Fani Willis Pays Up? Whats the First Thing Trump Should Do?

SPREAD THE WORD

5G

🗞🗞️ Stay Informed! Subscribe to MPN Newsletter: MyPatriotsNetwork.com/Newsletter

📢 JOIN OUR PATRIOT MOVEMENTS! 🌟
🤝 Connect with fellow Patriots! Join FREE Today at PatriotsClub.com/MPN 🌍
🚔 Join the CSPOA Posse! Stand for Freedom with Constitutional Sheriffs! 👉 Sign up now at CSPOA.org/Join

❤️ SUPPORT US BY SUPPORTING OUR PARTNERS
🚀 Ready to Feel Younger? Get Your Health Back Today! Learn More at iWantMyHealthBack.com/MPN
🛡️ Protect Yourself and Your Family Against 5G and EMF Radiation. Learn How at BodyAlign.com/MPN
🔒 Secure Your Assets with precious metals. Get Your Free Wealth Kit Today at BestSilverGold.com/MPN
💡 Boost Your Business by Driving More Traffic, Leads and Sales. Start Today at MastermindWebinars.com/MPN

🔔 FOLLOW MY PATRIOTS NETWORK
🎙️ Sovereign Radio: SovereignRadio.com/MPN
🎥 Rumble: Rumble.com/c/MyPatriotsNetwork
▶️ YouTube: Youtube.com/@MyPatriotsNetwork
📘 Facebook: Facebook.com/MyPatriotsNetwork/
📸 Instagram: Instagram.com/My.Patriots.Network/
✖️ X (formerly Twitter): X.com/mypatriots1776
✉️ Telegram: T.me/MyPatriotsNetwork


Summary

➡ Tom Fitton, the President of Judicial Watch, discusses the transition from the Biden administration to the Trump administration. He criticizes Biden’s actions, such as releasing terrorists from Guantanamo Bay and extending temporary protected status to certain aliens. Fitton also anticipates Trump’s return to office and expects a significant number of executive orders aimed at restoring the rule of law and addressing various crises.
➡ The text discusses various issues that need to be addressed by Trump, including protecting the Republic, reversing the Biden invasion, cutting prices, addressing lawfare, and dealing with censorship and abuses of power. It also mentions the need to boost morale in the Department of Defense and the Pentagon, and to focus on national security. The text also highlights the impressive record of Pete Hegseth, a nominee facing challenging issues due to allegations about his past activities. The text ends by discussing the issue of lawfare and the abuse of power by the Biden administration and the Pelosi Congress prosecutors.
➡ The potential Attorney General promises to uphold the law fairly and equally, without targeting individuals based on their political affiliations. She emphasizes that the role of a prosecutor is to start with a crime and find the person responsible, not the other way around. The article also discusses a lawsuit against the city of San Francisco over a program that provided monthly financial aid to low-income transgender individuals of specific races, which was deemed discriminatory.
➡ Judicial Watch sued San Francisco over a program that provided guaranteed income for transgender people, arguing it was discriminatory and unconstitutional. The city agreed to stop the program and paid over $3,000 in attorney’s fees and costs. The settlement also included a promise not to start a similar program in the future. This case is seen as a victory for the rule of law and a stand against discrimination based on race, sex, and transgender status.
➡ Judicial Watch has sued the California Coastal Commission for allegedly abusing Elon Musk and SpaceX due to Musk’s political views. The Commission rejected a proposal to increase the number of SpaceX launches, with one member openly stating her opposition was due to Musk’s support for President Trump. Judicial Watch claims this is a violation of Musk’s First Amendment rights and is also suing for the release of records related to this decision, which they believe are being unlawfully withheld. The case is ongoing and highlights potential political bias in decision-making processes.
➡ In 2024, the District of Columbia Board of Elections allowed 113 noncitizens to vote in the presidential primary and 388 in the general election, which may be a violation of federal law. This act undermines the rule of law and the value of citizenship. Congress, which has power over the District of Columbia, should stop this practice. Additionally, concerns have been raised about the security of the Panama Canal, which is controlled by a Chinese-linked company, potentially posing a threat to national security.
➡ Judicial Watch, a legal watchdog group, has been actively involved in various lawsuits and investigations to uphold the rule of law. Their work includes filing a wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of Ashley Babbitt’s family, suing states for election irregularities, and uncovering incidents involving President Biden’s dog. They also revealed a posthumous criminal investigation of Ashley Babbitt and exposed potential manipulation of a transcript of Biden’s interviews. Judicial Watch encourages public support for their ongoing efforts to ensure transparency and accountability in government.
➡ The speaker appreciates the support and contributions from Americans that enable their team of lawyers and investigators to hold the government accountable. They encourage continued support and spreading the word about their work. They hope for a smoother journey during the Trump administration, but assure that their work will persist regardless. They wish everyone a safe holiday and look forward to a smooth inauguration.

Transcript

Hey, everyone. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton here with our weekly update on social media. Thank you as always, for joining us. An important week, a historic week here in Washington, D.C. the end of the Biden administration, the beginning of the Trump administration. Coming up, the beginning of next week week. I’ll provide you the updates in terms of what’s been going on Hill, Biden’s last set of abuses. And I want to hear and consult with you about what you think President Trump should do as he begins his new term in office. We have new details on the Fanny Willis case.

She owes us big money. I’ll give you the latest on that. Judicial Watch had another successful settlement in San Francisco, California, over a woke racist policy that you’re just not going to believe. Plus, we’ve got new documents about. Well, they’re not new. They’re old documents about the Panama Canal in China that you’re going to be very interested in in light of President Trump’s statements and concerns about Panama and China. Plus, Elon Musk, we’ve got a lawsuit over the targeting and abuse of him. First up is the end of the Biden administration, the beginning of the Trump administration.

The long national nightmare is over. President Biden is on the way out. President Trump is on the way in. And I think many Americans, if not most Americans, are excited at the transition to the second Trump era, a continuation of the first one. As I noted around Election Day, lawfare has failed. The efforts to interfere in our elections by abusing the Justice Department and prosecutorial offices in New York and in Atlanta and frankly in other states as well, did not succeed in keeping Trump out of office. And in my view, the American people in voting for Trump, essentially found him innocent.

And of course, the lawfare is never going to stop, even if Trump, practically speaking, has beaten it into the ground. Even this week you had Jack Smith’sand the Garland Justice Department. And sometimes I go through in detail some of these materials as they’re released. This one doesn’t deserve the time of day. It’s a screed saying that Trump would have been convicted if only they could go, if only they had gone to trial. And of course, they wanted to convict him for doing what? Doing what presidents are supposed to do, ensure that elections are free and fair and laws are followed and doing what American citizens have a right to do under the Constitution, federal and state law, which is to dispute an election.

And so it was an effort by Biden and his gang, the Garland Justice Department, Jack Smith, to try to jail Trump for a disputing election retaliation, election interference. And it’s also a signal to others saying, if you do this too, we’ll come after you. But they failed. They lost. It doesn’t mean they still won’t try to smear him and keep on harassing him and people around him. But it’s a vindication in many ways for the rule of law. Now, Jack Smith has gone as well, further proving he resigned, further proving his position was purely political. I mean, if he was a special counsel neutrally pursuing justice, why would he resign? Why wouldn’t he just finish up his work under President Trump? Well, you know why? Because he was put in there for a political purpose, purely political.

And as far as I’m concerned, Jack Smith, Garland and all the rest should be subject to independent criminal investigations for what I believe to be unprecedented abuses of power on under the Color of law to deprive President Trump and other American citizens of their civil rights, in addition to other violations of law. So great news there in the sense that there still needs to be accountability and justice for what went on. But I want accountability and justice, and we will continue to pursue it. But Trump coming back into office and, and being vindicated by the American voter, I think many people will interpret as a measure of justice as well.

And President Biden on his way out, continues to engage in behavior that is, frankly, dangerous to the national security and to the safety of the American people. You may have missed it, but he released a bunch of terrorists from Gitmo the other day, Guantanamo Bay folks, including some, one of which at least previously was deemed too dangerous to release. Many of the others were the bodyguards for Osama bin Laden. Now there’s this awful record of those previously released from Gitmo going back and becoming terrorists again. So this shows you where this left wing ideology, this hate America, there’s like the American First, America first ideology.

And there’s also what I call the Hate America first ideology, and that’s the one the left pursues. They kind of like terrorism. Doesn’t mean they’re terrorists, but they like and condone terrorism and they don’t believe it’s as big an issue, even if it results in deaths as other vicious, murderous criminal activities. Because the left relies on political terrorism and the threat thereof to achieve its political agenda. And so that’s why you’ve got, they’ve got this soft, spartan hearts for terrorists. And we saw that literally with Biden releasing 11 terrorists from Gitmo. And I think just today he said, I’m releasing 2,500 drug criminals from the federal prisons.

Of course, none of the details have been made available, so you can presume they’re a drug dealers. And the worst of the worst, if you are in federal prison on crimes related to drugs, you’re not there because some trooper pulled you over and you were smoking a marijuana cigarette. You were there because there were significant drug crimes on your record or other related crimes. So just again, a kind of a cynical attack on the public safety. Another last minute Biden move was to extend what is called temporary protected status to, I think the number is a million or so aliens who otherwise should be home.

There’s a group of aliens, I think it’s from, I forget which Central American country, but he said that they needed to have temporary protective status for another several months and maybe as long as 18 months because of an earthquake that took place 20 years ago in their country. So just contempt, contempt for the American people’s concern about having foreign nationals here in violation of good sense and the law. So that’s where we are with Biden, you know, and he gave this speech on the way out that was, as I called it on Twitter, villainous, basically designating and targeting and, you know, I don’t know who wrote the speech for Biden.

He’s completely out of it. It’s pretty clear. Other than him being generally angry, you know, these policy moves are purely the creation, it looks to me, because he’s not capable of planning this type of thing or even thinking about it based on what we’ve been seeing the last several months. Purely the creation of ardent leftists who are actually running our government. And his speech. I don’t know if we have the tweet. I guess we did. I don’t think we pulled that tweet, did we? The villainous tweet. So I want to remind myself of what I wrote because I guess I could go off the top of my head, but, you know, that’s not fun, right? Villainess.

I think I spelled it. This is what I do in the office all day. Right. I’m just kidding, of course. Oh, you got to see this tweet I wrote. Yeah. So this is. So the tweet I wrote was this. Or I’m going to quote the thought from the tweet because the speech was incitement. I don’t know if you saw the speech. It was just awful. I mean, the presentation, you know, further demonstrated his cognitive decline, but the speech itself was just terrible. And this is my summary. Whoever wrote that villainous Biden speech reaffirmed that the left wants to destroy our constitutional republic by targeting the Supreme Court.

He attacked the Supreme Court again, encouraging lawfare and worse, basically suggesting all of his enemies are criminals that need to be prosecuted and destroyed. Confiscating wealth and property, attacking, quote, oligarchs. How do you handle oligarchs? You steal their wealth. That’s what the left does. Imposing censorship on Americans, fighting out misinformation, and again, eliminating First Amendment protections for free speech. That’s Biden’s message on his way out. Other than his petty concern that, oh, I could have beaten Trump, then why did you allow yourself to be couped out of the candidacy for the presidency? What threats were you given? That should be the subject of a criminal investigation as far as I’m concerned.

You know, so, you know, Biden’s leaving, but the damage to the republic will continue. And to that end, President Trump will be inaugurated on Monday. We were looking forward to attending it in person, but it got moved indoors to a very limited audience because of the cold weather. But by all accounts, Trump is going to immediately go to town. Based on what I’ve been hearing, it’s going to be biblical. That’s the word that was used in terms of the scope and breadth and number of executive orders meant to restore the rule of law, address the crises at the Republic, in our republic, to the extent he can, through executive order.

So it’s going to be a dramatic, not just first 100 days. I suspect it’s going to be a dramatic 10 days in a way that we’ve never seen before, at least with many of our Martin presidents. And there are so many issues to address. And I’d be curious to know, share below. What issues do you want Trump to address first? And you know, the challenge with the left when they control government, I often observe this, is that they set so many fires on the horizon, it’s difficult sometimes to figure out where to go to. Which ones do you put out first? I mean, let’s just talk about some of the fires President Trump has to put out.

He needs to protect the Republic from our. From the invasion. He needs to reverse the Biden invasion immediately. And that’s easy, or it’s not easy to do, but it’s easy to point out as a priority, he needs to cut prices, and that’s going to take a lot of work to do because he’s going to have to begin to. It’s not even a spigot. Just think of a giant ginormous valve of money flowing into our economy as a result of government spending and, you know, and other steps he needs to take to curtail that. We need to have our prices cut.

I mean, we’re being bled to death through inflation. He needs to address the lawfare immediately because it’s not just him being targeted by the Justice Department. There are other states targeting his supporters. So there needs to be a reckoning and an accountability moved by him in that regard. So what else? The censorship issue, the generalized abuses of power in the areas of energy and the environment, the war on energy needs to be reversed as well. Talk about causing inflation. Think of the cost of energy and the inflationary impact of Biden’s efforts to destroy our fossil fuel industry and waste money subsidizing in a way the market doesn’t desire.

Or we need the green energy issue. And then, of course, we have our national security. Our defense budgets are still too low. Morale is zero in our in our Pentagon, or, excuse me, in the Department of Defense. Morale is probably zero in the Pentagon right now because all the woke generals who’ve been ruining the military are probably worried about what Trump’s going to do. So a lot needs to be done. And what’s been good this week is that he seems to have a team put in place or ready to go that understands, to use the relatively trite phrase, what time it is.

And you can see that the left really doesn’t still know how to handle this. Really. It’s not just Trump. It’s so many tens of millions of Americans who are just up with the Washington way on issues ranging from lawfare to dei. Now, Pete Hegseth, he probably has, out of all the nominees, the most challenging issues facing him because there were allegations about his past activities, whether he drank too much, you know, the sort of personal scandal stuff that can easily derail a nominee. But I recall seeing earlier this week, I think Fox News put something out that detailed his record as a war fighter.

Incredibly impressive. Now, I know Pete Heitsev lightly, and I tell you, if I had known he was such a hero, man, what a great American. What he did as a military leader, see in combat, just incredible. Plus, he’s been a fighter in terms of policies for veterans and for getting the military back to doing what it’s supposed to do, which is defending the country, not being used as a vehicle for social justice and to brainwash our troops so that they are alienated from the country that they’re supposed to defend. So here’s. Let’s go to the brief clip by Pete Hegseth.

I think where he introduces some of these issues. Our standards will be high, and they will be equal, not equitable. That’s a very different word. We need to make sure every warrior is fully qualified on their assigned weapon system, every pilot’s fully qualified and current on the aircraft they are flying, and every general or flag officer is selected for leadership or promotion purely based on performance, readiness, and merit. Leaders at all levels will be held accountable, and war fighting and lethality and the readiness of the troops and their families will be our only focus. I tell you, if I were in the military, after four years of woke racist, brainwashing, transgender extremism excuses and apologies for America strength, I’d be excited.

Pete Hegseth is taking over, and I think his presence at the Pentagon is going to just in and of itself, he may not even have to do that much. His presence at the Pentagon will not only increase morale in our current fighting force and among our military troops, but also increase recruitment. And so I think his. He should be, as I was jokingly saying, he should have been confirmed yesterday, even before this abusive committee process. But the Democrats and the left lost big against Hegseth, as we see from this section of his hearings here, on a few things specifically, and exactly how we’ve gotten to where we’ve gotten with recruiting and morale.

Dei, there’s been a little bit of discussion about this, but for those watching at home, DEI is not about giving everybody opportunity. It is rooted in cultural Marxism, the idea that you pit the room, any room, with oppressor versus oppressed. It’s race essentialism, and it is poison. It has no business whatsoever in our military. I think the American people have spoken loudly and clearly about this. They’re tired of this. They’re tired of WOKE ideology. And to my Democrat colleagues on the other side, if you haven’t picked up on that, you missed the plot, because that’s what November 5th partially was about.

And so let’s talk specifically about some of these DEI programs that have been funded in our academy, specifically the Air Force Academy. It was advised as disfavored language to refer to your mom and dad as mom and dad. Okay. Dear mom and dad, I’m writing home. Don’t say that. That’s insane. We’re all just people. You can’t say that either. And in an effort to police this in a 1984 Orwellian novel, there was actually an eyes and ears program to rat on your fellow students who might say, mom and dad, or just say, in a tough situation, you know what? We’re all just People can’t say that this wasn’t limited, by the way, to our academies.

The Secretary of the Air Force, our current secretary of the Air Force, in a memo from August of 2022, thought we had too many white officers advocated for quotas. And if you crunch the numbers, that meant that 5,800 white officers who worked really hard should be fired in the United States of America. I don’t know how we got here. And by the way, the Air Force isn’t alone here. The Navy sort of touted a drag queen influencer. This stuff is insane. If people wonder why recruiting has dropped off and let me just go through a few numbers, then I want to get your comments on how we fix this because has gone completely.

So I mean, we see the type of content that Hegseth was able to generate as a result of his presence and content meaning education about the woke racism in our military. And as Senator Schmidt, one of my new favorite senators in the Senate highlighted, the military academies are a locus of evil when it comes to this woke racism training, this anti American DEI training. Judicial Watch has had several lawsuits expose some of the details that even Senator Schmidt is referencing there. But Hegseth just mowed down, ground over, rolled over the left wing senators there. And of course the Republicans did a relatively good job of highlighting those issues as we showed there.

So and as a result, my thinking is there isn’t another cabinet official who’s going to face any significant chance of losing in the Senate. Now of course, the leftist Democrats, even though Hegseth is likely to be confirmed, they don’t want him to be confirmed in a timely way, placing our national security at risk. So practically speaking, he could have been confirmed as soon as I think on Monday, but because they’re justdemocrats are going to exercise their prerogatives to keep that position open until Thursday and not get a final vote until days after he’d be ready, practically speaking, for a final vote.

Of course, the other big issue is lawfare, the abuse of power by the Biden gang in collusion with the Pelosi Congress prosecutors and political prosecutors in Georgia, New York and other states to target Trump and his supporters. Now, Pam Bondi testified briefly about what she wants to do here. Let’s run that first introductory clip of Pam. The partisanship, the weaponization will be gone. America will have one tier of justice for all. And then she got into it with a Democratic senator. And you can see Pam Bondi is no shrinking violet. She is the nominee for Attorney General.

She’s former Florida Attorney General. And you know, the Democrats seem to think. I say Democrats, but it’s this leftist approach. They think that bullying and abusing you will. Is somehow politically smart, is somehow a politically smart thing to do. Let’s watch this. You have said that Department of Justice prosecutors will be prosecuted in the Trump administration. What? Department of justice prosecutors will be prosecuted and why? I said that on tv. I said prosecutors will be prosecuted, to finish the quote. If bad investigators will be investigated. You know, we all take an oath, Senator, to uphold the law.

None of us are above the law. Let me give you a really good example of a bad lawyer within the Justice Department, a guy named Klein Smith, who altered a FISA warrant, one of the most important things we can do in this country. So will everyone be held to an equal, equal, fair system of justice if I am the next Attorney General? Absolutely. And no one is above the law. Under what circumstances will you prosecute journalists for what they write? I believe in the freedom of speech only if anyone commits a crime. It’s pretty basic, Senator, with anything, with any victim.

And this goes back to my entire career for 18 years as a prosecutor and then eight years as Florida’s Attorney general. You find the facts of the case, you apply the law in good faith, and you treat everyone fairly. And it would not be appropriate for a prosecutor to start with a name and look for a crime. It’s a prosecutor’s job to start with a crime and look for a name. Correct, Senator? I think that is the whole problem with the weaponization that we have seen the last four years and what’s been happening to Donald Trump.

They targeted Donald Trump. They went after him, actually, starting back in 2016. They targeted his campaign. They have launched countless investigations against him. That will not be the case if I am Attorney General. I will not politicize that office. I will not target people simply because of their political affiliation. Justice will be administered evenhandedly throughout this country. Senator, we’ve got to bring this country back together. We’ve got to move forward or we’re going to. Well, good for her. I thought her testimony was generally pretty good. And she didn’t back down from a willingness to investigate what needs to be investigated.

I mean, she’s right in the sense that. And of course, Senator Whitehouse was completely oblivious in asking that question. You don’t charge someone. You don’t pick someone out and then find a crime. As she pointed out, that’s exactly what they did with Trump. What we’re concerned about is whether the conduct that we have so many concerns about was criminal or not. So using the Justice Department to target to do exactly what White House said, which is to look at a person you don’t like and then spend resources to try to put him in jail simply because you don’t like him politically or you want to interfere with the election or raise or cause other political repercussions.

If that was, if that happened, as I describe it, it would be a crime or it would be criminal in the sense it would be more than one crime. And I think that needs a criminal investigation. I’ve seen the abuses by Jack Smith and his people. I know what their basis for their charges on Trump were not in good faith. Judicial Watch had direct experience in some of the claims they were making. As I’ve highlighted here for you, before the Biden Justice Department sent the FBI to my home to issue a subpoena to me, they subsequently issued subpoena to Judicial Watch.

But Jack Smith’s prosecutors, I had three prosecutors from Jack Smith’s office haul me before a grand jury as a, quote, a witness and harass me for four hours. And it was an argument about politics. In our First Amendment activities are protected First Amendment activities as Judicial Watch. Imagine the head of the ACLU being hauled in because they don’t like the criticism. The Justice Department didn’t like their criticism. I want justice for what happened, and I hope Pam Bondi gets to it. And as I’ve highlighted before, I think that President Trump should just frankly appoint a special prosecutor to investigate all those Justice Department officials, some of whom are probably still in the Justice Department.

So should the Justice Department investigate the Justice Department? I don’t think so. So some good, good testimony from Hegseth and Pam Bondi. And it’s reassuring to see on two very important positions, Defense secretary and the Justice Department, there’s someone, there are going to be people at the top with lights on in their head when it comes to the crises he’s facing. America DEI Lawfare so good stuff. So I promise you to give you promise to give you an update on Fannie Willis. And if you haven’t been following, I’ll just give you a brief update to date in terms of where we’ve been.

You know, we had asked for records from her office about her communications or showing her communications with the Biden operation, Jack Smith and the Pelosi January 6th Committee. And they told us several times they had no records, which was not true. It was false. They didn’t show up in court as they were supposed to do and respond to our lawsuit, which is because we knew they had records, because Congress had at least one letter Fanny Willis herself signed to Bennie Thompson, the corrupt head of the January 6th committee. So we caught them lying about their collusion records.

They didn’t show up in court. The court found them in default, found Fanny Willis in default, and not only ordered her to actually do a search for records, which she didn’t do seriously, in our view, that’s another. That will be. That issue will continue. But the court said you owe Judicial Watch attorneys fees and costs, and those attorney’s fees and costs were due today. $22,000. I think it’s $21,000. What is it? 21,500 something dollars? $21,578. Pretty close. $21,578. And the check was due to us today. Our lawyer down in Georgia got a call from them saying, oh, the check’s here.

And we’re like, why didn’t you send it to us? So supposedly the check is ready, so we just got to get our hands on it. And it’s not the end of the case because obviously the attorney’s fees and costs, we are due and we will take them. And it shows you the cost to the abuse of power to the taxpayer for Fannie Willis, her operation there. But in the end, we really want the documents, too. Right. So that fight continues because they’re hiding their documents that they lied about having, showing collusion with the January 6 Committee and Lord knows what else.

So we had asked the court to appoint a special master, which essentially would oversee a search for documents by Fanny Willis office because they can’t be trusted. So that still needs to be resolved by the court. So to sum up, Fannie Willis says the check is ready with our money. We haven’t cashed it yet because we haven’t gotten our hands on it yet. At least as of now. I’ll check my email while I’m talking. And then secondly, we still have to get the court to rule, and I think the court will have to rule. Well, should rule soon, because it should be right for decision making.

By that, I mean the issue will be fully briefed as of probably this week or next week. Yeah. So we don’t have the money yet. Looking for an email, but they said it’s ready. So that’s where we stand on Fannie Willis. And I can’t think of a better way to begin the Trump administration than to have the public understand that Fannie Willis, her misconduct was so grave that in terms of violating open records law. The high collusion that a court ordered her office to pay. Judicial Watch 21, $500. $21,500. So when the money comes in, I’ll let.

And what I this is what I love about Judicial Watch. We not only, you know, we obviously sue the federal agencies here. There isn’t a federal agency, probably we haven’t sued. But it’s not just federal agencies, as we see in Fulton County. We sued Fanny Willis office and we’ve had lawsuits in state after state after state, and we’re very active in California. And we had a massive lawsuit in California, a taxpayer lawsuit over a truly outrageous policy in the city of San Francisco. And in California still, taxpayers can sue to stop the illegal spending of money.

So when money is being spent essentially on illegal activity, taxpayers can go to court to stop it. And so Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the city of San Francisco over a guaranteed income for trans people program. It provides low income transgender San Franciscans with $1,200 each month or provided at the time up to 18 months to help address financial insecurity with trans communities. It was limited to only black and Hispanic men who identified as women. So in addition to the trans discrimination, I don’t even know what to call it, telling people who were not transgendered or did not identify as the opposite sex that they don’t get money and then limiting that category further by race.

It was abuse and discrimination on top of woke abuse and discrimination. And so we sued and the response from San Francisco was we give up. San Francisco stopped the program and said it would not start up again. And they promised that to Judicial Watch through a public law. And not only that, they gave us 3,000 plus dollars in attorney’s fees and costs. And here’s the description of the program in a little bit more accessible way than my poor effort to describe it. A video we did not too long ago. Let’s play. It also sued San Francisco to stop its discriminatory guaranteed income for transgender people program.

Under California’s constitution, everyone is supposed to be equal under the eyes of the law. And treating people differently based on race, sex, ethnicity, or transgender status is presumptively unconstitutional. Yet the radicals running San Francisco violated that provision with the gift program. Not only is the cash giveaway limited to transgender people only, but it grants preferences based on race, sex and ethnicity. Persons who identify as black are given priority over persons who identify as white, Latino, or Asian, and men who identify as women are given priority over women who identify as men. After we sued to stop this blatantly unconstitutional program, San Francisco announced that it would stop the payments.

This is what we are fighting against on behalf of Americans everywhere. And you can be sure Judicial Watch will continue to hold radicals accountable because no one is above the law. So here we have it. So it wasn’t your ordinary settlement, in a sense that, you know, some bureaucrats said okay, or some government appointed officials said okay. In order for the settlement to take effect, the city of San Francisco needed to literally pass a law, the city council, that had to be signed by the mayor, and that took place in this case. And let’s go to the settlement document, the legal document.

We have a click on the legal document there. That’s the settlement itself. Let’s go to the document that I asked that be printed out, the document of the city council document. Okay. Settlement of lawsuit. And Paul Wiles and Reed Sandberg are clients and the taxpayers who stood up against this, and they acknowledged that we filed this lawsuit involving alleged violations of the California Constitution, transgender status discrimination, sex discrimination, race, ethnicity discrimination. And the proposed terms of the settlement are a payment of $3,250 and injunctive relief, be it ordained by the people of the city and county of San Francisco.

The city attorney is hereby authorized to saddle the action. There’s the caption, Phillips versus London Breed. London Breed was the mayor on substantially the same terms as set forth in a settlement settlement agreement, which is the legal document describing the settlement agreement, which provides one, a payment of $3,250 in attorney’s fees and costs, injunctive relief, agreeing that the city will not continue the guaranteed income program that our clients alleged to be unlawful beyond September 2024. So we got it shut down a few months ago. And this is important. By law, there’s this agreement that the city will not create a new guaranteed income program with the same eligibility criteria.

So San Francisco, through the settlement, has not only stopped this unlawful discrimination based on someone’s transgender status and race, but we got them the promise they won’t do it again. Now, it was a split decision or a split vote. Let’s go to page three of the document. Let’s go back to the document. So there was this first reading, which is sometimes done in legislators, legislatures, or boards of supervisors. In this case, seven in favor of it, three opposed. And then it was finally passed seven to three. So the law of the land in San Francisco is judicial watches.

Taxpayer clients were right. And go down a little bit lower, you’ll see lower. There’s London Breed, the Mayor signed it last year, 12, 19, 24. I don’t know if we got the money yet. It’s a great victory for the rule of law. And I tell you there’s something positive and this is going to be separate, even and apart from the Trump administration. When you have a left wing, a really crazed left wing jurisdiction running as fast as it can from a brazenly unconstitutional woke racist, sexist, misogynist program that gave cash out based on race and sex.

You know, there’s something been changed in this country. You have the governments, excuse me, all these major corporations turning away from dei. Now, some of them, they will continue the offensive nature, the offensive aspects of the programs under different names, but they’re recognizing legally because of not only lawsuits like this, but cases like the Supreme Court where the Supreme Court ruled that race discrimination in college admissions is, is unconstitutional. Judicial Watch was heavily involved in amicus briefs for years on that very issue before the courts. So this is a great victory for the rule of law in California.

And you know, it shows you we can’t abandon states that we think, oh, they’re too far left and we’re never going to get justice there. I mean, I give credit to the politicians in San Francisco who said, yeah, we’ll settle this, we’ll stop doing it and we won’t do it again. I mean, that’s maybe, maybe there should be some more punishment for it. But that’s pretty darn good, isn’t it? And you can bet you none of these folks, I guarantee you none of them are Judicial Watch supporters. None of them are conservative. Although maybe I’m not being fair, I don’t know enough about them individually.

But you see, my point is like, we just can’t abandon California to the wolves. And when we show up and fight, we can win. We had two other cases in California where the state legislature passed two sets of laws. The first one was to require quotas for private corporate boards of directors on the basis of sex. And then they passed a second set of laws that included additional categories that had, you know, no business being enforced through quota programs. I mean, quotas are an abomination under the constitution, whether it be a state or federal constitution. And so we had some challenges under the state constitution against those two programs, those two quota regimes.

And we won in both cases. So the state courts in California vindicated our clients concerns about what was going on there and stopped the quotas. These left wing, brazen quotas. We beat the state of California, the state legislature, the governor, and we just beat well, it’s a settlement. So to be fair to San Francisco, they’re not necessarily admitting they did anything wrong, but certainly this gets us the result we wanted. Right? Which is the. And of course, as taxpayers, our clients can only really just get the result they got, which is to stop the expenditure of money under this program.

Great, great success, great success. That’s why I love Judicial Watch. Really outrageous race based cash program with this transgender extremism on top of it. And we shut it down. No doubt about it, we shut it down. That’s just great. Elon Musk. This is what I mean about lawfare. Never really stopping. You know, it will be more difficult to harass Trump. So my view is the left will target, and they’ve already done this, target people around Trump. And Elon Musk, since he’s become more supportive of President Trump’s agenda, more conservative in his public policy views, since he’s been promoting free speech or freer speech on social media through his X platform, has become the target of lawfare by the left, the Biden administration.

I think what you need to ask is which agency the Biden administration hasn’t been harassing and targeting. Elon Musk, for example, I mean, for example, securities Exchange Commission, a left wing appointed. You have a Biden administration official, left wing official, and their last minutes in office, essentially they sued Musk for not disclosing a stock trade within a 10 day timeframe. You know, when he disclosed it, according to their own lawsuit, 11 days. But talk about petty, vindictive retaliation. And then there’s this other issue of his SpaceX program. And now I don’t know if you’ve been following Trump’s SpaceX launches, but they are incredible.

I don’t care if what your political views are. It’s do we have the video of him catching or his company, SpaceX catching that rocket? Yeah, let’s play that. Booster landing burn CF13 engines. Booster now hovering as it aligns with the tower for catch. Booster coming in, ready for that boom. Down to three engines. I mean, to me, technologically speaking, I don’t mean to digress, that to me is like watching a plane fly for the first time in terms of human development and technological progress. It’s just incredible to me. And as far as I’m concerned, when I see SpaceX, I’m wondering what do we even need NASA for? I exaggerate slightly, but not much.

But SpaceX, despite being this dramatically and historically successful innovative company, it doesn’t matter to the left. They’re owned SpaceX is owned by the wrong man. So they’ve been targeting and harassing SpaceX. The media has been harassing SpaceX, coming up with fake scandals and concerns about its activities. And notoriously, the California Coastal commission went after SpaceX directly and basically rejected a recommendation that they be allowed to pursue a certain amount of launches. And one of the commissioners said, and I’ll get into the detail, we don’t like you, we don’t like your politics, so we’re going to vote against you.

And so what Judicial Watch has done is we’ve sued the California Coastal Commission. The commission which by the way, in part helped decimate so much of LA county through its mismanagement of the coastal region there. The wildfire risk increased by the insanity of the California Coastal Commission, which is part of this left wing bureaucratic deep state in California. So we’ve sued for records about its abuse of Elon Musk and SpaceX abuse. That, to me, again, I don’t use this word lightly, is criminal. I think there should be criminal investigations over the retaliations by left wing bureaucrats and politicians who use their powers entrusted to them by either voters at the state level or at the federal level, or blessed by them through public laws to abuse Americans based on their First Amendment protected activities, as I believe the California Coastal Commission did here.

And on top of that, they’re hiding records contrary to California open records law. So we sued, we sued about the decision to prohibit more Space Exploration Technologies Corporation SpaceX rockets from launching out of Vandenberg Space Force Base. A member of the commission specifically tied her vote against Musk and SpaceX to Musk’s support for President Trump. We asked for the records about this outrage back in October of last year. It’s now January, I think. We sued within the. I don’t know the date of the lawsuit. Well, we sued recently and we asked under the California Public Records Act, a simple request.

I mean, how many records and communications could they have had about SpaceX and Elon Musk, Donald Trump and the launches from Vanderbilt, now SpaceX. And this is what I love about Musk is he’s very judicial watch, like in his approach to government officials. He recognizes the corruption and because he’s got a half a trillion dollars in wealth, or was it $400 billion or something, now he can afford, you know, lawyers to sue over these abuses. And he sued actually the day before we filed our open records request, citing the agency’s egregiously and unlawfully overreaching of authority when it engaged in naked political discrimination, punishing a quote company for the political views and statements of its largest shareholder and CEO, who is Elon Musk.

And when you look at the detail, I encourage you to go to our website and I think there’s a link to the lawsuit on our press release there. I encourage you to read the lawsuit. I remember reading it back when it was filed. It’s a great lawsuit because the details are truly outrageous as to the discrimination against Musk because of his political views. The suit recounts an extensive history of SpaceX launches of the Falcon 9 rockets from Vandenberg. For decades, the Commission has, without failing, agreed with the long standing position of the United States Department of Air Force that the base’s commercial space launch programs are federal agency activities not subject to the Commission’s permitting authority or control.

So basically it’s military operations and California state entities can’t come in en masse further now, however, the Commission has decided to ignore long standing federal policy and law, its own established practices, to impose a different standard on SpaceX. Specifically, the Commission refused to concur with a proposal by the United States Department of Air Force to increase from 36 to 50 the number of launches that SpaceX can perform at the base. And the egregious activity, or kind of the proof of corruption occurred during a public meeting. So the evidence is out there for the public. It was a public meeting on October 10th.

So just a few days before Musk’s lawsuit and our FOIA request, they voted 6, 4 to deny the request to allow more rockets to be launched out of Vandenberg. And one woman, one commissioner, said, as Commissioner Carol Hart said, this is a quote from the lawsuit. The basis for the decision was not that a commercial operator with a space launch program at the base was increasing its annual launch cadence, meaning launching more rockets, but rather that SpaceX was the company doing it. The concern is with, and this is a quote of hers, I want you to listen to this carefully.

The concern is with SpaceX increasing its launches, not with the other companies increasing their launches. We’re dealing with a company the head of which has aggressively injected himself into the presidential race and made it clear what his point of view is. That’s a confession or an admission, whatever you want to call it. Legally, it’s a smoking gun statement showing that she opposed giving Musk’s company permission to increase rocket launches, not that they even have any purview of it based solely on his support for President Trump. Again, I think that’s a crime. Pam Bondi, call your office when you get, you know, I say that half jokingly.

When you become DOJ head, you should investigate the California Coastal Commission. The commission recently approved another commercial space launch operator launching up to 60 launches a year from the same base. So it’s obvious it was SpaceX being targeted because of must support for Trump and they’re covering up the records about it. The powerful California Coastal Commission engaged in naked lawfare and abuse against elon Musk and SpaceX because of his support for Trump. And now the powerful agency wants to cover up its abuse by illicitly hiding records from the public. Judicial Watch is going to court to remind this agency that it’s not above the law.

So I’ll let you know how this case turns out. But we’ve been investigating other abuses of Trump by federal agencies under the Biden gang. And I hope the Trump officials, once they come back, or I guess they’re going to be a whole set of new Trump officials coming back, that they start releasing these records and expose what went on in terms of this lawfare. The lawfare wasn’t just about the targeting of Trump all although that was the most significant component of it was about the targeting of other Americans because of being, because of their views being conservative or variations of conservative.

So one of the first big issues, and I don’t think I mentioned this, it’s election integrity that Trump has to address when he’s in office. And it’s not only like generally where we need voter id, we need to clean up the list. Of course, Judicial Watch is second to none in cleaning up voter lists. 4 million in the last two years or so dirty names have been removed from the rolls in various states thanks to Judicial Watch ensuring that ballots are counted when they’re supposed to be counted. Not days and weeks, not ballots who that arrived days and weeks after the election.

They shouldn’t be counted under law. We’ve got cases on that, including a major appellate here court case that found that counting of ballots received after election Day is contrary to federal law. We’ve got ongoing lawsuits to clean up the rolls. And another major concern is ensuring that noncitizens don’t vote in the elections illegally or frankly legally because localities can supposedly let under law noncitizens vote in local races. And they’re doing that here in our nation’s capital. So as far as I’m concerned, the ambassador from Russia can vote for mayor here in D.C. and as we previously found, because we’ve been investigating this, it doesn’t look like they’re doing anything significant enough here in D.C.

to ensure that noncitizens are only voting in the races they’re able to vote in. Meaning we got a list of names of people who voted in quoted presidential primary. What does that mean? Did they vote in the presidential primary? That would be illegal, but the list says they did. And we keep on asking, give us information showing that you’re just keeping these people limited to where you say they’re being limited, not voting in federal elections. They haven’t provided anything and keep on providing information suggesting otherwise. And it’s not just limited to non citizens in the sense that someone with a permanent green card here is voting in the D.C.

mayor’s race or whatever illegal aliens can vote. And Judicial Watch just uncovered the details about the D.C. november election. 388 noncitizens voted in D.C. s November election. We got the list. I can’t show you the list because it lists their names and addresses. I’m not, and no, I’m not giving them to you. You can ask the D.C. government separately for the list. It’s public information. 230 of the noncitizens are registered Democrats. So it shows you, at least in D.C. where the political inclinations are of noncitizen voters, that the left wants to be able to vote in all elections, local and federal.

Less than 20 are registered Republicans. So what’s 20 of 230? It’s about 10%. Actually, there are probably a little more Republicans in the noncitizen population, relatively speaking, than in the citizen population. And the remainder of those number are independent or registered with a third party. The list does not detail whether the voters are illegal aliens, nor whether the non citizen voters were restricted, as law requires, the voting for only local DC offices. As I said earlier in July 2024, Judicial Watch reported that data from the District of Columbia Board of elections revealed that 113 noncitizens voted in the 2024 presidential primary.

That fact, by the way, has been censored on Facebook. I think it’s still censored on Facebook. That shows you how desperate the left is to keep the truth about non citizen voting away from the American people. It’s an outrage and an insult to every American citizen and may be a violation of federal law because I don’t think they’re keeping these folks from voting in federal elections as law requires. I mean, I have seen no evidence they have yet. So it may be a violation of federal law that D.C. allowed 388 foreign nationals to vote in a 2024 general election.

As far as I’m concerned, the votes of 388American citizens were vote. Were negated by these votes. Now, can they, let’s say they just legally voted in the local elections. Noncitizens who were even legally here or illegally here, I don’t think they should be able to vote in any American elections. Citizens should be the only ones voting in elections. And to have citizens vote, noncitizens voting in elections cancels out, in my view, the votes of citizens. Congress can and should end this practice immediately. And by that I mean that Congress has constitutional power over the District of Columbia.

It has plenary power over the District of Columbia. Congress is king in the District of Columbia under our Constitution. There isn’t anything that happens in the District of Columbia without the approval or acquiescence of Congress. So if Congress didn’t want these people to be registered to vote and vote these noncitizens, it would not happen. Now, there was a fight last Congress about it. It went nowhere because of the, you know, President Biden was president and Democrats controlled the Senate. This should be on high on the list, don’t you think? Congress should exercise jurisdiction over the District of Columbia to ensure that a Republican form of government continues in the District of Columbia.

There’s a particular need for that in our nation’s capital. Now, the good news is D.C. is one of those places that we were successful in able to clean, in getting names cleaned off the walls. Did you know that they removed 65,000 names from the rolls after we threatened a lawsuit? So good for D.C. in that regard. But they undermine the rule of law and election integrity and as I say, the very nature of citizenship by allowing non citizens, including illegal aliens, to vote. So not only do they undermine citizenship, but they undermine the rule of law explicitly by giving the benefit of the right to vote to people who are here in violation of law.

So a Russian, the Russian and Chinese ambassadors can vote in D.C. and so can the illegal alien gangbanger who came up from Venezuela on a migrant flight from paid for with tax dollars under the Biden regime. It needs to stop and Congress needs to stop it now. And we’ve got the receipts. So Judicial Watch again, doing the heavy lifting and showing the leadership there. You know, there’s been all this debate recently by, because of Trump’s leadership, he’s talking about us exercising jurisdiction or gaining jurisdiction over Greenland and raising questions about the deplorable. Jimmy. The deplorable act by President Jimmy Carter to essentially give away the Panama Canal to the then dictator of Panama.

And the concern back then was the risk to our national security as a result of US Sovereignty being minimized and taken away there and Donald Trump being. Donald Trump recognizes that continued threat and he’s highlighted that issue and threatened strong action to secure the canal. You may not know this, but a Chinese linked company controls both entrances of the canal, runs port facilities on both sides of the canal. Judicial Watch exposed their the national security concerns about that. When did we do this? Almost 25 years ago. Let’s go to the tweet. Donald Trump is right to be concerned about the security, about the security of the Panama Canal.

Almost 25 years ago. Judicial Watch obtained 1998, 1999 intelligence reports about China’s efforts to exert control in Panama. The reports highlighted the involvement of a company controlled by, well, Hutchinson Whampoa, which is now CK Hutchinson Holdings Company. The company is controlled by the family of Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka Shing and operates ports on both sides of the canal. So let’s go to the report. Click on the reports just to show people what they look like. Go down, go down. So click on them. Show them Lee is connected to. This is a quote from one of the reports there.

Lee is directly connected to Beijing and is willing to use his business influence to further the aims of the Chinese government. He has positioned his son Victor Lee to replace him in certain CK Holdings, CK and HW Operations, which are two of his companies such as HW’s Hong Kong International Terminals. Lee’s interest in the Panama Canal is not only strategic but also a means for outside financial opportunities for the Chinese government. Another declassified intelligence report states Hutchinson Whampo’s owner, Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka Shing, has extensive business ties in Beijing and has compelling financial reasons to maintain a good relationship with China’s leadership.

And then it gets worse. Another intelligence report. Some Chinese companies, perhaps proxies for Beijing, are investigating the investment opportunities. Beijing may use expanded investment as leverage to undermine Panama’s diplomatic ties to Taiwan. This was a 1988 report. A subsidiary of Hong Kong’s Hutchinson Wampoa in 96 won concessions to operate ports on both ends of the canal. Sure enough, and come back to me here. Sure enough, Panama cut off ties with Taiwan, severed diplonic ties with Taiwan after the Chinese companies invested in the canal took over control of those ports. And they just recently signed up or re signed the Li Ka Shing companies for another 25 years.

So these Chinese companies will control the ports on both sides of the canal until the year 2020, until the year 2046. Now I got a question for you. Have you heard about that from anyone else in the media? It’s out there. I posted it on Twitter or X Media could see it. I mean, it’s not like I have a small Twitter account or judicial. What is Judicial Watch’s Twitter account? How many people follow Judicial Watch? 2.2 million. 2.2 million people follow Judicial Watch’s account. How many people follow my account? What is it, 2.9 million. Yes. So there’s no excuse to not tell the American people about this.

There are intelligence documents raising concerns about Chinese control of the ports on both ends of the canal. And Trump is right to raise concerns about Panama ability to maintain the free flow of goods. And given it’s the Chinese who can trust whatever they’re charging anyone for him anyway, which of course, you know, Trump is very transactional in that regard because he’s a businessman. He doesn’t want to be ripped off. He doesn’t want America to be ripped off. And of course, I mean, one of the secrets about the Panama Canal Treaty that the media won’t tell you about, essentially we can come in and take it over again anytime we think it’s in our interests.

Well, what do you think? Should it be taken over by President Trump and America? Again, there should be a debate in the lease. And we’ve got the receipts that there are several issues continuing unaddressed by the establishment here in Washington, D.C. for since the create, since the canal was turned over. By the way, just so you know, in 2000, I think it was 2000, we sued to try to stop the transfer of the Panama Canal. We didn’t win, obviously. So we’ve been around this issue for a long time. Judicial Watch has. That’s a fun little fact.

And I remember that lawsuit. I remember driving up to the Supreme Court with our lawyers file a last minute brief. So we were right about the Panama Canal. We uncovered the truth about the Chinese control and the threats our intelligence community highlighted. And I appreciate Donald Trump raising these issues again, again, showing leadership. And you know, it’s been a great year for Judicial Watch. And you know, we’re entering the Trump era or a new Trump era. And so we’re looking forward to doing a lot of work. There’s a lot more work to do, frankly, under a Trump administration than under a Biden administration, because one would think there will be more opportunities for disclosure.

Right. So we’re going to try to work to take advantage of what we hope to be more opportunities for disclosure because I know personally Trump is the most transparent president in American history. There’s been nothing, no one else like him. His willingness to disclose his thinking and what he plans to do and what he is doing and his desire to release information about what the government’s been up to, you know. But in the last year, I would submit Judicial Watch did so much to help preserve our free and fair elections, support the rule of law. I have no doubt that if not for Judicial Watch’s litigation, education efforts and advocacy for the rule of law, President Trump would have been in jail now, were really the only reason he stayed out of jail.

No, but we were a significant contributing factor to preserving the rule of law for President Trump. Making it, making sure that the election wasn’t stolen in 2024, at least at the presidential level. Yes, I know their allegations was stolen in other races, but the presidential race, they couldn’t steal it, in part because of the work we’ve done. And just in the last year, I want to go over with you because it’s worth reminding you and it’s important you know about, because some of these issues the media will never tell you about and what I had done as we were ending the year and beginning this new year, I went through each and every Judicial Watch public statement and highlighted the what I think the ones were, the ones we’re sharing again and again and again.

I want to go through them with you now. And this is just press release after press release, and it’s so darn impressive. And I tell you, I want President Trump to follow up on all of this. I want Congress to follow up on all of this, and I want the media to follow up all on this. And necessarily, Judicial Watch is already doing the heavy lifting here, but I want others to do it, too. So the first lawsuit, judicial watch files $30 million wrongful death lawsuit against US government on behalf of Ashley Babbitt’s husband and estate.

I don’t have the date here, but I know when it was filed. January 6th. I think it was January 6th, 2024. And we’re still fighting it. Set for trial in 2026. We have a hearing on January 30th. The Biden administration’s been fighting to move it here to Washington, D.C. from California, is trying to decimate our claims for Ashley’s family. So hopefully the Trump administration takes a different approach there. Judicial Watch sues Mississippi for counting absentee ballots received after Election Day. That led to the appellate decision finding that counting ballots received after Election Day is contrary to federal law.

DHS Secretary Mari Orcas personally declined Presidential candidate Robert Kennedy Jr. S request for Secret Service protection. Major piece of news. Conservative highlighting political interference and providing security for a Trump. Excuse me, a Biden opponent. We sued. Records revealed at least 23 biting incidents by Biden’s dog. Commander, if you want to know why the Secret Service is a mess, 25 agents of the Secret Service more or less were bitten by his darn dog. And no one did anything about it until Judicial Watch uncovered it. And still there’s not been suitable accountability. Judicial Watch sues Illinois to force cleanup of voting rolls.

That continues. FBI records reveal posthumous criminal investigation of Ashley Babbitt. The corrupt FBI investigated Ashley Babbitt for crimes after she died. That’s how. That’s the evil nature of the FBI in the Biden era. FBI records indicate Fauci agency funded gain of function Rouhan lab research that would leave no signatures of purposeful human manipulation. So the FBI was consulting experts telling them that what Fauci’s agency was funding in Wuhan was likely gain of function. Big news, don’t you think? Judicial Watch sues California for forced cleanup of voting rolls. Lawsuit number two again against California. Because we had sued LA county and California a few years ago, LA county removed 1.45 million names from the rolls.

As a result, the rest of the state is still a mess. So we sued again. Judicial Watch files class action lawsuit over reparations. Reparations in Evanston, Illinois. The federal lawsuit is the key lawsuit on reparations. Virtually every jurisdiction in left world considering reparations has put all that on pause waiting to see what happens in this Judicial Watch lawsuit where Evanston gives money to people who identify as black or African American and whose ancestors, or they were either residents and their ancestors were residents of Evanston between the years 1919 and I think 1969, but only if they’re black.

Completely racist. So that important lawsuit. Judicial Watch no Biden. Justice Department admits Special counsel transcript of Biden interviews is inaccurate. Yeah, they doctored the transcript of Joe Biden’s interviews with the special counsel to minimize pause’s ums and uhs. I say I give the ums and ahs too. You know, many people do, but he was doing it in a way and it was minimized in a way to help make it look like he wasn’t as awful cognitively as her. Determined. And they were messing. They were messing with the record of the court. Was it technically of the court? I don’t know.

Messing with an official record, federal record, whatever you want to call it, when transcripts are written of depositions. The ums, the uhs, the ands, the hums, the coughs. They’re all caught by the record. And to eliminate them shows some ulterior motive. Incredible. And Judicial Watch forced it out. Records show FBI provided Democrats with information on whistleblowers who testified at a May 2023 weaponization hearing. Do I need to say anything else? They gave them dirt on witnesses that were blowing the whistle on FBI misconduct. Again, abuse of power to target whistleblowers. New records detail federal state censorship coordination in the 2020 election.

More details of the deep state’s efforts to suppress the Trump vote and concerns about the election in 2020. There are many ways to steal an election. One way to do that is by censoring advocates for a candidate or advocates on issues that may inert to a candidate or encourage voters either directly or indirectly or by happenstance. And they did not want people to think the elections were at issue in terms of the way they were being administered and they were censoring them. We got more of the proof. Again, more criminal activity as far as I’m concerned.

Judicial Watch asked federal court to order release of the audio of President Biden’s interview with Special counsel her. So we’re asking, you know, we sued for it. We proved that they had manipulated the transcript. They’re still hiding the audio. And to me, it’s not now a matter of history. It’s a matter of accountability for corruption. There was a cover up about his cognitive abilities. And the COVID up includes the Justice Department’s continued refusal to receive the review release the audio of his interview with her. Maybe the Biden justice, maybe the Trump Justice Department will change their mind on this.

But the court hasn’t ruled yet. Judicial Watch announces publication of Rights and Freedoms in Peril, an investigative report in the left’s attack on America. Great new book. You got to buy it. If you want to know what Trump has to deal with in 2025 and beyond, you’re going to want to read my new book, Rights and Freedoms in Peril. It’s a great book, an important one. That’s why I put them on the list. 113 noncitizens voted in the D.C. presidential primary. Big news, don’t you think? If you believe in America and citizenship and election integrity. Judicial Watch Sue’s Oregon to force cleanup of voter rolls Lawsuit alleges Oregon has one of the worst voting lists in the nation.

So that’s three federal lawsuits against three separate states to clean up the rolls by Judicial watch in 2024. Judicial watch victory Federal court appeal of federal appeals court rules against counting a ballot received after election Day. As I discussed earlier, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals found counting ballots after election Day. First decision of its kind. First opinion to find that to be the case, that counting ballots received after election Day, Election Day, is contrary to federal law. And you can see how it undermines election integrity. Where it took seemingly six weeks or more for California to determine who won key congressional races.

Records confirm agent on Harris Secret Service detail broke into Massachusetts hair salon taped over security camera. Remember that craziness? I mean, you had Trump nearly killed as a result of Secret Service bungling. And then it comes out that this woman’s salon was invaded by law enforcement personnel, including Secret Service, without her permission. And then this was the final. This is the final big lawsuit I picked out. Or news court finds Fannie Willis in default. An open records lawsuit orders her to produce records in five business days. Well, she didn’t produce the records, but she was ordered to pay us $22,000.

And supposedly the check’s in the mail, more or less. So I tell you, if you can point to anyone else like Judicial Watch, tell me about them, because I want to support them, too. But in the meantime, you should support Judicial Watch. If you’re currently supporting Judicial Watch, this is the type of work we do. I can’t tell you how important it is to the country. I don’t think I need to tell you how important it is to the country if you’re already supporting Judicial Watch, because you already know. And if you’re not, I encourage you to join our movement, join our cause.

Go to judicialwatch.org and make a donation. But in the meantime, it’s an honor to be president of Judicial Watch. I’m so excited to see all of this great work we do. And one of the benefits of being president is I get to come on every week and talk about all the great work my colleagues, our lawyers and our investigators, all our staff do. And I couldn’t do it without your support. All this work we’re talking about is because of the voluntary contributions of Americans. So this is the American way, isn’t it? Using the power, using the law available to us, and exercising our precious rights under the Constitution to hold our government to account.

And I think our founders would be proud of that. And we’ve got so much to do. You can see how none of this is going to stop during the Trump administration. Hopefully, things might get a bit easier in some of these cases in the Trump administration. But the work will continue, and so it’s essential we continue it. And that’s why I encourage you to continue our support. But even prayers are helpful, and getting the word out about our work is helpful as well. So any way you’re able to support us, I encourage you to do that.

And with that, I’ll see you here next week, I hope, during the Trump administration. God bless you and have a safe and wonderful holiday week. And I guess as we look to see at the inauguration, let’s hope that goes off without a hitch as well. Thank you. Thanks for watching. Don’t forget to hit that subscribe button and like our video down below. SA SA.
[tr:tra].

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

Author

5G

Sign Up Below To Get Daily Patriot Updates & Connect With Patriots From Around The Globe

Let Us Unite As A  Patriots Network!

By clicking "Sign Me Up," you agree to receive emails from My Patriots Network about our updates, community, and sponsors. You can unsubscribe anytime. Read our Privacy Policy.


SPREAD THE WORD

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

How To Turn Your Savings Into Gold!

* Clicking the button will open a new tab

FREE Guide Reveals

Get Our

Patriot Updates

Delivered To Your

Inbox Daily

  • Real Patriot News 
  • Getting Off The Grid
  • Natural Remedies & More!

Enter your email below:

By clicking "Subscribe Free Now," you agree to receive emails from My Patriots Network about our updates, community, and sponsors. You can unsubscribe anytime. Read our Privacy Policy.

15585

Want To Get The NEWEST Updates First?

Subscribe now to receive updates and exclusive content—enter your email below... it's free!

By clicking "Subscribe Free Now," you agree to receive emails from My Patriots Network about our updates, community, and sponsors. You can unsubscribe anytime. Read our Privacy Policy.