Tag: corruption

Judicial Watch exposes Biden team pressure on Special Counsel Hur

Judicial Watch announced it received from the US Department of Justice in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit 49 pages of records detailing pressure asserted by Biden White House and Joe Biden’s personal lawyers on Special Counsel Robert Hur regarding the October 2023 interviews of  then-President Biden in the criminal investigation into his theft, retention, and disclosure of classified records. Non-disclosure agreements signed by the president’s lawyers are also included in the records.

Judicial Watch filed a July 2024 FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Justice for all communications about the Hur report with the Office of the White House Counsel and Biden’s personal lawyers (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:24-cv-02179)).

Judicial Watch has several ongoing FOIA lawsuits about Biden’s document scandals and the related unprecedented partisan prosecutorial and judicial abuses of former President Donald J. Trump.

In April 2025, Judicial Watch uncovered Justice Department records showing White House staffers suggesting edits to transcripts of President Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur regarding his handling of secret documents.

In February 2025, a federal court ordered the Department of Justice to declare whether it intends to continue denying Judicial Watch’s request for the full audio of former President Joe Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur. The Trump Justice Department has until May 20, 2025, to report its position on the release of the videotape.

In June 2024, the Biden administration was forced to admit that the transcripts of audio recordings of Biden’s interviews with Special Counsel Hur had been altered and are not accurate.

The new records include an October 18, 2023, letter, just a few days after Hur’s interviews of Biden, from Special Counsel to the President Richard Sauber and Biden’s personal attorney Bob Bauer to Hur. They express concerns about the release of the report:

At our meeting last Friday, we requested that you provide an overview of where matters stand in this case, particularly any remaining questions or concerns we should address. We also asked for the opportunity to discuss your expected report to the Attorney General at the conclusion of the investigation, including time to review it prior to its submission to the Attorney General. You advised us that you were not prepared to engage with these requests at that time but would take them under consideration.

Moreover, to the extent that your report touches in any way upon procedures in this or prior administrations for the handling of sensitive national security information, your report will also be read with intense interest in every foreign capital. It could affect the national security interests of the United States in ways that none of us can anticipate.

An October 31, 2023, email from Sauber to the Special Counsel’s Office documents the repeated efforts by the Biden legal team to review the report before its release. The letter states:

In our October 18 letter to you, we asked to have the opportunity to review and comment on a draft of the “confidential” report that you are required to write under the Special Counsel regulations. We also noted that we would follow up on the subject of the Special Counsel’s “final report” requirement more broadly.

At a minimum, the report should adhere to the kind of product contemplated by the Special Counsel regulations. As discussed, in contrast to the detailed independent counsel reports setting forth a “full and complete” description of their work, the Special Counsel regulations contemplate only that the Special Counsel will “explain[] the prosecution or declination decisions.” … We support your faithful fulfillment of this requirement. But, consistent with the Department’s description of a “limited” and “summary” product, … , the report should be economical. It should include the factual information necessary to the charging decision, but facts or events that are not essential to the decision have no place….

In a December 15, 2023,  2023, letter Sauber and Bauer reiterate the request and also ask for access to the classification review of the materials found and the return of the records of a personal nature to Biden.

Keep reading

US official admits misleading Trump on US troop numbers in Syria

Outgoing Ambassador Jim Jeffrey, the U.S. special envoy for Syria, admitted in an interview with Defense One to misleading President Donald Trump about the true number of U.S. troops deployed in Syria and convincing the president not to withdraw troops.

Jeffrey said, “We were always playing shell games to not make clear to our leadership how many troops we had there.” Jeffrey said the actual number of troops in northeast Syria is “a lot more than” the approximately 200 troops Trump agreed to keep in the country in 2019.

According to anonymous sources who spoke with Defense One, the true number of U.S. troops in Syria is said to be around 900, though the precise number is classified and reportedly remains unknown even to Trump and other members of his administration hoping to bring U.S. troops out of foreign engagements.

Trump called for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria at the end of 2018 and again in October 2019, both times receiving pushback. Despite calling for the withdrawals, both times Trump was convinced to leave a contingent of U.S. troops in the county.

“What Syria withdrawal? There was never a Syria withdrawal,” Jeffrey told Defense One. “When the situation in northeast Syria had been fairly stable after we defeated ISIS, [Trump] was inclined to pull out. In each case, we then decided to come up with five better arguments for why we needed to stay. And we succeeded both times. That’s the story.”

After his October 2019 call for the withdrawal of troops from Syria, Trump was convinced last year to agree to keep between 200 and 400 U.S. troops in the country to maintain control of oil fields. The actual number of troops in the country is said to be much higher than Trump was led to believe.

CNN national security correspondent Jim Sciutto similarly tweeted hearing claims that Department of Defense officials deceived Trump about the true U.S. presence in Syria.

Keep reading

FEMA’s Woke Disaster: $2 Billion Fraud, Reverse Discrimination, and Retaliation Buried for Six Years

For six years, FEMA has quietly buried one of the worst scandals in federal disaster response—a toxic mix of reverse discrimination, fraud, and whistleblower retaliation tied to the Hurricane Maria recovery in Puerto Rico. I led the contractor team that uncovered it firsthand.

In 2018, I deployed as the technical lead of a Lean Six Sigma team made up of straight, older, white veterans and executives.

Our mission was to bring order, transparency, and efficiency to a FEMA operation crippled by dysfunction. What we found was not just inefficiency—it was corruption: theft, favoritism, and rot embedded deep in FEMA’s culture.

We documented widespread violations of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and the Anti-Deficiency Act.

FEMA leadership stole contractor-developed intellectual property and inflated performance metrics in a $1.5 billion scheme to mislead Congress.

Unqualified personnel were promoted—not for merit, but for checking the right identity boxes. This was not mismanagement. It was deliberate.

FEMA’s culture was dominated by DEI politics—identity trumped merit, and promotions were rigged. One insider told us: “Straight white men are at the bottom here.” That was not just talk. It was policy.

At the heart of it was a tight-knit special interest group dubbed internally by FEMA insiders the “LGBTQ Mafia.”

They wielded outsized influence, shielded by management and FEMA’s Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) and FOIA offices, which buried complaints and blocked accountability.

Keep reading

Influencer Valeria Márquez is murdered live in Jalisco, sparking cartel rumors, alleged romantic links, and growing public pressure on authorities.

The Jalisco State Attorney General’s Office denied that Ricardo Ruíz, alias “El Tripa,” a known hitman of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), had ordered the murder, according to early investigations.

Authorities stated that, so far, Ruíz Velasco’s name does not formally appear in the case file and has not been mentioned in any of the testimonies gathered.

Nonetheless, despite the Jalisco Prosecutor’s denial, social media users continue to claim that Valeria Márquez had some type of connection to the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), and are calling on the authorities in charge of the case to thoroughly investigate any possible links so that those responsible can be identified and brought to justice.

This omission by the authorities raises serious questions: Are they afraid to take action against organized crime? Are they being threatened by the cartel? Or is there complicity within the very institutions meant to uphold the law?

The lack of solid answers and the apparent inaction only deepen public mistrust and reinforce the perception that the cartels operate under protection and impunity. While Mexico burns in violence, leftist governments seem more concerned with speeches than with taking real action.

The fatal attack took place at 6:30 p.m. at ‘Blossom The Beauty Lounge’, Valeria’s own salon, located in the Real del Carmen neighborhood.

A man posing as a delivery driver entered the salon and shot her three times—in the skull, chest, and torso. The young woman, who had over 90,000 followers on TikTok, collapsed in front of her camera as her fans watched in horror.

Keep reading

NATO rocked by corruption scandal

Police have conducted arrests and searches in several countries as part of a corruption investigation into current and former employees of the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA).

The raids, coordinated by Eurojust – the EU’s criminal justice agency – took place in Luxembourg, Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Italy, and the US. The alliance told Luxembourg Times on Wednesday that NSPA’s main headquarters in the Grand Duchy had initiated the probe.

“NATO – including the NSPA – is working closely with law enforcement to ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice,” spokeswoman Allison Hart said. “We are actively strengthening our ability to mitigate risks and root out misconduct,” she added.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte told reporters in Ankara on Thursday that the military bloc was working with the authorities. “We want to get to the root of this,” Rutte said.

Keep reading

Ed Martin Reveals J6 Pipe Bomber Probe Shakeup, Warns DOJ ‘Much, Much Worse Than People Think’

Ed Martin, a senior official in the Trump administration’s Department of Justice, is warning that corruption within federal law enforcement is far more severe than the American public realizes. Martin, who holds the roles of Director of the Weaponization Working Group, Associate Deputy Attorney General, and Pardon Attorney, made the comments during an interview with Tucker Carlson.

Martin weighed in the unresolved case of the January 6, 2021, pipe bomber, expressing frustration with the investigation’s lack of progress, wondering whether the lack of answers may have been intentional. “The pipe bomber—as a prosecutor – I’ve got the pipe bomber case in my office,” Martin told Carlson. Martin revealed FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino told him that the bureau had reassigned agents to the case, however, the renewed effort was still in it early stages. “It’s been going on for five weeks?” Martin said, likening the past probe to the bumbling “Keystone Cops.”

Keep reading

Georgia Governor Signs Bill Granting Immunity for Harms Caused by Pesticides and Fertilizers

Georgia Governor Brian Kemp signed SB144 into law, which has also been referred to as an immunity bill for agrochemical businesses that sell pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers. The bill states, “a manufacturer cannot be held liable for failing to warn consumers of health risks above those required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.” The Georgia legislature passed the bill and was awaiting Kemp’s signature, which he finalized on Monday.

Georgia became the second state in the nation to provide manufacturer immunity for harm caused by pesticides after North Dakota signed a similar bill into law last month. Bayer has been handling tens of thousands of lawsuits related to cancer allegedly caused by Roundup, a product that Bayer owns after the agrochemical corporation purchased Monsanto in 2018. In April, The HighWire reported about Bayer’s recent court loss in which the company is required to pay over $2 billion for causing a man’s non-Hodgkin lymphoma, but the high payout amount is expected to be appealed. This case was conducted in a Georgia courtroom.

The EPA is still awaiting a court decision regarding its most recent evaluation of glyphosate’s effect on human health. The EPA currently states, “No risks of concern to human health from current uses of glyphosate.” The EPA website also states, “No evidence that glyphosate causes cancer in humans.”

Meanwhile, the passage of SB144 in Georgia means a farmer cannot sue Bayer for harms allegedly caused by Roundup because the product contains the label required by the EPA. The label states, “Keep Out of Reach of Children CAUTION See [back/ side] [panel/ booklet/ label] for [additional] first aid and precautionary statements. Alternative Text: [See container label for [complete] use directions, first aid and precautionary statements.]”

Bayer issued a statement applauding the Governor for signing the legislation. The statement said, “The signing of SB 144 by Governor Kemp demonstrates that Georgia stands with its farmers, who work tirelessly to produce safe and affordable food for communities throughout the state. We thank Governor Kemp and the legislators, farmers and ag groups that supported this important piece of legislation.”

Keep reading

Judicial Coup Exposed: New Bill Proposed to Answer Courts’ War on Trump and America

A bold legislative proposal, the “Restoring Constitutional Mandate for Congress to Set Rules for the Federal Courts Act,” seeks to rein in what its author warns is an existential crisis – a  “judicial coup” targeting President Donald Trump and the American people.

Drafted by Jonathon Moseley, a 24-year legal veteran and founder of the Patriot Legal Defense Fund, the bill aims to rescind the Rules Enabling Act.  The Constitution empowers Congress to set the rules for the Federal courts.

But Congress generously trusted the U.S. Supreme Court with this honor and prestige.  The bill includes a rebuke of U.S. Supreme Court Justices who have abused their constitutional role.

On May 12, Chief Justice John Roberts – who never criticizes misconduct by judges, politicized lawfare, or abuses against conservatives – issued his third attack on President Trump.

Roberts has not seemed to grasp that respect is earned, not demanded.  But when judges like Roberts criticize only one side of the political world, they lose all credibility.

Roberts made similar veiled threats against the Trump Administration in Buffalo on May 7, the week before.

The previous week Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson added to a seemingly-coordinated drum beat.

On May 8, Justice Sonia Sotomayor basically rallied the nation’s lawyers to fight an insurrection against Republican officials, speaking at the American Bar Association.

Moseley argues that judges should never be speaking outside the courthouse to maintain the public trust.

“The ABA has sued Trump over federal grant terminations,” yet Sotomayor was speaking to a litigant in an active lawsuit.

Active members of the ABA are already the most left-wing and activist lawyers compared to most attorneys just working for clients.

Keep reading

New Biden Decline Details Emerge: ‘Beginning in 2023…’

We are getting even more confirmation of, and details behind, the scandalous lies and attempted cover-up surrounding former President Joe Biden’s physical and cognitive decline.  I call it an ‘attempted’ cover-up because they were unable to truly hide it from anyone with eyes, ears, and basic powers of observation.  They engaged in intense gaslighting, smearing anyone who accurately described what they plainly noticed as ‘cheap fakers‘ and ‘misinformation’ purveyors.  Contra the insulting, self-serving current line from many Democrats and journalists, Biden’s troubles were not some well-kept secret that was corruptly withheld from them by a small circle of advisors and family members.  They could all see what the rest of us were seeing, in real time, based solely on the president’s public appearances.  They actively joined the attempted cover-up, in service of their political party’s grip on control.  The indignant ‘Country Over Party’ lecturers aggressively prioritized Party Over Country, insisting that a plainly deteriorating president could not only remain on the job for a few more months, but could serve for an additional four years.  

They were mainlining their own political spin, conflating the interests of their tribe with the interests of the country.  This was textbook, hardcore partisanship.  Given the realities at play, it was also outrageous behavior, and an actual threat to the country.  We barely had a functioning president, and they were comfortable with lying to voters in the hopes of propping up some unconstitutional president-by-committee arrangement, for the sake of their power.  Democrats were all over television vouching for Biden’s wellness and capabilities.  The ‘news’ media instantly and dutifully parroted the newly-invented ‘cheap fake’ attack line from the White House within nanoseconds of its inception.  I’m sure those who were closest to POTUS had additional insights into the particulars about how bad things were getting behind the scenes, but the fundamental problem was glaringly apparent to millions of people who merely had access to videos of Biden doing things like walking and speaking — especially when it was already obvious how much they were limiting and restricting his public-facing events.  

Keep reading

Here Are 16 Of The Most Egregious Injunctions Barring The Trump Administration From Doing Its Job

The Trump administration hit the ground running in January, quickly executing a multitude of initiatives related to closing the border, deporting illegals, culling the federal bureaucracy, stopping the abuse of federal dollars to fund far-left programs, and eradicating harmful ideologies like diversity, equity, and inclusion from federal purview.

All of these items, most of which were campaign promises upon which President Donald Trump was elected by the American people, have received a litany of criticism from far-left actors — which was to be expected.

However, what has emerged in weeks and months of Trump doing what he promised voters is a pattern of unelected federal judges standing in the way of exercising the will of the American people and handing win after win to the left through incessant district-level nationwide injunctions on federal actions.

While many of the judges are Democrat appointees, what has become clear is that no matter who appointed a judge — from Trump himself, to former Presidents Clinton, Bush, Obama, or Biden — these judges appear to believe they serve as some entrenched panel of oligarchs who really have the final say on what the president is and is not allowed to do.

Keep reading