➡ The speaker criticizes the Biden administration for what they believe is an unjustified raid on former President Trump’s home, arguing it was politically motivated. They suggest that the administration wrongly classified Trump’s personal records as presidential or classified to justify the raid. The speaker also discusses the recent arrest of a suspect in the January 6th bombing, questioning the FBI’s efficiency and competence as the evidence was available for years. They conclude by expressing concern over the FBI’s ability to effectively carry out its duties.
➡ The article discusses concerns about the FBI’s efficiency, citing a case that took five years to resolve despite having evidence. It also mentions a video posted by Democrat members of Congress, which is seen as encouraging the military to disobey President Trump’s orders. The author suggests this could be seen as sedition and calls for a criminal investigation into the matter. The article ends by urging the Justice Department and the Secretary of War to investigate and take necessary action.
➡ The article discusses concerns about the FBI’s new leadership, Kash Patel and Dan Bongino, and their perceived lack of action against corruption within the agency. It criticizes their lack of transparency, particularly in relation to the Epstein files and the Freedom of Information Act. The article also suggests that Patel and Bongino may be influenced by the deep state, and questions the effectiveness of the FBI and other agencies like the CIA. It ends by expressing disappointment in the lack of change in the FBI’s approach and operations.

The Constitution is in crisis. Our republic is in crisis because of the Biden administration’s reckless, abusive and political raid on the home of President Trump. I want to talk to you about that at some length today and directly. I was unable to talk to you about it directly last week because I was on vacation, or at least I was trying to be on vacation. But the outrageous Biden corruption thwarted that to some extent. But I’m glad to be back here with you today because there’s so much going on and so much background that I want to share with you.

I can’t talk fast enough to get it out. So I want you to keep track and understand. In the end, this was a baseless, bad faith political raid on the home of the former president, President Trump, the former candidate for office, the prior president, obviously, who had run against Biden and who is likely to be his challenger in 2024. It has no precedent in American history. And as I will explain, the whole basis for it was fraud. And we should be outraged about it. We should be concerned that the FBI and the DOJ have been, you know, I get we’ve been always concerned about this, but they for sure have been hijacked for political purposes, to target the political opponents of President Biden, the Democrats and the left generally.

And when you have federal law enforcement being used in this way, not to advance the interests of the public, not to advance rule of law, not to fairly administer justice, but to target the political opponents of the current administration, that way lies the death of the republic. So these are serious times for our system of government. And, you know, the big media would have you believe, oh, the president had classified records, the president had presidential records. Oh, it must have been really serious for them to raid it. No, none of that is likely true, as I will explain.

And virtually anything that he, even if it were all true, there was nothing warranting the raid, the dangerous raid on President Trump’s home. Now, Judicial Watch has been now for almost 30 years, the number one litigator I would submit on records issues. And you’re going to hear some phrases thrown out by me today related to laws. And I’ll give you a quick there are several laws related to the handling of government records and access to them. Obviously, there’s the Freedom of Information act, which gives American citizens and others access to information about what the government’s up to, certainly at the executive branch level, meaning the agencies of the president are subject to foia.

And there’s another law called the Federal Records act, which is a kind of a more narrow law that relates to the responsibilities of federal agencies to create records and maintain records about the activities of the agencies. So it goes beyond, it makes it clear that when the government’s making decisions, they document them. And then the other law that is of interest to us today is the Presidential Records Act. It’s a law that purports to govern the handling and classification of records that the President’s. The President of the United States uses in the White House. And under the law, he can designate certain records as presidential records and certain records as personal records.

I want to say that again, under the law, the president and the president alone can designate certain records as presidential records to be saved for historical purposes, to be managed and ultimately released potentially by the National Archives, or he can designate personal records. And I don’t presumably need to tell you what a personal record means, practically speaking, it means there are records that he gets to keep and take with them after the presidency. And that’s the rub with the, with the sham investigation and targeting and abuse of President Trump. They’re pretending the records he had were personal or, excuse me, were presidential and, or classified.

And I would contend, because the position of the Justice Department has previously been that records the president has after the presidency presumptively are personal, presumptively are not classified, presumptively are not governed by the Presidential Records act, presumptively are not subject to confiscation by the National Archives or any of its agents, namely the Justice Department or the FBI. But they changed the rules, they’ve changed the law, and I suspect they pulled a fast one even on the court down there in Florida in suggesting all of this was at issue to justify a raid on his home, when, in fact, they had no good faith basis to do so.

And quickly. The other big news story this week was the arrest of the alleged January 6 bomber, someone who allegedly placed bombs around on or about January 6th. And five years later, they finally figured out who the suspect is, and there’s been an arrest. And supposedly it’s because the leadership of the FBI, supposedly the break in the case came because the FBI brought in new sets of eyes investigators to look at evidence they’ve had for years. Now, I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t sound right to me. And I kind of tweeted out my analysis here.

It’s worth reflecting on because I don’t think I’ll improve upon it. Talking off the cuff here. Let me bring up the tweet so you can look at it. And I kind of summarize. The nice thing about tweets, it sometimes forces you to kind of to make the point succinctly. And this is the point. The arrest of a January 6th pipe bomb subject nearly five years after his alleged crimes, based on evidence already long available to the government, is curious and disconcerting. Assuming this is the guy, one wonders how clues and evidence pointing to this suspect were supposedly missed by the FBI for years.

So there are a few conclusions here that one might draw based on the late apprehension of this individual. And they have all this detail. You can look at the details and provide links to the information provided to the court justifying the arrest. And how they have all these receipts and such showing his purchase of components that could be used to create such devices, how he was potentially in the area at the time, how he had maybe the same sneaker as the person in the video that has been put out there, all of which they’ve had. And so what conclusions can one draw that they had to have another set of eyes to take a look at this, that the most significant, most powerful law enforcement organization in the history of the world, the FBI, couldn’t figure it out till just now? Well, one conclusion that some people are drawing, and I’m not in a position to shoot it down, but I’m raising it, I’m not necessarily endorsing it, but I’m raising it, is that they had the information.

They knew who it likely was, but there was no interest in pursuing it because the person was seen to be a Democrat and might have been a leftist, and they didn’t want to arrest him because it would have undermined the narrative that January 6th was all about destroying our democracy by Trump supporters. The other conclusion that I think is more likely is that the FBI is a disaster, that they can’ tithey it’s Keystone Cops at best. I don’t think it was ignorance. I don’t think it was willful ignorance. I think generally it’s incompetence. The simplest explanation generally is the most likely one.

And I think it’s true in this case. And so rather than I don’t necessarily complain, I’m not necessarily complaining about celebrating that they caught the guy finally. But if I were the FBI director, if I were the attorney general, if I were the President of the United States, I would see this as more evidence that the FBI needs to be shattered and scattered. They can’t be trusted to investigate anything. They were able to obtain data in a way that was quite invasive. You know, they got credit card data for purchases all over the area nationally. Think of all the bank data they got related to January 6th that I thought was an outrageous fishing expedition, violating the privacy and civil liberties of countless Americans.

And they couldn’t find this guy. That’s not acceptable. And an organization that fails repeatedly on issues like this, forget about the politicization, forget about it being used like a political police against conservatives and Donald Trump, forget about all that. They just don’t do their job well. Now, are there individual agents who do their job well? I suppose so. But all that’s irrelevant. Institutionally, the FBI is a failure to a degree. It’s still around. It’s because of the inertia of the big state, of the deep state. And big government is that agencies are just around forever. Their efficacy, their success, whether they waste or abuse tax dollars.

It’s irrelevant. It’s absolutely irrelevant. So, yes, if this is the guy, I’m glad they picked him up. I’m interested to know if the evidence is strong, given the way the investigation progressed. I’m sure defense attorneys for this individual are going to be very aggressive in wondering why, if they had the evidence already, was he already a suspect? Why did they not arrest him earlier? You know, is the evidence any different? Or maybe they were just reading the evidence in a way that is inappropriate and presenting it in a way that’s inappropriate in terms of justifying an arrest, I don’t know.

But assuming all that aside, this FBI is a disaster, and I’ve said it many times before, and it’s worth repeating, I don’t trust the FBI. And the fact that it took nearly five years to find this gentleman, even though they had allegedly, by their own admission, the evidence to do so beforehand just is what, an indictment of that agency. So you can be sure that Judicial Watch will be using FOIA to investigate this disaster of an investigation. It’s no victory for the rule of law for an agency to be floundering for five years, unable to analyze the evidence they had until its time is passed.

So much that the final arrest is seen with suspicion by countless Americans. Is there sedition in Congress targeting President Trump? It looks like there is. Of course, the media is defending the outrageous video that was posted by Democrat members of Congress, essentially encouraging the military to engage in a mutiny and disobey orders of President Trump. Now, of course, they won’t say that’s what their intent was or what they said, but you could be the judge, and I think we all see through what they did. And here’s the video. It includes. Let’s go to Twitter here. Our friends at libs @TikTok posted it nicely for us.

As I said, leftists promoting a military coup. Here, let me see what you think, because the media will tell you what they said, characterize what they said. But I want you to see what they said so you have the context. I’m Senator Alyssa Slotkin. Senator Mark Kelly. Representative Chris d’. Aluzio. Congresswoman Maggie Goodlander. Representative Chrissy Houlihan. Congressman Jason Crow. I was a captain in the United States Navy, former CIA officer, former Navy, former paratrooper and Army Ranger, former intelligence officer, former Air Force. We want to speak directly to members of the military and the intelligence community who take risks each day to keep Americans safe.

We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now. Americans trust their military, but that trust is at risk. This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens like us. You all swore an oath to protect and defend this Constitution. Right now, the threats to our Constitution. Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution. We know this is hard and that it’s a difficult time to be a public servant.

But whether you’re serving in the CIA, the army or Navy, the Air Force, your vigilance is critical. And know that we have your back because now more than ever, the American people need you. We need you to stand up for our laws, our Constitution, and who we are as Americans. Don’t give up. Don’t give up. Don’t give up. Don’t give up. The ship. How on earth is that not encouraging sedition? They’re not fooling anyone. First of all, what unlawful orders is President Trump given or is set to give that would warrant a video like this? What they are implying quite directly, is that lawful orders that they don’t, like Democrats or leftists or progressives, whatever you want to call them, should be ignored by our military, should be ignored by civilian intelligence officials.

So if this isn’t a sedition or calling for effectively a military coup, I don’t know what you would do other than being more direct in doing so. So in my view, they’re fooling no one. It’s certainly encouraging in a dangerous fashion, sedition against the President, mutiny, whatever you want to call it. And they are using their status as veterans to provide, I think, dangerous and bad faith advice to members of our Military. And I just can’t believe they think that’s appropriate. So what is the response? Trump is bad because Trump highlighted it. Seditious, highlighted that the potential penalty in some cases for such sedition is the death penalty.

So what is their response? Oh, we didn’t say that. Well, they’re not fooling anyone. They did say it. And I do think they should be subject to criminal investigation. I call these six members who participated in this, the seditious six. They should be subject to criminal investigation. And to the degree any of them are still subject to military jurisdiction, I’m not sure if any of them still are. Maybe Senator Kelly is. The military should call him back into service where appropriate and commence court martial proceedings over this sedition. You know, the left has sought to kill President Trump, put his life in danger, sought to jail President Trump, they killed Charlie Kirk, they’re encouraging violence and lawlessness against federal law enforcement.

And ice suggesting the laws shouldn’t be followed. And the context of this is President Trump using his lawful authorities under Article 2 of the Constitution and Commander in Chief to deploy the military to protect life, limb and property in various cities, including here in Washington, D.C. and they simply are echoing the left’s malicious defamation, that that’s unlawful and it’s somehow inappropriate when in fact it’s perfectly reasonable under the law. And given the conditions taking place and the threats to the public safety and federal law enforcement in these various left wing controlled cities. And what they’re doing is they’re trying to set up a very dangerous situation where the military or members of the military refuse to follow lawful orders by the President of the United States.

And you’re not fooling me by pretending them to be unlawful. Do you expect them to come out and say you should ignore President Trump’s orders whether they’re lawful or not? No, they’re not going to say that. They’re going to couch it in the terms they did. Watch that video again and tell me if you believe that there was a completely innocent recitation of what the law is as to the rights of the military to follow only lawful orders. They’re fooling no one. So what is happening now? They’re complaining to the U.S. capitol Police that Trump threatened them.

So they’re trying to divert attention from their unlawful and potentially criminal conduct by pretending Trump did something wrong by defending himself against this seditious conspiracy. So there. And I’m not going to bore you with the law. You can these days. You don’t need me to tell you how to look up what the laws at issue here are potentially. But just so you know, there are civilian laws, meaning laws that cover those of us in the civilian world, both criminal laws about this type of behavior. And if you’re in the military, there are laws within the military legal structure where you can be subject to court martial.

And I think thosei think all of that should be pursued. So I’m not going to, I’m not going to pretend to ignore my lying. My eyes. Right. You know, it’s like, who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes? Right. I see what they did, you see what they did. And indeed, they’re kind of trying to run away. Oh, we didn’t mean he had done anything unlawful. We’re just worried about what he might do in the future. Future. What might he do in the future that requires you to encourage essentially military resistance to civilian control of our armed forces? I mean, I keep on talking about this coup that’s been taking place, and it’s been a long, slow motion coup against our republic.

And it’s most significant iteration has been the targeting of Trump. And here we just saw it this week. Here we just saw it this week. This is a dangerous situation for America. When you have politicians gambling. With lives, are they suggesting, for instance, that lawful orders? Because this is, this is the position of many on the left and many people disagree with. I think what he’s done has been perfectly appropriate, his taking out these drug smugglers, these drug runners on the high seas. So someone decides it’s not a lawful order to pursue this. How’s that going to work? Who’s going to be placed in danger in those circumstances? You know, here at Judicial Watch, you see a lot of awful things by government officials, politicians.

This is near the top. It’s really an assault on our Republican form of government. Appealing to the military to take a stand against the elected President of the United States. Unbelievable. Unbelievable. So what would be outrageous is for the Justice Department not to pursue this. What would be outrageous is. What would be outrageous would be for the War Department not to appropriately investigate those that are still subject to their jurisdiction or the law. Trump should just keep on keeping on on this. And I would go a step further than what President Trump has said. I would, if I were President Trump, direct the Justice Department, the Attorney General of the United States and the Secretary of War to investigate and if necessary, arrest and then prosecute if the facts and law warrant the individuals who did this.

Just do it. We’ve been critical of the. I wouldn’t say critical. We’ve been Concerned about the FBI’s new leadership, Kash Patel and Dan Bongino. And our concern is that they don’t seem to be taking the steps that at least in my view, they should be taking to clean up corruption in the FBI. And I would just completely cut back the agency do mass firings. Not very incremental moves as they seemingly have been doing. I haven’t seen any information to suggest that doing a broad based criminal investigation into lawfare against Trump. Certainly their position on transparency hasn’t changed in practice as it relates to Judicial Watch and the Freedom of Information Act.

I mean, we just sued last week. Well, we sued several months ago for the Epstein files. At this point, the government’s answer was due last week. And we asked the FBI and doj, give us Epstein files and plus give us records about, you know, your handling of the Epstein files from Cash and Pam Bondi, the attorney general. And the response has been to not give us one document yet. And they cited, I think, extraordinary circumstances or exceptional circumstances as justification for not giving us material yet. And they haven’t told us or the court when they’re going to turn over the Epstein files.

And that’s just one example of lack of transparency under law by the FBI. And I’m sorry, you don’t need time to comply with the law. We’re not asking them to build, you know, I do think they should be pursuing cases. This isn’t an issue about whether they have time to build a case. No, this is an issue about whether they’re going to actually follow the FOIA law every day in every way. And my colleague Micah Morrison, who writes the Investigative Bulletin over at Judicial Watch. Again, another reason to go to our website, had a really excellent piece and it’s called FBI’s Patel and hostages of the Deep State.

And it’s a nice piece. You can tell I shouldn’t say nice piece. It’s a fair piece to them, you know. And we note in the beginning here, Cash and Dan had 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, and expectations were high. Micah quoted, you know, our support of him of at least Cash Cash’s appointment there. But later in the piece, Micah notes 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. By the deep state. Excuse me, that they’ve been taken hostage by the deep state consensus and are failing to bring meaningful changes to the FBI. And so, you know, we just go through jot and till what the FBI has and hasn’t been doing in terms of accountability and such. And it’s not to say they haven’t been doing some good things.

There’s obviously some good things they’re going to be doing. I mean, Dan and Cash are generally good guys, there’s no doubt about it. But on these big picture issues, they’re a little bit behind, to put it charitably, as we say at the end of the piece. 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, quote, demolish the deep state is watching from the White House. So my guess is Trump is wondering too, or at least I would be if I were him.

They will not be forgiven for bungling an historic opportunity. That’s pretty strong stuff. But it’s true. Everything’s riding on it. I mean, they tried to destroy these agencies, tried to destroy our republic, and nothing’s been done. As best I can tell, that effectively holds them accountable for that. And I was talking about this issue with our friend Steve Bannon on the War Room the other day. Let’s talk. Let’s go to that videotape. Well, you know, on the foreign policy issues you raise, I’m more hawkish than you are, but I think we would both agree that the deep states approach to Ukraine, Russia and Iran is not to solve any problems, it’s to manage problems.

Right. And you know, Biden didn’t want Russia to win, but they also didn’t want Russia to lose, which to me is a wild abuse of the citizens caught up in a war like that. And same thing with Iran. Either we want them to have nukes or we don’t. Let’s not manage their nuclear program. We’re not in a position to do so. And that’s what the deep state specializes in, creating problems that have to be managed rather than solved. And I know that’s not Trump’s general approach. Now on these issues related though, to the agencies themselves, I’m not quite sure why we still have a CIA, given their failures, their documented record.

Amen. Of failures over the decades, there’s not a darn thing the CIA does that the military agencies can’t do, the intelligence agencies can’t and shouldn’t. And certainly the State Department can take up a lot of the slack as well. And, you know, and my colleague Michael Morrison had a really strong analysis of the situation that Cash and Don are in, that Dan are in, in the, in the FBI. You know, are they, you know, the title was are they hostages of the deep state? And I think there’s a strong argument that they’re hostages of the deep state consensus.

And on top of that, as Micah points out in the piece, you’ve got the inertia of just bureaucracies. You’ve got the political calendar. And in many ways, in my view, they’re distracted from their core responsibility, I think, which is to dismantle the FBI and protect the Republic. I mean, the left tried to kill President Trump last year. They tried to throw him in jail. They’ve been fomenting an insurrection. We had right now a political leader of the Democratic Party, a senator from California, assault law enforcement as he was disrupting a press briefing. They’re putting the country on the precipice.

And, you know, I would submit this insurrection, it’s the other side of the coin to the warfare against Trump. And you get these folks an inch, they will take a mile. And it’s about protecting the Republic in the end. And the FBI is an instrumentality of those who would destroy the Republic. And Dan and Cash may be running it for now, but organizationally and institutionally, I don’t think they’re redeemable and in the least, you know, I mean, I actually watch it strangely, in a disinterested way. Oh, I agree with me. I kind of. I often say.

Because, you know, are my comments making sense to me as I think about them even later? They are. It’s concerning. I mean, in the lease, we’re not even getting responses properly to our FOIA requests. They’re still stonewalling, installing. We have a case. I really don’t remember the detail because I haven’t done the prep on it for a discussion with you, but I’m going to tell you about it anyway. So we’re essentially, we’re asking the FBI. We sued for their foia. We sued under FOIA for their censorship records with Twitter and social media. And there’s key information Cash and Dan’s FBI are withholding from us.

And we’re going to have to go to court next week and fight about. They don’t want to talk about the Biden administration’s internal deliberations related to the censorship of Americans. And no, it’s not because they’re building a case. It’s because the agency takes the position we don’t have a right to see it. Because, oh, if we release the records about our internal discussions, that might chill further deliberations, future discussions. We want people to be open and honest. That’s the sort of crap we have to put up with, and I’m frankly tired of it. I thought we were going to have a change in pace, a change in approach.

Evidently not. So I want the FBI to arrest bad guys. I want the FBI to do the job they’re being paid to do. But do I trust the FBI institutionally? I do not. Do I think it should remain? I do not. Heck, they can’t give us one Epstein document. Not one. It’s been months. Unacceptable. Unacceptable. I mean, I could go through dozens of requests, literally. Excuse me, dozens of lawsuits against the Justice Department and the FBI, which have not changed one bit since the Attorney General and Cash took over. I tell you, if Trump knew the scope of it, he’d go ballistic.
[tr:tra].

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