As this book goes to print, our nation’s cities are being burned by radical, violent leftists seeking to overthrow our republic. This follows unprecedented restrictions on our constitutional freedoms, our ability to work and other God-given rights by mostly left-wing governors and local officials under the guise of controlling the coronavirus. Many leftist governors and mayors were quick to suspend constitutional rights and destroy businesses of the law-abiding but slow to protect citizens from rioters.
In one way or another, for good, and sometimes unfortunately, for bad, a crisis always reveals who we are as individuals and as a people. Always.
During the late winter and spring of 2020, the multiple individual, governmental, health-care, and private sector responses to the Wuhan COVID-19 crisis serve as a timely case study—one that should and will be examined in great detail over the course of the coming months and years.
A crisis, of course, should and does bring out the very best in a majority of us. We have seen that time and again in the past, and time and again at the height of the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic. Neighbors helping neighbors; major-league sports teams and professionals paying laid-off employees or providing other financial support; a grocery store chain donating at least 6 million meals to those hit hardest by the crisis; grocery store employees going way above and beyond the call of duty to stock shelves, ring up our orders, and keep their stores open; America’s truck drivers working endless hours and driving past the point of exhaustion to fill those stores and pharmacies with the supplies and medications our nation so desperately needed; and most important of all, our doctors, nurses, and their support staff who heroically manned the front lines of that pandemic to help and save as many infected as humanly possible.
Unfortunately, a crisis can also quickly or instantly reveal some troubling proclivities of those hoping to use it as a means to an end. Even, quite alarmingly and tragically, the Wuhan COVID-19 crisis.
There are a number of ways our republic can be—and is—under assault. One of the most unsettling, and truly vile, would be to attempt to weaken its freedoms, its laws, its borders, and the accountability of its government by exploiting a global pandemic for partisan or personal gain.
And yet, as we now know, there was a great deal of evidence that points exactly to that tactic. It was as if some politicians and activists were using the confusion, the trillions of dollars, and tragedy surrounding the Wuhan COVID-19 crisis to achieve political objectives, such as imposing long-sought changes to election integrity measures—such as ending voter ID, while pushing massive vote-by-mail schemes and ballot harvesting. Judicial Watch called for a rollback of the calling to “Liberate America” from the draconian dictates of the “cure.”
This pandemic “cure” was destroying millions of American jobs, the very economy of our nation, and our freedoms in the process.
There is no doubt that the Wuhan COVID-19 virus was quite serious and especially dangerous to the elderly and other susceptible populations.
The doubts and the questions surfaced over, first, how best to treat the virus without destroying our nation and the economic, mental, and physical well-being of tens of millions of Americans in the process. And second was the real concern regarding the World Health Organization’s (WHO) seemingly corrupt relationship with the People’s Republic of China and its leadership, and how that corrupt relationship might negatively impact the American people. For instance, based on rather obvious China lies, the WHO minimized the threat of coronavirus by suggesting the risk of human-to-human transmissibility was low. President Trump was so livid about WHO’s coddling of China that he withdrew the United States from the international organization.
Be it in our nation, or around the world, too many on the left and their allies in the mainstream media had no intention of letting the paralyzing fear and uncertainty over the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic go to waste.
It was the intention of the Left to exploit the crisis from day one.
As reported in March 2020 during a conference call held between House Democrats, House Majority Whip James Clyburn—third in line among House Democratic leadership and a strong ally of Speaker Nancy Pelosi—spelled out their selfish, biased, and truly anti-American strategy with one sentence.
Said Clyburn: “This is a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.”
Clearly meaning to use the panic and fear over the virus as a means to advance their leftist policy agenda.
President Barack Obama’s former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel—who, after leaving the White House, went on to become mayor of Chicago—must have been quite proud of Clyburn. For it was Emanuel who, as White House chief of staff, infamously said: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.”
That you “could not do before.” A better and more accurate translation of that being what you were not allowed to do before.
Such as using the pandemic crisis as an excuse to strip the American people of their Second Amendment rights. This was a tactic multiple liberals and their handmaidens in the media immediately tried as they loudly advocated for the outright ban on the sale of guns and ammunition during the early days of the pandemic. They did so because they noticed the immediate uptick in gun and ammunition sales—an uptick caused by Americans nervous about the draconian measures being hinted at or outright advocated by many on the left.
Or when—as mentioned in Issues & Insights—a number of liberal politicians and operatives—the Los Angeles City Council, made up of 14 Democrats and 1 independent, for example—made it clear they should have been given the power to completely take over private businesses under the guise of “Saving the people.”
Operatives from the Far Left seeking to take complete control of a business built from the ground up from the blood, sweat, and tears of hardworking, law-abiding American citizens is a scheme we have seem time and again. This is the tactic of totalitarian or dictatorial regimes.
Another tactic is rigging or stealing elections. When better to try than in the confusion of a national and international crisis?
As was noted in numerous news accounts, precisely because of the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic, many leftists instantly pushed a vote-by-mail “free for all” scheme that would give fraudsters a much easier chance to rig or steal the 2020 elections—and elections in the future. Naturally, with no voter ID needed or wanted.
As Judicial Watch has long pointed out, voter fraud is a key civil rights issue. This issue demands increased attention and, more important, action. Much of that action being to not only stop fraudulent vote-by-mail efforts, but also to oppose any cleanup of the existing voter rolls, which are littered with quite possibly millions of suspect names. Millions.
Calling back to Rahm Emanuel’s point, they sought to use the pandemic as an opportunity to aggressively push “what they could not do before.” Again, what would never be allowed under “normal” circumstances.
As liberal politicians worked as one to exploit the crisis for their own partisan agenda at the direct expense of the welfare of the American people, the liberal mainstream media continually sought to silence the voice of President Donald J. Trump during the crisis by not only smearing him every chance they got, but by ignoring and not broadcasting his then live updates to the nation regarding the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic.
While suppressing Trump, too many in the media were happy to defend the People’s Republic of China.
Shills for the communist leadership of the nation that, unintentionally or not, unleashed the virus upon the world.
Shills who, while still making millions of dollars, were also involved in a truly heinous cover-up.
For instance, the Washington Post has a long and ongoing business relationship with China Watch, which is a branch of China Daily, a newspaper and media outlet directly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese military.
For over thirty years, both the Washington Post and the New York Times have featured advertorial inserts from China Watch at a reported price of over $100,000 per page. The basic math on that spells out millions of dollars of Chinese government money going into the corporate bank accounts of the Washington Post and the New York Times.
It is little wonder then that during the weeks and months before the Wuhan COVID-19 was proven dangerous and highly contagious, the Washington Post, the New York Times, and a number of other media outlets benefiting financially from business relationships with and in the People’s Republic of China continually raised doubts about how serious the pandemic truly was while simultaneously smearing anyone—most especially President Trump—who dared to suggest that not only did COVID-19 originate in China, but that the Chinese government was actively trying to cover up that fact.
Over the coming months and years, good and decent people in and outside of various governments and organizations will try to ascertain approximately how many lives could have been saved had the world caught the Chinese Communist Party earlier in its vicious lies and deceptions regarding the Wuhan COVID-19.
Lies and deceptions aided and abetted by certain U.S. media outlets.
While we will long examine and debate which was the correct strategy to follow to save our nation and the world in a time of highly flawed pandemic computer models, there is no debating the initial motivations of much of the mainstream media in creating panic and hysteria over the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic.
Knowing that, it is critically important to examine and contrast the conduct of that same media—and even certain infectious disease experts who advised President Trump—with the coverage and advice surrounding the swine flu pandemic that hit our nation and the world in 2009 and 2010.
While most of the media and a few of those “experts” would prefer that we forget, when that swine flu pandemic finally ran its course in 2010, it infected 1.5 billion people on earth and killed upward of 700,000.
Here in the United States, the swine flu pandemic infected 61 million Americans, hospitalized over 300,000, and killed upward of 18,000. Many of them were children and young people.
And yet, in the media of that time, there was no hysteria. They created no panic. They did not weaponize it. All the opposite, in fact. They played it down.
Be it CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, or the major television networks, all either completely ignored the swine flu pandemic at first, or pushed it deep within their papers, relegated it to a sidebar story on their sites, or a minute or two on the nightly news.
Not by coincidence, as the swine flu pandemic and its real threat to the safety and lives of American citizens was swept under the rug by the media, the nation remained “totally open for business.”
No lockdowns. No “social distancing.” Were the medical experts wrong not to do so then? Did they overreact in the late winter and spring of 2020?
Also, and as we know, there were no threats of a massive fine, or arrest, or prison time for violating the edicts of those in power.
To further understand and explain some of that conduct of the time, let’s cast our minds back to 2009 and 2010 and try to remember who the president of the United States was at the time.
Oh, right: it was Barack Obama.
Next, it becomes mandatory to examine the actual mainstream media coverage of President Obama as it pertained to the “Crisis” that was… barely covered.
What a difference ten years, another pandemic, and a different president make. One who is totally despised by most of the mainstream media, Hollywood, and academia.
More than anything else, certain behavior within the media, academia, and now even medicine and science is driven by an unhinged and incurable hatred of President Trump, a condition some have named Trump Derangement Syndrome.
To underscore that, we need only go back to the last two major pandemics before the swine flu of 2009–10. Those would be the Asian flu of 1957 and the Hong Kong flu of 1968–69.
The Asian flu hit during the last administration of President Dwight D. Eisenhower. By the standards we use today, it was an incredibly dangerous pandemic, one that, by the time it ran its course, had infected tens of millions of Americans, hospitalized hundreds of thousands, and killed approximately 116,000 Americans out of a then population of about 175 million.
And yet, no lockdowns, no social distancing, no destruction of the American economy.
In 1968, during the last year of the administration of President Lyndon Johnson, came the Hong Kong flu pandemic. Again, by today’s Covid-19 standards, truly quite dangerous. A virus that in many ways was a mirror image to COVID-19 in that it was highly infectious and could be primarily lethal to those over sixty-five years of age with preexisting conditions. By the time that pandemic ran its course in 1969, it had infected tens of millions of Americans, hospitalized hundreds of thousands, and killed approximately 100,000 out of a population of about 200 million. Worldwide, it killed upward of 4 million people.
But again, the media that existed during the last year of President Johnson’s term and the first year of President Richard Nixon’s term remained calm and induced no panic whatsoever into the population.
Consequently, once again, no lockdowns, no social distancing, no destruction of the American economy or way of life.
Knowing that historical context, it then becomes fair to ask two questions. The first: Did some on the left in the media, academia, medicine, and science react differently because Trump was president? And second, because of that bias, were they holding President Trump to a much different and much higher standard than say, Presidents Obama, Nixon, and Eisenhower?
Or did they simply—and tragically—paint our entire nation into a corner with their panic and draconian measures and then were too cowardly to admit to their mistakes and refuse to choose the actual best course of action to fight the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic?
While the answers to those questions seem clear to most of us, many on the left—because of hate and ideology—still choose blanket denials as the way to go.
What can’t be denied by anyone who was paying attention in the late winter and spring of 2020 is that the emergence of the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic led to the deliberate and dangerous abuse of that crisis by some of the usual suspects, which led to the emergence of a new tyranny at the state and local level.
It is instructive that left politico-media concerns about the “spread” and being on lockdown “together” went out the window as soon as radical leftists needed to riot, burn, and loot after the death in police custody of George Floyd on May 25, 2020, in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
So how did this new tyranny emerge?
Certain—and instant—responses to the Wuhan COVID-19 by some of our “leaders” gave us all a crystal-clear look at that truly disturbing process.
Close on the heels and soon coupled with the deliberately fear-induced media panic came the “End of the World” COVID-19 computer model projections. Projections that exponentially accelerated the panic and lockdowns.
A number of those projected and highly flawed computer models emanating from either far-left universities and university professors, or from far-left organizations that stood to benefit from the billions of dollars of stimulus money forked over involuntarily by U.S. taxpayers as well as other hardworking taxpayers around the world.
The most notable and infamous of these “End of the World” computer models was produced by a professor by the name of Neil Ferguson and his team from Imperial College in London. As an aside, in May 2020 Ferguson had to resign his position after it was alleged that he violated his own “safe distance” and “lockdown” orders to spend the night with the wife of another man.
With regard to the lack of accuracy or even danger associated with computer models, back in the glory days of NASA during the 1960s, when the United States was racing the then Soviet Union to the Moon, our truly courageous astronauts offered up an incredibly accurate description of such models, a description that has most certainly stood the test of time.
Observed those astronauts who were risking their very lives on the whims of calculations and predictions: “Garbage in, Garbage out.”
With that truism in mind, in March 2020 as the Wuhan COVID-19 began to spread, the team at Imperial College fed “garbage assumptions” based upon what little real on-the-ground evidence they had at the time into their computer and came out with a computer model stating that approximately 500,000 would die from the virus in the United Kingdom and approximately 2,200,000 in the United States.
These numbers, uncritically pushed by media, panicked political leaders.
Never mind that the general rule with computer models such as that—or those predicting landfall for a hurricane in Florida or say, Hillary Clinton crushing Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election—is that they are almost always wrong for the simple reason that either their sample size is way too small, or they were fed incorrect or biased information from the start.
Specifically with regard to the Imperial College computer model, National Review correctly stated: “Models like this will always turn out to be wrong in some way or other because they rely on very strong assumptions about aspects of the disease we haven’t thoroughly studied yet. If nothing else, the original Imperial model will be obsolete soon.”
With that fact in mind, no one should have been surprised when the Imperial College computer model was made obsolete by Imperial College itself just days after making that “End of the World” prediction. After getting a bit more real-time accurate statistics, the projected death rate for the United Kingdom went from 500,000 to just under 20,000.
It should be noted that in a normal year with absolutely no pandemic the United Kingdom loses approximately 18,000 people to the common flu.
Again, the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic was quite serious and did merit the strongest response possible from all of us. But… a reasoned response.
Sadly, reason was left behind by many.
As we saw and experienced, the doom-and-gloom computer model projections are what set off not only that initial mindless panic, but greed and… the first hints of totalitarianism.
Not letting this good crisis go to waste, a number of governors and mayors in our country soon realized that thanks entirely to the growing panic and draconian lockdowns spawned from especially the error-filled computer model projection, they could suddenly exercise close to complete dictatorial powers within their respective states, cities, and towns and issue edicts that greatly curtailed or outright forbade the God-given rights and freedoms of their citizens. One couldn’t go to church, earn a living, run a business, protest, travel. Our most basic freedoms and liberties were restricted on a scale never seen before in American history.
All, of course, under the guise of protecting us.
Shockingly, in the United States of America, citizens could be fined or even imprisoned if found violating one of these arbitrary, indiscriminate, and indefinite edicts that shut businesses, required social distancing, and, now, mandated wearing a mask.
Fined or imprisoned.
And indeed, a number of Americans were arrested or taken into custody protesting the lockdowns.
We are not talking about North Korea, the People’s Republic of China, or Iran, but right here in the United States of America.
In many cases when countries, regions, or even states and cities lose their freedoms, it is not because the tyrant or dictator of the time forcibly took it from them. More often than not, it is because the people in those countries, regions, states, or cities slowly but surely began to surrender those freedoms in return for promised protection against the terrifying external threat of the moment. In this particular case, that terrifying—dialed up to truly mind-numbing—external threat is the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic.
Within just two weeks after the pandemic computer-model projections, American citizens within the United States of America were told by state and local officials that they could be arrested and possibly imprisoned if they violated the hastily put together edicts instantly put in place “for their protection.”
With our “leaders,” “experts,” and politicians having absolutely no clue as to whether their draconian actions would in fact work—or what the final societal, financial, mental health, or criminal costs to the nation would be—we were all collectively—and indeed forcibly—plunged into that unknown together.
The American people were literally given no say in their own fate or that of their families.
And, as we all fell toward that unknown, a select number from the left leapt at the chance to strengthen and expand that emerging tyranny, greatly expanding the alleged authority of government to run and restrict our day-to-day activities.
The radioactive dust and damage from this crisis is going to take months and even years to settle. As that process and evidence of mismanagement and especially deliberate wrongdoing unfolds, the millions of Americans and voters who lost their jobs, and life savings, and watched in desperation as their families suffered beyond comprehension must never lose sight of the life-altering lessons brought about by the virus… or… those who sought to exploit it.
One of the most telling takeaways was that many who instantly and even coldly advocated for a complete “lockdown” of our nation and the instant elimination of the jobs of tens of millions of hardworking Americans had nothing to lose themselves.
Nothing.
If they were federal, state, or local politicians, they had guaranteed salaries, health care, and more often than not a lifelong pension awaiting them.
If they were academics, they had tenured and protected jobs, paid health care, and pensions awaiting them.
If they were senior federal employees, they had their guaranteed jobs and health care.
And if they were many of the liberal media talking heads pushing for the complete “lockdown” of our nation, they had their often seven-figure plus salaries and full bank accounts to bring them comfort as millions of their fellow citizens suffered the severe consequences of those lockdowns.
As we close out this section, it is also critically important to remember that those who had no hesitation about using the world’s pandemic crisis to further their political agendas are the same individuals, organizations, and entities who are part of the Deep State, seeking to eradicate our borders, steal our elections, and transform the United States of America into something truly unrecognizable and frightening.
“Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppression of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day.”
—THOMAS JEFFERSON, APRIL 24, 1816
There—encapsulated within the wise and increasingly relevant words articulated by the third president of the United States; the principal author of our Declaration of Independence; and a driving force behind our Constitution more than two hundred years ago—is revealed the overriding mission of Judicial Watch. We always stand at the ready to enlighten the American people so their precious freedoms and rights cannot be taken from them by those using oppression for an orchestrated tyrannical outcome.
But… as we focus on Jefferson’s quote about “Enlightening the People,” the question of our time is: Whom do we trust with such a critically important responsibility? The media? Our media of today?
One can only wonder what arguably our nation’s most powerful advocate of liberty would think of the United States and the world of today. Because, as we continue to witness, in a number of freedom-depriving ways, some things have changed dramatically for the worse since Jefferson walked the earth.
For instance… that very media.
Knowing that to be a fact, let’s examine his often quoted and highlighted remarks regarding the need for newspapers and their power to truthfully inform the American people.
In a letter written in 1787 from Paris to Edward Carrington—whom Jefferson had sent as a delegate to the Continental Congress—he spoke to the importance of a free press to keep government in check. The then minister to France said in part:
The people are the only censors of their governors; and even their errors will tend to keep these to the true principles of their institution. To punish these errors too severely would be to suppress the only safeguard of the public liberty. The way to prevent these irregular interpositions of the people is to give them full information of their affairs thro’ the channel of the public papers and to contrive that those papers should penetrate the whole mass of the people. The basis of our government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right, and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.…
In principle—and in 1787—Jefferson is and was correct.
But Jefferson’s stated belief and desire that “were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter…” is predicated entirely upon the hope and assumption that said “newspapers” were ethical, honest, and only had the best interests of the American people in mind.
Flash ahead over two hundred years to 2020 and we find that many of the mainstream “newspapers” of today are not ethical, honest, nor have the best interests of the American people in mind, but are joined in their malfeasance by other powerful institutions and professions.
It is quite possible that in 1787, the great mind of Thomas Jefferson simply could not imagine that “newspapers” or any organizations or professions that commanded tremendous sway over the lives of his fellow citizens of the time could become so corrupt that they would embrace and espouse the liberty-robbing beliefs he had spent a lifetime fighting.
But… unfortunately, we don’t have to imagine and contemplate it because it is a part of our everyday lives. Not only are we living it, but watching as it seeks to erode the platform atop which sits the republic that Thomas Jefferson and our Founding Fathers sacrificed so much to create.
The catalyst for this destructive behavior is called “groupthink.”
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “groupthink” as: “A pattern of thought characterized by self-deception, forced manufacture of consent, and conformity to group values and ethics.”
Back in his day, Thomas Jefferson may have seen pockets of such “groupthink.” Unfortunately, two-hundred-plus years later, we have “Liberal Groupthink” which has come to dominate not only the mainstream media, but academia, science, medicine, and entertainment. A domination enabled and spread primarily by blatant and illegal discrimination against conservative, libertarian, faith-based, pragmatic, and dissenting thought of any kind.
The fact that this liberal groupthink is so crushingly dominant shows itself in issues pertaining to the Wuhan COVID-19 pandemic, the rule of law, terrorism, border security, global warming, energy independence, health care, education, corrupt public employee unions, and the political leaders of our nation.
As Judicial Watch has uncovered and detailed repeatedly over the last number of years, the liberal groupthink coverage of President Bill Clinton, President Barack Obama, and former first lady, senator, and secretary of state Hillary Clinton has not only been fawning to the point of embarrassment, but repeatedly deceptive as it sought to shield the Clinton and Obama teams from negative coverage and, more important, needed serious criminal investigations.
The inverse of that of course is their rabidly negative and unethical coverage of former president Ronald Reagan, former president George H. W. Bush, former president George W. Bush, and most especially, current president Donald J. Trump.
Incredibly, but not the least bit shockingly to those who follow Judicial Watch, many liberal to far-left members of this groupthink coalition of the media, academia, science, medicine, and entertainment have openly and proudly proclaimed themselves to be part of the “Resistance” against President Trump.
Let that sink in for a minute.
Countless “professionals” from these highly influential professions and arenas have openly come out to reveal themselves as part of the “Revolution” to topple a president legally and constitutionally elected by the people of the United States of America.
Had these people existed in the time of Thomas Jefferson, he would not only have never put his faith in such truth and freedom-destroying groupthink, but indeed would have vocally and loudly called it out as an enemy of democracy, liberty, and the rule of law.
Unfortunately—but always purposefully—the information flowing today from these professions or groups on a regular basis is often biased, ill-informed, deliberately deceptive, and often insulting or threatening to the opinions, narratives, or even lives of the American citizens who dare to differ with their preapproved narratives and dogma.
A fact of our everyday lives that will never change unless someone stands up to hold them accountable.
For those not quite familiar with the work of Judicial Watch, I am here to tell you that is what we do: hold government and other important institutions accountable to the rule of law
Since the very day we were established in 1994, we have been doing precisely that. Often, as a lone voice in the wilderness.
Our core mission remains to fight for transparency, honesty, accountability, and integrity in government, politics, and the law.
Judicial Watch was created as, and remains, a conservative, nonpartisan educational foundation that seeks to promote the highest standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life. While we do believe in limited government, individual liberty, the free market, and a strong national defense, our organization favors no party as it stands as one to ensure that our elected and judicial officials never abuse the powers we, as the American people, entrust to them.
Some—most especially the liberal mainstream media—like to claim, and inwardly wish, that our supporters are only “Republican.” Far from it.
Because our mission is to fight for transparency, honesty, accountability, and integrity in government, politics, and the law for all Americans, that means Americans from every walk of life support us and our cause. Americans who are Democrats, independents, Republicans, or simply those who attach themselves to no labels but are sick and tired of the corruption stealing their nation from them and their children.
With that background and mission in mind, our motto remains:
“Because no one is above the law!”
How does Judicial Watch go about carrying out such a crucial mission? One day, but often, multiple cases at a time.
On a regular basis, we employ a multipronged strategy of litigation, investigation, and public outreach. As many on the wrong side of the law or adverse to the welfare of the American people have found out, we use the freedom-of-information laws as one of the most powerful tools in our arsenal of getting to the truth and uncovering wrongdoing. In fact, almost all of our investigations into wrongdoing begin with a freedom-of-information request.
The federal Freedom of Information Act allows most anyone to request documents from executive branch agencies about government activities. And if these agencies ignore or improperly withhold information, requestors can go to federal court! (States have similar freedom-of-information laws.)
While we don’t sue at the “drop of a hat,” we will sue when needed to gather information or inform and educate the American people about the operations of our government and those seeking to subvert those operations for their own means.
Not surprisingly, no one understands the power of our freedom-of-information laws to expose the corrupt or the guilty more than those who operate anonymously out of the deepest, darkest, and most cowardly shadows of the Deep State.
Ultimately, no matter if it is a famous or even infamous politician or branch or branches of our own government, Judicial Watch’s work is designed to uphold the rule of law and drag government wrongdoing out into the light, where it can been seen for the danger it is by the American people.
Not only do we strive to continually protect the rights of the American people via our litigation and civil discovery process, but many times, as soon as those actions are made known to those we are investigating, the alleged corruption by those public officials or government agencies suddenly grinds to a halt. Imagine that.
In that sense, it can be most accurately stated that we are doing the work for the government that it often won’t undertake itself for a number of not so convincing or sound reasons.
With regard to our investigations, we have often been kiddingly or even sarcastically asked if Judicial Watch also watches the judiciary. The answer to that question is a loud and underscored “Yes.”
We would be remiss in our mission and our duties to the American people if we did not. Human nature is human nature, which means that no one from any walk of life is either infallible or is always resistant to temptation. That includes the official third branch of our federal government.
As judges are human, they can be biased, run into ethical issues, or occasionally be outright corrupt. As the judiciary does maintain a critical role in the running and the governance of our nation, it is imperative that we continually monitor it, and hold everyone in it who holds sway over our laws and lives accountable.
Precisely because Judicial Watch is at the forefront—and often initiating—these critically important investigations, more and more Americans reach out to us to learn not only about our activities, but most especially, the outlook and results of those activities and investigations. And, similarly, a judiciary that acts beyond its power and outside the Constitution is also an “ethics” issue. Judicial decision making that is nothing more than “legislating from the bench” is also a threat to the rule of law.
To respond to the public’s increasing requests for information, we expanded our educational outreach. We do so via direct television and radio outreach, as well as regular speeches, op-eds, and public service announcements.
As those who do follow and support Judicial Watch know, all of that information, background, and daily updates are housed and ready to be viewed 24/7 on our website, www.JudicialWatch.org.
It is there because it has to be there. We want and need it to be there.
The general public and honest and ethical media must know that our research, our lawsuits, our open-records searches and documents, and, most especially, our findings and evidence are accessible to them around the clock.
Full transparency is everything.
Darkness of the sort we investigate can only be defeated by that constant light of truth. The brighter and more penetrating, the better.
As we have learned over the years and now, decades, that darkness always has two constant allies. Those being secrecy and corruption. Both of them not only help to spread the darkness, but deepen its stain into the very fabric of our republic.
Judicial Watch believes it is our moral obligation and duty to cleanse that fabric, brighten and restore it to its original and intended red, white, and blue hues, and ultimately protect it.
As we approach the 2020 election and beyond, you can be assured that Judicial Watch will remain ever vigilant in our defense of the Constitution and the rule of law. And you will see we are relentless:
These matters can seem overwhelming, and, indeed, together they form one of the gravest crises our nation has ever faced.