Reaction & Commentary
Judicial Watch against a compromised Senator it looks like a lot to talk about as um our our nation continues to be in crisis as a result of the corruption endemic here in Washington DC and elsewhere now of course I’m in an undisclosed location where things really
Never stop even when I leave the office uh and and along those lines we had a major Supreme Court ruling this week nine nothing against the left and Democratic parties um really dishonest attempt to remove president Trump from the ballot uh citing section three of the 14th Amendment uh which uh in theory
Uh would allow certain officers of the United States to be uh ruled ineligible to be in office or maybe removed from office if they engage in some type of insurrection of course that was that section of the 14th amendment was passed after the Civil War and the way the amendment reads uh
It doesn’t apply to Trump frankly it just doesn’t apply to Trump and it certainly doesn’t authorize state judges or election bureaucrats or politicians uh to remove a president from the ballot based on their personal opinion uh under show TR after show trials and and you know fake investigations that he engaged
In Insurrection and the goal to remove Trump from the ballot as I’ve said before is an effort to uh really turn America it’s part of an effort to turn America into a one party State uh if what better way to turn our country into one party State than to eliminate from
The ballot the number one candidate for the presidency now that’s what happens at thir world countries uh you know certainly as I’ve discussed before Putin and the dictator in China you know in Cuba and elsewhere they would recognize what that’s all about and thankfully uh the Supreme Court Court uh at least for
Now resisted the left’s efforts in a unified way to uh require the president uh or require the removal of trump from the ballot in various States now Judicial Watch along with our friends at the Allied Educational Foundation we had filed an amus brief highlighting the chaos that would result in the various
States engaging in determinations as to whether or not a candidate was eligible uh for the presidency under this clause and as I’ve highlighted and I think we highlighted in this case that uh if they want to play the Insurrection game uh there’s um uh there’s a lot that can be said about
Removing Biden from the ballot certain members of Congress from the ballot for engaging in Insurrection because Insurrection it depends on who’s defining it right and they’ve defined it to mean anyone who disputed the 2020 election and tried to pursue that dispute uh through law under our Constitution under federal law and in
Congress now others might Define insurrection as those blowing up our immigration law and allowing an invasion of the United States you know that’s it’s it’s in the eye of the beholder right and the Supreme Court saw through that and said no n nothing that means every Justice including the extremists
Who are on the left on the court there uh justice Jackson so myor and to a certain extent Elena Kagan she’s probably not as as far to the left as the others but they’re a reliable block um they all agreed that this was inappropriate so I encourage you to read
The uh decision in its entirety uh it’s accessible it’s we’ll put a link to it below but I’m going to read to you um a key section of the decision one which I think that even the Liberals didn’t disagree with this is kind of the I think the core holding uh conflicting
State outcomes concerning the same candidate could result not just from differing views of the merits as I highlighted but from variations in state law governing the proceedings that are necessary to make Section 3 disqualification determinations some states might allow a section three challenge to succeed based on a preponderance of the evidence While
Others might require a heightened showing certain evidence like the Congressional report on which the lower courts relied on here might be admissible in some states but inadmissible hearsay in others disqualification might be possible only through criminal prosecution as opposed to expedited civil proceedings in particular States in some indeed in some
States unlike Colorado or Maine where the Secretary of State recently issued an order excluding former president Trump from the primary ballot procedures for excluding an in an ineligible candidate from the ballot may not exist at all the result could well be that a single candidate would be declared ineligible in some states but
Not others based on the same conduct and perhaps even the same factual record the patchwork would likely result from state enforcement would never would sever the direct link that the framers found so critical between the national government government and the people of the United States as a whole and they were quoting
A prior Supreme Court decision with that language but in a presidential election the impact of the votes cast in each state is affected by the votes cast or in this case the votes not allowed to be cast for the various candidates in other states an evolving electoral map could
Dramatically change the behavior of Voters parties and States across the country in different ways and at different times the disruption would all be the more acute and could nullify the votes of millions and change the election result if section three enforcement were attempted after the nation as voted nothing in the
Constitution requires we endure such chaos arriving at any time at different times up to and perhaps beyond the inauguration so uh really no that was what the Supreme Court said and this was my initial reaction action to it uh as it came down hey everyone Judicial Watch
President Tom fitt here is some great news the Supreme Court ruled n nothing in favor of President Trump he will be on the ballot and the left’s efforts to rig the election by removing him from the ballot frankly an effort to turn America into a onep party state has been
Thwarted by both Republicans and Democrats on the United States Supreme Court it’s a big victory for the Constitution our constitutional republic and the rule of law now the left is in going to stop they’re still trying to jail Trump uh but in the meantime Judicial Watch was proud to participate
In this case and the Supreme Court has more work to do uh to stop the left’s efforts to rig the election so of course the left can’t help but try to preserve its ability to disrupt and destroy the Republic and accordingly the three judges uh justices
On the Supreme Court on the left uh were upset with the what turned out to be a majority it looks like because Amy Comey Barrett didn’t want to go there too but for different reasons and didn’t want to uh support the left’s crazed um attack on the court decision uh so the the
Three leftists agreed with the coure holding that you know states don’t have any power to do what they propos to do here which is to essentially upend our federal presidential election uh by engaging in a peac meal analysis of whether the president is elig ible or a candidate is eligible under this Clause
Of the 14th Amendment and the Supreme Court noted that only Congress can enforce it through appropriate legislation now the court the three justices they got nervous about that right because they saw through that 54 holding essentially which is broader than uh and more specific than the underlying issue that the states can’t
Mess around here because they want the option it’s clear for federal judge Judes to come in and throw Trump off and they’re also planning and this is something that we need more discussion about because they were also similarly planning in 2020 the left is thinking of
Ways to upend the election if Trump wins not because they dispute the outcome of the election in terms of votes cast and the appropriate nature of the election process in terms of uh you know uh fraud and things like that they just think that if Trump wins he should be thrown
Out and be uh ruled ineligible from Office using this and other reasons like the 14th amend he was an insurrectionist so he can’t be president even if Americans select him as president and elect him as president and it seems to me there are three justices on the Supreme Court who were trying to
Preserve the ability of the left uh to upend our Republic that way so in many ways this case is is is very satisfactory in the end because it it walled off for practical purposes the effort to uh uh remove Trump from the ballot but the reaction
To it and even the three judges on the court the three justices on the court their reaction to it suggests the game is not over they’re thinking of other ways to try to uh remove Trump from Office some might call that an Insurrection right some might call that
A coup those are the those are the new rules and that’s what the left is planning they’re planning for Congress to overrule the vote of the people now this current justice department is Prosecuting people who did that who wanted to challenge the election and use the electoral college
Process to challenge the outcome of the election and and and from trt’s point of view vindicate the lawful outcome here they’re not even questioning whether the outcome’s lawful or not they just don’t think Trump should be president now under the Justice Department’s new rules they should be subject to
Investigation for conspiracy right you don’t have to commit the crime you can conspire to commit the crime of insurrection and to obstruct with the obstruct an election but of course you know the justice department isn’t going to do that but just shows you how the justice department has been hijacked by the left
To promote um uh the basically the destruction of the candidate that is most likely uh to beat Biden well frankly right now Trump is is going to be the nominee ABS enacted God he won Super Tuesday Haley Barb excuse me I keep on saying Haley Barber and I date myself uh Nikki Haley
Is uh removed herself from the race so he’s going to be the nominee and now the the target is uh they’re going to accelerate in my view uh their operations against Trump their illicit operations against Trump to try to rig the election so you know as I say here
It it was essentially and I’m giving you all the kind of the warnings about the challenges to Trump and our whole system or constitutional republic won’t stop with this ruling because the court has more to do uh but it was a good day yes
It was a good day for the rule of law with that Supreme Court decision the Supreme Court made a powerful and unified statement against the Brazen unconstitutional coup by leftists against the constitutional rights of tens of millions of Americans and thankfully a supreme court majority seems prepared to stop any Shady Biden
Administration and LEF his Congressional efforts and I would add judicial efforts to overturn any Trump Victory again as I said based on false allegation of insurrection so a big victory for the rule of now of of for the rule of law but now Trump faces other challenges they’re still pursuing him in federal
Court with these fake charges related to documents and challenging the election outright and then of course you have the Soros prosecutor up in New York uh Alvin Bragg who is pursuing a prosecution uh based on a a confidentiality agreement and suggesting that somehow that conf confidentiality agreement violated federal law so how
You tie federal law to a state prosecution well that’s an interesting that’s an interesting mess he’s trying to make up there but of course you know an unprecedented novel application of the law is a key test in my view to to figure out and to help you figure out
Whether a prosecution like this is Justified and it’s obviously a Democratic party because bvin Bragg is an elected Democrat he’s not an appointed prosecutor he’s an elected prosecutor it’s a it’s a it’s a conspiracy now you can argue whether it’s unlawful or not but it’s a conspiracy to Target Trump with this
Prosecution up in New York so that’s the that’s the next case he’s facing and you can bet the left will use that outcome which before a New York jury is almost pre-ordained right New York City jury given the partisan makeup up there so we’re we’re still in Banana
Republic part territory folks uh but Judicial Watch Won’t Back Down we’ve got our litigation to uncover what the doj’s been up to to uncover what Fanny Willis has been up to we’re monitoring quite closely uh and we’ve litigated over what uh Alvin Bragg has been up to you know
We’re just not going to stand by and watch the destruction of our Republic we’re going to go into court and expose what’s going on so you have full access to what your government’s up to and the corruption involved in a way the and the corruption uh that is uh so destructive
Uh to the American way so uh with your continued support you can be sure that we will continue to litigate investigate and educate about this dire threat to our Republican form of government through the illicit and illegal targeting of President Trump and by the way I want I want to add
Something about Trump winning on the election and don’t take this as an endorsement of any candidate because I I’m not allowed to do that at least through Judicial Watch I can do it personally uh but as president of Judicial Watch I’m not endorsing or opposing any candidate but certainly
From kind of a an objective political analysis view my view about the president his remarkable comeback by any standards a remarkable comeback of his gaining the nomination again he’s about to gain it officially soon is a a really a dramatic and historic repudiation of Voters of the left’s attempts to rig the
Election to abuse the rule of law abuse Trump and other Innocents they’re not buying it and the left has put this narrative out there about January 6 about the 2020 election all designed to make it impossible for Trump to come back and the voters said no we’re not buying any of it they
Rejected their corrupt narratives their dishonest narratives narratives designed to uh destroy your first amendment rights help them rig the next election and voters weren’t buying it and and it wasn’t just Democrats you had some Republicans doing this as well because they just don’t like the conservative brand that Trump was
Selling so uh they were willing to let this abuse happen and endorse it but it didn’t work out and it doesn’t mean the threats aren’t over from those abuses uh but the voters uh certainly on the Republican side of the sphere has have have are are saying we don’t buy
Any of this now you know if the left media uh had its way and I call it the left Borg that’s a Star Trek reference for those of you who don’t know you can look it up you’ll see what I mean this group think that tells us we’re not
Allowed to be concerned about election Integrity how dare you demand that there be voter ID how dare you believe that uh Mass mail in ballots aren’t isn’t exactly the best way to ensure uh that votes are cast accurately and fairly and free of fraud that ballot harvesting they say
How dare you try to stop um strangers from going around collecting votes from people then showing up with them and dumping them how dare you object to that but of course we’re we’re not scared and we stand strong against this and one of the ways we stand strong on behalf of
Free and fair elections is the challenge in federal court those States and localities that fail to follow federal law to take reasonable steps to clean up the roles and to that end we just filed another lawsuit against Illinois to require that state to follow the law to
Clean up the roles because the roles there are a mess now we’ve done this before we’ve done it in California New York Pennsylvania Kentucky Indiana Ohio we settled with most of those jurisdictions Kentucky I think was a consent decree wasn’t a settlement and all of that as resulted
Previously had 4 million names being removed from the rols 440,000 in New York City I forget the number in Pennsylvania 1.2 million was confirmed Med in LA county alone so 4 million in the last year or so by Judicial Watch so we looked at the at the numbers in
Illinois our election team led by Bob Popper who’s a former justice department attorney civil rights expert voting law expert and his voter voting law colleagues and experts here at Judicial Watch looked at the available data and it isn’t just well Judicial Watch is just making up these numbers who how do
We know we look at the numbers that Illinois counties present to the federal government and we see and then of course we ask additional questions that the law law allows us to do and we find out what they’re doing and or as importantly what they’re not doing and according to our
Lawsuit they’re not doing much of anything and at least 60% of the counties in Illinois to remove the names and let me give you some of the detail here 23 Illinois counties with a combined registration list of 980 and8 excuse me 980,000 or so voters reported removing a combined total of a
100 registrations in the last two-year reporting period under a this crucial provision of the federal law that we’re trying to enforce here the national voter registration act the lawsuit alleges that this is an absurdly small number and contends that there is no possible way these counties can be conducting a
General program that makes a reasonable effort to cancel registrations of Voters who become ineligible because of a change of residence while removing so few registrations and generally what the law requires and we’ve kind of kind of set the standard as to what the law requires through our previous historic
Litigation that I talked to you about is let’s say you don’t vote let’s say you don’t vote in 2022 you didn’t vote vote in the congressional election your jurisdiction either the state or the county typically uh it’s um well I shouldn’t say typically you your jurisdiction the responsible
Jurisdiction how’s that is supposed to send you a card that will say it’s me hey Tom fitton did you didn’t vote uh we don’t have a record of you voting are you still there and if you are still there you know please let us know and what happens is unless the voter responds
Affirmatively or votes in uh the two next federal elections so you don’t necessarily have to respond but if you just show up and vote over the next two federal election Cycles so 2024 and 2026 if you still don’t show up and you don’t give an answer that you still want to be
Registered uh they’re supposed to remove you from the roles so what happens is States either don’t send the cards out they don’t make any inquiry and the list just gets dirtier and dirtier because In America which is still a free country people move around a lot right and so people move and
Die and uh or if they do send the cards out and they they don’t follow up you know either the the the person doesn’t respond to the card and or doesn’t you know and doesn’t vote and they still don’t remove and so this is like five years
Almost that a voter hasn’t been active and they’re leaving the names on the roles now the problem is that dirty names can mean dirty elections that’s why there’s this Federal requirement that you take reasonable steps to clean up the roles because that’s a potential pool of
Dirty voters that can be used to vote illegally among other reasons and including just the basic reason of Americans don’t like it if the roles have names on there that aren’t supposed to be and it undermines confidence in the elections another reason why the feds passed the
Law and of course it was passed in tandem with the Motor Voter Bill remember that so the motor V motor vote excuse me the Motor Voter Bill required States and public agencies to uh make it easier to register to vote and the concern was well too many people will
Double register because they’ll be asked repeatedly register to vote and they won’t you know the list won’t be clean as a result and the deal was well we’ll just require the states to take Regional sets to clean up the roll so guess which way the left went they just enforced the
Massive registration requirement and ignored the cleanup report so this is a big lawsuit Illinois is a big state and um there are a lot of major issues I mean Cook County which is where Chicago you know is I don’t think they’re even reporting data and you know as we lay out if
They’re not reporting data it probably means they don’t have good data to report so they’re probably on that list of counties that uh isn’t doing what they’re supposed to do and removing the names and and those numbers could be potentially huge so I’m I’m thinking that there are tens of thousands if not
Hundreds of thousands of extra names on the roles in Illinois uh that need to be removed and I talked about this in announcing the lawsuit and I I made another video on it which nicely summarizes it for you and I encourage you to share it as well so let’s run that
Now hey everyone Judicial Watch president Tom fitt here election Integrity update judicial Watchers in federal court against the state of Illinois because that state and its counties haven’t been cleaning up its election roles the Cy simply haven’t been removing names as they’re supposed to that means tens of thousands
Thousands if not hundreds of thousands of extra voting names are on the roles dirty election roles can mean dirty elections now we’re not coming to this effort lightly we’ve already been in court and we have results to show for that work upwards of four million names removed from the roles in places like
New York City in Calfornia in Pennsylvania more needs to be done that’s why we’re in Illinois now so as I note this isn’t our first rodeo and we’ve done this type of litigation before we know what to look for and it’s and it’s getting increasingly frustrating at least to me as president
Of Judicial Watch You know despite very liberal jurisdiction settling with us when we raise these issues you know Los Angeles county in California they settled with us now did it solve the problem completely in California I’ll talk about that in a minute New York City settled with us Pennsylvania
Settled with us New York pass removed 440,000 names I think after we blew the whistle as to what they were doing you know DC they didn’t we didn’t sue so they didn’t settle they were they removed 100 they’re going going to if they haven’t already removed 138,000 names because of Judicial Watch pressure
And then our our lawyers know what they’re doing one of some of the top election lawyers in the country and what they found in illo you know beyond what I told you earlier I mean there’s even more their own reported data so this is Illinois material this is not judicial
Watches data this is Illinois’s data show that more than oneth of the counties remove few or no registrations as I say under this National voter registration act this Motor Voter Bill Illinois informed the federal election assistance commission that 34 counties simply failed to report any data about
Removals well you know no data suggests no removals in my view and that’s what we alleged 19 of these counties also failed to report any data regarding registrations removed because of the death of a voter I mean that’s a really easy that’s what they call I shouldn’t say they call
To use the famous phrase or the well-worn phrase lwh hanging fruit if a county or a state isn’t removing dead voters I mean what on Earth is going on that’s what’s happening in Illinois in too many counties dozens of other counties failed to report some other key data to the EAC
That provides us reassurance if it was fully reported that the law was being followed it’s pretty clear it’s pretty clear the law isn’t being followed and as I say in the release Illinois voting roles are a mess dirty vote dirty voting roles can mean dirty elections Illinois should take immediate
Steps to clean its roles to both prevent fraud and increase voter confidence in the elections so as I say uh as I said earlier uh Judicial Watch is a national leader in the effort to clean up the voting roles and also to ensure election Integrity is upheld in other ways we
Filed many many election law briefs or amus briefs uh to preserve and protect voter ID and advocate for that we’ve successfully challenged politicized gerrymandering that seek the rig elections by moving voters around usually based on race or or other improper political considerations and as I said before we’ve got this demonstrated
Record where our heavy lifting has gotten astonishing results to remove upwards of four million names from the roles and that’s just in the last year or two and we warned Illinois they didn’t take heed of our warning so we’re now in federal court and it’s not just on our behalf it’s on
Behalf of a voter and two public interest groups in Illinois one of the great things about working at Judicial Watch is being able to work with great clients a who are citizens or whistleblowers journalists yeah there are good journalists out there or activist groups involved in a conservative cause sometimes we work with
Candidates not because we’re promoting their candidacy but because they’ve got claims and two of the great organizations we’re working with in Illinois on this important case are the Illinois family Action Group which is a nonprofit and tax exempt legislative action arm of the Illinois Family Institute it was founded in 2010 to
Promote the common good and general welfare Prim primarily by means of Education including direct and Grassroots lobbying it works to advance public policies to protect the sanctity of Human Rights Life Christian marriage and natural family and other initiatives which are consistent with principles of good government so it’s a it’s a good
Culturally Conservative Christian oriented organization that uh wants to exercise its first amendment rights and who being harmed by having these dirty voting roles it makes it harder for them to do their job also breakthrough ideas is a policy advocacy and education Network that advances the causes of peace prosperity
And Freedom by highlighting the virtue of taxpayer Centric and Liberty focused policies and now they benefit all community members I mean so a group like that they let’s say they want to knock on doors right you know you kind of figure out well what let’s we want to
Talk to voters and if the voter lists are dirty you’re wasting wasting your time and wasting money by knocking on doors of people who are no longer there because they’ve moved so this is a great lawsuit uh against Illinois uh California also has a dirty rolls problem even though la cleaned up
And has got a process in place to clean up and they’ve confirmed to us that they’ve cleaned up 1.6 million names other jurisdictions in California aren’t doing what they’re supposed to do uh so litigation is is there’s a significant potential how’s that for a political way of putting it there’s a significant
Potential for litigation against California over its failure to clean up the roles so stay tuned for that so when it comes to clean elections Judicial Watch won’t ever stop uh because the battle is ongoing as I said earlier the left um wants to end elections as we
Know it by eliminating Trump from the ballot that’s a clean elections issue too right and uh of course opposing voter ID and any sensible measure to increase voter confidence and ensure your right to vote is secure is something they oppose too and the conclusion I draw from that is they want
Either no elections or dirty elections or they want the ability to steal elections if they don’t like the outcome through um fraud and other misconduct and so Judicial Watch will continue to do the heavy lifting for the rule of law on elections before I move to the next topic of congressional
Ethics in this case a specific Senate ethics complaint we file I want to talk about what the house is done or not done to uphold the rule of law and defund the abuses of Power by President Biden uh the Republican controlled house has consistently funded everything they say
They hate practically speaking now I know sometimes they’re some things at the margins they’re able to get at in these continuing resolutions or they funding fights but practically speaking uh the outrageous dangerous destructive effort to jail Trump is fully funded by the Republican controlled house repeatedly time and time again does it
Mean every Republican votes for it no but it means about half of them do with every Democrat uh same goes for the Biden border Invasion that’s continued to be funded and every other abuse Under the Sun that you don’t like including the censorship of Americans and uh uh you know baby killing abortion
Things like that that’s just unbelievable that they haven’t curtailed that to any significant extent using the leverage of these continuing resolutions the continuing resolution is a process in which the government continues to be funded with Congressional authorization kind of they just keep on the M the money gets that they appropriate it just
Continues to flow from prior years with no checks in place so that’s the continuing resolution until they pass an official appropriation measure for um for specific agency So to that end there was um they funded five or six agencies through what critics call and I would call an Omnibus
I don’t know why we picked the word Omnibus to criticize this because no normal person knows what an Aus is essentially it’s a gargantuan bill it was a th Pages as it was 1,50 pages I actually read a good part of it and on top of that I think there were um I
Don’t know how many pages of earmarks but a a large number of earmarks and earmarks are what they call member directed projects right where member inserts a specific spending measure to benefit their specific jurisdiction so Senator their state congressmen usually their own um uh District congressional district and that’s where a lot of
Corruption begins and ends in these earmark processes so that’s just another issue that’s so outrageous about government or Congressional spending uh but this this bill the five or six agencies included the justice department the justice department had full funding they voted with as I said that virtually every Democrat and
About half of Republicans voted to fully fund the Justice Department’s efforts to jail Trump through the end of the year or the end of the fiscal year so they could have had an amendment for instance to say no money for Jack Smith no money to fund uh a a prosecution of a presidential
Candidate uh they have federal doj funds that go to jurisdictions like in New York and New York City and Fulton County Georgia and Georgia no haircuts to them for violating the civil rights of Trump no effort to ensure Federal funding doesn’t go to support that abuse of
Power so I don’t know about you but I am upset that Republicans in the house and the Republican leadership speaker Johnson who you know is generally a pretty conservative guy but you know his analysis and his thinking on this approach to spending I think is just
Wrong and the idea that they would allow to go through a funding measure that fully funds the Justice Department’s Jihad against the Republic is just beyond belief to me now there’ll be other opportunities to curtail this type of spending because there’ll be another giant spending bill that comes
Up and so all sorts of um opportunities will continue to arise in this regard and so this is why you have to continue continue to communicate with your members of Congress if you think these corruption issues are important if you think that for instance that if Republicans control a house in Congress
Maybe they should decline to fund the invasion of the United States that Biden’s enabling maybe they should decline the fund the justice department and other jurisdiction’s efforts to rig our election and jail essentially and destroy the Republican Party opposition to the Democratic party that runs the presidency right now and runs the
Senate it’s not just here in Washington it’s other states that are doing this I just read the um Arizona Democratic Attorney General State he’s thinking of ways to put Republican operatives in jail there for daring to dispute the 2020 election this is a broad effort to criminalize
Politics and I I just can’t I I you know I understand there’s all sorts of calculations tactical considerations on these big spending measures and they don’t want to shut the government down they don’t want to set an agency down well forgive you me if an agency is trying to destroy the
Republic it should be shut down until those actions that are destroying the Republic are curtailed forgive me for thinking that now you got me going here and if you’re if you’re concerned about these issues and you want to share your views call your members of Congress call your Senators because the Senate is
Now considering what the house just did so what happens is the house passes it and then uh the Senate they may run amendments it’s unlike there you know they’ve got Again The Establishment Republican Senators will work with the democr the Republican excuse me the Democrats I get confused because
Sometimes Dem Democrats are Republicans and Republicans are Democrats in terms of these policy fights so there’s only about 20 or so Republicans on in the Senate that are consistently opposed to this type of spending mon these spending monstrosities and in addition why on Earth would you pass a bill for $460
Billion at once does that sound like good government to you so anyway it’s in the Senate and so they have to pass and then I guess if there are any changes uh it goes to conference or it goes back to the house and then the president will get to sign
It so the process is still continuing so it’s not too late to call and as I said there will be other bills like this for other agencies like DHS I think is next that’s the in that’s where the invasion can be curtailed most directly call your members of Congress at
202225 3121 that’s 202225 3121 so you know I talked about ear marks but there are other ways that that Congress can engage in unethical Behavior or individual members can and I guess one of the tried and true ways is to have your spouses or members of your
Family get involved in politics in a way that trades on your name and uh Joe Biden obviously being the epitome of this we all think we’re all led to believe that this corruption began only when he was vice president well someone like Biden he’s been doing
That for years even when was Senate you can be sure of that so you know the way it works is that you have members of your family that engage in lobbying or Consulting on areas of public policy and the concern is and what ethics rules
Require you to do is to avoid uh the appearance or or we actually doing any favors to benefit your spouse now um it’s one thing to let’s say your spouse is in the Senate is you just involved in in a particular cause and you’re you know you kind of share the same Outlook
You end up voting in ways that advance that cause that’s not the issue here the issue is the level of specific work that you do to advance the organizations which your wife is Affiliated and that’s what seemed to be happening with a notorious left-wing Senator Senator Sheldon White House who has been
Obsessed with alleging quite often falsely and without Foundation or using dubious analysised conflict of interests of Supreme Court Justices he doesn’t like he doesn’t like the idea for instance of amus briefs by filed by corporations he wants all of that fully disclosed undermining the First Amendment rights of everyone trying to
Litigate in the courts and it turns out he has significant ethics issues that Judicial Watch he’s a powerful Senator um uh took on and we filed an official ethics complaint with the Senate select committee on ethics uh to investigate the relationship between Sheldon white houses activities as a
Senator and his wife’s concerns as a consultant so this is what our complaint uh points out the publicly available facts suggested Senator White House’s legislative activity particularly he his sponsorship of environmental legislation funding his wife’s clients and her specific area of expertise Marine spatial planning I didn’t know there was
Such an expertise but I guess there is creates a reasonable appearance of a conflict of interests given this further investigation regarding Mrs White House’s Consulting activities aided by the committee subpoena power is warranted and this is what’s going on his wife Sandra Thor thoron White House
Is the president of ocean WS w nkss LLC a for-profit limited liability en environmental consulting company that was charted in 2017 and has its principal place of business in Rhode Island Senator White House as I said is the con senator from Rhode Island a senator from uh shortly after her husband’s
Election to the senate in 2009 Mrs White House and later her company ocean WS became a consultant to at least two known nonprofit corporations focus on environmental issues the ocean conserv conservancy and ala C influence watch an entity that investigates uh these types of connections found uh that Senator
White House’s spouse made over $2.6 million in total compensation uh from Ocean Conservancy since uh 2009 when White House came into office her present level compensation would make her eth highest earner among the employees there higher than several vice presidents of the ocean Conservancy according to a May
2023 report by our friends over at the Daily Caller since his election to the Senate White House has introduced at least 24 ocean related bills and co-founded the Senate oceans caucus in 2011 now we provide in the complaint and I encourage you read the entire complaint it’s very interesting
Uh you know these ethics issues can sometimes run sometimes these members of Congress have plausible deniability right they’re kind of separate enough but his work here cross the line and uh we make a compelling case in the in the complaint so in our complaint we list 24
Pieces of legislation that when you look at it or look at them strongly uh indicate that they were passed in a way that would directly benefit and arguably did benefit uh the Senator’s wife’s consultancy the companies that she helps and so when you look at the list of L of
I call it litigation legislation it’s legislation uh you’ll see um and some of them been a lot of it been passed into law where you got money flowing in a way that would Ben benit her clients and if not her directly so we make a strong case because it’s based on publicly
Available information about what the legislation does so it’s not like we have to dive into the secret finances of the White House family to find uh this information and when you look at the ties between the legislation and Mrs White House uh it’s pretty devastating
So I we cite the ethics rule at issue here it’s the conflict of interest rule that’s pretty straightforward forward paragraph one of the Senate ethics rule 37 States a member shall not receive any compensation nor shall he permit any compensation to acrew to his beneficial interest from any Source the receipt or
Acral of which would occur by virtue of influence improperly exerted from his position as a member officer or employee paragraph of 437 this rule 37 further declares that a senator shall not quote knowingly use his official position to introduce or Aid the progress of Passage or passage of
Legislation a principal purpose of which is to further only his pecuniary interest only the pecuniary interest of his immediate family or only the pecuniary interest of of a limited class of persons or Enterprises when he or his immediate family or Enterprises controlled by them are members of the affected class
The rules prohibition of conflict of interests are designed to be Broad and robust there’s a report that uh accompanies the rule that describes its prior application it states that the prohibitions on conflicts of interest are specifically designed to prevent conflict of interest or the appearance of such conflict of interest which is
Equally damaging to public confidence so it’s not only the actual conflict of interests but the appearance of the conflict of interests that’s the standard this rule prohibits a member from working for legislation a principal purpose of which is to enhance his financial interest or the interest of
His family now of course being married to Mrs White House it advances not only his financial interest because presumably you know their her money is their his money uh but obviously she gets a a cut too paragraph one was intended as a broad prohibition against members deriving Financial benefit directly or indirectly
From the use of the official position it’s broader than quidd proquo bribery so we’re not just looking for bribery here for example if a senator intervened with an executive agency for the purpose of influencing decision which would result immeasurable personable financial gain for a h the provisions of this
Paragraph would be violated thus if a senator uses his official position in manner that benefits him indirectly through the spouse such spousal compensation would approve his beneficial interest and violate paragraph one so uh this is a serious issue in my view for Senator White House and the question
Is is the Ethics Committee which is comprised unlike usual Committees of Republicans and Democrats in equal number I forget the actual number of uh Senate um Ethics Committee members of whether they’re going to do something about this given Senator White House’s long-standing practice to sponsoring or co-sponsoring legislation that
Indirectly benefits his wife and or her clients we urge the Senate Ethics Committee to conduct a preliminary investigation to disiner the full extent of Mrs White House’s Consulting agreements with both for-profit and nonprofit entities that may create a reasonable appearance of conflict of interest with their duties
So um we’ll put up a screenshot of the New York Post here you can see the New York Post covered this story and other media covering this story as well and it’s up to you dear listener dear viewer uh to call your Senator and ask them
What they are going to do about this ethics issue concerning Senator White House now some of them may be uncomfortable because they’ve got spouses who are doing the same thing and but for the grace of God go them when they look at what Senator White House is
Up to but nevertheless this is a pretty readily apparent issue of a conflict of interest that deserves full investigation by the Senate Ethics Committee not the cursory we got your letter we don’t like it and therefore we’re not going to pursue it and this is what I said about it in
Our release on the topic there is strong evidence that Senator White House may have violated Senate ethics conflicts of interest rules the Ethics Committee should immediately investigate this serious issue Senator White House seems to have stepped over the line of Standard Environmental legislative act advocacy and used his Senate Office to
Advance his and his wife’s personal and financial interest so Senator White House is a powerful influential Senator you may not know him uh but he’s one of the top Senators on the Senate uh Judiciary Committee uh and you know Senators just even individually are kind of uniquely powerful in our constitutional republic
And so the idea that they be held accountable to the really rarely enforced ethics rules in the Senate I think should go without saying so as I said call your Senators ask them what they think and to review judicial watches Senate ethics complaint which we’ll put a link to below put a
Link to our release you can see the complaint there and you know this is Judicial Watch is effective obviously because of the work we do the litigation this this complaint that we filed you know we’re we’re we’re we’re we are direct in sense we just don’t complain about something we do something we
Either file lawsuits or Demand Action through an ethic complaint uh pursue Foy investigations uh but because we have such a strong following millions of Americans support our work work that’s where the power comes from to affect change and protect the rule of law so if you follow up on this through
Phone calls to your Senators it’s going to get attention believe you me and it I know my voice reaches Millions through the internet through judicial watches other communication streams uh but I could tell you if just even a fraction communicate with their senators uh we will get some significant action I
Would think from the Senate so I encourage you to call your Senators a 202225 3121 202225 3121 so a lot going on rule of law Vindicated Judicial Watch and federal court uh to uphold fair and clean elections by requiring a key state to clean up its roles major ethics complaint against uh
One of the most power powerful senators in the United States Senate so much going on and I tell you much more is coming so you’re going to want to come back for our next weekly update uh next week God willing I’ll see you God bless you and God bless America thanks for
Watching don’t forget to hit that subscribe button and like our video down below
