemiology Data base relating to the accuracy of or changes to be made to data contained in the Defense Medical Epidemiology Data base.
The data from Defense Medical Epidemiology Database showing “skyrocketing levels of disease among military personnel,” also were publicized through an image shared on Facebook:
Percentage Increase Over the Average of the Last Five Years: Heart attacks 269%, Cancer 300%, Pericarditis 175%, Myocarditis 285%, Pulmonary Embolisms 467%, Cerebral Infarction 393%, Bell’s Palsy 319%, Guillain-Barre 250%, Immunodeficiencies 275%, Menstrual Irregularity 476%, Multiple Sclerosis 487%, Miscarriage 306%, HIV 590%, Chest Pain 1,529%, Labored Breathing 905%, Neurological Issues 1052%.
Responding to these concerns, an unnamed Defense Department source told Reuters:
The calculations, based on figures from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database, are incorrect. Last year’s apparent sharp increases were caused by underreporting for the years 2016-2020. A spokesperson for the Department of Defense told Reuters that due to “data corruption,” the platform showed only a “fraction” of the actual medical diagnoses registered in that period.
“The Defense Department seems to have something to hide about a key database that could provide insight on any issues related to the COVID-19 vaccines (which, outrageously, are still mandated for military service members),” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Through FOIA, Judicial Watch has uncovered a substantial amount of information about COVID-19 issues:
- Recently, Judicial Watch received records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, which indicate a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also reveal Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
- FDA records detailed pressure for COVID-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
- NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
- HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
- University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records showed the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines showed a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) revealed safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
- HHS records included emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19.
- HHS records showed that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
- Fauci emails included his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
The post Judicial Watch Sues Dept. of Defense for Records Concerning the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Air Force Records Reveal Tens of Thousands of Taxpayer Dollars Spent to House Ashli Babbitt Shooter and His Pet for Several Months in ‘Distinguished Visitor Suite’ at Joint Base Andrews
Judicial Watch announced recently it received 31 pages of documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, that show U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Judicial Watch Statement on the Passing of Russell Pearce, Patriot and Former Arizona State Senate President
Judicial Watch is proud to have worked with Russell Pearce. He was a hard-working, public-minded patriot who upheld the rule of law in the face of the slings and arrows of the open borders Left. As leader of the of the Arizona State Senate, Pearce was the chief sponsor of commonsense legislation that allowed law enforcement in Arizona to ask for proof of citizenship during traffic stops, as well as the “Legal Arizona Workers Act,” which required all Arizona employers to use the E-Verify system to confirm the eligibility of new employees and penalized employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. Key parts of this legislation survived court challenges and continue to protect Arizona and all of America.
ICE Arrests Double in 2022; Thousands with Multiple Convictions, Terrorists, Gang Members
Arrests of illegal immigrants inside the United States nearly doubled last year over 2021 and tens of thousands had serious criminal histories that include multiple charges and convictions, according to a recently published Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) report. The 80-page document, which contains fiscal year 2022 figures, helps illustrate the devastating impact of the Biden administration’s reckless open border policies which have allowed record-breaking numbers of migrants into the country with minimal or no vetting. This has made ICE’s task overwhelming as the Homeland Security agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws to preserve national security and public safety.
Al Qaeda Plans Plane Attacks Using “New Techniques and Tactics” as Air Marshals Keep Getting Sent to Mexican Border
While the nation’s Federal Air Marshals (FAM) are busy on the Mexican border providing illegal immigrants with welfare checks, transportation, and other basic services, Al Qaeda is planning attacks in the U.S. involving planes, according to high-level Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sources. Judicial Watch obtained from government sources a copy of the new intelligence alert, which was delivered on December 31, 2022, at 12:23:52 Greenwich Mean Time. The caption of the widely circulated warning reads: “Al-Qaeda says upcoming attacks on US, possibly involving planes, will use new techniques and tactics.”
In The News
Watchdog group, NYC settle voter roll lawsuit
The Daily Caller
Judicial Watch moved to dismiss a federal lawsuit on Wednesday it filed against elections officials in New York and New York City after, according to the watchdog organization, the city removed more than 440,000 ineligible individuals from its voter rolls.
These Are The Top 7 Times The Military Went Woke In 2022
The Daily Caller
The U.S. Air Force Academy reportedly offered programming on “gender-inclusivity” over recent years, according to teaching materials leaked in the fall of 2022. The Academy promoted a seminar on “Transgender visibility” in September, and in 2021 it rolled out a new curriculum instructing cadets to avoid gendered language, including words like “mom” and “dad.”
FDA Allows Pharmacies to Sell Dangerous Abortion Drug to Kill More Babies in Abortions
Life News
In November, a watchdog organization sued the Biden administration for information about its decision to expand use of the dangerous abortion drug mifepristone.
The lawsuit from Judicial Watch accuses the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) of repeatedly ignoring its requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Will Section 230 Be Reformed in Light of Twitter Censorship? - NYC Cleans Voter Rolls Thanks To Judicial Watch - Ashli Babbitt Shooter Given Free Pass by Pelosi!
-
The post NEW Ashli Babbit Records! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Thousands of Taxpayer Dollars Were Spent to House Ashli Babbitt Shooter and His Pet for Several Months in ‘Distinguished Visitor Suite’ at Joint Base Andrews
Al Qaeda Plans Plane Attacks as Air Marshals Are Sent to Mexican Border
On the Passing of Russell Pearce, Patriot and Former Arizona State Senate President
Thousands of Taxpayer Dollars Were Spent to House Ashli Babbitt Shooter and His Pet for Several Months in ‘Distinguished Visitor Suite’ at Joint Base Andrews
The shooting death of Ashli Babbitt is discussed frequently by the corrupt liberal media and their allies in Congress. So, it is up to Judicial Watch to uncover the full truth about the ONLY homicide tied to the January 6 disturbance.
We just received 31 pages of documents from the Department of the Air Force that show U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Judicial Watch obtained the records in response to a September 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after Joint Base Andrews, the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, and the FBI failed to respond to three July 2022 FOIA requests about Byrd’s housing at Joint Base Andrews while his name as the shooter of Ashli Babbitt was being withheld from the public by the government (Judicial Watch v U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:22-cv-02948)).
In our complaint, we explained to the court that we had asked all three government agencies for all records relating to the billeting of Byrd at Joint Base Andrews during the period from January 6, 2021, to July 2022, including authorization papers, housing, meals, transportation, and visitor logs.
The documents show that Lieutenant Byrd and a pet stayed in a “Distinguished Visitor Suite” at the “Presidential Inn” (part of Air Force Inns) under a “Capitol Police Presidential Inn Reservation” for the period July 8, 2021, through January 28, 2022.
A representative at Joint Base Andrews informed us that a “Distinguished Visitor Suite” is typically reserved for officers at the rank of O-7 (Brigadier General or higher.).
An August 2021 email from the assistant hotel manager indicates that the U.S. Capitol Police had been paying Byrd’s bills by phone “every 10 days.”
In an email thread beginning in November 2021, an accounting officer from the U.S. Capitol Police asks the Presidential Inn’s assistant lodging manager to provide detailed invoices reflecting all of the charges incurred by Lt. Byrd while staying at the Inn, in an email titled “Reservation Information-USCP [US Capitol Police] guest.” The manager then provides “folios” for Byrd’s reservation at the Inn from July 8 through November 11, 2021. When asked to explain pricing changes for Byrd’s lodging, the hotel manager explains that higher rates were due in part to the fact that Byrd moved from a “Temporary Lodging Facility” into a “Distinguished Visitors Suite.”
The records and an email dated November 15, 2021, indicate the cost of Lt. Byrd’s lodging fluctuated: from $161 in July 2021, to $158 for August 2021, to $184 for September 2021, to $185 for October 2021, and to $165 for November 2021.
On February 7, 2022, the U.S. Capitol Police again asked the hotel manager for detailed invoices for Byrd’s stay. The manager confirmed that Byrd checked out on January 28, 2022, and that there were “sundry items that were used in the room that were not paid for before the guest left.
The email appears to confirm that the Capitol Police were covering the cost of Byrd’s stay at the Presidential Inn, when a Capitol Police accounting officer tried to clarify Byrd’s hotel bill, asking the hotel manager, “So the hotel is charging USCP for the room and pet fee for January 28-30, or not?”
These extraordinary revelations forced out by our FOIA lawsuit show Defense Department facilities were used to provide long-term housing for the Capitol Hill police officer who shot and killed Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt.
In June 2022, we produced DOJ records related to the shooting of Babbitt that included a memo recommending “that the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia decline for criminal prosecution the fatal shooting of Ashli McEntee [Babbitt],” also noting that the shooter, Byrd, “did not create a police report or documents” related to the shooting of Babbitt. A footnote details missing evidence: “During the debrief of Lieutenant Byrd, he did recall writing a few sentences on an evidence bag the evening of January 6, 2021, at the request of a crime scene officer. To date, the bag has not been located by USCP or MPD.”
In November 2021, we received multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records include a cell phone video of the shooting. An audio file of a police interview of the shooter, Byrd, indicates he declined to cooperate.
We previously uncovered records from the DC Metropolitan Police showing that officers reported they didn’t see a weapon in Babbitt’s hand before Byrd shot her and that Byrd was visibly distraught afterward. One officer attested that he didn’t recall hearing any verbal commands before Byrd shot Babbitt. The records include internal communications about Byrd’s case and a crime scene examination report. Investigators who wrote the January 6, 2021, Metro PD Death Reportfor Babbitt (identified as Ashli Elizabeth McEntee-Babbitt Pamatian) note that the possible Manner of Death was “Homicide (Police Involved Shooting).”
We are engaged in a comprehensive, independent investigation into the January 6 disturbance:
- February 2022: we filed an opposition to the U.S. Capitol Police’s (USCP) effort to shut down our federal lawsuit for January 6 videos and emails. Through its police department, Congress argues that the videos and emails are not public records, there is no public interest in their release, and that “sovereign immunity” prevents citizens from suing for their release.
- In November 2021: Judicial Watch – in its FOIA lawsuit asking for records of communication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transaction records of people in DC, Maryland and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021 – told a federal court that the FBI may have violated law in its January 6 probes.
Our investigations and litigation are far from complete, so be sure to check back here often for updates.
Al Qaeda Plans Plane Attacks as Air Marshals Are Sent to Mexican Border
The Biden administration’s disdain for security at the border is echoed in its carelessness with security in the skies. Specially trained sky marshals have been deployed to do routine chores at the border – as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
While the nation’s Federal Air Marshals (FAM) are busy on the Mexican border providing illegal immigrants with welfare checks, transportation, and other basic services, Al Qaeda is planning attacks in the U.S. involving planes, according to high-level Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sources. Judicial Watch obtained from government sources a copy of the new intelligence alert, which was delivered on December 31, 2022, at 12:23:52 Greenwich Mean Time. The caption of the widely circulated warning reads: “Al-Qaeda says upcoming attacks on US, possibly involving planes, will use new techniques and tactics.”
The threat could not come at a worse time, as the Biden administration leaves aircraft at risk by sending 150-200 FAM monthly to the southern border to help deal with what it calls “a surge in irregular migration.” The deployments will continue indefinitely, according to multiple FAM sources, and the specially trained aviation security specialists are outraged. The agency works under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which was created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. FAM is charged with protecting commercial passenger flights by deterring and countering the risk of terrorist activity. Nevertheless, in late October, the Biden administration began deploying the highly trained law enforcement officers to busy Border Patrol sectors to help with hospital watch, transportation, security and welfare checks at migrant facilities.
Days later the Air Marshal National Council, which represents thousands of FAM nationwide, accused TSA Administrator David Pekoske and FAM Director Tirrell Stevenson of violating federal law and overstepping their authority by assigning air marshals to assist the U.S. Border Patrol with the illegal immigration crisis. In a formal complaint to the DHS Inspector General, the group also accused the Homeland Security leaders of fraud, waste, and abuse of authority. Sending air marshals to El Paso, Texas, San Diego, California, Laredo, Texas, McAllen, Texas, Tucson, Arizona and Yuma, Arizona to transport illegal immigrants and conduct welfare checks has no relation to TSA’s core mission of transportation security, the complaint states. “The statute does not give the Administrator any authority to deploy TSA or FAM employees to the southern border to perform non transportation security related matters,” the complaint to the DHS IG says. “Further, under section (g) the statute describes what the Administrators authority is if an emergency, as defined by the Secretary of Homeland Security, is declared.” The act makes clear that the legislative intent is to only allow TSA to exercise authority and deploy its assets for transportation security, the report to the DHS watchdog confirms.
Hours after learning about the latest Al Qaeda threat, the Air Marshal National Council fired off a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as well as Pekoske and Stevenson reminding them that deploying FAM to the southern border to perform humanitarian work is reckless and putting the nation at extreme risk. “We are once again requesting you immediately stop these dangerous and unnecessary deployments and let our FAMs do what the American taxpayers pay them to do, protect and defend our transportation system,” the letter reads. “We have to ask how can you justify sending FAMs to the border in huge numbers, when the border is in your words secure, and there is no emergency? Yet we have major security incidents happening right now affecting our aviation security.”
Sonya Hightower-LaBosco, a retired FAM who serves as executive director of the Air Marshal National Council, confirmed that FAM are still being pulled off flights at a rate of about 200 a month to serve illegal immigrants at stations along the Mexican border. “They are making sandwiches for them and driving them around like Uber or picking up supplies,” Hightower-LaBosco told Judicial Watch on New Year’s Day. The head of the council, David Londo, called the redeployment of air marshals to the southern border “insane” considering the latest aviation threat from Al Qaeda. “Either they don’t care about aviation security, or they really think it is secure,” Londo said.
On the Passing of Russell Pearce, Patriot and Former Arizona State Senate President
Former Arizona State Senate President Russell Pearce, architect of some of the most significant pieces of legislation to crack down on illegal immigration, died at age 75, his family said in a statement released on January 5, 2023.
We are proud to have worked with Russell Pearce. He was a hard-working, public-minded patriot who upheld the rule of law in the face of the slings and arrows of the open borders Left. As leader of the of the Arizona State Senate, Pearce was the chief sponsor of commonsense legislation that allowed law enforcement in Arizona to ask for proof of citizenship during traffic stops, as well as the “Legal Arizona Workers Act,” which required all Arizona employers to use the E-Verify system to confirm the eligibility of new employees and penalized employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. Key parts of this legislation survived court challenges and continues to protect Arizona and all of America.
We fought with Pearce on several fronts to uphold Arizona’s landmark immigration laws.
The Arizona State Senate said in a statement:
Pearce was a God-fearing man and loved his country with all his heart. He was an ardent champion for secure borders and gave his all which it came to preventing the violence associated with dangerous cartel encroaching into our communities. He was passionate about public safety and had a fiery approach when it came to conservative causes, like limited government. He leaves a memorable legacy behind, and Arizona is a better place because of him.
Until next week …
The post Ashli Babbitt Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton made the following statement regarding the passing of former Arizona State Senate President Russell Pearce, architect of some of the most significant pieces of legislation to crack down on illegal immigration
Judicial Watch is proud to have worked with Russell Pearce. He was a hard-working, public-minded patriot who upheld the rule of law in the face of the slings and arrows of the open borders Left. As leader of the of the Arizona State Senate, Pearce was the chief sponsor of commonsense legislation that allowed law enforcement in Arizona to ask for proof of citizenship during traffic stops, as well as the “Legal Arizona Workers Act,” which required all Arizona employers to use the E-Verify system to confirm the eligibility of new employees and penalized employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. Key parts of this legislation survived court challenges and continue to protect Arizona and all of America.
Judicial Watch fought with Pearce on several fronts to uphold Arizona’s landmark immigration laws. He died at age 75, his family said in a statement released on January 5, 2023.
The Arizona State Senate said in a statement:
Pearce was a God-fearing man and loved his country with all his heart. He was an ardent champion for secure borders and gave his all which it came to preventing the violence associated with dangerous cartel encroaching into our communities. He was passionate about public safety and had a fiery approach when it came to conservative causes, like limited government. He leaves a memorable legacy behind, and Arizona is a better place because of him.
The post Judicial Watch Statement on the Passing of Russell Pearce, Patriot and Former Arizona State Senate President appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today it received 31 pages of documents from the Department of the Air Force, Joint Base Andrews, MD, that show U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd was housed at taxpayer expense at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
The records were obtained in response to a September 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after Joint Base Andrews, the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, and the FBI failed to respond to three July 2022 FOIA requests about Byrd’s housing at Joint Base Andrews while his name as the shooter of Ashli Babbitt was being withheld from the public by the government (Judicial Watch v U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:22-cv-02948)).
In its complaint, Judicial Watch explained to the court that it had asked all three government agencies for all records relating to the billeting of Byrd at Joint Base Andrews during the period from January 6, 2021, to July 2022, including authorization papers, housing, meals, transportation, and visitor logs.
The documents show that Lieutenant Byrd and a pet stayed in a “Distinguished Visitor Suite” at the “Presidential Inn” (part of Air Force Inns) under a “Capitol Police Presidential Inn Reservation” for the period July 8, 2021, through January 28, 2022.
Judicial Watch was informed by a representative at Joint Base Andrews that a “Distinguished Visitor Suite” is typically reserved for officers at the rank of O-7 (Brigadier General or higher.).
An August 2021 email from the assistant hotel manager indicates that the U.S. Capitol Police had been paying Byrd’s bills by phone “every 10 days.”
In an email thread beginning in November 2021, an accounting officer from the U.S. Capitol Police asks the Presidential Inn’s assistant lodging manager to provide detailed invoices reflecting all of the charges incurred by Lt. Byrd while staying at the Inn, in an email titled “Reservation Information-USCP [US Capitol Police] guest.” The manager then provides “folios” for Byrd’s reservation at the Inn from July 8 through November 11, 2021. When asked to explain pricing changes for Byrd’s lodging, the hotel manager explains that higher rates were due in part to the fact that Byrd moved from a “Temporary Lodging Facility” into a “Distinguished Visitors Suite.”
The records and an email dated November 15, 2021, indicate the cost of Lt. Byrd’s lodging fluctuated from $161 in July 2021, dropped to $158 for August 2021, increased to $184 for September 2021, $185 for October 2021, and dropped to $165 for November 2021.
On February 7, 2022, the U.S. Capitol Police again asked the hotel manager for detailed invoices for Byrd’s stay. The manager confirmed that Byrd checked out on January 28, 2022, and that there were “sundry items that were used in the room that were not paid for before the guest left.”
The email, appears to confirm the Capitol Police were covering the cost of Byrd’s stay at the Presidential Inn, when a Capitol Police accounting officer tried to clarify Byrd’s hotel bill, asking the hotel manager, “So the hotel is charging USCP for the room and pet fee for January 28-30, or not?”
“These extraordinary revelations forced out by a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit show Defense Department facilities were used to provide long-term housing for the Capitol Hill police officer who shot and killed Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
In June 2022, Judicial Watch produced DOJ records related to the shooting of Babbitt that included a memo recommending “that the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia decline for criminal prosecution the fatal shooting of Ashli McEntee [Babbitt],” also noting that the shooter, Byrd, “did not create a police report or documents” related to the shooting of Babbitt. A footnote details missing evidence: “During the debrief of Lieutenant Byrd, he did recall writing a few sentences on an evidence bag the evening of January 6, 2021, at the request of a crime scene officer. To date, the bag has not been located by USCP or MPD.”
In November 2021, Judicial Watch received multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building. The records include a cell phone video of the shooting. An audio file of a police interview of the shooter, Byrd, indicates he declined to cooperate.
Judicial Watch previously uncovered records from the DC Metropolitan Police showing that officers reported they didn’t see a weapon in Babbitt’s hand before Byrd shot her and that Byrd was visibly distraught afterward. One officer attested that he didn’t recall hearing any verbal commands before Byrd shot Babbitt. The records include internal communications about Byrd’s case and a crime scene examination report. Investigators who wrote the January 6, 2021, Metro PD Death Report for Babbitt (identified as Ashli Elizabeth McEntee-Babbitt Pamatian) note that the possible Manner of Death was “Homicide (Police Involved Shooting).”
Judicial Watch is engaged in a comprehensive, independent investigation into the January 6 disturbance:
- February 2022: Judicial Watch filed an opposition to the U.S. Capitol Police’s (USCP) effort to shut down Judicial Watch’s federal lawsuit for January 6 videos and emails. Through its police department, Congress argues that the videos and emails are not public records, there is no public interest in their release, and that “sovereign immunity” prevents citizens from suing for their release.
- In November 2021: Judicial Watch – in its FOIA lawsuit asking for records of communication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transaction records of people in DC, Maryland and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021 – told a federal court that the FBI may have violated law in its January 6 probes.
The post Judicial Watch: Air Force Records Reveal Tens of Thousands of Taxpayer Dollars Spent to House Ashli Babbitt Shooter and His Pet for Several Months in ‘Distinguished Visitor Suite’ at Joint Base Andrews appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Arrests of illegal immigrants inside the United States nearly doubled last year over 2021 and tens of thousands had serious criminal histories that include multiple charges and convictions, according to a recently published Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) report. The 80-page document, which contains fiscal year 2022 figures, helps illustrate the devastating impact of the Biden administration’s reckless open border policies which have allowed record-breaking numbers of migrants into the country with minimal or no vetting. This has made ICE’s task overwhelming as the Homeland Security agency responsible for enforcing immigration laws to preserve national security and public safety.
In 2022 ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) apprehended 142,750 illegal aliens in the U.S., nearly doubling the number of arrests it made in 2021, government figures included in the report show. Over 46,000 had a criminal history and an average of 4.3 charges and convictions, including more than 20,000 charges or convictions for assault, 5,500 for weapons crimes, 1,500 for homicide-related offenses, and 1,100 for kidnapping. The agency also removed 2,667 gang members last year, 55 terrorists, seven human rights violators and 74 foreign fugitives wanted by their government for serious crimes such as homicide, rape, terrorism, and kidnapping. In a press release announcing the year-end report ICE writes that the document showcases how the agency has responded to “increasingly complex transnational security threats.”
The language downplays the magnitude of the epic illegal immigration crisis that is gripping the nation and appears to be worsening. Fiscal year 2022 was a record-breaker for illegal immigration along the Mexican border. Besides arresting 2.4 million migrants (up from 1.73 million in 2021), Border Patrol agents apprehended hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist. Federal agents also confiscated thousands of pounds of drugs, mainly methamphetamine. The alarming stats, released a few months ago, depict a chaotic Mexican border region rife with lawlessness that is inevitably seeping north. Keep in mind, the recently released ICE figures include those already inside the U.S., probably living in unsuspecting communities throughout the nation. ICE Acting Director Tae Johnson calls it “complex cross-border and domestic threats.”
The agency also conducted 72,177 removals last year to more than 150 countries worldwide, approximately half of them on charter flights. This includes 256 private, American taxpayer-funded flights to Guatemala, 220 to Honduras, 125 to Haiti and 120 to El Salvador. “Removed noncitizens had a total of 183,251 charges and convictions associated with them, for an average of 4.2 charges and convictions per person,” the report states. This includes 17,336 charges or convictions for assault, 7,370 for sex offenses and sexual assault, 4,711 for weapons crimes, 1,315 for homicide-related offenses, and 953 for kidnapping. “Removal management is a complex process that requires careful planning and coordination with a wide range of domestic and foreign partners and utilizes significant ERO resources,” the report says. “After a noncitizen receives a final order of removal and ERO has coordinated with necessary partners, ICE arranges their removal via a chartered flight, commercial flight, or land transport (for removals to a contiguous country).”
Last year ERO also issued 78,829 detainers for illegal immigrants arrested by local police for state crimes. The offenses include 26,186 assaults, 8,450 sex crimes, 2,934 robberies, 1,911 kidnappings and 1,751 homicides. The year-end report also reveals that an ICE subcomponent known as Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) conducted over 36,000 arrests and identified or assisted 1,170 victims of child exploitation as well as 765 victims of human trafficking. The division also set a record for seized currency and assets of more than $5 billion, an increase of about $4 billion from the previous year. HSI also seized 330 firearms, 43,466 rounds of ammunition and 92,055 pounds of narcotics from Mexican drug cartels, which are officially called Transnational Criminal Organization (TCO) by the U.S. government.
The post ICE Arrests Double in 2022; Thousands with Multiple Convictions, Terrorists, Gang Members appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner:
Judicial Watch moved to dismiss a federal lawsuit on Wednesday it filed against elections officials in New York and New York City after, according to the watchdog organization, the city removed more than 440,000 ineligible individuals from its voter rolls.
In July, the organization filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, claiming officials failed to follow parts of the National Voter Registration Act. While the law is best known for the “Motor Voter” provisions, which allow people to register to vote when they apply for, or renew their license. The law also calls for boards of elections to take reasonable steps to remove ineligible voters from their rolls, which includes people who have died or moved.
In its lawsuit, Judicial Watch claimed New York City only removed 22 voters from its rolls, which contain more than 5.5 million voters, over a six-year period.
Read more here…
The post Watchdog group, NYC settle voter roll lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller:
The Department of Defense (DOD) doubled down on “woke” initiatives in 2022 amid rising criticism from experts and politicians that the focus on progressive issues could undercut military readiness.
The U.S. Air Force Academy reportedly offered programming on “gender-inclusivity” over recent years, according to teaching materials leaked in the fall of 2022. The Academy promoted a seminar on “Transgender visibility” in September, and in 2021 it rolled out a new curriculum instructing cadets to avoid gendered language, including words like “mom” and “dad.”
At the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, cadets learned Critical Race Theory as a part of the class curriculum, according to more than 500 pages of documents obtained by Judicial Watch in June. The documents showed lectures titled things like “White Power at West Point” and “Understanding Whiteness and White Rage.”
Read more here…
The post These Are The Top 7 Times The Military Went Woke In 2022 appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Life News:
In November, a watchdog organization sued the Biden administration for information about its decision to expand use of the dangerous abortion drug mifepristone.
The lawsuit from Judicial Watch accuses the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) of repeatedly ignoring its requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act.
The organization requested documents about recent research and testing of the abortion drug mifepristone, as well as correspondence between HHS and the drug manufacturers, DANCO and GenBio. In December 2021, the Biden administration began allowing abortion groups to sell the drug through the mail without any direct patient contact.
Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said they believe Biden officials did not appropriately review evidence about the abortion drug before expanding its use last year.
Read more here…
The post FDA Allows Pharmacies to Sell Dangerous Abortion Drug to Kill More Babies in Abortions appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Newsweek:
The news about the Buffalo Bills’ Damar Hamlin collapsing during a game against the Cincinnati Bengals shocked NFL fans around the globe.
The game between the Bills and the Bengals on Monday was called off after the 24-year-old received CPR on the field and was rushed to the hospital. Information about the extent of his health issues is still forthcoming though the Bills said Tuesday that Hamlin had suffered a cardiac arrest. He remained sedated on a ventilator as of Wednesday morning. On Tuesday night, he was still in critical condition, reported CNN citing the player’s uncle.
Tom Fitton, president of the conservative activist group Judicial Watch, also suggested that Hamlin’s injury could be connected to myocarditis, an inflammatory heart condition that has been reported as a rare side effect of COVID-19 vaccines.
“The NFL pushed the covid vaccines on its players,” Fitton tweeted. “When will the league investigate whether the ‘rare’ myocarditis vaccine side-effect is impacting players—such as making them more susceptible to game-related severe heart injuries?”
Read more here…
The post Was Damar Hamlin’s Cardiac Arrest Related To Covid-19 Vaccine? What We Know appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Al Qaeda Plans Plane Attacks Using “New Techniques and Tactics” as Air Marshals Keep Getting Sent to Mexican Border
While the nation’s Federal Air Marshals (FAM) are busy on the Mexican border providing illegal immigrants with welfare checks, transportation, and other basic services, Al Qaeda is planning attacks in the U.S. involving planes, according to high-level Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sources. Judicial Watch obtained from government sources a copy of the new intelligence alert, which was delivered on December 31, 2022, at 12:23:52 Greenwich Mean Time. The caption of the widely circulated warning reads: “Al-Qaeda says upcoming attacks on US, possibly involving planes, will use new techniques and tactics.”
Judicial Watch and New York City Settle Federal Lawsuit on Voter Registration Clean-Up after City Removes 441,083 Ineligible Names from Voter Rolls
The Judicial Watch lawsuit detailed that New York City’s “own recent data concedes that there were only 22 total” removals under this provision “during a six-year period, in a city of over 5.5 million voters. These are ludicrously small numbers of removals given the sizable populations of these counties.” Moreover, the “almost complete failure of Kings, Queens, New York, Bronx, and Richmond Counties, over a period of at least six years, to remove voters” under a key provision of federal law “means that there are untold numbers of New York City registrations for voters who are ineligible to vote at their listed address because they have changed residence or are otherwise ineligible to vote.”
Judicial Watch: HHS Records Reveal Biden Admin Flights Stopping in Multiple Cities to Drop Unaccompanied Alien Children–Plane Originating in San Diego Stopped in Three Cities
“These shocking documents forced out by a Judicial Watch lawsuit show the Biden administration effectively trafficking unaccompanied alien children, dropping them off in city after city like items for delivery,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Biden open borders crisis is resulting in the most massive child and human trafficking operation ever.”
Hackers Tied to China’s Govt. Steal $20 Mil in U.S. COVID Relief Funds
Nearly a year after Judicial Watch launched an investigation into the theft of U.S. COVID relief funds by foreign hackers, the Secret Service confirms that cyber criminals connected to China’s government stole $20 million in benefits. This includes Small Business Administration (SBA) loans and unemployment insurance money in multiple states, according to a national news story that identifies the perpetrators as a APT41, a hacking group based in Chengdu. The report cites U.S. law enforcement officials and cybersecurity experts who believe the multi-million-dollar theft of government pandemic funds by the Chinese faction “may just be the tip of the iceberg.”
In The News
Biden staying at St. Croix villa of wealthy donors who got state dinner invite
The New York Post
“[First son] Hunter’s laptop and other evidence show Biden’s record of converting his public office into private gain,” said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative transparency group Judicial Watch. “So it is no surprise Biden is getting a free luxury vacation from a wealthy donor who ‘coincidentally’ received primo White House state dinner tickets.”
Biden Admin to Drop Half a Million on Artificial Intelligence That Detects Microaggressions on Social Media
The Washington Free Beacon
The Biden administration’s funding of the research comes as the White House faces growing accusations that it seeks to suppress free speech online. Biden last month suggested there should be an investigation into Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter after the billionaire declared the social media app would pursue a “free speech” agenda. Internal Twitter communications Musk released this month also revealed a prolonged relationship between the FBI and Twitter employees, with the agency playing a regular role in the platform’s content moderation.
Judicial Watch Sues Air Force Academy for Records on Critical Race Theory, ‘White Supremacy’
CNS News
The government watchdog group Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Defense Department because it has failed to release documents concerning “Critical Race Theory” and “white supremacy,” reportedly being taught at the Air Force Academy. The academy is overseen by the Defense Department.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Will Section 230 Be Reformed in Light of Twitter Censorship? - NYC Cleans Voter Rolls Thanks To Judicial Watch - Ashli Babbitt Shooter Given Free Pass by Pelosi!
-
The post Al Qaeda Planning New Plane Attacks? appeared first on Judicial Watch.
While the nation’s Federal Air Marshals (FAM) are busy on the Mexican border providing illegal immigrants with welfare checks, transportation, and other basic services, Al Qaeda is planning attacks in the U.S. involving planes, according to high-level Department of Homeland Security (DHS) sources. Judicial Watch obtained from government sources a copy of the new intelligence alert, which was delivered on December 31, 2022, at 12:23:52 Greenwich Mean Time. The caption of the widely circulated warning reads: “Al-Qaeda says upcoming attacks on US, possibly involving planes, will use new techniques and tactics.”
The threat could not come at a worse time, as the Biden administration leaves aircraft at risk by sending 150-200 FAM monthly to the southern border to help deal with what it calls “a surge in irregular migration.” The deployments will continue indefinitely, according to multiple FAM sources, and the specially trained aviation security specialists are outraged. The agency works under the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), which was created after 9/11 to prevent another terrorist attack. FAM is charged with protecting commercial passenger flights by deterring and countering the risk of terrorist activity. Nevertheless, in late October, the Biden administration began deploying the highly trained law enforcement officers to busy Border Patrol sectors to help with hospital watch, transportation, security and welfare checks at migrant facilities.
Days later the Air Marshal National Council, which represents thousands of FAM nationwide, accused TSA Administrator David Pekoske and FAM Director Tirrell Stevenson of violating federal law and overstepping their authority by assigning air marshals to assist the U.S. Border Patrol with the illegal immigration crisis. In a formal complaint to the DHS Inspector General, the group also accused the Homeland Security leaders of fraud, waste, and abuse of authority. Sending air marshals to El Paso, Texas, San Diego, California, Laredo, Texas, McAllen, Texas, Tucson, Arizona and Yuma, Arizona to transport illegal immigrants and conduct welfare checks has no relation to TSA’s core mission of transportation security, the complaint states. “The statute does not give the Administrator any authority to deploy TSA or FAM employees to the southern border to perform non transportation security related matters,” the complaint to the DHS IG says. “Further, under section (g) the statute describes what the Administrators authority is if an emergency, as defined by the Secretary of Homeland Security, is declared.” The act makes clear that the legislative intent is to only allow TSA to exercise authority and deploy its assets for transportation security, the report to the DHS watchdog confirms.
Hours after learning about the latest Al Qaeda threat, the Air Marshal National Council fired off a letter to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as well as Pekoske and Stevenson reminding them that deploying FAM to the southern border to perform humanitarian work is reckless and putting the nation at extreme risk. “We are once again requesting you immediately stop these dangerous and unnecessary deployments and let our FAMs do what the American taxpayers pay them to do, protect and defend our transportation system,” the letter reads. “We have to ask how can you justify sending FAMs to the border in huge numbers, when the border is in your words secure, and there is no emergency? Yet we have major security incidents happening right now affecting our aviation security.”
Sonya Hightower-LaBosco, a retired FAM who serves as executive director of the Air Marshal National Council, confirmed that FAM are still being pulled off flights at a rate of about 200 a month to serve illegal immigrants at stations along the Mexican border. “They are making sandwiches for them and driving them around like Uber or picking up supplies,” Hightower-LaBosco told Judicial Watch on New Year’s Day. The head of the council, David Londo, called the redeployment of air marshals to the southern border “insane” considering the latest aviation threat from Al Qaeda. “Either they don’t care about aviation security, or they really think it is secure,” Londo said.
The post Al Qaeda Plans Plane Attacks Using “New Techniques and Tactics” as Air Marshals Keep Getting Sent to Mexican Border appeared first on Judicial Watch.
New York City Removes 441,083 Ineligible Names from Voter Rolls Thanks to Judicial Watch!
Happy New Year!
New York City Removes 441,083 Ineligible Names from Voter Rolls Thanks to Judicial Watch!
We just settled a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps to clean its voter registration lists in the future.
We filed the lawsuit in July after the city failed to clean voter rolls for years. The lawsuit, filed under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), pointed out that New York City removed only 22 names under federal law over six years (Judicial Watch v Valentine et al. (No.1:22-cv-03952)).
Our suit detailed how New York City’s “own recent data concedes that there were only 22 total” removals under this provision “during a six-year period, in a city of over 5.5 million voters. These are ludicrously small numbers of removals given the sizable populations of these counties.”
Moreover, the “almost complete failure of Kings, Queens, New York, Bronx, and Richmond Counties, over a period of at least six years, to remove voters” under a key provision of federal law “means that there are untold numbers of New York City registrations for voters who are ineligible to vote at their listed address because they have changed residence or are otherwise ineligible to vote.”
The settlement details how the city responded to our notice about its voting roll deficiencies with a massive clean-up:
[The Board of Elections] notified Judicial Watch that, in February 2022, they removed, pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) of the NVRA, 82,802 registrations in Bronx County, 128,093 in Kings County, 145,891 in New York County, 66,010 in Queens County, and 18,287 in Richmond County, for a total of 441,083 registrations.
[The Board of Elections] notified Judicial Watch that going forward they intend to cancel registrations pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) in each odd-numbered year in the months following a federal election.
Specifically, the city also agrees to track in detail and report its voter roll maintenance efforts through 2025:
For both 2023 and 2025 … the [Board of Elections] will notify Judicial Watch … on or before March 31, by means of separate excel spreadsheets for Bronx County, Kings County, New York County, Queens County, and Richmond County, of the number of removals, including removals pursuant to … the NVRA, made during the previous two years.
The NVRA requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. Among other things, the law requires registrations to be cancelled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections. In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory (Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Inst. (138 S. Ct. 1833, 1841-42 (2018)).
This historic settlement is a major victory for New York voters who will benefit from cleaner voter rolls and more honest elections. We are pleased that New York City officials quickly acted to remove 441,000 outdated registrations from the rolls. We look forward to working together under this federal lawsuit settlement to ensure New York City maintains cleaner rolls for future elections.
We are a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of our work, we assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
California settled an NVRA lawsuit with us and began the process of removing up to 1.6 million inactive names from Los Angeles County’s voter rolls. Kentucky also began a cleanup of hundreds of thousands of old registrations last year after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, we settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after North Carolina removed over 430,000 ineligible names from the voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of our challenge to Maryland’s Democratic legislature’s “extreme” congressional redistricting gerrymander.
In May 2022, we sued Illinois on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.
Robert Popper, Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads our election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
Happy New Year!
As we welcome the new year, we recall a few of our successes in 2022:
We made it more likely that voters in North Carolina will have cleaner elections, and we are making headway for voters in Illinois by challenging its election law permitting mail-in ballots to be received as long as two weeks after Election Day.
We scored a win against two unconstitutional California quota mandates for sex, race, ethnicity, and LGBT status requirements for corporate boards.
We continue to uncover unsettling information regarding COVID-19, including the Biden administration’s extensive media plan for a propaganda campaign to push the vaccine.
I anticipate that Judicial Watch will carry its largest and most important caseload in our 29-year history into 2023 and engage our full arsenal of research, investigations and litigation into critically important public policy fronts. For example, uncovering critical race theory in our public institutions:
We successfully settled a civil rights lawsuit that we filed on behalf of a Massachusetts teacher who lost his position as head football coach after raising concerns about the promotion of critical race theory and Black Lives Matter propaganda in his daughter’s seventh-grade history class.
We uncovered critical race theory instructional materials from the U.S. Military Academy, West Point, including a PowerPoint slide with a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” We are pursuing similar lawsuits against the U.S. Naval Academy and the U.S. Air Force Academy to see if they are teaching similar racist, anti-American propaganda.
We’re certainly eager to learn more about Hunter Biden and apparent efforts by the administration to block investigations.
After the Allied victory over Hitler in 1945, but before the victory over Japan, Winston Churchill found himself in a similar situation of looking both back and forward. He declared: “We may allow ourselves a brief period of rejoicing, butlet us not forget for a moment the toil and efforts that lie ahead.”
Dark clouds hang over our country, but they only motivate us. As Churchill also observed, “This is no time for ease and comfort. It is time to dare and endure.”
We are grateful that you are with us as we enter 2023. All of us wish you and yours a Happy New Year!
I hope you’ll make a special New Year’s contribution in support of our essential work ahead.
Until next week …
The post Big Election Integrity Victory appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The New York Post:
“[First son] Hunter’s laptop and other evidence show Biden’s record of converting his public office into private gain,” said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative transparency group Judicial Watch. “So it is no surprise Biden is getting a free luxury vacation from a wealthy donor who ‘coincidentally’ received primo White House state dinner tickets.”
Read more here…
The post Biden staying at St. Croix villa of wealthy donors who got state dinner invite appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it is settling a federal election integrity lawsuit against New York City after the city removed 441,083 ineligible names from the voter rolls and promised to take reasonable steps going forward to clean its voter registration lists
Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit in July against New York City after it failed to clean voter rolls for years. The lawsuit, filed under the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), pointed out that New York City removed only 22 names under the federal law over six years (Judicial Watch v Valentine et al. (No.1:22-cv-03952)).
The Judicial Watch lawsuit detailed that New York City’s “own recent data concedes that there were only 22 total” removals under this provision “during a six-year period, in a city of over 5.5 million voters. These are ludicrously small numbers of removals given the sizable populations of these counties.” Moreover, the “almost complete failure of Kings, Queens, New York, Bronx, and Richmond Counties, over a period of at least six years, to remove voters” under a key provision of federal law “means that there are untold numbers of New York City registrations for voters who are ineligible to vote at their listed address because they have changed residence or are otherwise ineligible to vote.”
Today’s announced settlement details how the city responded to Judicial Watch’s notice about its voting roll deficiencies with a massive clean-up:
[The Board of Elections] notified Judicial Watch that, in February 2022, they removed, pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) of the NVRA, 82,802 registrations in Bronx County, 128,093 in Kings County, 145,891 in New York County, 66,010 in Queens County, and 18,287 in Richmond County, for a total of 441,083 registrations.
[The Board of Elections] notified Judicial Watch that going forward they intend to cancel registrations pursuant to Section 8(d)(1)(B) in each odd-numbered year in the months following a federal election.
Specifically, the city also agrees to track in detail report its voter roll maintenance efforts through 2025:
For both 2023 and 2025 … the [Board of Elections] will notify Judicial Watch … on or before March 31, by means of separate excel spreadsheets for Bronx County, Kings County, New York County, Queens County, and Richmond County, of the number of removals, including removals pursuant to … the NVRA, made during the previous two years.
The NVRA requires states to “conduct a general program that makes a reasonable effort to remove” from the rolls “the names of ineligible voters” who have died or changed residence. Among other things, the law requires registrations to be cancelled when voters fail to respond to address confirmation notices and then fail to vote in the next two general federal elections. In 2018, the Supreme Court confirmed that such removals are mandatory (Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Inst. (138 S. Ct. 1833, 1841-42 (2018)).
“This historic settlement is a major victory for New York voters who will benefit from cleaner voter rolls and more honest elections. Judicial Watch is pleased that New York City officials quickly moved to remove 441,000 outdated registrations from the rolls. We look forward to working together under this federal lawsuit settlement to ensure New York City maintains cleaner rolls for future elections,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Judicial Watch is a national leader in voting integrity and voting rights. As part of its work, Judicial Watch assembled a team of highly experienced voting rights attorneys who stopped discriminatory elections in Hawaii, and cleaned up voter rolls in California, Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, among other achievements.
California settled an NVRA lawsuit with Judicial Watch and began the process of removing up to 1.6 million inactive names from Los Angeles County’s voter rolls. Kentuckyalso began a cleanup of hundreds of thousands of old registrations last year after it entered into a consent decree to end another Judicial Watch lawsuit.
In February 2022, Judicial Watch settled a voter roll clean-up lawsuit against North Carolina and two of its counties after the North Carolina removed over 430,000 ineligible names from the voter rolls.
In March 2022, a Maryland court ruled in favor of Judicial Watch’s challenge to Maryland’s Democratic legislature “extreme” congressional redistricting gerrymander.
In May 2022, Judicial Watch sued Illinois on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law.
Robert Popper, Judicial Watch senior attorney, leads its election law program. Popper was previously in the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department, where he managed voting rights investigations, litigations, consent decrees, and settlements in dozens of states.
Ethan Leonard, Esq. and Neal Brickman, Esq. of The Law Offices of Neal Brickman, P.C. in New York City assisted Judicial Watch in the lawsuit.
The post Judicial Watch and New York City Settle Federal Lawsuit on Voter Registration Clean-Up after City Removes 441,083 Ineligible Names from Voter Rolls appeared first on Judicial Watch.
California Appeals Court Upholds Injunctions Against Corporate Board Quotas
Exposed: Biden Administration Flights to Multiple Cities to Drop Off Alien Children
Judicial Watch Sues Air Force Academy for Critical Race Theory Records
Hackers Tied to China’s Government Steal $20 Million in COVID Relief Funds
Merry Christmas!
California Appeals Court Upholds Injunctions Against Corporate Board Quotas
This is an important victory for Judicial Watch, as well as taxpayers and stockholders.
The California Court of Appeal has upheld two injunctions against California quota requirements for corporate boards.
Earlier this year, two California trial courts had found (here and here) state quota mandates for sex, race, ethnicity, and LGBT status unconstitutional. On December 1, 2022, the California Court of Appeal denied (here and here) two separate emergency requests by the California Secretary of State to lift the injunctions.
The California courts again have upheld the core American value of equal protection under the law. Our taxpayer clients are heroes for standing up for civil rights against the Left’s pernicious efforts to undo anti-discrimination protections. Our legal team has helped protect the civil rights of every American with these successful lawsuits.
Here’s the background.
We filed a gender quota lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court in 2019 on behalf of three California taxpayers. The lawsuit challenged a 2018 law, Senate Bill 826 (SB 826), which mandated that every publicly held corporation headquartered in California have at least one director “who self-identifies her gender as a woman” on its board of directors. We successfully argued that the quota for women on corporate boards violates the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution. In May 2022, after a 28-day trial, the Superior Court delivered its verdict finding that “S.B. 826’s goal was to achieve general equity or parity; its goal was not to boost California’s economy, not to improve opportunities for women in the workplace nor not to protect California taxpayers, public employees, pensions and retirees.”
In 2020, we filed a separate taxpayer lawsuit challenging Assembly Bill 979 (AB 979), which Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law on September 30, 2020. The bill mandated boards of directors of California-based, publicly held domestic or foreign corporations to satisfy racial, ethnicity, sexual preference and transgender status quotas.
Our lawsuit successfully asked the Superior Court to declare the diversity quota scheme unconstitutional under California’s equal protection guarantee and to permanently enjoin its enforcement. On April 1, 2022, the Superior Court issued a ruling and opinion striking down AB 979’s diversity quotas and granting a permanent injunction in favor of our taxpayer clients enjoining the state from implementing the statute.
Exposed: Biden Administration Flights to Multiple Cities to Drop Off Alien Children
The Biden administration is delivering unaccompanied alien children around the country like packages.
We received 16 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing the nighttime transportation of unaccompanied alien children (UAC) by air from Texas to Tennessee, as well as two other flights making multiple stops across the country.
The Administration for Children and Families, a division of HHS, produced the records in response to an October 2022 lawsuit filed after HHS failed to respond to a May 20, 2021, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-03044)) asking for:
- All documents related to the preparation and logistics involved in the transportation of Unaccompanied Alien Children (UACs) to and from Chattanooga’s Wilson Air Center on May 14, 2021.
- All ACF officials’ internal email communications related to the transportation of UACs to and from Chattanooga’s Wilson Air Center on May 14, 2021.
The records include a May 15 email from a person whose name is redacted to an unnamed person at MVM Inc’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) Transport DFW (Dallas Fort Worth) Command Center detailing charter flights
One flight travelling from SAN-OKC-CHA-EWR [San Diego, Oklahoma City, Chattanooga, Newark airports] via “Swift Air,” which was operating a Boeing 737 with “148 seats” [likely the number of passengers]. It indicates that there would be two buses at the San Diego Convention Center, two buses in Oklahoma City, two buses in Chattanooga, and two buses at Newark.
A second flight, from MFE-ELP-EWR [McAllen, El Paso, Newark] also via “Swift Air,” and a 737, with 150 seats, notes: “Pecos [TX] will be bused to ELP [El Paso] to catch charter flight. 1 bus will report 0800. 2 buses to report at 0800 at Delphi EIS [Delphi Emergency Intake Site]
The records also include a May 13, 2021, email thread from a redacted person at MVM Inc. to RF1Badging@rf1.us[likely Response Force 1] and others regarding an Administration for Children and Families’ (ACF) Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) transport of minors from Kay Baily Hutchison Convention Center in Dallas on Friday, May 14, 2021, before dawn, at 3 a.m.
RF1 Badging then replies, “Please be advised that the following UCs [Unaccompanied Children] … does not match in our system.” He then proceeds to list the details of nine children.
Also in this thread is an email from an individual at Culmen International stating that one of the minors is “not cleared to travel.”
The records include a list for a charter of 36 children from Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico and El Salvador. A handwritten note on the spreadsheet says: “Dallas to Tennessee Air Charter Flight 5/14/2021.” The record notes that the children are to be transported to these shelters: La Casa de Sidney, Lincoln Hall Boys’ Haven, Children’s Home of Kingston, Children’s Village Shelter, and Cayuga Center TFC. It indicates three of the minors are “reunifications.”
(Chattanooga’s unaccompanied migrant minor housing facility, La Casa de Sydney, was closed in 2021 after reports of runaways and sexual battery.)
An undated “Transfer of Custody” form indicates the transfer of six Guatemalan and Honduran children from “KBH” [likely Kay Baily Hutchison Convention Center in Dallas] to La Casa de Sidney.
These shocking documents that we forced out show the Biden administration effectively trafficking unaccompanied alien children, dropping them off in city after city like items for delivery. The Biden open borders crisis is resulting in the most massive child and human trafficking operation ever.
In a May 26, 2021, letter to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Tennessee Senators Marsha Blackburn and Bill Hagerty, along with Tennessee Congressman Chuck Fleischmann, detailed their concerns regarding unaccompanied minors:
We write to seek information on the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) management of unaccompanied alien children (UAC) in federal custody and the facilities used to house them. We are particularly concerned about recent reports regarding the use of Chattanooga, Tennessee, as a central location for resettling UACs in the United States.
There are media reports that, within the last week, at least four planes carrying UACs landed at Wilson Air Center in Chattanooga, Tennessee, before swiftly boarding the children onto buses and transporting them to multiple cities across the southeastern United States for apparent resettlement, with zero transparency regarding what was happening. For months, reports have detailed how thousands of children are being housed in neglectful conditions at mass shelters operated by HHS under a veil of secrecy. We are deeply troubled by the lack of transparency and accountability regarding the conditions that HHS is subjecting these children to.
In September 2021, we revealed HHS documents that list 33 separate incidents of alleged sexual abuse in a one-month time period tied to unaccompanied alien children shelters.
Our investigation and lawsuits continue into the Biden invasion, and we will keep you apprised as events in this crisis warrant.
Judicial Watch Sues Air Force Academy for Critical Race Theory Records
Our military academies are infested with Marxist dogma, and we’re rooting it out.
Our latest action is a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit for United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) training material on critical race theory (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:22-cv-03510)).
We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Air Force Academy, a component of Department of Defense, failed to respond to an August 5, 2021, FOIA request for all PowerPoint presentations used for training and/or classroom instruction discussing critical race theory (CRT) and/or “white supremacy.” We also requested emails about this issue for Air Force Academy senior leadership.
This is the fourth lawsuit on the crisis at our military academies:
On September 23, 2022, we filed a FOIA lawsuit on behalf of Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. (STARRS) against the U.S. Department of Defense for Air Force Academy records regarding “systemic racism,” as well as records of critical race theory at the Academy.
In July 2022 we sued the U.S. Department of Defense for records related to the United States Naval Academy implementing critical race theory in the training of naval recruits.
In June, we received records revealing critical race theory instruction at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.One training slide contains a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” [Emphasis in original]
Marxist critical race theory and its racial division have no place at the Air Force Academy, which is training the next generations of Air Force leadership. And, per usual, the scandal is compounded by the cover-up of records about the propaganda program abusing Air Force cadets.
Hackers Tied to China’s Government Steal $20 Million in COVID Relief Funds
As Congress considers a staggering $1.7 trillion spending bill, it is wise to look at what happens to your tax dollars in the hands of careless bureaucrats. Consider COVID relief money. Combining insult to injury, China hackers have made off with a huge chunk of it, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
Nearly a year after Judicial Watch launched an investigation into the theft of U.S. COVID relief funds by foreign hackers, the Secret Service confirms that cyber criminals connected to China’s government stole $20 million in benefits. This includes Small Business Administration (SBA) loans and unemployment insurance money in multiple states, according to a national news story that identifies the perpetrators as a APT41, a hacking group based in Chengdu. The report cites U.S. law enforcement officials and cybersecurity experts who believe the multi-million-dollar theft of government pandemic funds by the Chinese faction “may just be the tip of the iceberg.”
Back in February Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the SBA as part of an ongoing investigation into the pervasive fraud associated with the government’s COVID-19 cash giveaway. Specifically, Judicial Watch requested memoranda, reports, email communications, investigative reports, and other communications or data concerning the following: COVID-19 Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) deposits originating from a foreign Internet Protocol (IP) address, account holders attempting to transfer funds to foreign accounts of any type and loans approved utilizing a fraudulent social security number. On February 23, the SBA acknowledged via electronic mail that it received Judicial Watch’s FOIA request and issued an official tracking number. So far no records have been provided to Judicial Watch and the SBA is in violation of the federal deadline—20 working days—to produce the information.
Most government agencies practice similar stonewalling tactics and Judicial Watch has repeatedly been forced to file lawsuits to compel the release of records. Our goal as a nonpartisan educational foundation is to promote transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics, and the law. Pandemic relief has been a colossal multi-billion-dollar debacle rife with fraud and corruption. The problem is so bad that the Department of Justice (DOJ) created a COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force to “enhance efforts to combat and prevent pandemic-related fraud.” The special unit has been quite busy prosecuting a multitude of scams, false statements, and money laundering related to pandemic relief. Earlier this year House Republicans issued a report documenting 500 days of massive waste, fraud, and abuse in the American Rescue Plan. It includes more than $783 million in stimulus checks for convicted prisoners including the Boston Marathon bomber, $40 million to expand libraries in Delaware, $2 million for a Florida golf course and $16 million for electric vehicle charging stations in Maine and $20 million to modernize the state’s fish hatcheries. The list goes on and on.
The SBA got on Judicial Watch’s radar because it has disbursed approximately $390 billion to nearly four million small businesses and nonprofits under its COVID-19 EIDL. The program provides up to $2 million in financial assistance to help small businesses recover from the economic impacts of the pandemic. Like many of the other COVID relief initiatives, the government made it way too easy to obtain cash and failed miserably to implement adequate vetting protocols. Officials cited in the recent news article confirm that other federal investigations of pandemic fraud also seem to point back to foreign state-affiliated hackers. The Secret Service admits there are over 1,000 ongoing investigations involving transnational and domestic criminals defrauding public benefits programs and Chinese hackers are key among them. As if it were not serious enough that Chinese hacks are stealing American taxpayer funds, one senior Justice Department official points out the cybercrimes also have serious national security implications.
Besides the SBA’s EIDL, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, passed by Congress to provide over $2 trillion in “fast and direct economic aid” to Americans negatively impacted by the pandemic, also launched another fraud-infested initiative known as the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). In addition to the DOJ’s special task force, federal prosecutors across the nation have charged dozens of individuals with crimes associated with PPP scams. A recent example includes a father and son convicted of illegally obtaining $1.7 in loans. A federal jury in North Carolina convicted the men of money laundering and other offenses with the father sentenced to four years in prison and the son three years. This month the top federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia revealed that in 2022 her office has charged more than 50 defendants in 26 cases of fraud schemes connected to COVID relief that defrauded the government out of nearly $125 million.
Merry Christmas!
Throughout the year, Judicial Watch engages the government in court to expose its never-ending efforts to control us. These legal battles have at times been with the IRS and the Census Bureau, and they have revealed the government wielding power to stay in power.
None of this is new.
The story we celebrate on December 25th – the birth of Christ – occurred amid the ruthless imposition of government authority. In his desire to eliminate any pretender to the throne, Caesar Augustus mandated a census to identify anyone who might challenge him. A census was also a first step in taxing the people.
And so, despite Mary being in her ninth month of pregnancy, she and Joseph travelled to his home, Bethlehem, a week-long journey of perhaps 90 miles through treacherous landscape, and it was there that Jesus was born.
Herod, who ruled over Judea, had been given the title “King of the Jews” by Rome, so when the Wise Men from the East used that title for the Christ child they came to worship, Herod was inflamed. He demanded that the travelers reveal the location of Jesus, but they refused.
This infuriated him even more. It took little effort for him to order the national massacre of all boys under two years old. Warned of this in a dream, Joseph took Mary and Jesus to Egypt for safekeeping, and they didn’t return until Herod was dead.
But once again a despotic ruler would influence the Christmas story. When he heard that Herod’s son Archelaus, who had massacred thousands of Jews, had assumed control of Judea, Joseph resettled his family in Nazareth outside of Archelaus’ power.
These tempestuous events echo loudly in our time. We can take from them the realization that the kings of this earth have no power over the Truth, and, despite the tribulations of our age, we can genuinely be of good cheer.
All of us at Judicial Watch pause from our labors in this season to wish you a Merry Christmas!
Until next week,
The post Court Victory in California! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 16 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing the nighttime transportation of unaccompanied alien children (UAC) by air from Texas to Tennessee, as well as two other flights making multiple stops across the country.
The Administration for Children and Families, a division of HHS, produced the records in response to an October 2022 lawsuit filed after HHS failed to respond to a May 20, 2021, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-03044)), asking for:
· All documents related to the preparation and logistics involved in the transportation of Unaccompanied Alien Children (UACs) to and from Chattanooga’s Wilson Air Center on May 14, 2021.
· All ACF officials’ internal email communications related to the transportation of UACs to and from Chattanooga’s Wilson Air Center on May 14, 2021.
The records include a May 15 email from a person whose name is redacted to an unnamed person at MVM Inc’s Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) Transport DFW (Dallas Fort Worth) Command Center detailing charter flights.
One flight travelling from SAN-OKC-CHA-EWR [San Diego, Oklahoma City, Chattanooga, Newark airports] via “Swift Air,” which was operating a Boeing 737 with “148 seats” [likely the number of passengers]. It indicates that there would be two buses at the San Diego Convention Center, two buses in Oklahoma City, two buses in Chattanooga, and two buses at Newark.
A second flight, from MFE-ELP-EWR [McAllen, El Paso, Newark] also via “Swift Air,” and a 737, with 150 seats, notes: “Pecos [TX] will be bused to ELP [El Paso] to catch charter flight. 1 bus will report 0800. 2 buses to report at 0800 at Delphi EIS [Delphi Emergency Intake Site]
The records also include a May 13, 2021, email thread from a redacted person at MVM Inc. to RF1Badging@rf1.us [likely Response Force 1] and others regarding an Administration for Children and Families’ (ACF) Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) transport of minors from Kay Baily Hutchison Convention Center in Dallas on Friday, May 14, 2021, before dawn, at 3 a.m.
RF1 Badging then replies, “Please be advised that the following UCs [Unaccompanied Children] … does not match in our system.” He then proceeds to list the details of nine children.
Also in this thread is an email from an individual at Culmen International stating that one of the minors is “not cleared to travel.”
The records include a list for a charter of 36 children from Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico and El Salvador. A handwritten note on the spreadsheet says: “Dallas to Tennessee Air Charter Flight 5/14/2021.” The record notes that the children are to be transported to these shelters: La Casa de Sidney, Lincoln Hall Boys’ Haven, Children’s Home of Kingston, Children’s Village Shelter, and Cayuga Center TFC. It indicates three of the minors are “reunifications.”
(Chattanooga’s unaccompanied migrant minor housing facility, La Casa de Sydney, was closed in 2021 after reports of runaways and sexual battery.)
An undated “Transfer of Custody” form indicates the transfer of six Guatemalan and Honduran children from “KBH” [likely Kay Baily Hutchison Convention Center in Dallas] to La Casa de Sidney.
“These shocking documents forced out by a Judicial Watch lawsuit show the Biden administration effectively trafficking unaccompanied alien children, dropping them off in city after city like items for delivery,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Biden open borders crisis is resulting in the most massive child and human trafficking operation ever.”
In a May 26, 2021, letter to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Tennessee Senators Marsha Blackburn and Bill Hagerty, along with Tennessee Congressman Chuck Fleischmann, detailed their concerns regarding unaccompanied minors:
We write to seek information on the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) management of unaccompanied alien children (UAC) in federal custody and the facilities used to house them. We are particularly concerned about recent reports regarding the use of Chattanooga, Tennessee, as a central location for resettling UACs in the United States.
There are media reports that, within the last week, at least four planes carrying UACs landed at Wilson Air Center in Chattanooga, Tennessee, before swiftly boarding the children onto buses and transporting them to multiple cities across the southeastern United States for apparent resettlement, with zero transparency regarding what was happening. For months, reports have detailed how thousands of children are being housed in neglectful conditions at mass shelters operated by HHS under a veil of secrecy. We are deeply troubled by the lack of transparency and accountability regarding the conditions that HHS is subjecting these children to.
In September 2021, Judicial Watch revealed HHS documents that list 33 separate incidents of alleged sexual abuse in a one-month time period tied to unaccompanied alien children shelters.
The post Judicial Watch: HHS Records Reveal Biden Admin Flights Stopping in Multiple Cities to Drop Unaccompanied Alien Children–Plane Originating in San Diego Stopped in Three Cities appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Washington Free Beacon:
The Biden administration’s funding of the research comes as the White House faces growing accusations that it seeks to suppress free speech online. Biden last month suggested there should be an investigation into Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s acquisition of Twitter after the billionaire declared the social media app would pursue a “free speech” agenda. Internal Twitter communications Musk released this month also revealed a prolonged relationship between the FBI and Twitter employees, with the agency playing a regular role in the platform’s content moderation.
Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton likened the Biden administration’s funding of the artificial intelligence research to the Chinese Communist Party’s efforts to “censor speech unapproved by the state.” For the Biden administration, Fitton said, the research is a “project to make it easier for their leftist allies to censor speech.”
Read more here…
The post Biden Admin to Drop Half a Million on Artificial Intelligence That Detects Microaggressions on Social Media appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Nearly a year after Judicial Watch launched an investigation into the theft of U.S. COVID relief funds by foreign hackers, the Secret Service confirms that cyber criminals connected to China’s government stole $20 million in benefits. This includes Small Business Administration (SBA) loans and unemployment insurance money in multiple states, according to a national news story that identifies the perpetrators as a APT41, a hacking group based in Chengdu. The report cites U.S. law enforcement officials and cybersecurity experts who believe the multi-million-dollar theft of government pandemic funds by the Chinese faction “may just be the tip of the iceberg.”
Back in February Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the SBA as part of an ongoing investigation into the pervasive fraud associated with the government’s COVID-19 cash giveaway. Specifically, Judicial Watch requested memoranda, reports, email communications, investigative reports, and other communications or data concerning the following: COVID-19 Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) deposits originating from a foreign Internet Protocol (IP) address, account holders attempting to transfer funds to foreign accounts of any type and loans approved utilizing a fraudulent social security number. On February 23, the SBA acknowledged via electronic mail that it received Judicial Watch’s FOIA request and issued an official tracking number. So far no records have been provided to Judicial Watch and the SBA is in violation of the federal deadline—20 working days—to produce the information.
Most government agencies practice similar stonewalling tactics and Judicial Watch has repeatedly been forced to file lawsuits to compel the release of records. Our goal as a nonpartisan educational foundation is to promote transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics, and the law. Pandemic relief has been a colossal multi-billion-dollar debacle rife with fraud and corruption. The problem is so bad that the Department of Justice (DOJ) created a COVID-19 Fraud Enforcement Task Force to “enhance efforts to combat and prevent pandemic-related fraud.” The special unit has been quite busy prosecuting a multitude of scams, false statements, and money laundering related to pandemic relief. Earlier this year House Republicans issued a report documenting 500 days of massive waste, fraud, and abuse in the American Rescue Plan. It includes more than $783 million in stimulus checks for convicted prisoners including the Boston Marathon bomber, $40 million to expand libraries in Delaware, $2 million for a Florida golf course and $16 million for electric vehicle charging stations in Maine and $20 million to modernize the state’s fish hatcheries. The list goes on and on.
The SBA got on Judicial Watch’s radar because it has disbursed approximately $390 billion to nearly four million small businesses and nonprofits under its COVID-19 EIDL. The program provides up to $2 million in financial assistance to help small businesses recover from the economic impacts of the pandemic. Like many of the other COVID relief initiatives, the government made it way too easy to obtain cash and failed miserably to implement adequate vetting protocols. Officials cited in the recent news article confirm that other federal investigations of pandemic fraud also seem to point back to foreign state-affiliated hackers. The Secret Service admits there are over 1,000 ongoing investigations involving transnational and domestic criminals defrauding public benefits programs and Chinese hackers are key among them. As if it were not serious enough that Chinese hacks are stealing American taxpayer funds, one senior Justice Department official points out the cybercrimes also have serious national security implications.
Besides the SBA’s EIDL, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, passed by Congress to provide over $2 trillion in “fast and direct economic aid” to Americans negatively impacted by the pandemic, also launched another fraud-infested initiative known as the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). In addition to the DOJ’s special task force, federal prosecutors across the nation have charged dozens of individuals with crimes associated with PPP scams. A recent example includes a father and son convicted of illegally obtaining $1.7 in loans. A federal jury in North Carolina convicted the men of money laundering and other offenses with the father sentenced to four years in prison and the son three years. This month the top federal prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia revealed that in 2022 her office has charged more than 50 defendants in 26 cases of fraud schemes connected to COVID relief that defrauded the government out of nearly $125 million.
The post Hackers Tied to China’s Govt. Steal $20 Mil in U.S. COVID Relief Funds appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News:
The government watchdog group Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Defense Department because it has failed to release documents concerning “Critical Race Theory” and “white supremacy,” reportedly being taught at the Air Force Academy. The academy is overseen by the Defense Department.
“Marxist critical race theory and its racial division have no place at the Air Force Academy, which is training the next generations of Air Force leadership,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a statement.
Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch Sues Air Force Academy for Records on Critical Race Theory, ‘White Supremacy’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch Sues Air Force Academy for Records about Critical Race Theory and ‘White Supremacy’
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Air Force Academy, a component of Department of Defense, failed to respond to an August 5, 2021, FOIA request for any and all PowerPoint presentations used for training and/or classroom instruction discussing critical race theory (CRT) and/or “white supremacy.” Judicial Watch also requested emails about this issue for Air Force Academy senior leadership.
Judicial Watch: Decorated Veteran and FBI Analyst Sues FBI after Being Falsely Accused of Disloyalty to the United States
Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed a lawsuit on behalf of FBI analyst Marcus Allen in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina against FBI Director Christopher Wray for violating Allen’s constitutional rights by falsely accusing him of holding “conspiratorial views,” stripping his security clearance, and suspending him from duty without pay.
Removal of Criminal Illegal Immigrants Arrested by Local Police Drops 71% Under Biden
Besides smashing a record for apprehending a ghastly 2.4 million illegal immigrants along the Mexican border last year, the Biden administration is also making history for drastically slashing the number of criminal aliens that get deported. In its first nine months the administration removed 71% fewer criminal aliens arrested by local police compared to a comparable period in 2019 under President Donald Trump.
Judicial Watch: FDA Records Show Significant Number of mRNA Test Rats Born with Skeletal Deformations
Judicial Watch obtained the records through a September 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) failed to respond to a June 2021, FOIA request biodistribution studies and related data for the Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson& Johnson COVID vaccines (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:21-cv-02418)).
In The News
FBI sued for suspending analyst, military vet for espousing ‘conspiratorial’ Jan. 6 views
Just the News
Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit against the FBI for having put on administrative leave an analyst for espousing “conspiratorial views” that suggest support for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
Elon Musk: ‘My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci’
The Washington Times
As Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch chief, tweeted in reply to the swirl of condemnation against Musk: “The Left’s hysterical response to @ElonMusk’s criticism of Fauci (along with slight mockery of transgender extremism) is something else. That they have so much invested in Fauci’s authoritarian approach to public policy speaks volumes.”
Rhode Island Father Stands Strong Against Radical Race and Gender Indoctrination In Public Schools
Legal Insurrection
Westerly, Rhode Island, father Robert Chiaradio was convinced that if only people could see it with their own eyes, they would join his battle to remove Maia Kobabe’s book, Gender Queer: A Memoir, from the high school library.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Ashli Babbitt Shooter Given Free Pass by Pelosi! - Musk TARGETED for Exposing Fauci Corruption! - Merry Christmas from Judicial Watch!
-
The post NEW: Judicial Watch Sues to Expose Critical Race Theory! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) training material records on critical race theory (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Defense(No. 1:22-cv-03510)).
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Air Force Academy, a component of Department of Defense, failed to respond to an August 5, 2021, FOIA request for any and all PowerPoint presentations used for training and/or classroom instruction discussing critical race theory (CRT) and/or “white supremacy.” Judicial Watch also requested emails about this issue for Air Force Academy senior leadership.
“Marxist critical race theory and its racial division have no place at the Air Force Academy, which is training the next generations of Air Force leadership,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And, per usual, the scandal is compounded by the cover-up of records about the propaganda program abusing Air Force cadets.”
On September 23, 2022, Judicial Watch filed a FOIA lawsuit on behalf of Stand Together Against Racism and Radicalism in the Services, Inc. (STARRS) against the U.S. Department of Defense for Air Force Academy records regarding “systemic racism,” as well as records of critical race theory at the Academy.
Judicial Watch in July 2022 sued the U.S. Department of Defense for records related to the United States Naval Academy implementing critical race theory in the training of naval recruits.
In June, Judicial Watch received of records revealing critical race theory instruction at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. One training slide contains a graphic titled “MODERN-DAY SLAVERY IN THE USA.” [Emphasis in original]
The post Judicial Watch Sues Air Force Academy for Records about Critical Race Theory and ‘White Supremacy’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Decorated Veteran and FBI Analyst Sues FBI after Falsely Being Accused of Disloyalty to the United States
FDA Records: Significant Number of mRNA Test Rats Born with Skeletal Deformations
Driver’s License Security Law Delayed Another Two Years over COVID
Decorated Veteran and FBI Analyst Sues FBI after Falsely Being Accused of Disloyalty to the United States
This week, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of FBI analyst Marcus Allen in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina against FBI Director Christopher Wray for violating Allen’s constitutional rights by falsely accusing him of holding “conspiratorial views,” stripping his security clearance, and suspending him from duty without pay (Marcus O. Allen v Christopher Wray (No. 22-cv-4536)).
The FBI revoked his security clearance because apparently, the FBI believes that any views contrary to its own regarding what occurred on January 6 constitutes disloyalty to the United States.
The new lawsuit details Allen’s outstanding military and FBI service:
Because of his outstanding military service, [Allen] was awarded the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal and the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal. In 2004, [Allen] was designated the Marine Corps Intelligence Activity Runner-Up for Intelligence NCO of the year.
In 2015, [Allen] joined the FBI as a staff operations specialist. Among other tasks, he has provided ad hoc all-source analytical support to the FBI Charlotte Field Office Joint Terrorism Task Force. He has consistently been rated “Exceeds Fully Successful” on his FBI performance evaluations. He received the FBI Charlotte Field Office Employee of the Year Award in 2019.
[Allen] first received a Top Secret security clearance in early 2001.
Despite Allen’s exemplary service, in a January 10, 2022, letter the FBI asserted:
The Security Division has learned you have espoused conspiratorial views both orally and in writing and promoted unreliable information which indicates support for the events of January 6th. These allegations raise sufficient concerns about your allegiance to the United States and your judgment to warrant a suspension of your clearance pending further investigation.
In a February 17, 2022, letter the FBI further notified Allen that he was being placed on administrative leave without pay due to the suspension of his security clearance.
The lawsuit states:
[Allen’s] allegiance is to the United States, as he has demonstrated during his years of exemplary military and law enforcement service to his country.
[Allen] was not involved in the events of January 6 and did not support them in any material way. The FBI has made no allegation or offered any evidence to the contrary.
[Allen] has expressed no view that could be reasonably interpreted as personally expressing support or sympathy for any unlawful activity that occurred on January 6.
The FBI has not identified any specific statements or actions supporting its contention that Plaintiff has done otherwise.
We contend that the FBI did not give Allen a chance to clear himself, despite his repeated inquiries. In early May 2022, however, the FBI requested that Allen appear for an interview. He promptly complied. The interview request came only days after FBI Director Wray was confronted by members of Congress over concerns that the FBI was weaponizing the security clearance process to target politically conservative employees. Since that time, Allen has received no further word on the status of the FBI’s investigation.
On June 7, 2022, Rep. Jim Jordan, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Wray regarding the firing of FBI employees, noting that, “Multiple whistleblowers have called it a ‘purge’ of FBI employees holding conservative views.”
The lawsuit alleges several violations of Allen’s First and Fifth Amendment rights and asks that Allen’s security clearance and employment be restored.
The FBI can’t purge employees based on political smears. We are reminding the FBI that it is not above the law with this civil rights lawsuit for Mr. Allen, a decorated Marine veteran and highly regarded FBI employee.
FDA Records: Significant Number of mRNA Test Rats Born with Skeletal Deformations
We continue to investigate the government’s approval of the COVID vaccines.
Most recently, we received 699 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, which indicate a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine.
The documents also reveal Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
We obtained the records through a September 2021 FOIA lawsuit we filed after the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) failed to respond to a June 2021 FOIA request biodistribution studies and related data for the Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccines (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:21-cv-02418)).
These previously hidden records about the COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy studies raise a number of disturbing questions. The fact that it has taken a federal lawsuit to get access to this material is yet another scandal.
The records include a “Nonclinical Overview” prepared by Moderna and submitted to the FDA for approval of its vaccine revealing that a number of rats were born with skeletal deformations, known as “wavy ribs” and “rib nodules,” to mothers injected with the mRNA vaccine. The study dismissed the anomalies as “not considered adverse:”
mRNA-1273-related variations in skeletal examination included statistically significant increases in the number of F1 rats with 1 or more wavy ribs and 1 or more rib nodules. Wavy ribs appeared in 6 fetuses and 4 litters with a fetal prevalence of 4.03% and a litter prevalence of 18.2%. Rib nodules appeared in 5 of those 6 fetuses. Skeletal variations are structural changes that do not impact development or function of a developing embryo, are considered reversible, and often correlate with maternal toxicity and/or lack of other indicators of developmental toxicity (Carney and Kimmel 2007). Maternal toxicity in the form of clinical observations was observed for 5 days following the last dose (GD 13), correlating with the most sensitive period for rib development in rats (GDs 14 to 17). Furthermore, there were no other indicators of mRNA-1273-related developmental toxicity observed, including delayed ossification; therefore, these common skeletal variations were not considered adverse.
(Non-adverse deformations receive a different perspective in the July 2009 Environmental Research article, “Dose–response relationships of rat fetal skeleton variations: Relevance for risk assessment:”
(Whether or not a substance-induced increase in the incidence of fetal skeleton variations should be taken into account for human risk assessment is a long-standing controversial issue. It has been argued that chemical-produced increases in variations are not to be considered for risk assessment because they are “unlikely to adversely affect survival or health.” The counter argument is that even not being overtly adverse and conveying no apparent selective disadvantage, a treatment-induced increase in the occurrence of variations means that the chemical agent has the potential to perturb skeleton development. According to this view, under a different condition of exposure, or in another species, this perturbation of normal bone formation may give rise to a different and more severe outcome.))
A “Pharmacokinetics Written Summary” marked “Confidential,” indicates that the information it contains is related to the mRNA-1273 (Moderna vaccine) strain; however, much of the data comes from work with mRNA-1647. The study states:
The results of a biodistribution study of mRNA-1647 support the development of mRNA-1273.
The biodistribution of mRNA-1647 was evaluated in a non-Good Laboratory Practice (GLP), single-dose, intramuscular (IM) injection study in Sprague Dawley rats…. mRNAs that are within an LNP of the same composition (e.g., mRNA-1273 and mRNA-1647) are expected to distribute similarly.
mRNA-1273 is Moderna’s covid vaccine, which was delivered to the National Institutes of Health in February 2020 for study. mRNA-1647 is a previously developed vaccine for the cytomegalovirus.
The “Summary” indicates:
- No absorption studies with mRNA-1273 [used in Moderna’s COVID vaccine] have been performed.
- No metabolism studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
- No excretion studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
- No PK [pharmacokinetic] studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
- No other PK studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
(According to PubMed.gov, “Pharmacokinetics studies are performed to clarify the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of drug candidates…[and] are required for establishing the efficacy and safety in humans.”)
A separate study submitted to the FDA sponsored by Moderna Therapeutics Inc. and conducted by Charles River Laboratories in Montreal, Canada, is titled “A Single Dose Intramuscular Injection Tissue Distribution Study of mRNA-1647 in Male Sprague-Dawley Rats” in which “[t]he objective … was to determine the tissue distribution of mRNA-1647,” as opposed to mRNA-1273 used in Moderna’s COVID vaccine.
In one appendix to the study, a “clarification” was issued in the toxicokinetic report regarding the half-life of mRNA injected into the rats, noting: “The average value of terminal half-life for the muscle (i.e. injection site) in Sections 4.2 and 5 of the toxicokinetic report should be read 14.9 [hours] instead of 8.39 [hours] based on the results of the toxicokinetic evaluation.”
The study further notes that the wording of the conclusion was modified to read, “The half-life … of mRNA-1647 was reliably estimated in muscle (site of injection), proximal popliteal and axillary distal lymph nodes, and spleen with average values for all construct t½ [half-life] of 14.9 8.39, 34.8, 31.1 and 63.0 hours, respectively.” [Emphasis in original]
Another appendix, titled “Summary Mean (±SE) mRNA-1647 Pharmacokinetic Parameters in Sprague-Dawley Rat in Plasma and Tissues Following 100μg Intramuscular Injection Administration of mRNA-1647 on Day 1,” reveals that, in addition to distributing to the muscle site, lymph nodes and spleen, the mRNA particles also distributed to the bone marrow, brain, eyes, heart, liver, lungs, stomach and testes.
A separate study indicates that the mRNA-1647 particles injected into rats were “observed in muscle (i.e. site of injection), followed by proximal (popliteal) lymph nodes, axillary lymph nodes and spleen, suggesting the mRNA-1647 distribution to the circulation by lymph flow.” (The mRNA was delivered via “lipid nanoparticle dispersion.”)
Through FOIA we have uncovered a substantial amount of information regarding COVID-19 issues:
- In October 2020, we received FDA records that detailed pressure for COVID-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
- NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
- HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
- University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records show the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines show a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) reveal safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
- HHS records include emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19.
- HHS records show that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
- Fauci emails include his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
Driver’s License Security Law Delayed Another Two Years over COVID
The Biden administration is not in a hurry to enact a commonsense safeguard, adopted after the 9/11 attack in 2001, to protect against the misuse of driver’s licenses by terrorists. Two decades later, we’re still waiting, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
More than two decades after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil, the Biden administration is using COVID-19 as an excuse to further delay enforcement of a law requiring minimum security standards for driver’s licenses and identification cards. The measure, known as the REAL ID Act, was passed by Congress after 9/11 to establish a more secure national system less prone to fraud after several of the hijackers exploited loopholes to obtain dozens of driver’s licenses from various states. The cards allowed them to take flight lessons and board planes to carry out the 2001 attacks. At the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission Congress passed the law in 2005 and states originally had until 2011 to comply, though the Obama administration tried to drastically weaken the legislation. Obama Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano granted a 20-month extension on the deadline as she worked behind the scenes to undermine the REAL ID Act, asserting that it violates civil liberties and privacy.
In the fall of 2020 the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that, after multiple delays, all 50 states were finally in full compliance with the REAL ID Act with most states becoming compliant under pressure from the Trump administration. “To date, the 50 states have issued more than 105 million REAL ID-compliant driver’s licenses and identification cards, representing 38 percent of all driver’s licenses and identification card holders,” DHS revealed at the time. In less than a year full enforcement of REAL ID will take effect at all federally regulated airports, federal facilities, and nuclear power plants, the 2020 bulletin further states. That means federal agencies, such as the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), will be prohibited from accepting licenses and ID cards that do not meet the law’s standards. Though it was welcome news at the time, it was still outrageous that it took 15 years after Congress passed the legislation to protect national security.
This month, the Biden administration is extending REAL ID full enforcement for another two years to give states more time to ensure residents have driver’s licenses and identification cards that meet the law’s security standards. “The extension is necessary, in part, to address the lingering impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the ability to obtain a REAL ID driver’s license or identification card,” according to a DHS notice issued last week. The pandemic hindered REAL ID progress, the agency writes, because state driver’s licensing agencies had to work through backlogs and many automatically extended license expiration dates and shifted operations to appointment only. Keep in mind the agencies had more than enough time to comply before COVID. Rest assured however, DHS continues to work closely with states to finally meet REAL ID requirements, according to Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. “We will continue to ensure that the American public can travel safely,” Mayorkas said.
The continued delays are inexcusable considering what is at stake. The measure’s crucial verification process requires states to certify the authenticity of every driver’s license applicant by requiring that documents, such as a birth certificate or passport, be submitted to get the card are legitimate and that the applicant is in the United States legally. It also calls for a newly created federal database to link all licensing information that must be checked before states issue new cards. This will establish a much-needed standardized national driver’s license system less vulnerable to fraud and will prevent terrorists from abusing it as did September 11 hijackers. Once the law is fully enforced, federal agencies will be prohibited from accepting driver’s licenses or ID cards from noncompliant states for official purposes, including boarding an aircraft, accessing a federal facility, and entering a nuclear power plant.
It is not clear how the Biden administration plans to handle the dozen states—including Arkansas, California, Maine, and Oregon as well as the District of Columbia—that offer gender-neutral licenses and ID cards in violation of the REAL ID Act. Title II of the act specifically states that “features on each driver’s license and identification card issued to a person by the State” must include: The person’s full legal name; the person’s date of birth; the person’s gender; the person’s driver’s license or identification card number; a digital photograph of the person; the person’s address of principle residence; the person’s signature; physical security features designed to prevent tampering, counterfeiting or duplication of the document for fraudulent purposes; a common machine-readable technology with defined minimum data elements.
Until next week,
The post Decorated Vet, FBI Analyst Sues FBI appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit against the FBI for having put on administrative leave an analyst for espousing “conspiratorial views” that suggest support for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
Read more here…
The post FBI sued for suspending analyst, military vet for espousing ‘conspiratorial’ Jan. 6 views appeared first on Judicial Watch.
‘Multiple whistleblowers have called it a “purge” of FBI employees holding conservative views’ – Rep. Jim Jordan
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a lawsuit on behalf of FBI analyst Marcus Allen in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina against FBI Director Christopher Wray for violating Allen’s constitutional rights by falsely accusing him of holding “conspiratorial views,” stripping his security clearance, and suspending him from duty without pay (Marcus O. Allen v Christopher Wray (No. 22-cv-4536)).The FBI revoked his security clearance because apparently the FBI believes that any views contrary to its own regarding what occurred on January 6 constitutes disloyalty to the United States.
The new lawsuit details Allen’s outstanding military and FBI service:
Because of his outstanding military service, [Allen] was awarded the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal and the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal. In 2004, [Allen] was designated the Marine Corps Intelligence Activity Runner-Up for Intelligence NCO of the year.
In 2015, [Allen] joined the FBI as a staff operations specialist. Among other tasks, he has provided ad hoc all-source analytical support to the FBI Charlotte Field Office Joint Terrorism Task Force. He has consistently been rated “Exceeds Fully Successful” on his FBI performance evaluations. He received the FBI Charlotte Field Office Employee of the Year Award in 2019.
[Allen] first received a Top Secret security clearance in early 2001.
Despite Allen’s exemplary service, in a January 10, 2022, letter the FBI asserted:
The Security Division has learned you have espoused conspiratorial views both orally and in writing and promoted unreliable information which indicates support for the events of January 6th. These allegations raise sufficient concerns about your allegiance to the United States and your judgment to warrant a suspension of your clearance pending further investigation.
In a February 17, 2022, letter the FBI further notified Allen that he was being placed on administrative leave without pay due to the suspension of his security clearance.
The lawsuit states:
[Allen’s] allegiance is to the United States, as he has demonstrated during his years of exemplary military and law enforcement service to his country.
[Allen] was not involved in the events of January 6 and did not support them in any material way. The FBI has made no allegation or offered any evidence to the contrary.
[Allen] has expressed no view that could be reasonably interpreted as personally expressing support or sympathy for any unlawful activity that occurred on January 6.
The FBI has not identified any specific statements or actions supporting its contention that Plaintiff has done otherwise.
Judicial Watch contends that the FBI did not give Allen a chance to clear himself, despite his repeated inquiries. In early May 2022, however, the FBI requested that Allen appear for an interview. He promptly complied. The interview request came only days after FBI Director Wray was confronted by members of Congress over concerns that the FBI was weaponizing the security clearance process to target politically conservative employees. Since that time, Allen has received no further word on the status of the FBI’s investigation.
On June 7, 2022, Rep. Jim Jordan, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Wray regarding the firing of FBI employees, noting that, “Multiple whistleblowers have called it a ‘purge’ of FBI employees holding conservative views.”
The lawsuit alleges several violations of Allen’s First and Fifth Amendment rights and asks that Allen’s security clearance and employment be restored.
“The FBI can’t purge employees based on political smears. Judicial Watch seeks to remind the FBI that it is not above the law with this civil rights lawsuit for Mr. Allen, a decorated Marine veteran and highly regarded FBI employee,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.”
Ruth C. Smith of the Elmore and Smith Law Firm in Asheville, N.C., is assisting with the suit. Allen is being represented in his administrative security clearance case by Sean Bigley and Jeffrey Billett of Bigley Ranish, LLP.
The post Judicial Watch: Decorated Veteran and FBI Analyst Sues FBI after Being Falsely Accused of Disloyalty to the United States appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Besides smashing a record for apprehending a ghastly 2.4 million illegal immigrants along the Mexican border last year, the Biden administration is also making history for drastically slashing the number of criminal aliens that get deported. In its first nine months the administration removed 71% fewer criminal aliens arrested by local police compared to a comparable period in 2019 under President Donald Trump. Overall deportations also declined under Biden from 186,000 in fiscal year 2020 to 59,000 the following year, according to government data provided to the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The Washington D.C.-based nonprofit is the nation’s only think tank devoted exclusively to the research of U.S. immigration policy and has issued a multitude of informative reports over the years.
This month the nonpartisan group published the findings of its analysis of state and local statistics involving illegal aliens removed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in fiscal years 2019 through 2021. The records include migrants identified by ICE with a biometric match under the Secure Communities program, which uses a federal information-sharing partnership between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to identify aliens in custody without imposing additional requirements on state and local law enforcement. ICE uses fingerprint matching to flag illegal immigrants arrested by local police for state crimes and the agency removes individuals who present significant threats to public safety as determined by the severity of their crime and criminal history, according to ICE’s Secure Communities website. The agency stresses that “the federal government, not the state or local law enforcement agency, determines what immigration enforcement action, if any, is appropriate.”
Under Biden the number has nose-dived. Besides the 71% drop in removals of deportable aliens that came to ICE’s attention after a local criminal arrest, deportations of convicted felons also fell 25% from 36,000 in fiscal year 2020 to 27,000 in fiscal year 2021. CIS found that 51 jurisdictions “experienced acute declines” with criminal removals dipping an unbelievable 90%. Ten states—Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Vermont—saw an “extreme decline in enforcement” of over 80% under Biden, the CIS report says, adding that of the 50 American counties that typically have the highest criminal alien removals 14 experienced the extreme 80-plus percent drop under Biden. About a third of the “high-volume counties” are in Texas, according to the figures obtained by CIS. One of them, Howard County in the state’s western region, is singled out as an example of the public safety implications of the Biden enforcement policies. “It is reasonable to conclude from these statistics that under the Biden policies, ICE is knowingly taking a pass on removing most deportable criminal aliens who have come to their attention after arrest in Howard County, and even knowingly taking a pass on some of the deportable criminal aliens who were convicted of serious or violent crimes in Howard County,” CIS writes in its report. “As a result, Howard County likely is experiencing some degree of repeated crime from those criminal aliens who continue to offend and victimize community members after ICE declined to take action to remove them.”
Researchers at the immigration think tank conclude that the public safety consequences of the Biden interior enforcement policies experienced in Howard County are undoubtedly occurring in hundreds of other jurisdictions around the nation. “State and local authorities should keep track of cases of criminal aliens who are not removed by ICE and bring these cases to the attention of ICE leadership, members of Congress, and the public,” according to CIS. “In addition, through appropriations or otherwise, the new Congress should clarify its expectations with respect to immigration enforcement in the interior, particularly involving criminal aliens, certain of whom are subject to mandatory arrest and detention under the Immigration and Nationality Act.”
The distressing CIS report comes on the heels of a record-breaking year for illegal immigration along the southern border. Besides arresting 2.4 million migrants in fiscal year 2022 (up from 1.73 million in 2021), Border Patrol agents apprehended hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist. Federal agents also confiscated thousands of pounds of drugs, mainly methamphetamine.
The post Removal of Criminal Illegal Immigrants Arrested by Local Police Drops 71% Under Biden appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 699 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) regarding data Moderna submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, which indicate a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine. The documents also reveal Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
Judicial Watch obtained the records through a September 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) failed to respond to a June 2021, FOIA request biodistribution studies and related data for the Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson& Johnson COVID vaccines (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services(No. 1:21-cv-02418)).
The records include a “Nonclinical Overview” prepared by Moderna and submitted to the FDA for approval of its vaccine revealing that a number of rats were born with skeletal deformations, known as “wavy ribs” and “rib nodules,” to mothers injected with the mRNA vaccine. The study dismissed the anomalies as “not considered adverse:”
mRNA-1273-related variations in skeletal examination included statistically significant increases in the number of F1 rats with 1 or more wavy ribs and 1 or more rib nodules. Wavy ribs appeared in 6 fetuses and 4 litters with a fetal prevalence of 4.03% and a litter prevalence of 18.2%. Rib nodules appeared in 5 of those 6 fetuses. Skeletal variations are structural changes that do not impact development or function of a developing embryo, are considered reversible, and often correlate with maternal toxicity and/or lack of other indicators of developmental toxicity (Carney and Kimmel 2007). Maternal toxicity in the form of clinical observations was observed for 5 days following the last dose (GD 13), correlating with the most sensitive period for rib development in rats (GDs 14 to 17). Furthermore, there were no other indicators of mRNA-1273-related developmental toxicity observed, including delayed ossification; therefore, these common skeletal variations were not considered adverse.
(Non-adverse deformations receive a different perspective in the July 2009 Environmental Researcharticle, “Dose–response relationships of rat fetal skeleton variations: Relevance for risk assessment:”
(Whether or not a substance-induced increase in the incidence of fetal skeleton variations should be taken into account for human risk assessment is a long-standing controversial issue. It has been argued that chemical-produced increases in variations are not to be considered for risk assessment because they are “unlikely to adversely affect survival or health.” The counter argument is that even not being overtly adverse and conveying no apparent selective disadvantage, a treatment-induced increase in the occurrence of variations means that the chemical agent has the potential to perturb skeleton development. According to this view, under a different condition of exposure, or in another species, this perturbation of normal bone formation may give rise to a different and more severe outcome.))
A “Pharmacokinetics Written Summary” marked “Confidential,” indicates that the information it contains is related to the mRNA-1273 (Moderna vaccine) strain, however, much of the data comes from work with mRNA-1647. The study states:
The results of a biodistribution study of mRNA-1647 support the development of mRNA-1273.
The biodistribution of mRNA-1647 was evaluated in a non-Good Laboratory Practice (GLP), single-dose, intramuscular (IM) injection study in Sprague Dawley rats…. mRNAs that are within an LNP of the same composition (e.g., mRNA-1273 and mRNA-1647) are expected to distribute similarly.
The “Summary” indicates:
- No absorption studies with mRNA-1273 [used in Moderna’s COVID vaccine] have been performed.
- No metabolism studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
- No excretion studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
- No PK [pharmacokinetic] studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
- No other PK studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
(According to PubMed.gov, “Pharmacokinetics studies are performed to clarify the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of drug candidates…[and] are required for establishing the efficacy and safety in humans.”)
A separate study submitted to the FDA sponsored by Moderna Therapeutics Inc. and conducted by Charles River Laboratories in Montreal, Canada is titled “A Single Dose Intramuscular Injection Tissue Distribution Study of mRNA-1647 in Male Sprague-Dawley Rats” in which “[t]he objective … was to determine the tissue distribution of mRNA-1647,” as opposed to mRNA-1273 used in Moderna’s COVID vaccine.
In one appendix to the study, a “clarification” was issued in the toxicokinetic report regarding the half-life of mRNA injected into the rats, noting: “The average value of terminal half-life for the muscle (i.e. injection site) in Sections 4.2 and 5 of the toxicokinetic report should be read 14.9 [hours] instead of 8.39 [hours] based on the results of the toxicokinetic evaluation.”
The study further notes that the wording of the conclusion was modified to read, “The half-life … of mRNA-1647 was reliably estimated in muscle (site of injection), proximal popliteal and axillary distal lymph nodes, and spleen with average values for all construct t½ [half-life] of 14.9 ~~8.39~~, 34.8, 31.1 and 63.0 hours, respectively.” [Emphasis in original]
Another appendix, titled “Summary Mean (±SE) mRNA-1647 Pharmacokinetic Parameters in Sprague-Dawley Rat in Plasma and Tissues Following 100μg Intramuscular Injection Administration of mRNA-1647 on Day 1,” reveals that, in addition to distributing to the muscle site, lymph nodes and spleen, the mRNA particles also distributed to the bone marrow, brain, eyes, heart, liver, lungs, stomach and testes.
A separate study indicates that the mRNA-1647 particles injected into rats were “observed in muscle (i.e. site of injection), followed by proximal (popliteal) lymph nodes, axillary lymph nodes and spleen, suggesting the mRNA-1647 distribution to the circulation by lymph flow.” (The mRNA was delivered via “lipid nanoparticle dispersion.”)
“These previously hidden records about the COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy studies raise a number of disturbing questions,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The fact that it has taken a federal lawsuit to get access to this material is yet another scandal.”
Through FOIA Judicial Watch has uncovered a substantial amount of information regarding COVID-19 issues:
- In October 2020, Judicial Watch received FDA records that detailed pressure for COVID-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
- NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’slack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
- HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
- NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
- HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
- HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
- HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
- University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records show the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
- HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines show a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
- Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) reveal safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
- HHS records include emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19.
- HHS records show that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
- Fauci emails include his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
The post Judicial Watch: FDA Records Show Significant Number of mRNA Test Rats Born with Skeletal Deformations appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Washington Times:
As Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch chief, tweeted in reply to the swirl of condemnation against Musk: “The Left’s hysterical response to @ElonMusk’s criticism of Fauci (along with slight mockery of transgender extremism) is something else. That they have so much invested in Fauci’s authoritarian approach to public policy speaks volumes.”
Read more here…
The post Elon Musk: ‘My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
More than two decades after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil, the Biden administration is using COVID-19 as an excuse to further delay enforcement of a law requiring minimum security standards for driver’s licenses and identification cards. The measure, known as the REAL ID Act, was passed by Congress after 9/11 to establish a more secure national system less prone to fraud after several of the hijackers exploited loopholes to obtain dozens of driver’s licenses from various states. The cards allowed them to take flight lessons and board planes to carry out the 2001 attacks. At the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission Congress passed the law in 2005 and states originally had until 2011 to comply, though the Obama administration tried to drastically weaken the legislation. Obama Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano granted a 20-month extension on the deadline as she worked behind the scenes to undermine the REAL ID Act, asserting that it violates civil liberties and privacy.
In the fall of 2020 the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that, after multiple delays, all 50 states were finally in full compliance with the REAL ID Act with most states becoming compliant under pressure from the Trump administration. “To date, the 50 states have issued more than 105 million REAL ID-compliant driver’s licenses and identification cards, representing 38 percent of all driver’s licenses and identification card holders,” DHS revealed at the time. In less than a year full enforcement of REAL ID will take effect at all federally regulated airports, federal facilities, and nuclear power plants, the 2020 bulletin further states. That means federal agencies, such as the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), will be prohibited from accepting licenses and ID cards that do not meet the law’s standards. Though it was welcome news at the time, it was still outrageous that it took 15 years after Congress passed the legislation to protect national security.
This month, the Biden administration is extending REAL ID full enforcement for another two years to give states more time to ensure residents have driver’s licenses and identification cards that meet the law’s security standards. “The extension is necessary, in part, to address the lingering impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the ability to obtain a REAL ID driver’s license or identification card,” according to a DHS notice issued last week. The pandemic hindered REAL ID progress, the agency writes, because state driver’s licensing agencies had to work through backlogs and many automatically extended license expiration dates and shifted operations to appointment only. Keep in mind the agencies had more than enough time to comply before COVID. Rest assured however, DHS continues to work closely with states to finally meet REAL ID requirements, according to Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. “We will continue to ensure that the American public can travel safely,” Mayorkas said.
The continued delays are inexcusable considering what is at stake. The measure’s crucial verification process requires states to certify the authenticity of every driver’s license applicant by requiring that documents, such as a birth certificate or passport, be submitted to get the card are legitimate and that the applicant is in the United States legally. It also calls for a newly created federal database to link all licensing information that must be checked before states issue new cards. This will establish a much-needed standardized national driver’s license system less vulnerable to fraud and will prevent terrorists from abusing it as did September 11 hijackers. Once the law is fully enforced, federal agencies will be prohibited from accepting driver’s licenses or ID cards from noncompliant states for official purposes, including boarding an aircraft, accessing a federal facility, and entering a nuclear power plant.
It is not clear how the Biden administration plans to handle the dozen states—including Arkansas, California, Maine, and Oregon as well as the District of Columbia—that offer gender-neutral licenses and ID cards in violation of the REAL ID Act. Title II of the act specifically states that “features on each driver’s license and identification card issued to a person by the State” must include: The person’s full legal name; the person’s date of birth; the person’s gender; the person’s driver’s license or identification card number; a digital photograph of the person; the person’s address of principle residence; the person’s signature; physical security features designed to prevent tampering, counterfeiting or duplication of the document for fraudulent purposes; a common machine-readable technology with defined minimum data elements.
The post Driver’s License Security Law Passed after 9/11 Delayed Another Two Years Over COVID appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Secret Service Has Repeatedly Changed Story on Existence of Hunter Biden Gun Records
Judicial Watch announced recently that the United States Secret Service has repeatedly changed its position about whether it is in possession of records related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware. The Secret Service now says it now located over 100 records, totaling over 400 pages and will complete its initial processing of the records by January 9, 2023.
Soros-Funded Nonprofit Gets $12 Mil from U.S. to Empower Workers in Latin America
The Biden administration is giving a nonprofit partially funded by leftwing billionaire George Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) $12 million to strengthen labor rights and empower workers in three Latin American countries. The U.S. taxpayer dollars will go to the Solidarity Center, a Washington D.C.-based group closely allied with OSF as well as the country’s largest union conglomerate, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO).
Judicial Watch Sues Homeland Security for Censorship Requests
“Why is the Biden administration hiding records about federal demands of Big Tech to censor and suppress Americans participating in the debates about elections?” asked Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
U.S. Funds Workshops in India to Counter Stigma, Prejudice in Transgender Community
Though years ago India passed a sweeping law giving transgender people rights—and prohibiting discrimination in education, employment, and healthcare—the Biden administration is spending American taxpayer dollars to counter stigma and prejudice against the transgender community in the south Asian nation with the world’s largest democracy. Uncle Sam will pay for workshops that will help employees and leadership at Indian companies create awareness about transgender persons and their rights.
In The News
Rhode Island Father Stands Strong Against Radical Race and Gender Indoctrination In Public Schools
Legal Insurrection
Judicial Watch reports that it obtained a document from a whistleblower regarding Westerly School District in Rhode Island and found training materials that fit right in with what we have come to expect.
FBI’s 4-Acre Geofence Dragnet at the US Capitol on Jan. 6 Violated Fourth Amendment, Defense Attorneys Contend
The Epoch Times
“This is a huge area of land around the Capitol that is typically accessible to the public,” Fitton told The Epoch Times, “as many of those thousands were there in unknowing violation of the rules, exercising their First Amendment rights.”
California Reparations Task Force Floats $223,000 Housing-Discrimination Payment for Black Residents
National Review
The California Reparations Task Force, a nine-member panel appointed by Governor Gavin Newsom, projects that Black state residents could be eligible for as much as $223,200 per person as part of an effort to redress historical housing discrimination.
Video Highlights
-
-
- Judicial Watch Attorneys are Challenging Critical Race Theory! - FITTON: Critical Race Theory is the Pandemic That We Have to Worry About! - REMEMBER: Trump Did Nothing Wrong And Biden DOJ Knows It!
-
The post NEW Hunter Biden Docs! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Legal Insurrection:
Undaunted, Chiaradio kept digging, and enlisted the aid of Judicial Watch. By October of 2021, they found the smoking gun: a 53-page CRT training guide for Westerly teachers titled “Culturally Responsive & Sustaining Pedagogy.” We covered the story here:
Judicial Watch Obtains Critical Race Teacher Training Guide For Westerly, Rhode Island
Read more here…
The post Rhode Island Father Stands Strong Against Radical Race and Gender Indoctrination In Public Schools appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Monitors Georgia Election Polls During Run-Off
Court Hearing in Lawsuit Challenging Illinois Counting Ballots Received up to Two Weeks after Election Day
Judicial Watch Monitors Georgia Election Polls During Run-Off
As part of our ongoing election integrity efforts, we had volunteer observers on the ground, monitoring polling sites in Georgia this week during the post-Election Day run-off.
Our legal team monitored Fulton, Dekalb, Cobb, Gwinnett, Cherokee, Forsyth, and other counties. We do this to ensure compliance with state and federal laws. Our observers have monitored many state and national elections and have been certified and served as international election observers.
Our lead election law attorney Robert Popper established the organization’s election monitoring program. Popper is a former deputy chief of the Voting Section, in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice and a veteran poll observer for the Department of Justice.
Georgia has improved its election system in recent years but, as we saw in Maricopa County, Arizona, many problems can pop up.
We will keep you apprised of developments in Georgia, as well as in our many ongoing election integrity efforts across the country.
Court Hearing in Lawsuit Challenging Illinois Counting Ballots Received up to Two Weeks after Election Day
U.S. District Court Judge John F. Kness conducted a court hearing this week in the case we filed on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law (Rep. Michael J. Bost, Laura Pollastrini, and Susan Sweeney v. The Illinois State Board of Elections and Bernadette Matthews (No. 1:22-cv-02754)).
We filed the lawsuit on May 25, 2022. Christine Svenson, Esq., of Svenson Law Offices in Palatine, Illinois, is assisting us with the lawsuit.
On November 11, 2022, Judge Kness rejected a motion by the Democratic Party of Illinois to intervene as a defendant in our lawsuit challenging the Illinois election law permitting mail-in ballots to be received as long as two weeks after Election Day.
Federal law defines Election Day as “the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year.” The initial complaint states: “Despite Congress’ clear statement regarding a single national Election Day, Illinois has expanded Election Day by extending by 14 days the date for receipt and counting of vote-by-mail ballots.”
We point out that the current Illinois election law allows vote-by-mail ballots received up to 14 days “after the polls close on Election Day” to be counted as if they were cast and received on or before Election Day. Illinois law also provides that “[e]ven vote-by-mail ballots without postmarks shall be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.”
Until next week …
The post Election Integrity Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Epoch Times:
Use of dragnet warrants will likely have at least one major side effect: the chilling of First Amendment-protected speech, according to Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch.
“This is a huge area of land around the Capitol that is typically accessible to the public,” Fitton told The Epoch Times, “as many of those thousands were there in unknowing violation of the rules, exercising their First Amendment rights.”
Fitton said the investigations seem to go beyond people suspected of violence or other criminal activity at the Capitol.
“The group of individuals I think they’d be interested in are those who entered the building or engaged in violence,” Fitton said. “And how does this warrant get them to that spot? Well, you know what it does, it gets them to be at the spot of, ‘let’s scare folks from participating in other First Amendment-protected activities in the future.’”
Read more here…
The post FBI’s 4-Acre Geofence Dragnet at the US Capitol on Jan. 6 Violated Fourth Amendment, Defense Attorneys Contend appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From National Review:
The California Reparations Task Force, a nine-member panel appointed by Governor Gavin Newsom, projects that Black state residents could be eligible for as much as $223,200 per person as part of an effort to redress historical housing discrimination.
The task force passed a motion in March outlining eligibility based on “an individual being an African American descendant of a chattel enslaved person or the descendant of a free Black person living in the US prior to the end of the 19th century.”
Nearly 7 percent of Californians are expected to qualify for reparations, which suggests the housing-discrimination allotment would amount to approximately $569 billion statewide.
Tom Fitton, president of the conservative watchdog organization Judicial Watch, called the proposed payout the “nation’s biggest restitution ever” on Twitter Monday night.
Read more here…
The post California Reparations Task Force Floats $223,000 Housing-Discrimination Payment for Black Residents appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News:
A labor group underwritten by controversial billionaire George Soros is receiving $12 million from the federal government to back workers in several Latin American countries.
The U.S. government this week announced “the award of a $12 million cooperative agreement to the American Center for International Labor Solidarity,” the Department of Labor said in a press release. The funding is intended “to strengthen democratic, independent workers’ organizations in Brazil, Colombia and Peru.”
The conservative group Judicial Watch noted this week that the Center has received over $2 million from Soros’ Open Society Foundations grant machine since 2018.
Read more here…
The post Soros-backed labor organization gets $12 million in taxpayer funding to back Latin American workers appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Daily Wire:
The Secret Service found more than 100 records that may be responsive to a lawsuit seeking details about an investigation into a gun-related incident involving Hunter Biden, according to a recent court filing.
The disclosure marks a turn in the long-running Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) case brought by Judicial Watch after the Secret Service previously walked back a statement that said it had found potentially responsive documents about communications regarding the discovery of a firearm owned by Biden that was found in a Delaware dumpster several years ago.
Although Judicial Watch is casting the fresh development as evidence of the Secret Service being unable to get its story straight about the records, the joint filing between the conservative watchdog group and Homeland Security Department, which is the parent agency of the Secret Service, states that the two parties held consultations that led to further clarity on the scope of the request.
Read more here…
The post Secret Service Finds Records In Hunter Biden Gun Case After ‘Error’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From BizPac Review:
After several flip-flops, the United States Secret Service has finally revealed it is in possession of more than 100 records related to yet another Hunter Biden scandal — his alleged gun, which was reportedly ditched in a dumpster in Delaware.
According to its website, Judicial Watch, led by Tom Fitton, “uses the open records or freedom of information laws and other tools to investigate and uncover misconduct by government officials and litigation to hold to account politicians and public officials who engage in corrupt activities.”
Following an October 2020 report from the Blaze, in which a source claimed that “in October 2018, Hunter Biden’s handgun was taken from his vehicle without his knowledge by Hallie Biden — the widow of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden’s son Beau — and she placed it in a garbage can outside a Delaware supermarket,” Judicial Watch launched an investigation into whether the Secret Service intervened in the situation on the first son’s behalf.
Read more here…
The post Secret Service finds more than 100 records on Hunter Biden gun case that agency earlier said didn’t exist appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller:
Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared to contradict his own agency during a Nov. 23 deposition by claiming that he is not involved in the redaction of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, a transcript of the record revealed on Monday.
The seven-hour deposition was led by Republican Attorney General (AG) Eric Schmitt of Missouri and Republican Attorney General Jeff Landry of Louisiana to uncover Fauci’s role in aiding social media censorship in 2020. When asked about his role in responding to various FOIA requests about his emails from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), of which he is the director, and the National Institute of Health, Fauci responded that he was not immediately involved; however, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) previously claimed otherwise.
However, the HHS claimed otherwise during a Joint Status Report in a 2020 lawsuit filed by the Daily Caller News Foundation over a public record request. The request is being managed by Judicial Watch, a conservative organization dedicated to “transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law,” according to its website.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, accused Fauci and the HHS of being “dishonest.”
“Either Fauci was being dishonest about his role in FOIA or his agency was misleading a federal court to stall the release of key China-covid documents,” Fitton told the DCNF.
Read more here…
The post Fauci Claimed He Had ‘No Involvement’ In Redacting Sensitive Emails, But Legal Filings Tell A Different Story appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch today announced that a court hearing will held before U.S. District Court Judge John F. Kness on Wednesday, December 7, in the case filed on behalf of Congressman Mike Bost and two other registered Illinois voters to prevent state election officials from extending Election Day for 14 days beyond the date established by federal law (Rep.Michael J. Bost, Laura Pollastrini, and Susan Sweeney v. The Illinois State Board of Elections and Bernadette Matthews(No. 1:22-cv-02754)).
The lawsuit filed on May 25, 2022.
The hearing will be held:
Date: Wednesday, December 7, 2022
Time: 9:00 am CT, 10 am ET
Location: Everett McKinley Dirksen Courthouse
219 S. Dearborn St, Chicago, IL
Courtroom 1725
On November 11, 2022, Judge Kness rejected a motion by Democratic Party of Illinois to intervene as a defendant in Judicial Watch’s lawsuit challenging the Illinois election law permitting mail-in ballots to be received as long as two weeks after Election Day.
Federal law defines Election Day as “the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even-numbered year.” The initial complaint states: “Despite Congress’ clear statement regarding a single national Election Day, Illinois has expanded Election Day by extending by 14 days the date for receipt and counting of vote-by-mail ballots.”
Judicial Watch points out that the current Illinois election law allows vote-by-mail ballots received up to 14 days “after the polls close on Election Day” to be counted as if they were cast and received on or before Election Day. Illinois law also provides that “[e]ven vote-by-mail ballots without postmarks shall be counted if received up to 14 calendar days after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day.”
Christine Svenson, Esq., of Svenson Law Offices in Palatine, Illinois, is assisting Judicial Watch with the lawsuit.
The post Judicial Watch: Federal Court Hearing Scheduled on Lawsuit Challenging Illinois Counting Ballots Received up to Two Weeks after Election Day appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Washington Times:
“Baker was the epicenter of two scandals related to election interference — the FBI’s election interference against Trump and Twitter’s election interference against Trump, again,” said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.
Read more here…
The post Twitter lawyer who blocked Hunter Biden laptop story helped ignite Trump-Russia probe appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that as part of its ongoing election integrity efforts volunteer poll observers will monitor polling sites in Georgia on Run-Off Election Day.
Judicial Watch’s legal team will be monitoring Fulton, Dekalb, Cobb, Gwinnett, Cherokee, Forsyth, and other counties. Judicial Watch monitors elections to ensure compliance with state and federal laws. Judicial Watch’s election observers have monitored many state and national elections, and have been certified and served as international election observers.
Judicial Watch’s lead election law attorney Robert Popper established the organization’s election monitoring program. Popper is a former deputy chief of the Voting Section, in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice and a veteran poll observer for the Department of Justice.
“Georgia has improved its election system in recent years but, as we saw in Maricopa County, Arizona, many problems can pop up,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The post Judicial Watch Monitors Georgia Election Polls During U.S. Senate Run-Off Election appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the WeekPress Releases
Judicial Watch: Secret Service Has Repeatedly Changed Story on Existence of Hunter Biden Gun Records
Judicial Watch announced recently that the United States Secret Service has repeatedly changed its position about whether it is in possession of records related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware. The Secret Service now says it now located over 100 records, totaling over 400 pages and will complete its initial processing of the records by January 9, 2023.
Soros-Funded Nonprofit Gets $12 Mil from U.S. to Empower Workers in Latin America
The Biden administration is giving a nonprofit partially funded by leftwing billionaire George Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) $12 million to strengthen labor rights and empower workers in three Latin American countries. The U.S. taxpayer dollars will go to the Solidarity Center, a Washington D.C.-based group closely allied with OSF as well as the country’s largest union conglomerate, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO).
Judicial Watch Sues Homeland Security for Censorship Requests
“Why is the Biden administration hiding records about federal demands of Big Tech to censor and suppress Americans participating in the debates about elections?” asked Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
U.S. Funds Workshops in India to Counter Stigma, Prejudice in Transgender Community
Though years ago India passed a sweeping law giving transgender people rights—and prohibiting discrimination in education, employment, and healthcare—the Biden administration is spending American taxpayer dollars to counter stigma and prejudice against the transgender community in the south Asian nation with the world’s largest democracy. Uncle Sam will pay for workshops that will help employees and leadership at Indian companies create awareness about transgender persons and their rights.
In The News
It’s Time to Meet in Budapest
The European Conservative
In recent days, we have seen news reports proclaiming the Ukrainian victory along the western bank of the Dnipro River in the city of Kherson. These news reports, however, have served to drown out critical facts and considerations about the ongoing consequences of Russia’s unlawful aggression against Ukraine.
Elon Musk declares ‘cancel culture needs to be canceled,’ Twitter users cheer: ‘Free all the banned accounts’
Fox News
Twitter users rejoiced on Wednesday when CEO Elon Musk declared that “cancel culture needs to be canceled.”
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton tweeted, “Defund cancel culture. Billions behind it, including tax dollars.”
Judicial Watch files FOIA suit against DHS for censorship records
Just the News
Conservative watchdog Judicial Watch announced on Wednesday it had filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit against the Department of Homeland Security to obtain records connected to the DHS’s misinformation censorship efforts.
Video Highlights
-
-
- REMEMBER: Trump Did Nothing Wrong And Biden DOJ Knows It! - FLASHBACK: Hunter’s Corruption Implicates Joe Biden! - Do You Oppose Government Corruption?
-
The post Secret Service Hiding Hunter Biden Docs! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The European Conservative:
In recent days, we have seen news reports proclaiming the Ukrainian victory along the western bank of the Dnipro River in the city of Kherson. These news reports, however, have served to drown out critical facts and considerations about the ongoing consequences of Russia’s unlawful aggression against Ukraine.
Recent tactical advances by the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) have fueled Western social media campaigns. However shocking to the Twitterverse, however, Vladimir Putin and his generals do not appear swayed by them. Well-intentioned as they may be, bravado-filled tweets will not drive the Russians to their knees. They also will not keep the electricity on in Kiev this winter.
Read more here…
The post It’s Time to Meet in Budapest appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Secret Service Repeatedly Changes Its Story on Hunter Biden Gun Records What is the Secret Service Hiding about Biden Raid on Trump’s Home? Judicial Watch Sues to Find Out! Judicial Watch Sues Biden Agency for Censorship Records Soros Nonprofit Gets $12 Mil from U.S. to ‘Empower’ Latin America Workers U.S. Funds Workshops in India to […]
The post Hunter Biden Gun Scandal! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: The Secret Service will not say why they changed their position regarding a government watchdog’s records request into Hunter Biden’s gun investigation records. Government watchdog Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request in April 2021 regarding the gun reportedly owned by Biden and disposed of in a dumpster in […]
The post Secret Service won’t say why they changed their position on Hunter Biden gun investigation records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the United States Secret Service has repeatedly changed its position about whether it is in possession of records related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware. The Secret Service now says it now located over 100 records, totaling over […]
The post Judicial Watch: Secret Service Has Repeatedly Changed Story on Existence of Hunter Biden Gun Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration is giving a nonprofit partially funded by leftwing billionaire George Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) $12 million to strengthen labor rights and empower workers in three Latin American countries. The U.S. taxpayer dollars will go to the Solidarity Center, a Washington D.C.-based group closely allied with OSF as well as the country’s […]
The post Soros-Funded Nonprofit Gets $12 Mil from U.S. to Empower Workers in Latin America appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News: Conservative watchdog Judicial Watch announced on Wednesday it had filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) suit against the Department of Homeland Security to obtain records connected to the DHS’s misinformation censorship efforts. Read more here…
The post Judicial Watch files FOIA suit against DHS for censorship records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: Twitter users rejoiced on Wednesday when CEO Elon Musk declared that “cancel culture needs to be canceled.” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton tweeted, “Defund cancel culture. Billions behind it, including tax dollars.” Read more here…
The post Elon Musk declares ‘cancel culture needs to be canceled,’ Twitter users cheer: ‘Free all the banned accounts’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all records of communications between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA), a division of DHS, and the Election Integrity Partnership (EIP), which was created to flag online election […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues Homeland Security for Censorship Requests appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Though years ago India passed a sweeping law giving transgender people rights—and prohibiting discrimination in education, employment, and healthcare—the Biden administration is spending American taxpayer dollars to counter stigma and prejudice against the transgender community in the south Asian nation with the world’s largest democracy. Uncle Sam will pay for workshops that will help employees […]
The post U.S. Funds Workshops in India to Counter Stigma, Prejudice in Transgender Community appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all communications between the Secret Service and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the search warrant which precipitated the raid on former President Donald Trump’s Florida residence at Mar-a-Lago on […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues DHS for Communications Between Secret Service, FBI on Search Warrant in Raid on Trump’s Florida Home appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases NSF Awards $576,061 to Combat Science Misinformation in Black Communities Keeping with its mission of combating disinformation, the Biden administration is giving professors at a public university over half a million dollars to fight science-related misinformation and misperceptions in black communities. The goal is to counter inequity and […]
The post Gov Spends Millions to Censor! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Happy Thanksgiving! Happy Thanksgiving! Each year I like to remind our supporters to recall what life was like for the Pilgrims who arrived on these shores in December of 1620. As the Plimoth Plantation describes: Many of the colonists fell ill. They were probably suffering from scurvy and pneumonia caused by a lack of shelter […]
The post Happy Thanksgiving! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner: San Francisco’s district attorney has refused to release public documents and video of Paul Pelosi’s attack to conservative watchdog Judicial Watch, instead directing the group to a New York Times article. Judicial Watch and news organizations have attempted to obtain the materials under California’s Public Records Act but have been nixed by […]
The post Watchdog weighs up suing San Francisco DA for Paul Pelosi attack records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Newsmax: Legal experts rallied to Donald Trump’s defense Friday in criticizing Attorney General Merrick Garland’s appointment of former federal attorney Jack Smith as special counsel to head the Department of Justice’s investigations of the former president. Smith was the chief prosecutor at The Hague investigating war crimes in Kosovo and who led the DOJ […]
The post Legal Experts Defend Trump Over Special Counsel Pick appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: Conservatives on Twitter tore into CBS News for finally admitting that the controversial Hunter Biden laptop — containing the personal files and shady business dealings of President Joe Biden’s son and foreign countries — is real. On Monday, the news network confirmed via its own forensic investigation that the laptop the New […]
The post CBS tarred and feathered for admitting existence of Hunter Biden’s laptop two years after New York Post report appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Keeping with its mission of combating disinformation, the Biden administration is giving professors at a public university over half a million dollars to fight science-related misinformation and misperceptions in black communities. The goal is to counter inequity and mistrust in scientific information and understand science misinformation in black communities, according to the government agency that […]
The post NSF Awards $576,061 to Combat Science Misinformation in Black Communities appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch: San Francisco District Attorney Refuses to Release Details of Police Response to Assault of Paul Pelosi Judicial Watch announced recently that the San Francisco district attorney refused to provide documents and video of the police activity at the home of Paul Pelosi, husband of the Speaker […]
The post Paul Pelosi Assault Records Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
San Francisco DA Won’t Release Details of Paul Pelosi Assault Judicial Watch Appeal Seeks FBI January 6 Communications with Banks TSA Director Accused of Unlawfully Deploying Assets to Mexican Border San Francisco DA Won’t Release Details of Paul Pelosi Assault An attack on the spouse of the Speaker of the House is of considerable interest, […]
The post Paul Pelosi Assault Records Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Asserts Two Persons Were Present When Police Arrived at Pelosi Home; ‘Mr. Pelosi was the only person in the home at the time of the attack’ (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that the San Francisco district attorney refused to provide documents and video of the police activity at the home of Paul Pelosi, […]
The post Judicial Watch: San Francisco District Attorney Refuses to Release Details of Police Response to Assault of Paul Pelosi appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Daily Wire: Some of the writers behind NBC’s long-running sketch comedy show “Saturday Night Live” may be planning to boycott the next show because comedian Dave Chappelle has been tapped to host. According to a report from Page Six, some of the writers were angry that producers had asked Chappelle — who has been […]
The post ‘SNL’ Writers Could Boycott Show Over Dave Chappelle Hosting Gig appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From BizPac Review: The Biden administration released guidance Thursday ensuring abortions for illegal migrant youth at the expense of American taxpayers, even if it means transferring them across state lines, allowing “predators to continue victimizing women and children.” The Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Refugee Resettlement released a memo reiterating that all […]
The post Biden admin to transport migrant children across state lines for abortions, taxpayers to foot bill appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News; Judicial Watch sued the Barack Obama Presidential Library after it failed to respond to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records regarding alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The lawsuit was filed Nov. 9 after the silence that followed the March 4 FOIA request, which included releasing records […]
The post Watchdog Group Sues Obama Library for White House Records on the 2016 ‘Russia Collusion Hoax’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News: Conservative watchdog Judicial Watch on Wednesday announced an appeal of a prior court decision permitting the FBI to withhold communications between the bureau and certain financial institutions related to purchases made in the D.C. area on Jan. 5-6, 2021. “This appeal arises from what appears to be an unprecedented abuse of […]
The post Judicial Watch files appeal to secure FBI communications related to Jan. 6 appeared first on Judicial Watch.
‘This appeal arises from what appears to be an unprecedented abuse of the financial privacy of thousands of Americans’ (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it has filed an appeal challenging a U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia decision allowing the FBI to withhold records of communication between the Federal Bureau of […]
The post Judicial Watch Files Appeal Challenging FBI’s Withholding of Communications with Banks Regarding January 6 Disturbance appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From the New York Post: The Federal Trade Commission can sanction shady corporate bait-and-switch tactics but it has no jurisdiction over fraudulent political payoffs. Judicial Watch’s Tom Fitton tweeted today: “Was Biden’s unlawful student debt scheme election interference?” Did Biden delay the announcement of student-loan bailout until close to the mid-term elections so it would […]
The post Biden bribed young voters with student loan bailouts he knew he couldn’t give appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch: Defense Department Records Reveal U.S. Funding of Anthrax Laboratory Activities in Ukraine Judicial Watch announced recently it received 345 pages of records from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), a component of the U.S. Department of Defense, revealing that the United States funded anthrax laboratory activities […]
The post Obama Corruption Cover-Up – Judicial Watch SUES! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The head of the federal agency created after 9/11 to protect the nation’s transportation system is accused of fraud, waste, and abuse of authority for unlawfully deploying assets to the Mexican border to perform duties unrelated to transportation, according to a report filed with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Inspector General. In the formal […]
The post TSA Director Accused of Fraud, Waste for Unlawfully Deploying Assets to Mexican Border appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues for Obama White House Records about the 2016 ‘Russia Collusion Hoax’ Defense Department Records Reveal U.S. Funding of Anthrax Laboratory Activities in Ukraine Taliban Uses U.S. Military Equipment, IG Withholds Records of Afghan Security Forces Collapse Veterans Day – Why We Fight Judicial Watch Sues for Obama White House Records about the […]
The post Obama Library Secrets appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Mail: And Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton called Biden’s remarks an ‘abuse of power’ as he re-released a video he put up in June saying the president called on social media companies to ‘attack free speech.’ Read more here…
The post ‘What about you, Joe?’ Conservative commentators slam Biden for trying to pressure DOJ into investigating Elon Musk’s ties with other countries (when president is embroiled in son Hunter’s dodgy dealings) appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 345 pages of records from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), a component of the U.S. Department of Defense, revealing that the United States funded anthrax laboratory activities in a Ukrainian biolab in 2018. Dozens of pages are completely redacted, and many others are heavily redacted. […]
The post Judicial Watch: Defense Department Records Reveal U.S. Funding of Anthrax Laboratory Activities in Ukraine appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Barak Obama Presidential Library for Obama White House records about the 2016 “Russia Collusion Hoax.” The records, which by law were not available under FOIA until five years after President Obama left office, are held at […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues Obama Library for Obama White House Records about the 2016 ‘Russia Collusion Hoax’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Taliban is training and operating with U.S. military equipment including rifles, trucks, and helmets with night vision mounts since the Biden administration withdrew American troops from Afghanistan last year. Taliban forces even held a military parade with dozens of U.S.-provided armored vehicles and Mi-17 helicopters flying overhead, according to a federal audit documenting the […]
The post Taliban Uses U.S. Military Equipment, IG Withholds Records of Afghan Security Forces Collapse appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was blasted Monday for saying that waiting a couple of days for results is how elections are “supposed to work.” “We may not know all the winners of elections for a few days. It takes time to count all legitimate ballots in a legal and orderly […]
The post Karine Jean-Pierre blasted for warning it may take ‘a few days’ to count votes: ‘This insanity has to stop’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases DHS Slammed for Failing to Counter Terrorism, Secure Border, Manage Explosive Devices Two decades after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created to protect the U.S. from another 9/11, the agency faces serious management and performance challenges that prevent it from fulfilling its critical mission, according to […]
The post Border Crisis Update! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News: Twitter has removed its warning label on a post from the account of Just the News editor-in-chief John Solomon about his story on a whistleblower alleging ballot harvesting in Florida, following Solomon’s direct appeal to the platform’s new owner, Elon Musk. Solomon made the post Thursday that included a link to […]
The post Twitter removes warning flag on JTN ballot harvesting story, after direct appeal to Musk appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Wire: Elon Musk, the new owner of Twitter, acknowledged on Friday that the left-wing establishment has a massive censorship apparatus to which conservatives are largely helpless. The world’s richest man has been making adjustments to the social media platform and has repeatedly solicited advice from prominent users. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton […]
The post Elon Musk Acknowledges Left-Wing Censorship Machine Has It Out For Conservatives appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: The Biden administration is being sued for information about the effectiveness of an abortion drug after the Department of Health and Human Services refused to release details about its test results. Judicial Watch first filed Freedom of Information Act requests with HHS on the drug mifepristone in February, but when HHS refused […]
The post Biden admin sued over failure to release abortion pill records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Bloomberg: “One side is pushing for more security to instill confidence in how elections are run, and the other side is pushing for less security under the guise of more people voting being better,” said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative nonprofit Judicial Watch. “Americans should ask: why is it that the Left opposes […]
The post Voting Lawsuits From Illinois to Arizona Soar Ahead of Midterms appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues for Records on COVID Vaccine Safety Studies Dozens on Terrorist Watchlist Among Record 2.4 million Migrants Caught in 2022 DHS Slammed for Failing to Counter Terrorism, Manage Explosive Devices Judicial Watch Sues for Records on COVID Vaccine Safety Studies Why is the Biden administration hiding information about the safety of the […]
The post New Vaccine Lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Two decades after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created to protect the U.S. from another 9/11, the agency faces serious management and performance challenges that prevent it from fulfilling its critical mission, according to a federal audit that says DHS must improve how it identifies domestic terrorism threats and better manage its efforts […]
The post DHS Slammed for Failing to Counter Terrorism, Secure Border, Manage Explosive Devices appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records on COVID-19 vaccine safety studies (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:22-cv-03153)). The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Records on COVID Vaccine Safety Studies appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch Sues State Department for John Kerry’s Calendars and Travel Costs as Biden Climate Envoy Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of State for details of climate envoy John Kerry’s office, including his calendars, the […]
The post Another Biden Admin Cover-Up – About John Kerry! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Besides shattering a U.S. record for apprehending nearly 2.4 million illegal immigrants along the Mexican border in fiscal year 2022, Border Patrol agents arrested hundreds of gang members—mostly from the famously violent Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13)—and dozens of people on the national terrorist watchlist. Federal agents also confiscated thousands of pounds of drugs, mainly methamphetamine, according […]
The post Dozens on Terrorist Watchlist Among Record 2.4 Million Migrants Caught in FY 2022 appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Court Rejects Dem Party Role in Suit Against Illinois Election Day Extension Air Marshals Sent to Border to Protect Federal Personnel and “Non-Citizens” Judicial Watch Sues for Kerry’s Climate Envoy Calendars and Travel Costs Judicial Watch Sues HHS Over Approval of Abortion Drug Mifeprex Judicial Watch Sues HHS for Unaccompanied Alien Children Transportation Records John […]
The post Election Integrity Battle Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Federalist: Institutional groupthink and delusion have become endemic at the Pentagon. It started on Inauguration Day, 2021, when President Joe Biden directed all government agencies to devise and enforce diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) mandates. “Diversity” and “nondiscrimination” are important, but percentage-based “equity” goals differ from “equality.” Additional Biden administration orders reversed President […]
The post With Drag Shows And ‘Genderfluid’ Internships, It’s No Wonder Military Recruiting Is Down appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner: Volunteers to recall District Attorney George Gascon have found 1,560 valid voter signatures that were thrown out by the county of Los Angeles, prompting a lawsuit to speed the review of all disqualified signatures. Recall campaign workers have found a 39% error rate after reviewing just 2% of the 195,758 invalidated signatures […]
The post Los Angeles County voter errors could overturn failed Gascon recall: Lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Daily Caller: Newly unearthed documents offer additional insight into the departure of multiple key vaccine officials from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) last year. Dr. Phil Krause, who resigned from his position as deputy director of the FDA’s vaccine review office last year, expressed frustration with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and […]
The post FDA Documents Confirm Top Scientists Were Frustrated Over CDC Ramming Through Boosters appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: Government watchdog group Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit to obtain information and documents from Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry’s office that have been hidden from public view. Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia last month, alleges that the State Department […]
The post Judicial Watch sues Biden admin over John Kerry’s travel costs, calendar, staffer infoR appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of State for details of climate envoy John Kerry’s office, including his calendars, the identities of its staff members and its cost of his travel (Judicial Watch Inc. V. U.S. Department of State ((No. […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues State Department for John Kerry’s Calendars and Travel Costs as Biden Climate Envoy appeared first on Judicial Watch.
To help deal with “a surge in irregular migration,” the Biden administration is deploying Federal Air Marshals (FAM) to the Mexican border to “protect the life and safety of federal personnel,” according to a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) memorandum sent to the highly skilled law enforcement officers this week via electronic mail. Judicial Watch […]
The post Air Marshals Sent to Mexican Border to Help with Welfare Checks, Hospital Watch, Transportation appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch: Delaware Supreme Court Strikes Down State’s Vote-by-Mail and Same-Day Voter Registration Judicial Watch reacted recently to the recent move by the Delaware Supreme Court to strike down the state’s vote-by-mail and same-day voter registration statutes for violating the Delaware Constitution. In making its ruling, the court […]
The post Election Integrity Win! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Students of scandal took note last month when President Biden announced the appointment of one of the dirtiest figures in presidential politics as his clean energy czar. John Podesta, the White House said, would step in as “Senior Adviser to the President for Clean Energy Innovation and Implementation,” overseeing the new Inflation Reduction Act’s “expansive” […]
The post John Podesta: The Scandal Master Returns appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Fox News: Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton tweeted, ‘Fact check: Fake history and false comparison’ Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton debunked the president’s argument, writing, “Fact check: Fake history and false comparison. PPP loan forgiveness was passed by Congress — the loans were designed to be forgiven. Biden has no legal/constitutional authority to spend […]
The post Biden schooled for equating PPP loans with student loan handout to bash GOP: ‘Policy-illiterate talking point’ appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues Secret Service for Records about Raid on Trump’s Home FDA Records Detail Pressure on Covid Booster Use and Approval Delaware Supreme Court Kills Vote-by-Mail, Same-Day Voter Registration Records Show CDC Officials Discussing Post-Vaccine Myocarditis in Adolescents Judicial Watch Sues Secret Service for Records about Raid on Trump’s Home Given that the […]
The post New Lawsuit on Trump Raid appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today it received 43 pages of heavily redacted records from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding the COVID-19 booster vaccine. Judicial Watch obtained the records in response to a February 2022 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) that was filed after HHS failed to respond to a […]
The post Judicial Watch: FDA Records Detail Pressure on COVID Booster Use and Approval appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Agrees with Judicial Watch Amicus Curiae Brief That Delaware’s Mail Voting Statute Impermissibly Expands State Constitutional Limits (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch reacted today to the recent move by the Delaware Supreme Court to strike down the state’s vote-by-mail and same-day voter registration statutes for violating the Delaware Constitution. In making its ruling, the court effectively concurs with the amicus curiae brief Judicial […]
The post Judicial Watch: Delaware Supreme Court Strikes Down State’s Vote-by-Mail and Same-Day Voter Registration appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The Biden administration is close to reaching a shameful plea deal that could exclude the death penalty for five Islamic terrorists charged with coordinating the 2001 attacks, sources told Judicial Watch during a recent trip to the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba where the jihadists are incarcerated. For years Judicial Watch has traveled to […]
The post Gitmo Sources Confirm Biden Administration Plea Deal to Exclude Death Penalty for 9/11 Terrorists appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 1,081 pages of records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing internal discussions about myocarditis and the COVID vaccine. Other documents detail adverse “events for which a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.” Judicial Watch obtained the records […]
The post Judicial Watch: HHS Records Show Senior CDC Officials Discussing Myocarditis in Adolescents Following COVID Vaccine appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From CNS News: The government watchdog organization Judicial Watch is suing the Department of Justice for all records of its Supervisory Intelligence Analyst, Brian Auten, to learn whether the FBI possibly obstructed a senatorial investigation into Hunter Biden and his alleged malfeasance. “It is no coincidence the FBI operatives implicated in improperly protecting Hunter and […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues for Records of Possible FBI Obstruction in Hunter Biden Case appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch Sues for Records on Possible FBI Obstruction of Hunter Biden Investigation Judicial Watch announced recently that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Justice for all records in the possession of FBI Supervisory Intelligence Analyst Brian Auten regarding an August […]
The post NEW Judicial Watch Hunter Biden Lawsuit! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues for Details of Ashli Babbitt’s Shooter’s Special Housing Judicial Watch Reveals Biden Administration Propaganda Plan for COVID Vaccine Millions in DHS ‘Terrorism Prevention’ Grants go to Promote ‘Media Literacy’ Judicial Watch Sues for Details of Ashli Babbitt’s Shooter’s Special Housing The government’s actions during and after the January 6, 2021, events at […]
The post Ashli Babbitt Shooting Update appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Department of Justice for records related to the housing of U.S. Capitol Police Lieutenant Michael Byrd at Joint Base Andrews after he shot and killed U.S. Air Force veteran Ashli Babbitt inside […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues to Uncover Details of Ashli Babbitt’s Shooter’s Special Housing at Joint Base Andrews appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Amid the rampant fraud and corruption in the government’s massive COVID-19 relief cash giveaway, Internal Revenue Service (IRS) employees have been charged with stealing over a million dollars from pandemic relief programs to buy luxury goods, fancy cars, and travel. Five current or former employees from the feared tax agency easily withdrew the money by […]
The post More Fraud in COVID Relief Cash Giveaway; IRS Workers Steal $1 Mil to Buy Cars, Jewelry appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The New York Post: WASHINGTON — The Secret Service says it checked again and still can’t find any records that identify visitors to President Biden’s Delaware residences — where he has spent roughly one-fourth of his presidency — outraging Republicans and prompting one congressman to say “the stonewalling and gaslighting must stop.” The agency […]
The post Biden’s Delaware visitors shrouded in mystery as Secret Service insists no records exist appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 249 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing the extensive media plans for a propaganda campaign to push the COVID-19 vaccine. The records were received in in response to an August 2021 Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)lawsuit filed after […]
The post Judicial Watch Uncovers Biden Administration Propaganda Plan to Push COVID Vaccine appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Judicial Watch Sues California Sec of State for Causing YouTube to Censor Key Election Integrity Video Just Before 2020 Election The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court Central District of California Western Division. It states that the California Office of Elections Cybersecurity (OEC), which Secretary of State […]
The post Judicial Watch SUES over YouTube Censorship! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Just the News: Judicial Watch on Thursday announced a suit against the California secretary of state for allegedly pushing social media giant YouTube to censor a video on election integrity that the group published. The suit alleges that the California Office of Elections Cybersecurity (OEC), which Secretary of State Shirley Weber oversees, caused YouTube to […]
The post Judicial Watch sues California for allegedly pushing YouTube to censor video appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The agency created after 9/11 to protect the nation from another terrorist attack is giving nonprofits, local governments, and academic institutions millions of dollars to promote media literacy and combat what the Biden administration considers to be “disinformation.” Among the recipients of the grants awarded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a center […]
The post Millions in DHS Terrorism Prevention Grants go to Promote Media Literacy, Combat Disinformation appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Files Two New FOIA Lawsuits for Records on Biden Raid on Trump Home Judicial Watch Sues California Sec of State for Causing YouTube to Censor Key Election Integrity Video Just Before 2020 Election Judicial Watch Sues on Behalf of Concerned Military Group for Air Force Academy Critical Race Theory Records Judicial Watch […]
The post Judicial Watch SUES Over YouTube Censorship! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Watchdog Group Files Federal Civil Rights Lawsuit after Uncovered Gov Documents Show Censorship (Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Shirley Weber, in her official […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues California Sec of State for Causing YouTube to Censor Key Election Integrity Video Just Before 2020 Election appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Judicial Watch Sues Secret Service Over Hunter Biden’s Gun Records Reveal Paul Pelosi Invoking Nancy Pelosi’s Name During Arrest COVID-19 Vaccine Studies Used by HHS were Conducted in China The Cheerful, Courageous Ken Starr Immigration Courts Dismiss “Historical Record” Cases, Will Triple Last Year’s Judicial Watch Sues Secret Service Over Hunter Biden’s Gun When […]
The post New Biden Corruption Lawsuit appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 115 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) revealing previously redacted locations of COVID-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected by the […]
The post Judicial Watch: New Documents Reveal COVID-19 Vaccine Studies Used by HHS were Conducted in China appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received records from the California Highway Patrol (CHP) Public Records Unit that include 44 photos and five hours of audio/video footage depicting the misconduct and arrest of Paul Pelosi, husband to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. The material shows Mr. Pelosi invoked his wife’s name […]
The post Judicial Watch: Records Revealed on Paul Pelosi Arrest appeared first on Judicial Watch.
The record-breaking number—more than 2 million and counting—of illegal immigrants that have entered the U.S. through Mexico this year has inevitably received considerable media attention lately, but there is another alarming figure that deserves coverage. Federal immigration courts have closed a “historical record” 375,000 cases in the first 11 months of fiscal year 2022, which […]
The post Immigration Courts Dismiss “Historical Record” Cases, On Track to Triple Last Year’s Closures appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Another “Open Letter” Warning to Americans By Chris Farrell We now have another “Open Letter” – claiming America is “an exceptionally challenging civil-military environment” — signed by 8 former U.S. defense secretaries and 5 former chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff. The letter is published by “War on the Rocks” a website advertising itself […]
The post OPINION appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Funeral services for former Whitewater independent counsel Ken Starr will be held Saturday in Waco, Texas. Starr died September 13 in Houston. He was 76, a son of Texas. Coverage of his passing was entirely predictable: the media, the Left, and the academy vilified him in death precisely as they had vilified him in life. […]
The post The Real Ken Starr appeared first on Judicial Watch.
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for Secret Service records related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (No. 1:22-cv-02841)). The […]
The post Judicial Watch Sues Secret Service for Records about Hunter Biden’s Gun Allegedly Found in a Dumpster appeared first on Judicial Watch.
Top Headlines of the Week Press Releases Mayorkas Secretly Met with Soros-Funded Groups During Border Trip to Address Migrant Crisis During a highly publicized Mexican border visit to address the record-breaking migrant crisis, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas secretly met with influential open border groups including nonprofits funded by leftwing billionaire George Soros and another […]
The post Soros and the Biden Border Crisis! appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From The Daily Caller: A Delaware court ordered the University of Delaware Aug. 23 to provide clarity on its move to keep President Joe Biden’s Senate records hidden. It’s the latest development in the Daily Caller News Foundation and Judicial Watch’s lawsuit to make the records public. The DCNF and Judicial Watch objected on July […]
The post ‘What Is Biden Hiding?’: Court Orders University Of Delaware To Explain Why It’s Still Hiding Biden’s Senate Records appeared first on Judicial Watch.
From Washington Examiner: Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas held private meetings with border activists linked to liberal megadonor George Soros just before commiserating with Texas Border Patrol agents last year over the out-of-control migrant crisis, Judicial Watch has reported. The meetings occurred during an August 2021 visit promoted by the Biden administration to temper […]
The post Top Biden official met with Soros activists ahead of border crisis discussions: Report appeared first on Judicial Watch.