The content wraps serious questions of judicial ethics in a layer of partisan sensationalism, trading nuanced legal analysis for inflammatory rhetoric. It functions more as a populist spectacle than a rigorous examination of constitutional integrity.
Install our extension to search inside any video instantly.
Trump Election Order VICTORY! Don Lemon CRUSHED! Obama Judge BLASTED!
Added:Yes. Hello, my beautiful friends and welcome back. Great live stream planned ahead. We're talking about an election victory. Remember, Trump issued that election mail-in ballot, US Postal Service executive order. Bunch of blue states came out of the woodwork and were suing all over the country. We now have a decision on it that is a good one.
It's not a total victory, but we also see some other activity from the DOJ.
They are pushing this forward aggressively. The citizenship lists, the male integrity, new rules, all coming into effect at a rapid clip. And so, the litigation will accelerate from here.
But we do have a victory as it relates to a huge portion of the Democrat party claims. And so, we'll be here to celebrate that. Then updates on the Don Lemon case. Remember, he and a bunch of other maniacs went into a church and attacked everybody inside. They tried their darnest to get their hands on a bunch of information and that has now failed. We'll take a look at that decision before we turn our attention to another Obama judge. guide who was actually in charge of pulling Trump's name off of the Kennedy Center now hit with a judicial complaint because his wife is an anti-Trump individual who is working aggressively against the administration and the judge is helping his wife out. So, bunch to come. Very glad to have you here and with us. We covered all of the Supreme Court stuff this morning. We had three interesting cases this morning. None of the big ones related to birthright citizenship or to election materials on that one. But we'll be back next week, 10 a.m. on Tuesday and on Thursday for the new decision drops hopefully from Scotas next week with all the big ones. But we covered the three other good ones that dropped this morning. So check that out if you're interested. But it looks like the tubes have connected themselves all across the interwebs. And so that's tremendous. Let's go ahead and get started, shall we?
Election litigation updates and some big victories handed down by Judge Indira Talwani. Remember this is the case state of California and all of the blue states suing the president to try to stop his election executive order. that very order that said, "We're going to create citizenship lists at the federal level and then hand those out to the states."
And if you want to mail in ballots, you can mail in your ballots against the citizenship list to validate that you actually are allowed to do that. We'll talk about that, but also the other implementation of these rules from the US Postal Service and the DOJ. And you can see a bunch of activity happened here on the docket. notices being submitted by the acting AG Todd Blanch, bunch of people from the DOJ, United States Postal Service, Social Security Administration, who were all making sure that this executive order goes into effect. And let me share with you what they dropped before we get to the judge's decision, which dismisses a large part of the Democrat claims while keeping some others that will persevere.
So, here's what the DOJ dropped for us.
They submitted a notice today fresh out of the oven. They said earlier today, pursuant to federal law, the postal service has provided advanced notice of a proposed new general privacy act system of records to coincide with its proposal to amend the mailing standards for the USPS. And recall that historically, we've talked about this.
They're going to create barcodes that will go on mail-in ballot envelopes. So, when you put your ballot in an envelope, it will have an election label and a logo, and we'll be able to trace and backtrack how many go out, how many ballots are shipped out because we'll tag them with a barcode. How many come back in, we'll know with a barcode. will know where they went, where they came from, and so we don't have very strange, anomalous return rates from certain locations. So, they're keeping tabs on it. Now, the rules are being updated.
This is about the transmission of mail-in or absentee ballots for federal elections. And pursuant to the law, advanced notice of the SAR was provided also to Congress, they got it. Oversight committee got it. Government reform committee got it. Homeland Security, Governmental Affairs in the Senate, Office of Management and Budget. And following that advanced notice, so now they're notified, the Postal Service will also transmit the SAR to the Federal Register. And we're going to publish this baby. Yes. Then once that happens, the SAR will become effective on the latest of 30 days from the publication in the Federal Register. if no comments are received or the publication date of the postal service responses to comments received or the effective date of any final rule to actually amend the standards. Okay, rules are changing and this is happening much more quickly than I think many people were anticipating. If the postal service does not issue any final rule in connection with that rule making, then the system of record will not take effect respectfully submitted by Isam K.
Al Sharifi on behalf of the DOJ. That's just one notice saying, "Hey, we're moving forward with all of this." Here's another notice saying, "Judge, we are now respectfully submitting the following notice about recent developments in this matter." And let's not forget, they were sued by the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, one of these nonprofit groups, one of these leftist organizations that says, "We have standing because we're a league of voters." All created. We saw a bunch of this stuff happen back during 2020.
Voters got together ensued, changed all of the election rules back then and really caused a ruckus. Really changed a lot of the rules in effect for 2020 because of MCO. Then we had the state of California and all the blue states came piling in. And of course, they didn't sue in California, they sued in Massachusetts. And the case got assigned to this woman, an Obama judge called Judge Indira Talwani. She's in Massachusetts. She's going to hand down a ruling coming up, but Barack Obama is the president who appointed her. So, the DOJ gives her another update on this.
They say, "Here's some more about what's going on here.
More notices regarding recent developments right here."
As explained in the prior notice that we just read, the Secretary of Homeland Security also signed a memorandum on June 8th relating in part to Trump's executive order on the mail-in balloting and the citizenship lists. And a copy of that memo is attached to this notice.
We'll show you exactly what it looks like right here. So, they sent this back into the judge. Now, we've got Homeland Security who's coming into the game. New player, welcome. also stamped here by US citizenship and immigration services under homeland saying all right everybody this is a memorandum for the secretary and this memo resends and supersedes a previous memo that was issued just a week before because that didn't accurately reflect the current policy of the administration. Here is the change. This memo seeks your approval regarding a course of action for USCIS, immigration services, that relates to Trump's new executive order, ensuring citizenship verification and integrity in federal elections utilizing existing law, existing statutory authority. The proposed approach to fix our elections is designed to leverage existing capabilities and legal authorities to operate within current privacy and security frameworks and to advance this directive from Trump ordering us to compile, maintain, and transmit the state citizenship lists. And now we seek to establish a technological method. How are we going to do this? to provide state election officials access to citizenship list information under our control. We already know we've got good lists. It's the federal government. They know everything. So, we have social security. We have department of state and we at USCIS, we are on track to deliver the core technological infrastructure required for state access on or around June 30th, baby.
just weeks away.
We are working to support direct sharing of citizenship list information with the states. And separately, we're also exploring an appropriate method of coordinating with the postal service consistent with applicable law. We're not violating anything. We're not wrecking democracy. It's all lawful, you jerks. And depending on the development of pending rulemaking processes, all of this is relating to mail-in and absentee ballots. So the pedal is pressed to the floor. We are accelerating at rapid speed and we love to see it. Trump's order, for background here, directs Homeland Security through the director of USCIS in coordination with Social Security to take appropriate action to compile and transmit no fewer than 60 days before each regularly scheduled federal election or promptly upon a request of the state to send a list to the chief election official of each state, a list of individuals confirmed by the United States federal government who are citizens who will be above the age of 18 at the time of the election and who actually live in the state. They have to maintain a residence. This is designed to assist states in safeguarding election integrity. And the order from the president further specifies that this must be done to the extent feasible consistent with the law. We also have to follow the privacy act because all of the states say my privacy. So to support this effort, homeland strategy and policy, we've identified the following four outcomes. Here's what we're working on, and they just told the judge this today.
Establishing infrastructure to compile and transmit the state citizenship list.
Two, defining a process for states to actually obtain the information in these lists. Designating a single DHS point of contact for state citizenship list related requests and creating a mechanism for individual citizens to view records and submit corrections. So, if you want to vote, you want to go check, hey, am I on the list? You can do that. You're not going to be disenfranchised. The League of Women Voters and the others all say it might be confusing for them and they don't want to be disenfranchised and you're taking away their right to vote. Just go check.
You have to register to vote anyways, unless you are in one of those states that does universal registration and just ships you a ballot. But here they explain the overall solution should establish the operational infrastructure on or around June 30th and to find a viable path to creating a citizen-facing access portal for delivery at a later date. We're all going to remain in compliance with law, legal, privacy, and security and so on. Now, regarding the transmission of this list and the immigration status on this information to the states, we have authority to do this. We can already use this law, section 1373, to send and receive immigration status to and from federal state governments. We're already allowed to transmit this information. So, we're just going to use that. Further, this section A and B explained that we further possess authority pursuant to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 that requires the creation of an electronic system to validate alien applicants for recipients as recipients of federal money. So, we can verify, we can already check against this list.
We're going to do the same thing, just apply it to the mail.
This system must be made available to the states. And additionally, under additional acts like the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, Homeland is also required to respond to any inquiries from the states to verify citizenship or immigration status for any individual within the jurisdiction for any purpose authorized by law. Now, the core of the proposed approach is a technological mechanism that should be delivered June 30th and will initially focus on secure access for state election officials.
Adrien Fontes from Arizona blown out.
The idea is to provide states with citizenship list information from us.
USCIS, Social Security, Department of State, including a digital portal mechanism for states to access and download this info while the underlying records remain in each agency's existing systems to the extent that the access can be provided consistent with the law.
This structure preserves agency control over its own data and leverages established controls. It also allows state officials to determine how to use this information. Now, in practice, they will go to login.gov.
At that portal, they can download separate outputs from each of the three agencies like getting a credit report or something subject to certain service and disclaimers. Now the downloaded files will then provide citizenship related data elements like name, date of birth, relevant agency identifiers that they can all go get. And the portal has several advantages that support meeting the required delivery dates. It allows USCIS and the other agencies to rely heavily on existing systems and privacy impact assessments. We don't have to go and reinvent the wheel wheel.
We've already done it. We already have inter agency agreements and by retaining data inside the existing agencies and inside their enclaves, we're not creating something new that might jeopardize or require a new privacy impact assessment.
We can provide meaningful functionality by this date while remaining firmly within the law. In addition, we're also going to continue to work to generate the information contained in this portal in a consolidated list and send those to the state election officials. So, we're currently on track to deliver all of this. Technical teams have defined the basic architecture, including login.gov for user authentication and mechanisms to generate these reports. Back-end development to support report generation, logging, and status tracking is already underway.
And we're not using live data right now.
It's all dummy data.
and all of the privacy offices and councils are coordinating to make sure we're following existing legal authorities and we're adding supplements if we need them. So Trump's executive order and the outcomes identified that we are now contemplating in addition to state-f facing capabilities. A portal through which citizens can also go and look at their own records and submit corrections is being implemented. We recognize the importance of this transparency and a red addressability function but does not believe it is feasible to deliver a productionready citizen portal by June 30th. Okay. So the state officials will get it by June but we won't. Accordingly we propose a phased approach. First phase delivering on June 30th which would be for state officials to log in and go check these. Then subsequent phases later in 26, this year, presumably before November, would then create a citizen portal. This sequencing allows Homeland to meet its immediate responsibilities and then reduce the risk that if we accidentally release some information on a citizen portal and it gets hacked or whatever, we'll be in trouble. Now, here's how it integrates with the postal service and the absentee ballot voter lists. In coordination with the postmaster general, immigration is also exploring a concept that depending on the conclusion of our pending rulemaking and implementation process could allow Homeland to leverage USPS data related to mailin and absentee ballot participation lists. This potential capability is neither contemplated nor required by the EO. And moreover, no determination yet has been rendered as to the feasibility of this approach at all. But it is dependent on some final rule making decisions. Any legal input would need to be obtained.
And so we're thinking about some other things. Now Trump's order designates Homeland acting through USCIS and other agencies to maintain and respons be responsible and transmit the state lists. Given the departmentwide implications of this role, we need a DHSS level signatory to sign off on this. We also need to establish infrastructure to do this within the time frame. Meeting this accelerated mandate requires solutions to be implemented rapidly and that's what we're doing. So by focusing first on the state portal and then the citizenship portal later for citizens to go in, we are near complete.
DHS can meet the term requirements and then take it from there. So we advise homeland leadership to approve the technological approach that we just described. Under this approach, all of the agencies could deliver by June 30th.
States can go and cross reference the lists. We further recommend endorsing a phase plan. The citizens can access it later.
And finally, we recommend that Homeland continue preliminary conversations with the postal service about potential data sharing arrangements. And should the postal service finalize its rulemaking process, we consider working to advance potential coordination with them so that we're fully compliant with all of the orders under Trump's order and lays a foundation for future enhancements that can strengthen election related transparency and integrity.
Signed by this fella, is that Mark Wayne Mullen's signature?
Looks like a couple of L's there. Looks like an M at the front. 6826.
All sent in to the judge today. So, they are moving and grooving and we love to see it. So, with all of that being said, what happened here is, as we know, the blue states then sued. They sued Trump.
They're furious about this. By the way, there was another case out of DC where that judge said, "Your lawsuit fails because nothing has even happened yet."
They were little too early to the entire game. and dismissed their case ultimately saying, "I'm not granting you an injunction." They wanted to stop even the contemplation of the executive order to not even allow these people to have a meeting about it. Judge said, "I'm not doing that. Get out of my courtroom."
So, they still had this one going on and it's in Massachusetts. And of course, the judge is an Obama judge. And so, some time ago, right after Trump announced this, they filed a lawsuit.
Bunch of states joined in on this and they were saying, "Stop this from happening." Now, the judge has ruled on the government's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. So, California sued Trump. The red states also joined in. The red states said, "We want this to happen.
That sounds great. You mean you're going to do a bunch of the heavy lifting for us? We're state election officials. We expend a ton of time and energy to make sure that our lists are good and to maintain them. And so, if you can help us with this, perfect. Send it over.
Red states joined in, blue states sued to stop it. We also had the League of Women Voters who are the blue aligned plaintiffs who definitely don't want it to go into effect. So, Judge Indira said, "Here is the decision, and it is a victory, but not a total victory. Not yet, as we'll see."
Following the publication of Trump's executive order, she says two groups of plaintiffs sued to stop this in Massachusetts. In the first action, eight nonprofits, I'm sure they're nonprofits, involved with voter education, collectively known as the plaintiffs organizations.
They say if this goes into effect, we're too dumb to figure out how to vote.
We're going to be excluded. In the second action, then we had the blues. 23 states and DC, the collective plaintiff states, they all sued. They said, "Hey, you're usurping our ability to administer state and federal elections, which obviously is not happening at all.
All they're doing is generating lists and invalidating that mail, federal mail via the USPS, is not being a facilitator of fraud by mailing fraudulent ballots from illegal aliens in the mail.
you can still administer your elections.
So, blue NOS's, blue 501c3s and blue states, a group of 12 states, the reds, then they move to intervene in each of these cases. They said, "Hey, we have a concrete interest in receiving this as well. We want increased security for mail-in ballots in our elections."
And so, this is great. Now, look at all these plaintiffs, just to be clear.
League of Women Voters like Women Avengers, League of Women Voters in another group, another League of Women Voters, another League of Women Voters Education Fund, another Association of American Residents overseas, which I've got a whole problem with, too. If you live over there, that means you don't reside here. Okay? If you live in another state or you live in DC, you don't get to vote in Arizona. As I'm learning, I don't get to vote in Arizona cuz we moved here. We're close in proximity to the federal government, so I can't cast my ballot in Arizona because I don't reside there. But if I went overseas and lived in England, then I guess I could vote. So it makes no sense. But anyways, so Association of American Residents Overseas, we've got US Vote Foundation. We've got AsianPacific American Advocates. We got Delta Sigma Theta. Yeah, all the blues came in. Arizona, California, Colorado, Del uh Delaware, DC, Illinois, Maine, the rest of the Blues.
And the Reds came out. Alabama, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas all here. So, defendants were joined by the red states, Trump and the DOJ, joined by the Reds, and they seek dismissal of these suits by the Leagues and by the Blues. The court consolidated the two cases for a hearing. And in this consolidated order, the court addresses the ripeness challenge, can you sue right now?
And grants dismissal victory without prejudice as to claims about the EO and its implementation for elections occurring after November 3rd this year.
So the judge is splitting it based on the election date this year. So claims that relate to this upcoming election she's going to continue to entertain.
But anything after this all gone, which is a big part of their claims. So we're now limited to changes before this election.
The other claims all fail. otherwise denies the ripeness challenge and reserves on other issues raised in the motion to dismiss. So this litigation will stay active, but the Democrats, the Blues, the Leagues just lost a bunch of stuff that they would say should be in permanent effect even after this election. All gone.
She says, "Here's some more background.
Trump's executive order asserts, quote, an unavoidable duty under article two of the constitution to, you know, actually enforce federal law. And what that means, if you're the president, you have to prevent violations of federal criminal law and you have to maintain public confidence in election outcomes.
And the executive order notes that several executive agencies maintain records already already allowed and codified under law that can assist in verifying identity and federal election voter eligibility. And we find that additional measures are necessary to enhance election integrity by the mail.
Fix the mail.
Section two of the EO from Trump then directs immigration, homeland, social security, and others to compile lists of eligible citizen voters who can vote in their specific states.
The EO provides that the confirmed lists, quote, shall be derived from federal citizen and naturalization records, social security records, the systematic alien verification for entitlements data, which I think they abuse because they get a lot of our entitlements and they can pull from other federal databases. It defines the confirmed citizen lists as limited to individuals confirmed to be citizens who are above the age of 18 at the time of an upcoming federal election and who actually reside in the state. So citizenship 18 and you live there. Feds know all of that data. All they're doing is just putting it in a spreadsheet. The EO also requires Homeland to establish the infrastructure that's necessary to compile and maintain. And she underlined that compile, maintain, and transmit the lists by June 29th.
They're on track. They're going to get them out hopefully June 30th.
And also by June 29th, Homeland must designate a point of contact about list related inquiries from individuals and state officials. Trump's EO requires that Homeland update and transmit the citizen lists for each state to the state election officials at least 60 days before the election that's coming up. And if there is a special federal election before those two and so accordingly for the November 3rd election this year, the EO requires Homeland to provide these lists by sometime by September 4th, 2026.
Now, section three also applies to the mail. Orders the postal service to initiate rules to ensure the integrity of mail voting and then get a final rule in place by July 29th. The EO requires that the proposed rule includes requirement about election mail design.
So, your mailin ballots get a special envelope. They get a note. They get treated more like certified mail.
There's a more of a chain of custody.
It's not just a free-for-all. You're not just mailing ballots out all over the place. As I've made here the point many times, an anecdote that I got a dead guy's mail, election ballots to my house, multiple elections in Arizona until somebody removed him.
So now we're going to keep tabs on it.
Specify the US Postal Service after receiving the state furnished list of voters who are approved to vote by mail.
So list is created goes to the state official. State official should then be corroborating and cross- refferencing those lists. Then send the official, you can get into the club list. You're the door man. Front door. You on the list?
Yep. Perfect. We'll accept your ballot.
Goes back and then shall provide each state with a list of individuals who are enrolled with the US Postal Service pursuant to a process specified in the rule. And you shall not transmit the ballot of any voter unless the individual has been enrolled.
Not on the list, not coming in. No vote.
The EO also requires that the proposed rule specify that states may choose to notify the postal service of their intent to use mail-in ballots no fewer than 90 days and they may submit no fewer than 60 days a list of voters to whom the state intends to provide the ballots. And so accordingly, all that needs to happen by August 5th this year, states need to notify, yep, we're going to use ballots, and here's our list by early September. Judge explains, "In sections two and five of Trump's order, the EO describes several criminal offenses, both directly and indirectly relating to election fraud, and requires the US DOJ AG attorney general to prioritize the investigation and the prosecution of state and local officials who issue ballots to non-eligible voters because they're facilitating fraud.
They have been provided notice and they're now on notice officially. The lists are available. They're sent out who is a citizen. So if they don't want to maintain their list and they have not been compliant in this at all. Har Dylan has been suing all over the place to say, "Can we just come check to make sure you're doing list maintenance?"
They're not. Judicial Watch suit in California finding over 870,000 something voters who are ghost voters who are presumably still on the list even though they're dead, even though that they've moved out of state and should have been kicked off, but they don't care. They're moving like removing onetenth of 1% of a vote of the entire list off. It's statistically impossible to do that, which means they're not doing it. So the EO also provides that states and localities should preserve for 5 years all records and materials excluding the actual ballots that have been cast evidencing voter participation in any federal election ballot envelopes regardless of the carrier. So these organizations they sued with four of these brought against the president and the US postal service.
They say this order violates the separation of powers and it's ultravirus. It's outside of the law and it violates principles of federalism.
These claims are ridiculous.
And violates their members right to vote because some of them are college students and some people can't figure out how to make sure they're on the list and some people might be disenfranchised. no evidence that anybody is or will be or has been disenfranchised. It hasn't even come into effect yet.
So, you have to stop it because somebody might be on it, might not be on it.
These organizations also say there's a violation of the Voting Rights Act by the Postal Service and violations of the Privacy Act and the APA, which is like the catch-all claim that they always throw in there by Homeland and by the Social Security agency defendants. So the states then also sue. They bring three counts. They say it's unconstitutional.
They're suing Trump, the DOJ, acting AG Todd, Homeland, Social Security, Commerce.
They say that this is unconstitutional.
Section 3 and section 5 is also unconstitutional. So, Judge Indira explains Trump and the admin across all of the various agencies. They maintain that the EO is merely an intraexecutive branch directive. It's not a separation of powers problem. We're not stepping on Congress's toes, a separate branch.
We're not stepping on the judiciary, a separate branch. This is how we govern the execution of the law. All it's doing is directing a future agency action that of its own force doesn't change anything about elections in any states at all.
People can still go vote. They can show up there if California wants illegal aliens voting. And I think they just moved to advance that by the way in California today.
The illegals can show up in person and vote. But federal mail is not going to facilitate the fraud. They assert that judicial review will be appropriate later. If people are disenfranchised, then you can sue. After these actions have already been taken, and we're still considering and deliberating future actions, so nothing has even been decided yet. They also say that there are no active cases or controversy that will exist until this actually is implemented.
And we put in the order. We're following all of the rules and the law. The states also argue, the red states came in and they said, "We have to talk about the credential ripeness doctrine. It councils against allowing their constitutional arguments to succeed and nuke us before final agency actions even exist."
Now, plaintiffs, the the Blues and the C3s, they say our clims are ripe because the election is imminent. So, you have to hear this. and the EO has caused significant uncertainty and confusion because they're idiots regarding planning.
They have said and defendants do not dispute that preparation for the election is already underway. We know people are voting. States have also further said that the red the blue states that their election officials fear criminal prosecution. Good. if they issue ballots to voters who are not on the confirmed citizenship list or if they issue ballots to eligible 17-year-old voters in connection with federal primary elections.
So, you can still issue the ballots. You just can't send them via the mail, I think, would be one way to get around that. But they want mass mail in balloting. So, they put all that in there. We're going to go to jail if we break the law. Yeah, that's true.
No one's above the law. member. Hey, similarly, plaintiff organizations have alleged that they are currently wrestling with the impact of this executive order on their members, all of the ballot harvesters and the vote voter fraudsters on their voter education programming. We're going to have to change our PowerPoint slides. The League of Women Voters of Massachusetts, for one example, has stopped actively disseminating any new voter education materials about male voting because of the EO, which I don't know what's so complicated about this. Why would they have to change anything?
If they were already only encouraging citizens to vote by mail, nothing should change at all.
They could just keep the same material.
Don't have to change a single word on your powerpoints, on your little pamphlets, your little trifolds. Don't have to change anything. It's all the same. Just go vote. Make sure you're a citizen. Your state will handle the business. If you're a citizen, great.
You'll get a ballot in the mail. Not complicated. So, get your mail. Get your ballot. Go check.
Fill it out. All the same instructions.
Put it back in. Seal it up. Send it back in the mail. All the same. nothing changes unless their literature is not exactly that.
All plaintiffs say that there will be substantial confusion about the EO and the impact on the 2026 election and on elections in general and that is a reason alone according to them to say we have to stop all of this. our stupid voters to whom we send ballot materials and election education materials can't figure it out. And so stop all election integrity everywhere because some college kid can't figure it out. So the judge explains when we talk about ripeness, this is a justability doctrine. Can you even bring a lawsuit in the first instance? When we talk about justability, we have standing, we have muteness, we have ripeness, we have latches, all of these various ways to stop a lawsuit from even going forward because you have no standing. As we learned a lot in 2020, this is designed to prevent the courts through avoidance of premature adjudication from entangling themselves in abstract disagreements over policies and also to protect the agencies from judicial interference until a decision is actually been formalized in a way that creates a concrete result.
And this turns on the fitness of the issues. Can judges even decide something that hasn't even been implemented?
Now, as the former to the former, a claim is not ripe for adjudication.
Like a fruit is not ripe to eat if it rests upon a contingent future event that may not occur as anticipated or may not even occur at all. Why are we suing if this thing is not even happening?
The fitness for review prong is more easily satisfied when it presents an issue that is purely legal and will not be clarified by further factual development. One one prong on prong two separate set of analysis. It is necessary to evaluate the extent to which withholding judgment will impose a hardship and will it be direct and immediate damages. Both prongs need to be satisfied. Although a very strong showing on one axis may compensate for a weak showing on the other. Those are the rules. Now, here's what she says about future elections after November 3rd, after the midterms, and they lose this one for sure. There are clearly many uncertainties as to how the agencies will ultimately imple implement this new Trump executive order, including the source and the accuracy of the DHS citizen lists and what final rule, if any, will be adopted by the postal service. The implementation of the EO may well result in the evolving and dynamic process that they describe.
So you may have an implementation, it may be pretty good but not perfect. And so you need to go back and reconfigure.
Up this didn't work, so we'll fix it. So it will improve and they can participate. All the League of Women Voters may participate. They can go comment on these things. There's already a rulemaking procedure to go get involved in. And if they do that, they go make their comments, the agency could incorporate their results into the decision. Oh yeah, they made a good point. These college kids or these 17 year olds or whatever.
So 17 at the time the mail goes out, they're not on the list, but they turn 18 right before the election. So then, okay, they on election, you know, day before election day, they turn 18. So maybe we make a different interpretation of that. Okay, 17 with a birthday by the time the election occurs, you're 18.
Great. We'll change that no problem to make sure you're included, but that doesn't mean that you're going to be harmed indefinitely.
This is a give and take process. And where some issues may be addressed in part or even narrowed well before more distant elections and without core consideration of the EO as it relates to future distant elections, that's going to pose little hardship to any of the Blues, to any of the League of Women Voters. there is sufficient time for legal challenges after the implementation and you can sue then. And so accordingly, their desire to stop this for all future elections after November 3rd this year is dismissed without prejudice because it is not ripe, blown out. They wanted this to be stopped dead on arrival. Whole thing stopped. You can't do this at all.
you're doing something illegal right now. Judge says, "No, they're not."
And we'll see what she says about this current election because she's going to do some more analysis here, but it's a loss for them. They're furious about this because they wanted this all just cut off at the knees. So, they couldn't even contemplate the rules. But the judges, even this Obama judge, is finding you're not making a good case now. All your arguments about separation of powers or the APA or these other amorphous claims that everybody just makes up when they don't have a good claim are failures.
But as it relates to this one in the midterms, now this one is more imminent than 2028.
Their challenge to the EO as it impacts this upcoming November 3rd election itself and the multiple primaries and special elections that are scheduled to occur prior to that date is different.
The November 3rd election will occur in less than 5 months and the EO explicitly requires that certain actions already be taken before then. And they're happening as we just mentioned. If you're just getting here, we covered this entire document. They're building baby. They are creating infrastructure. They say by June 30th, they're going to have this mostly functional.
For example, it requires the US Postal Service to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking about election integrity requirements 60 days.
We've got infrastructure necessary to compile the citizen lists within 90 days by June 29th. They said June 30th will be the day.
Other rules by July 29th from the postal service. Then we've got other provisions by August 5th. All of it in anticipation of November 3rd. So, this is missionritical for them. The lists, the mail-in balloting, the registration messes that they've built are all intentionally designed to benefit the Democratic party, which is why they built him this way. Just like when they were gerrymandering all of the districts based on racist districts, gave them a structural benefit that they've been coasting on my whole life. until now.
So, a state may choose to notify the postal service if it intends to allow ballots to be sent. State sends this.
We're sending ballots. Okay. And advising the states to notify the postal service if they intend to allow mail-in ballots. And then, okay, fine. You want to use our system to send your ballots.
Great. Give us a list of the voters to whom the ballots will be sent 60 days before the federal election. That way we can add your data into our data and we'll pick up the ballots and then drop them off by September 4th, 2026 for this upcoming election.
So the judge is explaining there's a lot of activity here. Homeland's on it.
Social Security's on it. They're saying they're abiding by the Privacy Act. 60 days, another date, September 4th. So she says, "Okay, so this is right." Now, in light of the EO's specific deadlines over the next three months and the reality that elections will be occurring throughout this period with the November 3rd midterms occurring in just 5 months, postponing judicial review is impracticable and may inflict significant hardship on them, saying the EO, according to them, has quote created a direct and immediate dilemma for them, citing another EPA case from 1992. Because the EO requires state election officials and voters to reckon today with both the likelihood that the executive branch agencies will follow this. They are the multiple directed actions and simultaneously with the uncertainty that exists as details are slowly rolled out. Both plaintiffs, the League of Voters and the Blue AGs in the blue states, they have offered unrebuted evidentiary support for their allegations that significant preparation and planning underpin and facilitate elections and that these efforts are already underway. One guy from Connecticut said, guy called Rosenberg said major changes to the process are typically planned for a year or more preceding an election. And so I don't know how to send a a request to use the mail. And then I don't know how to get a spreadsheet from the government that says these are citizens and I can't figure out how to cross reference my voter registration list with their voter registration list because spreadsheets are so hard for me. I need a year and really they just want to stall this out for the midterms.
Someone else said, "Preparation for the 2026 midterms already consumes all of the Minnesota election officials team's time. Minnesota is a disaster. They have vouching up there. So, we can't figure it out either. Everything's going to be too difficult for us." And the League of Women Voters are talking about voter education efforts, describing efforts to translate election materials into other languages, right? because bunch of foreign people are voting in our elections. Can't even speak English, can't even read English, and they're like, I know how to govern America.
Great. So, the AsianPacific American advocates, great. So, they have to translate for them, too. So, that's very complicated, and they need more time to figure that out. For example, California mails every registered voter a ballot.
State law says every voter, if you're registered, you get a ballot. Don't even have to request it.
which means there are a bunch of extra ballots out there that are being sent to people who have no intention, no desire to vote at all. May have moved, may not even be residing in the state anymore because they don't update their lists except for essentially San Diego County.
They do. All of the other counties have ridiculous numbers when it comes to actual removal and list maintenance.
So, hundreds of thousands of ballots are just floating around out there. That's why you see Nithia Ramen go and round all of them up, harvest them, and get them turned in, even if they go to homeless people at homeless shelters.
So, they say for each election, the election official shall no later than 29 days start mailing the ballots to every single registered voter. So even without a final rule from the US Postal Service, California election officials, we have a law. We must prepare now to how to learn how to mail our ballots.
And so they say we can't wait for a final rule where the practical realities of running an election require us to act now.
More quotes. and this is going to wreak havoc on us as a purely practical matter, said some amicus brief of state and local election officials. They said implementing this with so little time remaining before the rapidly approaching election would wreak havoc on electoral processes nationwide.
Why? What's the havoc going to be? It's pretty simple. Are your lists inclusive of people who are not citizens?
If you've not been maintaining your lists and your lists are a disaster, then maybe it will be havoc in your state because you haven't done your due diligence.
So now I can understand their perspective. They're going to say, "We got to go through our list and kick a bunch of people off and then they're going to come and complain to us, why didn't I get a ballot?" It's going to be a lot of work for them.
But the point is, those people should not be on the list in the first place.
The compilation of a confirmed citizen list, says the judge, also vividly illustrates the problem. During a June 2nd hearing a couple weeks ago, the government admitted that compliance with federal privacy law would necessarily render any confirmed citizen list underincclusive. It's not going to include everybody on there who should be on there.
And so the state will then have to add people to it. And moreover, the list will also be underinclusive as a result of feasibility issues where the government may be unaware of name changes like when a woman changes her name at marriage or resident changes when a citizen moves from state to state. In many of these states, the reason why they don't want to give up their lists, Har Dylan has been suing 16 plus states to get their lists so that she can validate that because federal law says they have to update their list under Hava and the NVA, but they're not.
But the EO does not require feasibility of an accurate complete list of US citizens. Instead, it orders preparation and delivery to the states, a list of individuals confirmed as citizens. So, it's not saying we have to have a final list. It's saying here's our contribution to the conversation. We only want people who are citizens to vote. These are the people that we think are citizens. Who do you think are citizens? Oh, great. We'll add yours to our list. It's about feasibility and being consistent with applicable law. In other words, the executive order orders preparation and delivery of a list of United States citizens who are residing in each state that will necessarily be incomplete.
And so accordingly, even assuming that implementing agencies will comply with all legal requirements set out in the EO and will only create lists to the extent feasible, incomplete lists will still be compiled, thereby creating a direct and immediate dilemma for the plaintiffs.
And so they're going to hang their hat on this. We can't comply. It's too difficult for us to figure out who should be on the lists.
It's going to take us years, probably 20 years to figure this out. and so therefore you can't implement it.
Further, despite the government Trump's admins and their assertion that agencies are merely deliberating as to plans, they have recently updated the court that they approved a plan. Homeland secretary, I think that was Mark Wayne Mullen, a plan to comply with the EO and they explained June 29th is going to be the date. So with an ever narrowing window of time in which review is appropriate and practicable and where that review may well require timely involvement by the court of appeals or the Supreme Court prior to November 3rd in order to maintain public confidence in the elections, the court finds that the legality of the EO as to the election is both ripe and fit for review. So she's going to hang on to this election and we're going to continue to litigate over it. The defendants and the red states and the reliance on a recent Supreme Court decision merits additional discussion. In Trump versus New York, a coalition of states and other nonprofits sued to challenge a Trump memo announcing a policy of excluding non-citizens from the census for the purposes of congressional aortionment and then directing the secretary of commerce to advise the president on how to implement that policy to the maximum extent feasible under the law. The impact of any aortionment policy change would not be experienced until the states first got an aortionment report from Congress and then subsequently implemented those things which could be years after the report. And so in that case the Supreme Court found that they lacked standing to sue. You can't sue to challenge the memo because it's not ripe yet. There's a bunch of contingencies. You're speculating about how this census will be interpreted and so get out of here. Any prediction how the executive branch might eventually implement this is no more than conjecture at this time. Now the court in the Supreme Court there based its decision on the uncertainty regarding implementation of the memo and the president's qualifying language about feasibility and legality. But unlike that case, in that case, Trump requested the commerce secretary to implement a policy, the EO here is a specific directive as to certain federal actions that are going to be taken right now that definitely do have substantive outcomes that are going to be implemented in the upcoming election.
And unlike in the other case about the census, it is neither speculation nor conjecture that they're going to compile citizenship lists as directed and then the states are going to have to figure out what to do with those while the postal service is simultaneously engaged in rulem and that election officials will have to respond to both the lists that are sent to them and whatever rules the postal service creates. So where they have raised constitutional challenges, the Blues and the League that may be addressed without further development of the list or the rules, credential considerations do not warrant deferring consideration of those claims with respect to these elections.
and she gives us a quote. No right is more precious in a free country than that of having your voice in the election heard which as good citizens that's the whole point of the quote we must live other rights even the most basic or illisori if the right to vote is undermined that's our entire point here if we don't have actual elections the whole sham of democracy evaporates that's the point that's why we need this implemented so actual citizens can be validated. So she explains for all of the above reasons, the court grants Trump and the intervenor states the motion to dismiss their complaint on ripeness grounds as it relates to claims that are occurring after the midterms. So big win for the first half, but denies the defendants's motion to dismiss. So Trump and the rest would prefer to have it dismissed as it relates to the midterms and any other earlier elections. And so litigation will continue on.
But I think this is more of a win than it is a loss. I think that what the judge is saying is all of their claims, if their claims were stronger, she would have denied it as to both. I would I would think and it wouldn't be a standing issue. It would just be a matter of law that she could decide on the merits right here without the need for further factual development. So her the the plaintiff's underlying claims were this is a violation of the Constitution. this is a violation of the right of states to govern their elections. This is a vi if the judge were to find that that's that was true. Then this would have been a harder decision against the president.
She wouldn't have dismissed the future claims because it would have been an actual concrete constitutional harm or a separation of powers harm or a federalism harm. And it wasn't. So she's saying I'm going to hang on to this and let the facts develop. But on its face right now, what we're seeing is not something that's so damning that she's granting them a total victory because they're following the law. These are already laws in place. And so I think what we can read into this is that this judge, unlike the other judge in DC who dismissed everything, that was earlier, so we didn't have these rules that were actually in effect at the time.
She's allowing the facts to develop and hanging on to it with dear life trying to kind of keep their claim on life support as these facts continue to develop. So I think this is good success. She's going to hang on to it and the DOJ is going to continue to march forward with this. And right now, pursuant to their most recent disclosures, they're going to get all of this implemented by June 30th. And a huge portion of their claims are now gone. Subject to more factual development. They're going to have to claim that there are harms that are actually going to be imposed and continue to fight for a stoppage to this actually being implemented. Now, while all this is going on, a lot of this could easily be rectified if Congress would do something about this. And so, President Trump said, "Hey, idiots.
Anyone who doesn't want to terminate the filibuster is a fool and a very stupid one at that."
The Democrats will end it within minutes of taking office and then rapidly proceed to destroy our country, adding two radical left states, four Democrat senators, many congressmen and women, their dream of a 21 Supreme Court justice, not just 13, an unlucky number, an impossible to beat number of electoral college votes, and that's the ball game.
popular vote, landslide, so-called popular, and so much else. The Republican party will never win another election. And many Republicans, I think, would be happy about that because if you're in the majority, you have to make hard decisions, and they're not good at that. I will sadly be the last Republican president. Senate Majority Leader John Thun and the Republican Senate must not let this carnage happen.
They will go down on the wrong side of history, as will all Republicans who just stood by and watched. The Republican party isn't at stake. Our country is.
So terminate the filibuster and immediately approve the Save America Act. God bless the USA. President Donald J. Trump.
And one guy has been at the helm leading this charge inside the Senate. His name is Mike Lee from Utah. You know him?
This guy right here. And he's got another idea. He says, "Just bring it to the floor. We'll just debate it and just march on. Everybody's going to have to come out, get down to the Senate floor, and sit there until we pass it, debating, debating, debating, debating.
Don't have to actually nuke the filibuster, although that would be an easy way to do it. Then you just need a simple majority vote to pass legislation. Otherwise, right now, we have a tyranny of the minority. The Democratic Party is actually in control of the Senate.
So just go down, debate it out, and we can get it passed even without nuking the filibuster. But for some reason, we have some backstabbing Republicans out there. This is from Andrew Deediario.
He's a senior congressional reporter over for Punch Bowl News and he covers the Senate and he's Italian shout out.
He said, "Here's some news from yesterday.
GOP senators went after Senator Mike Lee from Utah. GOP senators did during a closed door lunch meeting yesterday over his push for the Save America Act in what one source described as a pylon.
WHO DID THAT? OH, JOHN Cornin did and John Kennedy did.
They challenged Lee about his strategy.
Mike Lee's been all over the place screaming from the rooftops about this.
We really appreciate him for that. They complained. They said, "Mike Lee, you jerk. You keep talking about this all over cable news and all over the internet and posting on X." And you are leading Trump to being led to believe that it's possible for the Senate to pass it. And now you're leading to Republicans attacking each other. And Trump is undermining his own agenda.
So Mike, stop talking about the Save America Act. We're not going to pass it.
We can't pass it. We're not nuking the filibuster. Mike Lee has a whole thesis on another way to get it done.
But John Kennedy and John Cornin, who lost his butt to Ken Paxton and will be out of there soon. So good rins to him. But Kennedy is dogpiling on Mike Lee to say, "Shut up. Stop talking about the Save Act.
You're giving Trump hope. There is no hope. We run the Senate and we're not doing anything good for America. So just eat it." Mike Mike says, "No. F you guys. I'm not going to do that." He said the Save America Act would help save America by restoring election security, which has gotten dangerously weak in in recent years. Those who disagree with my support for the bill or the aggressive strategy I'm proposing for getting it passed or are free to do so, but I'm not stopping. Period. Here's what Mike Lee had to say about all this.
Our constitutional republic can't really thrive. The American people certainly can't thrive and aren't well served by a government in which honest, secure, fair elections are routinely observed. That requires us to have laws in place to protect them. Now, the states run the elections. It's typically up to the states to figure out the procedure by which they do that. that under article one of the constitution, the Congress also has the power to make or amend uh rules governing the conduct of federal elections.
I feel really strongly about the Save America Act for this reason. There are unique vulnerabilities baked into the cake in existing election law, uh especially those governing federal elections. Some of this has to do with the 1993 statute called the National Voter Registration Act, also known as the Motor Voter Law and the way it was interpreted a couple of decades later by the Supreme Court wrongly but conclusively as you know restricting somehow um prohibiting in fact the states from asking for any type of citizenship verification once someone has registered to vote uh using the federal NVR form which you typically fill out at at a MV. Those vulnerabilities are there and they've gotten steadily more pronounced in recent years as we've had a flood of non-citizens pouring into our country.
>> Yep. Getting the licenses. Uh and as we've made it easier and easier for people to vote, often without any verification, not only as to citizenship, but on election day with many states not requiring in some cases adamantly prohibiting any type of voter ID, photo ID at a polling location.
Um, like I don't fight for every piece of legislation with the same degree of fervor or aggressiveness as I do the Save America Act. Uh, I'm not going to stop. And the reason I'm not going to stop is because there are some things that really matter this much.
um if we don't do this, if we don't do everything in our power to fix this now before this election, it could be too late and it could get more and more difficult to bring about these reforms.
>> He's right.
>> So, um for those who disagree with this, for those who don't share my enthusiasm for it, I respect your right to disagree.
I'm going to keep advocating. I'm not going to stop. We need this legislation and there is really one way to go about it. It involves putting it on the Senate floor and debating it and announcing when we do that and we're going to continue to to debate it for weeks if necessary until it passes. This is overwhelmingly supported by Americans and I believe it'll get more popular, not less, as we do this and as we take steps toward doing it. We don't want to wait until after it's too late.
The words I'm sorry won't carry much meaning at that point.
>> No.
>> So, look, if some people don't want me to advocate for it, I'm sorry. I'm going to continue to advocate for things that I think are important.
>> Good.
>> The Save America Act is one of those things and I'm not stopping. In fact, I'm just getting started.
>> Yeah. Yeah. All right. So, that's Mike Lee from Utah. And I think honestly some of the senators just don't want to go and like be on the Senate floor for a long time. It's tired. You know, it's a lot of work and it's easier to just sit in your office and not do anything.
Rather than go down and fight like hell in order to do something that's actually good for America. We know, man, if this was FISA or something, they'd get down there to make that happen. But Trump said, "I'm not going to sign that unless you actually pass the Save Act." And so they can get a bunch of things done if they would grow a spine and find their backbone, but they're not actually doing that. So a guy like Mike Lee gets dumped on. Corin, we expect Kennedy.
I am disappointed. But we do see the election executive order is marching forward. And the decision today from the judge, while not a total victory, seemingly is keeping the claim on life support, letting it continue to develop factually, which means she's not buying their constitutional claims, their separation of power claims, and more.
And as we saw, they are racing forward to get this stuff implemented rapidly. June 30th is the date and they'll continue to develop the infrastructure leading up to the midterm elections. And so this one at some point may go all the way up to Scotas. We'll see if they accept the case and how this litigation fleshes out. Thanks for joining us as we keep our eye on this one. Thank you for subscribing. Thanks for liking the video and thanks for sharing it with a friend or family member. Cares about election integrity in America. One of the key issues of our time. We got invaded by millions of people. Ballots are flying out all over the place out to their doorsteps and we need to reclaim our country. This is a good place to start. So, thank you for joining. Thank you for subscribing and for being here. Now, we're not done yet. We got some other good updates here. And Don Lemon just had a major loss.
And this was actually, I think, decided a couple days ago, but it just hit the docket. And so, here is this one from the District of Minnesota. Don Lemon loses a big one. Remember, he got charged with a crime for being one of the co-conspirators who invaded the Christian church and started screaming and shouting at people as part of a big entourage of individuals.
Well, now the District of Minnesota just handed down a new order which he's not going to be happy with. And the decision came down from Douglas Mo, the same judge whose wife works for Keith Ellison in the AG's office. And he explains exactly what happened here. The main defendant is Nekima Levy Armstrong. She was one of the people organizing the mob. Don Le Man was there and they were feeding off of each other. Don had his live stream gear.
He was spreading the message. One half of the operation. She had the crew. She needed an audience to perform in front of. Don Lemon gave it to her. Don Lemon needed some content and to be an activist and to go and interfere with a Christian mass in proceed in process. So they were helping each other. In this conspiracy, judge says, "All right, this matter that is before the court involves Don Lemon, Georgia, Shane, Michael, but they all want access to the grand jury proceedings." And let's not forget this judge did not want to indict them.
Criminal complaints were filed against Don Lamont and he said, "No, he's got a First Amendment right or whatever." So, they bypassed the judge. They went to a grand jury and they indicted them. The grand jury said, "Oh, yeah, that's definitely a crime. That judge is an idiot." Then the case got reassigned back into the same judge who originally didn't think that there should be a criminal complaint that was submitted.
He said also before the court, so they want grand jury proceedings to challenge the indictment. Also before the court is Don Lamont's motion for an immediate disclosure of Brady materials and another extension of discovery deadlines. The government, the DOJ prosecutors, they oppose each of these motions. They say, "No, no grand jury materials. Brady materials, you'll get those. We're not giving you stuff early.
We're not letting you pierce the secrecy shield of grand jury proceedings." And a bunch of motions have been submitted back and forth, all listed here. Now, for the reasons stated below, defendants Don Lemon and others and their motions are hereby denied.
And additionally, Lemon's other motions are also denied as being moot. So, you lose, Don. On February 26, remember the government charged 39 lunatics and defendants by indictment with one count of conspiracy against right of religious freedom at a place of worship in violation of US law.
And remember, Biden went after people.
If you showed up at an abortion clinic and you so much as looked at somebody crosseyed, then they would charge you and arrest you for interference with their religious rights, which is to eliminate babies. They also had one count of injuring, intimidating, and interfering with exercise at a religious place of worship in violation of other law.
The superseding indictment, which is version two, alleges that on January 18th, 2026, these defendants entered the city's church in St. Paul, Minnesota after religious services had begun and engaged in acts of oppression, intimidation, threats, and interference in physical obstruction. And as a result, the congregation was forced to terminate the church's worship.
Lemon and others, they say in their motion, well, there were very likely factual and legal misstatements in the indictment. So all of the charges should be dismissed because the material that was presented in the grand jury proceedings was a misstatement. They say the government grossly misrepresented facts and law to the grand jury in order to get them to actually indict them.
Similarly, the other defendants argue in their motion that there was also reason to believe based on other flaws in the indictment's allegations that the government provided a misleading legal instruction and failed to ensure that the grand jury engaged in an individualized defendant bydefendant assessment of probable cause. saying that the prosecutors went in in front of the grand jury, made improper commentary or improperly rushed their deliberation or claimed that there was a national emergency going on and the whole thing should be thrown out. According to Dong, they have demonstrated a particularized need to overcome the presumed secrecy of grand jury proceedings and get the information and the materials inside so they can make their defenses and beat the charges. Now the government they say no they say that Don Lemon's arguments of impropriy before the grand jury are all speculation and therefore he has shown no particularized need at all justifying the disclosure of any of the grand jury materials here. But in any event says the government we're not even required to present any legal instruction or any exculpatory evidence to the grand jury. So all those motions should be denied anyways.
Now, as for defendant Don Lamman and their demand for an immediate disclosure of this Brady material, they also say the government's indictment of an innocent person underscores the need for the remaining defendants to get Brady materials and discovery without further delay. The government says that it will produce any Brady material related to Miss Lewis's dismissal in accordance with the court scheduling order and that an order for immediate disclosure of any such material is unnecessary. So you'll get your Brady material which is exculpatory information when we have to give it to you but not earlier.
So the judge writes Don Lemon and the defendants they have that they will seek dismissal of this superseding indictment because they say there were irregularities from their vantage point.
The extraordinary course the government took to go get the superseding indictment and the alleged public misstatements of law by DOJ officials about this prosecution must have infected the grand jury proceedings such that the government lawyers the prosecutors provided similarly falter faulty legal instructions and withheld other exculpatory facts from the grand jury in order to secure the finding of probable cause to charge them. Now all this according to Don amounts to a particularized need justifying the disclosure of the grand jury materials which as we know here are secret.
The government though denies that. They say any DOJ official uh never actually misstated the law at all. And even if they did publicly misstate the law says the government that the defendants have failed to show that the council of record made similar statements to the grand jury. According to the government, the defendants Don Lemon, they have failed to connect any of the legal misstatements out in public or factual misrepresentations to any of the proceedings in this case. So they can't carry their heavy burden of showing a need for the disclosure, judge says. But whether the grand jury was provided faulty or firm legal instructions or presented with facts exculpating defendants is of no moment because a prosecutor is no under no obligation to actually give the grand jury legal instructions. Nor do prosecutors have a legal obligation to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury.
Judge explains. Let's look at the rules of criminal procedure saying the court may authorize the disclosure of grand jury matters to a defendant who actually shows they need it. If you want it, you have to make a strong showing of a particularized need for the materials.
You can do that if you show that s the sought-after material is needed to avoid a possible injustice in another proceeding or the need for the disclosure is greater than the need for secrecy or the request covers only and the request covers only the needed material. So three things conjunctive the material is necessary to avoid injustice in another proceeding. There's a balancing test. Disclosure outweighs secrecy and it's narrow and limited. But a generalized hope to get your hands on it or arguing some defect in the proceedings is not enough cuz every defendant everywhere will make that argument. Rather, a particularized need requires presenting specific evidence of prosecutorial overreach. And a defendant who has not pointed to anything in the record which actually might suggest that the prosecution has engaged in improper conduct fails to carry his burden. And under the laws of this circuit, a prosecutor is not under an obligation to provide the grand jury with any legal instructions at all.
Another eighth circuit case from 1988.
Somebody dismissed an indictment, but they shouldn't have done that because the prosecutor did not instruct them on the law of obscenity. And the prosecutor also, according to another ETH circuit case, is not under a duty to disclose facts to the jury, which would be the basis of a defense at trial. Once you're charged, then you can make your defense known and at a trial, present all of that evidence to the jury. The DOJ doesn't need to do that for you. They then point to misstatements by highle DOJ officials. They say Trump made a comment about this and they said the government provided improper legal instruction.
They also argue the government failed to provide exculpatory evidence and therefore since they didn't do that, they misrepresented the facts. They assert that because of these flaws, this warrants a dismissal of the entire indictment. They all walk.
They say because of those arguments, we need it. and that's particular. So, give us the materials. But the judge says, "No, there are at least three problems with Don Lemon's position and many more problems with Don Lemon in general."
First, although Dawn points to specific statements by DOJ officials and the president that they claim may have influenced the proceedings, this does not translate to a showing that those involved in actually presenting the matter to the grand jury in that room that they made any inappropriate statements or that they engaged in improper conduct. So what if the president said something? he wasn't in the room.
And that is the more salient inquiry when it comes to grand jury proceedings.
Quoting, "A defendant who has not pointed to anything in the record which might suggest that the prosecution did something improper has failed to carry his burden." Now, this is not after all a motion to dismiss based on outrageous government conduct at all.
And second, even accepting the defense theory that the government provided erroneous legal instructions, the government is not under an obligation to provide any legal instructions at all.
Quoting, thus, even if we further assumed that the grand jury was not properly instructed, we would not dismiss the related counts and we would have no permissible basis to invade the secrecy of the proceedings. And so therefore, a challenge to an instruction to the grand jury is not a proper basis for the dismissal of an indictment that is valid on its face. And here, although Don Lemon and the others allude to motions to dismiss that they intend to file, there is nothing before the court challenging the facial validity of the indictment. So essentially, they're fishing for the materials. And finally, as for Don Lamman's theory that the government may have failed to provide exculpatory evidence to to go in there and say, "Well, Don could be innocent because of this." The government and governing law requires no such disclosure. The grand jury sits not to determine guilt or innocence. That's a trial, but only to assess whether there is an adequate basis for bringing the charges in the first place.
And likewise, an indictment need not anticipate the defendant's defenses. So even accepting for the purposes of this motion that yeah, let's say, okay, fine, they did fail to provide proper legal instruction, no one cares, and exculpatory evidence, neither of those serve as a basis to dismiss the indictment. Period. They rely on the Comey case to say that the court should order the disclosure of the materials.
But Comey is different. In that case, the particularized findings of the court did establish that grounds may exist to dismiss the indictment because of a matter that occurred before the grand jury. And we talked about that on yesterday's show when Comey the search warrant that led to evidence that was presented to the grand jury may have been problematic. And that's what the judge found here. Even accepting that the government provided improper legal instruction and failed to present exculpatory evidence, that does not establish a ground to dismiss an indictment. And so therefore, Don Leman and his people have presented no permissible basis at all to invade the secrecy of these grand jury proceedings at this time. And so, accordingly, Don Lammon's motion is denied.
So next they asked the court for an order saying we want disclosure right now immediately. Give us all Brady material including grand jury materials and we want an extension of discovery deadlines. They say the government charging an innocent person. So somebody else got charged and I think they dismissed the charges against her. They say well and they may have just gotten somebody wrong or they may have talked to her and she said actually I was kind of you know forced in there. I wasn't a part of them. and they said, "Oh, okay.
Good to know. So now we dismiss your case." They say, "Well, you dismissed hers.
So that means you screwed up over there." But as even the defendants note in their motion, the court has ordered the government to immediately disclose any materials under Brady already. And the court has issued the same order for every defendant in this case. And he cites them all right here. All of them listed. So, because the court has already ordered the government to timely comply with its Brady obligations and warned the government, if you don't do this timely, there will be consequences.
We may exclude evidence against you. We may give the jury an adverse instruction. We may dismiss charges. We may hold you in contempt. You may be hit with disciplinary actions. In other sanctions, the court's not going to do that again. And so, your motion for an order directing the immediate release is denied as moot. I've already ordered that.
Now, as for your request for permission to file a motion to reconsider the discovery deadline, also denied failures. When you filed your motion, the deadline was April 24th. That deadline is passed now. Then litigation over the government's discovery was postponed until May. That deadline is also passed, too. Because the government discovery deadline has passed. Now, your request to file a motion for reconsideration of deadlines is moot.
And so, accordingly, Don Lemon loses again. Three for three. What a total failure. Don Lemon, you lose Brady.
You lose grand jury. And you lose your discovery deadlines because you're a moot. And you're moot.
Denied. signed by judge Douglas El Mo in a three for3 blowout. So Don Lemon loses again and that was the judge who actually didn't want to charge him in the first instance. So very nice to see it and we'll keep our eye on this one to see what is coming next for Don Lemon, but he's not going to get ahead of the game. He's not allowed to jump and cut in front of the line to get access to info to which he's not entitled. And he's not allowed to pierce the grand jury secrecy. He's not James Comey.
He's Don Lemon. So, his lawyer's blown out. I think Abby Lel was one of his attorneys. Blown out. But they'll continue to try. They'll continue to grasp. And we'll keep our eye on this case until Don Lemon goes to jail. All right. We got one more update today and then we'll hear from you on the matter.
A federal judge now in hot water over his wife seen here. He has been very anti-Trump. This is the same judge who ordered Trump's name to come off the building. Christopher Cooper, an Obama judge who has a real TDS problem, is married to a woman who also has a TDS problem. Two peas in a pod. And now we've got a judicial complaint that is being lobbed their direction. And let me share with you more about this woman.
Her name is called Amy Jeffris. She's a partner here in Washington DC and she works at a law firm called Hecker Frink.
And so let me share from her own bio page all of her accolades and she's married to a federal judge. She won't take his name though because maybe the patriarchy or something and she's a little bit too close. It's much easier to say they're not comingling their anti-Trump efforts, one in private litigation, the other in the federal court of law, if you can't connect them by their last name. So, she on her bio handles a bunch of things and has wide spread recognition for her work. But look at this. She also represents Joe Biden.
She represents members of Congress and former intelligence officers who promote respect for the rule of law, which means you're a leftist lunatic. She represents a Washington Post reporter when the FBI went and raided Hannah Natinson's home.
Advises multiple law firms in compliance with FAR foreign agents. Perfect.
and she has been a successful person challenging the Trump's administration's efforts to defund nationwide jobs.
She's got nonprosecution agreements for people under investigation. She got a declination in a prosecution for export violations. And it just gets better.
More nonprosecution agreements.
And it goes on and on and on.
She represented the FBI lover called Lisa Page, a former senior FBI attorney before the House Judiciary Committee.
Lisa Page was allegedly making bang bang with Peter Struck, another FBI agent.
They were texting each other, "We will stop him. We'll stop the president."
And also was working on the Clinton email server and Russian interference in the US election, which never happened.
Okay, so that's this lady and I think even more extensive work, US embassies, national security, white collar defense.
She handled some of these things before she joined this law firm. That's what the asterisk has to say.
And did I see Peter was in here? No, Peter Struck's not in here. It's Lisa Page. So, the FBI lover is was one of her clients at some point, and she's very anti-Trump, obviously. You can see from this litany here something else about fighting back against the DOJ Interpole extradition from US to Israel Lisa Page Jeffrey Pratt House Judiciary DOJ investigations long list. All right. So she's married to a federal judge. Federal judge is named Christopher Cooper. He was appointed by Barack Obama. This is the guy who took Trump's name off the Kennedy Center and absolutely hates Trump. Been micromanaging that case and keeping close tabs on it for a very long time.
And I think he also went after Katherine Herage. Remember her? So he held veteran reporter Katherine Herage in civil contempt for refusing to reveal her source.
And we know who this guy is. took the name off the Kennedy Center. And now we're asking about this conflict of interest.
The judge is married to Jeffris. She served also as a lawyer to Eric Holder and her wedding to Cooper. The judge was officiated by Merrick Garland, Joe Biden's attorney general. They're Democrat operatives in the federal judiciary.
So, the Obama appointed judge who ordered the name down is married to a lawyer who represented a former anti-Trump FBI lawyer, Lisa Page, served as counsel to the House January 6 select committee and currently represents Joe Biden. Trump said on a truth social post, called him out.
He pointed to Jeff's past, the wife, which included some of his most prominent critics. He called her a radical left Democrat who's influencing her husband to rule against him. He posted on Truth, "Trumphating judge wants to keep it open because his wife probably told him so about his plan to close the Kennedy Center down. He said, "No, I'm running the Kennedy Center." He issued his ruling back in May. Trump also said his wife doesn't use the last name Cooper because they as a couple don't want people to know that she has a conflict of interest with a federal judge and probably because she hates him. The president pointed to Jeffrey's professional background. She was a lawyer to Eric Holder and represented other FBI agents who were trying to rig the election. Opened up Crossfire Hurricane and tried to take out Trump. There's Peter struck right there. text messages between him and Lisa Page, another FBI lawyer, and they were saying, "We will stop him."
She says, "Trump won't become president, will he?" He says, "No, baby. I love you. We will stop him cuz we're the FBI and we're actually running the country."
So, now Judge is getting hit with a complaint.
Trump also said, "Amy is totally wired into the left system from her husband on down, and it is impossible for me to be treated fairly. He has a total conflict of interest and should be brought up on charges for not revealing these facts at all." Obama appointed this guy in 2014.
Cooper has drawn a lot of scrutiny here.
He was managing some of the John Durham investigation into Michael Susman. All of that was rigged, too. Michael Susman was the guy who was feeding Hillary Clinton campaign propaganda to the FBI.
John Durham tried to prosecute him and failed miserably and then gave us a crap report. We lapped up and glazed the DOJ.
That's so amazing. Sorry I have to investigate you. The suspect case stem from Durham's probe into Crossfire Hurricane. Durham made us all look like idiots.
All of us sharing photos like, "Oh, Durham's going to do something. Look, it's the walrus." And then he did nothing.
So, they've been married since 1999, and she still doesn't want to take his name.
She's like, "Uh, I mean, I love you, but not that much." So, here is the complaint. It's now been submitted by this organization, which we're learning a lot more about. Casa, not that Casa Center to advance security in America.
And now they've lobbed a judicial complaint against the judge.
And they posted that here for us to enjoy. Here's what they wrote. All right, District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals.
We are now sending this complaint to you about Judge Christopher R. Cooper because of his TDS wife. Dear Mr. pallet.
This complaint addresses potential misconduct by Judge Christopher Cooper due to revelations that his wife has served and per our understanding continues to serve in many legal roles where their joint financial interest is directly tied to embroiling President Trump in legal battles.
Judge gets a benefit, wife gets a benefit. If judge makes adverse rulings against Trump, wife benefits, judge benefits. This pecuniary interest money however did not stop the judge from adjudicing ca adjudicating cases involving the president. And so the center to advance security in America.
It's a non-partisan organization. We're dedicated to improving the safety and the security of the American people. We educate and inform the American people about the actions of their government and its officials that impact their safety, peace and security, democracy, civil rights, and civil liberties and privacy. A lot of what we do here, too.
On December 18th, 2025, the board at the John F. Kennedy Center for Performing Arts voted unanimously to rename the Kennedy Center to the Trump Kennedy Center. The next day, workers added signage to the center that reflected the board's democratic choice. Caroline Levit made a post about this and said, "Look, this is great. They voted and the name is now added." Then on December 22nd, apparently after political backlash for her initial board vote in favor of the name change, Rep. Joyce Bey filed a lawsuit against Trump in the district court in DC. Judge Cooper gets assigned May 29th. Then the judge comes out, permanently enjoins the renaming of the Kennedy Center, writes a short summary order. Now, after the judge's order, it was uncovered via social media that his wife Amy was a longtime Democrat administration attorney and is the current personal lawyer for Joe Biden. She has represented numerous clients adverse to Trump and has served in government capacities literally against the president, including serving as counsel to the House Select Committee investigating January 6, the illegal committee at the time of Judge Cooper's order and presently Jeffris represents former Joe Biden against Trump in an ongoing legal action as well. So both of these people litigating against Trump and you're not supposed to do that. All right, there are ethical standards.
Canon one says, "A judge should uphold the integrity and the independence of the judiciary, avoiding all impropriy and canon 2, act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence and the impartiality of the judiciary.
Should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other relationships to influence conduct and should perform your duties fairly, impartially, and diligently. Don't be swayed by partisan interest. disqualify yourself in a proceeding when your impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including when, in canon 3C1, a judge's spouse is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding. Now, to be sure, they say this complaint is not about the merits of any particular case. Such grounds alone would be improper for a complaint. Instead, we are deeply concerned with the fact that a sitting federal judge did not recuse himself and adjudicated to disposition a case from which he and his spouse financially benefit. Indeed, a large portion of his wife's business model is relying on handling litigation that is anti-Trump in nature.
Each of the cannons above and their several subp parts were likely violated by this judge not recusing himself or at the very least not disclosing his wife and his interest in the Kennedy Center.
Canon one says you have to uphold the integrity. Independence means that you're not subject to pressure. He presumably goes home every night to his wife maybe whose career is predicated on suing Trump. So, it would be odd to assume anything other than the fact that Judge Cooper and his wife talk about their days, talk about his wife's work, and the financial benefit they both enjoy from the wife suing Trump. Not only does Judge Cooper have a pecuniary interest against Trump cuz his wife gets paid from it, he also has a marital interest. And while the judge may be fi a fine judge in other cases, I doubt it, perhaps even cases involving political issues, the directness of his wife's ties to legal challenges against Trump compromises his independence as a jurist.
Canon 2 also requires that a judge even avoid the appearance of impropriy. Even if actual impropriy could be segregated, can't have an appearance of a noxious odor. as we learn in Fanny Land. More specifically, Canon 2 lists occasions when the appearance of a relationship impacts a judge's ability to adjudicate a case. When public confidence is hampered, when spousal relationships influence judicial conduct. That's a problem. Both are present here.
Cooper's been on the bench since 14. He has successfully heard plenty of cases involving political issues. A case involving Trump when his wife has built her brand literally on her bio website around legal action against Trump is not like those. And so for good reason, the president immediately took umbrage when Cooper's wife and her long-standing ties to legal actions against him and his supporters were unveiled on social media. There would be and have been no prejudice for the judge to recuse himself once he got this case. There is at least the appearance of prejudice, however, in a judge ruling on cases where his joint financial and marital interest are impacted because wife is getting paid to litigate against the president. Canon 3 also requires a judge to rule with fairness and impartiality.
These qualities are presumed by the canon to be adversely impacted when a judge could be swayed by partisan interest or when his wife might scream at him reasonably calling into question the judge's fairness and impartiality.
Maybe they go to the Kennedy Center. How many times have they been there? They live in DC. Again, the code of conduct is not narrowly constrained to actual proven beyond a reasonable doubt, prejudice, or compromise. All that is required is a reasonable concern. And given the fact that Judge Cooper's wife, Amy, has an interest in the president losing legal challenges and that type of link is explicitly contemplated by the rules as presumptively compromising, that is sufficient for discipline.
And it should not be that the outcome of a case appears predetermined the moment it is assigned. That imagery is by definition the appearance of impropriy.
Judges who have ties such as the one seen here should recuse themselves to avoid any risk of self-serving outcomes.
And this judge did not do that. And so an inquiry into this matter is more than warranted. And so for each of these reasons stated here below, this judge Cooper should be investigated and if found to have violated any of the judicial cannons, be disciplined by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. Respectfully, your friend Curtis Schubet for advancing-amea.org, or the center to advance security in America and onx at secureusa.com.
And that's what we like to see some complaints against biased judges sent here by Casa, not the illegal alien CASA, a good Casa, and we're happy to see it. So, we'll keep our eye on this one. We'll see if this judge does anything differently. I doubt that he will. We'll see if the DC Court of Appeals does anything. I doubt that they will, but at least it's on record. And now we can all see just how incestuous the whole thing is. So he's married to an anti-Trump tedious lunatic and then issues rulings that are very in alignment with the same people who say Trump is violating the law, handing legal victories to the Democratic party, overriding the votes of the Kennedy Center board, and delivering victories for the left.
But Amy now called out. Now we know who she is. She can't hide behind her marital name, her non-marital name, and she does not want to take the Cooper name, probably because she hates him.
So, we'll keep our eye on this one.
Thanks for joining and subscribing as we do. All right, friends. If you're just getting here, we had a great stream today. Thank you for joining us. Happy Thursday. We had some interesting developments in the election order, executive order litigation and some uh good notices filed by the DOJ. They said, "We are moving this forward. We're creating our citizen lists. We're checking them twice to find out who's naughty and who should be reported to ICE. I got to work on tightening that up." But also, the postal service rulem is happening. They released a new memorandum that was signed here by Mark Wayne Mullen that said this is all going to be in effect, not all of it, but good portions of it by June 30th, which is just outstanding.
The judge came down and issued an order on this, granting the DOJ's motion to dismiss a huge slew of their complaint as it relates to future elections, holding on to other complaints that are related other portions of the complaint that are related to this upcoming election.
I think if she found their arguments more sufficient, she would have held on to both and invalidated them uh at the outset and granted an injunction. That is not happening at the current moment.
So, I think this is basically keeping their claim on life support, which means it's a big win for us. Trump also out saying that we've got a lot of of fools in the Republican Senate, which is true, and that the Democrats are going to take full advantage of them if they do not act. We got apparently reporting that Kennedy and Cornin are dogpiling on Mike Lee for trying to pass the Save Act, but Mike Lee says, "I'm not stopping." We then saw that Don Lamont got blown out three for three. Total loser in his attempt to get grand jury proceeding transcripts and materials. No, their secret. Wanting Brady material delivered now. No, you'll get it when you're due.
and then also wanting something else and he lost that too. Then we talked about Amy and Coupe who are the power couple in DC, powerful lawyer and federal judge who are working overtime to go after Trump and why this judge should be disciplined for failing to recuse himself off these key cases. And now, my friends, it is time to hear from you. Thank you for being here. Thanks for subscribing if you're heading on out of here. We'll be back tomorrow to get into it again. If you want to see some updates from the Supreme Court, we did a separate public live stream earlier this morning and went through three cases that dropped this morning. One was a good Second Amendment right. So, if you're a marijuana enjoyer, good news. That's not sufficient for a criminal charge if you also possess a gun. Read through the full decision there. There was another decision about appellet rights and and really jurisdiction if you sue in state court and then you want to go to federal court. Kind of a boring case although interesting fact pattern. And the other one was about a criminal defendant and waiver of appellet rights. Supreme Court set a new standard on that and we had a good time covering those things. But next week on Tuesday and Thursday, 10:00 a.m. Eastern time, come join us across the board cuz we got apparently two decision days coming out next week and we're excited to see what SCODS delivers for us.
Hopefully good ones. Let's see who's joining us.
Yeah, and I saw there was the reflecting pool stuff. Yeah, there was I think some fake news. I think it was satire saying that they made an arrest of some people, but I don't think that has happened.
Yeah. And let me read some of these from this morning. I had to uh skid on out of here this morning. Milo Phone Bill shared this from the far-left Mother Jones talking about the 14th Amendment. Yeah.
So, thank you, Milo, for the donos this morning.
saying that that when it comes to birthright citizenship, they're trying to scare people to say that you're going to lose. If you're a citizen, you're going to lose your kid being a citizen, which is ridiculous. That's not an argument that anybody's ever made. It was for people who are here illegally and it was for people who were here temporarily.
You don't reside here. You don't subject yourself to the jurisdiction thereof if you are here uh illegally. It applies to you, not to us. Good to see you, Sharpie guy. Hopefully, we're coming through loud and clear.
Relantel, great to see you.
Dan, we had to pause, but we're back. We had a short pause from this morning and we're back. Right on, gal. Thank you for the dono. Hey, I'm an American man.
Thanks for the dono. Prayers up. I'm an American man. Thank you, sir. Amen to that. Ospac hey meant to post this earlier about the reflecting pool but better late than never.
This reflecting pool is capturing a lot of attention. There's all these videos about it. Everyone's talking about it uh on X. I think the BBC did like a full thing about it and were idiots about it.
Anyways, Ospac there's not to make reply, theirs not to reason why. theirs but to scrub and sigh. Into the algae bloom waited the 600. Wow. Algae to the right of them.
Algae to the left of them. Algae in front of them. Floated and blundered.
Stormed at with shock and smell.
Chlorine they poured and well into the jaws of green into the mouth of swell.
Waited the 600.
Hm.
That's pretty profound. It's poetry.
Is that from something that I don't know? Ospac. It's beautiful. What is that exactly? I don't really know what that is.
So, thanks for that. John says he's not going to get that. I don't get it, but it's beautiful. Whatever it is, help me out. Hey, Lurch Linger. Hey, thanks for the great show and congratulations in the house. Thank you, Lurch, for being here for 14 months. Thanks for joining us again on a double whammy today. A double live day. Been a good one. Liberty Vet says the left claim fraud isn't significant enough to investigate, but then they sue the voting rules for non-existent voter suppression. That's right.
It's Well, they there is no voter fraud.
It's not happening. Are you investigating it? No, because it's not happening. Well, if you looked, you'd see that it is happening.
But it isn't, so we don't have to look.
That's leftist logic. Oh, is that like a famous poem that I should know that's been re uh configured for the algae scandal? Hey, Don. Hey, Rob.
Congrats on your new mayor. Yippi. Yeah, I think we have like a literal communist now as the mayor of DC. Like literally, which is just great. We're here temporarily. We're just here on a little short jaunt and an adventure and they'll be getting out of here. So, uh, and especially if the Republicans don't win in 2028. Thank you, Don. I know it's wild. Hey, Lori Pipkin. I had to have my birth certificate and my marriage certificate in Florida 10 years ago and get my license updated. moved to Oregon and had to have my birth certificate, marriage certificate.
Yeah, you need these documents for virtually everything, including real ID now. So why why do you have to have standards to get a real ID to get on an airplane, but you can't have those same standards to go cast a ballot?
It makes no sense. Thank you, Lori Pipkin.
And if you don't want to get these documents and you don't want to vote, like if it's too hard to vote, I can only vote by mail and I don't want to add a copy of my license in there or I don't want to check a website or something, then I honestly don't want you voting. Then just stay home and watch TV or whatever. Like, let the self-governance go to the people who are interested in it. We don't need mass infranchisement of a bunch of people who can't be bothered to get up off their A's and actually do something with some effort.
Stay home. No one cares. Don't heavy read. It's called Danger Close. Danger Close by Patrick Burn. I know Patrick Burn. Shout out.
Thank you, Dylan, for the recommendation. Danger Close by Patrick Burn. Amazing Sharpie guy. So, the lukewarm milk toast judges ruling is most certainly laid out to three weeks before the election 2026 because she's playing both sides against the middle and as well sure the Democrats will win and it will go away.
Right, Rob? Love y'all watchers. Rob and Alexis be blessed. Love you too, Sharpie guy. Uh I mean she's I think she's pumping life support into their claims but she's she didn't really even uh play around with their other issue like their constitutional issues like if it was clearly unconstitutional clearly a separation of powers problem at the outset because of what was already done she would have held on to both claims I think and just hand you know and said well it doesn't really matter when it's happening this is a concrete harm that's happening now it's not that she's saying we're going to have to let the facts develop a little bit more if the acts develop in favor of following existing law and using existing law and making the argument this is intraexecutive then they're the ones who are going to be violating the separation of powers not the executive so I think it's actually a positive decision Lori Pipkin add on to get my change of address over with the postal service yeah man we we may have to get all of our stuff, you know, verified. You might want to check instantly. Make sure you're on that list, baby, if you're going to be mailing it. Hey, baby Lewis.
Interesting on Kennedy. We just got a letter from him with $1 in Florida. You put your party, you are in on a driver's license. I feel we had to give correct paperwork saying I'm a citizen.
So Kennedy, the senator, sent you some mail with a dollar bill in it. That's pretty nice.
And in Florida, you guys put your party on your driver's license. I didn't know that.
Thank you, baby Lewis, for the sheriff.
Rob, we need to gather on the steps of Congress to protest to pass the Save America Act.
Yeah, they'll probably arrest us for being insurgents. John Thun, get these insurrectionists out of here. Thank you, Rob. Not a bad idea. Biology, what's up?
Thank you for bringing in five more membos. We love our membos. We'll see you tomorrow morning on the Friday members only morning stream. Hey, what's up? Stays sweet. Stacy, sweet. Katie, Caddyy Chamberlles in the house. No one from nowhere. Welcome. Rips 420, Doug Force.
All gifted membos, courtesy of biology always wins. Thank you, biology, for bringing in some more membos. We'll see you tomorrow morning. Yeah.
Psychological projectionist says Don Leoron. Love that. Live streamed the prosecution's case. I know.
and literally obstructed the proceeding of Christians worshiping and then says that's his free speech right. Oh, so your free speech right trumps his free right his first amendment right to association and the freedom of his religion and there are federal laws that say no. Hey JP Mangin says the candidates will have standing.
They will need to argue that mailin causes them to lose. Discovery will be devastating to them on the election case.
Yeah, I don't I don't think we've seen candidates sue yet. I I would imagine they have, but I don't think we've seen them. They were not a party to that case. The one that we just read was the nonprofits, the League of Women Avengers and the states who were basically making arguments on behalf of their state secretaries and their election officials. It's too much work. We don't know how to cross reference our spreadsheet with their spreadsheet. We can't figure it out. It's going to take forever. We don't have the resources and so we're being harmed, which might be the stronger of the arguments that that maybe survives and maybe some of this gets injuncted before the midterms, but then it's going up on appeal and we'll see what we'll see the Supreme Court does. Like this is going to be a fun one to follow. Hey Jim tells you amazing doing a stream tonight. We'll send over some friends as soon as we're done here.
Clark Blount, thank you for the confirmation. Mother Jones is a communist yellow journalism rag. Yeah, I think there's a lot of that out there.
And Mother Jones is at the top of the heap of the garbage. So, thank you, Clark. Thanks for the dono. Thanks for being a memo. Great to see you here.
Hey, Flea Speech. Hope all is swell with the DC Bobby G. With the DC Bobby G family to be. And Joey and mom are well.
Love from Denmark, man. Shout out to our friends in Denmark. Thanks for watching the show, Flea Speech on Rumble all the way over there.
Shout out to our Denmark friends.
Good to have you here. Family's great.
Alexis is growing. Baby's kicking around in there. Excited to come out. We're excited, too. Coming soon, July. So, the baby will be growing. Clark Blan is a great substitute for toilet paper. Lot of that, too. Yeah, a lot of that, too.
No question.
So, thank you for that heads up. Yeah, and we don't ever read from there, but I think I do come across their headlines from time to time. Hawkeye, I had to have a picture ID to get into a Tijana whhouse when I was in the Navy.
Wow. So, Tijana has greater wh house integrity than American election systems. Wow. Not a surprise.
Well, maybe they need to know who you are in case you catch something, you know, so they can notify your residents or something. But hopefully that didn't happen to you, Hawkeye. Glad you're here. Rob, BRC only applies to children born to illegal aliens and non uh LPRs 30 days after the executive order signed on by President Trump on January 20th, 2025. Yeah, it's not for citizens, okay? It's not eliminating birthright citizenship for your children.
Never was. But that's what they're brainwashing everybody to think. Wait, my kids are going to be like illegal aliens if I have a baby? No, you're a citizen. If you're an illegal alien, then you don't get the benefit of breaking our laws, passing on citizenship to your kids. You want to come in legally and become a lawful permanent resident, you want to become a green card holder, that's a different story.
But why should you get the benefit of American law when you ignore and abandon American law? Makes no sense at all.
Zone Girl saying, "Hello." Yep. Good to see you, Zone Girl. Rick D, here you go.
Los Angeles approved putting allowing illegal aliens to vote in city and schoolboard elections on the November ballot. That's what they're doing in California.
So, literally, illegal aliens can vote in American elections. Can you believe that crap? Hey, what's up, Dan?
Oh, Doogie. backdoor doogie who let an illegal alien use and abuse her back door. She is now being scheduled rescheduled for sentencing Wednesday, July 8th. Outstanding. Thank you, Dan.
Yep. The Doogie sentencing coming up soon.
Hey, Rob. Saw something about an Amazon gift list and registry for a baby shower. Could you share it? Absolutely.
Hope everything's well with the three of you. By the way, when's the due date?
So, sometime mid uh mid to late uh July. So, Alexis is saying July 20th is her date. And yeah, let me share this right here.
Tweak got the links over there for you.
Amazon, Zola, thank you, Tweak. And many of you have already sent us stuff, so thank you for those. is we have to go pick up the packages and we're very grateful and we're going to be sending thank yous to everybody and we're super excited. So everything is great. Tweak, thank you so much. Due date July 20th is what Alexa says. Might be a little bit later than that. That might be ambitious, but I hope I hope that she's dead right and we just Oh, July 20th.
Here comes the baby.
Right into the catcher met. Thank you, Tweak. Good to see you, my man.
Hopefully things are well for you. We got Turbo Encabulator talking about this group called Omega4 America, a voter role integrity group.
They solved eBay's fraud problem.
Yeah. They say a big part of this is about crooked registars. I think that's right. Omega has been contacted by mail carriers who say they were instructed to take ballots which are undeliverable, put them in a bin. This is fraud.
Rob, what happens with your old Arizona address? What if someone votes your ballot from your old address and you reregister in DC? Good question. I can check. I think I can just check that and go on check my voter list on the government website and see if it if they counted a vote for me. This could put you in jeopardy of committing a felony.
You can't vote in two different races.
My suggestion to Omega is they find double voters, refer them to the DOJ for felony prosecution.
Yeah. And this is the thing. It's like prosecuting any criminal case takes a ton of resources in general and they don't have those. The DOJ lost like 10,000 attorneys or something or 10,000 employees. Maybe not all attorneys, but a lot. So, they don't have the resources in general and they have to have some complicity from the states who are covering up the lists.
So, it's really hard to find them. But if you could, that would be a good place to start. And if you had the resources to do it, that would be a good place to start. The biggest benefit from the prosecutions is that people will freak out who have moved and left a loose ballot. They will frantically contact their registar to make sure it's canceled.
That's the kind of blazing inferno inferno that we need to burn the enemy's cash of fake ballots. What say you? I think that's I I'm in favor of prosecutions for voter fraud.
And I don't know if it's like these people who don't file a notice of a change of address or move but who are actually the ones doing it. I think it's probably the ballot harvesters. Like I think the bigger there's probably big epicenters of these places like the homeless shelters and the treatment centers and the lingering centers. Bunch of people even UPS stores. bunch of people registered at these various addresses that I would imagine are getting gobs of ballots sent to them.
Sharpie guy and thank you for the great comment. We got Sharpie guy. Is there anything more to do to overrule her before the 2026 election? I think you're talking about the election executive order judge and the election executive order judge. Uh, I mean they could appeal that decision on the motion to dismiss, but I think the case is going to continue to percolate.
So, and the the other side might appeal too.
So, I think right now things are pretty steady. Dan, Rob, you are responsible to unregister for from your county when you register in DC. Thank you, Dan.
We don't have any house reps or senators to vote for here, but thank you for the heads up on that. Dan Bod, has it been proven that the algae was caused by sabotage? Not to my knowledge. I always thought it was. Didn't it happen uh the same time as the numbers? High levels of phosphate is not natural. Yeah, I don't know exactly how it got so algaified so quickly. That can happen. Water can turn pretty quickly, especially in the summers. You don't have chlorine in there. You don't have a disinfecting system like the nanobubblers.
It's like one big heating jacuzzi. You got to have some chemicals in there. You got to have something to prevent it from growing.
And I believe some of the water actually came from the PTOAC. So they pumped in PTOIC water, which I would guess, even if it's been filtered, is riddled with algae spores and it just bloomed out of control.
Yeah. But we were contemplating the thesis. What if they ran over to the mall? They dumped a bunch of uh muriatic acid onto the grass. So, they wanted to destroy the grass with one component, gasoline or acid, etch in the 8647, then have an opposite compound like a fertilizer, and go and just dump that in the pool, the reflecting pool, dump in some fertilizer, and really pervert the condition of the water, and then it just explodes with algae all on the same day, one just big day.
But I would imagine they would have I mean honestly they haven't arrested as far as I know the 8647 vandals. Where' those guys go? How can you go etch and it's huge. We made a video about it for our membos. But we walked around it.
It's huge. How could you spend like, you know, an hour out there etching something into the grass and they can't catch you? There's no cameras. They can't track your vehicle.
Where did you come from? Those people haven't been arrested. Are they not monitoring the reflecting pool?
Somebody's dumping fertilizer in there.
There are actual vandals in DC. They've reported that they are cutting the back of the fuel lines for other generators outside.
Yeah. Was it the pipe bomber who did it?
CIA did it?
I don't know.
But it does feel like it it turned very quickly. very quickly. Although I used to clean a lot of pools. Pools could turn very quickly. Like it could be something that flips in a matter of 48 hours. Clear pool, green pool goes very quickly. And when I clean pools, we would clean them generally once a week.
And sometimes like you'd have a bad storm or they would have a big party, so it would deplete the chlorine in a pool.
We have a bunch of dogs jumping in there. Depletes the chlorine. It's 115 in Arizona in July.
It can start to turn. Like I would, you know, let's say clean it on a Thursday, Friday, they party all weekend. I come back on the following Thursday or Friday, the pool's like about to turn bad. Your boy's like, "Don't worry, I'm here." And I've got gallons of chlorine, America's and the world's most perfect chemical. So, we'll they're working on it. I think we're going to go check it out this weekend. and head back down there and just give it another look.
See, they're posting about it now. Like the the Department of the Interior is posting about it. They're saying, "We're on it. Okay, stop getting mad at us."
Because a lot of thing a lot of people are discussing it. It's like all over the media. Leftists are having fun with it.
Look at what they've done.
Yeah. And some other comments from this morning. What's up, Hoofer? Abigail Spanberger just signed a new gun law.
That's great. She's a CIA agent.
Liberty, good to see you. Pea picking prosecutors could also go against alcohol. We talked a little bit about drunk urge this morning.
Jeff, the thing that makes me sad is NPR in theory is a good idea. Taking a good idea, turning it into a non-person reporter is a waste of usefulness and productivity. They take up space in the minds of the undisiplined and those with discernment challenges and well and then people just think, "Oh, it's nonpartisan. They're just brainwashed into that." And then it turns into no longer thinking about what they're listening to. Zone Girl. Movie disclosure is good. Worth the watch from Zone Girl. Man, thank you for the endorsement.
Movie disclosure.
It actually looks terrible to me. I watched the trailer. I'm like, what is this? And I like sci-fi. I like space movies. I like alien movies.
But it's like, what is going on on this?
It's like the aliens are animals and they're kidnapping kids. What's going on? I don't know. Don't let that don't let that dissuade you from going. If you want to go check it out, I'm sure we'll see it, but I don't really get it.
Yeah. And I think they've built some uh some security around the reflecting pool. So, we'll go check it out. I think the National Guard was out there and a lot more.
Yeah, good stuff.
Someone else says, "It's demonic. Don't watch it." Okay, so a couple of reviews.
It's good. Watch it. It's demonic. Don't watch it. All right. Couple of options.
We'll have to check it out. Yeah. And I was thinking about that. I could just get uh one of the scooters and just frisbee a bunch of chlorine tabs in there and just solve this whole thing.
I'd get arrested probably for that. Just my luck trying to save the reflecting pool.
They're going to fix it. I think they're making good progress on it. They were posting about it today. So friends, it has been a beautiful stream. Thank you for joining us. Happy Thursday. We're excited to come back tomorrow and tomorrow will be Friday. Hey, we're looking forward to it.
Hey Barb, this is the poem. Thank you Barb for the assist.
The charge of the light brigade by Lord Tennyson.
Yeah, I wouldn't have never got that. It would have been like Jeopardy. I'd be just like sitting there.
The answer is what is the charge of the light brigade?
never would have got it. Fortunately, it wasn't a daily double. So, that's the poem. Amazing. Thank you, Barb, for the heads up.
And Obama was out. Yeah. Did you see? I think that they should sue. I think the people who had their land stolen from them should sue. Obama was out today.
Said that we're on stolen land with his new building with a tribute to the stolen land. You can't have stolen property. Who does he think he is? So, they should sue to reclaim that land.
Uh, someone's asking Grock, how many times in this video is the word back door used? Number only, please. H, let's see if Grock gave an answer.
Zero. That's wrong. Can't access audio or transcript of the exrocast account spoken instances accurately.
It's definitely more than zero. Today wasn't even a Dugan case.
So, come back on a Dugan case, Will, and it's going to be like a hundred because we can't help ourselves. We like explaining how much she let him use her back door. All right, so friends, it has been a beautiful stream. What a lovely day. We're excited to come back tomorrow to get into it again. We hope that you join us as we do. Big thank yous to our mods and meme of course including Donut Mind me John. We got Muffin Rando. We got K Bean Carrie B Neuro D as you just saw on X. We got Janek Dog Digger Jum Gigum Elliot and just Rhonda modding the fort down for us. Keeping things nice and beautiful and orderly around here.
And thank you for being here. Thank you for sharing the show with a friend or a family member. have them come on back and join us tomorrow when we go live because it's better when we do it together. Don, if your commie mayor screws the pooch, DC would have to go to the federal government for assistance instead of Virginia providing grounds for federalization.
Uh, well, she might. Yeah. I mean, I think there's a lot of interface between the two.
So, I don't know what her policies are.
I mean, this this place is basically communist. There's leftists everywhere.
like mega leftists everywhere. It's the worst part of being here for sure. But it's um an interesting experience. We are learning a lot. We're seeing a lot of things, learning a lot about how it all works, seeing where it all happens, and we're just warming up. So, yeah, we'll see what she does. I don't know how much power they ultimately have.
Anyways, Mayor Bowser basically buckled and came under the under the scrutiny of the feds. So, we'll see. Nacho Mama, 22 months as a mebo. Have a great night.
See you all tomorrow. Thank you, Nacho Mama, for being here 22 months. Membos, we'll come back in the morning. We'll have a great stream and then we'll be back tomorrow afternoon to close out the week strong. Thanks again for being here. Hopefully, you return us tomorrow.
return back to us tomorrow because in order to do all of this appropriately, we are going to need to see you right back here so that together with your help, we can shine that BIG, BEAUTIFUL SPOTLIGHT of accountability and transparency down upon our system with the hope of finding justice. Make it a beautiful night. Sleep very, very well.
We'll see you right back here tomorrow.
Bye-bye.
Thanks for watching my beautiful friends. Now it's that time where the stream must end. You brought the heat with every chat in line. Together we expose corruption. One more time we dove in the truth where the media hides. lit up the lies with receipts on all sides.
The fight isn't over, but we made them sweat. We ain't done yet. No, not just yet.
Because together we are watching the watchers. Truth on our side.
Watching the watchers. We won't be denied.
Watching the watchers, eyes open wide.
Fighting for freedom with nothing to hide.
So drop a like and don't forget to share. And bring a friend who's ready to care. Tomorrow's lies are just today's news. But here we see through the scripted rules.
Together we are watching the watchers shine in the light.
Watching the watchers defending what's right.
Watching the watchers station each night together in liberty.
holding the light.
See you next time.
Stay vigilant, stay free, and always keep watching the watchers.
Related Videos
JAMIA BA LLB 2026 Offline Mock Interview | Final Interview Round Preparation
MLSLAWACADEMY
104 views•2026-06-16
6/15/26 Lively v. Wayfarer - Full Settlement Agreement is now public
littlegirlattorney
11K views•2026-06-15
HOA Demolished My Yacht for “Unauthorized Docking” — Too Bad I Own the Entire Marina!
Pro-RevengeStories
423 views•2026-06-15
JACKSON KIHARA'S SECRET DEAL: The Deal That Brought Out Jackson Kihara From Jail | LifeLens TV
LifeLens254
5K views•2026-06-14
Guelph's New Renoviction By-Law Explained.
CallCodyRE
807 views•2026-06-14
SCOTUS Rules 9-0 on Gun Rights for Marijuana Users
TheReloadSite
164 views•2026-06-18
A Family Tradition of Federal Time
LoneWolfUsul
603 views•2026-06-14
YouTuber Alexander Zabel Jr arrested again near Nancy Guthrie’s home amid investigation disruption
StarBuzzHD
136 views•2026-06-15
