BEST OF: Will Hunter Go to Jail? DEFUND Trump Prosecutions? MORE!

➡ Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, criticizes Congress for not taking solid actions to halt government corruption and the misdemeanours of the Biden administration, saying it is their moral responsibility to stop the alleged abuse of power, mass censorship of citizens, illicit funding of abortion, promotion of transgender extremism, and other practices. He discusses the controversial attempts by the Biden administration to prosecute former President Trump on supposedly unprecedented charges, and expresses the need for the judiciary to be unbiased for the smooth functioning of the system of justice. He also criticizes the long vacation of Congress, stating that they should be back at work, handling the alleged ongoing crises.
➡ The ongoing corruption crisis with President Biden is causing tension among lawmakers, with focus on funding misconduct and transparency issues in government. Resistance against impeachment inquiry is prominent, and concerns about agencies of the Biden administration, censorship, and critical race theory are rising. Lawsuits over the Hunter Biden gun scandal and efforts to release January 6 videos have created a hostile environment for the administration.
➡ The text revolves around concerns and skepticism regarding an investigation by Special Counsel into potential felony charges against Hunter Biden. It further discusses corruption within the Justice Department, allegations of favoritism toward the Bidens and unrest related to the Special Counsel’s operation and potential political motivations. There are also references to a lawsuit by Judicial Watch, a cover-up by deep state agencies and speculations about the reliability of the charges against Hunter.
➡ The text revolves around allegations of corruption and cover-ups against the Biden family, including scrutinizing the Justice Department, FBI, and IRS for potentially suppressing evidence. Also discussed are certain financial deals that appear suspicious and allegations of bribery involving Hunter Biden. The text brings up concerns about the Justice Department’s fairness and the idea that no one should be above the law. It also discusses the issue of federal agencies potentially influencing tech platforms in censoring certain content, leading to disputes over violations of the First Amendment.
➡ The speaker alleges the Biden administration is involved in ongoing censorship that violates the first amendment rights, and is working with big tech companies to suppress information they deem harmful to democratic interests. Judicial Watch has reportedly filed lawsuits against different entities in the administration to expose this censorship. The speaker asserts that discussions around issues like COVID and climate change are also being heavily censored, and warns this trend could continue into the 2024 elections.
➡ The discussed Second Amendment aims to prevent federal funding from going to local or state jurisdictions that prosecute presidential candidates. The aim is to eliminate political interference in presidential elections by defunding prosecution efforts. An example given was President Trump’s inability to campaign effectively due to ongoing legal challenges. Further, this summary talks about how the attack on the Second Amendment could impact other civil liberties and the way it’s related to maintaining First Amendment rights. Additionally, concerns are expressed over potential abuses of power by certain governors, particularly those attempting to undermine the Second Amendment, as witnessed in New Mexico.

I’m Tom Fitton. I’m president of Judicial Watch, america’s leading government watchdog organization. We have a simple request for Congress do your job. It’s not enough to do investigations and reports. We need to stop the government corruption and abuse that is so concerning to the American people in this new budget fight, or basically the old budget fight that we’re being asked to pretend is new. There’s an inflection point.

Are we going to continue to fund Republicans in the House? The wild abuse by the Biden administration of its political opponents, the mass censorship of tens of millions of Americans, the border invasion we’ve heard so much about, and the other wild abuses of power that are right now fully funded with Congress. And I don’t know what we’re talking about with a clean cr. I see a dirty cr, a cr that will fund the worst of dirty politics and corruption in our federal government.

And there’s a positive moral obligation right now, not next year, but right now, to stop the abuses, the effort to jail Trump on protectual unprecedented charges in a way never seen before in American history. An obligation to stop right now the Biden administration censorship of tens of millions of Americans. The obligation to stop right now the illicit use of tax monies to fund abortions in our military and elsewhere.

We need to stop right now, the attack on children through the promotion of transgender extremism. We need to stop right now, the lack of serious investigation into the Biden administration corruption, specifically Biden corruption. We need a Justice Department or special counsel that has confidence of the American people. All of these issues can be addressed in this continuing resolution. And if they don’t want to address it, that suggests to me those who vote for it are on the side of corruption and those who oppose it are on the side of justice.

Thank you very much. I’ll open up with this is the current crisis as it relates to the prosecutions, the political prosecutions of President Trump by the Biden administration Democratic Party and its allies in New York City and in most recently Fulton County, Georgia. Developments in that case, or those cases include Judge Chutkin, who is the recent not that recent, actually. She’s an Obama appointee judge, no friend of President Trump, based on comments she’s made from the bench previously in January 6 cases that she’s handled, she set a trial for the sham prosecution of Trump for March 4 of 2024, which is a day before the Super Tuesday primaries.

And as I’ve highlighted to you, this is a case about alleged election interference by President Trump, right, that he wanted to quote overturn the election by disputing the election, which of course is analyse in wonderland legal analysis run by political being put out there by these political prosecutors in the Biden Justice Department. And so on top of that, the judge, rather than rejecting the desperate effort by the Biden administration to jail Trump next year because they wanted this trial to begin in January.

She said, oh, no, that’s too soon. It’s going to be two or three months later in March, actually, literally two months later. And President Trump’s lawyers had asked for the trial to begin in 2026. So it’s clear that Judge Chutkin accepted the Biden administration’s and the Democratic Party’s invitation to have the judiciary interfere with the elections next year. And of course, this snap trial that I think is really an abomination in terms of the president’s rights to a fair trial is just on top of all the other abuses we’re seeing.

It’s bad enough to have the prosecutors abuse their powers, but when you see the judges ratify it and play along or pretend it’s not happening, it’s really destabilizing, I think, to our system of justice. It undermines confidence in the fair administration of justice. And, for instance, in this case, you have tens of millions of documents, at least 12 million documents, last I checked, that need to be reviewed by Trump’s lawyers to prepare for the trial.

And of course, there are other witnesses and things like that. And of course, he has other indictments he’s facing from Allied, not only from the Justice Department, but from the prosecutors in New York and in Georgia. And Judge Shutkin actually said, well, you should have begun preparation when the grand jury was first called. So you’re not indicted, you’ve not been accused of a crime, and you’re supposed to be preparing for the defense.

Well, that shows you that the grand jury process is corrupted if the judge thinks that you should just presume, you’re going to be indicted if a grand jury is called. But again, that’s more of an Alice in Wonderland legal analysis. You should be prepared for trial just because there’s been a grand jury, and you should prepare your defenses over cases that haven’t been filed against you, charges that haven’t been specified against you, and he’s punished for that with a snap trial.

So whether the trial takes place or not, I think, is still an open question, because part of this process, you go to trial, you start essentially on that day in March of next year, March 4. That’s when the trial begins. In a sense, the jury selection begins. But what happens is the court kind of backs away from that date. And there are a series of briefs that are due in preparation for the trial, right.

And some of those briefs could delay the trial significantly if they are appealed. The president’s lawyers plan to assert immunity. Wade’s First Amendment issues, selective prosecution issues, and who knows what else. And they may even object directly to the court about the snap nature of this trial. And this is on top of the desperate effort by the Fulton County to have a snap trial again in Georgia. So on top of that, they want a trial because one of the defendants of the I think 18 defendants wants a quick trial in October, and the response of the Fulton County, Georgia, prosecutors said, well, everyone should be prosecuted or put on trial in October.

Then, of course, President Trump doesn’t want to be target, want to face trial that soon because he needs more time to prepare any defense or any challenges he has to the prosecution. So I want you to imagine a snap trial of 18 defendants on unprecedented charges related to daring to dispute under the First Amendment under the other constitutional provisions governing elections under federal law governing elections under your rights as a citizen and a candidate in the case of the President.

A president. And they’re trying to jail nearly two dozen people in one fell swoop in one trial. This shows you the contempt and the politicization of the system of justice there in Fulton County. We see it happening up here in Washington, DC. And I don’t know if they’re going to seek recusal of Judge Chuckin. I don’t know if there’s enough for recusal. I know just because people think, well, she’s appointed by Obama, therefore she has to recuse herself.

Well, that’s not the way it works necessarily, but she has said a few things from the bench that would make me think a recusal question should be raised, especially when she complained I don’t have the exact quote, but you can look it up. She essentially complained that Trump hadn’t been arrested. She was sentencing or talking to another defendant or referencing a defendant in the January 6 prosecutions, and she basically bemoaned the fact that Trump wasn’t prosecuted.

Now, that suggests a certain bias that I think should be explored by Trump’s lawyers, but we’ll see. So it’s a terrible time for the republic still. I mean, it’s being buffeted day by day, week by week, by these out of control prosecutors, these rogue prosecutors, these road prosecutions. And the courts don’t seem terribly interested in reining it in too much, based at least on what’s happened thus far up here in Washington, DC.

And what is Congress doing about it? Don’t worry. They are still on vacation, as I said to you before. They are on a seven week recess, and they won’t be back till September twelveTH. So you get Labor Day off. I’m sure most of you will be getting Labor Day off. And those of you who are working, thank you for working, but Congress has a seven week recess. And if McCarthy, speaker McCarthy were serious about dealing with the current crisis, he would have called Congress back.

He would have called the House back weeks ago. I was in a meeting the other day, and I said, well, how about calling Congress back, the House back just a day early? Just pretend you take these issues seriously. We’re running up on the by the way, there’s a September 30 deadline on this big spending fight, right? They’re supposed to have all their ducks in a row with regard to appropriations by September 30.

Otherwise they got to pass a continuing resolution, that fiscal cliff supposedly, and they’re coming back on the twelveTH. And on top of that we have these outrageous prosecutions and election interference and abuse of power by the Justice Department and Fulton County in New York, all of which can be stopped by congressional action in the context of that spending fight I just told you about. And then we have the ongoing crisis with President Biden’s corruption, which McCarthy is trying to dance around.

He keeps on saying, well we’re getting close to an impeachment inquiry, but he doesn’t want an impeachment inquiry. Otherwise we’d have one by now he’d call Congress back. So if you are interested in having Congress do the work and do the heavy lifting that’s necessary to stop this corruption because they know what’s happened. So are they going to keep on funding it or not? Okay, this is where the rubber meets the road over the next six weeks.

Are they going to keep on funding it or not? Now the establishment will say you can’t not fund the government, right? You have to fund the government. Doesn’t matter what you’re spending the money on. The spice must flow to quote the great book Dune, we’ve got to keep the money flowing. So if you’ve got concerns about the FBI being funded to target Americans and harass Americans, you’ve got concerns about the Justice Department interfering in our elections or obstructing justice to help Hunter, if you’re concerned about agencies of the Biden administration censoring Americans, that has to be funded.

If you’re concerned about military academies telling their students, their cadets, their midshipmen that America is racist and we have to support Marxist critical race theory, that has to be funded. If you support this craze prosecution in Fulton County or up in New York City against Trump, where they’re trying to jail him for doing his job as President, literally, that has to be funded. Federal monies have to flow to Fulton County.

There can be no cutoff. They’re essentially going to be ratifying it unless they do something about it. Now there are some Congressmen who are going to be submitting appropriations bills. I think Congressman Clyde and Congressman Biggs and a few others, Congressman Gates, they’ve talked about doing this. So these are all opportunities for accountability. And not only that, but it actually could fix some of the misconduct and stop it.

So it’s all coming up. So you got to talk to your members of Congress and let them know what you think because you know what the establishment media is going to say, what the left media is going to say, what the establishment Republicans are going to say. Mitch McConnell, I know, who has health issues, I disagree with him on a lot of stuff, I agree with him on other things, but he doesn’t want to do impeachment.

That crowd over there doesn’t want to do impeachment or anything related to accountability. And as I said, if McCarthy wanted to do something on impeachment, he already would have done something on impeachment. And to keep you updated, as I told you a few weeks ago, we’re still trying to get the January 6 videos out of Congress, right? And we’ve sued the Capitol Hill Police Department. And I want to tell you how frustrating it was two weeks ago when we were in court on a hearing related to this case was this case’s hearing.

We were seeking the so it’s me, our lawyer, Michael Bakesha. We’re in federal court before the judge, and at the other table are the attorneys for the Biden Justice Department, along with an attorney for the US. Capitol Hill Police. So essentially, that’s the McCarthy Congress, right, being represented by the Biden administration’s Justice Department as they try to stop the January 6 videos from being designated public records and being widely released to the American people.

So right now we are battling Speaker McCarthy’s, Congress and the Biden administration on this core transparency issue about January 6. So I know sometimes McCarthy does the right thing, but I tell you, when you’re on the wrong side of transparency, when you’re on the wrong side of government accountability, judicial Watch is going to call you out. And we are nonpartisan. Republicans and Democrats both need to be held accountable to the rule of law, and they just can’t let the corruption go by as if no one’s being impacted and our system isn’t being broken by it.

We were in court earlier this week, federal court. We had a zoom court hearing with the US. District Court Judge in the District of Columbia, and I attended as client, as I typically do, and we were represented by Michael Piccho, one of Judicial Watch’s senior attorneys. And it was a case about and I talked to you about this last week a little bit about the Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that we had against the FBI over the Hunter Biden gun scandal.

And we had begun a series of investigations and lawsuits when we saw in various news media reports that the Secret Service and the FBI went and vacuumed up documents at the gun store that Hunter supposedly purchased his gun from after his gun was thrown in a Dumpster and then seemingly disappeared for a time. And it was thrown into the Dumpster by his then girlfriend sister in law, the widow of his brother.

So it was just completely crazy town. And the government, rather than just giving us records about that, the FBI wasn’t involved in this because the Secret Service previously had given us records already about this issue, and the records were cagey about whether they were involved or not. But we did get records in this case. The FBI is not only refusing to give us any records, at least now, but they don’t want to even tell us how many records they have because supposedly that would ruin their law enforcement investigation.

So we can’t even negotiate with them, practically speaking, about when the records should be produced to us, the sorts of things you would do typically in a legal battle. But the court wanted to know what the basis was and what the legal basis was and asked the Justice Department to defend their, in my view, unprecedented effort to hold these records from us by telling us that they won’t even tell us how many records there are.

Just think about this. You’re trying to fight with the government over records that would be responsive under the Freedom of Information Act. Well, how can you double check what they’re doing if you don’t even know how many records are at issue after they do their search? So that’s where we stood. And what’s interesting is, well, what’s good is that? The court it was a judge, I forget her name, lord help me, but she was a recent appointee.

I think she’s a brand new judge appointed by President Biden. But it was a straightforward analysis, analysis. Judicial Watch fairly, is asking these questions and we want to get these records and process along. We’ve been asking for these records for some time, so it’s frustrating to have to litigate even the issue of whether they can tell us how many records they have. But the case is moving along.

So we come out of the court and I think it’s the next day or so, we find out why they were potentially so sensitive about this issue. And that was there was an announcement by the so called special counsel, Mr. Weiss, up in Delaware, and he filed it, I think, in Delaware court, that he would be filing what looks to be a felony gun charge against Hunter by September 29.

Now, what a remarkable turn of events, isn’t it? It really confirms that the gun charge that previously they didn’t want to charge him at all for basically just they wanted to keep it off the books. Practically speaking, it wasn’t even technically part of the plea deal. He wasn’t pleading guilty to any gun crimes. It was part of a side deal that was exposed in that infamous, or I should say famous court hearing that exposed the Justice Department corrupt and unprecedented cover up to help Hunter Biden get away with a series of tax and it looks like gun crimes.

And you may recall those IRS whistleblowers said that it was all rigged and the Justice Department was interfering with and messing with the investigations to help Hunter and protect Joe. And part of that obstruction was the special counsel investigation, or was the investigation by Weiss, who then wasn’t special counsel, but was the Garland justice Department liked to pretend he was, but he had no powers and his cases were getting and he allowed them to get derailed.

In fact, there were charges related to taxes that the statute of limitations were allowed to run on, meaning he can’t be charged on them in theory, and that was purposely done by the Biden Justice Department. So all of that gets exposed. And so in response, what does Biden do or Garland do? Because Garland is Biden’s stand in in this regard is that he appoints Weiss as special counsel.

And so rather than basically investigate Weiss for this obstruction and the way this case was handled, the Justice Department puts the fox in charge of the hen house, relatively speaking. And so his first move, in my view, was to distract from all of that corruption I’m talking about by targeting Hunter in this gun charge. Now. Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe Weiss is like, I did the best I could under terrible circumstances, and now that I’m special counsel, I’m going to go to town and this Hunter case is the first one out of the gate.

And it’s going to be a broad investigation. We’re going to get into all the tax issues and the foreign agent issues and whether or not Hunter and Joe were in some sort of racketeering conspiracy, maybe that’s all in the offing. And this big know, if you’re Hunter, you’re facing a felony charge, right? And he’s potentially facing significant time in jail if he’s convicted. And so who knows? Now, I’m skeptical.

I think frankly, if, say, we had this deal, you weren’t willing to even prosecute me or make me plead out to a crime related to this issue. And I think in theory, the charge would relate to whether he filled out the federal form related to gun purchasing in a way that was truthful. And so he said his theory is that this was no big whoop, you didn’t care about it initially, and the only reason you’re coming after me is politics.

I don’t know, it’s kind of a fair argument in some ways, right? I hate to be on the side of Hunter here, but that’s the problem. When the Justice Department plays games, people who benefit from the games, obviously that’s outrageous, but on the other hand, they can also play games the other way. So it just undermines confidence in the fair administration of justice no matter where you stand here.

And this is why the Justice Department and this whole investigation should be handled by people who don’t have an interest because of their prior involvement in the obstruction. And that would include Weiss and Garland. They can’t be involved in this or as best as can be prevented. They should be the target of an investigation in the least. And so any investigation, let’s say the charge against Hunter is well founded and good faith.

Well, people are going to question it, hunter’s going to question it. People like me are going to question it. So the Justice Department, as I keep on saying, is an ethical collapse. And every investigation they are involved in is suspicious. So I had a discussion first. I have a clip here of our discussion of the court hearing. My reaction to the court hearing right after we came out of court and I kind of go after the FBI here and this is really part of the scandal.

Let’s go to that. Hey, everyone. Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton here with some news. We were in federal court today against both the FBI and Justice Department who are trying to hide those FBI documents about the Hunter Biden gun scandal. You may recall how Hunter Biden’s gun ended up in a dumpster up there in Delaware, I believe. Now the FBI doesn’t even want to tell us how many documents they have about this scandal, about their potential involvement and help covering up this scandal for Hunter Biden.

And of course now they’ve invoked the sham and compromised Special Counsel as an excuse to further delay the release of these documents. Well, the court wants more information from the FBI and has demanded a brief explaining why it is they can’t tell us even how many documents they have about this Hunter Biden corruption scandal. It takes heavy lifting by Judicial Watch and your support to keep on fighting against this terrible corruption here in you know, I’m glad we played that because it reminded me that they are using the Special Counsel as an excuse to keep these documents away from us.

I guess my thinking was and is we’d asked for these documents a long time ago. I think this request and this lawsuit was, I think, filed in January of this year. We’ve been investigating this long before then, long before Special Counsel was, you know, what’s the law enforcement investigation here is it into Hunter. And was this whole gun scandal and the dumping of the gun somehow tied to these upcoming charges? Frankly, it doesn’t sound like that’s the case.

Frankly, if the investigation is they’re investigating the FBI and Secret Service’s role in helping cover up the scandal for them, that’s another you know, we have this confirmation that the Special Counsel has to, quote, review all the documents that Judicial Watch wants. And that’s why they want to stall and delay and don’t even want to tell us the number of documents that would be available to us or should be are going to be reviewed.

That’s the first hurdle. How many record did they do the search? Right? Let’s say they find 1000 documents. Well, we don’t necessarily get all those documents. They quote half the process them, which is look at them and either and cut out or black out redact material, hopefully lawfully as opposed to unlawfully, which is dishonestly, and then release them. That’s the processing. So it shouldn’t take forever in a day.

And the fact that it is suggests that there’s a cover up going on. Now I laid out my concerns about the special counsel. What do you think? I run hot and cold. And I think given the corruption at the Justice Department, we should be distrustful. And this was my initial reaction here upstairs on the roof of Judicial Watches headquarters. Hey, everyone. Judicial Watch president Tom FitOn here with some breaking news.

The so called Special Counsel announced that he’d be filing charges against Hunter Biden related to his gun purchasing. This conflicted compromised and corrupt. Special Counsel was caught red handed with an unprecedented sweetheart deal for Hunter that was undone through a federal court proceeding up in Delaware. And now he’s trying to distract from the fact he compromised and dropped charges against Hunter Biden that could implicate Joe Biden and countless others.

Don’t be distracted by this latest move concerning Hunter Biden. We should be investigating and demanding accountability, something Judicial Watch already is doing in federal court for the Justice Department’s corrupt protection of the Biden clan, a protection racket they’ve been engaging in, while at the same time targeting and abusing President Trump and other innocent Americans. Well, you can see I was in a very skeptical mood when I made that presentation.

I’m a little less skeptical today. But the point is that we’ve got a crisis. We can’t trust the Special Counsel to do anything. There’s little doubt that the Garland Justice Department isn’t playing games in protecting Joe Biden. And the question is, what is it we do about it? And I highlighted what Judicial Watch tries to do, which is to file lawsuits and series of Freedom of Information Act requests to get information about the Biden corruption issues, whether it be specific details of what the Bidens were up to and the corruption there.

And then secondly, the IRS, FBI, DOJ, State Department, you name it, cover up of said corruption. Just last week I highlighted how or was it two weeks ago? Doesn’t matter. We just sued the CIA, for instance, for their role in the COVID up of Biden corruption. So we’ve got not only the underlying corruption that we’re, Judicial Watch, is investigating, but also the obstruction and the COVID up of that corruption by these deep state agencies.

And so I kind of explained the reality of this, I thought, in a pretty good way with our friend Stuart Varney on Fox Business the other day. Let’s go to that discussion. What is the significance of this possible indictment? Well, it further highlights the corrupted Justice Department handling of the Hunter Biden investigations. The only reason we’re here is because the unprecedented non prosecution of the Gun deal was exposed essentially as corrupt as Lucas described as a result of a court inquiry.

You know, Weiss needs to be investigating, frankly, the FBI and the Secret Services intervention, reportedly as Judicial Watch has been trying to do in foil litigation. Remember, that gun was dumped into a dumpster by his then girlfriend and sister in law Haley Biden. And the report is the Secret Service and Fox News reported this out and the FBI went and vacuumed up documents way back five years ago.

We were just in court yesterday, literally stu in federal court. The FBI is telling the court that they can’t even tell us because it’s a secret how many documents they have about this scandal. And I tell you, Weiss is compromised. He can’t be trusted to investigate. Frankly, you know, Hunter Biden’s lawyers, I suspect, are going to say, look, we had a deal and we’re going to hold you to it.

And I think Hunter deserves, maybe ironically, the benefit of the doubt here in terms of the Justice Department trying to protect its rear by targeting him on this gun charge, which is, by the way, substantial, despite what his lawyers do. True, but it’s gun charges, not tax charges. Is that a deliberate strategy to help the Biden campaign stay away from the tax idea? Well, certainly a beneficial distraction in the sense that we know that these prosecutors ditched and allowed to lapse key charges related to his taxes.

They seem uninterested in him being a foreign agent or even Joe Biden being a foreign agent based on the rules. And so the big question is, is this special counsel going to be diligent in investigating the full penalty of Biden’s scandals? And there’s no reason to think he will be, given his misleading of Congress about what he was supposed to be doing and how the Justice Department interfered with and obstructed this investigation.

Not only the Biden should be investigated, but the Justice Department, the FBI, and the IRS and others who hampered and suppressed evidence and investigations into Biden family. Know, I kind of laugh looking at that report. It’s a good report when I watch it’s. OD, obviously watching yourself on TV, on a TV show in this case. So now it’s like two places, two people removed. But when I look at this material, when I see what Judicial Watch is saying on TV, in this case, me saying it, my view is I agree with that guy.

I agree with that guy. It may sound weird to you, but it’s like, yeah, I agree with what he’s saying. And those are the big issues. Can we trust this Justice Department, this special counsel, and to fairly administer justice? And that means ensuring that Joe Biden and Hunter Biden aren’t above the law, but also that they’re not abused as well. And that’s the concern here. And that’s kind of the irony of this crazy situation with Joe and Hunter.

And the thing about this gun charge, which is so outrageous, is they’ve been sitting on it for five years, five years. I think this gun issue first erupted in 2018, if I recall. And so there’s other information, for instance, this week, and it goes back even further into the Biden administration, Obama administration. One thing to remember is that the Biden corruption story is an Obama corruption story because all the issues we’re talking about, the Obama gang, they knew full well what Joe was into.

And the problems that Hunter was causing in terms of national security and foreign policy. And there’s a new story out of our JustTheNews. com I should have printed it out and highlighted some details for you, but you can look it up. Our friend John Solomon, the great journalist, investigative journalist, has a story out there’s, a whistleblower with one of the big financial firms that had been asked to work on a Hunter Biden related bond deal.

And they did the analysis, they did their due diligence and they saw all sorts of indicia of corruption with that deal. And what they did was they created a document and detailed it with the detail of who was involved and the kind of the insider nature of the transaction that was unusual. Other efforts to disguise some of the things that were going on, all the sorts of alarm bells that these financial guys who have the government breathing down, literally looking over their shoulder at every transaction and every move they make, they said, well, there’s something up here.

And they alerted the security, I think it was the Security Exchange Commission, the SEC under Obama. And they did nothing. And they did nothing. And so it was just another example of how the Obama administration was involved in protecting and covering up Hunter Biden. And why is it important people say, well, he’s not Joe Biden. Why it’s important is because the other evidence is Hunter was funding Joe’s lifestyle and taking care of Joe directly complained to a family member, as has infamously been highlighted in the laptop about Joe getting 50% of his money.

And of course, you have the 10% for the big guy. But on the other hand, also, you can bribe someone by taking care of a family member. So that’s the big question here. Bribery, extortion, other corruption related to the Bidens, not only in the current situation as the President, but when he was vice President under Obama. And this gun charge just highlights the corruption. It’s all of a sudden a charge that they wanted to have the court have no role in, they didn’t even want him to plead out is now a felony in federal court.

So which is it? We’re going to find out, right? Because now it’s presumably going to have to go to trial. So we’ll see what happens. So you can trust Judicial Watch, though, to keep on keeping on with our investigation into the handling of this gun charge. We have a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit in federal court already on it, and I suspect we’re going to get a feel for where and how excuse me, when and how many documents we’re going to get based on that court hearing we were in last week at the latest in January.

I know it seems too far away. I know it’s too far away for us too, but that’s the outside timeline in terms of getting this at least getting it adjudicated in a way that we can figure out what they’re hiding from us. So again, that’s why I love Judicial watch. We come on and we’re not just talking about the news, we’re behind the news doing this heavy lifting to get information and hold the government accountable.

And then this is a great opportunity to educate you about what we find and what we’re doing. We have new lawsuits over the censorship of Americans, which I think is the other than really jailing Trump and other innocence over their First Amendment protected speech. Kind of the broadest attack on the First Amendment in the history of America, which is the embrace of the Biden administration, of the idea that they can get big tech companies to censor Americans.

And there’s nothing wrong with that. And we know during the last administration under Trump, these agencies thought they could get Americans to get censored, and they were secretly doing it to help Joe Biden win elections. With the censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop and of course, the HHS and NIH and companies and agencies like that were also getting big tech to censor us on, of course. But the difference is, I think Trump would have shut it all down.

I don’t know. Did he know about it? I don’t think he knew about the censorship. He certainly wouldn’t have approved it. Of Hunter Biden’s laptop story being pushed by the FBI and the CIA, as we talked about earlier. But the Biden administration has openly embraced it. The president on down and Judicial watch filed two new freedom of information act lawsuits against three federal agencies, powerful federal agencies, the department of justice and the Department of Homeland Security, and the office of Director of National Intelligence, which is nominally the lead office for our intelligence community.

The first lawsuit was against the justice department and Department of Homeland security. So there are two agencies at once, and we sued after the FBI failed to respond to a November 2, 2022 request for all records related to the use of Facebook’s content request government reporting system by any official employee or contract employee of the federal Bureau of Investigation. So essentially, they were using this system to censor you, dear citizen.

The FBI, the allegation Is, was using this system to censor you. So Facebook had this special access. They granted the government to give them material on which Americans to censor and over what. Same goes for the department of Homeland Security, cyber and Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency, which was their election censorship bureau, and the national Security division of the justice department. And they don’t want to give us any records about what they were doing with Facebook.

It’s just incredibly brazen in terms of the lawlessness. There was an October 31, 2020 2nd report, 2022 report by the Intercept, which is a left wing publication, by the way, which details how DHS involvement, how DHS was involved in an expansive effort to influence tech platforms. There was a formalized process for government officials to directly flag content on Facebook or Instagram and request that it be throttled or suppressed through a special Facebook portal that requires a government or law enforcement email to use.

So we want to know what they were doing there, and they don’t want to tell us. The second lawsuit is against the Department of justice and the Office of Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security for all records concerning any meeting between any government official or employee of the Federal Bureau of investigation and any of the following Twitter employees between June 1, 2020, and the present yol Roth, who formerly was basically the chief censor at Twitter vaye Gotte, who was one of the lead lawyers in terms of censorship there, and Jim Baker, the former FBI top lawyer who became top lawyer over at Twitter.

The reports include, but is not limited to all related agenda notes, summaries, reports, transcripts, and similar records. And we basically want the same information from Department of Homeland Security and the Office of Director, National Intelligence. Now, all three of those individuals, as I said, were prominent in internal discussions at Twitter about censoring the New York Post Hunter Biden laptop story. Journalist Matt Taibi revealed on December 2, 2022, in the first release of the Twitter files so it’s been well established that the FBI and these other government agencies were regularly meeting with Twitter and trying to convince them to take stuff down, often successfully so, which is a violation of the first Amendment and potentially other laws.

So we want the details on it. And as I noted in our press release, the Biden administration’s ongoing censorship schemes are a clear and present danger to the first amendment. It is no surprise these Biden agencies would hide documents that could have further exposed their lawlessness. So they’ve never really stopped this conduct based on what they’ve been saying, because they’re proud of it. In fact, there was a federal judge who highlighted this type of conduct by the White House and the other agencies and tried to enjoin it, and the Biden administration said, no, you can’t stop us from doing it.

And even though there were findings that they violated the first Amendment, unfortunately the appellate court said, no, you can’t enjoin them from doing it. So what does that mean? They’re doing it now. And of course, a lot of this looks back on the effort to rig the 2020 election through censorship by these deep state agencies working secretly hand in glove with these big tech companies to keep information that would harm Joe Biden or Democratic Party partisan interests away from the American people by censoring people on social media like me.

Like you. Dare I say it? I’m sure you’ve been censored. You know, how do I know you’ve been censored? Because if you follow me or Judicial Watch or anyone else who’ve been censored, and you would have been interested in this type of information that was being censored. You’re being censored, too. If people are withholding information from you, by censoring people, you follow the leading. Donald Trump, for instance, of course you’re being censored.

You’re just as much of a victim as the person whose post is taken down. And judicial watch has got multiple lawsuits and investigations on this issue. Just a few months ago, we sued DHS for all their records as part of this election censorship operation called the election integrity partnership. The cybersecurity and information security agency was the chief censor within the department of homeland security censoring you. We have lawsuits on that.

Lawsuits on the FBI work with social media to suppress Hunter biden’s laptop, specifically. And of course, we sued the secretary of state California. That’s on appeal now, or shortly will be, because they went and asked YouTube to take down a video of judicial watch about election issues just before the election, and they did it. We’re still getting censored, and there are different ways of censoring you. You can have your material suppressed.

Vandalized YouTube’s still doing it to judicial watch. Just last week, I think we had two videos that YouTube labeled. I talked about the January 6 issue because we had sued for the videos, right? And they labeled like, for the truth about this. I forget the exact language they used. Maybe we can dig it up, we’ll go to YouTube, guys, maybe we can pull it up and show people how they’re mislabeling our material.

And they tell people to go look at wikipedia about January 6. And they also said, go look at wikipedia about the January about the election disputes of 2020. Wikipedia is a left wing group. Well, I shouldn’t say it’s always left wing, but on matters of public controversy, it’s controlled by the left and by vandalizing our videos, in addition to taking them down outright with warnings or for more information, because you can’t trust judicial watch, go here.

That’s suppression and censorship, too. And they do take down our videos. They took down a video of judicial watch, I think, just last year on these election controversies. Judicial watch is the nation’s, I would submit the nation’s leading expert on election integrity disputes. And they’re censoring us because they don’t like our expertise and what we say. And I know I’ve been targeted directly and personally. I was deleted off of twitter for months.

And obviously the videos usually on YouTube involve I’m talking about the work. TikTok has banned me completely. I know some of you don’t think I should be on TikTok, but the point is, it was another vehicle where millions and billions of people are on, and I was posting judicial watch related content. They just banned me. No, they didn’t give me a specific reason. So the censorship continues. The Biden administration embraces it.

So we’re suing for details about it, not only about how it affected the 2020 election but how it’s affecting right now, the 2024 election or debates about COVID censorship now or any other debate, if you think they’re going to stop with COVID there. For instance, the Left wants people to be censored if they dissent from the propaganda related to the climate scam. If you don’t buy into the climate scam, they want you to be censored.

So just don’t think it’s over because COVID is, for now, retweeted. Excuse me? Not retweeted. Retweeted. Retweeted. Of course. Now it’s coming back. I don’t know if it’s literally coming back, but certainly the left wants to start pushing COVID restrictions again, so maybe the censorship will be coming back along with that. I’ve been bemoaning the fact that Congress has been out of office or been on recess for seven weeks, but you all have gotten back.

And today is we started off with an announcement here with the speaker saying that he’s going to direct at least two of the committees, congressman Comer’s committee and Congressman Jordan’s committee, the House Oversight Committee, and the Judiciary Committee to initiate, finally, biden in an impeachment inquiry into President Biden. What’s your initial reaction to that news? Well, I think it’s long overdue. I mean, we’ve been seeing the evidence of the Biden crime family coming out, especially in the Oversight Committee and some in the Judiciary Committee for months and months and months now.

And I’m glad to hear that we’re beginning that. I think it’s necessary. I think we need to hold the President accountable for what he has done and how our country is being leveraged for his personal profit. I’m sure you’ve been back in the district for some time for the last month or two. What are folks been telling you about what’s going on up here? Is it a surprise to you that Speaker McCarthy came back and the first thing he did after the recess of seven weeks is to announce impeachment? Are you hearing that from your constituents back home? Most definitely.

I’ve been hearing that honestly for over a year now in our district. We are literally the most conservative district in all of Georgia, and people want the government to be held accountable. And when the President of the United States is involved in such incredible corruption, like what we are seeing coming out of the evidence, coming out of the Oversight and the Judiciary Committees, then people are upset about that.

But also they want us to get back to work and to get back to dealing with the weaponization of the government. Well, we have this personal corruption issue by Biden, and impeachment obviously is necessary. It’s obviously not sufficient, as we’ll get into. And then the mirror of that is the corruption of the abuse of government abuse, targeting President Trump and other innocent Americans. The effort to jail Trump in Washington, DC, the DC prosecutors officely operating in Florida, and then Democratic Party politicians in New York and Georgia also seeking to jail.

You know, the left would have us believe, or frankly, the establishment would have us believe. Well, these prosecutions, there’s nothing you can do about it. It’s just like the know, the weather’s going to happen and these prosecutions are going to occur, and there’s nothing that can be done about it. And one of the reasons I wanted to talk to you today was because you beg to differ. I do beg to differ.

I think people are tired of all talk and no action, and that’s what Congress is famous for, and I don’t believe in that. I believe that when there’s something that you can do, you do it and you take action. This is clearly election interference. Joe Biden’s running for president again, and he’s having all these issues now where his corruption is coming to light, and he wants to do everything he possibly can to diminish the opportunities of his primary opponent, which is President Trump.

So he is going to use and he said back in November of last year in a press conference that he would use the entire power of the government to keep President Trump from coming back into so when you say that sort of thing. And then you see the weaponization of the Department of justice, where they are going after President Trump for literally, pardon the pun, trumped up charges that it’s unconscionable and you have to deal with it.

And the way you deal with it is you defund it. Congress has the power of the purse. It’s the most powerful thing we can do. We are at the apex of our power right now, the beginning of a new fiscal year. So I am introducing two amendments. I’m on the Appropriations Committee. I’m actually on the Commerce Justice Science Subcommittee that deals directly with the budget of the Department of justice.

And so I’m introducing two amendments. One to defund at the federal level any money going to the prosecution of a presidential candidate between now and the November 24 elections, all right? And then the Second Amendment will deal with any federal money going to a state or local jurisdiction that prosecutes a presidential candidate. We will eliminate both of them, and that will basically defund the entire prosecution. They can investigate all they want, but they can’t prosecute.

So they could spend no taxpayer money pursuing the prosecution. Currently up here in DC. On the challenges to the election that President Trump was involved in northern Florida, and how would it work with the jurisdictions in New York, New York, the county of Manhattan up there, and Fulton County? Would all federal funding for that state or Georgia be cut off or how much money and what would be an issue for the state? Well, it would be the entity that actually does the prosecution.

It would not be the state, all right? It would be the prosecutor, all right? And we would completely defund the prosecutor’s office of all federal money and trust me, every state prosecutor gets federal money, and there’s a fair bit of it that they get. So that would go to zero. And I think, of course, they don’t have to do that. They could simply say, all right, we’re not going to prosecute until after the election.

But that’s not what they want. What they want is election interference because what that does, Tom, is it makes the process the penalty here, and we can’t allow that because you can’t really recover from that. You look at one of the court cases is going to be the week of Super Tuesday, seriously starting Monday. So there’s no opportunity to have a major rally that Monday evening prior to Super Tuesday.

I mean, that takes the President, President Trump, out of the ability to effectively campaign the way he wants to. That’s right. That’s election interference right there. And the Georgia case is so broad that it would actually freeze the entire campaign operation. If he was being very cautious in his communications about what he was talking about on the campaign trail with not only his colleagues in the campaign but at the Republican National Committee and other Georgia leaders are implicated.

I think the Georgia Republican Party down there. Mr. Schaefer well, there’s a lot. So the point is they’re freezing the political campaigns through these prosecutions as well, which I don’t think I don’t understand why judges would accept that invitation to do that. But secondly, it’s so obviously corrupted. But what sort of feedback are you getting from your colleagues on this? What I love about this is that there are many of your friends and colleagues on the Hill, and we’re talking Republicans mostly here because Democrats obviously have no problem with jailing their political opponents, evidently, but the Republicans pretend to be upset about it, or some do, but will fund it.

And I think there’s got to be some kind of accountability or reckoning for that position. And so your effort, and I think there’s some other members who have similar efforts to push this issue is well worth taking. Well, this will be their opportunity to show where they stand. Do they stand for funding the prosecution of a primary political opponent in a presidential race, or do they not? Will they stand against it? It doesn’t mean that it won’t ever happen.

It just means it can’t happen until presidential election of 2024. I mean, that’s the important thing right there. Let the people decide who they want to vote for and not some prosecutor. Think about this. You’ve got these grand juries from these very liberal areas, vastly Democrat areas. You’ve got a Democrat prosecutor, you’ve got a Democrat judge, you’ve got a Democrat grand jury and now a criminal jury pool coming from the same Democrat base.

Do you think the President’s going to have a fair trial in any of these cases? No. So it’s got to be defunded so that liberty and election integrity and justice prevails it’s election rigging. In my view, the second amendment is under consistent attack by the left. And I always highlight and it’s worth reviewing the I always encourage people I’m not a lawyer, but I always encourage people to read the supreme court decisions because they’re really written for the people.

And the supreme court decision upholding our second amendment rights highlighted, it’s not just the second amendment that’s at issue here. It’s the 14th amendment. That’s right. So when they attack the second amendment, there are other civil liberties that are attacked with that. And we’re kind of seeing that in New Mexico because you described a the Biden administration’s crazed obsession with banning guns. I think it’s a fair way of characterizing.

It is. And respond to what you’re seeing in and, you know, talk about another opportunity, maybe for an appropriations writer to protect good citizens in New Mexico from this abuse by their governor. Well, I’ll tell you, when president Biden can’t get through the house through proper legislation, he’s going to attempt to get through by rewriting a definition, redefining a definition, writing a rule through the ATF to come against the second amendment.

And it’s so important that we have a second amendment. Our founding fathers were such brilliant men. Our first amendment, the right to speak, to assemble peaceably, to bring the government your grievances, to worship where you choose, that right is so important, but it can never be maintained without a second amendment. The second amendment is truly the teeth behind the first amendment, and that’s what keeps that first amendment secure.

And so if you want to get at the first amendment, you got to attack the second amendment first. And that’s exactly what’s happening. And I think what you’re seeing in New Mexico is a governor that is pushing the envelope to see just how far she can get, all right, before she gets pushed back. And honestly, I hope they impeach her because she has clearly violated the constitution. New York rifle and pistol versus Braun was such a great decision.

First, you had the Heller decision in 2008. You had McDonald v. Chicago in, I think, 2012 or 2014. Now you’ve got this one. So the New York decision, that was the one I was referencing that mentioned the 14th amendment being vindicated exactly. And protecting your rights to carry a weapon. That’s right. Three incredible pro second amendment supreme court decisions. And honestly, I don’t think we would have had new York rifle and pistol versus Braun that incredible win if we didn’t have three conservative supreme court justices appointed by Trump.

Appointed by President Trump. Okay. So his legacy begins right there. Thanks for watching. Don’t forget to hit that subscribe button. And like our video down below. .