Justice for the Ashli Babbitt and the Truth about January 6 | Judicial Watch
Summary
Transcript
Good evening. Welcome back, everybody. There’s so much to dive into from tonight between John’s latest covering Congressman Barry Loudermilk’s very damning January 6 report to election integrity special counsel Robert her going before the oversight committee to testify, as well as the ongoing leadership shakeups that just took place over at the RNC, which were preceded by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell announcing his upcoming departure from the chamber’s leadership.
And lucky for us, we have the perfect next guest to dive into all of these latest headlines. Tom Fitton is the president of Judicial Watch and he joins us now. Tom, welcome back to the show. Thanks for being here. Hey, good to be with you, Amanda. Thank you, John. Good to see. And, you know, for our audience, who’s just now tuning for, for a lot of us, we knew these revelations.
John’s been reporting on it for two years. But the two major revelations out of this report that, in fact, the driver who was driving President Trump testified that there was no lunging by the president of the United States, which directly contradicts star witness Cassidy Hutchinson’s testimony. And it’s interesting because you have the driver, which infers that he was in the car driving, and then Cassidy Hutchinson, who was not in the car driving.
And then the second major revelation that this conversation took place between President Trump, then Defense Secretary Chris Miller, and then Mark Milley, joint chiefs of staff at the time. And then three days later, that information, the approval of the 10,000 additional National Guard troops, was then passed on to DC Mayor Muriel Bowser, who said, no, we’re good. Why on earth do you think that Mayor Muriel Bowser, after knowing all of the intelligence, because I know she heard the intelligence of what could happen that day.
Why do you think she turned it? Know, my instinct is that they thought leftist agitators were going to show up in large numbers antifa, and they were hoping for and did not want National Guard or significant police presence to get in the way of antifa attacking Trump supporters. What actually happened was the lack of security allowed bad actors to engage in violent acts, unlawful acts in certain parts of the, that’s what happened.
I mean, this was a disturbance caused by a failure of policing. Riots happen, disturbances like that happen because of political decisions by those in charge of security, such as those running US Capitol Police. And part of that January 6 disturbance was accelerated by crazed US Capitol police response. Some of it was the result of some Trump supporters going overboard, obviously. And then there’s the mystery area where, who was there that the feds were working with? And what about situations where Americans walked in thinking this is their capital, and they end up getting arrested.
So we’re all supposed to take the leftist lectures, as always. Well, you have to be nuanced on these issues. January 6 was incredibly complicated in terms of what happened. And the left had this interest in pretending that Trump wanted to overthrow America and that every Trump supporter should be jailed as a result, and they’re still running with it. You saw that with President Biden’s State of the Union the other day.
That was such a good description of actually the complexity of the event. It is a complex event. One thing. It’s not complex. Now, we know the January 6 committee tried to destroy evidence. They tried to hide evidence. They tried to move evidence to the White House and Homeland Security Department to keep it from Republicans because that evidence didn’t match what they claimed in their taxpayer funded report. And that follows a pattern.
Right? Russia collusion. We were told there was collusion using tax dollars. There wasn’t. And we were told there’s nothing to see with Hunter Biden. There was. We were told a laptop was russian disinformation. It wasn’t the repeat rinse cycle of american people being misled by their own government and their own tax dollars being turned against them. How do we break this cycle? I’d retract the January 6 report.
The House Republicans should just take it, say, this is no longer a product we can vouch for as a U. S. Congress. It was created under unprecedented circumstances. We have evidence of corruption surrounding how it was conducted and such. So we’re retracting it. It was not a bipartisan report. It was a democratic party report by a rump committee that had some Republicans, but who answered to Democrats and didn’t represent the republican party caucus.
So I just retract it. They have enough information to retract it, and of know, a more serious investigation, even by the House, would be well warranted. And then there’s other opportunities. We just filed a lawsuit judicial watch did on behalf of Ashley Babbitt’s family, the only homicide official victim that day, shot and killed unnecessarily by Lieutenant Bird of the US Capitol police. $30 million federal wrongful death lawsuit against the US government.
So hopefully we get some truth and accountability there. And of course, the next honest president, given everything that we know about how the Justice Department has conducted this, and the kind of the big lie of a narrative that the courts have bought into as well, should pardon and commute the sentences of virtually everyone prosecuted tied to January 6. If the Justice Department is out of control. One of the checks in place our constitution gives is the pardon power.
Yeah. Well, my concern, though, is that, as John said, this is wash, rinse, repeat over and over again. And even if you take that initial product, the initial report from the January 6 committee, and you say we can no longer vouch for this, we don’t co sign. We’re going to replace it with Barry Loudermilk’s report there. Still, I don’t think is an incentive for this to not happen again.
I don’t know if it looks like an ethics violation or an ethics investigation. I mean, essentially, this isn’t a court of law, but this is a Brady violation. They withheld evidence that was bad for them, but good for President Trump. Well, the ethics committee in the House is made up of equal number of Democrats and Republicans. So that effectively ensures that an investigation that would arise from the ethical issues that you raise, Amanda, won’t be pursued.
But on the other hand, you’re never going to pursue it if it’s never asked or never put before the committee. And so you raise a good point. It’s the sort of thing that the committee on its own should have been raising and republican leadership should have been raising. But this is in some ways, it’s a day late. Is it a dollar short? I don’t know. But the truth never comes too late when it comes to government accountability, in my view, it may result in not as much accountability as we want, but better late than never.
Always. We get so much of that from your good work at judicial watch, too, Tom, the lawsuits that you do every day that bring to a light things that the government tried to hide from us. So important. Tomorrow, a big day. Robert Hurr is going to be on the stand, the man who suggested that Joe Biden was too senile to be prosecuted for mishandling classified documents. What will you be looking for? We got about a minute left.
Why did Biden get a pass on the same fact pattern in terms of what the Justice Department say is a crime? And if the pass is that he had a memory issue, why is he still mean? That’s the simplest thing. And I think one of the dishonest aspects of the her report was he can’t get a Democrat jury in DC to convict Biden. Right. And this whole issue is about the partisan abuse of the Justice Department and her’s testimony, one way or another is going to provide more insight on that.
Yeah, good point. All right, Tom, I want to squeeze in one more topic before we let you go. 30 seconds left. You are suing Illinois to clean up their voter rolls. That is huge. Why was Illinois so bad that you targeted them? And do you think it’ll actually happen? Oh, yeah. I mean, we’ve got a record of getting other states to clean up the roles. Places like California, New York City.
They’re no friends at judicial watch in terms of their philosophy of government. Illinois is a mess. Many counties have reported removing no names from the roles. We find evidence the counties haven’t removed any dead people from the roles. And when people move away, they got to take reasonable steps to clean up the roles. That isn’t being done in Illinois. We previously caused 4 million names just in the last year or so to be removed nationwide.
And I think we’ll get cleaner roles in Illinois because of this new law. Awesome. Well, that’s going to be huge going into November. Tom, we always love having you on president of judicial Watch. Everybody follow their work. It’s very important. We’re going to take a quick break and we’ll be right back. .
See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.
