Replies

Computer generated transcript of 51 minute Judicial Watch video dated 10/25/2020:

Major Biden Corruption Update, New Fauci Emails on China/COVID19, Wray-FBI Coverup

comey was spying on trump

the reason he was writing the memos was

to create a record so that he could

destroy no american

knowingly colluded with the russians to

interfere in our election campaign

oh wait unless you mean hillary clinton

pardons

prosecutions and transparency

hey everyone judicial watch president

tom fitton here with our weekly update

on social media thanks for joining us

this week a very busy week

astonishing corruption revelations about

joe biden

we have new lawsuits over

fbi hidden text messages

and on top of that we've got new emails

from dr

fauci they've never seen been seen

before about china that you're going to

want to

learn about as well but first up

obviously is the big news about

the metastasizing the burgeoning

biden family corruption scandal and

i talked about this a little bit last

week

we have several kind of ongoing

concurrent scandals now

we have the underlying scandal of what

the biden family was up to

in terms of and the emails and text

messages suggest

that hunter biden and joe biden's other

family members brothers and such

were doing international business and

potentially it looks like saving uh and

holding back and for payment to joe

biden

the monies they were getting and

there's been dramatic evidence about

emails

related to a china deal which i'll talk

to you about in a little bit

so the other aspect of the scandal is

that the fbi and justice department

have had this information through at

least since at least december of last

year

and have evidently done nothing with it

and in fact probably have hidden it

and then the third corruption scandal

associated with it

is the media and big tech suppression of

the story

despite new revelations despite further

confirmation of the authenticity of the

material

you still have the big media and big

tech suppressing information about

it uh in an effort to

help joe biden and oust donald trump

and i'm not saying that uh you should

vote for or against any candidate

i'm just saying that you shouldn't have

information about candidates withheld

from you

by improper and fraudulent intervention

by either big tech companies

or the media and so what judicial watch

is aiming to do is to provide

you information that you pro you may not

be able to find elsewhere

although thankfully um given our new

media age and the new internet

uh and i know the internet's not new but

the fact that we can now

access information outside

the traditional gatekeepers you probably

know about what a lot about what i'm

talking about

now remember these documents are not

foia documents these documents

are material that was in

in in a few places uh there's emails

that have been

released separately uh from one of joe

uh hunter biden's business partners

there's emails from

uh a gentleman mr uh

what was his name of course i'm going to

forget his name

tony babilinski who

uh is a retire as a veteran and also

a business partner of hunter biden and

his colleagues

who has said uh he came forward after

revelations in the last few weeks

that essentially uh he was part of this

china deal that was

being pushed by it looks like uh

very very senior folks in china uh

to give millions and millions of dollars

uh joe biden's son

and uh bubulinsky says

that the email about the big guy the big

guy email that i've told you about

where hunter says that he would hold 10

percent of

uh some of that money for 10 of the

money for the big guy

that was joe biden and bobolinsky says

when joe biden says he didn't know

anything about

hunter's foreign business interests he

says that's not true he personally

witnessed hunter and joe talking about

his businesses and regularly consulted

with him on it in fact

he says he met with joe biden for i

think for an hour talking about this

china deal

which at least i think was happening in

2017.

and this is on top of the barista

scandal so you know what i was thinking

about this that you know we knew

and found out most directly about uh joe

biden getting

excuse me hunter biting getting all that

money from barisma and joe biden's

efforts

uh to coincidentally remove the

prosecutor investigating barisma yes and

there was an ongoing investigation and

diversity at the time

we knew about that thanks to the

whistleblowing of president trump

now the deep state was angry that joe by

that president trump wanted

accountability for what ukraine was

doing both in terms of its

uh interfering uh in a way to upend

his candidacy and then his his uh

his presidency and also the corruption

tied to the biden and barisma issue

and little did we know i mean we can't

we saw that they were willing to blow up

the constitution

once he raised questions about that

biden's defenders in the house and the

senate the leftists and the democrats

but now we know that the 83 000 whatever

amount of money that

biden joe hunter biden was getting per

month

was a side hustle for them wasn't it you

got three and a half millions

from the russians according to a senate

report

this china deal it's not clear how much

money was ever transferred it looks like

at least five million maybe

but they were talking tens of millions

of dollars 10 million dollars just for

introductions in this china deal

and who knows how much other money has

been sloshing around there

and of course the text and emails

suggest that hunter biden and his family

members

were taking money from those deals and

passing it through

to their father joe bide now this was

raised

during the debate uh joe biden's

response was to suggest it was russia

disinformation which was

which is obviously silly i know the

media is pretending that's the case it's

there's no evidence of it

it's just more of the same type of

smearing you raise

questions about corruption in the

democratic party now you're a russian

agent

that's the new rule of thumb for the

left-wing media

and its acolytes and or its allies i

should say

in places of power uh like in the house

and the senate it's unbelievable

you have adam schiff lying about it

again you have other members of the

senate lying about it again they know

it's not russia collusion they know it's

not russia disinformation

we've had the fox news and the wall

street journal confirm

the china email and frankly the contents

of the laptop indirectly as a result

now we know that the fbi has been

embarrassed into questioning

mr bobolinsky

after his revelations why didn't they

talk to him six months ago eight months

ago

it's not like they didn't know what his

name was they had he had the information

in the laptop

this is just like the weiner laptop all

over again

it's politically inconvenient data and

so the fbi

covers it up

so you know in washington dc

being as obsessed in dc as we are about

the political consequences of scandal

and how it might impact the election

you've got this distortion

going on with the cover-up and as i

pointed out the big tech censorship

which is uh

fraudulent business practices where

they're pretending to be neutral when

they're not

they're political and they target people

based on politics

not in some neutral business principle

that can be defended frankly

in court

so the big focus is as a result on what

is the political consequences of this

what's going to happen in the election i

don't know

you know personally i suspect president

trump will probably win again

i'm not saying that because you should

vote for against president trump or vote

for against president uh excuse me

mr biden i'm not advocating someone's

election

just giving you a guess as to what i

think will happen

uh but um but in many ways this is kind

of like the clinton email scandal again

isn't it doesn't it remind you of that

i just i just you know that and the

consequence of the clinton email scandal

was that

that we uncovered uh that trump the

consequence of the clinton email scandal

wasn't

was uh i think uh was a significant

contributing factor to put it mildly

to the president of the united states

donald trump being

put into the presidency uh by the

american people in 2016. and we'll see

if there's new

this new corruption issue uh

makes a uh uh results in

similar outcome uh in his re-election i

don't know

but i'm gonna be a little bit more

positive about what the outcome

is here because people have asked i just

did an interview with my friend charlie

kirk for uh his uh for his podcast

and he said what's good what do you

think's going to happen legally if biden

wins on this issue

you know and it occurred to me that it

may not be it's

look they're going to try to shut down

any criminal investigation of joe biden

in a biden administration i know that

will be the case they will try

and they will probably succeed

but it isn't going to be as easy as you

think it isn't going to be as easy as

you

think so just because joe biden may win

the presidency

it will not shut down any criminal

investigation

targeting him you know we still do have

a government that is answerable to the

american people

it's run by politicians who are afraid

of the voters more or less they don't

want to be turned out of office

so if there is a serious criminal

investigation of joe biden and you know

that's a big if

i don't know if it's going to be able

he's going to be able to shut it down

easily

i don't know i you know i i'm not naive

in the sense that they'll do anything

significant against him

but it could dog him for some time and

you know past experiences the best

indicator

of future results when it comes to these

investigations

so joe biden's likely to be protected no

matter who

becomes the president whether president

trump is reelected or biden is

re-elected uh but he's not it's not

risk-free for him

so the fbi for instance investigating

his business partner

i mean if you listen to what rudy

giuliani is talking about and of course

rudy has been right on this

i shouldn't call him rudy's the mayor i

call him the mayor

has been so right on this you know he's

been blowing the whistle on this and for

his pains

his patriotism

he's been attacked viciously

he's been targeted with you know threats

of jail and being called a russia agent

all sorts of smears

because he was blowing the whistle on

this corruption

for two years and he was righter than

right

president trump was righter than right

i mean heck i you know i knew there was

something big with biden i knew but i

didn't know

what was so big because i saw the

reaction that they were willing to blow

up the constitution with this coup

attack on president

trump after he just raised some

reasonable questions about what biden

was up to in ukraine

and i thought the overreaction suggested

there was something much

bigger there and sure enough it's just

the tip of the iceberg ukraine was just

one of many countries

uh that they were um involved

that was a part of the looks like the

grift

for the biden family so uh

is the fbi going to do anything i don't

trust the fbi to do anything is the

justice department going to do anything

i don't trust the justice department to

do anything this is why i think the

president

should appoint a a separate special

counsel

not in the justice department not in the

fbi

there are other law enforcement agencies

in the government

at the federal level that can perfectly

investigate this

they don't need the fbi to investigate

this

you could have dhs investigated you

could have the postal service

investigated they've got an inspector

they got a criminal uh investigative

unit they can investigate this

i don't trust the justice department the

fbi to do it they've kind of proven

that they can't be trusted and it

doesn't mean that

tenor general barr is corrupt doesn't

even necessarily believe

mean that rey is corrupt it just means

institutionally

they are not they can't they will not

satisfy

um and me at least and i know millions

of americans

i speak for that any investigation will

be legit

because of their prior corruption and

the failure of those agencies

to hold those responsible for that

corruption accountable till now

so if i were the president uh i'd

recommend he

i i'd appoint a special counsel so

that's

uh we'll see what happens with the joe

biden scandal now judicial watch of

course

is on it we already have cases and

lawsuits about joe biden

and barisma you know for instance

we uncovered that hunter biden went to

uh 29 countries we uncovered that

through a freedom of information act

lawsuit

and what's interesting in these emails

because we had asked for additional

documents about his travels we didn't

get them so we sued and the secret

server said look

we don't have secret service records

after i forget which month in

in 2014. suggesting that biden given up

his secret service

retinue and protection at that time

which raised additional questions what

was he doing when

why why did he give it up if he did

now these emails suggest that

he didn't give it up that the secret

service was still providing protection

for him

so we may go back to the court and

reopen our case

i tell you you know what's awful about

these corruption issues is that you know

that you can't trust the

agencies that interact with corrupt

government officials as a result because

there's

there's this almost reflexive effort to

cover up on their behalf and i don't

know if that's happening here at the

secret service but we're going to look

into it

based on the new emails that we've

uncovered and of course we've got

uh we immediately sent out foias and are

sending out freedom information act

requests

on the new revelations here with respect

to china

and and uh biden laptop generally and

the fbi and justice department's

mishandling

so judicial watch is on the case whether

or not the justice department and

fbi do what is required under the law

uh and don't expect them to have

anything done before election day

that's they're not going to do it

they've made the decision to protect him

you know the big question i have you may

recall i think was back in may of this

year attorney general barr said

that he didn't see anything that they're

going to be investigating barr um and

cuny obama are buying for

well did he know about the hunter biden

laptop at the time if not why not

if not why not so

it's interesting it's it's going to be

an interesting period of time here

and um i i want to separately raise the

issue

of election integrity we've had some

cases come up

just recently we had chief justice

roberts i think

wrongly uh intervene or refuse to

chain um basically the supreme court has

eight members now right

so uh there was a pennsylvania court

ruling

that author changed the law change the

rules

that authorize ballots to be counted up

to three days after the election in

pennsylvania that arrive up to three

days after the election

with or with that without a postmark

potentially

so uh the trump campaign and the voters

and others

uh sued and tried to get the supreme

court intervened to change that and it

split four

four meaning the lower court ruling was

upheld

and justice roberts was on the side of

the liberals in the court

uh and also in north carolina there was

a a court-mandated rule change i think

and i think it's six states they'll be

counting ballots after the election

so those are two big states now judicial

watch separately has

lawsuits over cleaning up the election

rules in north carolina and pennsylvania

and we've uncovered upwards of two

nearly two million names on the rolls

that shouldn't really be there

which shows that as i speak as i

constantly say the recklessness

of of large-scale mail-in ballots

relying on such lists

now i don't believe in either state they

they are

um i shouldn't say

i don't want to guess too much but i'm

not quite sure the rules are if they're

just mailing blindly the ballots to the

list

but when you've got dirty lists it can

mean dirty elections

that's that's the reality of it of

course you you instinctively know that

don't you

i say that the left says what do you

mean that's outrageous

of course it's not outrageous it's a

truism

so in those two states there's going to

be more controversy about the election

because they've provided a pathway

for fraud in north carolina and

pennsylvania thanks to activist court

rulings in the case of north carolina

you had the liberal-controlled appellate

court in the fourth circuit

uh endorse this uh radical rule change

and i don't know what the supreme court

is going to do now thankfully

chief excuse me judge amy connie barrett

was

just yesterday confirmed by the senate

judiciary committee

and she should be on the supreme court

by tuesday of next week

october 27th i don't know if she'll be

technically on the court but confirmed

now um so we may have a vote

in the just in a new vote in a

uh in the supreme court with a justice

barrett

that will support the rule of law on

elections

see the left likes to think it's all

about oh if you're

they believe in political politicized

judicial decision making i see it as

do you want the courts to intervene in

the elections

to help one side or do you kind of come

up with a rule of

application that says the law is what it

and you can't have judges making it up

as they go along in the end

to help their perceived political allies

now the left will scream that well

that's just republicanism it's not it's

just conservative judicial decision

making

i mean chief justice roberts is in many

ways being

political when he refuses to stop judges

from messing with our elections

so my that's a long way of saying that

uh if when justice barrett becomes when

judge barrett becomes justice barrett we

may have

even better outcomes in the supreme

court on behalf of the rule of law and

election integrity

which is why the left was so crazed

about opposing her

and to that end i once again encourage

you to

call your senators at 202-225-3121

and tell them what you think about the

confirmation of

judge barrett you know it wasn't

inevitable and it's not inevitable

practically speaking it is now

inevitable that she's confirmed

that she what would have been confirmed

before election day

or confirmed at all

and so let your senators know what you

think about this outcome

you know if they if they did the right

thing by your lights

praise them they did the wrong thing let

them know what you dispute

but your senators want to hear from you

they do want to hear from you

i mean i know you think they don't want

to hear from you they hate to hear from

voters

they love to hear from voters

what's what political animal doesn't

want a barometer of what their

constituents are thinking through phone

calls

voluntary phone calls that voters are

making to them

they love to hear it helps them figure

out where they stand

and what to do next if they're good

senators they don't they aren't afraid

to hear from you but

if you disagree with them or agree with

them let them know

uh it is a great day it will be a great

day for the constitution

when judge barrett is confirmed it will

be a great day for the constitution

it will be a great day for the

constitution because the american people

don't want politicians and robes she is

committed and she has a record

demonstrating her commitment more

importantly

to applying the law as written and

originally understood by the founders or

the legislatures of if it's a later law

at least federally

or constitutional amendment at least

later

so uh we we can expand i don't know if

she'll rule in a way that i will agree

with every time

but i do know that she has a approach

consistent

with respecting our right to govern

ourselves

our right to have the constitution be

applied in a way the founders

and the writers of the various parts of

it intended

and that congress and the legislative

executive branch

should not be unduly interfered with by

the judicial branch

the judicial branch is there to serve as

a check and balance

not to be a supremacist or

there's this idea of judicial supremacy

i reject that

it's contrary to our republican form of

government

and justice uh judge barrett agrees

uh with our approach on that so good

good for senator graham for getting this

pushed through

good for all the senators that are going

to support her uh

you had the democrat senators refused to

show up and participate in the final

committee vote

talk about someone who had to talk about

showing contempt for the voters

so if your senator was a democrat on

this committee

and they didn't show up the vote you

were deprived of your

you know constitutional expectation that

they would represent you

in the governance of the country what an

attack on our republic and an

attack on the senate that is i mean it's

not only

juvenile and petty but it undermines the

rule of law in our republican form of

government when you have

elected officials decide to take their

take their little toys and go home

rather than participate in the process

completely lawless so we'll see

next week will be a good week for the

constitution uh if things go

as we expect so judicial watch

uh is uh another big issue obviously and

it's been up it's come up in the debates

repeatedly

between president trump and

the former vice president biden about

china and coronavirus

and our friends at the daily caller news

foundation asked the

nih specifically

for documents about wh

o china and coronavis and and the

documents were

dr fauci's emails and the emails of his

top deputy

so needless to say they got the stone

wall and then so judicial watch came to

the rescue

to file a lawsuit on behalf of the daily

caller news foundation and

uh the response was stonewall delay in

fact they wanted to turn they

found documents they did the initial

search but they didn't want to turn over

any of them until

after the election and a federal court

judge says no you got to at least begin

giving us the first batch before the

election which was october 21st so we

finally got the documents

uh last night or yesterday and uh

and they show the following

they show that a w-h-o entity

let me call it up here

wanted um was oddly

focused on pushing out a

friendly press release for china this is

again during the beginning of the

pandemic

and the entity is the global

preparedness monitoring board which is

an entity convened by the world health

organization and world bank

and they wrote an email in january 27

2020 and this was before

they knew the full scope of the virus

and all of that

uh it was called a time sensitive

message from

the gpmb this w.h.o body

co-chairs review of a drafts gpmb

statement on the 2019 novel coronavirus

there was a consensus for the gpmb to

issue a statement supportive of

countries

especially china lay right in

parentheses

and wh response efforts and to call for

urgent action to further strengthen

global preparedness

and response to this outbreak please

find attached a draft

statement on january 29th

fauci responds looks fine please see my

comments and attach document of course

they didn't provide the draft comments

which is typical

inappropriate but typical

and so uh

you've got this who entity

pushing for the statement to be released

about covid

with a focus on praising china

and of course job it was done

because i went and looked online to see

well

okay what statement was actually issued

and this is what the statement says

the global preparedness monitoring board

gpmb as i said convene on january 27

2020 to discuss the current opera

break of the 2019 and cove

which is the novel coronavirus coven

which was first detected in wuhan china

and is now quickly spreading

internationally

the board commends the speed of the

response so far by countries

and the world health organization

the transparency of china in sharing

information

and the genome sequence of the virus and

the strong collaboration between china

and affected countries and with who

so i don't need to tell you about the

controversy in the way china handled

this in terms of

targeting those who are blowing the

whistle internally on it

delaying disclosure to key entities

about what was going on in china

and other problems and isn't it

interesting that whos

and their you know this front for who

because you know i keep on calling it

the gmpb

it's really who

their collective concern is

most you know it's clear in the email

about praising china's role here

it helps explain why they don't want to

turn over this document doesn't it

and uh i think it's real interesting

there are other emails here that

kind of show you the back and forth and

they're interesting to read but this is

the big stuff

and i don't know what else is out there

but

i tell you

it is exceedingly frustrating that

agencies presumably nomin

uh you know nominally run by the

president of the united states

continue to withhold information and i'm

convinced they withhold information

because it it can be seen to be helpful

to him as opposed to hurting him that's

the way i'm

that's what's been happening it's it's

been relatively consistent

dr fauci according to the government

perfect

is is the reason it's slowed down is

because he has to review all these

emails which is

nonsensical

as i wrote in our statement these facts

emails show how praising china was the

odd priority

of the hwho in the face of a novel and

dangerous coronavirus that the nih tried

to slow roll

the release of these emails and is still

sitting on

thousands more as a scandal so they've

only reviewed 300 pages

there are 4 200 pages that they've found

and they're going to release the monthly

so now what's three

into 42 12 is 30 say for 14 months so we

won't be able to see these documents

until

2022 and in their entirety

i jokingly say we'll be in a chelsea

clinton administration

before we see all the documents that

deep state is hiding from us

and as our friends over at the daily

caller news foundation the now

government is uh says neil patel

the government is now ever so slowly

complying with the law and letting the

american people know

how they did business with who in china

at the outset of this pandemic

we are grateful for to judicial watch

for helping us force the government to

do its job

which is to follow the law

oh boy and what i found interesting

about these emails admittedly it's only

a small portion of the documents

but they don't show at least in this

batch

that they saw this as a dramatic virus

initially

you know you can go and look at the

documents and i encourage you to review

themselves there's no there's no

indication that

this was like a high red alert issue

i mean they were moving people to try to

study it that's clear

uh but it's pretty clear early on they

didn't see it as the contagion that

we've

since come to learn it was or or

threatened to be they didn't kind of

know about it probably because the

chinese weren't telling them about it

and um you know it looked like they were

deferential to the chinese here

uh in the emails uh you know why praise

them when you

really didn't know what was going on i

mean in my view

if you're dealing with the chinese

communist government you

should be skeptical of them and just

presume they're lying about everything

i mean you know my view is you should be

skeptical when the government tells you

pretty much anything

even in a democratic or constitutional

republic why would we believe anything

in the chinese

that the communist government in china

would be telling us on something

obviously they would have a

significant political interest in

minimizing

but that's the way things work and

that's what dr fauci

uh approved according to these new

emails so we'll see what else is

happening and we'll uh

talk about it uh uh

later i'll give you updates as we get