➡ The wrongful death lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch on behalf of Ashley Babbitt’s family has been settled for $4.9 million by the U.S. government. This settlement is seen as a victory for Ashley’s family and a step towards justice. Despite the settlement, the government does not admit any liability or fault. The lawsuit was initially filed for $30 million, but the final settlement was a compromise to avoid further litigation.
➡ Judicial Watch, a legal watchdog group, has filed a $30 million lawsuit against the US government for the wrongful death of Ashley Babbitt, who was shot during the January 6th Capitol riots. The group also exposed the misconduct of District Attorney Fanny Willis, who was found in default for not responding to a lawsuit and ordered to pay $22,000. Judicial Watch continues to seek justice for Ashley Babbitt and transparency in government operations, thanks to the support of its members and donors.
➡ The federal court has ordered Fanny Willis to hand over documents related to a lawsuit concerning the alleged targeting of Trump. The lawsuit is significant as it aims to uncover whether there was a conspiracy to target Trump, orchestrated by Democrats in Washington, D.C. Willis has been criticized for her conduct in the lawsuit and for potential conflicts of interest. The outcome of this lawsuit and others like it are seen as crucial for accountability and the future of the country.
➡ The article discusses the FBI’s investigation, known as Crossfire Hurricane, into potential Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its possible connection to the Trump campaign. It alleges that the FBI, including former director James Comey, acted improperly by not informing Trump of his rights during the investigation and by writing secret memos about their meetings with him. The article also suggests that the Justice Department has been reluctant to take action against these alleged wrongdoings. It ends by expressing doubt that any serious criminal investigation will take place.
➡ The text discusses a grand jury investigation, the Clinton email case, and the need for transparency in obtaining documents. It also mentions the role of Judicial Watch in uncovering evidence of criminal activity and pushing for prosecutions. The text criticizes the Justice Department, the impeachment push by Democrats, and the handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal by the Biden administration. It ends by emphasizing the importance of Judicial Watch in upholding the rule of law and pushing for accountability.
➡ The article discusses the efforts of Judicial Watch to uncover information about the Afghanistan debacle, particularly the attack at Kabul’s airport in August 2021 that resulted in the death of 13 American servicemen. The organization has filed a lawsuit to obtain communication records from key officials, as they believe the public has a right to know the circumstances that led to these deaths. The article also criticizes the Biden administration for its handling of the situation and accuses it of hiding records. Lastly, it mentions a case Judicial Watch is bringing to the Supreme Court, challenging an Illinois law that allows the counting of mail-in ballots up to 14 days after Election Day, arguing it violates federal law and threatens election integrity.
➡ This Supreme Court case might change the way elections are held in the future. Judicial Watch will keep working to ensure elections are honest, as everyone must follow the law. Remember to subscribe and like our video.

More great news. Today we can announce that the wrongful death lawsuit that Judicial Watch filed for Ashley Babbitt’s family has been settled with the federal government, the United states government, for 4.9 million. $4,975,000. And it’s a great victory for Ashley and her family. It is necessary. It’s a fair settlement. And we had filed this lawsuit for her family back in, I think it was 2022. And we’ve been battling in court for years, investigating, litigating, exposing what went on with her. What I would. Well, it’s not what I would call her literal homicide. And thanks, frankly, to the Trump administration being in power, they settled this case with us.

And what a day for justice as a result, as our press release sets out, this fair settlement is a historic and necessary step for justice for Ashley Babbitt’s family. Ashley should never have been killed. And this settlement destroys the evil, partisan narrative that justified her outrageous killing and protected her killer. Judicial Watch’s team spent years investigating, litigating, exposing the truth about Ashley’s homicide. And credit goes to the hundreds of thousands of Judicial Watch supporters who fought for this cause. President Trump was an absolute rock in supporting Ashley’s family and advocating for justice. So what a wonderful team effort by Judicial Watch’s team, with the support of Americans, and, of course, Ashley’s widower husband, Aaron Babbitt, who we filed the lawsuit for.

And, of course, we’ve been helping and praying and supporting. Also Ashley’s mother, Mickey, and I can tell you they’re thrilled about this settlement. And you can be sure the left, because there’s been stories previous to this, because I couldn’t talk about the amount or the settlement. I mean, it just happened, literally today. The government signed the settlement papers today. Here I’ve got the settlement here. This is what it looks like. And the lawyer for the Justice Department signed. It doesn’t look like they used an auto pen today on June 6th. And. But it had been previously reported someone had leaked it, that the settlement was.

And of course, we had a court battle earlier on that required us to disclose that we had settled in principle. And the left went crazy. They started smearing and defaming Ashley and her memory, attacking her family, attacking Trump, attacking January 6th. This is all about this. And this settlement blows out of the water. The lies about January 6th, you know, their whole narrative depended on only police officers being hurt that day. And there were police officers that were hurt that day. But what got in the way of that narrative about how terrible January sixers were poor.

Ashley was killed for no good reason by Lieutenant Byrd. Let’s play the video of Ashley being killed again. No, there’s a gun. There’s a gun. There’s a gun. I can’t believe he shot her. To this day, I can’t believe he shot her like that. I think she was crawling through that window. I think, you know, looking at the videos for safety. And we published online the last 19 minutes of Ashley’s life. And it looked to me watching what went on, they could have saved her life if they had moved more quickly to save her life and provide her medical support.

So we filed the lawsuit in 2024, not 2022, as I misremembered. And we filed today. I don’t think we filed this actual document with the court, but the document, it reads, it’s called a stipulation for compromise, settlement and release. Now, of course, the lawsuit initially was filed for $30 million, but the settlement now is for 4.975 million. And it’s a settlement. Right? It’s a compromise. And this is how it describes. This is how the settlement is described legally in the document 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 of, or, excuse me, from the acts or omissions that gave rise to the above captioned action under the terms and conditions set forth in the stipulation.

The 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. The settlement is entered into all by parties. Excuse me. The settlement is entered into by all parties for the purpose of compromising disputed claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act. And that was the law under which we sued for Ashley’s family and avoiding the expenses and risk of further litigation. So in consideration for the plaintiff’s agreement to accept the terms and conditions of this settlement, the United States agrees to pay plaintiffs the amount of $4,975,000.

There you have it. That’s how settlements are reached. Standard. It’s relatively standard language, so the government is admitting liability. But, you know, my view is you can draw your own conclusion from the number $4.975 million that they gave to settle the case. It’s a compromise number. They admit nothing, but they were prepared to go to trial on this case before the Trump people came in. We’re going to be in trial in 2026. The lawsuit included claims against the government for wrongful death, assault and battery and various negligence claims. And the lawsuit was very useful and still is useful potentially for anyone who wants to actually pursue further law enforcement action against Ashley Babbitt’s killer, who should never, in my view, been anywhere near that scene, let alone even having a gun.

He left his gun in the bathroom in the middle of the Capitol Visitor center, which is where all the tourists walked through to visit the Capitol. He was involved with an improper shooting near his home. He couldn’t even get a shotgun from civilian authorities because of his record and it had to be lent to him by the U.S. capitol Police. We also exposed how during the shooting he put out a radio. Shots fired, shots fired. He was the only person who fired a shot and they covered his name up for months. They hid him from the American people.

Judicial Watch exposed how he was given special accommodations. He was allowed to stay rent free at Joint Base Andrews, a United States base, a military base. The Defense Department was involved in the COVID up of who he was. For months this shooting was treated like no other police involved shooting in recent memory. And I don’t think there was ever a serious criminal investigation of that shooting. Death of Ashley Babbitt, the only official homicide victim that day put up another Picture of Ashley, 14 year veteran of the United States Air Force. And she came to D.C. by herself because she loved Trump, supported Trump, and she ended up in this situation where she got shot by this out of control police officer.

So yeah, the government was right to settle the case for $4.975 million with Ashley’s family over what happened. Does it mean this issue is over? Of course not. We’ve got litigation for records about Ashley and I know, you know, people who were there. The shooting occurred at. Let me tell you what the people said who were there. The shooting occurred at the east entrance to the Speaker’s lobby after demonstrators filled the hallway outside the lobby. This is from our lawsuit. 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 United States Capitol police officer, police commander and was the incident commander for the house on January 6, 2021, shot Ashley on sight as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door side light. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashley before seeing her hands were assessing her intentions or even identifying her as a female. Ashley was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty and in plain view of Byrd and Other officers in the lobby. The facts speak truth. Ashley was ambushed. When she was shot by Lt. Byrd, multiple witnesses at the scene yelled, you just murdered her.

Byrd was never charged or otherwise punished or disciplined for Ashley’s homicide. He’s still up there. You know what they did? They made him a captain. Despite his record, despite this unlawful, awful shooting, they made him a captain. Basically an endorsement of the killing of an innocent woman by the leadership of Congress and the police administration, the U.S. capitol Police. There was an ambush, as far as I’m concerned. So the major lawsuit over Ashley’s Death is over $4.975 million settlement for her family. The litigation for records about Ashley continues by Judicial Watch. And the question is, is there going to be law enforcement action? Is there going to be a reopening of the investigation, a criminal investigation into the death of Ashley Babbitt? And again, I want to thank our team for doing this.

The lawyer who is running this case, Robert Patrick Stick, spent thousands of hours investigating this. Aaron Babbitt, great, great guy, Mickey, who’s been not only advocating for justice for Ashley, but her mom, Ashley’s mom, Mickey has been. No matter what’s happening in D.C. you can be sure Mickey will be there advocating for Ashley. And she’s been a trooper in terms of advocating for the rights of the January 6th defendants who then, thankfully, have been pardoned by President Trump. So just a great. And of course, you, dear Judicial Watch supporter, we’re only able to do this because of the support of our members.

So if you’re giving donations to Judicial Watch, this is the type of work that it supports justice for Ashley Babbitt. And, you know, one of my fondest memories, at least as it relates to this case, is talking about this issue before a crowd at cpac. I think it was last year, and I simply was kind of. It’s hard to tell from the video, but I was kind of overwhelmed by the powerful response. Let’s play that speech excerpt. I got very upset again recently about January 6th. I was rewatching the video of the needless killing of Ashley Babbitt, the Air Force veteran shot for no good reason by Lieutenant Michael Byrd of the US Capitol Police.

Now, I’ve watched those videos. I can’t believe he just shot her dead like that. I just can’t believe it. And few in this corrupt city give a rat’s tale about that awful shooting. But millions of Americans care, and her family cares. I think her mom, Mickey, is still here at cpac. Is Mickey here? Well, give her a round of APPLAUSE Anyway, God bless her, it. And that’s why I’m so pleased. Judicial Watch just filed a $30 million wrongful death lawsuit against the US government on behalf of the family of Ashleigh Babbitt. As our lawsuit states, the facts speak truth.

Ashley was ambushed when she was shot by Lieutenant Byrd. Multiple witnesses at the scene yelled, you just murdered her. Judicial Watch is celebrating its 30th anniversary this year. I tell you what, if it takes 30 more years to get justice for Ashley, that will be time well spent. So we did get justice for Ashley. And is it sufficient? It’s never going to be sufficient. She’s still bad, she’s the victim of a homicide. But this settlement certainly is a wonderful way of vindicating her, a veteran, wife, daughter. And there are a few more important things that Judicial Watch has done over the decades I’ve been here at least than to try to get justice for her.

So this settlement, again, thank you, Aaron. Thank you, Mickey. Thank you, Robert. Thank you, Judicial Watch supporters. Thank you, President Trump. Thank you to Trump Justice Department, and thank you everyone else who is a citizen who’s been praying for justice for Ashley because. Because we got a good piece of justice for her just today. So God bless Ashley and God bless America. I’ll give you another reason to support Judicial Watch. It’s our remarkable and successful effort to expose the full truth about what Fannie Willis was up to. In her illicit, in my view, targeting of Trump and abusive targeting of Trump and unethical targeting and handling of the Trump cases.

Just remarkable success as a result of one FOIA lawsuit, one open records lawsuit under the Open Records act of Georgia. Now, we knew or suspected that Fanny Willis was coordinating with the Biden operation. Jack Smith, in the Pelosi January 6th operation, we asked for records, she denied she had records, didn’t even show up. Once we sued for the records in court, she was found in default, which means you didn’t answer a darn lawsuit, which is just incredibly. I’ve never had. I’ve been. Let’s put it this way, Judicial Watch has been doing this work for 31 years.

Hundreds of FOIA lawsuits, and we pretty darn well know about other FOIA lawsuits out there. The idea that a government agency of any type would just not show up and answer a FOIA lawsuit, be found in default is historic in a bad way. But that’s what Fanny Willis did in her office, and she was found in default and ordered to pay us $22,000 as a result. But it didn’t stop there. As I was talking about last week, there was a hearing and because we wanted a special master to oversee the record, manage the records of the case.

Because she said initially I don’t have records. And then she said, oh, we do have records, but you can’t have them. And so there were like half baked searches. They didn’t know where they were looking. They didn’t look completely. It was a complete disaster. They didn’t show up. And then they’re playing games and being dishonest with Judicial Watch, in my view, the court. So that’s why we wanted a special master, someone oversee the search. So the court had the hearing as we talked about, and he orally ordered them to turn over the new records that they found, 212 pages of records.

But then he issued a written order that not only, you know, kind of verified his oral order, but slammed Fanny Willis misconduct in this case. And I’ll read you a good section of was just ordered on March 7th. Now, it couldn’t have been March 7th. I think it was issued this week, but maybe it was. Actually, I have the order here. Let me look. See what the date is. Yeah, it was filed March 7. Took a while to get to us, I guess. In August 2023, plaintiff Judicial Watch submitted an open records request to defendant district attorney Fanny Willis seeking, quote, all documents and communications sent to, received from or relating to special counsel Jack Smith, and all documents of communication sent to or received from the United States House January 6th Committee.

Defendant claimed to have no responsive records. Doubting this, plaintiff sued and has since secured a default judgment against defendant, who it turns out, does have responsive records. After several non searches, one court order, and one at least one actual search of unknown thoroughness, the defendant revised her answer. In essence, I do have records, but you can’t have them. Except for this one record you already have and gave me. This is a Fulton county judge, state court judge talking about the district attorney of that state of that county, Fannie Willis. Just incredible. Unsurprisingly unsatisfied with this post adjudication response, Plaintiff’s Judicial Watch on December 17, petitioned the court for the appointment of a special master to conduct her own search of defendant’s files for responsive records and review the documents defendant has determined fall outside the ambit of the state’s open records law.

So the records they’re saying we can’t get because there’s an ongoing criminal investigation supposedly into Trump and all of that. And I would argue that she lost all the right to assert any privileges because she never answered the lawsuit in court, you lose. On February 28, the court held a hearing, and that hearing we played for you previously here on our motion for Special Minister, which both sides presented argument and made various factual representations to include an assertion that the universe of responsive documents consists of 212 pages, some of which may be duplicative. I love when government people say it’s duplicative.

You know what they’re saying? It’s duplicative. They say, this is what they consider to be a duplicative email. Let’s say I send you an email to your John Jones, hey, John Jones, I need you to do this for me asap. And John Jones forwards that to a third person, Betsy Jones. Betsy, I need you to do what Tom said, and you need to do it quickly. So how many emails is that? That’s three. The government would say, well, that’s duplicative. And you can’t have all three. You know, there’s the email I forwarded, I sent to John Jones.

That’s one email. And then there’s the email that he forwards on. That’s a second email. Maybe it’s just two emails. But you see my point? And they’re telling us that that’s duplicative. So they only count. It only counts as one. That’s not true. Each separate email is a different record, and it’s used as an excuse to hide records from us. I mean, it’s not just a difference in counting records. It’s they say, well, that’s duplicative, so you can’t have it from these presentations or representations. The judge goes on to say so. He says, I heard all these arguments.

I heard these new factual representations made to me. The court rules as follows. No special master will be appointed for now. Too bad. But we haven’t given up hope. Defendant shall, through counsel, deliver to the court within five business days of the entry of this order, all records defendant has identified as being responsive to plaintiff’s request, but which are being withheld pursuant to one or more of the exemptions. Along with the documents, defendants should provide a list of indicating which documents arguably fall under which exemption. So tell us what’s going on here. Why are you turning the documents over? And be specific.

And he also wants a detailed description of the search and the search terms. Now, if it were a federal FOIA case, we would, you know, there’d be a little bit more clarity as to what the requirements are since the law has been laid out here. But we’re in Georgia State court, so you know, the court, you know, can kind of seemingly do what he wants to do here. I’m not sure about that. But in the end, we now know there are 212 pages of documents and the federal court ordered Fanny Willis to turn them over to him.

Him. Why? Because he doesn’t trust her. Now, what is he going to rule? Is he going to rule that, you know, the privileges are overcome and, you know, that’s going to be more briefing in the future? But Fannie Willis was slammed in this, and I read you the court order. I mean, the court is mocking Fanny Willis, making fun of her behavior in this FOIA lawsuit. And it’s a pretty darn important FOIA lawsuit or Open Records act lawsuit under Georgia law, because it gets at the heart of what was going on with the targeting of Trump.

Who was behind it? Was it organically rising in various jurisdictions or was there a grand conspiracy, as is largely being confirmed, to target him, run out of Democrats offices in Washington, D.C. whether it be in the White House and Justice Department or as has been confirmed, the Pelosi operation through the January 6th committee. So there’s a lot more information we want. It’s a victory for accountability. Fannie Willis is being hauled before the court repeatedly as a result of her misconduct. Remember, she has been thrown off the case because of her conflicts of interest and her ethical, I don’t know, blindness.

I don’t know, maybe that’s the charitable way of putting it in hiring her boyfriend to run the investigation into Trump. I mean, by all accounts, based on my analysis of what went on, I mean, it’s even like more base than just the Democrats wanting to get Trump. She wanted to do this criminal prosecution to Trump to launder money for her romantic relationship with her boyfriend. So Judicial Watch has a number of lawsuits on this abuse of Trump. And, you know, and I highlighted last week that, you know, we’ve got to get these records out. I mean, we’ve got the Trump Justice Department under Pam Bondi going into court last week to defend Biden administration withholdings of who USAID is giving money to.

I was just on a hearing this morning as a client. Our lawyer was arguing for us, Michael Pikesha. We’re involved in a case with the Justice Department over the text messages of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page. Six years they’ve taken to turn the records over. They began during the Trump administration. And now they say, well, we will complete the records that we’re going to give to you. We will finish review and have them over to you by the end of I Think the month six years later and then now we have to litigate over the records they withheld.

I hope things change under the Trump administration. I mean, just think of the categories of records that President Trump and his people should be focused on releasing now. Just think of the categories. The lawfare against him, Biden corruption, the Biden crime family, the COVID ups of his misconduct and criminality, the abuse of the January 6 event to target and jail Trump and other innocents, the censorship of American citizens, the Biden border invasion, the COVID cover up the China cover up the gain of function, cover up the election integrity mess, the efforts to suppress concerns about how the elections were conducted in 2020 and beyond.

I know there’s this focus on Epstein records, there’s this focus on JFK records, but I tell you, our republic was almost destroyed as a result of some of the scandals I’m talking about here. And I’m not saying you shouldn’t be outraged about any Epstein cover up or such, but that wasn’t going to make or break the country. The categories of documents I’m talking about were part of an effort to destroy America and our constitutional republic. And so this Fannie Willis collusion fight, it’s part of that. So I’m glad the court ordered more disclosure there because I think our country needs it if we’re going to be around much longer.

I’m serious. Because we can’t have President Trump in office for four years and have no advancement to the accountability that nearly destroyed the country. Because what would happen is if a different category of politician got in, you know, we’d be back to square one because nothing’s been done. There have been no consequences. Accountability and consequences come from the disclosures. So that’s why this Fanny Willis lawsuit and our other lawsuits for all of the issues that I’m talking about are so important. And we’re not going to stop, we’re simply not going to stop. This failure to prosecute Comey by the Justice Department is the decision in this matter, in my view, virtually guarantees there will be no prosecutions on the coup targeting President Trump.

I hope I’m wrong. This is a guess, but I’m going to tell you why I’m concerned about it. The IG report, if you’ve read the media, well, to the degree the media has even reported on it, other than our friends at Fox News or Oann or elsewhere or Judicial Watch, because we are the media too, the focus has been on his handling of the memos. But the real focus to me or the important focus, I mean not that that’s unimportant because that was criminal too, is that this report outlines in plain sight the Kookabah, the conspiracy targeting President Trump.

So the Justice Department has had in its staring, had presented to it already information demonstrating the illicit coup in seditious conspiracy targeting President Trump. Why is it I say this? Because the discussion on page 17 of the report and I encourage you to go and look at the report, read it yourself. Don’t believe me. Talks about the James Comey, with the approval of the President of the United States, Barack Obama, going to ambush President elect Trump with the salacious and unverified dossier with the hopes of getting him to say something that would put him in legal jeopardy.

That’s the coup. And here are the details and I think it’s worth reading. I think I read a little bit of it to you last week. But it shows the coup. It, it not only shows the coup, but it shows the incredible development that we have as a result of this IG report. It’s been confirmed that Comey was more than just keeping a secret FBI file on President Trump improperly and then leaking it. He was spying on President Trump. Don’t believe me? Believe the report. Comey’s first one on one meeting with President Trump with Trump occurred on January 6, 2017 at Trump Tower as part of a briefing to the president elect on an intelligence community assessment of Russia efforts to interfere in a 2016 presidential election.

The assessment was jointly prepared by the FBI, National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency with the oversight from the Office of Director of National Intelligence, the deep state. According to Comey, the plan for the ICA briefing of President Elect Trump had two parts, both of which Comey said he was concerned would be, quote, controversial and difficult conversations. The first part was of the briefing jointly conducted by the intelligence community directors. That was Brennan and company like that involved briefing the president elect on the overall conclusions of the ica. The assessment, the second part of the briefing concerned notifying the president elect of, quote, salacious and unverified information about Trump’s alleged conduct in Moscow several years later.

Prior to the January 6, 2017 briefing, the FBI learned that several media outlets also had this information and were intending to publish it. Multiple witnesses told the OIG that the intelligence community directors agreed that Trump must be briefed on this information and that the Director of National Intelligence decided that the briefing should be done by Comey in a small group or one on one. No witnesses. Before briefing President Elect Trump, Comey met with senior leaders of the FBI, including his Chief of Staff James Rebicki, then FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, and then FBI General Counsel James Baker, and the supervisors of the FBI’s investigation into Russia interference with the 2016 election.

That would have been Peter Schreck. By the way, what the IG report doesn’t say is that the day or two before that meeting, I think even the day before he was in the Oval Office, Comey was with this whole group with President Obama and Vice President Biden, all discussing this operation against Trump. Comey wasn’t spying for his own purposes. Obviously he hated Trump. He was doing it with the approval and direction of the President of the United States, Barack Obama. Comey was Obama’s spy. Baker and McCabe told the IYG that they raised and discussed with Comey a number of concerns about Comey meeting alone with President Elect Trump.

Baker and McCabe said they agreed that the briefing needed to be one on one so that the Comey could present the, quote, salacious, unquote information in the most discreet and least embarrassing way. At the same time, we were told they did not want the President Elect to perceive the one on one briefing as an effort to hold information over him, quote, like a Hoover esque type of plot. Oh, why would he think that? The FBI director showing this garbage dossier to him, saying the Russians got dirt on you and we know about it. What do you think he’s going to think? Witnesses interviewed by the OIG also said that they discussed Trump’s potential responses as to being told about the, quote, salacious information.

Remember, they all knew it wasn’t true or they had no reason to believe it was true, yet they went at him with it anyway, including that Trump might make statements about or provide information of value to the pending Russia interference investigation. The FBI counterintelligence investigation known as Crossfire Hurricane concerned whether individuals associated with the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election were coordinating with or have been unwillingly co opted by the Russia government. This is a spy operation. He was a subject or a witness. Certainly not a witness in the traditional sense. He was a subject and they wanted to see what he’d say when given the information.

He should have been read his rights. Comey violated the law and the President’s constitutional rights in this meeting, and they all knew about it. The coup cabal, it’s listed here, folks, I just read you the names. They all knew what was going on. Sure enough, that’s why they wrote the memo. Multiple FBI witnesses recalled agreeing ahead of time that Comey should memorialize his meeting with Trump immediately after it occurred. Comey told the OIG that in his view, it was important for FBI executive managers to quote, executive managers to be, quote, able to share in Comey’s recall of the salient details of these conversations, unquote.

They were conducting an investigation of the President elect for no good reason. They had nothing. Remember this dossier? It came from Hillary Clinton’s campaign, Democratic National Committee and our cutouts at the State Department, the FBI, doj, you name it, Bruce Ohr, Nelly Orr. This was the apex of the criminal seditious conspiracy targeting President Trump. Comey also said that an additional concern shared by members of his management team was that if the briefing became, quote, a source of controversy, it would be important to have a clear contemporaneous record because Trump quite, quote, might, quote, misrepresent what happened in the encounter, unquote.

Why do they think that? Because they were his political opponents shows the bias. So they wrote a secret memo on their meeting with the President as part of an investigation of him. President Elect Trump a few days before he’s inaugurated. No criminal scandal, no political corruption scandal like this is American history and I’m reading it to you. And the Justice Department didn’t want to do anything about it. McCabe told the OIG. In his view, it made sense. McCabe who’s they’ve been dithering about prosecuting him for other lies for a year and a half. It made sense for Comey to, quote, capture contemporaneous recollection, unquote, because there were millions of ways that the FBI could get follow up questions or criticism.

And Comey wanted to recollect exactly from his perspective how that had taken place. If you want to know where why on earth these people would be later discussing wearing a wire on the President, this is their attitude. It’s not a stretch to go from writing a dirty memo on the President to, to make him look bad if things came, push came to shove, to trying to wear wire on him. It’s the same type of seditious activity. Comey told the OIG. He began writing memo one immediately following his meeting with Trump on January 6, 2017. He said he had a secure FBI laptop waiting for him in his FBI vehicle, that when he got into the vehicle, he was handed the laptop and began typing as the vehicle moved.

He said he continued working on memo one until he arrived at the FBI’s New York field office, where Comey gave a quick download of his conversation with President Elect trump. The Rebicki McCabe Baker and supervisors. Again, that’s Page and Strzok, who are conveniently left out by name by the IG supervisors of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigative team via secure video teleconference. Comey said he probably told the participants he would send them his detailed notes of the interaction. So it goes into the discussion about him writing the emails, writing the memo. Memo one was the only one of the memos because I think there’s, I forget seven memos he wrote, on which Comey placed any classified dissemination controls or other handwritten handling markings.

Comey placed an overall classification marking of secret orcon no foreign at the top and bottom of the email. That’s secret orkon. I’m not sure what that means. No foreign means no foreign dissemination. He also placed the following classification block before the substantive text of the email classified by director with the other declassification detail. In the email’s introductory note, Comey Roessler wrote, I am not sure the proper classification, so I’ve chosen secret. Please let me know if it should be higher or lower than that. So he’s going to share this with others. Obviously, Comey told the IIG that he classified memo one in this way because this shows you he was spying.

This is the key, folks. Pay attention. He classified memo 1 in this way because his judgment was that the information ought to be treated like, quote, FISA derived information or information in a counterintelligence investigation. This is a product of a spy operation that was the basis for his classifying it. Who was the spy operation targeting President Elect Trump? Comey was spying on Trump. There you have it. And as Byron York has pointed out, he didn’t write a memo on his next communication with Trump because despite this classified briefing outrageously being used to try to destroy Trump.

Well, actually, the briefing itself was being used to destroy Trump. Then it was leaked that he was briefed. Byron York writes for the Washington examiner and he’s reminded us that, remember, the dossier already had kind of been out there because the Clinton camp wanted to get it into the media to destroy Trump. It’s political garbage, opposition research. They don’t care if it’s true or not. They’re just trying to win. And once President Trump won, they were still trying to use it to destroy Trump to overturn the results of the election, driving a stake through the heart of our constitutional republic.

They didn’t care. So it gets leaked and President Trump, President Elect Trump calls Comey and complains about it and Comey lies to him. Well, you really can’t Call it a leak because it was already out there. Well, that wasn’t the point. What wasn’t out there and what had been leaked was, was the fact that it was given to President Trump. That was the hook, as Byron York puts out, that gave the media excuse to begin reporting on the dossier. And it led to its full publication by buzzfeed News. Comey didn’t write a memo about his dishonest conversation with President Trump, about his misleading him on the leak.

So why did I get into that with you? Because everyone says we got to wait for the IG report on FISA to come out to see what Comey does, to see what the Justice Department does, whether there’s going to be any prosecution. We got to wait for Durham to do whatever he’s going to do. Look, the detail here is enlightening, but the basic elements of Comey’s criminality and the ambush interview of President Trump has been widely known. The details are just devastating. But it’s. Much of this has been in the public record, thanks in part to Judicial Watch.

You didn’t need an IG report to prosecute Comey. They refused to prosecute him. Are we going to have the same with the FISA gate? Much of the FISA gate, fraudulent activity, the spying on President Trump, FISA gates, only about the Carter Page FISA warrant applications that were targeting Trump world, that’s generally out there. We don’t need an IG report for prosecutions to begin or a criminal investigation to begin. But even if we did, what makes you think, given the spy operation illicitly targeting President Elect Trump that’s been ignored by the Justice Department, they’re going to change their minds and say, well, yeah, lying about the FISA warrants was prosecutable.

It’d be a miracle if that happened. I tell you, it’d be a miracle. And miracles do happen. President Trump fired James Comey, so Judicial Watch is continuing to try to get the documents. Because I think it’s important that we get this information out there because nothing will be done if the public doesn’t know about what needs to be done. If we don’t know the details of the criminality, nothing will be done. That’s why the fisa, that’s why the IG reports, despite being an expose and to cover up at the same time the IG reports are, they’re almost always cover ups.

They’re exposes too. But there’s always material. They soft pedal or withhold material or characterize activity in a way that helps the agency. They’re supposed to be investigating, which they all work for. So Barr’s team dropped the ball on Spygate, folks. They’ve already done it and I don’t think it’s going to change with any Pfizer report. I just don’t see it happening. I don’t see a credible, I don’t even see strong evidence of a serious criminal investigation. The U.S. attorney Durham, I guess he’s questioning people, but I don’t, I don’t, you know, is it a review, is it an administrative review or is it a criminal investigation? If it’s a criminal investigation, I think there’d be more disha of that activity.

You’d have grand juries in operation. And when you got a grand jury investigating such a sensitive manner as this, a lot of witnesses are going to be deposed and questioned and they’re going to talk. There’s nothing prohibiting a witness from testifying and then talking about it or complaining about having to testify or having their lawyers talk about it. It would come out. I have no doubt there’s a grand jury that’s getting some information to oftentimes in the case of the Clinton email investigation, they used the grand jury not because they were serious about criminal investigation, but because they needed it as a vehicle.

They needed the subpoena power to get documents they otherwise would not be able to get. I think that’s what’s happening again now. How do we change the outcome so that justice is more fully served by Judicial Watch frankly and President Trump following our lead in the sense of getting the documents out, going on a transparency tear, we’re asking for the rest of the FISA materials, we’re asking for the page struck email communications, all getting obstructed from, or getting obstructed from the FBI on this. The Bruce Orr materials we’ve got out showing that the FISA process was fraudulent and corrupted.

Nelly Orr Fusion GPS having easy access to the Justice Department, you wouldn’t believe what was going on. You would believe it. But Judicial Watch has gotten the material out. So we already know there’s enough evidence of criminal activity to warrant prosecutions. But it isn’t happening yet. So I know it may be upsetting to you to hear that, but trust Judicial Watch to do what we are able to do because no one else is doing anything about it. I’m not saying no one in the Justice Department is interested in trying to get justice. But you know, as I was on, I was on Lou Dobbs this week.

Lou Dobbs is in Washington D.C. and he’s normally in New York. So I never get to see him. So it was good to be with him in person, in the studio. And I made the point that Attorney General Barr, I suspect is, is a lot like President Trump. His instincts are right, he wants to do the right thing. But he’s surrounded by 1,000 lawyers, all kind of like James Comey, who on the best of days are anti conservative. On pretty much every other day. They’re viciously anti Trump. They’re smart, but intellectually dishonest. Coming up with a thousand reasons not to do what needs to be done to drain the swamp and to hold accountable.

What needs to be hold accountable? Those who need to be held accountable here. Hillary Clinton’s never been questioned on this issue. She hired Fusion gps. Her lawyers were talking to the FBI about all of this. No one’s asked her any questions about it. Barack Obama, I know that’s a more sensitive topic because he is the President of the United States or was the President of the United States. So the ability of the Justice Department to question him about his management of intelligence activities is a little more limited. But it’s not prohibited from him having to answer questions or being asked questions.

Let him object based on privileges. That hasn’t been done. And it’s important that it be done because it’s crucial that we don’t allow these government deep staters. And it’s not just Democrats. You had John McCain who was shopping around the dossier. We proved that. Who decide they know better than you who should be president. Like I said, they want to drive a stake through the heart of our constitutional republic that if their president is elected, they don’t like or there’s a candidate that’s running for president they do like, they will put their thumb on the scale and upend your right to vote.

And the decisions of tens of millions of Americans as to who to put in office. And it’s continuing. The Democrats are not backing off impeachment, which is the next phase of the coup. The report is that supposed, and this is to me pretext reporting, meaning that these are friendly reporters dutifully printing out what their Democratic colleagues are telling them to, to write that they’re getting a lot of pressure from folks at home during the 46 day recess they’ve been on. What did you do the last 46 days? Have you been on vacation for 46 days? Well, Congress has been and they’re going to come back saying that the people want impeachment and they’re going to intensify the impeachment.

Push. Despite their party’s involvement in the worst criminal conspiracy in American history here in Washington, D.C. in terms of politics. Unbelievable. And it’s only Judicial Watch that’s doing the basic oversight. The FBI 302s documenting Bruce Ohr came out, thanks to Judicial Watch. The FISA warrant applications, thanks to Judicial Watch, the documented relationship between the FBI and Christopher Steele here with Clinton spy, thanks to Judicial Watch, State Department documents showing that they were involved in pushing this Russiagate smear targeting President Trump in an effort to destroy him. Thanks to Judicial Watch. All of this thanks to Judicial Watch.

So don’t despair. Judicial Watch is here and we’ll do work. We’ll keep on working to uphold the rule of law. And if the agencies don’t want to do it, it’s unfortunately not much of a surprise. But at least there’s a way of getting some accountability by getting the truth out about what happened. And without that basic foundation out there, nothing will ever be done. So if you want prosecutions, you’re going to want Judicial Watch to succeed. Because if left to their own devices, you’ll never know anything and they’ll never tell you what they’re not prosecuting. But thanks to Judicial Watch’s work, you’ll know what they’re not prosecuting.

And perhaps the pressure from knowing the pressure from that outrage will spur appropriate prosecutions under the law. Congress, you know, moving on to the next topic, and it’s an issue that came up at the debate is the Afghanistan debacle, the worst surrender, worst defeat in American history. And I go back to, you know, the War of 1812. We essentially lost, but the correlation of forces were very different. You know, we were a small country and small power compared to the British Empire at the time. In Afghanistan, we’re the big kahunas there, we were the big gorilla there, 800 pound gorilla and we fled.

Chaos caused by Biden’s, I would submit it was his dementia that caused that cr. He refused to listen to any reason from reportedly, his advisers who became mum and frozen in the face of this debacle. And just rather than leaving and resigning or doing what they’re able to do under law and ethics, they just allowed the mess to metastasize. They left the air base, Bagram Air Base, the embassy was chaos. And of course, part of the chaos was they because the airport or our airbase was abandoned. Essentially everyone had to flee out of the unsecured Kabul airport.

And that’s where, in the midst of the evacuations and the chaos of thousands upon thousands of Afghans trying to flee the country. We had Americans kind of trying to manage the chaos. Our troops there at what is now infamously known as the Abbey Gate. And of course, they were sitting targets, right? And sure enough, the terrorists came in and blew them to bits. Thirteen heroic Americans. And it’s been three years and there’s been virtually no accountability for it. As Trump mentioned, no one’s been fired. Biden hasn’t even admitted. Harris hasn’t even admitted that anything wrong happened in a substantial way.

And so they had this massive report come out this week. I mean, they’re still, you know, and of course it’s only interim because they haven’t talked to most of the key people in the Biden administration. To me, I mean, there’s useful information in here. It’s from the Foreign Affairs Committee. We’ll provide a link to it below. Willful Blindness, an assessment of the Biden Harris administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan and the chaos that follows. So some useful information in here, but it also highlights the failures of Congress to pursue it all in an aggressive way. I mean, they’re still talking.

It’s 250 page report and I want to go down to the recommendations. I’m getting a little distracted here, but I think it’s important that you know the way DC Works, because no one’s going to tell you this on tv. I mean, our friends in the conservative media just talk, you know, and I’ve cited the report, but we should note the deficiencies of the process. One of the investigators, Jerry Dunleavy, who used to work with Judicial Watch, was doing an investigation before the House and he left because he didn’t like the way they were proceeding. Oh, here’s recommendations.

They haven’t talked to Lloyd Austin, for instance. Is it Lloyd Austin or Austin? Lloyd, what’s the name of this? I did get it right. You know, as I get old, I get worried that I’m turning into Joe Biden when I forget names. I’m sure you all know what I mean. They haven’t interviewed Lloyd Austin, the Defense Secretary on the Afghanistan withdrawal. John Kirby, who is essentially, I think he is the President in many respects. You see him as a spokesman at the White House. Often they haven’t interviewed him. He was, he was a top person at the Pentagon, top NSC officials.

Jake Sullivan, Benghazi Jake. He worked for Hillary, now he’s working for Biden as his national Security advisor. He was involved in the Russia, Russia, Russia hoax. So of course he gets a top job in the White House as A reward. So all these key people haven’t been talked to by Congress. So this again, where Judicial Watch moves into the gap, starts its own heavy lifting. We have many FOIAs out pending on the Afghanistan debacle, and we just filed a lawsuit on one of the worst aspects of it, if not the worst, which is the death of those 13American heroes in August of 2021.

We filed the lawsuit after they denied our request or essentially refused to even respond to our request for nearly three years. And it was a straightforward request. Any and all records of communications, including emails referencing Abby Gate, sent to the following and from the following Lloyd Austin, Mark Milley, and the Vice Chairman of Chiefs of Staff, John E. Hyten. General John E. Hyten. I think his last name is spelled, spelled, pronounced that way. And they’ve given. It’s been a complete blackout on documents. On August 26, 2021, two suicide bombers and gunmen attacked crowds of Afghans flocking to Kabul’s airport in the waning days of an airlift for those fleeing the Taliban takeover.

The attacks killed 13 U.S. troops. And I want to spend a minute because as far as I can tell, Joe Biden hasn’t mentioned their names. Kamala Harris hasn’t mentioned their names. I want to spend a minute going through the names of the heroes that died that day trying to protect their fellow troops, obviously, and protect the innocents who are trying to flee the Taliban horde that Biden had surrendered to. And these are their Staff Sergeant Darren T. Hoover, age 31. Sergeant Johanni Rosario Pichardo, age 25 Sergeant Nicole L. Gee, 23. Corporal Hunter Lopez, 22. Corporal Deegan W.

Page 23. Corporal Humberto A. Sanchez, age 22. Look at how young these people are. These kids. These are kids as far as I can, you know, as far as I’m concerned, they’re kids to me. Marine Corps Lance Corporal David E. David l. Espinosa, age 20. Lance Corporal Jared M. Schultz, age 20. Lance Corporal was Riley L. McCollum, age 20. Lance Corporal Dylan R. Marola, age 20. And last but certainly not least, not ever least, Lance Corporal Karim and Naku, age 20. And here’s. Look at how young these men and women are. Look at them. Let’s take 10, 15 seconds and just pray for their families and their friends.

So we didn’t sue on behalf of the families, although as far as I’m concerned, I’d like to think we’re helping the families. We’re suing on behalf of Judicial Watch to get these documents because these heroes deserve to be Vindicated in the sense that everything that happened to them and how it happened, the public has a right to know. So a those who did anything wrong that led to their needless deaths, because the deaths were needless, because the situation should never have allowed to happen. And it was a foreseeable result of Joe Biden’s decision making. And those who robotically implemented it and happily participated in something they knew was going to result in something terrible.

And 170 civilians were also killed. 170 civilians. So there’s a lot of blood on the hands of the Biden administration in Afghanistan, which continues. The poor terrorists are rising in Afghanistan. The Taliban is marauding as they’ve done in the past. And this administration is hiding records. And they’re so desperate to hide records that it’s been three years. We have to go to federal court to get them basic information. They don’t even want to tell us how many records there are. Sometimes they tell us, we have records. You can’t get them. They don’t even want to do that.

But thankfully, thanks to Judicial Watch’s heavy lifting, we get to go into federal court and they’ve got to respond and they have to tell the court, this is, these are the records, this is the number, or we’re going to start searching and we’ll see what we got. That’s the only way to get these people to move off the ball here, you know, and the report, this report, the willful blindness report out of the house. They had some, you know, it’s worth reading to see some of the material about what happened at Abbey Gate. And these are some of the key conclusions they drew.

The failure to close Abbey Gate in spite. So this was a place where people were entering the airport. The failure to close Abbey Gate in spite of consistent threat warnings about an imminent attack. So they knew something was going to come and they didn’t do anything to protect our people. The intention behind this decision was magnanimous. Getting innocent civilians to safety. But As a result, U.S. service members were exposed to significant risk. Killed. They were killed. The reliance on the Taliban. This is another big point. The reliance on the Taliban for security. I mean, I remember that, remember that craziness.

The Taliban was providing security for the US Troops. Relying on a long time brutal enemy to provide security around the airport was fraught with problems from the very beginning. The Taliban long harbored violent intentions towards Americans, toward Americans and have expressed no regard for innocent human life. In addition, their security screening was inconsistent and haphazard. So they weren’t our Friends, and they weren’t professional, to put it mildly. The Taliban also did not consistently assist the US Military with confronting known or suspected ISIS K cells operating in the city, including the cell that would eventually carry out the attack.

This is another key point. The refusal of the US Military to conduct any direct attacks against ISIS K inside Afghanistan for fear of upsetting the Taliban. So it was cut and run. Intelligence pointed to the ISIS K cell behind the attack, but the US Military did not have the manpower and the Biden Harris administration did not have the political will to conduct operations in and outside Kabul to neutralize it. Instead, the administration relied on terrorists to capture other terrorists. 13 people are dead and there’s been zero accountability other than a report from the House. And the woman who said she was the last person in the room as the decision was being made is the nominee for the Democratic Party.

And I don’t think she’s been asked a question. The media hasn’t demanded that she be asked a question on this. For three long years, the Biden Harris Pentagon has unlawfully been hiding records about the preventable deaths of 13American servicemen at the infamous Abbey Gate. This cover up is disgraceful, and it’s just one more cruel act against the families of the fallen and other Americans who want the full truth about the deadly Biden Harris Afghanistan debacle. Now, of course, Judicial Watch has been second to none in getting documents about, generally speaking, our foreign policy, especially as it relates to terrorism.

We already have a lawsuit or two on Afghanistan. Of course we’re getting the runaround. We’ve uncovered many important details about the Afghanistan cover up, including the erasure of key reports from the Internet by the Biden gang. And so they’re not embarrassed in terms of the material and other things they were leaving behind. They deleted material. At least $239 million has fallen into the hands of the Taliban under this administration. You know, and it all ties back again to 9 11. The Supreme Court of the United States is about to hear a landmark case that could reshape how elections are run.

Nationw, Judicial Watch is challenging an Illinois law that allows the counting of mail in ballots that arrive up to 14 days after election day. That’s two weeks beyond the date set by federal law. Even ballots that arrive without a postmark can be counted. Federal law says the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even numbered year is election Day for federal elections. Extending the counting of ballots doesn’t just run counter to federal law. It invites voter fraud and undermines voter confidence. Judicial Watch argues that Illinois’s law violates federal law and threatens election integrity.

In addition, we argue candidates running for office should be able to challenge these sorts of laws in court. Until recently, it was self evident that candidates could sue to challenge election regulations. However, two lower courts ruled that our clients candidates for federal office lacked the basis to challenge Illinois’s practice of counting ballots received after Election Day. Standing is the legal term for this legal right to pursue a lawsuit in court. Judicial Watch lawyers responded that 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. If a candidate can’t challenge the illicit counting of ballots contrary to federal law, who can? This is the exact issue now before the Supreme Court. No other legal organization has matched Judicial Watch’s record in ensuring free and fair elections. The outcome of this Supreme Court case could impact how elections are run for years to come. And you can be sure Judicial Watch will continue to fight for election integrity because no one is above the law. Thanks for watching.

Don’t forget to hit that subscribe button and like our video down below. Sam.
[tr:tra].

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