NEW: Did Biden Machine LIE to Court to Hide Documents? | Judicial Watch
Summary
Transcript
But in this case, there’s a potential new avenue of recourse because we caught, it looks like Delaware lying the university to the court about whether there was taxpayer money behind the handling of Biden’s Senate records. And if that’s the case, we should be able to access them. Speaking of Biden’s personal corruption, remember the Delaware records. Now, judicial watch and our friends at the Daily Caller News foundation had been alone in trying to get Joe Bidens Senate records that he had been hiding from the american people that were housed at the University of Delaware.
And the University of Delaware told us that they couldnt give us the records because they werent public records. No taxpayer money had been used to collect or maintain them. And the courts agreed. We couldnt even get the secret agreement they had. See, thats how things work in Delaware, it looked like. But then her issued a report that raised questions about whether the University of Delaware lied to the courts.
And we just filed another brief asking for the case to be reopened based on what looks to be a series of lies by the University of Delaware to protect itself. And Joe, now, of course, we know based on public reports and the Hurr report, that there was classified records he had for decades he wasnt allowed to have that were part of those records. So we moved to reopen the Senate records lawsuit that we famously had filed because this special counsel report suggested the University of Delaware misled and lied to the courts.
Let me get some detail here. In July 2020, Judicial Watch initially filed the Freedom of Information act lawsuits against the University of Delaware for Biden Senate records, which are housed at the library there. It was filed in state court in Delaware. July 2023, the Delaware Supreme Court sided with the University of Delaware, denying the release of President Joe Biden’s senate records because the university stated to the courts, no tax dollars were used to manage the records.
But on February 5, 2024, just last month, her released his report on the Biden records scandal, which called into question the representations by the university that no state tax dollars were used to manage the Biden Senate papers, which her found to have contained unlawfully retained classified information. So unlike presidential records or vice presidential records, to which I would argue Joe Biden had a right to have even in his home, and that same right applied to Trump, he didn’t have any right to classified records from his days as a senate and should have been convicted or prosecuted.
But we’re told his memory was bad. Right. So I guess I could talk a lot at length about that, but that’s beside the point here. This is what we say to the court in asking the court to reopen this litigation. The university’s affidavit they filed an affidavit trying to convince the court and they did. No taxpayer monies were used, therefore it’s not public. The university’s affidavit provides in relevant part that no consideration was paid to President Biden.
No consideration was paid to President Biden, state funded or otherwise, in connection with the senatorial papers to the contrary. The special counsel report found that Mister Biden asked two of his former longtime senate staffers to review his boxes in courtesy storage and that the staffers were paid by the University of Delaware to perform the pre gift review. It sounds like consideration. They paid someone to help Joe Biden.
Otherwise Joe would have had to pay for the employees himself. These former staffers reviewed and catalogued the boxes and recommended to him which papers to donate. Again, this is from hers report. One staffer emailed President Biden, I have not forgotten about the boxes and files at your house. I am looking to start on those just after Thanksgiving. Another email notes is a staffer was looking through about 20 to 25 boxes in the garage from that group.
He had about two boxes of Senate material so far and they told the court we had nothing to do with it. We didn’t spend money. They were paying employees to help Joe get the records together for the gift. The search for Senate documents took place at Mister Biden’s direction, required the participation of many, and was paid before by the university. Even the university general counsel was involved in coordinating with Mister Biden’s chief of staff.
In sum, the report shows that the president directed his former staffers work in reviewing and cataloging the Senate papers receiving the benefit thereof and the university paid for it. Such payments constitute consideration paid on President Bidens behalf in connection with the donation of senatorial papers to the university contrary to the representations of the university. Now, before we filed this motion, we asked the lawyers, what’s your response here? We asked the University of Delaware’s lawyers and this is what we described to the court as what went on.
On February 20, 2024, petitioners wrote to the council for the university seeking clarification and additional information regarding the discrepancies between the special counsel report and the supplemental affidavit. On March 13, 2024, the university responded, dismissing petitioners concerns and doubling down on the representation that no consideration was paid to Mister Biden for the gift of his Senate papers and that your apparent assertion that payment for services provided to the university by former Biden staffers who were independent contractors.
What difference does that make? Constitutes a payment of consideration of Mister Biden for the gift of the Senate papers is simply false. Oh, and that former, when I said former, that was the emphasis in the original correspondence from the university’s lawyer. But you know, as we tell the court, the lawyer is wrong. It directly contradicts the special counsel report, which found that Biden solicited and directed his former staffers work.
The former staffers performed work for the Mister Biden rather than the university, and the university paid the former staffers. So they were Biden. You know, it’s like saying I didn’t get any consideration from Burisma. I mean, they paid people to come and get my papers together for me, of course that’s consideration for me. That’s something I’d be responsible for otherwise. Now, to be clear, I have no relationship with Burisma.
These stunning revelations from the Hur report extend beyond the president’s memory lapses and mental state. The court needs to reopen this case to determine whether the University of Delaware lied, says Michael Bastak, who is the editor in chief of our friends at the Daily Caller News foundation, who is also our co plaintiff and who we are representing here. The her report provides disturbing evidence. The University of Delaware misled the courts in order to hide Biden’s senate papers.
I’d say maybe lied to the courts. I guess misled is a nice way of saying lied, but that’s what it is at issue here. So we’ll see what the Supreme Court does. Are they gonna let the University of Delaware get away with lying to the courts and lying to the people to protect Joe? That’s what I love about judicial watch. We never give up. Well, we do sometimes.
If we lose, we can’t go anywhere. I mean, in court, sometimes you have to give up because you don’t have any more recourse. But in this case, there’s a potential new avenue of recourse because we caught, it looks like Delaware lying the university to the court about whether there was taxpayer money behind the handling of Biden’s Senate records. And if that’s the case, we should be able to access them under their foia.
So this is just like a great instance of judicial watch. Just keep it on. Thanks for watching. Don’t forget to hit that subscribe button and like our video down below. .
See more of Judicial Watch on their Public Channel and the MPN Judicial Watch channel.
