Uncovering Corruption with Tom Fitton

before that too. I mean we saw with the Obama administration as well, the I R. S scandal, Fast and Furious, you know, among other things. So we're going to talk to a man who does this for a living, who uncovers government corruption for a living. You guys know Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch. You se him a lot on Fox. But he is one of those guys leading the charge

as president of Judicial Watch. And what they do is they file Freedom of Information Act lawsuits otherwise known as request to try to uncover information about misconduct by our own government and by these government officials. And I don't have to tell you, but there's a lot right now. Right there's a lot going on in terms of government corruption.

So I want to talk to him about his read on all these different things that are happening in the country, what they're digging up, what they're trying to get to the bottom up, and just get a little perspective from someone who has covered different administrations and who has been in this looking under the hood of how corrupt or government is. So stay tuned for Tom Fitton Judicial Ledge. So we've got a lot of government corruption right now. So it's a good thing we've got Tom Fitton of

Judicial Watch. Tom, you guys are doing great work and just uncovering some of the stuff we're saying. So I really appreciate you taking the time to join the show. Oh you're welcomely, so good to be with you. Yes, you've been doing this for a long time. What concerns

you the most about where we are today as a society. Well, you know, as you know, Judicial Watch does the kind of government corruption watchdog work, not kind of it's uh, you know, we're a nation's were the nation's leader on it in many ways, and things have metastasized, and at least on the government side in terms of a willingness by those in power but to misuse federal law enforcement and in the case of Trump, state law enforcement too,

to target their political opponents. We saw that with Trump and Russia. We're seeing it in many ways with January six and we're seeing it, but most recently with the raid. On the top of that, you have Democrat district attorneys in New York and Georgia, you know, also using the powers and trusted to them by the American people or their local voters to you know, target Trump and and

people who support them. So you know, that's you know, when when when law enforcement is explicitly turned over, you know, brazenly turned over um to political ends. Um, you know that way lies the end of the republic. Is it worse now than it than it was before? I mean, you've covered different administrations. What strikes you about the Biden administration. Well, we didn't know what was going on during the abam administration, so a lot of the illegal spying, um, you know,

we secret. And here there's kind of this public embrace of politicized law enforcement that I don't think we even had in the In the Obama administration, they kind of knew it was bad and so they were in public about it. And remember the I r S scandal, for instance, We didn't know about that until you know, Biden was almost to the Obama was almost out of office. The

same goes during the Trump administration. Uh, you had abuse internally by the bureaucracy to target and harass Trump, but you're here, you have this endorsement at the highest levels of manipulating and abusing the law to target the president's putitive campaign opponent. We haven't seen anything like that in

American history. For instance, the raid on the President's home, which was a while abuse of power, and there's simply nothing to compare to in terms of frankly, any time in American history where you've had a candidate so terribly targeted by we're former presidents, so horribly targeted by law enforcement um for political ends. Why do you think the Biden administration feels so emboldened to to use government as a weapon in a way that we haven't seen before.

You know, what do you think is behind that? Because I don't think there's been sufficient accountability for the prior abuses of power. So we talked about how the FBI was abused, the Justice Department and these other agencies were abused to target Trump and no one's been held accountable, and to degree anyone's been held accountable by Durham, it's you know, basically tertiary figures. And so it was at best Durham's investigation and accountability efforts were helpless. So so

there's no there's no recrimination, there's no accountability. Those who get fired even for doing something wrong, you know, are fitted by the media, get big contracts and get to

appear on cable television. So what's so no consequences, they're going to just escalate it, and they've escalated it well, and I think what's sort of wild about the place we are now is we have this you know, sort of unholy alliance between big tech and these corporations and government, and we've seen that come to had with censorship on social media. You know, what kind of stuff have you uncovered?

And and sort of looking at that unholy alliance and how they worked together, Well, we know we've been targeted and victimized um and by big tech and our suspicions where the government was behind it. There's little doubt about it. Uh and now in in recent months, you know, we've proven it. We know, for instance, the California Secretary of State. I told YouTube they should take down flagged one of our videos on election integrity just before election, and YouTube

took it down. So we just sued the California Secretary of States office for that violation our First Amendment rights. And you know, you may have seen the just the news reports highlighting this left wing consortium of allegedly private entities, some of which our government funded, that was working with the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department to target for censorship and American citizens and and groups and media organizations. I was tied for number four on the

target list and judicial watchers targeted as well. So, uh, you know, on top of that, you have Biden, the Biden White House explicitly encouraging big tech to quote a curtailed disinformation, which means censorship. I've we haven't seen anything like this in terms of targeting the First Amendment. You have to go back probably just before World War One and Woodrow Wilson and company when they were jailing h individuals who were criticizing the government's entering into World War

One and other and other issues. Uh here, uh, this is this is a modern day um as. I call it the great suppression of speech on the Internet with the encouragement of the government, our government, well, you know, and and a lot of times these things that they're censoring end up being true. I mean, we saw this

repeatedly during COVID. It you know, people raising and ringing the alarm about the coronavirus coming from the Huhan lab, which you know, you'd have to be an idiot to think it didn't, or raising questions about vaccines, and now people are slowly admitting that they might not be as safe as we were originally told, and they certainly don't

stop the spread of COVID. And so, you know, repeatedly or lockdowns don't work, masks, you know, it's like repeatedly people were censored, you know, for things that we know to be true today. But you know, I know that you guys have been trying to get to the bottom of some stuff regarding COVID and vaccines. You know, what kind of stuff have you guys been able to uncover

in that regard? Yeah, you know, I've been doing this work for you know, longer than I care to admit to a judicial watch, almost coming on twenty five years at this point, and you know, I know what it's quote allowed and what's not allowed even under this censorship regime, But that doesn't matter. If it's inconvenient or it goes against the specific political narrative or policy agenda they have, they will delete you, they will cancel you, they will

suppress you, they will vandalize you. Which is I really when they label your tweets or your or your statements, you know, with warning labels or you know, clarifying links to me, is so egregious and um so, so truth is no bar for censorship, and uh, this is this is the danger we're facing and its justn't you know, if you get censorship least or I get censorship, excuse me, if you get censorshipped? Is that even a word? What if you get it is today? It is today at

that time, you're good. You're good at is today? So I mean, if you were I get censored, obviously it's it's terrible for us. But you know, we have a lot of followers. People watch what we say and they rely on individuals like us to help them figure out what's going on and provide them information. So they're censoring all of our followers too, and they're censoring all of those who view and watch us. So this is a this is an egregious violation not only of our rights individually,

but the rights of countless millions of Americans well. And to point what we see is not only the censorship, but the smearing as well, which I know you've been on the receiving end of this. I have as well. You know, you oppose or you have questions about vaccines, you're an anti vaxx, or you raise questions about you know, maybe Russia didn't sabotage its own pipelines, and you get called Pearl Russia, and so you know, it's not just the censorship, but it's just the smearing of anyone who

dares question things. Yeah, it's the swarming you know. Recently on Twitter, the uh you know, some media have gone after me for defending the rule of law and Trump and suggesting that I may have talked to him about records that are in dispute now and the left has just gone crazy. So, um, it's the swarming attack which is designed to try to keep me from continuing to post and making it difficult to continue to tell the

truth on social media. My view is, you know, if they were winning on social media, they wouldn't be trying to censor us. And that's kind of what the I guess the positive side of this is they're losing. And when when someone's losing, um, and when the left loses, they break the rules. So you know, if they were winning the fight for to persuade Americans, they wouldn't be cheating. Um. You know, they wouldn't be seeking a suppress parents, questioning,

you know, curricula at schools. They wouldn't be seeking to kick people off of social media platforms. That's because they're losing, and so you know, we shouldn't be you know, upset in the sense that, oh my gosh, we're gonna lose. No, they're they're losing, and these are desperate measures by them, but they're dangerous in the sense that you know, they

couldn't they could end. You know, the American way in many ways is whether it be our Constitution or republic or just the core idea that people have a right to free free expression. Uh and and and it should be respected. Click commercial break back with Tom Fitton on the other side, you know, now it looks like Elon Musk is in fact buying Twitter. What do you make of this and what how do you think that will

reshape some of the conversations we're having in the country. Well, it depends if Musk is willing to stand up, and I suspect he, you know, his his comments recently have suggested he is and demand the right or or protect the right for to free expression on his social media platform or what soon could be as social media platform. Uh. You can bet now though, the Biden administration and the left will just attack him. You know, they kind of backed off after he came to blows with Twitter over

the deal. But now that he's about to take over Twitter, or so it's been report, did, you can expect them to ramp up the attacks. He'll be subject to retaliatory investigations by the Biden administration and you know Twitter will well, the left will come up with other reasons and excuses, uh, to try to tarnish his reputation and punish him for defending First Amendment freedoms. No, I think that's probably to be expected. You're right, you know, I wanted to kind

of take through some of the big issues. Obviously, you guys worked to sort of uncover information through FO your requests and and the whole government accountable. What are you guys looking to get to the bottom of with the marrow lago raid on President Trump? You know, so this

is a story on the raid. You know, we had sued ten twelve years ago at this point for Clinton records, and these were tape recordings that an author had made of Clinton being president talking foreign leaders, members of Congress, and we found out he kept those tape recordings in his soft war that we see the National Archives. We took the position that Justice Department's taken, well, these are

presidential records, shouldn't take go get them? And the Justice Department told us no, The Archives told us no, and a court told us no. He said that no one can second guess the presidential decision to keep records as a personal versus presidential And in fact, the Justice Department said, by the way, the fact that he has in the mafter Heley's office, suggests that their president the presumption is

that they're personal saloon. Behold we hear you know back in February of this year that there was this dispute. There was this dispute where the Archives one of these records and the president gave him back to him, and like, what's going on? This is a hundred and eighty degrees the opposite position that the law and the Justice Department had taken on these issues. So it was one rule for Clinton, another rule for Trump. And so my view, they used this as a pretext to go raid his home.

You know, we can argue about what the reasons were, you know, or speculate, you know. I suspect they wanted to know what the had, what he had for sure, but more so what he had on them. And so we've been suing to get access to the records about the raid getting and the reason we're in court is because the National Archives, which defends the public's right to know right and it's trying to vindicate it, doesn't want to give us the documents. The same thing goes for

the Justice Department in the FBI. They're ignoring the request. They don't want to give us the documents. And uh and the Justice Department I think needs to be held accountable here. Why why is it they changed their mind

to target Trump while protecting Bill Clinton? And why are they changing and why were they lying in my view to the courts and misleading the courts about what the rules were you know, this is this is a straightforward analysis of law that we were on the wrong end of right that the Justice Department said the president has these prerogatives to keep records on of you know, to

keep records personal. And the course that there's no will rate will will RD a second guess this and you know, except for Trump, and I'm just tired of the double standards, I think we all are, you know, I mean, this is what we've repeatedly seen as a totally different standard for Republicans than Democrats, and and it's infuriating, and so

I appreciate you getting to the bottom of it. You know, I was, I was reading on your site that you guys uncovered documents and regard to UM, the Biden administration and the Department of Health and Human Services, their media

plans and the propaganda push surrounding vaccines. Can you talk a little bit about what you guys have found out with that and then any other things that you guys are working on UM in regard to the COVID vaccines, We're we have a pretty comprehensive UM investigation and several four OHIL lawsuits on that. You know, pretty much everything we know about gain of function came out because of

Judicial Watch litigation. You know, we know FAUCCI knew early on that there was a gain of function issue with this eco health alliance and the Luhan instant going back years. They were worried about it, and to shoot and as soon as the vaccine or excuse me, as as soon as the COVID the virus hit and and and the public health crisis hit, they got worried because they knew they had dirty hands with this gain of function research.

And then on top of that, uh, you know, there's there are the concerns about the vaccines and how they were how they were approved. We've been investigating that. And then you know, we were talking earlier about the censorship of anyone who was critical of all of this, including the way the vaccines were being pushed. So sure enough,

we just got this this plan, this propaganda plan. There's no other way to describe it, describing a unbelievably comprehensive effort to enlist every facet of society to push these vaccines, entertainment, cultural, you name it. It's a star wishing. When you look through the documents, and I mean my conclusion after reading you know, everything they wanted to do, you know, talking to producers to target you know, for instance, young people on in in TV and get scriptwriters in as unbelievable.

You have to wonder who wasn't working for the government practically as an agent in the entertainment industry after going through this, I mean, who who wasn't working with the government on this? And why didn't we know about it? Well, I say, you know, we weren't because they've targeted us. Uh. And you know it also was reading that the COVID vaccine had testing facilities in China. Yeah, isn't that interesting? Why would they do doing some of these vaccine related

tests in China? And we had asked for the documents initially gave them to us, and they were acted where the doc testing was where the testing was being done? And we pushed back and they admitted it was in China, Shanghai. I wasn't that curious? And you know, the American people have a right to know. I mean, the vaccine is a big deal, and let's you know that this is for people who are supporting the vaccine and people who

are skeptical about it. No matter how you slice it, it's one of the most important medical treatments in the history of modern man. And so forgive me if I think we have a right to each and every document about its safety, efficacy and basically how it came to be. And the fact that the government is fighting us tooth

and nail on it speaks volumes. Well, we've also seen, you know, the big Pharma and I think even I think it was like the f d A of not wanting to really not wanting to be transparent with people about wanting to release critical information about safety and a variety of other things, and really trying to fight people and some of these Foyer requests and information coming to light.

But but it really does boggle the mind. So you're gonna have testing facilities in China, the country that is responsible for unleashing COVID on the rest of the world, whether intentionally or unintentionally, Well, that's that's true. And uh, you know, when you look at what they were doing in China, they were doing gain a function research. Frankly, all the biological research in China, or much of it um was funded by our government. So we were partners

with them, We knew what they were up to. In fact, we were worried about the documents we have. We were worried about what they were up to. It was crazy. We were essentially spying on them while funding the same programs we were spying on. I mean, that's how insane it was in China. Of course, all of this is out of factory's agencies and I H and I A I D. I didn't know this till we received the documents.

But did you know that the faunci's agency and a full time employee working out of the embassy kind of trying to monitor all of this, you know, and where is she hm? You know, she's providing all these reports and they're being told, oh, you know, be careful, be sure to send these to us before you share them widely, because there's gonna be a lot of people interested in this. And this is and I'm talking about the Wuhan Institute.

I mean, other documents show that the Wuhan Institute's top guy, one of the top guys, was asking for disinfectant advice from the N I A I D people, how to keep the how to keep the lamp get disinfected, you know, talk about hair raising requests for help, And how do I know this? Went up the chain because he saved the email. You know, as you send an old email, you use it to kind of follow up on a different topic years later. So he said, oh, by the way,

I'm horrified about COVID. No listen, now, there anything we can do for help, And in the email chain he attached all of his prior requests for help on keeping Wuhan this in effective because they didn't know how to do it. It was also it was sent to Faucci and company. Crazy stuff. And of course the media isn't interested in this. I mean, for all their interest in COVID, I mean, they have zero interest in where it came

from and how it happened and who was involved. And you know, my concern is what else is going on that we don't know about in this gain of function regime That's not only going on here in China. I mean, when you find out the documents that we have about what's the craziness here in the United States, you'd be like, well, forget about wu Ham, what's going on down to Texas?

What is going down to Texas? Well? You know, this gate of function approach is something that has been pushed throughout the United States and we have the documents showing that that it was happening and people were screwing up, you know, because it's you know, labs are run by human beings and people drop stuff, you know, prick themselves and do things like that. So oh my gosh, it's for the grace of God, nothing more serious. Well, I couldn't get any more serious than what COVID did to us,

but it can get worse. Although I don't think we're entirely getting the truth of from COVID verse with COVID in terms of deaths in the country, I think that you know a lot of people who are incentivized to, you know, calculate deaths that were with COVID versus from COVID for financial um reasons. But but to your point, you know, and what I think odd to you know,

to go back you do. One can one can understand that COVID was the impact was My view is the impact could have been lessened, although it was significant and severe. But of course we had our act together and we weren't funding this type of dangerous research. It might have been awarded entirely completely, you know. To say that it's to say that it's it was it was bad news. Wasn't to suggest that, you know that some people were

ramping it up or hyping it. I see the purposes beyond that was that was outrageously inappropriate too, and and also dangerous well, and you know to the censorship. I had Dr Harvey Rish on for the last episode and he was just talking about how I ever met in hydros and instead because of financial reasons because their cheap generic drugs that was shot down, and Dr Fauci light about it, the media light about it, and they all clevered up and it could have saved you know, a

lot of lies. And what I think thought about China too is you know, I don't know if we'll ever get to the bottom of if it was intentional or an unintentional release with someone just making a mistake in a lab, which has happened in the past. But what is weird is happy or happy accident. Yeah, But like, do you remember all those videos that were going around

on Twitter of like people dropping dead in China? I mean, when did that happen elsewhere in the world of people just dropping dead in the middle of the streets from it and where did those videos come from? I don't know we've got to take a real quick break. Stay with us. You know, I wanted to ask you too. I know that you've worked really hard and uncovering videos with January six, you know, and and they tried to shield as much information from us as they can and

as they could. What if you won't cover about January six? What should people know that maybe they don't know already? Well, the government was well aware that tens of thousands of people were likely to send on the capital, and obviously the security was lacking. Uh, the government, UMU. We have documents about the shooting death of Ashley Dabbitt, the only homicide that day, that shows, in my view, there was no good reason to shoot her. Uh. The officer, Lieutenant Bird,

just shot into the crowd. It was completely crazed that he did that with no accountability and consequence. And then, you know, much of much of what we're doing also is out figure out what we don't know and challenging Congress to release these records. We've sued in court and sued to get access to these congressional records about what

went on. You know, we know about the fourteen thousand hours of videotape, none of which has been released, you know, publicly by Congress, at least in the process that we think it ought to be held. You know, the process that we think about to reply, which is tell us what you're turning over, tell us what you're withholding, and you know, stop editing stuff. But also there's and people don't know this widely, is there's there there's at least two d and seventy emails from a January six from

within the police department there the US Capital. And also what we don't know about January six is important because it's Congress is hiding the information. We sued Congress to get access to those fourteen hours of videos that the policy Congress doesn't want to release any of them, you know, under the process that we think is appropriate, which is give us the videos, don't don't selectively edit them, don't hide other videos, and if you hide them, you need

to justify while you're hiding. The same thing goes for two hundred and seventy plus emails. They're hiding emails about January six. So Pelosi is coming into court, the Commerce is coming into court saying we have no right to sue their sovereign immunity, and even if we had a right because who the records aren't aren't of sufficient public

interest is to require their release. It's really outrageous. They're going out taking the phone records and text messages of Americans and leaking them while hiding virtually everything they have about January six. That would be very educational, I would think for the American people well. And then also just using it as a way to target their enemies, you know, going after Steve Bannon, going after Jenny Thomas, just you know, adding anyone to the list that they can, uh, you know,

to target. You know, I wanted to ask you, I saw someone flew with the idea. I don't remember who it was, so I apologiz us for not giving them credit. It wasn't me, so I'm not going to take credit for someone else's But I saw I saw someone float the idea of if when Republicans win back the House and the Senate. In the House, they should uh overtake the January six investigation and continue it, but start investigating the things that Democrats don't want answered. What did Pelosi? No?

What are they not telling us? What do we need to know about what happened to Ashley Babbitt, Why do they withhold the video? What video do we not? You know, and and try to get into some of those questions that you've been raising in this conversation. What do you what do you think about that idea? If they're brave enough to do that. You know, my experience with the Republican leadership, which largely hasn't changed in the last several years since they don't like to really do investigations and

push too hard. But who knows, maybe the public will demand it, maybe their voters will demand it. Certainly, you know, we would encourage full disclosure. Um, you know, right now my understanding is the Republican leadership can release these videos what they haven't, so we'll see what their legal position is.

You know, if I were them, I would recognize there's a lot of work to be done in terms of oversight, but there has to be demands to get some prosecutions and accountability here and um, you know, for instance, fully funding the Justice Department and the FBI given their wild abuses of power. I mean, how how does that work? I don't I don't understand how it would. And certainly members of the House who are involved in this one

six committee. Why should they be trusted to serve on any other committee given the abuses they've engaged in currently. You know, so there's a lot of opportunity for accountability here that you know. I think Speaker McCarthy needs to be strongly encouraged to pursue, presuming that he's the speaker and the Republicans win. As someone who's covered this stuff probably more than anyone, and uncovered more information than probably anyone, what kind of oversight would you like to see from

a Republican led Congress? What areas would you like them to tackle, and sort of what advice would you give them on on what they should be looking at? Well, ay, they should be you know, I know I don't mean to be tried here, but they should really be investigating everything. I mean, there are so many problems with uh, you know, the way COVID was handled. Uh, who was doing what

in terms of suppressing information about COVID? You know, for instance, the vaccines, And you raise the issue about these alternative treatments, but who who is making the decision to attacks fellow scientists and such who are promoting alternative treatments and refusing to even even countenance discussions of them and and seeking a suppressed debate with the targeting of Trump and the Justice Department mistake, you know, misapplying the law to suggest

that anyone who disputed the election should be subject to criminal grand jury investigations. What's going on there? Uh? You know, frankly going back to talk about the intervention of private parties in the and the and the elections and what the plans were. I mean, you know, the left tries tries to pretend that the Republicans we're seeking to overturn democracy, when in fact their plans were actually quite specific that

they were. For instance, John Podesta, who now I believe as a Biden White House official, and he was he did war gaming and he was playing Joe Biden. This was the big left war game because they thought Trump was going to try to oppose you know, the elections, and their their war game was that if the electors were going the wrong way, they should have states threatened succession. M boy, I'd like to be I'd like to figure

out who was who was thinking about that. I mean, if that's the new rule, let's do a broad, comprehensive investigation of how elections are to be disputed and who was planning what in right now it's only been a one sided invest instigation, but what's what was the other side planning? And of course you have these internal investigations. You know what was Adam Schiff up to? Well, they dare start investigating members of Congress who are abusing their authority.

We'll see those are all X. I mean, I'd love to find out on all those and also obviously what's going on at the southern border um as well, which is yes, and plus the invasion. It's just I think they can spend ten minutes on that, I would hope. So, I mean, there's a lot of problems in front of us. Tom, I appreciate you joining the show. Is there anything else you'd like to leave us with before we go? You

guys did such great work. Well, you know, I think one thing we need to be looking forward to is the attack on election integrity, this debate about January six. They don't really care about that anymore. They're in power, you know, They're they're just doing what they can in my view, not to kind of, you know, make any public arguments about January six. It's more to keep people from exercising the First Amendment rights to raise to advocate

for election integrity and suppress political involvement. Generally, that you'll be punished if you come out and talk and advocate for candidates. I mean, they're suggesting anyone who supports Trump doesn't deserve the protection of the law. So you know, we have a right to participate in our democracy despite what Biden says, and we have to be vigilant and protecting that right. Well said, Tom, and I know that you are, and we're all going to continue doing that.

We know there's a lot at stake. In November, Tom Fitton Judicial Watch, thanks so much for joining the show. I really appreciate it. Thank you Tomphitton of Judicial Watch. They do the great work just covering government corruption through FUIA request and really just digging in, so I appreciate his time. I appreciate you guys for listening every Monday and Thursday, but you can listen throughout the week. Feel free to leave us a review, rate us five stars

on Apple Podcast. I always like reading those. It means a lot when you guys leave me comments. What do you think? John Cassio, my producer, for putting the show together. Until next time,