Judicial Watch Sues over Attack That Killed 13 American Troops During Biden’s Afghanistan Pull-Out 

For three long years, the Biden-Harris Pentagon has been unlawfully hiding records about the preventable deaths of 13 American servicemen at the infamous Abbey Gate. This cover-up is disgraceful and is just one more cruel act against the families of the fallen and other Americans who want the full truth about the deadly Biden-Harris Afghanistan debacle.

We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Defense for information on the communications regarding the deaths of 13 American servicemen at “Abbey Gate” outside the Kabul airport during the withdrawal from Afghanistan on August 26, 2021 (Judicial Watch Inc. vs U.S. Department of Defense (No. 1:24-cv-02598)). 

We sued after the Pentagon failed to respond to its September 2, 2021, request for:

Any and all records of communications, including emails, internal (Pentagon) communications systems, and cables, referencing “Abbey Gate” sent to and from the following officials: Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley and Vice Chairman Gen. John E. Hyten.

On August 26, 2021, two suicide bombers and gunmen attacked crowds of Afghans flocking to Kabul’s airport in the waning days of an airlift for those fleeing the Taliban takeover. The attacks killed 13 U.S. troops: Marine Lance Cpl. David Lee Espinoza, Marine Sgt. Nicole Gee, Marine Staff Sgt. Taylor Hoover, Army Staff Sgt. Ryan Knauss, Marine Cpl. Hunter Lopez, Marine Lance Cpl. Rylee McCollum, Marine Lance Cpl. Dylan R. Merola, Marine Lance Cpl. Kareem Nikoui, Marine Sgt. Johanny Rosariopichardo, Marine Cpl. Humberto Sanchez, Marine Lance Cpl. Jared Schmitz, Navy Hospitalman Maxton “Max” Soviak, and Marine Cpl. Daegan William-Tyeler Page. One hundred seventy civilians were also killed. 

A report on the Afghanistan debacle released this week by Congress details some of the following failures behind the attack: 

The failure to close Abbey Gate in spite of consistent threat warnings about an imminent attack. The intention behind this decision was magnanimous — getting innocent civilians to safety. But as a result, U.S. service members were exposed to significant risk.

The reliance on the Taliban for security. Relying on a long-time, brutal enemy to provide security around the airport was fraught with problems from the very beginning. The Taliban long harbored violent intentions toward Americans and have expressed no regard for innocent human life. In addition, their security screening was inconsistent and haphazard. The Taliban also did not consistently assist the U.S. military with confronting known or suspected ISIS-K cells operating in the city, including the cell that would eventually carry out the attack.

The refusal of the U.S. military to conduct any direct attacks against ISIS-K inside Afghanistan for fear of upsetting the Taliban. Intelligence pointed to the ISIS-K cell behind the attack, but the U.S. military did not have the manpower and the Biden-Harris administration did not have the political will to conduct operations in and outside Kabul to neutralize it. Instead, the Biden-Harris administration relied on terrorists to capture other terrorists.

We have extensively covered the U.S. role in Afghanistan.

On July 20, 2024, we reported that at least $239 million has likely filled the coffers of the Taliban extremists running the Islamic republic.

In November 2023, we reported that the Taliban has established fraudulent non-governmental organizations (NGO) to loot the hundreds of millions of dollars in humanitarian aid that the United States has sent Afghanistan since the 2021 military withdrawal.

In November 2022, we reported that the Taliban is training and operating with U.S. military equipment including rifles, trucks, and helmets with night vision mounts since the Biden administration withdrew American troops from Afghanistan last year. 

In December 2021,we sued the Department of State for records about the censorship of government reports about U.S. tax dollars spent on military support and equipment for Afghanistan, as well as records about payments to Afghanistan’s Government and/or any member of the Taliban related to the U.S. departure from Afghanistan.

In November 2021, we received records from the office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), which show Special Inspector General John Sopko’s opposition to the Biden administration’s order to remove Internet access to hundreds of pages of public reports on the weaponry and training the U.S. provided to Afghan security forces.

If and when we manage to extract documents about the Abbey Gate attack, I’ll be sure to report back to you….

Biden-Harris State Dept Records Detail Targeting of Tucker Carlson over Putin Interview

Tucker Carlson was of great interest to the Biden-Harris State Department.

We received 105 pages and 211 pages of heavily redacted records from the U.S. State Department in a FOIA lawsuit that show officials in the Biden State Department exchanging an article comparing Tucker Carlson’s February 2024 interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin to Adolph Hitler’s handing out copies of Mein Kampf to newlyweds in Germany in the 1930s.

We filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the State Department failed to comply with a February 7, 2024, FOIA request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:24-cv-00840)) for:

All (2024) emails and diplomatic notes sent to and from the following officials referencing “Tucker Carlson:” Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Deputy Secretary Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary James O’Brien, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Yuri Kim, Deputy Assistant Secretary Sonata Coulter, Deputy Assistant Secretary Gabriel Escobar, Deputy Assistant Secretary Joshua Huck, Deputy Assistant Secretary Douglas Jones, Deputy Assistant Secretary Jacqueline Ramos, and/or Deputy Assistant Secretary Christopher W. Smith.

On February 8, 2024, the Tucker Carlson Network and X (Twitter) ran Carlson’s interview in Moscow with Putin. It was the first interview with Putin to be granted to a Western journalist since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022.

The records we obtained show the State Department has significant interest in the interview and significant interest in hiding its response to the interview.

In a nearly fully redacted February 20, 2024, email from top State Department official George Pyatt to U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Bridget Brink and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Europe and European Affairs Christopher W. Smith, Pyatt attaches an article by Atlantic Council President and CEO Frederick Kempe titled “Dispatch from Munich: The lessons of appeasement for US lawmakers withholding support for Ukraine,” in which Kempe compares  Carlson’s interview of Putin with Adolph Hitler handing out copies of Mein Kampf to newlyweds in Germany. 

Kempe writes in the article that the Carlson-Hitler comparison is “not such a bizarre vehicle if one considers Carlson’s influence on a Republican minority in the House that is currently standing in the way of approving additional aid for Ukraine.”

A lengthy paper circulated by email among officials in the State Department’s Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs (EUR) beginning on February 9, 2024, is almost entirely redacted. A portion of the paper is subtitled “Tucker Carlson interview of Putin?” This section of the paper is labeled “U” (Unclassified) but all of the content is redacted citing FOIA exemption (b)(5), which covers material considered to be “deliberative” in nature, or marked “non responsive.”

In the preceding email exchange State Department officials note that the paper has been prepared for Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs James O’Brien, who would be meeting the following Monday with reporters from the Washington Post, New York Times and PBS. Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Yuri Kim then responds in the email thread, “Clear, with edits. One more Q [question]: What do you make of Tucker Carlson’s interview of Putin?” A press officer responds to Kim and others, “Thank you very much for the edits. Staff assistants, see attached for the updated paper to include lines on Tucker Carlson’s interview of Putin.” 

After receiving a Reuters article on February 7, 2024, titled “Putin Gave Tucker Carlson an Interview Because He Differs from One-Sided Media,” from the press office of the State Department’s Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs (EUR), Deputy Asst. Secretary Sonata Coulter replies, “I was looking for a green-faced [nauseated] emoji but came up short.” A State Department official whose name is redacted replies, “Ha!”

On February 12, 2024, Tatiana Stanovaya sends a newsletter containing summaries of breaking news in an email with the subject “Putin’s Interview with Tucker Carlson; Nadezhdin: An Unexpected Challenge; Yandex, Sold: Who is Behind the Deal?” to Coutler. One of the article summaries states, “Putin’s Interview with Tucker Carlson. We dissect what went awry and the peculiar reaction Carlson’s visit elicited in Russia. We also uncover the tactical and strategic objectives Putin had in mind when he agreed to the interview.” Coulter forwards the newsletter onto a State Dept colleague: “I’m always intrigued by the teasers …” Her colleague, whose name is redacted but whose title is Director of the Office of Russian Affairs, responds, “The world wants to know!”

An email sent to Coulter on February 9 titled “Summary of Putin/Tucker Carlson Interview” by an intern working in the Office of Eastern European Affairs, characterizes the tone of the interview as “fawning,” and writes that “little new information was presented,” and that “Putin rambles on (and on and on) about Russian history.”

On February 9, 2024, the State Dept press office sends to the Director of the Office of Russian Affairs a document titled “Putin Interview with Carlson, Media Slam New Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief, New Initiative on ‘Undesirable’ Organizations,” which includes a synopsis of the Putin interview by Carlson. Officials then forward the documents to Coulter with the cover comment, “Lowlights from the Carlson interview.”

Our lawsuit shows how the Biden State Department obviously had it in for Tucker Carlson and secretly briefed the press on Tucker’s interview with Putin but wanted to keep those briefings secret. This is corrupt.

Fraud Grips Food Stamp Program, $61.5 Million in Stolen Benefits Replaced

With the price of your groceries shamefully high you certainly won’t appreciate the sloppiness with which your tax dollars are being handled in our fraud-ridden food stamp program. Our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.

Fraud in the government’s food stamp program is so pervasive that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the agency that administers it, launched a special system to facilitate the replacement of the welfare benefit when recipients claim it stolen. In the two years since the Biden administration created the program, the government has doled out a hefty $61.5 million to replace pilfered food stamps—rebranded Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by the Obama administration to eliminate stigma—in 127,290 cases. Keep in mind, this is in addition to the staggering $112.8 billion that Uncle Sam spends to provide 42.1 million with free groceries, according to the latest government figures.

The USDA’s SNAP Replacement of Stolen Benefits Dashboard reveals that 79% of claims were approved by the agency and that 339,269 fraudulent transactions were identified through approved stolen benefits claims. Recipients in every state in the nation have submitted claims and New York has by far the most food stamp fraud cases—50,678. Maryland is second with 33,509, followed by Illinois (16,369), Texas (11,633), Washington State (4,208), New Jersey (3,630), Arizona (3,541), North Carolina (3,434), Indiana (3,309) and New Mexico (3,027). Three states have reported over 2,000 cases and more than half a dozen have over 1,000. The federal government allows states to replace benefits stolen as far back as October 2022, according to the USDA dashboard.

“The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is aware of increased reports of Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) theft due to card skimming, cloning, and similar fraudulent methods,” the agency announced in January 2023, revealing that at the end of 2022 President Biden signed a measure that includes a provision for the replacement of stolen food stamp benefits with federal funds. The USDA cites the section of the law that requires it to issue guidance to state agencies and “promulgate regulations to protect and replace SNAP benefits stolen via card skimming, card cloning, and other similar fraudulent methods.” Other similar fraudulent methods may include, but are not limited to, scamming through deceitful phone calls or text messaging that mimics official state agency messaging and phishing. “A theft that resulted from any of these methods would be eligible for replacement,” according to the USDA.

Rather than so easily replacing the stolen benefit, perhaps the government should create a system to crack down on the rampant fraud. Besides saving American taxpayers tens of millions of dollars, it seems like a more efficient way to operate. Afterall, the nation’s bloated food stamp program has long been plagued by problems that have fleeced the system out of large sums. A few years ago, the USDA disclosed that it sees over a billion dollars annually in food stamp fraud. Many of the retailers authorized by the government to accept food stamps also engage in illegal practices, the agency has found. A few years ago, nearly 200 people were arrested in Florida for operating a sophisticated ring in which 22,000 fraudulent food stamp transactions totaling $3.7 million were recorded by a task force of local and federal authorities. In 2016 the feds busted the largest food stamp fraud operation in history, a $13 million scheme run by flea market retailers in the largely black and Hispanic areas of south Florida’s Miami-Dade County known as Opa-Locka and Hialeah.

The government has failed to mitigate the illicit activities that have long plagued the program and now it is doling out tens of millions of dollars to replace stolen benefits rather than implement a system to prevent it. Just a few weeks ago, a Kentucky news station reported that thieves have stolen more than $5 million worth of food stamps in the past year from families in Kentucky and Indiana. “Scammers are draining accounts linked to EBT cards,” used by the government to distribute benefits, the story says. In South Carolina a woman recently got busted for fraudulently receiving more than $28,000 in food stamp benefits. Another woman was also recently arrested in the state for fraud after taking over $12,000 in food stamps that she did not qualify for. In Delaware and Tennessee, the government recently replaced hundreds of thousands of dollars in stolen food stamps, according to local news reports. The list goes on and on.

Teen Boys on Hormone Therapy to Induce Female Puberty Can Compete in Girls’ Sports, Obama Judge Rules

Leftist transgender extremism is a plague of our age – and our courts are not immune. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the latest. 

An Obama-appointed federal judge has ruled that two teenage boys in New Hampshire who identify as girls can compete in female school sports teams despite a state law banning it. Earlier this year New Hampshire enacted the Fairness in Women’s Sports Act requiring public schools to classify athletic teams based on biological sex at birth and therefore prohibiting transgender students from playing on teams that instead align with their so-called gender identity. Dozens of states have passed similar laws and last year federal legislation was introduced to ban individuals of the male sex from participating in programs or activities that are designated for women or girls. The measure, which President Biden has promised to veto, states that “sex shall be recognized based solely on a person’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth.”

Under New Hampshire’s law transgender athletes in grades 5-12 must play sports on teams that align with their biological sex rather than gender identity. The measure also requires schools to designate all teams as either girls, boys, or coed, with eligibility determined based on a student’s birth certificate “or other evidence.” The goal is to protect girls from the potential risks and injuries of competing against bigger and stronger transgender athletes, state officials say. When Governor Chris Sununu signed the bill in mid-July he said it “ensures fairness and safety in women’s sports by maintaining integrity and competitive balance in athletic competitions.” The Republican governor also pointed out that the law is widely supported throughout the nation with nearly half of all U.S. states taking similar action.

With the help of a leftist civil rights group, two boys—15-year-old Parker Tirrell and 14-year-old Iris Turmell—sued the Granite State to participate in girls’ sports, asserting that the law discriminates against transgender students in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The boys allege that the measure denies them equal educational opportunities and singles them out for discrimination solely because they are transgender girls, in violation of federal law. The Fairness in Women’s Sports Act denies them the many educational, social, physical and mental health benefits that come with playing sports and isolates them from friends and teammates, according to their complaint, which explains that each has been diagnosed with gender dysphoria, a health condition characterized by distress resulting from an incongruence between one’s birth sex and gender identity. “As part of their prescribed medical treatment for gender dysphoria, Parker and Iris live and interact with others as girls in every aspect of their lives; they are accepted as girls by their parents, family, schools, peers, teammates, and coaches,” the complaint states, adding that both teens are “receiving puberty-blocking medication and hormone therapy to align their bodies with their female identities and to alleviate the distress of physical characteristics that conflict with their gender identity.”

This week Judge Landya McCafferty, appointed to the bench in 2013 by Obama, blocked the enforcement of New Hampshire’s law, ruling that it discriminates against transgender students. The requirement that students stick with their biological sex at birth for sports teams is an obvious legal mechanism to discriminate against transgender girls, according to the judge. “Indeed, transgender girls are the only group whom the Act bars from playing on the team associated with their gender identity,” McCafferty writes in her 48-page order. The disparate treatment of transgender girls is clear in the statute and the “singling out of transgender females is unequivocally discrimination,” the judge writes. She further notes that the transgender athletes are unlikely to have any physical advantage over their female teammates because both are receiving female hormone therapy. “Neither Parker nor Iris have undergone male puberty,” Judge McCafferty’s order states. “Neither of them will undergo male puberty. Both have received hormone therapy to induce female puberty, and both have developed physiological changes associated with female puberty. It is uncontested that there is no medical justification to preclude Parker and Iris from playing girls’ sports.”

The judge also provides a lesson on gender identity and dysphoria, writing that the first is an accepted medical term for a person’s innate sense of gender, which may or may not align with their biological sex or anatomy. Gender dysphoria is a “highly treatable” medical condition resulting from a lack of alignment between one’s birth sex and gender identity that if left untreated may result in anxiety or depression, eating disorders, substance abuse, and even suicide, Judge McCafferty writes.

Until next week,

Tom Fitton