➡ Judicial Watch, a watchdog group, has sued the National Archives for the release of all unreleased records related to JFK’s assassination. Despite President Trump’s promise to fully release these records, the National Archives has stated that it cannot predict when all the records will be available due to the volume of material and complexity of the digitization process. So far, only 80,000 out of 6 million pages have been released. If the current pace continues, it could take decades for all the records to be made public.
➡ Judicial Watch is frustrated with the delay in releasing Epstein’s records, despite promises made. The FBI and Deputy Director have been discussing the documents and insist there’s no evidence of anything other than suicide. However, the public is yet to see these records. The FBI is urged to release the material quickly through the FOIA process to ensure transparency and trust.
➡ The text discusses various concerns about the FBI’s investigations, including the handling of a pipe bomb incident, the Dobbs leak decision, and potential threats against Supreme Court justices. It questions the FBI’s ability to conduct unbiased investigations, suggesting that the institution is flawed and untrustworthy. The text also criticizes former FBI director James Comey for his alleged threats against President Trump and questions why he hasn’t been prosecuted. The author suggests that President Trump should direct the prosecution investigation of the “deep state assault on America.”
➡ The text discusses concerns about the misuse of power and law, particularly in relation to the treatment of former President Trump and the handling of immigration issues. It criticizes the courts for failing to protect Trump’s rights and for allowing abuses of power. The text also highlights the issue of illegal immigration, criticizing the use of federal funds to house illegal immigrants in hotels. It ends by calling for transparency and accountability in the use of federal funds.
➡ New York spent $2 billion on dealing with illegal aliens and reversing the invasion, but Congress hasn’t yet fully funded this. The goal is to pass a reconciliation package by July 4th to help with this. Meanwhile, the United States Military Academy at West Point removed the motto “duty, honor, country” from its mission statement, causing controversy. The documents reveal that the decision was made by the Biden administration’s Defense Department and West Point leadership, despite their attempts to avoid responsibility.
➡ The article discusses concerns about changes at West Point Academy, including the removal of the motto from the mission statement and the implementation of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Critics, including the MacArthur Society of West Point graduates, argue that these changes are detrimental to the academy’s values and the military’s role. The article also mentions a lawsuit challenging the counting of late ballots in Illinois, and hopes that the Supreme Court will take up the case. The author encourages readers to stay informed and engaged with these issues.

Hey everyone. Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton here with our weekly update. So much going on. I will start first with a, I guess the grandfather of conspiracy theories or an issue that Americans are concerned about. It’s the assassination of jfk. And President Trump promised records about the assassination would be fully released. Excuse me, that is yet to happen, although it is in process. And seeing the confusion about the initial release of records and the genuine public concern about the issue, still Judicial Watch asked for and then when we didn’t get the requested information, sued for essentially the JFK assassination files earlier this year and we filed the lawsuit.

Let me get back to the details here. We filed the lawsuit in February of 2025 after the National Archives, which is the federal agency that has the assassination records. Both I should say generally in the sense that assassination records is a technical term these days under the federal law. But the assassination records that we want is broader than just the definition under federal law as it relates to JFK. And there are 6 million of those records. But we sued after they failed to respond to our January 20, 2025 for your request for all previously unreleased records in the possession of the National Archives and Records Administration regarding the assassination of President John F.

Kennedy. This request includes, but is not limited to all records transferred to nara, the National Archives by the Assassination Records Review Board, which was the so called commission that investigated the Trumpexcuse me, the JFK assassination. Thankfully Trump was not assassinated and people questioned that report and investigation as well. And so we filed the lawsuit. And what happens typically in these cases is you start talking to the government, you try to get a feel for where the government is in responding to the request. And and the courts sometimes order or request what is called joint status reports be filed with the court to let the court know what’s happening in the case in case the court needs to take any action to any in case the court needs to take any action as requested by the parties.

And so the joint status report that Judicial Watch filed with the National Archives included some interesting information and the big news and the big headline out of this, it may not surprise you, is that the National Archives and this is the headline from our press release, National Archives tells court it can’t predict when JFK assassination records will be released. It can’t predict when the records are going to be released. And they’ve released 80,000 records thus far, or at least 80,000 have been posted online. In the Joint Status Report, the Archives highlights how there are 6 million pages of records that essentially need to be reviewed before they’re released under the law, and at this rate, what is 80 into 6 million? I think it’s like 75.

Right? So if they release 80,000 pages a year, that’s 75 years. If they release double that, it’s 30 something years. If they release triple that, it’s still a long time. So in the end, it’s potentially decades unless there’s a tremendous acceleration in the review and the release of the records. And this is an issue that’s been basically percolating for decades. And I can tell you, I’m sure President Trump is frustrated, I know we are frustrated that most of the records are not going to be released basically within our lifetime unless the court intervenes or unless the administration decides to take a different approach to releasing the information.

And here’s the specific information that we provided to the court. Plaintiff FOIA request. Plaintiff being Judicial Watch seeks all previously unreleased records regarding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, including all records transferred to NARA by the Assassination records review board. ARB. NARA estimates that there are over 6 million pages of records from responsive to Plaintiff’s FOIA request. Since January 23, 2025, NARA has posted approximately 80,000 pages of responsive records online. NARA the archives cannot fully predict when records responsive to Judicial Watch’s FOIA requests will be released online because of the volume of material, the complexity of the digitization process, and the remaining restrictions on access, such as grand jury and court sealed information, taxpayer information protected by 26 USC 6103, that’s typically IRS, your tax forms and things like that, and intellectual property.

NARA will continue to work diligently to process plaintiff’s request and post records online on a rolling basis. So what does that all mean? Oh, wait, here’s more. Additionally, fulfilling Plaintiff’s request for records of the Assassination Review Board itself will be labor intensive. The records are part of the JFK collection, but do not meet the definition of an assassination record within the statute. These records, which have not been previously fully reviewed for public release, must be digitized and reviewed line by line for FOIA exemptions. And there are records that are available in the collection at the research room.

So if you want to come to D.C. and look to see what’s available, you can do that. But that’s not obviously an option for most Americans. And this is why it’s important to be produced to Judicial Watch and posted online. So we’ve got to move this along. And, and I highlight this to say that when the administration makes promises to release records and there are 6 million records there’s got to be a plan in place to move them along quickly. And certainly they have to comply with the FOIA process. But a lot of the concerns they’re raising are discretionary concerns, meaning that they can release large swaths of documents without having to worry about the FOIA exemptions and just release them if they’re intent on withholding information from the American people.

And as they say in this joint status report, want to go through a line by line review of each record, you’re never going to see the records, my fellow Americans. You’re never going to see them. It’s going to take forever and a day. And the fight over which records are going to be withheld, you know, I’m not going to be around. I’m not going to live long enough to be able to dispute that. Maybe my successors at Judicial Watch in two generations will. Because what the government’s position typically is that, oh, we can’t even argue about what we’re withholding from you until we do a complete review.

And you have to wait till we finish producing records to you. And then, and only then can you argue about the records or parts of records you haven’t seen from us. So, As I said, 75 years, decades, there’s got to be a different approach. That’s what I said in our, in our press release. The National Archives needs to speed up the release of the Kennedy records. At this rate, it will be decades before the files are even partly made publicly available to the American people. And I don’t think that’s what President Trump intended. I don’t think it’s what he wants.

And so I’m hoping that we are educating the government about what the government’s doing here. Right? I mean, the leadership of the government sometimes are told one story internally and are told the truth externally by watchdogs and honest brokers like Judicial Watch. And so if I were President Trump, I’d tell the archives, you know, let’s err on the side of disclosure. Let’s cut to the chase. Let’s not worry about certain exemptions, speed, review along. There’s no good reason we can’t get really a million records out this year, for example. I mean, whatever the standard is to get the material out there, the president at least should mandate NARA get all the records released before he leaves office in four years or before his term ends.

Because at this rate, and I don’t think anyone wants this, I don’t think President Trump wants this, and there’s little patience from the American people for the continued delay here. And you know, we have a separate lawsuit. And I’ll keep you updated if we get any more information. Maybe this video will jar loose some extra documents, who knows, over the assassination records, the other set of records that people are concerned about. And by the way, just because we want the records doesn’t mean we have a particular view as to what happened at the JFK assassination. I mean, I tend to be kind of a traditionalist on this.

I think the left would like us to believe that it wasn’t a communist train to Moscow who killed Kennedy. They’re happy to have us believe it was the CIA and things like that. But I just want all the records. The American people have a right to information about the murder of a president. And so the debates that we’re having, are they going to be solved by the release of the records? No, but these are our documents. These are our documents and there’s got to be good reasons for withholding them given the passage of time. And I haven’t heard any sufficient and certainly nothing requiring the sort of exhaustive line by line review that requires a FOIA analysis as if, you know, we’re going to release a state secret with respect to the Kennedy assassination from the early 60s.

It’s just incredible that we’re still arguing about documents so far gone. But I guess it shouldn’t surprise me because when you look at the Epstein records, we still don’t have the Epstein records. Judicial Watch had to sue for the records earlier this year. And the reason we asked for and sued for the records was because again, there was a promise to release the records. There was an initial release that the administration admits was probably not the most optimum process. It turned out, according to what they said initially, that there was a obstructive effort by the FBI.

And Attorney General Bondi famously highlighted how she had records, you know, these Epstein records on her desk and they were ready to go. And ironically, part of our FOIA lawsuit that we filed was tell us about that whole mess there. And they said, well, there are no records from the Attorney General about that issue. So what is going on? Huh? What is going on now? The FBI Director Cash and the Deputy Director, Dan Bongino have been out there talking about the Epstein documents, saying they’re working on releasing them. They both said they looked at the file and there’s no evidence that there was a suicide, there was anything other than a suicide.

In fact, Dan was on. Who was he? He was on Fox and Friends earlier this week and he made this comment about the Epstein files and the video, specifically about his controversial death. Let’s go to number 23. Those two cases obviously are of significant public interest. I’m just telling you what we see in the file. I just want to be crystal clear on this. I am not asking anyone to believe me. I’m telling you what’s there and what isn’t. Right? There is nothing in the file at this point on the Epstein case. And there’s going to be a disclosure on this coming shortly.

We are working through some. There is video that is something the public. There’s video of him killing himself. No, no, not. Not the actual act. But the MCC bay. It was only one camera. There were other. There’s video that when you look at the video. And we will release. That’s what’s taken a while on this. We are working on cleaning it up to make sure you have an enhanced. And we’re going to give the original. So you don’t think there were any shenanigans. You’re going to see there’s no one there but him, right? There’s just nobody there.

So I say to people, if you have a tip, let us know. But there’s no DNA. There’s no audio. There’s no fingerprints. There’s no suspects. There’s no accomplices. There’s no tips. There is nothing there. If you have it, I’m happy to see it. There’s video clear as day. He’s the only person in there and the only person coming out. You can see it. So I don’t know what’s that all about? Why can’t we just get the tape released? What’s the state secret? They need to clean it up. We’ll release the original, then clean it up later.

I don’t understand the interest in characterizing what’s in the material. Material presented to him by the previous FBI. Remember the family? For Epstein’s brother, I think it was. His brother hired a phenomenal expert, Michael Baden, who you know, one of the most famous medical examiners in the nation. He concluded that it was a homicide. That is, the forensic analysis was inconsistent with the suicide. And I appreciate his analysis, but I want to see the records. I mean, this is my frustration. This is now, this week, three or two of both Dan and Cash talking about the Epstein files.

Files we don’t have yet. Now Judicial Watch asks for all the Epstein records. But we didn’t just want the client lists. We didn’t want, you know, the secret lists of people who might have been involved in the Trafficking. The records include his death. Give us the records about his death, too. That’s all the records. When we want all the records, we want all the records. Now they say they’re going to be released soon. Are they going to be released under foia? If they’re not going to be released under foia, they’re going to be back under scrutiny again because when they’re released in a leak or through a leak, you don’t know what’s being withheld.

So I’d recommend that they release the material as quickly as possible through the FOIA process so that Americans can be sure, because it’s a court process at this point, right? So Americans can be reassured that it’s at least all the material they have. And there’s a requirement. They tell the American people that they’re withholding material and if so, for what purpose? And they keep on talking about the process without releasing the records. I don’t understand it. I guess I do understand it because the leadership of the FBI, you know, you go in, you’re gung ho, you know, I know Dan and Cash personally, and I’m sure they wanted to do.

But what happens is you go in there and you have all these deep staters around you saying, oh, sir, I know you want to release this, but listen to all the reasons we can’t release it quickly. And if you do, you’re going to get sued. If you do, they’re going to come after you and they just. What they try to do is create bureaucratic roadblocks, make up legal reasons. No, excuse me, not reasons, but excuses to not disclose the material quickly. I’m not saying follow foia, and that should be a reason and an excuse to slow it down.

I’m saying follow foia, err on the side of disclosure. Don’t cite the exemptions. You usually do if you’re a deep stater, to keep information from the American people and start pushing it out. So I don’t want to hear anything more about the Epstein death until the videos are released, until the files are released. And it’s good that he’s characterizing it, but, you know, with all due respect, I don’t trust the FBI and his characterization of material that no one else has been able to see in the public. We have to verify. Trust, but verify. It’s the most charitable way of putting it.

The least charitable way of putting it is, Dan, don’t trust your lying eyes when it comes to looking at records produced to you by the corrupted FBI curated material. I don’t know what he’s looking at. Is that the quote, the file? What else is there? Where did you get this material from? Was there a comprehensive search done within the agency? I mean, we have enough experience with the FBI to know if you ask the wrong question or direct it at the wrong official or they may decide to search a particular set of records and ignore another set of records, you won’t get what you think you’re getting in terms of a comprehensive response.

Now, I’m sure, you know, Dan and Cash are going to be mad at me again for saying what I’m saying here, but I’m just trying to make their lives easier. Right, by telling them what they need to do to be transparent, what’s the process and how they should evaluate the advice I’m sure they’re getting as to why it’s taking longer than the American people want. And I just. We want the transparency. Now, Dan was on Twitter the other day talking about cases that he was going to be pursuing or the FBI was reinitiating or such. Let’s put the tweet up and I’ll let the tweet speak for itself.

Let’s go to number 22. So go down and click that. Show more under Dan Bongino. Thanks for following this account and allowing us to update you about what we’re doing at your FBI. Few updates. Okay, they’re going to have a reform team in place, et cetera, et cetera. They said shortly after swearing and go up a little bit, the director and I evaluated a number of cases of public potential, public corruption that understandably have garnered public interest. We made the decision to either reopen or push additional resources and investigative attention to these cases. These cases are the D.C.

pipe bombing investigation, the cocaine discovery of the prior administration’s White House, and the leak of the Supreme Court Dobbs case. I received requested briefings on these cases weekly and we are making progress. If you have any investigative tips on these matters that may assist us, then please contact the FBI. So let’s go back to see what I wrote. Go back to that tweet, the full tweet. 22 and I wrote, the FBI is not capable of investigating itself. The agency should go the way of the usaid. I mean, I’m sorry, but this is not good enough. What are they going to be investigating in the cocaine.

In the cocaine case, are they going to investigate the Secret Service? Because if there was a problem with the investigation, it was a result, I guarantee you, of political interference and corruption in the Secret Service investigation of what Obviously was Hunter Biden’s cocaine or one of his buddies or whoever. It’s obviously a Biden family member responsible for the cocaine. Now, do I know that for a fact? Of course not. But do I believe that the federal government could investigate something like that and then come back credibly and say, come credibly, say, oh, well, I guess we’re never going to know.

It’s just going to be a mystery how that cocaine got into the West Wing of the White House. Just an eternal mystery. We’ll never figure it out. So the pipe bomber investigation, which has been slow rolled and slow walked by the FBI, so they’re going to add additional resources to an investigation that’s been obstructed. Who’s going to investigate the FBI’s investigation of the pipe bombing issue on January 6th? Are they going to investigate the Secret Service, how it is they missed the pipe bomb and allowed Vice President Kamala Harris at the time to be within the vicinity of the pipe bomb or one of them? And what’s the third one, the Dobbs leak decision? I mean, I think that’s an important issue.

But wasn’t there an investigation already into it? Who did it and why wasn’t anything done about it? Are they going to investigate Schumer for his threats on Supreme Court justices? Are they going to enforce the law protecting justices at their homes from being intimidated and put in harm’s way by protesters? Are they going to investigate why those laws were not enforced by the prior administration? Is the FBI going to investigate the FBI? Is the FBI going to investigate the doj? This is why it won’t work. And this is why. And it’s not a criticism of, well, I don’t care.

People want to take it as a criticism. They can take it. They need to shut down the FBI. As far as I’m concerned, it can’t be trusted to investigate anything. I trust Dan to, you know, to personally investigate something. But he’s just one man. Cash is just one person. He’s going to be relying, they’ll be relying on a flawed institution, a flawed institution, one that I don’t think is fixable. I mean, there was a leak just today. It was. I forget which newspaper. It was some liberal rag. I forget it was either the Washington Post or the New York Times that people are concerned within the FBI, that FBI agents are being asked to investigate and handle the immigration invasion.

They say that it will distract from their national security related investigations. So what’s the import of that? It means that there are people in the FBI who don’t consider the reversal of Biden’s invasion to be a national security issue. And they’re leaking to the papers now. So don’t tell me the FBI is salvageable, just don’t tell me. Now, practically speaking, is the FBI going to be eliminated, budgetarily or even curtailed the way the Department of Education has been? Probably not. But I’m just going to keep on trying to provide some leadership on it. Where is the investigation, the broad investigation of the lawfare against Trump, where is it? See no evidence of it.

And even if it began, I don’t think the FBI ethically can do it because they’re compromised, they’re conflicted. The same with doj. This is why I said it once and I will say it again. President Trump, as the chief prosecutor, prosecutor in chief, the executive magistrate should direct the prosecution investigation of the deep state assault on America. Set up a separate investigative unit reportable to him. He can direct the investigations, he can direct the prosecutions. He can take advice and counsel from Pam Bondi and anyone else he wants. But he’s the prosecutor in chief. I mean, we’ve been talking about, the news, has been talking about.

Well, thanks to Judicial Watch’s release of this, forcing the release of the audio of Joe Biden’s rambling answers to the special counsel, her that they tried to cover up. We caught them red handed trying to change and successfully changing, it looks like transcripts to hide how awful he was. But Comey was in contempt of Congress for hiding that audio. Why hasn’t he been prosecuted? It’s been weeks. Low hanging fruit, as it’s often said. And if I were the president, I’d call up the attorney general and say, you need to prosecute Mr. Garland for the obstruction, the contempt of Congress.

McComi is still walking around a free man after threatening the murder of the president or advocating for the murder of the President. Let’s go to clip. What’s the clip of him being on that TV show? Is it 12? I can’t believe this guy hasn’t been arrested yet. You were walking down the beach. What happened? You walking on the beach and you saw this on the beach? Yeah, my wife and I, Patrice were walking on the beach and saw those numbers in shells on the beach. You didn’t do this. Somebody else did this. Yeah, somebody else did it.

We were on a walk preparing for this week. Roll out of my book. Yeah. She looked at it and said, why’d someone put their address in the sand? All right. We stood at it trying to Figure looked at it, trying to figure out what it was. And she’d long been a server in restaurants. And she said, you know what I think it is? Yeah. And I think it’s a reference to restaurants. When you would 86 something in a restaurant. Right. It’s off the menu. Yeah. I said, I remember as a kid you’d say 86 to get out of a place.

This place stinks. Let’s 86. I was a bartender. You would 86 a customer. If they were getting drunk, like that’s 86. I’m just like, give them a low proof alcohol or something like that. Yeah. And so I said, I think it’s a clever political message. And she said, you should take a picture of it. I said, sure. And then she said, you should Instagram that. And boom. Yeah. I thought it was a clever political message. My wife, who’s a server, who talks like that. It was her rehearsed, absurd story that obviously is fake. Why hasn’t he been prosecuted yet? And Dan Bongino was on rightly complaining about the increase in death threats the FBI now has to investigate because of Comey’s corruption.

Let’s go to 19. I gotta tell you, of all the things that have surprised me in the close to now three months I’ve been here, is the depravity of Jim Comey. This man is a disgrace to the badge, the FBI and the country. What he’s doing right now, one, going out, I mean, taking shots at Cash. Cash doesn’t belong. Cash was the chief of staff at the department of Cash. Cash is a patriot. Cash has served in numerous high level roles. Taking personal shots while you’re on the beach, implying a threat towards the president and blaming your wife about it.

And let me just add about James Comey, you know, Saint Comey, who walks around immoralizing to everyone. How wonderful of a human being he is. What you said is absolutely accurate. We have wasted countless man hours now running out tips to our tip line about people putting 86, 47 because of Jim Comey, because he cannot control himself and his emotions. He is a child. He is a big child. And let me tell you one more thing. Jim Comey, who wants you to believe Jim Comey taking a shot at the President. Oh, look at me. I’m such a victim.

The President’s going after me. He’s making a ton of money on this book. The only person that got prosecuted was the President. Jim Comey. We’re finding stuff even now. So why hasn’t been, why hasn’t he been prosecuted. I agree with Dan. Dan’s analysis is right on. Now, to be fair to Dan, he’s not the prosecutor. It’s the Justice Department. 86 the President of the United States and he’s expecting us to believe it’s just like cutting someone off who got drunk at a bar. Good Lord. And given his hatred for Trump. Talk about motive. He was fired by Trump.

There’s Judicial Watch uncovered. Force out the truth. He stole classified information. He stole Trump’s FBI files and then leaked them. Attorney General Barr at the time gave him a get out of jail free card for that. Outrageously, he spied on Trump. Yeah. So it stands to reason he would want him to see him dead and threaten his life and make a clever political statement. So, you know, I see Congress is going to be looking at the issue of Biden next week or the next few weeks. They’re going to be calling individuals to talk about whether or not who was running the White House.

Given Biden’s corruption, they should demand. They should be demanding this Justice Department and this FBI get on it. Now, do I think they were able to get on it? No. But at least we need to have a focus that these issues are important. Trying to get the President killed is important. It needs to be. There needs to be some law enforcement there. Trying to jail a president simply because you don’t like his politics and he disputed an election, that’s a terrible abuse of power. That’s criminal in nature. Targeting other Americans over their free speech rights related to elections, that’s a terrible abuse of power.

I mean, Ed Martin, before Thom Tillis, the Republican senator torpedoed his nomination, was looking in the U.S. attorney’s office when he was acting there about the abuses of the January Sixers. How did that happen? Remember, they placed a charge or put people in jail based on a charge the Supreme Court found overwhelmingly to be unfounded application of the law. Who’s responsible for that abuse of power was a criminal. I don’t know what’s going on. I don’t know what’s going on over there. I don’t. They’re doing some great work on issues that we all care about. There’s no doubt about that.

But we also care about these issues. You know why? Because we almost lost our country because of what they did. And if there’s nothing done about it, we’re going to lose it. We’re going to lose our country. Because the same crowd eventually will come back into power and they’ll do it all over again. And they might succeed. In ways they were unable to against the superhero President Trump, who for the grace of God was able to survive these abuses of him. I don’t know if there’ll be another candidate who would be similarly be able to survive this targeting.

You know, we have this crisis now. My segue next. When the courts really failed President Trump and the American people, really, they have largely since certainly most apparently during the 2020 election. And they just let President Trump’s rights be railroaded in so many ways since then. The Supreme Court finally stepped in to stop the worst of the abuse and provide some immunity protection. But Trump is still under criminal indictment in Fulton County, Georgia, as a result of that corrupt prosecutor Fannie Willis operation. He was abused up in New York with that sham conviction. Letitia James trying to destroy his business.

Supreme Court hasn’t done anything to stop that. And now that Trump the reformer is doing so much great work, he’s being thwarted at every possible corner by the anti Trump judiciary, the abusers of power. I call them part of the judicial couple. And it’s again happening this week. We had this Court of International Trade. You probably never heard of it before, but it’s a powerful court when it comes to trade matters in the United States. They issued a radical decision that essentially tore from the President any and all power he had to declare an emergency in order to impose tariffs, a law that he was following to the letter as passed by Congress.

And here’s a tweet I wrote about it. In one fell swoop, a federal judicial panel effectively erased the president’s ability to declare any emergency. Go back to the tweet because I can’t read it now. In order to impose tariffs under federal law, and thankfully, an appellate court put a stay on that disrupted the entire world economic system. I mean, this is what the court said. You think fentanyl is an emergency? Oh, no, we don’t think it’s an emergency. You think the invasion’s an emergency? Oh, no, we don’t think it’s an emergency. You think having certain economies, certain businesses or, or areas of the economy be protected from being controlled by hostile foreign interests as an emergency? No, we don’t think that’s an emergency.

Do you think courts are in any have any basis to second guess the president’s decisions in that regard? I don’t. And you’ve had courts intervene to stop the president from protecting Americans from foreign nationals who want to enter the country without sufficient vetting? That’s the whole fight about whether foreign students get to come into the United States. Without sufficient vetting. And then you had a court decision. I think it was out of Massachusetts where Biden had used so called parole authority to grant amnesty effectively for at least two years, effectively forever, to 500. I think the number now is 530,000 foreign nationals from four different countries.

It was Cuba, Venezuela, I Forget the other two, maybe Nicaragua and a fourth country. 530,000. I think the number now is. So Biden could bring in 500,000 people. Contrary to law, parole essentially allows an agent, administrative allows the president or his designee to say, hey, this person deserves to come in for, you know, we’re going to let him in for a few years and waive the law essentially. And it requires a person by person analysis, a case by case analysis. It’s not designed to just allow entire swaths of a foreign nation to just enter the United States.

So one of the first things Trump did was sign an executive order and it was implemented by his Secretary of Homeland Security, Christine, to reverse the Biden parole and this parole and other similar actions. I think that’s nearly 900, nearly a million people have come in under that, essentially shepherded in under that invasion authorized by Trump. I mean, this wasn’t authorized by Biden. These weren’t people who scurried across the border. Biden said, come on in, come on. A million people. You come in. And Trump said, no, no, no, by the way, the parole is being revoked and you’re subject to deportation if you don’t leave within 30 days.

And thankfully, the Supreme Court overturned the anti Trump activist court ruling below. And here’s a tweet I had on it just today. Judicial coup reversal. Supreme Court stays anti Trump judge’s decision to stop his reversal of Biden’s parole amnesty for 500,000 aliens. As I said, it’s more than that. It’s now 530. According to the most recent reports, mass deportations can proceed as planned. Justice Jackson writes dissent, which was joined by Justice Sotomayor, but was not joined by Justice Kagan. So even Justice Kagan agrees with me and the majority of conservatives. So it was a 7:2 decision.

So that’s good news. I mean, the court has spent, has kind of enabled a lot of this abuse at the lower level. And it’s very disruptive to our constitutional system. It’s placing people at risk, it’s placing citizens at risk, it’s placing deportees at risk, it’s placing law enforcement at risk, it’s placing you at risk. So I’m going to applaud the Supreme Court when they get it right. And I’m going to encourage the Supreme Court to get on board and defer to the President as the Constitution requires and protecting the nation from this foreign invasion by reversing it in a quick way.

That reminds me, because we’ve got a lawsuit about this very issue because the costs have been tremendous. You’ve seen, I hope you’ve seen the stories about how much they were paying up in New York City to house the illegal alien invaders that Biden lent through, through in hotels. I mean, would you ever think, would you, could you ever believe in all of American history that local or state governments, with the help of the feds, would allow people to cross the country illegally and then provide them, literally put them up in hotels using your tax dollars for an indeterminate amount of time? I think New York spent $2 billion doing it at least.

And of course, they got a big chunk of change from the feds. So FEMA was spending tens of millions of dollars to subsidize illegal aliens in New York hotels. And what we want is Judicial Watch wants is information from FEMA about what was going on. We just filed a new FOIA lawsuit against fema, the Federal Emergency Management Agency. So Biden lets people invade the country, he calls it an emergency and starts spending our tax dollars to clean up his mess. Just unbelievable. Assuming that Biden was making all those decisions. Right. We asked for the records in February of this year for records of payments and funding allocations, documents, invoices, receipts, contracts and financial records reflecting FEMA payments to New York City.

Any records indicating whether these funds were used for hotels or other accommodations. And we also want internal communications and other policies and guidelines about the spending. The name of the program is called the Shelter and Services Program. And in February, Cameron Hamilton, acting administrator of fema, reportedly suspended payments of New York City to house migrants and said that staff who made them will be held accountable. Elon Musk wrote on X that we just discovered that female sent $59 million last week to luxury hotels in New York City to house illegal migrants. When was that? Last week.

And some of you can look up that post. Go to the press release and click on it. I don’t know what last week references. It was also reported that four FEMA officials who made the payments were fired. They include the agency’s chief financial officer, two program analysts and a grant specialist. And so Kristi Noem said they clawed back some of the money spent by these deep staters. Taxpayer money was misused to fund hotel rooms for Illegal alien invaders. The Trump administration should prioritize transparency about this potentially illegal misuse of federal funds. So this is another example.

We asked for these records back in. When did we file this lawsuit? We filed the lawsuit on May 16, and we asked for the records back in February. It shouldn’t take three months to get this info out. I mean, we’re not looking to sue for suing sake. The purpose of our request. The purpose of our request is to get the documents. So if we can get the documents without suing, we’re happy. And oftentimes we do, or more often than you might think, but too rare, given what the law requires. Now, New York spent $2 billion. The 59 million that Musk details, it’s just a portion, you can be sure, of what the Fed spent up there.

And then, of course, we have the billions spent to deal with the illegal aliens at the local, state and federal level since the invasion happened. And it’s going to take a lot of money to reverse it, which is even more outrageous. And Congress hasn’t yet appropriated the money to fully reverse the invasion. It’s May, and they haven’t appropriated the money yet. Now, some of that money, or a good portion of it, or the down payment, I would argue, is in the reconciliation package that was passed by the House and the Senate. You know, the theme or the goal is to get it passed out of the Senate by July 4th or get the bill generally signed by July 4th.

And in the meantime, they’re at capacity. I mean, if they have to do a reverse of invasion of millions of people, 100 people a day or even 1,000 people a day ain’t going to cut it. We’re going to have to deport or encourage others to deport themselves. Right. Five, six thousand people a day in order to reverse the Biden invasion alone. And that doesn’t cover the aliens who have been here beyond that period of time. And the more we know about who spent what and how much in the Biden administration, the American people can now say, okay, we want some accountability for that.

I’m of the position that aiding and abetting illegal alien invasion of the United States is criminal. Now, I defer to the lawyers and the prosecutors to figure out whether and how that would apply to individual decision makers within the government. But that’s got to be a priority, don’t you agree? Ah, my traditional watch never stops. Today is May 30, which is the traditional Memorial Day. As I said earlier last week, I said I’m sensitive about it because it’s also my birthday. I’m turning 57. I started at Judicial Watch when I was 30. Maybe I was younger than 30.

Yeah, I started when I was. Yeah, I started working. Well, officially I began as president when I was 30. I started working with Judicial Watch when I was 29. I’ve been here for 27 years celebrating my 57th birthday on traditional Memorial Day. I don’t know why we don’t celebrate Memorial Day on Memorial Day. Well, I do. It was a stop to the government unions. But it’s my way of saying we’re concerned because of the service and sacrifices made by our military over the centuries, really about how our military is being treated and whether that sacrifice is being honored in the current military.

And that’s why we were so upset, as were many actual veterans, certainly army veterans. But frankly, any patriot was upset when it was announced last year that West Point, the United States Military Academy at West Point was changing its mission statement to remove duty, Honor and country from it. Now Duty, Honor and country is the motto of the West Point. But it was, I think after it was put up the last time the mission statement was changed to include that was I think in 98. So it had been there for some time. And so when it was removed people were upset because they knew what the Biden gang was up to.

It was removed last year, diminishing core values as it relates to the military and its purpose. And so what Judicial Watch did was as soon as we found out about it, we began asking questions and when we didn’t get answers, we sued. And since then we’ve gotten 400 at least the slightest batch. It may be over the course of two disclosures, but this is about 450 pages of records and they disclose, I tell you, if you’re in the military or a veteran, I don’t know if you’re going to want to read these records because you’ll probably get some, you know, you’re going to think you’re going to be maybe have some bad memories of military bureaucracy.

Right. How they kind of justify an over, you know, with all the records about their terrible decision making. I mean the military is famous for making decisions, good or bad and you know, making sure that there’s a triplicate of whatever the decision is. And these records detail the COVID up of the removal of duty, Honor and country from the mission statement. And if so, it was announced in March of last year and what had happened was a critic of the Biden gang’s efforts to destroy our military attended the West Point Board of Advisors meeting. So the board of advisors is essentially a group of individuals appointed by the President.

I think it’s appointed by. I think there are members of Congress who serve in ex officio on it as well. So anyway, it’s kind of a. As you might imagine, it has a lot of interest on the Board of Visitors and they’re supposed to advise and help run the US Military Academy and the Air Force Academy has a board of advisors and so does the Navy, etc. The Naval Academy as well. And so the representative of a group of critics of the transformation of the military, and specifically the army, was there and he found out that they just announced with no fanfare that they were changing the mission statement.

And here’s what. And here’s the kind of the record of it which was provided to us. Go to that page. Could you page the current mission? I’ve lost. So the current mission. Do you have that page up? Do you. I can’t hear. 69. You said. Okay, well, they don’t have it. So the current mission, or excuse me, the then mission statement read, to educate, train and inspire the corps of cadets so that each graduate is a commissioned leader of character, committed to the values of duty, honor, country, and prepared for a career of professional excellence and service to the nation as an officer in the United States Army.

They changed it and still not clear who the they is. To build, educate, train and inspire the corps of cadets to be commission leaders of character, committed to army values and ready for a lifetime of service to the army and nation. So duty, honor, or country was dropped unceremoniously by the leadership of the Biden administration’s Defense Department and West Point, and it caused quite the uproar, both internally and among graduates. The long gray line, as it’s called. And what was the response? Let’s come up with excuses and try to justify the rationale without explaining the basis for it.

Typical bureaucratic response. And it’s clear from the records that we’ve uncovered in this whole group of records, and I encourage you to go and look at it. We put them all online. So you don’t want to argue. I know there are people who hate Judicial Watch and hate me and they don’t want to actually deal with what we’re saying. But for those of you who are normal, patriotic Americans, go read this and weep, and you’ll see how the bureaucracy and the military and at West Point was completely out of control, had contempt for its critics, had its contempt for tradition, had its contempt for really the whole army tradition, all because of dei, there’s no doubt about it.

So the key records show that they were celebrating. The problem they had was it got out around the time they were celebrating what’s called Founders Day up at West Point, which commemorates the creation of the military academy. And I think the army, forgive me on the history those of you Army Guys in 1802 by Thomas Jefferson. So there’s a lot of activity around West Point on Founders Day as a result. And so what the documents show is they sent out talking points to deal with the blowback on them destroying the mission statement of West Point. And they go through all of this excuse making and providing talking points for, quote, Founder Day’s speakers a few weeks after it was disclosed.

They were, as I said, changing the mission statement. And this is their argument is that, well, we’re not denying army, you know, we’re not denying that, but we’re not changing the motto, the motto. We’re just saying army values, which is broader than the motto. These organized. So they said the motto was not added to the mission statement until 1998. As if that makes a difference. Why was it taken off? And this is what they tell their people to say. Avoid saying removed, replaced, deleted. Just refer to the updated mission statement and reinforce the motto remains unchanged.

The talking points include avoid the perception that the external review team, which by the way, and the documents show include political appointees of Joe Biden at the Defense Department was political or made the decision the academy selected them. So they’re misleading what’s going on here. Now, there may have been a review team that were that was pushing this, but the final decision making and the decision making generally, according to the documents, included political appointees of the at the Pentagon, Academy leadership made decisions misleading. The head of the army made the decision according to the documents, or at least was involved in the decision making.

And so they say the mission statement points to army values, of course, without delineating them. Why not Loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity and personal courage. And then they go after the group that highlighted the change in the email traffic. Let me get my press release out. There’s a lot of documents here. I spent the day looking at them and I just got madder and madder because I just saw a bureaucracy out of control. And I encourage you to go to the because this group has been doing, as far as I’m concerned, the Lord’s work in highlighting this issue.

The MacArthur Society of West Point graduates. And they smear them as, quote, a small but vocal group of Academy alumni who criticize the academy on our continued transformation efforts. There you have it, folks. Transformation efforts. That’s DEI proof positive. And in the talking points, they try to explain away their DAI obsessions that they’re forcing the West Point people to go through the cadets up there. I call them people, the cadets. And when you look at the MacArthur group, the alumni group, they’re desperate about West Point. They feel that it’s failing our country. They highlight how ROTC officers in civilian schools have a greater success rate or are kept longer in the military than academy graduates.

I didn’t know that. So you’re going to see all the garbage they have, all the time they spend defending dei, attacking a group for highlighting that they were casually changing, removing the motto of West Point from the mission statement. And they spend all their time justifying it in bureaucratese. I’ll tell you, Pete Hegseth has such a job to do there, and I know he’s been taking a leadership role at the direction of the Commander in Chief, President Trump, to erase DEI from the military. But the superintendent is still the superintendent of West Point. He allowed this to go on.

He’s still there. Now. Should he be fired? I don’t know. I don’t like to try to tell government officials to go and fire specific people. But certainly he should be held accountable for this, because as far as I’m concerned, DEI is abuse of the troops, abuse of the cadets. And we’ve highlighted it in Judicial Watch’s prior work that the cadets are forced to go through brainwashing. In June of 2022, we exposed how critical race theory instruction at the US Military Academy included a training slide entitled Modern Day Slavery in the usa. And that’s what they think of America.

They’ve spent. And this is why the erasure of duty, honor and country was so seen as such a moment, really, or an exhibit. Exhibit A in the War on Our Military Duty, Honor, country, the left objects to those values. Of course they want some language about army values, because you see the MacArthur folks, they see that as a way to get around having any values at all. But the goal of the Left through DEI was to alienate our military, our rising officers in our academies, specifically from the country they’re swearing to protect. The Communist left sees the military as a tool to oppress the population of a country, not a tool to protect the population of a country.

And that’s why Pete Hegseth’s role and goal to remove the EI from our military is so essential. And if there’s One thing that President Trump can do, if that’s the one thing he gets done, stamps out DEI in the military, he will go down in history as a great president. And we’ve been working with retired military on the various academies trying to expose what’s been going on. But it’s important we know who’s involved and what they did. And these records help describe that. And you’ll see in the emails and such the leadership had contempt for those criticizing them here.

Really frustrating or outrageous or maybe both. So here we are at the end. And I encourage you. Oh, before I go, I want to talk to you about one other thing I talked about last week. I didn’t even bring it up with my colleagues before I came in here. So the Supreme Court was considering last week whether to take up during a conference Judicial Watch’s request that they consider are challenged to lower court decisions that essentially eliminated a candidate’s right to challenge a federal the messing with federal law in Illinois of counting ballots that arrive after election Day.

In Illinois, they count ballots that arrive for up to two weeks after election Day. And we represent Congressman Bost and two electors in Illinois. And the lower court said, congressman, the federal candidate has no right to challenge this, not in these circumstances. And the appellate court upheld it. And it’s absurd to say a federal candidate can’t challenge a law that’s at odds with federal law that sits in election day counting ballots for two weeks after election Day. That arrived for two weeks after Election Day, late, late ballots. And so they held a conference according to their reading the tea leaves, but they pushed it over to discuss at the next week’s conference.

So we don’t know what they’re going to do. So they may still take up the case. So continue to pray for wisdom and discernment by the Supreme Court that they take up this case so we can get vindication. I hope in the end that a candidate has a right to challenge election lawbreaking. Now, we already have a lawsuit that’s ongoing in California where they count ballots that arrive for up to seven days after election Day. There are two House seats that were changed from Republican to Democrat as a result of that, what we allege to be unlawful counting.

I’m not sure why the House hasn’t done anything to fix that. And of course, in Mississippi, we had a similar case five days after election Day. And we had an appellate court, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, find that counting ballots after election day, like Judicial Watch is alleged, is indeed unlawful. But you’ve got this in the Illinois court that says a candidate can’t do anything about it, and that can’t be the law. That just can’t be. We’re hoping the Supreme Court takes action. So we didn’t hear whether they’re going to take the case last week because they want to talk about it again this week or I think it’s been set for conference this week.

I’m not sure the exact date. So let’s keep our fingers crossed, shall we? And with that, I wish you the best. Have a wonderful week, 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.