Biden PR firm was working with the California Secretary of State’s office to monitor us and once they found that we were saying things they didn’t like that could be unhelpful to them or made them angry, they had our video deleted by asking YouTube to take it down. We’ve talked a lot about censorship here on this program because we’ve been censored. I’ve been censored. I just had an election video censored on TikTok. I was banned from TikTok and then they let me back on or maybe they didn’t let me back on but anyway I’m back on and I only have a few hundred followers so it’s kind of a baby account in that regard but I posted a video of my talking about our election work or election or challenge or lawsuit challenges to states for counting ballots that arrive after election day and they censored the video.

The Chinese communists run or controlled TikTok censored the video. Took it down violating community standards. I still don’t know why it’s been taken down but it’s not just TikTok because it’s bad enough to you know the irony is TikTok is actually following the lead of other at least in the past of other social media platforms run by freedom of loving Americans allegedly and YouTube took down a video of me this literally are one of our weekly update segment videos of me talking about Judicial Watch’s election integrity work in the days and weeks before the election in 2020 and it was done at the request of the California Secretary of State’s office and we found out about that as a result of a Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit.

We sued because as I said we sued California Secretary of State and they settled a lawsuit with us to clean up the rolls. I talked about them cleaning up the rolls evidently they didn’t like what I was saying and they retaliated against us and took action by asking YouTube to take our video down which they did just weeks before the election I think it was on August of 2020. See I started off calm now I’m getting myself angry about it but it’s outrageous. When the federal courts in California in my view have mishandled this and now we’re asking the Supreme Court to step in and step up to vindicate the rule of law against this government abuse.

We filed the brief with the Supreme Court asking them to take our case Judicial Watch versus Shirley Weber in her official capacity as the Secretary of State in the state of California. This is the brief that’s interesting. So when you file cases with the Supreme Court you basically have to go to these special companies that print the briefs out in the style and format the Supreme Court likes. I guess the judges all want to be able just to read the briefs and things they need to read in these little booklets. I don’t know if we file them online as well but so anyway this is the actual brief and it’s a good brief.

I encourage you to read it because it tells us it tells a horror story about our civil liberties about government retaliation in the days before an election to punish us for telling the truth and basically helping people and educate people about election integrity threats. We filed the lawsuit in September of 2022 and so now it’s almost three years later over for the Supreme Court and on September it’s actually I thought it was in August but it was a September case it was September that the September 2020 it was September of 2020 the end of September that the censorship occurred.

Judicial Watch posted on its YouTube channel a video entitled election integrity crisis dirty voter rolls ballot harvesting and mail-in voting risk. A 26-minute video featured me discussing the vote by mail processes changes the state election procedures ballot collections sometimes referred to as ballot harvesting another abomination and states failures to clean up their rolls among other topics including the failure of California clean up their rolls. Fitten’s comments my comments were informed by successful lawsuits brought by Judicial Watch against the Los Angeles County and and the Secretary of State California in 2017 to compel the county and the state to comply with the National Voter Registration Act voter list maintenance requirements.

For instance in June 2019 this is at the time Judicial Watch was informed that Los Angeles County had sent notices to 1.6 million inactive voters on this voting list after a settlement agreement had been reached. Pretty good indication that the rolls weren’t clean if they had to send up 1.6 million names isn’t it? Judicial Watch uncovered the California Secretary of State’s monitoring of Judicial Watch’s videos for months leading up to the 2020 election with the help of a public relations firm closely connected to the Biden presidential campaign and we uncovered that through our own FOIA so we were investigating the censorship and lo and behold we found out that we were a victim of government retaliation and subsequent censorship at the behest of the government by YouTube which is run by Google.

So what is the legal issue for the court to explain or to handle at the Supreme Court level? And I’m trying to think are you going to be interested in it? I think you might be interested in it, right? Because I think it goes to the heart of what we tolerate and what the law tolerates in terms of government abuse of its citizenship, of its citizens. Let me read you a little bit of the brief. Contrary to 11, well I’m quoting from the press release here so let me get the page here. Contrary to 11 other appellate circuit courts in the country, the Ninth Circuit, which is the appellate court that ultimately handled our case because we filed it there in California, has made it more difficult for citizens and groups trying to hold government agencies responsible for retaliating against these citizens or groups for First Amendment protected speech.

They didn’t like what I was saying. They didn’t like what judicial watch was saying. They didn’t like what you were hearing and wanted to stop you from hearing it. So in many ways you’re a victim of this censorship and this adverse retaliation against judicial watch. Until this case, every regional circuit, so all the other appellate circuits, had held that an adverse action in the First Amendment retaliation context is one that would chill a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in protected activity. Chill a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in protected activity.

So what does that mean? If a person of ordinary firmness found out the government was watching what they were saying and was prepared to go to their social media platform of choice and ask that their content be taken down, would that chill their speech? You bet your bottom dollar it would and that’s what happened in California. The Ninth Circuit strayed from its sister circuits, excising the chilling effect inquiry from the universally accepted standard. It ruled that the Secretary’s course of action was not adverse. Completely new standard and therefore not actionable so we couldn’t sue.

But they didn’t define what adverse action meant or analyze whether the course of action would chill a person of ordinary firmness. So basically what you’re telling the Supreme Court and what it means is there’s a split. You have the Ninth Circuit, it’s making it easier for the government to abuse citizens. Every other circuit court that looked at similar issues as ruled in a way to make it easier for citizens to stand against government abuse. The Supreme Court should not give a green light to California or any other government to retaliate against Americans for exercising their free speech rights.

Simply put, California’s retaliation against us led to YouTube removing and censoring our accurate election integrity video just before presidential election. What does that sound like to you? The Biden PR firm was working with the California Secretary of State’s office to monitor us and once they found that we were saying things they didn’t like that could be unhelpful to them or made them angry, they had our video deleted by asking YouTube to take it down. Sounds like election rigging to me. I don’t know what it sounds like to you. And we’ve been separately uncovering instance after instance, detail after detail, a broad censorship by the deep state, the Biden administration of American citizens.

And I encourage you to go and look at our various lawsuits and litigation about it. Thanks for watching. Don’t forget to hit that subscribe button and like our video down below. [tr:trw].

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