The fact-checking entities out there are one of the worst forms ethically of journalism I’ve ever seen. In 2020, you may recall, social media began suppressing concerns about how the 2020 election was to be conducted. And how do I know that happened? Because it happened to me. It happened repeatedly about election controversies. And Judicial Watch is a national expert on elections. So we know what we’re talking about. And you would think, given the controversy around that censorship since then, how in the case of, for instance, the Hunter laptop, the Twitter and the big media suppressed that story, censored it, that they would be more careful this time around.

Nope. It’s begun again. And Judicial Watch is the victim and the target. Now you may recall the last time I was here with you, I think it was the last time I was here with you, I talked about how we uncovered through the local Freedom of Information Act here in the District of Columbia a list of non-citizen voters who voted in quote the 2024 presidential primary, the DC primary. Now, how did we get that information? It was on an Excel spreadsheet. So we said, give us the list of voters. They gave us the list of voters.

We told them, give us the list of voters who voted in the DC presidential primary. They gave us that list. And they were all non-citizens. So it was 113 names. So the other day I got an email from one of the fact-checking organizations that contract with Facebook, lead stories, saying, well, that’s that, you know, to give us evidence they voted in the presidential primary. And I said, well, the evidence is the document. And their feedback or pushback was, well, the DC board of elections say they didn’t vote for quote the president part of the presidential primary.

Well, that’s not what the documents say. And so, you know, all we can do is report accurately in a fair way what the documents say. Now, of course, that they actually voted in the presidential primary as these documents seem to suggest that could be a crime. And again, lead stories is arguing with us about what the document says. There’s no argument what the document says. They’re just saying we have to believe the spokesman who has no information, no documents that we’re aware of showing what actually what ballots these people actually use. The suggestion is these individuals were given only local ballots because in DC they can illegal aliens or aliens and non-citizens can vote in the local elections, which is outrageous as it is.

And they’re saying, well, just because they say they voted in the 2024 presidential primary doesn’t mean they voted in the presidential primary. Of course, well, what does that have to do with whether the document is fair and accurate or a press release about it? And so we posted this material up on Facebook, and this is what Facebook started doing to it based on the intervention of this third party fact checker, which in my experience is a leftist juvenile unprofessional organization that basically targets conservatives in an unfair way. And here’s what they said.

So this is what we’re getting as a notice. Independent fact checkers reviewed the information in a post you shared and said it was missing content, context, excuse me. Facebook added a notice to the post and it moved it lower in feed. So what does that mean? It means if you go to our post, and I don’t know if we can show what our post looks like now, it has this vandalization below leading to this third party left wing site and as Facebook tells us, it means that story is suppressed and censored.

Lowering the feed means it’s not going to be shown to as many people as it otherwise would. And the press release, again, is perfectly accurate and it’s not misleading. And to say otherwise is disingenuous, dishonest and pure politics. And here you have a case of a left wing fact checking organization and Facebook using as an excuse to censor information that is unhelpful to left wing narratives because they don’t want anyone to think that non-citizens are voting in any elections, let alone a presidential primary election. And a document that suggests otherwise, now if they give us documents that say they didn’t vote in the presidential primary per se, obviously that would be interesting.

But they haven’t given us that. I don’t think they know. But we do know we have a list that they provided saying 113 non-citizens voted in the non-presidential primary. And the evidence to the contrary is a spokesman for the government. It’s absurd. The documents speak for themselves. And so now they’re suppressing information about non-citizens voting in our elections. So we’re fighting back, as best we’re able. We’re not going to leave Facebook because that’s where people are. I mean, they want us to leave. I’m convinced of that. In the end, they’d be happy to see us leave.

We’re not going to leave. We’re not going to be pushed around. But we are going to expose this misconduct. And let me just say something about these fact checkers. The fact-checking entities out there are one of the worst forms, ethically, of journalism I’ve ever seen. I’ve been doing this work since 19, for 35 years, more or less, since I started working here in Washington, D.C. And you see the left-wing journalists, and you recognize when they’re acting in a way that’s dishonest and such. But the level of dishonesty, mendacity, juvenile behavior, and unethical behavior associated with the fact-checking journalist community is unmatched.

It really is unmatched. And it’s all geared to protecting the left and targeting conservatives. Now, they’ll always point to leftists that they fact-check. But there’s an inordinate focus on conservatives. And it’s not fact-checking. It’s argument. It’s opinion. We got a document that said non-citizens voted in the presidential primary, and they’re telling us that’s missing context. It’s not missing context. Frankly, it’s evidence of a crime. The Justice Department should investigate whether, indeed, they did vote in a presidential primary, as the list suggests. The D.C. government has it also an obligation to investigate this. But, of course, the fact-checkers aren’t interested in that.

I mean, for instance, this fact-checker, they told us they sent me an email about their fact-check that they obviously had already drawn a conclusion about a little over an hour before their deadline. And I wrote back, I said, you know, this is just so typically unethical of the way you all operate. And, of course, you’re like, well, do you need more time? It’s like, that’s not the issue. You know that’s not the issue. And they know it’s not the issue. So they’re smearing judicial watch and targeting you. Because if you’re on Facebook and you want to gain access to this, you’re less likely to be able to gain access to it because of this suppression.

So it’s not only a suppression of our free speech, but it’s a suppression of your free speech because you’re denied access to information you might otherwise have. So you’re the target of this censorship of operation. So hopefully Facebook backs down. I doubt they will. But, you know, if you want information about where our elections are going and the threat to free and fair elections from non-citizens voting, well, Facebook is not going to be a reliable place for it because they’re censoring material about it. I’ve got government documents we’re promoting on Facebook about non-citizens voting in a presidential primary, literally voting in a presidential primary.

And they’re telling us it’s misleading. It’s not misleading. The only document we have says that these folks voted in presidential primaries. Do they only get ballots that were for non-presidential offices? No documents of such has been presented to us, nor did it lead stories, the so-called fact checker, promote anyone or give them, you know, a report on him. So there you have it. So be warned, as we come up on the election, the lefties are going to be going after the truth and trying to suppress the truth about election integrity concerns. Thanks for watching.

Don’t forget to hit that like button, and we’ll see you next time. [tr:trw].

See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.