➡ Judicial Watch, a watchdog group, has obtained documents suggesting that the Biden White House may have edited a transcript of an interview with President Biden to hide his cognitive challenges. The group claims that the transcript, which was part of a criminal investigation into Biden’s alleged mishandling of classified information, was altered to make Biden appear more coherent. Despite these changes, the group is still pushing for the release of the full audio of the interview.
➡ The White House lawyers allegedly manipulated a transcript of Joe Biden’s special counselor interviews to hide his potential cognitive issues. This has raised questions about Biden’s mental competence and his actions during his time as vice president. The article suggests that releasing the audio of the interviews could clear up these concerns. It also mentions a lawsuit filed by Judicial Watch for the release of documents related to the Epstein scandal, which the Justice Department has not yet responded to.
➡ The Attorney General is urged to release certain records, with the belief that transparency is important for the American public. There’s also a discussion about the interpretation of the 14th amendment, specifically about the citizenship of children born in the U.S. to non-citizens. The Supreme Court is set to consider the issue of nationwide injunctions. Lastly, there’s criticism of judges who are perceived to be obstructing the deportation of illegal immigrants and a call for Congress to take action to prevent such judicial overreach.
➡ The speaker discusses a variety of topics, including President Trump’s control of the border, a Supreme Court case involving the extradition of an El Salvadorian citizen, and allegations of misconduct against New York Attorney General Letitia James. The speaker praises Trump’s border control efforts and criticizes the media’s portrayal of the Supreme Court case. They also express suspicion towards Letitia James and her alleged mortgage fraud, suggesting a need for further investigation.
➡ Judicial Watch, a watchdog group, has been investigating the Democratic Arizona Attorney General’s actions during the 2024 presidential election. They claim the AG falsely suggested that President Trump committed a crime to influence the election outcome. Despite these allegations, Trump won Arizona by over five percent. Judicial Watch continues to fight government corruption, not only in Washington, D.C., but also in various states across the country.
➡ The article discusses the disturbing records of a young woman who showed signs of self-hatred and violent tendencies. These records, which include her plans for a mass shooting, were made public to help people recognize similar warning signs and potentially prevent future tragedies. The author also mentions ongoing legal battles and praises the Justice Department for their transparency. Lastly, the author encourages support for Judicial Watch, an organization that uncovers scandals and corruption, and wishes everyone a happy Easter and Passover.

Hey, everyone. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton here with our weekly update. Breaking news, we have new documents out of the Biden White House showing a concerted effort, in my view, to cover up his dementia. I know American citizens had been concerned about Biden’s cognitive challenges that were quite evident. It led to a coup against him. But it also helped protect him from prosecution because special counsel Robert Hur, who was investigating his mishandling lies and theft of classified information, found that his responses and his interviews with him or interview suggested he didn’t know what he was saying or doing, that he had a failing memory, and no one was going to convict him on it.

Now, I wasn’t terribly persuaded, but the Biden White House was very much concerned at the time because he was still running for president, that despite the fact he got a get out of jail free card, it was because he was out of it. So there was this pushback on it. And so Judicial Watch, because this is what we do, we say, give us the receipts, give us the evidence. We understand there is a video of this interview. Give us the material. And now they released the transcript. And Judicial Watch had sued for all of this. Right.

And it was thanks to our lawsuit that we found that the transcript had been edited. They messed with the transcript. They took out material in the transcript that would have made Biden look bad in terms of being able to communicate effectively and efficiently. And when it came to the video, they said we can’t have it because Biden has a privacy interest in his voice, believe it or not, and that we can’t get the records as a result. And the Biden administration obviously took that position. And then the Trump administration came in and the court said, what are you going to do? Are you going to give this video now? What’s your view now? Have you changed your position? And they said, we need till May 20.

But in the meantime, we found, as I said, this transcript had been edited. They messed with it, they doctored it to help Joe, and we sued. And we’ve been trying to get the records. And the good news is we got some transparency out of the Trump administration. So things are beginning to move a little bit. So I can’t complain as much as I might otherwise, given the nature of the records we got, which were somewhat extraordinary. We received emails and charts that revealed detailed revisions to the transcript of President Biden’s interview with the special counsel. And this was in response to a lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch against the Justice Department for records of communications between the agency and the White House.

Regarding the altered transcripts of Special Counsel Robert Herr’s October 2023 interviews of President Biden in the criminal investigation into Biden’s theft and disclosure of classified records. So I guess now that I recall, this reminds me, I think there were two interviews, as I said, in a separate lawsuit, the court ordered the Justice Department under the new president, President Trump, whether it intends to continue denying Judicial Watch’s request for the full audio of Biden’s interviews with her. And like I said, we’re waiting at least Justice Department said they need three months, which ends on May 20. The documents are really quite incredible.

First of all, it’s the type of document you normally don’t get released under foia. Typically, communications with the White House about a matter such as this would be withheld using all sorts of exemptions, both valid and invalid. Typically. But we got these charts showing, I don’t know if they can, I don’t know if you can see them here. Maybe they can pull them up and go to a few pages down into the document showing what the White House wanted changed and the court reporter’s responses to some of the changes. And sometimes the White House tried to get material change and it wasn’t changed, according to the transcript reports.

As I say in the press release, let me read the press release. So I’m getting like Joe Biden. I can’t rely on my memory anymore. The new documents provided in this case include a chart, as I said, of suggested Biden, of suggested changes by Biden White House and his personal lawyers to the transcript. Also included are emails that detail Bob Biden lawyer Bob Bowers requesting access to interview exhibits and a meeting with the special counsel to discuss the case. Which, you know, normally you don’t get emails like that, but we got them. Justice Department official Mark Kirkbaum confirmed most White House revisions to the transcript were accepted.

So that was the person who was working, I guess, for special counsel her. Including minor clarifications and changes potentially masking Biden’s confusion, such as correcting who said yeah or altering references to Biden’s Delaware garage and President Biden’s seeming inability to recall the name of his defense secretary, Lloyd Austin. As I noted in the press release, these new documents provide an extraordinary insight into the COVID up the White House by the White House of Biden’s cognitive challenges. The Bondi Justice Department deserves credit for releasing this information, but they should follow up with the full release of the actual audio of President Biden’s disastrous interview with the special counsel on his document.

Theft and mishandling. And the documents, I encourage you to go look at them. As I said, I got them all here and they’re all on our Internet site. So don’t believe me. You know, you can trust your own eyes and your own analysis is what I love about judicial watch. Wherever and whenever possible, which is virtually all the time, we release the documents we obtain, which isn’t always true of Congress. You sometimes see Congress says they got documents and they talk about them, but they don’t post them. That’s not what we do unless there’s really a legal reason for not posting something or some extreme extraordinary reason.

We post virtually everything we get or talk about. And so the specifics are. So this is. This is a kicker here about what the changes that the White House gang wanted to protect. Joe, Some proposed transcript edits detailed in a chart, as I said, show that there seemed to be an effort to cover up his mental confusion. So the White House suggests as follows. And maybe we should go to the release to show the specifics here. Is there a way we can call up the release? So scroll down a little bit and zoom in. It will be tough to show you on the documents themselves, but it’s easier.

Keep on going further down. Pass this email. Scroll down. Down further. Okay, so here the White House suggests. And this is the transcript excerpt. President Biden. Stop here. The date is 42 09. Was I still vice president? I was, wasn’t I? Yeah. Yeah. So the original transcript was Mr. Bowers said yeah, and then President Biden followed with a yeah, meaning he had to be told by his lawyer they wanted that out and they said that Biden said both. But the court reporter says it was an identified male who said both or there was an unidentified male who said yeah, and then President Biden said yes.

So what does this mean? It means that Bauer, according to the audio, suggested the question answer. And they don’t want that to be seen. So they’re pretending that Biden said yeah, yeah, as opposed to having been told whether he was vice president at the time. And as I recall, now that I’m talking about, it didn’t hur note that Biden may have been confused about when he was vice president. I think so. Other changes also seem significant. One seems to refer to Biden’s garage as his Delaware home where secret documents were found. The White House proposed this change.

Were delivered my garage. They want to change it to the garage. The court reported regards. They were delivered to my garage. Right. So they were trying to distract or minimize the fact it was Biden’s garage. And at another point, Biden, there’s a typo there we should fix. Biden may have been confused about the name of the Secretary of Defense. The White House proposed this change. Secretary of Defense Gates. Unidentified male Speaker Gates. A White House entry on this note notes, according to the audio, President Biden says Gates prior to identified male speaker. The court reporter records Secretary of Defense Gates question mark, unified figure.

Unidentified Male Speaker Gates. The White House responds. The court reporter inserted a question mark that is unsupportable by the audio recording. It is clear the president said Gates as a statement rather than a question, we ask that the question mark be replaced with a period. Regarding that last entry and another, on January 3rd, another White House lawyer emails, thank you for sending. We have reviewed and are fine with almost all the court reporter questions. And they kind of keep on pushing back. So the court reporter didn’t buy everything that they were selling as the emails later follow up.

And what was the final other issue? Was there another issue that. So it was Gates. He couldn’t remember the name Gates. They tried to cover that up. Let’s come back. There was the issue of the garage and then there was the issue of not knowing when he was vice president and relying on his lawyer to figure it out and rather than just, you know, maybe he didn’t remember the year specifically. I don’t, I don’t, you know, in the greater scheme of things, it’s probably not the end of the world. But they were sensitive about it and it meant manipulating a transcript.

So there’s a scandal here. And the scandal is the White House lawyers were trying to help Joe Biden by disguising his answers or literally changing his answers, according to the court reporter in a transcript of his special counselor interviews. Now, how can all this be cleared up in part? Release the audio. It’s simple. I don’t want to belabor it, but why is this even an issue for the administration right now, whether they release this video or not? So we have to wait at least another month. And then there’s references to other last minute changes. So we have this what I, as I called pretty extraordinary details from the White House.

Typically, White House material like this is withheld under foia. So I am pleased that the Trump administration, the Trump Justice Department, released this material to the American people through this Judicial Watch lawsuit. But there’s other information and it’s an interim response, so who knows what else is out there. I think it’s an interim response that as Judicial Watch previously uncovered. The transcript was further altered by taking out phrases like, you know, the sorts of verbal hiccups that sometimes suggest confusion, uncertainty, and, yes, dare I say it, dementia. And they took them out. This is why we want the audio.

And why is it a big deal? Because people want to know whether Biden was competent mentally. It raises questions about his actions. It raises questions about his culpability and liability, which I think still should be pursued on certain matters. For instance, you know, under the Supreme Court precedent, I don’t think he can be convicted because I don’t think it was necessarily illegal for him to take records as vice president that were classified. He my understanding of the Presidential Records act, he has the same type of authority a president has to take records he chooses to take.

And there’s really no constitutional way to second guess that under the Presidential Records act or the U.S. constitution. And the same rule applied to Trump. What he didn’t have the ability to do was take classified records from his days as senator. And that should be subject to prosecution. So I don’t think that case should be just resolved and we should move on from it. Do you think he should get a pass for prosecution, Joe Biden, for anything because of his mental state? I don’t think so. He’s still out there courting the reports, trying to earn money, asking hundreds of thousands, according to one report I saw to speak.

He just spoke the other day. He gave some speech where he was his usual self, if you know what I mean. And people around him need to be held accountable for covering up what was his seeming incompetence and cognitive disability. And we have elements of the COVID up here. I mean, I don’t know why Congress isn’t following up on stuff like this. Why aren’t they bringing in top Biden, White House officials on this? What are they doing? They’re not cutting spending. They’re on vacation for weeks at a time. I know they do some good hearings and they point to them, but they could be doing a lot more.

I know they could. We would be if we had that power. So, you know, this gets me back to my general critique of the way our government operates here in Washington, D.C. these corruption issues politicians won’t care about and pursue unless they’re pushed. Unless they have Judicial Watch pushing them by making them look bad, by getting disclosures and asking why didn’t they get them? Unless there’s pressure from Judicial Watch and voters and citizens of the executive on the executive branch to get information out. I mean, the resting state of the deep State is secrecy. So any political appointee of President Trump has got to have a particular commitment to transparency to overcome that.

So they can’t just say, okay, well, I authorize the release, respond to these public inquiries about these scandals. No, they got to be on it. They’ve got to be on it as much as they would any other issue that the deep state doesn’t want to give up information on or proceed on. They hate transparency as much as they hate accountability because the two go hand in hand. And of course, Congress can do more in that regard. Always can do more. I mean, it’s Congress, so I guess they can always do more. Right. It’s almost redundant to say that.

Right. But if that White House was run the way most Americans suspect, and now all the liberal media are pretending to be surprised about what they all knew was happening, the COVID ups in the White House to cover up Joe Biden’s dementia, well, why aren’t there government investigations of it, Congressional investigations, it relates to the 25th Amendment, et cetera. And again, it’s left to Judicial Watch to do the basic heavy lifting, to find out about some of the worst corruption and concerning activity in American history. We’ve never had a president like Biden. Okay, if you’re a Biden supporter, you can pretend I mean it positively, if you’re sensible, you understand what I mean.

And it’s up to Judicial Watch to try to uncover this insanity in control at the White House where the president was cognitively disabled and everyone around him was covering it up. And what were the results of that disability? You know, I was, I was at a meeting. It was a Judicial Watch. We had a Judicial Watch meeting. And so it was. And someone was making the presentation who I respect, someone you’d recognize in terms of her presence in writing. But she was thinking and she made the argument that, you know, I found interesting, that Joe Biden should be held accountable, that cognitively he had challenges.

There’s no doubt there were times of day and situations and stressors that, you know, caused him really to fall apart. Right. We saw it repeatedly and we were all told to ignore it, pretend it wasn’t in existence. But she said that there were times and many times, and she’s talked to many people who have been close to Biden and attended meetings with him where he’s perfectly fine. So I’m, you know, I think you can have both issues and be concerned about both issues and demand accountability for both issues. Yeah, there were cognitive issues that made him unfit for the presidency, but not so bad that he’s not liable for misconduct and corruption.

There you go. Now, D.C. doesn’t want to talk about it, Trump talks about it, and thankfully, the Justice Department sees at least some importance in talking about it. But it’s only from Judicial Watch’s pushing that it’s happening. So just great work all around by my legal colleagues at Judicial Watch, who are like bulldogs, dogs with a bone, whatever the metaphor is. We just keep on keeping on. So just a great, great work by our team. So a lot happening this week as well. I got a brief update on the Epstein lawsuit. Now, you may recall we filed the lawsuit for the Epstein files.

I don’t know where they are. I thought they were all going to be released. Right. And I talked about it in this video here. So Judicial Watch just sued for the Epstein files. We want the client list. We want the documents the Justice Department and the FBI have about this case scandal. We’ve been getting stonewalling. So despite the release of some records, it looks like other records haven’t been released yet. Indeed, they haven’t responded to our basic FOIA requests for this information. That’s why we’re in federal court. Now. The best way to understand what records are available, which records are being held secret, and where did they look for the records is to be in court.

And that’s where Judicial Watch is, and that’s what we specialize in doing, getting secrets from the government they don’t want you to know about. And people want to know about the Epstein scandal. And we aim to get to the bottom of it. So we caused a lot of. A lot of excitement and news in our lawsuit. So, interestingly, we get a letter written the same day we filed the lawsuit, and the letter said the following. I quoted it in our tweet here. Let’s bring up the tweet. Strange. On the day we filed the Epstein lawsuit, the Justice Department sent us a letter that said they had no records from Attorney General Pam Bondi’s office in response to our records request to her office, which is now part of a federal lawsuit.

And this is the quote for all records of communications between Attorney General Bondi and any other individual or entity regarding any list of other records depicting the identities of clients or associates of Jeffrey Epstein. So I found that strange. You know, the Attorney General said she had the list or the materials on her desk. There are no emails or communications about it with her by her. And I guess maybe it’s possible, but it’s curious and why it is. They sent us the letter the same day we filed the lawsuit is also curious. And if I were Attorney General Bondi, I’d say, look, we’ve got this lawsuit from Judicial Watch.

Let’s take it seriously. We want to be transparent. And I do think she wants to be transparent. It’s just a matter of focusing and getting it done. Let’s get it done. Release the records. If they’re withholdings, let’s withhold it. Let’s focus on getting this done. The American people want this information. There’s international interest in it. Let’s get it done. And sending out letters like this make us look like the gang who couldn’t shoot straight. I mean, they make a big deal about having the records on her desk, and then they say, I don’t have any records concerning these issues on her.

You know, it doesn’t make any sense to me. Either the records, either there was nothing written to or from her about it, which doesn’t make any sense, or they didn’t look in the right spot, which is also probably, you know, which is oftentimes likely. We try, we try, we just try and help them by filing lawsuits like this, but it’s hard. Right. But on the other hand, we sometimes get the documents and we’ve been getting some more interest in from the Justice Department in getting some of this material released. And I’ll talk about that a little bit later.

Oh, so the other big news is the judicial coups, as I call it, the judicial lawfare against President Trump. So there have been some developments. The Supreme Court announced, essentially using the case that Trump is trying to advocate, that natural born citizenship should be limited to those who are natural born citizens of citizens, not the offspring of people who are here illegally or here in a transitory way. If you’re just visiting and passing through, your kid doesn’t become a citizen if you’re, if they’re born here, if you’re here illegally, your kid doesn’t become a citizen if they’re born here.

Straightforward, in my view, reading of the 14th amendment. So there have been challenges to Trump’s efforts to strictly enforce the 14th Amendment along the lines I’m suggesting. Now, the Supreme Court isn’t going to hear that specific merits issue next month, but they are going to consider the issue of what’s known as nationwide injunctions, where, for instance, Judge Boasberg, in the case of the Alien Enemies act, issued a nationwide injunction protecting any Venezuelan designated by Trump from being removed. And there’s been case after case of that happening in ways and in number that’s never happened. Before in American history, of course, all of most of which is targeting Trump.

So the Supreme Court’s going to hear that in May, which augurs. Well, it’s not a prediction of what they’ll do, but it shows that there’s significant interest in the issue at the court. But, you know, but then you got all of this. Ms. But then there’s this insanity around, frankly, sometimes judicial insanity around the deportations of Americans, excuse me, of non Americans, of illegal alien criminals. And I was on Newsmax talking about this the other day. Let’s go to clip 11. Meantime, Massachusetts Judge Indira Telwani is unconstitutionally trying to stop the Trump administration by issuing another nationwide injunction to revoke and deport a half million illegal aliens who were flown in here by the Biden regime under the parole program.

This judicial tyranny is a direct violation of the president’s Article 2 powers. Everybody sees, doesn’t Congress need to act to rein in this judiciary before the entire country loses complete confidence in the judicial branch? Well, Congress needs to do what Congress is able to do under the Constitution to ensure that judges don’t abuse their powers. And they have a variety of techniques available to them, limiting on jurisdiction and how broad their injunctions can be, can have one district court judge essentially grind the federal government to a halt when it comes to immigration enforcement. And then, of course, you’ve got the impeachment power ultimately.

And, you know, none of this seems to have been used thus far by Congress in recent, frankly, not years, but decades. And it’s about time Congress to take a look at all of those options. And just on this specific case. So Joe Biden brings in tens of thousands of individuals in an abusive parole authority just in a whole fell swoop. And President Trump wants to remove that parole amnesty. And the judge says, oh, no, you can’t do it. And you have to do each person one at a time. So it would take decades potentially to remove everyone that Biden brought in in minutes.

It’s just an absurd double standard in terms of the law. And, you know, these judges sat by, not specifically, but generally the judiciary sat by as Joe Biden let an invasion occur into these United States. They did virtually nothing. But President Trump removes one person. It’s a constitutional crisis. Yeah, that was a good interview. You should share it. And now there’s this. It’s very strange. The left has become the party or the movement of MS.13. I mean, look at, look at this. I highlighted. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that there now seems to be an Ms.

13 caucus in Congress, they probably share office space with the Hamas caucus. I mean, that’s kind of a half a joke, you know, half of a joke, but it’s the other half ain’t all that funny, is it? When you had the senator from Maryland, Chris Van Hollen, travel to El Salvador to meet with someone the government has, well, a, was an illegal alien, had no right to be here. B, credible, significant evidence presented by the government, more than enough to designate him as such under the law and make him further deportable. Mississippi 13 member. And the constitutional rub is that there was an immigration order that prevented him from being removed to El Salvador and they accidentally moved him to El Salvador.

And the courts have said, now you’ve got to try to get him back or facilitate his removal. And there’s a judge who is fanatically abusing and targetingabusing his office, in my view, and targeting Trump to advocate for running foreign policy when it comes to getting this noncitizen out of El Salvador, who’s a criminal by all accounts, and back into the United States, yes, the administration deported him to the wrong country in theory, and I don’t even think that’s the case. Everything you hear about how outrageous the administration’s actions are in my experience, and I’ve looked at them all because I don’t want to be supporting any unlawful conduct.

Jwash doesn’t want to support unlawful conduct. It’s bunk. It’s bunk. The criticisms of Trump more or less are bunk. The hysteria is bunk. The protection of the invaders is treacherous. There’s an entire political movement spending time, effort and money abusing, misusing the court process, judges too many of which allowing them to do so to help illegal alien invaders reside here in the country illegally and effectively make it impossible to ever remove them, even when they’re denied jurisdiction, even when the Supreme Court says, no, you can’t do that, they don’t stop. We see this with Judge Boasberg, the chief judge here in the District of Columbia.

He was removed from the case on the Alien Enemies act, removed from the case on Venezuela. The Supreme Court found he had no jurisdiction, and Judge Boasberg is trying to set up a scenario. He’s found good cause here. I’ll read the tweet. Now we go back to the tweet. I’ve carefully reviewed Chief Judge Vosberg’s memorandum opinion finding probable cause to believe Trump team members engaged in contempt of court. I found nothing persuasive in the opinion to suggest any such thing, and certainly no evidence suggesting criminal conduct Though it now seems the court now has a procedural vehicle to engage in what is, in effect, judicial lawfare and harassment of the Trump administration, despite the Supreme Court’s finding he had absolutely no jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction to issue any of the orders over which he now seems willing to throw administration officials in jail for allegedly not obeying. Now, does it mean he gets impeached? I don’t know. I do know he is really pushing the line in terms of his jurisdiction, arguing over when planes took off. No plane took off before. He said they couldn’t take off with these Venezuelan nationals. You read this decision, you wonder what is going on here, that a senior judge here in the District of Columbia is spending or engaged in all this noise, signifying nothing legally. And the goal is to try to leverage this case to put Trump, or, I mean, to put his appointees in jail.

I don’t know if they want to put. Well, they do want to put Trump in jail. Whether this is a vehicle or not. I don’t think it is. But you know what they’re up to. So we’re supposed to shut down our foreign policy systems and turn it over to a court judge because, according to the left, they mistakenly sent a gang member to the wrong country? I don’t think so. Zero interest. As I said in the Newsmax piece, you know that generally they have zero interest in the victims of these illegal alien marauders. Zero interest. President Trump met with the victim, the mother of a young woman who was murdered in Maryland.

You know, Van Hollen basically ignored that murder, and he’s down there desperate to meet with a. Well, Yeah, a terrorist. Ms. 13 has been designated a terrorist operation. I wonder if that’s legal or not. Man, I’m getting so mad, I’m going to tear up the paper I need to use. But, you know, Trump’s got a good team around him. I mean, they’ve gotten. And they deserve, as far as I’m concerned, he should get the Nobel Peace Prize for gaining control of the border. The border’s under control now. For practical purposes, we’ve got control of the border now.

We’ve got millions to remove. But the border invasion has virtually stopped at the southern border. And one of the architects of that strategy, under President Trump’s leadership is Stephen Miller. Sharp guy. I’ve known him for years. I knew him back when he was in the Senate. And he’s a fine patriot, effective spokesman for President Trump, keen mind. And he just tore it up on Fox the other day. Let’s play this clip. It’s something you’re going to enjoy. So I want to correct. I hate to do it, Bill, but I got to correct you on every single thing that you said because it was all wrong.

First, we won the Supreme Court case, clearly, 9 0. A district court judge said unconscionably that the president and his administration have to go into El Salvador and extradite one of their citizens, an El Salvadorian citizen. So that would be kidnapping, that we have to kidnap an El Salvadorian citizen against the will of his government and fly him back to America, which would be an unimaginable act, an invasion of El Salvador’s sovereignty. So he appealed to the Supreme Court and it said clearly no district court can compel the president to exercise his Article two foreign powers in any way whatsoever.

DOJ called me after that Supreme Court ruling and they said, this is amazing. We won this case. 9 0. We are in excellent standing here. So this has been portrayed wrong for 72 hours in the media. They said the most a court could ever compel you to do would be to facilitate return, which would basically mean if El Salvador voluntarily sends him back, we wouldn’t block him at the airport, we would put him back into ICE detention and then he would be deported either back to El Salvador or somewhere else. The Supreme Court said that is the most the government can be expected to do.

So we won the case handily. The misreporting on this has been atrocious. I appreciate he was not. No, he was not mistakenly. And the judge took that ruling and is ordering and wants to investigate everything the Trump administration is doing in this regard. We didn’t put these judges in place to run our foreign policy, you know, and the court sometimes tries to be nice, you know, tries to be normal, tries to be sensible and that they’re not dealing with an approach in the judiciary that abides by that. The left isn’t wanting to be nice, isn’t want to be normal, isn’t wanting to be normal.

I mean, there are abusers at the district court level and frankly at the appellate court level that don’t get a mess, don’t take, don’t get the message if it’s not presented in a blunt fashion and a more direct, succinct and powerful way. You can’t let these judges abuse our constitutional system. My dear justices on the Supreme Court, you give them an inch, they will take a mile. We see that they are. Their judicial decision making to be charitable, because this is a passive description, has been ruined by their anti Trump animus. Ruined. They should be looking at removing judges engaged in this type of behavior from considering these issues further, which is another maybe the Trump administration.

I think they’ve tried to do that in a few cases, but that should be more often utilized. Heal thyself, physician, my colleague, my friends in the judiciary, because the other options are congressional action, impeachment, etc. Oh, before I go to the next story, did you hear about Letitia James, the corrupt Attorney General of New York? And I say corruption, knowing her abusive office to try to jail Trump and harass him and destroy his business based on fanciful interpretations of law and abuses of power. Well, the Federal Home Finance Administration, I think it’s called, has referred Letitia James to the Justice Department for potential criminal prosecution over financial fraud, mortgage fraud, the very issues that she pretended and falsely accused President Trump of engaging in as it relates to his real estate empire.

And there’s this report I watched on Instagram. Let’s run it. The Federal Housing Finance Agency has referred New York Attorney General Letitia James to the Justice Department for alleged mortgage fraud. FHFA Director William Polt sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche alleging James falsified records to secure home loans for a Norfolk, Virginia property. The letter claims she identified the Virginia property as her, quote, principal residence while she was a New York prosecutor. The letter also says James misrepresented her five family home in Brooklyn as only having four units. Polt says because she listed the unit as a four unit dwelling instead of five, she could have reduced her mortgage rate by as much as 1% and had lower monthly payments.

Pult also reportedly attached several documents detailing how James purchased another property with her father as a cosigner, but listed the pair as a, quote, husband and wife in 1983. And, well, is she guilty? I don’t know. I’m not going to say she’s guilty. Do I trust her? No. Would it surprise me if she were guilty? No. Given her misconduct in other matters. But it really highlights the hypocrisy, if true, of Letitia James. And remember, the targeting of Trump, both generally and specifically in this case, I’m convinced, has always been to keep him from being able to prosecute them.

And we’re seeing an example of this. And I hope the official responsible for this got all the facts straight in asking for this criminal investigation of Letitia James, the Attorney General of New York. But there’s got to be law enforcement against all sides. You can’t, as a leftist, say, I only want Donald Trump to be investigated or prosecuted. But when similar issues arise for politicians you support, say, oh, no, that’s just purely political. Now, if it were up to me, I don’t know if I’d allow the Justice Department to prosecute anybody these days because I don’t trust the institution that’s been so corrupted.

Who knows why they do anything. So, yeah, we should be suspicious of federal prosecutions generally, but we also should be suspicious of corrupt politicians like Letitia James. So when information like this comes up, we should take a careful look. So Judicial Watts will be following up on this issue with our own FOIA investigations. I don’t know if we’ll file lawsuits. You never know until the option comes. And of course, we’ve been ongoing or been persistent and consistent and smashing through stone wall after stone wall on the lawfare targeting Trump generally. So, you know, the Justice Department doesn’t seem to be doing much on it.

No prosecution is the best I can tell. No serious criminal investigation as best I can tell. So we’ll just keep on keeping on. Maybe they’ll catch up to us. And one of those issues relates to the abuse of President Trump, not only in here in D.C. but in other states, including in Arizona, where they’ve targeted Trump, they’ve targeted his allies, leaders of the Republican Party, Americans, simply for disputing an election. But there was a real specific abuse that we thought was interesting in figuring out what was going on around, and that was Democratic Attorney General. So Trump comes out and says something about Liz Cheney is like, Liz Cheney, you know, I’m paraphrasing, is a warmonger.

These warmongers should go onto battlefields and know what it’s like to be shot at. She somehow, the left wing Attorney General of Arizona suggested that he was threatening her with being killed. It was an absurd interpretation, but she ran with it, suggested he committed a crime, and kind of ran around to the media promoting it. So we investigated it and here’s a report initially on what we found. A Judicial Watch open records lawsuit reveals that Arizona Attorney General Chris Mays seems to have used her office for political purposes by threatening to prosecute President Trump on the eve of the 2024 presidential election.

In the final days before the 2024 presidential election, Mays publicly stated that she had directed her criminal division chief to investigate this comment made by Trump about former Congresswoman Liz Cheney. She’s a radical warhawk. Let’s put her with a rifle, standing there with nine barrel shooting at her. Okay, let’s see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face. You know, they’re all warhawks when they’re sitting in Washington in a nice building saying, oh gee, Will, let’s send, let’s send 10,000 troops right into the mouth of the enemy. Judicial Watch filed a public records request in November 2024 for documents related to this investigation.

Only one document supposedly tied to a criminal investigation was located, but was ultimately withheld from disclosure. However, dozens of media related documents show the Attorney General engaged in a media campaign suggesting Trump committed a prosecutable crime. I have already asked my criminal division chiefs to start looking at that statement, analyzing it for whether it qualifies as a death threat under Arizona’s laws. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said this about the matter. Our lawsuit and investigation into the Democratic Arizona Attorney General shows that the announcement of the investigation on the Friday before the 2024 presidential election was a sham to try to influence the outcome of the election in an important swing state.

This is yet another example of lawfare abuse targeting Trump. Attorney General Mays officially ended the investigation on November 13, 2024, just days after President Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris. President Trump won Arizona by over five and a half percent. So there was no investigation. It was a pretend investigation. They wrote a memo, they don’t want to give us the memorial. But that wasn’t the point. Wasn’t it? Or was it? The point was to falsely suggest a crime quite obviously and feed it to the liberal media. And this isso we sued for records. Tell us about this criminal investigation.

There was no criminal investigation. It was a memo saying there’s no crime. But we did get lots of documents of her walking around the media telling everyone who would listen. Deeply troubling. Arizona AG investigating Trump over possible death threat Trump investigated by Arizona AG over gun comments about Liz Cheney Arizona AG to investigate Trump’s Liz Cheney comment as potential death threat goes on and on as we highlighted the television interviews about it. What an abuse of power. All to try to rig an election in the last minute with this smear of President Trump having committed a crime when he was making the rather obvious point about what people have called chicken hawks and Judicial Watch exposed it and these abuses of power by prosecutors to target their political enemies and in this case engage in election interference.

And as we know, Trump won Arizona, so it failed. Who knows, maybe he could have run by won by 10%. Maybe other candidates could have won as a result of more Republicans coming out. I don’t know. There are other cases, you know, when a President’s vote is suppressed or the changes, it affects other races as well, directly and indirectly. So it is election interference. If I were the Justice Department, I’d be investigating that. Abusing your office to mess with an election. I think there’s more to be found here. And this isn’t our only lawsuit. I’m not going to talk about the other one we have yet because I don’t literally have it in front of me.

So you don’t want me doing that. I’ll talk about it soon. I mean, we are not just active in Washington, D.C. obviously, this is where the federal government is. This is where all the money is spent, practically speaking. A lot of the corruption takes place here, but there’s a lot of corruption in the states. And the corrupt politicians here in D.C. sometimes collude with these other politicians at the state level. We saw this with the prosecutions of Trump, right, with Fannie Willis and Alvin Bragg and company. But we are second to none, not only in investigating corruption here in our nation’s capital, but in the states.

There are a few states we haven’t investigated. I’m sure there are some. I can’t go through the list off the top of my head, but we’re active in Arizona. We’re active in California, Kentucky, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Maryland, Virginia, here in the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Indiana, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Texas, Oregon, Hawaii, Alaska, New York, Vermont. We’ve been everywhere. We’re everywhere. Judicial Watch. When it comes to fighting government corruption, Judicial Watch is the nation’s leader, both here in Washington, D.C. and in the several states. Just great work.

Now, that reminds me, speaking of our nation, you know, it’s the 250th anniversary of Paul Revere’s ride, Lexington Concord battles as well. This week or this weekend, God bless America. Lots of 250th anniversaries coming up as it relates to our nation’s founding and the War for Independence. I encourage you to follow it and alert certainly the young people and your children and grandchildren so they can acknowledge it and understand the history behind the founding. I mean, go look up Paul Revere’s ride and the details about that. And, you know, we’ve all been taught about it. I don’t know if they teach kids about it anymore, but it’s worth going back and going over it again, certainly from the adult perspective to recognize the bravery and bravado that helped save and launch our nation.

Just amazing. So God bless America. So Judicial Watch is, you know, sometimes we have to kind of sue over things we prefer not to have to even look into because it’s such a terrible situation. One of these issues is the Covenant School shooting in Tennessee in March of 2023. And, you know, there was a big issue related to the motivations of the shooter. There were documents supposedly where that constituted what many consider to be a manifesto, and it was not being released. And materials like that typically are released. So we sued on behalf of one of our friends in Tennessee, a retired sheriff in Hamilton County, Tennessee, James Hammond, and the Tennessee Firearms association, because, as you know, the gun anti gun lobby uses these shootings as an attempt, you know, to leverage gun bans from them.

So, you know, the truth about the motivations, the circumstances of the shooting, and the role of guns in both promoting the, you know, allowing the shooting to take place. Obviously it was a shooting, but. And maybe the presence of guns that could have averted it. You know, that’s a matter of debate. So we need all the details. So we sued in Tennessee, couldn’t get anything. And the families, for reasons that I don’t want to necessarily second guess, but I think legally were incorrect, came in and essentially thwarted our attempts to get this information, this manifesto information.

So we’re now at the appellate level, but the feds had the records as well. And we had sued for the records in, I Guess it was 2023 too, and we weren’t getting them from the Biden administration. And then we saw that Megyn Kelly had been granted access to them by the Trump administration, which is fine, you know, but she wasn’t allowed to publish them. We’ve been in court for years and they were telling us we couldn’t get them. So we went back and said, what’s going on here? You said we weren’t allowed to see them because there’s an ongoing investigation.

There is no more ongoing investigation. The shooter is dead for two years. What’s happening? And then you had Megyn Kelly be given permission to talk about them, but not publicize them or publish them, which is not exactly the most transparent approach. And the feedback we got back was, you’re right, Judicial Watch, the senior official in the Justice Department, has authorized their release. So we got the documents, or at least ports of the documents known as the manifesto of the Tennessee shooter, from the FBI. And according to the FBI, they completed the interim review of records subject to our request, and they withheld some information under 7C&F, which is law enforcement, as I recall.

Privacy is C. I forget what F is. Anyway, so there Are appeals related to. I mean, there’s material in here that’s been withheld. I didn’t see anything that we probably end up fighting over, but who knows? But I tell you, this is the first time they’ve been officially published. There have been leaks in some of the records to Steven Crowder, who’s been doing some good journalism on this, Megyn Kelly was able to talk about them. But this is the first official leak, the official, not official leak. The first official FOIA release of the records. So the first official publication we can confirm these are the records.

Right. And they’re really terrible to read and I don’t want to go through them individually with you because it’s just so awful. And as I say in the release, I try to characterize them generally. So you know what’s in them. The records detail the shooter’s violent thoughts, and that’s a nice way of putting it. She’s a very disturbed individual. The targeting and planning of the school shooting attack on the Covenant School and her transgender related distress, the records show she considered an attack on a mall. This is interesting, I thought. But she thought better of it because she noted that security had been stepped up and there was too much of a security presence there for her to think that she could do it.

And when you look through the records and I encourage people to review them, I mean, if I’m just warning you, it’s not they’re very unpleasant. It’s they convey that, you know, the records show a very disturbed young woman, childlike in many respects. I mean, when you see what her. I mean, one of these documents is before death, goal list. And most of her goals were to look at cartoons and juvenile oriented films. You know, basically a child, basically the goal list of a young, not an old teenager, but a young teenager. So it’s upsetting to see.

And then she’s got horrible language describing herself, her self, hatred, how she wants to die. And then she says terrible things about the targets of her violence. It’s terrible. I keep on saying terrible, terrible, terrible. It really is terrible to see. But what’s useful about the material, which is why it should have been made public long ago, is that it may help Americans understand and better protect and prepare and prevent future mass shootings at schools and other locations. I mean, you read the material, you say you can see that what the circumstances were and what her thinking was, maybe it will alert people, hey, there’s someone I know who’s behaving like this.

And in terms of what she planned and the Details about her plan are really significant. So we essentially got two notebooks. One notebook shows her really disturbing thoughts and writings. Another notebook gets into the details of her planning. She knew what she was going to do. It’s not nice to see. And so hopefully by looking at what she was planning to do, I mean, for instance, she, the thing she was prepping to do to prepare for the shooting was to watch a whole bunch of documentaries about other school shootings. So I don’t know, you can tell I don’t like talking about it because we got the material this afternoon.

I read through it. It was one of the most unpleasant things I’ve had to review while at Judicial Watch, let’s put it this way. And so. But it’s in the public interest that it be released. So I caution you, it’s available online at our website to look at it and there may be some ramifications on it. People will make arguments one way or the other. And you know, as people debate on it, I’ll share my views, but it’s there for you to see. And there may be other materials. As I said, we still have this legal fight in Tennessee, you know, which has gone on interminably in my view, completely at odds with any understanding we have of FOIA law.

It’s kind of another world with the courts down there to date, unfortunately. And so I, and I also want to commend again the Justice Department, Bam Bonney’s Justice Department for releasing this FBI material. I mean, a lot of this, I don’t know if they could have been withheld. But you know, just because it is public or should have been made public, it doesn’t mean an agency releases it. So what I see between the release of this and the Biden material is a growing commitment maybe to transparency on key issues by the Trump administration, specifically the Bondi Justice Department.

And that would be good to see. So we’ll keep our fingers crossed. You know, we’ll applaud them when they’re transparent, we’ll highlight where they’re not. I mean, that’s all we can do as a group. Right? And we do it with your support. Some more great work from Judicial Watch this week, huh? You know, uncovering this scandal about Joe Biden’s dementia cover up at the White House. We’ve got this manifesto document which I hope can save lives. Just amazing. Record after record after record. And of course, you know, exposing the corruption in Arizona election rigging 101 again by another left wing politician trying to get Trump.

Just great work. By Judicial Watch. So we do it only with your support. So I encourage you to support our work. If you’re not Already, go to judicialwatch.org if you are supporting our work. Thank you. But continue to support us as well with your most generous additional contribution. So with that, I wish you the best. I wish you specifically all the peace and joy of Easter. Blessings to you and your family. And I wish that to you on behalf of everyone here at Judicial Watch, to everyone in your world and of course, if you’re I guess this is Passover as well.

So happy Passover to those of you celebrating Passover as well. But I always love the fact when Passover and Easter coincide, it’s particularly special. So God bless you and I’ll see you here next time on the Judicial Watch weekly update. Thanks for watching. Don’t forget to hit that subscribe button and like our video down below, Sa.
[tr:tra].

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