➡ Ashley Babbitt’s husband and her estate have filed a $30 million lawsuit against the U.S. government for her wrongful death. Ashley, a 14-year Air Force veteran and business owner, was shot by Lieutenant Michael Byrd of the U.S. Capitol Police during the January 6th disturbance. The lawsuit, filed in California, seeks justice, accountability, and truth about the incident, claiming Ashley was unarmed and shot without warning. The case aims to hold the government responsible for its employee’s actions, alleging negligence and assault.
➡ A police officer, Lieutenant Byrd, left his loaded gun in a public bathroom at the Capitol Visitor Center, a place visited by thousands daily. Despite previous incidents where his police powers were revoked due to poor firearm handling and an unjustified use of force, Byrd continued his duties. This led to the shooting of Ashley Babbitt on January 6, 2021, which is now the subject of a $30 million lawsuit seeking justice for her wrongful death. The lawsuit alleges that Byrd breached multiple standards of care, and if he had adhered to these, Ashley would still be alive today.
➡ The article discusses legal proceedings involving President Trump, with a focus on the policy of not prosecuting sitting presidents. It mentions a case against Trump related to the January 6th incident, and the potential for his legal team to take swift action. The article also discusses the role of Judge Merchan and Jack Smith, and the possibility of misconduct by prosecutors in Georgia. Lastly, it highlights a lawsuit by Judicial Watch against Fannie Willis for alleged collusion with the Biden DOJ and the Pelosi January 6th committee, and her refusal to release certain documents.
➡ Fannie Willis, who has been found guilty of violating open records law, is trying to hide documents related to her collaboration with a partisan committee against Trump. Despite her attempts, Judicial Watch is pushing back in court to reveal these records to the public. This case is seen as a victory for Judicial Watch and the American people, as it uncovers potential misuse of resources to target Trump and his allies. The aim is to hold Willis accountable and educate the public about her actions.
➡ The article discusses a lawsuit alleging that officers acted improperly during a shooting incident involving a woman named Ashley Babbitt. The lawsuit also criticizes the lack of a thorough investigation into the incident. The article further discusses the involvement of the CIA in the response to the January 6th disturbances on Capitol Hill, raising questions about their role and actions. The author encourages support for Judicial Watch, an organization seeking answers and justice in these matters.
➡ Joe and Jill Biden’s German shepherd dogs have repeatedly attacked Secret Service and White House personnel, with the incidents possibly totaling up to three dozen. The Bidens were often present during these attacks, with Joe Biden even walking the dog during some incidents. Despite the severity of the situation, the Secret Service was allegedly trying to delete records of these attacks. This information was uncovered by Judicial Watch through a lawsuit and Freedom of Information Act requests.
➡ The President’s dog, Commander, has been involved in multiple biting incidents, causing harm to Secret Service personnel. Despite these incidents, the dog was allowed to remain in the White House, leading to further attacks. The situation has raised concerns about the safety of the Secret Service agents and the potential misuse of power by the President. The issue was brought to light by Judicial Watch, who sued for the records, revealing the extent of the problem.
➡ The text discusses concerns about President Trump’s safety, alleging failures by the Secret Service and a cover-up of an assassination attempt. It also criticizes President Biden’s handling of his dogs, which have reportedly bitten multiple people. The text further mentions Judicial Watch’s efforts to uncover information about the alleged assassination attempt and the Secret Service’s supposed incompetence. Lastly, it discusses a court ruling that counting ballots received after Election Day is against federal law.
➡ Judicial Watch, a legal watchdog group, has won a significant court case that supports the idea of having a specific Election Day. The group sued Illinois and Mississippi for counting ballots received after Election Day, arguing that this practice is against federal law and could lead to voter fraud. The 5th Circuit Court agreed, stating that ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials on Election Day. This decision could impact future elections and the way votes are counted.
➡ The text discusses the importance of understanding and monitoring election laws, with a focus on the counting of ballots after Election Day. It highlights the work of Judicial Watch, an organization with over two decades of experience in election law issues, including cleaning up election rolls. The text also celebrates President Trump’s victory, describing it as a remarkable personal achievement against significant odds. It concludes by emphasizing the need for transparency and accountability in government, particularly in relation to election integrity and civil rights.
➡ The article discusses allegations of corruption in previous administrations and the recent election results. It suggests that despite challenges, the Republicans have achieved a broad victory, potentially controlling the House, Senate, and presidency. The author credits this success to improved election integrity measures and the work of Judicial Watch. However, the author also raises questions about the significant drop in Democratic votes compared to the previous election, suggesting further investigation is needed.
➡ The text discusses concerns about the voting results favoring Biden and suspicions about Trump’s treatment during his presidency. It suggests that Trump faced opposition from within government agencies, which may have undermined his presidency and potentially put him at risk. The text also criticizes certain governors and politicians for their stance against Trump’s policies and suggests they may be promoting insurrection. Lastly, it warns of potential risks for Trump and other Republicans from what it calls the ‘deep state’, and recounts a personal experience of being subpoenaed by the FBI.

First up, though, is this major new lawsuit that Judicial Watch filed on behalf of Ashley Babbitt’s husband Aaron and her estate. A $30 million wrongful death lawsuit against the United States government was filed today. The anniversary of January 6th is this weekend. And it is an historic lawsuit and it’s a long time coming. And we’re honored to be able to represent Mr. Babbitt and Ashley’s estate in order to get justice and accountability and the truth out about what happened that day. An outrageous, inexcusable shooting death of Ashley. There’s pictures of Ashley with her husband Aaron, 14 year Air Force veteran.

She and Erin owned a pool cleaning business together. And you know, she came to Washington because she wanted to support President Trump, participate in that rally. She traveled here alone and she was shot for no good reason by Lieutenant Michael Byrd of the United States Capitol Police. The lawsuit was filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of California. So it was filed out in San Diego. And as I said, it was filed on behalf of the family of Ashley Babbitt, who is the, as I said, the U.S. air Force veteran shot that day on January 6th.

And I’ll say it once, if I won’t say it again, I will, let’s put it, I’ll say it once and then I’ll say it again. That’s what I mean to say. Ashley Babbitt was the only homicide victim that day at the January 6th disturbance. And the left media and the politicians pushing a January 6th narrative that’s anti Trump and anti Trump supporter in order to justify their abuses of law. Don’t want you to know that, but that’s the darn truth. And we want the government to be held accountable for what its employee did. The lawsuit includes claims against the United States government for wrongful death, assault and battery and various negligence issues.

Babbitt was a 35 year old air Force veteran, a resident of San Diego, where she owned and operated a successful pool business with her husband, Aaron. Ashley traveled alone from San Diego to Washington D.C. to attend the Woman for America first rally on January 6th at the Ellipse. Ashley loved her country, as the lawsuit details, and wanted to show her support for President Trump’s America first policies and to see and hear the President speak while live, while he, while he remained in office. Ashley did not go to Washington as part of a group or for any unlawful or nefarious purpose.

She was there to exercise what she believed were her God given American liberties and freedoms. After the rally, Ashley, like a great many other patriotic Americans Attending the rally walked to the Capitol peacefully, a distance of about 1 1/2 miles. Two undercover Metropolitan Police Department officers followed close behind Ashley as she climbed the stairs to the west terrace. Ashley entered the Capitol on the Senate side long after others had done so. Once inside, Ashley encountered a female Capitol police officer who directed her to walk south towards the House side. Ashley complied, walking alone, excuse me, walking alone through the Capitol and ultimately arriving at the hallway outside the main door to the House chamber where demonstrators had gathered.

From there, Ashley walked by herself east along the hallway outside the House Chamber, then turned south, reaching the hallway outside the Speaker’s lobby, out the southeast corner of the Capitol. The shooting occurred at the east entrance to the Speaker’s lobby. And I think in the lawsuit itself, I think we have a copy of the. There’s a photo of the Speaker’s lobby area where Ashley was killed. And maybe the guys can pull that up while I’m reading. After demonstrators filled the hallway outside the lobby, two individuals in the crowded, tightly packed hallway struck and dislodged the glass panels in the lobby doors and the right door side light.

Lieutenant Byrd, who is a United States Capitol Police commander and was Incident Commander for the house on January 6, 2021, so he was a senior guy, shot Ashley on sight as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door sidelight. Byrd later confessed that he shot Ashley before seeing her hands or assessing her intention or even identifying her as a female. Ashley was unarmed. Her hands were up in the air, empty and in plain view of Lt. Byrd and other officers in the lobby. The facts speak truth. Ashley was ambushed when she was shot by Lieutenant Byrd.

Multiple witnesses at the scene yelled, you just murdered her. Lieutenant Byrd was never charged or otherwise punished or disciplined for Ashley’s homicide. The Lawsuit further states Lt. Byrd, who is a United States Capitol Police Commander and was the Incident Commander, as I said, for the house on January 6, shot Ashley as she raised herself up into the opening of the right door side light. Not one member of Congress was in the lobby, which was guarded by multiple armed police officers. Additional armed police officers were in the hallway outside the lobby and or the adjoining stairway. Ashley could not have seen Lt.

Byrd, who was positioned far to Ashley’s left, left and on the opposite side of the doors, near an opening to the Retiring Room at a distance of approximately 15ft at an angle of approximately 160 degrees. Sergeant Timothy Lively, one of the armed officers guarding the lobby doors from the hallway, later told officials investigating the shooting, I saw him. There was no way that that Woman would have seen that Lt. Byrd, who was not in uniform, did not identify himself as a police officer or otherwise make his presence known to Ashley. Lieutenant Byrd did not give Ashley any warnings or commands before shooting.

Dead Ashley remained conscious for minutes or longer after being shot by Lieutenant Byrd. Ashley experienced extreme pain, suffering, mental anguish and intense fear before slipping into preterminal unconsciousness. The autopsy report identified the cause of death as, quote, a gunshot wound to left anterior shoulder, unquote, with onset, interval, interval of minutes. The fact that Ashley was alive and conscious in extreme pain and suffering is documented in videos of the shooting. Furthermore, nothing about the wound track described in the autopsy report would be expected to result in immediate death or instantaneous loss of consciousness. And Ashley’s lungs contained blood, further confirming that she was alive and breathing after being shot.

Ashley was pronounced dead at Washington hospital center at 3:15. The medical examiner determined that the manner of death was homicide. So this is an important lawsuit, and it’s important because an American citizen, Ashley Babbitt, was shot and killed in a way that was unlawful, improper by United States Capitol police officer, the official police force of Congress. January 6th. I guess President Biden is going to use January 6th as an excuse to justify his effort to jail his political enemies this weekend. It’s been used as a leverage, a fulcrum to leverage attacks on the political opponents of the left.

And Ashley Babbitt’s shooting death is an inconvenient truth in that regard. What the facts show there, that she was unlawfully killed and that there was no accountability for Lt. Byrd or anyone else who is responsible for what happened that day in terms of managing and training and supervising the police on site there. And the left, media and partisans have sought to downplay Ashley’s death, suggest that she had it coming, and other smears and vicious comments that would never be used to justify the shooting death in similar circumstances of any other American citizen. I mean, there isn’t a police officer who’s honest in the land who would look at what happened to Ashley that day.

And you’ve seen the video of the shooting death, and if you haven’t, you can go look it up quickly. Unjustified. Completely unjustified. Now, the Justice Department refused to pursue criminal charges against Lt. Byrd, though in their conclusion, I don’t think they said the shooting was justified. They just said that they didn’t have enough to charge him, or that’s what they told us. Whether I believe it or not is another matter, given the politics of the situation, as I’ve disclosed and Then on top of that, administratively, he was investigated by the Capitol Police, and they did nothing, too.

So, no accountability. And this lawsuit is designed to provide accountability and a more full understanding of the truth of what happened on January 6th. And one of the big issues is the conduct of Lieutenant Byrd. You know, that was an out of control situation that he created, popping out and shooting Ashley like he did. And as the lawsuit describes, Lt. Byrd’s employer, namely the Capitol Police Board, ultimately Congress, obviously the US Capitol Police knew or should have known that Lieutenant Byrd was prone to behave in a dangerous or otherwise incompetent manner. And we make the following allegations in this lawsuit.

Less than two years before January 6, 2021, on or about February 25, 2019, Byrd left his loaded Glock 22, the same firearm he used to shoot and kill Ashley Babbitt, in a bathroom in the Capitol Visitor center complex. Now, the Capitol Visitor center complex is if you’ve ever visited the Capitol, you know you got the big capital right? And in front of it on the east side of the Capitol is a giant plaza. And what they’ve done at great taxpayer expense is they on that plaza, facing the Capitol Underground, there’s this huge visitor center where tourists enter for tours before they go up into the Capitol.

There are meeting rooms and conference facilities such down there as well. So thousands of people go through that facility every day. And he left it in a bathroom there. The loaded Glock was discovered during a routine security sweep later that same day. I mean, I wonder how many hours he didn’t have his gun without knowing it. I’d like to know that little detail. Approximately 15,000 to 20,000 people passed through the Capitol Visitor center, which serves as the main entrance for visitors to the U.S. capitol during peak season. Lawmakers and staff charged with oversight at the Capitol Police were not made aware of the incident until contacted by a reporter.

So this happened, and none of the leadership knew that this serious incident had happened. Unbelievable. His police powers had been revoked on more than one occasion prior to January 6, 2021, for failing to meet or complete semiannual firearms qualification requirements. Imagine that. I mean, again, if there are law enforcement watching this, or former law enforcement, or folks who are generally aware of the requirements for law enforcement training. I appreciate your responses to what I’m disclosing here because I think, and I think other viewers would appreciate it too, because it’s really difficult to overstate how outrageous it was that Byrd was allowed to continue his duties given these issues.

And it gets worse. In fact, Byrd had a reputation among peers for not being a good shot. Under the USCP’s range management system, the Capitol Police’s range management system, an officer who fails to meet qualifications, who fails to meet firearm qualification requirements is given one week of remedial training. If the officer still fails to qualify after remedial training, police powers are then revoked until the officers qualify. Until the officer qualifies. His police powers were also revoked for a prior off duty shooting into a stolen moving vehicle in which the occupants were teenagers or juveniles. The stolen vehicle was Lieutenant Byrd’s car.

Byrd fired multiple shots at the fleeing vehicle in a suburban area. Stray bullets from Byrd’s firearms struck the sides of homes nearby. An official Investigation found that Lt. Byrd’s use of force was not justified. What was going on that he was allowed to continue, as I said, in his duties, which involved protecting the US Capitol and the visitors to the Capitol. We’re seeking, excuse me, Judicial Watch details in its complaint that plaintiffs seek the full and just amount of $30 million, plus costs and interest according to law and any and all further relief to which plaintiffs may be justly entitled.

As I said, it was filed out in San Diego. I think the government has 60 days to respond. The lawsuit was filed by our lawyers out there. Robert Stick worked on it. I think he’s the lead lawyer in the case and obviously our team here in Washington, D.C. as well. But it wasit’s an important lawsuit in the sense that the government’s finally going to be held accountable here. And no one else in Congress was willing to look seriously at what Byrd did. Republicans have been in control of the House for a year and they haven’t done jack on holding Lieutenant Byrd accountable.

Haven’t done anything. And you know, as I said, we’re honored. Let me read what I said in the complaint here or excuse me, in the press release. The only homicide on January 6 was the unlawful shooting death of Ashley Babbitt. Her Homicide by Lt. Byrd is a scandal beyond belief. This historic lawsuit seeks a measure of justice and government accountability for Ashley’s wrongful death. Judicial Watch and our supporters are honored to represent Ashley’s steadfast widower, Aaron Babbitt and her estate in this legal action. Ashley was shot in cold blood. And the rule of law requires justice for.

And I’m also, and I know her mother, Mickey is regular now here in Washington, D.C. i see her all over town and I met her. I think there’s a picture of her and me. I put in Twitter just recently, guys, if you want to show. And she’s Been out trying to get justice for her daughter as well. So, you know, pray for her mom as well, Ashley’s mom. And we’re just so honored to bring this claim for her. And we’ve been very much interested in January 6th for the reasons I stated January 6th was being. There’s a picture of me with Ashley’s mother at CPAC last year.

She’s a wonderful woman. And, you know, and I’ve looked at the videos time and time again and obviously more repeatedly recently. And I frankly, you know, just speaking as Tom Fitton, I just can’t believe they shot her. I can’t believe that police officer shot her. I mean, when you look at the video, I encourage you to look at the video again. The fact that nothing had been done in terms of accountability for that obviously bad shooting, that unlawful shooting is just beyond belief. And every police officer is, you know, you have all these police officers dying in the line of duty, putting their lives on the line, doing all this wonderful work to protect the public safety.

And this one officer engages in this misconduct and he gets away with it to date. And I wanted to go into a little bit more in the lawsuit. Here’s the lawsuit. This is what the lawsuit looks like. Probably can’t see because it’s all white. And I’ll show you close what it looks like. There you go. You really can’t see anything, can you? State of Ashley Babbitt and Aaron Babbitt individually and on behalf of the state of Ashley Babbitt, plaintiffs versus the United States of America. Complaint for assault and battery, negligence, negligent supervision, discipline and retention, negligent training, survival and wrongful death.

So it’s a survival action. Right. The survivor can sue in circumstances as we’re describing. So in the lawsuit we go into detail and I encourage you to read the lawsuit completely because it will explain just how off the bird killing of Babbitt was and how unjustified it was. Because when you’re filing a lawsuit like this, at issue is going to be what are the general training requirements, certainly for the police agency here. You know, what the law allows, what discretion police officers have, et cetera, et cetera. And we describe just how awful that shooting was with some detail that I think is quite powerful.

When Lieutenant Byrd shot and killed Ashley, he breached multiple applicable standards of care governing a, the safe use of a firearm, the perception and assessment of imminent threats, use of force levels and escalation, de. Escalation of force, the perception and assessment of relevant facts, the use of warnings, firing backdrops, Think literally, what is the backdrop, what he was firing into a crowd of people, including other police officers, and obtaining timely, appropriate medical aid, among other breaches, to be identified through discovery. Had Lieutenant Byrd adhered to these standards, he would not have fired, and Ashley would be alive today.

And we describe his negligent use of the firearm, or we allege it here. Lt. Byrd breached standards of care in the following ways, among others, to be identified through discovery. Unholstering his firearm before he even saw Ashley, and therefore before, quote, any expected prudent and lawful discharge, unquote, while leaving his position in the retiring room and advancing and moving to the doors of the speaker’s lobby, failing to maintain his unholstered weapon at low ready, and instead pointing his firearm at no fewer than three people on the other side of the lobby doors and in the direction of Ashley.

And as many as seven uniformed officers positioned near her in the hallway and holding his finger inside the trigger guard and tapping his finger on and off the trigger for at least 14 seconds before he saw and shot Ashley. So not a good shooting. And that’s a nice way of saying he killed her unlawfully, but it was a homicide and it was an unlawful shooting. I don’t know how else to describe it. It’s just awful, and it’s shameful that our government hasn’t taken responsibility for it, both in terms of holding Byrd accountable and holding itself accountable through the processes available.

And then on top of that, there were three police officers who were present on the other side of the door. So you think of the door being closed. Ashley and some of the other demonstrators are on one side of the door. Bird’s on the other side. Well, there were three police officers on Ashley’s side of the door who were standing in front of the doorway, who then left. And after they stepped aside, other demonstrators started breaking into the. You know, breaking the glass. And Ashley became agitated. You know, she had law enforcement background. It’s clear to the video, at least to my eye, that she was upset by what was going on.

She was requesting that the officers do something. And obviously seconds later, she was shot. And when you watch the videos, you’ll see other officers right behind. So Ashley gets. You know, she’s up in the window. Byrd shoots at her like that. She falls back, and there are officers immediately behind her as she shot, who could have been killed also by Bird if. If the shot had gone awry further beyond Ashley. And the officer who immediately is next to Ashley and closest to the door aims his weapon, clearly ready to shoot because he didn’t know where the bullet was coming from.

So the tragedy could have been even worse if that officer had shot to defend himself and others based on this crazed shooting by Bird. And so the lawsuit alleges that those officers shouldn’t have left their posts like that. And now Judicial Watch has been front and center in investigating not only the Babbitt issue. You know, we uncovered that Byrd was given special sweetheart treatment and allowed to stay at Andrews Air Force Base for a long period of time at taxpayer expense. That he didn’t give any official statement to investigators. He didn’t talk, he refused to talk.

He was given a special dispensation to kind of go through a walk through with an unofficial statement. So they did no serious investigation, Nothing similar to the other investigations. We’ve all, you know, if you’re a citizen who keeps up with the news, you know, generally what happens when there’s a police shooting where there’s an issue about. Right. There are grand juries impaneled, there are a series of investigative steps that take place. And there’s no indication any of that took place with respect to Byrd because as I would suggest, it was a political operation that stepped up after Ashley Babbitt’s shooting and that meant she wasn’t going to get justice.

So pretty much everything we know about the Babbitt shooting is as a result of Judicial Watch’s litigation to date through foia. Now, obviously, we’re going to gain more information. We, we disclosed it through the allegations in the complaint. That is, I would believe to be educational and newsworthy and obviously useful for proving our case on behalf of the Babbitt estate and Aaron in court. But you can be sure that as this case proceeds, if it’s allowed to proceed, because you never know what the court’s going to do, get more information through discovery, as we discussed earlier, that we’re going to find out more about what happened around that shooting death.

So when it comes to, like the full story on January 6, you can trust Judicial Watch, you can’t trust Congress. I mean, that January 6th report is an abomination. The rump committee set up by Pelosi that involved no participation by the Republican Party. Yes, I know she appointed Republicans, but they weren’t representing the Republican Party. They were there at her sufferance. And the Republican leadership had no role in that investigation, as is typically in congressional investigations. So. And of course, we now know, or I shouldn’t say we now know, it’s obvious January 6th has been used to justify trying to jail Trump, Trump trying to take Trump off the ballot.

The one party state approach. That’s what the left wants now, by the way, a one party state that when you go to that when you go to vote in November, they want only one candidate on the ballot. I don’t even think they do that in Russia. I think they have candidates in Russia that they allow on the ballot. They harass the heck out of them. But this is the revolutionary state we’re in where the left is revolting against the very idea of free and fair elections and is rushing America towards a one party state by trying to keep Trump off the ballot based on what happened on January 6th.

And so the story that Ashley Babbitt was improperly killed by a police officer doesn’t help that cause, doesn’t it? And that’s why she hasn’t gotten justice today. So we’re going to pursue this $30 million lawsuit for Ashley Babbitt. If you like what Judicial Watch is doing here, I encourage you to support our work. You can go to judicialwatch.org, donate to our cause. You not only help with the lawsuit for Ashley’s estate and Aaron Babbitt, her widower, but, you know, all of our other important litigation that we’re pursuing and our educational activities, such as what you’re hearing now, you know, we can only do it with your voluntary support.

Now, I got a question for you. What if I had told you three weeks ago and I said, oh, I think the CIA was involved somehow on January 6th? Somehow they were involved somehow. I’d probably get thrown off the Internet. Right, for promoting a conspiracy theory. But we just uncovered documents that show the CIA had folks involved in the response to January 6th. And here’s my video first highlighting it. Hey, everyone, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton here with some massive news. Judicial Watch just uncovered that the CIA was involved in the response to the January 6th disturbances on Capitol Hill.

In fact, CIA bomb technicians were sent over to the RNC and DNC where those pipe bombs supposedly were found. On top of that, there were CIA dog teams on standby in response to January 6th. Now, there are a lot of questions that are raised by our disclosures. First of all, why did it take Judicial Watch heavy lifting in federal court to get access to these documents after all these years? Why didn’t the Pelosi January 6th committee, even as corrupt as it was, not disclose the CIA involvement? What was the CIA involved for? Were they investigating foreign intelligence operations? Were they investigating American citizens? What else have they done related to January 6th? All these questions you can be sure your Judicial Watch will pursue in federal court if necessary.

That’s a pretty good summary, huh? Isn’t it? Incredible. So we had asked for records from the Department of Justice. What did we ask for last year? We asked for records and communications regarding shots being fired inside the US Capitol, as well as requests for Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Explosives Special Response team assistance on January 6th. So remember, they had these pipe bombs that were supposedly found at the RNC and dnc. And so we were interested in the responses there. So we got a bunch of text messages. Of course, they ignored our request and we had the sue in federal court again.

This is June of 2023. We filed the lawsuit. We probably had asked. Yeah, we asked in. No, we filed the lawsuit in August. We asked for the records in June. So we’ve been waiting almost a year for these records. And it took a federal lawsuit to get them out to us. And so we got these ATF text messages that detail the CIA’s involvement. And there are kind of two sets of text messages, and they’re very interesting to read because they do talk about. As I say, we were asking about the reports of shots fired. The only shots were fired were the shots fired, at least into Capitol.

The shot fired at poor Ashley Babbitt by Lt. Michael Byrd, U.S. capitol Police officer, who in our view, unlawfully shot her, illicitly shot her, shot her for no good reason. Popped out, shot her dead. And we’re representing her family in a wrongful death action right now. Federal lawsuit against the US government for $30 million. So here you can see the ATF, you know, basically all these panicked text messages about the disturbance on January 6. But what was most interesting in them to me was the involvement of the Secret Service. So here’s the first text message detailing the secret.

Excuse me. The involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency. Not the Secret Service, the CIA. Several CIA dog teams on standby near the southwest area of the Capitol. What were they doing there? Why were they on standby? Were they called ahead of time? I don’t know. First time we’re hearing about it. And then there were technicians sent to where those pipe bombs were. CIA bomb techs. Why were they down there? You know, now, typically, the CIA is not supposed to be involved in domestic operations like that. So what was the purpose of their being involved? I mean, this is the D.C.

area. They don’t. We don’t need extra folks like the CIA being involved here, typically. Was there a foreign intelligence component that they were investigating? What else did they do? I don’t know. But we’re going to ask more questions and try to find out. But these are pretty extraordinary records. Don’t you agree? The CIA was involved in the response of January 6th where they called ahead of time and told to stand by? Who talked to them? Why were they put on standby? Or did they just show up in an emergency fashion on January 6th? I don’t know.

Why didn’t Pelosi’s rump January 6th committee disclose this? Where’s the media been? Where have Republicans been? Do you think it’s important that CIA resources were deployed in response to the January 6th? And I don’t even know if it was in response. Maybe they were just waiting around because they knew something was going to happen. I had a good interview. We should link the interview below with Glenn Beck about this. But this is pretty shocking. CIA do anything else related to January 6th? Then we’re going to ask the question other than Judicial Watch. I hope so. Maybe Congress can finally do something after they spend all of our money.

So there’s this story that Judicial Watch alone, practically speaking, has uncovered. And the story is one of terrible abuse of federal personnel by Joe and Jill Biden. They have allowed their German shepherd dogs over the years to attack Secret Service and White House personnel time after time after time. I think it’s at least two, three dozen times when you combine the attacks by both dogs. Commander. I mean Major initially and then Commander. And we just uncovered more documents thanks to another lawsuit we had to file that show that Joe Biden or further demonstrate that Joe Biden watched his dogs attack Secret Service agents.

Specifically. Commander. Our friends at the New York Post broke the story. Story. Let’s go to the New York Post story. They had an exclusive from us in reporting the story. So this was their big story. Biden repeatedly watched his dog attack Secret Service agents as staff wished. See, we have to go through what you go through whenever you look at the Internet. We get all the ads pop up on our browsers too, as staff wished each other safe shift docs. And the docs were from Judicial Watch. President Biden repeatedly watched his German shepherd commander attack Secret Service members who wished each other a safe shift as the number of incidents mounted with one exasperated workplace safety professional urging the use of a muzzle.

Agency records show the number of dog attacks involving Commander who the White House said in February was given away after more than two years of terrorizing the professionals assigned to protect Biden and the former first dog major who was rehomed in 2021 after also attacking personnel. Of course, all of that uncovered by Judicial watch could top three dozen. The newly surfaced records suggest the 81. Of course, you know, what was the FBI? What was Joe’s response? The Secret Service is lying about this. Look at what the Post said here. The 81 year old President reportedly accused a Secret Service member of lying about being attacked by major during his first year in office, but was present for at least three separate incidents.

Separate attacks involving commander files released to Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information act or lawsuit show. A previously unreported incident on September 12, 2023 featured a pair of bites in which commander tore holes in a Secret Service member’s suitcase as Biden took him for a walk in the Kennedy Garden along the South Lawn of the White House. So you can go and read the full New York Post story there. And this is my report alert to folks earlier this week about the Biden attacks. Hey everyone, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton here. We got some crazy documents from the Secret Service about Joe Biden’s crazy dog Commander attacking Secret Service personnel.

According to the documents which we got thanks to a federal FOIA lawsuit, Joe had the dog when he attacked Secret Service. One of the incidents showed that Joe was walking the dog. Had the dog when the dog attacked the Secret Service agent twice bit him on the arm not once, but twice while Joe had the dog. Other documents show the Secret Service was trying to delete records. It shows without a shadow of a doubt that Joe Biden is personally responsible for the attacks of his dogs and Secret Service personnel. Of course Jill had the dog. From other documents, we know when the dog attacked Secret Service as well.

So both are responsible for it. Looks like upwards of two, three dozen attacks on Secret Service and White House personnel. What type of insanity is going on over there in the White House that the first couple would allow their dogs to attack Secret Service personnel repeatedly. And of course, all this was exposed only thanks to the heavy lifting of Judicial Watch. I mean, it’s psychotic that this is happening. Would you want to live next to people who allowed their dogs to attack 25 people and not do anything unless they were called out on it and still not do anything after they called out on it.

That September 2023 attack that occurred months after Judicial Watch disclosed the dog was out of control? Had accused had attacked like a dozen people by then. I think we had issued a release in the summer of 2023 and a few months later, dog is still attacking Secret Service while Joe’s walking them. Well, Fox News covered it pretty pretty significantly. Let’s go to Laura Ingram and Fox and friends and then Jesse Waters. Our friends there had a good report on it. All right. Is it time to sequester the witness? Because a new report has Biden being aware of what commander did with just a few choice Secret Service agents.

Fox News senior national correspondent Kevin Cork is here with all the chewy details. Kevin, brilliantly written, my friend. Evening to you. Now, Judicial Watch is giving us a window. One thing that did not help the president’s image when his dog went on an attack spree. Biden reportedly watching his dog, Commander, attack Secret Service on multiple occasions as staff wished each other. Hey, have a safe shift. Fox News alert. We have new details on Biden’s bad dog. The president watched as commander attacked Secret Service agents. Kevin corks in D.C. with the story. Kevin. Evening, Jesse. Judicial Watch giving us an exclusive window into the harrowing circumstances surrounding.

You said it, Commander. The president’s dog and his numerous attacks on Secret Service agents, which could, by the way, top three dozen such attacks, according to newly released records. What’s more, apparently the president himself was present for at least three of those attacks. Now, everybody knows Commander has been known to, you know, bite, but there are a lot of examples you may not know about, including this one. Quote, as I started to walk toward him, him being the president, to see if he needed help, Commander ran through his leg and bit my left arm through the front of my jacket.

I pulled my arm away and yelled, no. POTUS yelled and then blank. Now the story went on Jesse to say that the dog later jumped up and bit him in the left arm again for a second time. His suit coat had not one, not two, but three holes, one all the way through. And that’s not it. There are other conversations between Secret Service officials, including this one from September 2023. Heads up. And FYI, TMZ just reported a dog bite at the White House. Can we please find a way to get this dog muzzled? Now, you’ll recall former First Dog Major was also rehoused back in 2021 after apparently attacking a lot of people.

In this instance, Secret Service members, Jesse wished each other safe shift as the attacks mounted. That’s really damning right there. That tells you plenty, Jesse, and it’s not funny. I’ve been bitten by a vicious Democrat dog, too, and it hurts. I still have a mark on my upper thigh. No one will see that. Except that was a good story by Kevin Cork describing Judicial Watch as documents. And here are the documents we got. You can go look at them all. Get them on Judicial Watch’s website. We’ll provide a link to the press release below and the document through which you can confirm that the Biden dogs are out of control or were out of control.

I don’t know where they are now. I don’t know why we would believe anything they’re telling us. This chart may have been released before, but it’s worth going over again. It lists a lot of the dog bites. I mean, look at this. Left arm, left hand, left forearm, right arm, right quad thigh, right lower back. That’s a classic one. I remember that attack. Or the details of that attack. So the. There was a. I think it was a Secret Service technician, Right? So he goes to the house, someone opens the door, and the dog gets out.

I guess he went like this and the dog bit him on the back. I mean, can you imagine being subject to that type of dog attack? That’s pretty traumatic. I know there’s a lot of people laughing about this, but I think it’s pretty darn serious that the Secret Service were under constant attack by this first couple’s dogs. It’s inexcusable. It’s, in my view, a criminal abuse of power. Completely insane. Let’s go back to the chart. Right wrist, right forearm, right elbow, upper arm, left elbow, left chest. But I don’t know the detail of that one. I don’t remember that.

Do you guys remember it? I don’t remember it. I mean, this only goes to July of 2023. I guess they were at the. I guess there’s the Kennedy Garden attacks. So it’s two bites in the left arm, and then they’re up at the beach and there’s another attack. And here’s the email. Let’s go back to the email that Kevin quoted on Fox. Look at that. POTUS took Commander on a leash. So the Secret Service agent’s reporting to his colleagues, and I was standing halfway from the booksellers in the family theater. POTUS opened the bookseller door. I’m not quite sure what the bookseller is in the White House.

I don’t know if that’s. Is there a shop or something? I’m not sure. And said, blank. I guess he was calling him. As I started to walk toward him to see if he needed help, Commander ran through his legs and bit my left arm through the front of my jacket. I pulled my arm away and yelled, no. Potus, I guess, yelled something. It’s interesting that they’re protecting what Joe said. No, Commander. Potus, then blank. I Obliged and Commander let me pet him. When turning to close the door, Commander jumped again and bit my left arm for the second time.

And then he attached the leash to him. No skin was broken. You know, other documents show that we’ve had before that it was a bloody mess. I mean, I want you to imagine a dog coming at you and the only thing you can do to defend yourself is putting out the arm. In this case, that poor Secret Service agent had to start once, twice, while the President of the United States watched. Now, do I say that Biden sicced the dog on the Secret Service? No. But the fact is that the Secret Service was constantly abused by these dogs and they did nothing about it.

The earlier documents show that Jill Biden had the dog and was in control of the dog. When the dog attacked Secret Service personnel, I don’t forget if it was Major or Commander, but it doesn’t matter. And all this was coming out because we were tipped off, by the way, because Major was removed after we uncovered the dog bit. A lot more people than they admitted to. Caught the White House in a lie. So they got Commander as a new dog after poor Major was removed. And they had a third dog, Champ. And I don’t remember if Champ was a biter or not.

Then we got a tip that Commander was out of control and we exposed it. I mean, they all, you know, some of those folks, they had to either go to the medical unit, a few had to go to the hospital. I mean, one poor guy could had a suit room. When he tried to get it reimbursed, they gave him the runaround. There you go. Replace the suit. Secret Service log of the same day reported that 8:06pm on September 25, 2023. An officer is probably because there’s a uniform division of the Secret Service, right? And then you have the protective division.

I don’t know if it’s technically the two division names, but the guys in suits, the guys and women in suits you’re used to seeing, that’s what I consider to be the protective division. And the officer, the uniform division are, you know, they’re dressed like normal police officers, you know, protecting the grounds of the White House and the environs there. Officer redacted, post redacted. So they don’t say where the person was posted or the person’s name advised. Bit by family pet and requested sector official. Sergeant Blank requested EMT to respond. So emergency personnel had to respond. This is September.

This is what’s interesting. The last entry on the log indicates 8:58pm Captain Blank requests joint Operations Center Log to be deleted. What’s going on there? As I noted in my comment, it looks like they’re trying to delete records. We’re currently investigating that, by the way. I’ll have more on that at a future update, maybe. And the press was all onto this. The press knew about this. CNN followed our lead and uncovered there were many more bytes than had been previously acknowledged, even after we released that material. So what happened was we released 10 or 12 bytes last year.

In the middle of the year, CNN heard that there were upwards of a dozen, two dozen bytes, including the bytes. I guess it was in September or October. A colleague asked, how does TMZ know before we do? Because they referenced. About that TMZ story. Well, go to that TMZ story, guys, if you can. It’s in the press release. There’s a link. Stand by, because I want to show you how the TMZ knew. Very interesting. So the TMZ story. There we are. Go to the link. His dog commander accused of biting seven people. So scroll down. Where did TMZ get that information? Secret Service member by the New York Post.

Let’s go to that New York Post website story. Exclusive the pooch. That’s the story I’m telling you about it disclosed by Judicial Watch. So the reason we got this material and the Secret Secret Service is like, well, how do they know about this? Because Judicial Watch sued for the records they got, so none of this would have come out. And I’m proud of Judicial Watch’s work here. I know some people online say, well, this isn’t important. I think it’s important. I think it’s important that the first lady and the President of the United States, their dog has attacked a dozen or three dozen personnel.

I mean, if a dog attacked your family member, bit him on the thigh or bit him on the arm, would you think that’s important? And the dog was owned by the President of the United States and you knew that the dog had previously bitten 20, 25, 30 people previously? I mean, dog bites are a serious issue. And I tell you, when the Commander in chief allows the people who protect him to be abused like that. I hate to use the word because I think it’s strong, but it’s appropriate. It’s psychotic. Sociopathic. Is that the word? It’s insanity.

It’s criminal abuse of power, in my view. And you want to know. You know, you wonder why it is that he casually jails his political opponents. Casually violates the law, Casually allows an invasion of the United States of America. Well, that to me is easy to understand if you understand he’s casually allowing and accusing the people protecting him of lying as his dog is attacking them. Now the media is onto this. Look at all these news stories. Daily Mail, Fox News. That’s too small for me. Let’s go to the Daily Mail. They always have fun. Headlines.

Bombshell. New records reveal more than three dozen attacks. Look at that. Even the Daily Beast had a story saying about, you know, the story of the Daily Beast. I don’t know if it’s linked in that set of that email guys, but the Daily Beast story, as I recall, I think I linked it in our Twitter feed or my Twitter feed, you know, reveals that the Secret Service have issues with the way they’ve been treated. Can you blame them? So, yeah, I think it’s a big story and I’m proud of Judith Shawach’s work trying to protect law enforcement personnel in the Secret Service.

Being abused by the commander in Chief. Violently abused. It’s funny. I wasn’t funny. I was walking near my home today and someone walked down the street with a little pit bull. And I stopped a good 10ft away because it was a pit bull. And the pit bull stopped, gave me a look and made a decision that he was going to start trying to attack me. And thankfully the woman on the leash was able to constrain the pit bull. And it was a relatively small dog. But I don’t care how big you are, how strong you think you are, you don’t want to be attacked even by a little dog, let alone a German shepherd or a pit bull or anything like that.

And that was going on on a day to day basis basis at the Secret Service. And they were being told, keep your hands in your pockets, you know. And the Secret Service’s job is to protect the President of the United States. So they’re supposed to be looking outward, right? Looking out for threats. I’m kind of making exaggerating here. They shouldn’t have to worry about being attacked from behind by the First Family’s dog. I mean, to me it’s dangerous not only for the Secret Service, but for the protectees. So if I were telling the Bidens, look, you don’t want their, you don’t want your Secret Service nervous about protecting you because of the dog because that distracts from their core function.

They’re human beings. But I guess reason didn’t matter here. So I think it’s a big deal. So we’ve got more documents. I’m sure. Coming on this. And I’ve got one thing to ask you. Imagine if it was Trump’s dogs. Now Trump doesn’t have dogs. I don’t think he’s, he’s not a pet, as I discussed earlier. I don’t think he’s a pet guy. If Trump’s dogs bit 25 people, he’d be impeached. He’d be impeached. I don’t know, maybe, I don’t know, maybe that would be the only reason to impeach someone. If they could get Trump caught allowing his dogs to bite 25 people, I don’t know, maybe he could, he would be fairly impeached.

Now, we’re laughing in the office today because someone asked about the Biden’s cat. And I don’t know what the cat’s up to. Maybe the cat put the dogs created this whole scenario to get the dogs out of the way. Who knows, you know, what goes on with cats. But you know, I guess I’m saying not to mock it, right? But you know, cause it’s, you know, but it’s a dog story. It’s literally a dog bites man story. But it kind of goes, it tells us a lot about the Biden approach to other human beings approach to frankly, the rule of law.

I mean, I’d be worried about liability, wouldn’t you? And certainly people getting hurt because of your dog. Not once, but 25, 35 times. Jeez. Like I said, psychotic. This country faces so many crises. You know, there’s a war in the Middle East, Iran attacking Israel, Israel trying to defend itself. Violence, I think that is erupting because of the weakness of President Biden. And I’ll get into that later. And of course, the other crisis speaking of Iran is the threat, the ongoing risk of death for President Trump not only because of threats from Iran, but the failures, incompetence in politics of the Secret Service.

And you know, one of the most outrageous things about what happened to Trumpand there are manyit’s bad enough what the Secret Service did or did not do in terms of his protection, but the subsequent cover up is, continues to be astonishing, even to me. And I’m used to seeing a lot of COVID ups as head of Judicial Watch. And I was just talking a few weeks ago about the FBI covering up virtually everything about the first Trump assassination attempt. Let’s go to that tape, everyone. Breaking news, the FBI is withholding records about the Trump assassination issue from Judicial Watch.

They’re citing law enforcement proceedings and interference with such to hide any records they have about coordination with the Secret Service for Trump speaking event up in Butler, Pennsylvania that resulted in his near death from an assassination attempt. This is on top of the Secret Service withholding records from Judicial Watch as well. Now Judicial Watch is initiating proceedings that will likely result in loss. But there is a coordinated, it looks like, and comprehensive cover up on the Trump assassination attempt from the Biden administration and that cover up continues. We have at least one federal lawsuit there’s been against the Secret Service about their failures to protect Trump and or to provide the necessary security for Trump.

And as best as I can tell, the FBI and the Secret Service have yet to release any documents under foia. The good news is for transparency is that Judicial Watch has kind of threaded another way to get some documents and information and that’s from local officials in Pennsylvania who are trying to comply, it looks like, with the Right to know law. In Pennsylvania it’s literally called the right to know law. And we received some documents that are going to be unpleasant. So if you don’t like blood and guts, don’t watch the next minute or two of this broadcast.

But the beaver I think it was, is it Beaver county or town of Beaver? Which one? County or town? Huh? Beaver County, Butler, Pennsylvania. Beaver County. And up near Butler they had a sniper team that was providing support to the Secret Service and their local colleagues. And we were able to obtain, thanks to our persistence, some documents from them, specifically photographs, text messages. We have some video as well and other operational details and reports and we’re still examining them. But here are some of the photographs we received that include. There you have the blacked out or whited out picture of the shooter dead there on the roof.

Pictures that we’ve previously disclosed that Judicial Watch had exclusively obtained earlier. But here, stop it here, kid learning around the building. I guess that’s a typo we are in. I did see him with a range finder looking towards stage. FYI, if you want to notify Secret Service snipers, look out. I lost sight of them. Also a bike with a backpack sitting next to it in the rear of the building that was not seen earlier. Then someone says call into command and have uniform check it out. So you can see that they began to notice and the shooting was some time after that.

So kind of a dramatic illustration that they knew. So let’s look at some of these other photos here. There’s the backpack with the bike. There’s the phone that was found next to the body. Those pictures of the. There he is. Close enough to see his phone. We had released that photo before. There’s blood streaming down from the body there. There he is, hands tied behind his back. So all of this is released not because of the federal government, not because of Congress, but because of Judicial Watch. And without Judicial Watch’s insistence and persistence in getting documents such as these, you just won’t have this basic information.

We have video of the police briefing the Secret Service about what they found. I think the video had been publicly before, so we’re going to have more detail later, maybe next week on what we uncovered from local law enforcement in Pennsylvania. You know, but in the meantime, President Trump is going to be up in Butler again, which is good to see. And, you know, Elon Musk said he was going up there, and I made the. I made the comment that there should be Democrats and Republicans up there with him. I know it’s a political event, but I’m sure there’s.

There’s a way you can work it out. I mean, you can show up and say, I’m. I’m here because I’m happy Trump is alive, and I want to honor the man who was killed and the people who were injured, and let’s celebrate. You know, we all got through this. But, you know, in the meantime, I guess that’s kind of a naive wish of mine, right? Because the left has decided to continue to eviscerate Trump, incite violence against him. As I noted after the second assassination attempt, the left’s response was, he deserved it. His rhetoric caused the shooting.

I mean, you’ve had a politician recently talk about him being one of Trump’s Cabinet. Excuse me, Biden’s Cabinet officials talking about how Trump needs to be extinguished. There was an MSNBC host just the other day talking about how he should get a knuckle sandwich of some type. This incitement is clear, and I fear for the president’s safety. And Judicial Watch is not. I’ve said it once, and I’ll say it again. Judicial Watch is not going to move on. The Secret Service is a mess. The New York Times had a big piece this week, a dishonest piece, because it kind of avoided a lot of the political issues that would hurt Trump, Biden, and Harris.

But the piece suggested that, you know, the Secret Service was hemorrhaging staff because it was a miserable place to work, corrupt, full of favoritism. They ignored the DEI garbage that Judicial Watch has exposed. The efforts to place, you know, the reality that they were placing agents at risk to cover up abuse by Biden with his dogs biting them. Imagine working for Biden and him, allowing his and his dog biting you and 24 of your colleagues, and nothing being done by your leadership. Would you want to be in that agency? Of course not. And of course they’ve been denying Secret Service protection, adequate protection to President Trump.

They’ve been lying about it. They tried to lie about it. They still are denying him adequate protection. And so Judicial Watch has at least two dozen FOIA requests. We have one lawsuit more likely coming. And in terms of public education, we’re just going to keep on punching, punching, punching about the corruption at the Secret Service because there are agents there who are putting their lives on the line and who are being put needlessly at risk by the leadership because of their failures. I mean, so when Trump is almost killed, that means the agents around him are almost killed.

When the perimeter is insecure at the golf course and there’s a guy with a gun aiming at Trump, all those agents and law enforcement around are put at risk. This is a much bigger issue than just protection of Trump, Trump. It’s protection of the agents as well. And that’s why we’ve been adamant in demanding accountability. As I talked about, our Election Law team is second to none in this case. Russ Nobel, one of our lawyers, was leading this case. We obtained a massive victory from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, finding that the counting of ballots received after Election Day is contrary to federal law.

Massive victory. It may not be imposed on Mississippi, which is the state that was counting the ballots after Election Day for five days. Received after Election Day. Five days after Election Day, they were still going to be able to take ballots in and count them. But it’s a massive victory in terms of. For the first time, an appellate court has found out, found what I think is an obvious point, that Election Day means Election Day. And we’ve done an animated video kind of highlighting and explaining what the issue’s about. So let’s run this. Some states allow votes to be received and counted after Election Day in violation of existing election law.

Federal law says the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of every even number year is Election Day. For federal elections, extending the counting of ballots runs counter to federal law and invites fraud and undermines voter confidence. Right now, Judicial Watch is suing Illinois and Mississippi for allowing ballots to be received and counted days and weeks after Election Day if the ballots are dated on or before Election Day. As you can see, Judicial Watch is hard at work ensuring our elections are fair and honest. And you can be assured we are ready to do the heavy Lifting to make sure they stay that way, because no one is above the law.

So isn’t that great? We’re out there educating folks, and then we get this key victory on the fifth Circuit. And, you know, we’ve been pushing this issue for years. We filed, really the first comprehensive lawsuit. I think there were issues about this in 2020, but we really got it perfected in terms of what the legal argument would be in our lawsuit filed against Illinois in 2022. Now, that case is on hold because the courts found that candidates don’t have standing to challenge the potential illegal counting of ballots, which makes no sense. It’s absurd, and the court should be a little bit ashamed of running an argument like that.

Now, Mississippi, the lower court, found against us on the merits. They thought federal law didn’t prohibit it. And as I highlighted there, it’s kind of an easy call, isn’t it? So the 5th Circuit decision was really a dramatic victory for those of us concerned about getting back to the idea of an election day and having the law that requires an election day be vindicated. Because when you count ballots that arrive after election day, not only is it contrary to federal law, as the fifth Circuit has affirmed at least, but it requires. It’s an opportunity for voter fraud and undermines voter confidence.

Now, our client in Mississippi was the Libertarian Party of Mississippi, and I’d like to thank them for pursuing justice here. The other other plaintiff in the case was the Republican National Committee. Of course, the left intervened to try to stop us down there. They lost. So it’s not just the state we sue. We ended up having to sue leftists because they intervened to be defendants in the cases. Sometimes on these election law issues, part of the opinion reads, congress statutorily designated a singular day for the election of members of Congress and the appointment of presidential electors.

Text, precedent and historical practice confirm this day for the election is the day by which ballots must be both cast by voters and received by state officials. Because Mississippi’s statute allows ballot receipts up to five days, receipt up to five days after the federal election day, it is preempted by federal law. We reverse the district court’s contrary judgment and remand for further proceeding. There’s something else I wanted to read from here. The state’s problem. And this is kind of. I encourage you to read the decision. It’s educational. The court cites or references. It doesn’t necessarily give us the credit, but references many of the arguments and details on the history of election law and our elections in the United States uncovered by Our litigation team.

So this is a Judicial Watch opinion through and through. In my view, the state’s problem is that it thinks a ballot can be cast before it is received. So the government was saying, Mississippi was saying, oh, it doesn’t matter if we get the ballots five days after election Day, because effectively the vote occurs before election day, meaning it’s postmarked. It means that’s when the vote occurs and it’s been cast. And the court said, well, that’s ridiculous. And here’s their example. What if a state changes its law to allow voters to mark their ballots and place them in a drawer? Or what if a state allowed a voter to mark a ballot and then post a picture on social media? The hypotheticals are obviously absurd, but it should be equally obvious that a ballot is cast when the state takes custody of it.

And the court made the point that the election is continuing if votes are, quote, being cast and received after election day, which is contrary to the plain reading of the federal law at issue there. And so it goes through the history of voting, the history of mail in ballots or absentee ballots. Of course, a lot of this stuff would be obviated if there was. We could got back to the traditional approach on absentee ballots, which was essentially making it rare. Mail in balloting is anathema, as I said before, to fair and free elections. And it causes issues like this.

But what a victory. And it’s difficult to overstate how important it is. Now the question is, well, is it going to apply to this election question? It’s unlikely, given what the court found here. And they reference a Supreme Court decision that, you know, it’s called the Purcell Doctrine. The Purcell Doctrine generally frowns upon messing with election processes in the run up or close to an election. And so they basically told the lower court, you know, keep this case going, because there’s a point here that Judicial Watch and others are making, but, you know, don’t mess with the next election.

But on the other hand, this issue is going to be a big debate even in this election, because we’ve all been told that it’s normal for the 18 or 19 states to do it, to count ballots received after election day. And it ain’t normal. And according to the fifth Circuit, it’s contrary to federal law. Now, the fifth Circuit, I think their states in the fifth Circuit are only, is it Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas. But certainly, you know, it’s going to be used and considered in other states as well, in other challenges. As Justice Kavanaugh, this is the final part of the decision, as Justice Kavanaugh recently emphasized, to state the obvious, a state cannot conduct an election without deadlines.

A deadline is not unconstitutional merely because of voters own failures to take timely steps to secure the franchise. Federal law requires voters to take timely steps to vote by Election Day. And federal law does not permit the state of Mississippi to extend the period for voting by one day, five days, or 100 days. The state’s contrary law is preempted. So this is a great decision. I mean, it’s everything that Judicial Watch has been saying about this for years now. I think it’s a little bit wrong. You want to hear where I think it’s wrong? In the decision, the court says, well, this doesn’t mean they can’t count ballots past election Day that have been received by Election Day.

And I would say that’s contrary to the law that they cite here, too. If there’s no deadline by which states need to count ballots, what good is having an election day? I mean, we saw in 2020, for the first time in American history, at least modern history, we had election results that were not obtained that told Americans, practically speaking, who won. In fact, the vote totals at the time showed that Trump won. And it was days before we found out, found out who the winner was. Maricopa county, they announced it’s going to take them 13 days to figure out the votes.

Texas, right now, they count ballots that arrive up to the day after Election Day, so that Georgia Raffensperger, the Secretary of State, said they may not know the winner until three days after Election Day because they count votes according to this decision, illegally up till Friday, they allow overseas ballots to come in three up to three days past Election Day. There’s no provision in federal law for that. So I would submit that counting ballots received after Election Day obviously is illicit. The fifth Circuit agrees with me on that. They don’t agree, and I don’t know if they don’t agree in the sense that, that it’s a finding, as opposed to dicta, meaning a passing reference that doesn’t really provide any substantial legal guidance or precedence.

I mean, under that theory, maybe they can count ballots forever. It just never stops. I mean, think of congressional fights where you have disputes about congressional outcomes, right? And it’s up to the House or the Senate to decide, and it’s happened before, who gets to be seated. I mean, think of if there’s no, quote, deadline for counting ballots, you know, that would be an inducement to just keep up, keep the election open, practically speaking. I mean, I Think when federal law says you need to choose the electors on election Day, that means you got to choose the winner and document it.

And don’t tell me it can’t be done. Of course it can be done. Now, does it mean you don’t, like calculate votes afterwards? Yes. But if the calculation of votes afterwards, there’s votes that are provisional ballots and such like that, to the degree provisional ballots can be counted post election Day, there has to be justification for that in federal law. And the states are playing fast and loose with Election Day. And I think it’s undermining election confidence. So I don’t want to get distracted too much on this issue. But it could be a big issue in 2024 again, because I don’t think ballot counting should extend past election day as it’s happened.

How they’re planning to do in Michigan, how they’re planning to do in Pennsylvania, in Arizona, in Georgia, and certainly this decision, and I think we plan we’re going to share it with all the 19 states that do it, whether we sue there or not is another matter. But all the states should be on notice and you should find out whether your state allows the counting of ballots after election Day. And this could be a nice little activist opportunity for you. Dear listener, dear viewer, look at this first fifth Circuit opinion. It’s linked on our website. We’ll link it below and send it to the responsible officials in your state, send it to your state legislature legislator, send it to your or legislators.

Right. I guess some states have assemblies and senates and houses. I think there’s one or two states with a unicameral body. So whoever your state representatives are, send it to the governor and send it to the leading election official, which in most states is the secretary of state, and say, why is our law at odds with the logic in this decision? It means in Texas, too. Texas needs to fix this law now. So that’s nice little activism for you all to do. Demand that they stop counting ballots received in the least after election Day. And you’ll read in this decision, the logic is irrefutable.

Irrefutable. You know, it’s a great, you know, and they don’t want us and they don’t want us to. And I just want to say something else because I was about to get into the censorship of our talking about this because I sometimes don’t praise judicial. Not much enough. So our election law work has been going on for well over a decade. I mean, in 20. No, actually more than that, two decades. Did you know in the year 2000, I was down in Florida with other Judicial Watch colleagues and a Judicial Watch team generally counting ballots that were disputed in the 20 in the 2000 election in Bush vs Gore.

Do you know that? So we’ve been monitoring and dealing with election law issues for two and a half decades here at Judicial Watch. So there are few organizations with more expertise, experience and knowledge and awareness of election issues than your Judicial Watch. And not only do we have these lawsuits, including this massively successive lawsuit in the fifth circle, but we have lawsuits that have been successful over the years and other litigation, legal action to clean up the election rolls. 4 million names cleaned from the election rolls in just the last year and a half or two.

We just filed a lawsuit in Oregon to clean the rolls there as I talked about last week. And so I know the RNC has been suing on some of these issues now, which is fine. And other groups have been suing on some of these issues now, like for instance, our friends. I think it’s at American First Legal sued in Arizona for the list of names of voters who were found to be ineligible potentially to vote in federal elections. If I think I’m describing it correctly. Nice little victory there. So I’m glad there are other groups doing it.

But respectfully to everyone else, there’s no one that can match our expertise in this regard. There really isn’t. And our demonstrated record of success, certainly on election law issues. So it’s important that we are able to continue this work. And frankly, we only do it with your support this week. And I’m still tired. I don’t know. Are you still tired? I stayed up late watching the election returns. President Trump is going to be the 47th president of the United States of America. It is a tremendous victory. There’s been really nothing like it in American history in terms of what he had to overcome to gain his seat back or his office back.

He faced large odds that no other president or candidate for presidency has ever faced. And he promoted or created kind of a broad national coalition that could have potentially long lasting solidity in our nation’s political life, where he increased support among certain key demographics. And I’m not going to get into all of that with you because that’s what all the other networks have been doing for, for the last several days. But you generally know what I mean. It’s just beenit was an extraordinary feat. And here was President Trump on, I guess not election night, but early the next day, in the middle of the night, around 2 or 3 in the morning, Here’s a clip of what he had to say after his victory.

Many people have told me that God spared my life for a reason. And that reason was to save our country and to restore America to greatness. And now we are going to fulfill that mission. Together, we’re going to fulfill that mission. The task before us will not be easy, but I will bring every ounce of energy, spirit and fight that I have in my soul to the job that you’ve entrusted to me. This is a great job. There’s no job like this. This is the most important job in the world, just as I did in my first term.

We had a great first term. A great, great first term. I will govern by a simple promises made, promises kept. We’re going to keep our promises. Nothing will stop me from keeping my word to you, the people. We will make America safe, strong, prosperous, powerful and free again. And I’m asking every citizen all across our land to join me in this noble and righteous endeavor. That’s what it is. It’s time to put the divisions of the past four years behind us. It’s time to unite. And we’re going to try. We’re going to try. We have to try.

And it’s going to happen. Success will bring us together. I’ve seen that. I’ve seen that. Yeah, Big deal. It’s a big deal. It’s President Trump. He won, right? It’s his victory. Obviously, there are people, the voters put him in office, but it was a remarkable personal victory for him, and congratulations to him. And this was my initial reaction the other day. A quick one, remarkable victory by Donald Trump against a rigged system that saw his home raided, jam prosecutions, the Biden Harris Secret Service nearly getting him killed. Big victory for the rule of law. He needs to clean house.

Yeah, right. He needs to clean house. That should be job number one. Or two or three. Maybe job one A, B or C. Right. Because there are so many priorities facing our country in terms of crises that I don’t envy him having to get it all done because he does have a relatively limited time once he’s in office, before the political calendar starts changing in a way that makes it difficult to get things done even for a president. And our statement, our official Judicial Watch statement kind of went through all the challenges he had to overcome in order to really achieve what I would say is the most remarkable political comeback in American history.

And I think you’d have to kind of go through the annals of civilization to find not American history. You have to kind of go through world history to find similar political comebacks. And there’s really nothing comparable because there’s been no civilization like Western civilization. There’s been no nation with the power that the United States has. You know, we should remember that President Trump or the President of the United States is the only candidate, obviously the Vice president as well. There’s, er, two that faces the electorate nationally, so that the only national candidate in this great nation we have.

So it’s really quite remarkable. And as I noted in our statement, we of course congratulate President Trump on his remarkable election as 47th president of the United States. The voters broadly and directly repudiated, repudiated the lawfare targeting Trump, as well as the dangerous government abuses and contempts for the rule of law endemic here in Washington, D.C. president Trump had to overcome unprecedented abuse by corrupt and partisan prosecutors, politicians and judges, all of whom tried to rig the election by smearing, raiding, investigating, prosecuting, trying, convicting and gagging President Trump. In short, President Trump. Trump needs the clean house.

The FBI and Justice Department are irredeemably compromised and corrupt. And the government abusers who targeted Trump and other innocent Americans should be subject to criminal investigation. And as sunlight is the best disinfectant, President Trump should open wide to deep state files on politicized deep state lies and corruption, especially its war on the rule of law, constitutional government, our First Amendment and other civil rights. Judicial Watch, of course, and you know, this is ready, willing and able to help and sue for government accountability as we continue our mission to uncover what the government is up to and to enforce the rule of law, for election integrity, immigration, and of course, against the crazed woke discrimination and racism.

So the threats aren’t going to stop. Right. And this is why Judicial Watch’s mission is as important as ever, even, well during any presidential administration. And what I’m hoping is that President Trump focuses like a laser on opening up the records, getting the info out on the corruption of the prior several years. I’m talking about deep state corruption that goes back from through Biden, through his administration, where they were targeting him from inside and of course into the corrupt Obama administration. I used to joke, there’s my tweet, defund and defang the deep state. And of course that’s a big deal for what Congress has to do.

But let’s go see, go to the map and see where we stand in terms of what the results are. So you can see he has a pretty broad victory here. And this is, I think, the Associated Press map, which is a bit more conservative than others. Who have already given him, I think at least Arizona and Nevada perhaps, which would bring him, I think, to 312 electoral college votes, which is pretty extraordinary. And you can see the map itself is evidence of a kind of a broad base support for him in the Senate. It looks like Republicans.

It’s been confirmed that Republicans. Let’s go to the Senate map. So there are still a few Senate seats up for grabs in Nevada and Arizona, at least according to the Associated Press, But Republicans are set to get at least 53 seats. So they’re going to have a pretty strong majority. And in the House, it’s a bit more of a close call. My guess is, which is educated, is that Republicans will retain control of the House. So if it happens, as things seem to suggest, as the votes seem to suggest will happen, Republicans control both the House, the Senate and the presidency, which provides opportunities for tremendous reform, as I said, to defang and defund the deep state.

And Kamala Harris, of course, was ayou know, I don’t want to do the obituaries on campaigns or spend too much time on it, but the coup was a failure, right? It was a failure. I mean, I’m increasingly convinced and this is there’s my tweet on it. I’m increasingly convinced and this is just my putting on my political analysis analyst hat is that the Democrats realized that they were going to lose early in the year. And they saw with President Biden and his diminished capacities as kind of confirmed to everyone during that debate. And they all knew about it anyway behind the scenes that things were going to be much worse election wise.

They were going to lose the presidency, likely. But they had an idea maybe they could keep the Senate. Certainly they wanted to turn the House and they didn’t think that was going to be possible with President Biden. So they needed to get someone else in quickly. So hence you had the coup and Kamala Harris is placed in. And you know, everyone knows what her deficiencies were. But I don’t know if it mattered as much as the fact that there was this terrible inflation extremism by the Biden administration, the lawfare, the efforts to kind of jail and target your political enemies.

So, you know, to me, the writing was on the wall, and I think the Democrats largely knew the writing was on the wall. It doesn’t mean they don’t spend the money, doesn’t mean they don’t try to win at the presidency. But I think they were just trying to mitigate the loss that was expected at the presidential level. And certainly the American People, in my view, and that analysis suggests. Right. That you have all been lied to, that it was a race when it really wasn’t a race. And as I highlighted when they started calling Trump fascist and Hitler two weeks ago, I mean, that wasn’t, quote, a new campaign strategy.

That’s what you do when you’re losing. You engage in that kind of extremist name calling. So in some ways, the writing was on the wall. Now, on the other hand, in 2020, you know, Biden was a terrible candidate. Right. And they didn’t know what to do, so they kept them quiet. And I would argue they manipulated the rules and engaged in shenanigans and unprecedented after Election Day counting that ruined the election. And they couldn’t do it again this time around. And I think they couldn’t do it again, largely because, or in part because of the work by Judicial Watch and, frankly, other citizen activists, the Republicans got their act together a bit more on election integrity measures.

And that’s how the steal was stopped. Because I’m convinced that one of the reasons they didn’t call the election. I don’t know if you were watching it on election night. I’m sure some of you went to bed before it was called, but it was called way late, especially given all the information out there that President Trump was the winner. And I’m convinced that they were kind of figuring out ways, how could they steal it? Could they manipulate the results or suggest they still had votes outstanding in a way that would allow them to take it away from the real winner? And I don’t think that was possible because of the work that Judicial Watch did and the work others did.

So, yes, the steal was stopped. And I discussed that in this video here. Hey, everyone. Indeed, the steal was stopped on Election Day, I think, in no small part thanks to Judicial Watch’s heavy lifting. In just the last year and a half or two, we’ve cleaned up 4 million dirty names from the rolls. We also got that huge 5th Circuit ruling the other day that found counting ballots received after Election Day is unlawful. You can. That all helped ensure cleaner elections on Election Day. But there’s more work to be done, so be sure to support Judicial Watch’s election integrity work.

So our work, I think, was instrumental in making the elections cleaner this year. I have no doubt about it. Four million names, a warning shot from a major court that post Election Day counting, even if it was limited to ballots only received after Election Day. The idea of counting ballots after Election Day received a significant blow thanks to Judicial Watch’s work. And on top of that, you had the Republican National Committee following our lead on a lot of these election integrity issues. And they were actually willing and able to go to court on issues big and small to let the left know that anything inappropriate, illegal or fraudulent or in violation of common sense in the law would be challenged.

I mean, you saw up in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, where the bureaucrats tried to tell voters who were in line they couldn’t vote. There were some shenanigans down in Georgia as well, and Republicans were all over that issue. Does it mean the elections were pure? Of course not. I mean, I’ll get to that with Arizona. But this is how we save our country, by ensuring fair and clean elections and taking key steps to do it. And as a result, you know, and I went through previously with you, you may recall the various scenarios that either Kamala Harris wins outright on election night, there’s no discussion of any additional vote counting in terms of having an impact.

The decisions made on election night that clearly she won, or President Trump clearly wins on election night, which is actually what happened. And the good news is, of course, the concern I had was that if he was winning on election night and he wasn’t certified the winner, more or less, that this election would be taken from him again as it was in 2020. And the good news is, and it’s not because of the I’m not saying this because I share some policy goals and I’m happy Trump won. It’s because I’m happy for the country because I believe the left was prepared to engage in violence if it was close in order to pressure Democrats to somehow deny him and to provide cover for them to steal the election.

And because his vote was overwhelming, he avoided that outcome. And Americans avoided that outcome. I mean, here’s the popular vote numbers, which is an interesting issue in light of the issue of I was talking about removing, removing 4 million dirty names from the rolls. Let’s put up that popular vote chart. The Democrats got what, 15 million less votes than last year? I think that’s the current number. I don’t know what it is. Trump won the popular vote and Democrats got 15 million votes less than Biden did last year. Kamala Harris did. And the question is, where do those votes disappear to? And I don’t know the answer.

Is there a legitimate answer? Yeah, this is the number. Look at the difference in the blue bar there. Between 2020 and 2024, Trump got a fewer, about 3 million fewer votes than he received last year. And look at that bar graph going across from 2012 through 2016 to 2024, you see the consistencies there, and then you got that big jump in 2020. What happened? Did those votes disappear? Were they phantom votes? I think that’s an area ripe for investigation and discussion. Now, there may be legitimate reasons for it. It may have been that 2020 was a.

Because of the massive mail in balloting. You had people both legal and I would suggest just maybe ineligible voting in ways that never would ever be matched again. But why were they only voting for Biden? It doesn’t make sense because I think, you know, Trump got a record number of votes for a Republican at the time. I mean, his vote numbers, I think, would have been higher in terms of the popular vote. So it’s a mystery. But, you know, the other question is, what should Trump do? And as he noted at the end of his remarks, or the remarks we showed, he’s got a clean house.

We’ve got these agencies that have been rogue, that can’t be trusted to give him the time of day. I mean, I’m even concerned about the transition. Do you remember the transition from last time when he was coming in? They used the transition to spy on him at the highest levels. So, oh, we have to have an orderly transition of government. Don’t you believe it? They never believed in it. They used the orderly transition of government to engage in sedition and spying on the incoming president and efforts to destroy him and undermine him from within. So I tell you, if I were Trump or his team, I wouldn’t meet with any of them.

I exaggerate for effect, but you know what I mean, I’d keep the FBI away. I’d call them and say, you know what? You guys just leave the office and leave the keys on the desk and we’ll come in and figure out what to do. I wouldn’t trust them as far as I could throw them. And you know who was behind a lot of that? That smear operation, that sedition operation. It wasn’t just Obama, it was Joe, too, because he had a lot riding on it because of all the corruption. He had to undermine people who knew all about him, like Mike Flynn and others.

So there’s still grave risk for President Trump from the deep state. And it’s going to take a while for him, assuming he’s as aggressive as he’s promised, to even get a hold of it. And in the meantime, he will remain in danger from sedition, spying and such. I mean, for all we know, he’s under criminal investigation again, by this Gang don’t believe they’re going away. And of course, you know, and to be fair to the Democratic Party and people who didn’t support Trump, I mean, if you lost the election, you’d be upset, but you wouldn’t say, well, I’m going to give up now.

Right? You would just reorganize and see what you could do to advance your policy agenda and maybe slow down or stop the policies you disagree with. And that’s what. That’s perfectly right in a republic. But what’s wrong is engaging in behavior that suggests your opponents and language that suggests your opponents are illegitimate and should be, quote, overthrown through coup like activity. Use language that the left always uses to direct violence at their opponents. I mean, look at what these governors have been saying. Here’s the governor. Let’s go to the governor from Massachusetts. Let’s hear what she has to say about her plans to basically attack democracy.

Right. If the Trump administration requests it, would the Massachusetts State Police assist in mass deportations? No, absolutely not. But that sounds like sedition to me. What are they going to do? Help illegal aliens here in violation of law evade lawful federal authorities trying to enforce federal law? Here’s Governor Pritzker, the governor of one of the most corrupt states in the country. Illinois Democrat Governor, let’s hear what he had to say. Here we are. Here’s the governor. Illinois essentially majority of women are not the only to protect illegal aliens, as federal law requires many Illinoisans about the road ahead.

And I’m here today to remind people that no matter the storm that we face, Illinois will always strive to make you welcome and safe and protected. While I was certainly surprised by Tuesday’s results, I was not unprepared. Having fought through the headwinds of the first Trump administration, the General assembly and I took proactive steps to plan for the potential of a second Trump presidency and protect our residents from the damage that it may attempt to cause. Illinois will continue to be a refuge for those whose rights are being denied elsewhere. Women seeking reproductive health care, immigrants searching to work hard for a better life, LGBTQ Americans looking for.

Sounds like insurrection in May. Right? And people with disabilities whose civil and human rights are under attack. I mean, it sounds like someone wants to set up their own little country in these states. I mean, no one is suggesting anyone do anything other than follow the law on any of those issues. And there’s a process to even enforce the rule of law. And they have zero interest in acceding to the lawful directives and interpretation and application of the law. By the federal government. Government. Because I don’t, I don’t, I don’t hear like, well, we will comply with the law and if there are violations, potentially we will exercise our rights.

I hear insurrection language. Right, Insurrection language. And of course aoc, who, you know, I know many people criticize her. I think she should be taking seriously because she’s a leader of this so called resistance. Even using the word resistance, by the way, suggests that you don’t use the word resistance in a democratic republic or a constitutional republic. It’s typically the loyal opposition right or the opposition party or the minority party. Resistance suggests that the owner, the rulers or those in power are illegitimate. It and this clip from aoc, she goes full communist. Listen, our main project is to unite the working class in this country against a fascist agenda, period.

We have had an enormous setback in this election because the fascist won a lot of working class support, which has happened before in history. And we can talk about that. This is going to be a very scary time. And again, I cannot emphasize how important it is that we as an aligned people be very cautious about attacking one another. Yeah, I mean, that’s just pure communism she’s talking there. Organizing working people against a fascist state. I mean, that’s like 1950s style Soviet propaganda from a senior. She’s senior. She’s a senior person in the House and a leader in the House.

And you see the governors join her, joining her in less extreme language. Right. Gavin Newsom is announcing, you know, his opposition to the Trump administration even before Trump administration comes in. Same in New York. And you see that language calling him a fascist, which is again language that the left uses to direct violence at specific people and their opponents. If someone’s a fascist, that means they don’t deserve the protection of the rule of law. So it’s extremely dangerous. As I noted, you know, they denied Trump Secret Service protection, adequate Secret Service protection during the campaign and nearly got him killed.

And it was for politics and certainly constrained his campaign. That’s one way to rig an election. He overcame that rigging of his campaign or rigging of the election. I mean, the news is breaking as I go and talk to you right now, that the Biden administration finally, two days after election, was it? Yeah, two or three days after the election, they announced, oh, well, there was this big Iranian plot to try to kill Trump. And even though they knew that plot was a foot, they still denied him full and adequate protection. So I tell you, when Joe Biden says that Trump should come by the White House and They’re, you know, you know, how I might react to that.

And I don’t blame Trump for going there. There are reasons beyond, you know, beyond maybe my personal peek at seeing this gang almost get him killed and putting him in jail illegally. So that’s why, you know, I said, in terms of what happens next, transparency, accountability, integrity, FBI and doj, they can’t survive in their current form. Maybe not at all, certainly with respect to the FBI, because if they still do at the end of Trump’s term, term, it’s going to happen all over again. If Trump will obviously still be targeted and retargeted and any other rising Republican will be too, or conservative.

I mean, I know what they’re capable of doing because they did it to me. In part, they did it to your Judicial Watch. I mean, some of you may not know this, but it was in 2022, the Biden gang, the Biden FBI, they came knocking at my door. I had literally just gotten home from surgery for skin cancer. I’m lying on the couch. Knock, knock, knock on the door. Knock, knock, knock on the door. Six, 6:30. It was at night. It was two FBI agents giving me a subpoena. And later I was hauled in before the grand jury.

Judicial Watch had to deal with this document subpoena. I had to deal with the document subpoena. And they harassed me for four hours over our advocacy for you, the American people, on election integrity, on the rule of law, and against Justice Department abuse. It was pure retaliation. And I’m just a witness. They want to put Trump in jail, and they still do. I mean, and to show you the political game around these prosecutions, there’s announcements and leaks this week. Oh, well, there’s a policy that we can’t prosecute sitting presidents. So we’re just going to shut all those cases down that Jack Smith’s been running.

Well, if they were so important, why would you shut them down? And here’s the statement that Smith filed on the court docket the other day. In the case that is still, like, real active, which is the January 6th case against Trump. As a result of the election held on November 5, the defendant is expected to be certified as President elect on January 6 and inaugurated on January 20, 2025. The government respectfully requests that the court vacate the remaining deadlines in the pretrial schedule to afford the government time to assess this unprecedented circumstance and determine the appropriate outcome going forward, consistent with Justice Department policy, which is to not target presidents.

Of course, the policy should be not to target former Presidents, but they change those rules for Trump. Now what’s going to happen in New York is Judge Merchan, he’s got a hearing or a decision to make about whether the immunity knocks out his sham case against Trump over non crimes in New York, the so called 34 felony convictions, which are about as legitimate. I don’t know. I’m so mad I can’t even close that metaphoric loop. Do you think Judge Merchand’s going to not try to imprison Trump? I would say it’s 5050 and there’s going to have to be incredible swift action taken by Trump’s legal team to stop that abuse from going forward.

I don’t know what’s going to go on in Georgia. Looks like the courts may shut all that down because of misconduct by the prosecutors. Is Jack Smith going to hold all of this in abeyance toll the statute of limitations? What are they going to do? Are they going to target the others around him? Scare everyone else from working from the Trump administration by pretending they have the ability to prosecute them while keeping him away even though he’s integral to the case? Trump should not only fire Jack Smith, he should look into anyone else who abused their authority, hold them accountable.

And let’s be clear, there must be a criminal investigation of the Justice Department’s abuse of Trump and other innocents immediately. I mean, I posted something on Twitter the other day where I retweeted at my speech, one of my speeches I gave talking about the FBI harassing me and my family. I want justice and I’m sure Trump wants justice too, and I hope he gets it. And these agencies need to be held accountable. And if they’re not, the abuses will continue as surely as night follows day. Judicial Watch through our litigation on a lawsuit against Fannie Willis for documents about her collusion with with Jack Smith, the Biden DOJ and the Pelosi January 6th committee.

We approved that she was colluding with the committee despite protesting earlier that there were no documents. And here is my initial reaction to the disclosures that I posted earlier this week. Well, Fanny Willis just confessed to having. Right. Records of her communications with the January 6 Pelosi operation, the Get Trump operation. She only confessed to this yesterday thanks to a Judicial Watch lawsuit. Of course, when we first sued and began asking for these records, they told us they had no records. Well, it turns out that wasn’t true. In fact, the only reason we got the confession yesterday was because a court last week found her in default.

She didn’t bother to answer the lawsuit under law as she was supposed to. But rather than turn the records over, as the court I think strongly suggested, she’s using a loophole of exemptions and privileges to hide the records from the American people. Now we’re going to push back hard in court. Our heavy lifting will continue. But in the meantime, this really does confirm. A, she was in collusion with the Pelosi I operation to get Trump. B, she has no respect for the rule of law. C, she has no respect for your right to know. Yeah, that’s a pretty good summary and we did a little special report on it as well here.

Let’s run that. A Georgia court forced Fulton County District Attorney Fanny Willis to confirm additional documents exist about communications Willis had with Special counsel Jack Smith. Smith and the House January 6th Committee. Willis admitted additional documents exist. However, she cited various legal exemptions for her reason not to release the documents. Judicial Watch sued for Willis, who spearheaded the prosecution against President Trump for his challenging the 2020 election results in Georgia, previously denied having any records. Just a week prior to Willis’s confession, the Superior Court in Fulton County, Georgia entered an order granting a motion for default judgment against Fannie Willis.

In Judicial Watch’s lawsuit for communications Willis had with Special counsel Jack Smith and the January 6th Committee, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton had this to say about Fannie Fannie Willis is something else. We’ve been doing this work for 30 years and this is the first time in our experience a government official has been found in default for not showing up in court to answer an open records lawsuit. Judicial Watch looks forward to getting any documents from the Fannie Willis operation about collusion with the Biden administration and Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi’s Congress on this unprecedented and compromised get Trump prosecution.

Fitton also promised his followers on X heavy lifting, Judicial Watch will push back in court against this disingenuous secrecy. Yeah, so she gave us the response on Monday, late in the day. That was the deadline. And you know, the court ordered her to give us the documents or explain why they’re being withheld. And she gave us a half baked response. And I don’t think it’s sufficient to comply with the court order. Obviously Judicial Watch’s lawyers will look at it more carefully than I will as the layman Judicial Watch president complaining about the response. And as I said, you know, we’ll push back, but you know, we’ve been doing foia.

I’ve been doing FOIA long enough to know a deficient response when I see it. First of All. She didn’t respond. It was the office of her unnamed person. I don’t know who did it. According to the record, it is the office of. What is it? Excuse me? Oh, I don’t have it. Oh, wait, I was looking at the wrong page. Forgive me, everyone. Yeah, Open Records Department. What’s the Open Records Department? We don’t know. This is what she specifically said or whoever the anonymous staffer wrote. Members of the District Attorney staff having conducted a search as directed by the court, the office provides the following response regarding all documents, communication sent to or received from or relating to Special Counsel Jack Smith or any employees in his office.

A diligent search indicates that no such documents or communications exist. Regarding all documents and communications sent to or received from the United States House January 6th Committee or any of its employees, a diligent search indicates that any such documents and communications are legally exempted or accepted from disclosure. And then she cites the laws. But they did turn over one document that had been publicized already by the House, which proved that they were lying, which was a letter to Betty Thompson, who was the chairman of the rump January 6th committee, in which Willis herself signed a letter as part of an official request from her to access records that may be relevant to the criminal investigation.

Investigation. So Fanny Willis told something false to Judicial Watch, which is that they had no records. And she confirmed, thanks to this court order and Judicial Watch’s diligence, that that was false. They do have court records. They do have records showing what I interpret to be collusion with the Pelosi January 6th Committee to get Donald Trump. Isn’t it interesting? The January 6th Committee is happy to help. It looks like Fannie Willis. They can’t be bothered to investigate what the heck the FBI was doing invading its capital through confidential human sources. Right. So this is a major development, and it’s a key piece of evidence.

Now we have that there was collusion stretching from Fulton county to D.C. to get Trump on unprecedented charges. And she’s now citing privileges on a case that’s dead in the water. All these privileges are citing are, you know, there’s a lawful basis typically to just decide them. I’m putting being charitable and generous, but they’re discretionary in a sense. There’s no requirement to hide these records from the American people, assuming there’s a legitimate basis to do so. And I’m not assuming that at all. Oh, you can’t see this. It will harm our investigation. It will give away our secrets.

That’s often an excuse, not a reason to withhold records. Records. And we don’t believe necessarily they did a diligent search. So when they say they have no Jack Smith records, I don’t believe it. I mean, they already lied to me and to Judicial Watch and the American people that they didn’t have any records at all. That they had no records at all. And now they just confirmed that they do have records. And remember, as we highlighted in the earlier reports, she was found in default. She didn’t even respond to the lawsuit in court and didn’t want to follow the rules to reply under law to us.

And the court found her in violation of the open records law as a result of being in default. Fannie Willis is a lawbreaker. It’s official. Again, the court finds defendant Willis in her official capacity is in default and has been since the 11th of April, 2024. She never moved to open the default on any basis. She never paid costs, and she never offered up a meritorious defense. As far as I’m concerned, she’s waived all of her privileges. You don’t show up in court and you’ve got these privileges you want to throw out. No, no, no. I don’t think the court should let that happen.

Judicial Watch in a state court forced Fanny Willis to confirm additional documents exist about her collusion with the partisan Pelosi January 6th commitment committee to get Trump. But Willis, signing legal exemptions for a prosecution that’s essentially dead in the water, now wants to hide these records from the American public. And so we’re going to be pushing back against this secrecy in court now. So we have to respond and, you know, try to hold her accountable, try to get these records more information about them. We don’t even know how. They didn’t tell us how many records there are.

And, you know, in federal FOIA cases, at least, you know, the government, when they withhold records, they have to give you some information, enough information in terms of details about the records individually and which exemptions apply and how, in order for us to be able to ask the court to overrule the exemptions. Because they have all the secrets now, and so they need to disclose more information, I would argue to Judicial Watch so we can adequately fight back, assuming that she’s even allowed even to assert these exemptions to withhold information. So this is an example of even when they don’t give us the information, the records, the admission that the records exist is huge because they told us they didn’t exist.

And now we have confirmation. There’s more than just one letter, a letter they didn’t even want to tell us about. Congress disclosed it. And there’s more. How much work were they doing with the Pelosi operation to get Trump? Was Congress misusing its resources to have a prosecutor target target the target of its investigation, Donald Trump, to harass him during the campaign? No wonder they all want pardons up there. No wonder Schiff wants a pardon. No wonder Benny Thompson wants a pardon. Is Pelosi going to get a pardon, too? So, a great victory for Judicial Watch, a great victory for the American people in terms of getting information about what I believe to be the worst corruption scandal in American history, the misuse of prosecutorial resources in federal and state courts to target President Trump and his allies.

And this is just the tip of the iceberg. And it’s information we would never have known but for Judicial Watches. Heavy lifting, persistence, diligence. So those of you who supported Judicial Watch, this is what happens with your support. We’re able to accomplish these successes for the rule of law and accountability now. Does more need to be done? Yes, and we’re committed to doing it. There’s always more to be done. We can’t prosecute Fannie Willis, but we can hold her accountable through this process and educate the American people about what she’s been up to. And hopefully people who are in positions to take action to hold her more accountable in different ways, they take notice.

I mean, Congress has been following our lead here. They’re demanding these records, too, because they saw what was disclosed to Judicial Watch and what the court ordered here or what was not disclosed to Judicial Watch. As far as I’m concerned, she’s in contempt of Congress, or at least Congress is going to argue that it looks like. So some great news there. As many guessed, she’s playing stonewalling. Right? She’s stonewalling Judicial Watch and the American people. But on the other hand, she’s also disclosing as a result of Judicial Watch’s strong legal action. So, good news. Thanks for watching.

Don’t forget to hit that subscribe button and like our video down below.
[tr:tra].

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