Fauci’s Post-Retirement Protective Detail
‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

[Header]

Fauci’s Post-Retirement Protective Detail

Biden Administration Won’t Discuss Whether It Placed Gabbard on
Terrorist List

[[link removed]]


President Donald Trump has nominated former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard to be
the next director of national intelligence. She appeared this week for
a Senate confirmation hearing.

Meantime, we’re trying to get to the bottom of how the Biden
administration treated her.

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA ) lawsuit responses
[[link removed]]
from
the Department of Homeland Security
[[link removed]],
the Transportation Security Administration
[[link removed]],
and the Office of Intelligence and Analysis
[[link removed]]
of
Homeland Security show that the Biden administration refused to
“confirm or deny” that Gabbard was targeted for surveillance under
the Transportation Security Administration Quiet Skies terrorist watch
program.

We filed the December 2024 lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against
the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for records on former
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard being targeted (_Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S.
Department of Homeland Security_
[[link removed]]
(No.
1:24-cv-03427)). The Transportation Security Administration is a
component of the Department of Homeland Security. As noted in
the December 11 court order
[[link removed]],
we
sought to expedite
[[link removed]]
the
lawsuit.

We sued after Homeland Security failed to respond to three August 5,
2024, FOIA requests for records of Homeland Security Department and
Transportation Security Administration officials regarding both
Gabbard and its Quiet Skies program.

The Biden administration’s responses, all dated January 17, 2025,
include a letter signed by a Homeland Security FOIA officer, informing
us that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of
Intelligence and Analysis
[[link removed]]
(I&A)
“conducted a search for records responsive to the FOIA request that
do not tend to confirm or deny any individual’s status on or off a
Federal Watch List and found no responsive records.”

Similarly, the Transportation Security Administration
[[link removed]]
wrote:
“TSA cannot confirm or deny the existence of records that would tend
to confirm a particular individual’s status on or off a Federal
Watch List, including Quiet Skies, which are protected by statute and
therefore exempt from disclosure. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3). TSA conducted
a search for records responsive to the FOIA request and, pursuant to
FOIA and its exemptions, … is processing any responsive records that
do not tend to confirm or deny any individual’s status on or off a
Federal Watch List.”

Homeland Security
[[link removed]]
reported
it reviewed 506 pages of responsive records and produced 13 pages
initially, which are redacted of any substantive information.

On August 4, 2024, it was reported
[[link removed]]
that
“several Federal Air Marshal whistleblowers have come forward with
information showing that former U.S. Representative and Presidential
candidate Tulsi Gabbard is currently enrolled in the Quiet Skies
program.”

On August 23, 2024, the House Oversight Committee wrote to
[[link removed]]
David
P. Pekoske, the administrator for the Transportation Security
Administration, that Gabbard was added “to the Quiet Skies program
on July 23, 2024 – one day after she criticized the Biden
administration in an interview.”

Gabbard, who on November 13, 2024, was nominated by then
President-elect Donald Trump to be the next director of national
intelligence
[[link removed]],
subsequently confirmed the reports, asserting in a video
[[link removed]]
she posted on
X that she had learned that three air marshals were assigned to watch
her every time she “traveled in the airport and on the flight.”
Gabbard added, “TSA deployed explosive canine detection teams and a
TSA explosion specialist.”

According to the DHS website, “Quiet Skies” is a “tool that
allows the Federal Air Marshal Service to more efficiently deploy law
enforcement resources to focus on travelers who may present an
elevated risk to aviation security.”

We recently reported
[[link removed]]
that
the Transportation Security Administration, a federal agency created
after 9/11 to protect the nation’s transportation system, has no
idea how aviation security was impacted when:

> [I]t plucked Federal Air Marshal Service agents from their critical
> duties to help with the Mexican border crisis. Air Marshals operate
> under the Transportation Security Administration, and in the last
> few years the agency has forced the highly trained aviation security
> specialists to assist Customs and Border Protection (CBP) with the
> onslaught of illegal immigrants entering the country under Biden’s
> disastrous open border policies.”

The Biden administration’s decision to place Tulsi Gabbard on a
terrorist watchlist was abusive on its face. Given her pending
nomination to director of national intelligence, we hope the Trump
administration takes a different approach and provides more details on
this scandal.


ANTHONY FAUCI RECEIVED U.S. MARSHALS PROTECTIVE DETAIL AFTER
RETIREMENT

President Trump ended
[[link removed]]
Anthony
Fauci’s security detail. “When you work for government, at some
point your security detail comes off,” he said. “And you know, you
can’t have them forever. So, I think it’s very standard.”

Fauci seems to have received the type of security reserved for a
former president of the United States at obviously great expense.

Now we’ve uncovered a little-known fact illustrating the Biden
administration’s eagerness to protect their covid czar.

We received 3 pages
[[link removed]]
of
heavily redacted records from the U.S. Department of Justice in a
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that show Dr. Anthony Fauci
was provided a U.S. taxpayer-funded protective detail by the U.S.
Marshals Service after his retirement in January of 2023.

On January 20, 2023, Fauci retired
[[link removed]]
as
President Biden’s chief medical adviser and as director of the
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

An April 17, 2023, email from Marshals Service then-Associate Director
of Operations Mark Pittella
[[link removed]]
to
Director Ronald Davis states that Fauci’s USMS detail is a
“reimbursable agreement” that “was agreed upon and paid for”
by the Department of Health and Human Services, which is NIAID’s
lead agency.

We filed the September 2024 lawsuit
[[link removed]]
in
the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after the Justice
Department failed to provide records requested in a June 2024 FOIA
request (_Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(1:24-cv-02606)).
Judicial Watch is asking for:

> All records, including emails, email chains, email attachments,
> correspondence, memoranda, statements, reports, agreements,
> expenditures, invoices, reimbursements, expense reports, briefings,
> or other form of record, regarding government funds spent on USMS
> [U.S. Marshals Service] protection of Dr. Anthony Fauci, former
> Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
> (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH). This request also
> includes any requests or authorizations to initiate USMS protection
> of Dr. Fauci.

The U.S. Marshals Service is the enforcement and security arm
[[link removed]]
of the U.S. federal
judiciary.

In July 2023 it was reported
[[link removed]]
that
Fauci was “receiving [a] government-funded security detail despite
his alleged retirement.” And while HHS reportedly
[[link removed]]
“was
set to end its protection of Fauci,” it was discovered that the U.S.
Marshals had assumed protective responsibilities on January 5, 2023.

Open The Books reported
[[link removed]]
on
November 7, 2024, that Fauci received $15 million in taxpayer-funded
security services after his retirement. The security detail began on
January 4, 2023, and ran through September 20, 2024.

In an April 17, 2023, email, Pittella writes:

> I asked some specific questions of JSD [Judicial Security Division]
> related to the chart they provided earlier today regarding our
> protection details and the number of personnel. Please let me know
> if you would like additional information regarding the numbers
> provided to each of the details. Thank you and have a nice evening.
>
> If [redacted] and Dr. Fauci all have full portal to portal details,
> why [redacted]
>
> [Redacted]
>
> However, the actual number that makes up the detail depends
> [redacted]. While we would like to remain consistent on the details,
> the number of personnel we are able to assign [redacted].
>
> For Fauci, the number of deputies requested at the time of the HHS
> [Health and Human Services] reimbursable agreement was [redacted].
> This request was based on [redacted]. Since Fauci is a reimbursable
> agreement, the request for [redacted]deputies was agreed upon and
> paid for by HHS. JSD [Judicial Security Division] requested
> [redacted] to ensure the agency was funded for the appropriate
> number [redacted].

***

> The number of deputies proposed for the Director’s detail is
> [redacted]. Currently, there are [redacted] assigned to his
> protection detail’ totaling [redacted]. With no changes to the
> posture, the total number assigned to fully staff the detail would
> be [redacted] personnel. With the Director’s request to [redacted]
> it has been proposed that the Director’s detail be staffed-up
> [redacted] personnel. Because this detail is staffed by JSD
> personnel, JSD would prefer to [redacted].

> [Redacted]

> [Redacted]
>
> [Redacted]
>
> [Redacted] only has DUSMs [Marshals] assigned to his detail. Is that
> enough DUSMs to properly provide security?”
>
> Yes, [redacted]
>
> This is the recommended number of personnel for this detail type
> based on JSDs protective detail model….
>
> Overall there is disparity among the details with similar levels of
> protection, as it pertains to DUSMs assigned to each of those
> details? Why?”
>
> The disparity is that we are not staffing the special details
> permanently.”
>
> [Redacted]
>
> This is what causes the disparity in numbers.
>
> While JSD attempts to equally use resources so that each detail has
> a similar security posture across the board, without permanent
> personnel assigned, the numbers will continue to fluctuate.

Our FOIA lawsuits and investigations have uncovered much of what the
public knows about Fauci and his former agency and the Covid-19
controversies:

* In July 2024, we sued
[[link removed]]
the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services for records of Fauci, various
top officials, grantees, and contractors regarding efforts to subvert
FOIA and other information requests about Covid issues.
* In June 2024, we sued
[[link removed]]
the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for records from the
Assistant Secretary for the Administration for Strategic Preparedness
and Response (ASPR
[[link removed]])
regarding
after action reports, review of procedures, or studies concerning the
preparation for and response to the Covid-19 pandemic
* In April 2024, we uncovered FBI records
[[link removed]]
that
showed an April 2020 email exchange with several officials in the
bureau’s Newark Field Office referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s
National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) grant
to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China as including
“gain-of-function research” which “would leave no signature of
purposeful human manipulation.”
* Emails between U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy and top Facebook
executives in 2021 regarding the censorship of user posts about Covid
controversies
[[link removed]]
showed
Facebook leadership seeking to “better understand the scope of what
the White House expects from us on misinformation going forward.”
* Records from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) showed
that a Pfizer study surveyed 23 people in 2021 to gauge reactions to
its Covid vaccine booster before asking the FDA
[[link removed]]
to approve
it.
* Records
[[link removed]]
from
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) included the
initial grant application and annual reports to the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) from EcoHealth Alliance
[[link removed]],
describing the aim of its work
with the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create mutant viruses “to
better predict the capacity of our CoVs [coronaviruses] to infect
people.”
* HHS records included emails
[[link removed]]
of
then-Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Francis
Collins showing a British physicians’ group recommended the use of
Ivermectin to prevent and treat Covid-19.
* Heavily redacted HHS records showed
[[link removed]]
that just two
days prior to FDA approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine a
discussion was held between U.S. and UK health regulators regarding
the Covid shot and “anaphylaxis,” with the regulators emphasizing
their “mutual confidentiality agreement.”
* We obtained HHS records
[[link removed]]
regarding
data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA Covid-19 vaccine, which
indicated a “statistically significant” number of rats were born
with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the
vaccine. The documents also revealed Moderna elected not to conduct a
number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test
animals.
* Heavily redacted records
[[link removed]]
from
the FDA regarding the Covid-19 booster vaccine detailed pressure on
Covid booster use and approval.
* HHS records
[[link removed]]
detailed
internal discussions about myocarditis and the Covid vaccine. Other
documents detailed adverse “events for which a contributory effect
of the vaccine could not be excluded.”
* We uncovered
[[link removed]]
HHS
records detailing the extensive media plans for a Biden administration
propaganda campaign to push the Covid-19 vaccine.
* HHS records revealed previously redacted
[[link removed]]
locations
of Covid-19 vaccine testing facilities in Shanghai, China. The FDA had
claimed the name and location of the testing facilities were protected
by the confidential commercial information exemption of the FOIA.
* NIH records showed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s
controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of
Virology. The records also showed National Institute of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about
“gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of
Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth
Alliance’s
[[link removed]]
lack of compliance
with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the
NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
* Texas Public Information Act (PIA) records showed the former
director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of
Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), James W. Le Duc
[[link removed]],
warned
Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential
investigations into the Covid issue by Congress.
* HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for
the Covid-19 vaccines showed how a key component of the vaccines
developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found
outside the injection site
[[link removed]],
mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals,
eight to 48 hours after injection.
* Records
[[link removed]]
obtained
from HHS through a FOIA lawsuit related to hydroxychloroquine and
Covid-19 revealed that a grant to EcoHealth Alliance was cancelled
because of press reports that a portion of the grant was given to the
Wuhan Institute of Virology.
* HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277
[[link removed]]
was given to the
Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
* NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to
EcoHealth Alliance
[[link removed]]
to research
coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants
to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the
vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding
disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor
surfaces.
* HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauc
[[link removed]
[[link removed]
email chain,
citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth
Alliance
[[link removed]].
The government emails
also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates
worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for
Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help
“raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from
China on important international counsels as high level commitment
from China.”
* Our four-part documentary
[[link removed]]
regarding the
coordinated effort by the government and Big Tech to censor and
suppress information on topics such as Hunter Biden’s laptop,
Covid-19, and election debates is available here
[[link removed]].


FBI ISSUED WARNINGS OF DOMESTIC EXTREMISTS AFTER MAR-A-LAGO RAID

The FBI raid on President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home was an incredible
abuse of power based on false allegations. The raid was followed by
the FBI distracting the public with a politicized document slyly tying
President Trump and other critics to threats over this abuse. Who can
trust the FBI at this point?

We received 8 pages
[[link removed]]
of
records from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit which show the DHS and FBI warning law
enforcement agencies that they should be prepared for a surge in
threats from so-called Domestic Violence Extremists (DVEs) following
the August 8, 2022, FBI raid on former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago
estate in Palm Beach, Florida.

We obtained the records through an October 2022 lawsuit
[[link removed]]
filed after the
Department of Homeland Security failed to comply with an August 2022,
FOIA request (_Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S. Department of Homeland
Security_
[[link removed]]
(1:22-cv-03275)).
Judicial Watch asked for:

> All records of communication between any official or employee of the
> U.S. Secret Service and any official or employee of the Federal
> Bureau of Investigation regarding the execution of a search warrant
> at the residence of President Trump on August 8, 2022.

A widely distributed August 13, 2022, email
[[link removed]],
from which the sender and recipients’ names are redacted, was sent
to officials in FBI, ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives), BOP (Federal Bureau of Prisons), FDA (Food and Drug
Administration), State Department, and numerous other agencies, with
the subject “Recent Violent Threats Against Law Enforcement”
stating:

> Colleagues, I wanted to provide you an update on the FBI’s
> response to the heightened threats against law enforcement following
> the FBI’s recent investigation actions in Palm Beach, Florida.
> Attached is a Joint Intelligence Bulletin that provides information
> on the potential threats posed by domestic violent extremists
> following this event.
>
> To date we have received [redacted]. I wanted to thank all of you
> for your continued partnership and support of the Miami Field
> Office. [Redacted]. The safety and wellness of employees is my
> paramount concern. Let me assure you that FBI Miami will continue to
> work with your agencies to identify and monitor threats against law
> enforcement and will continue to communicate updated information as
> it becomes available.
>
> If you have any questions, I encourage you to contact our
> counterterrorism ASAC [Assistant Special Agent in Charge]
> [redacted].

The message is signed by Special Agent in Charge Robert DeWit
[[link removed]
[[link removed]].

A document titled “Joint Intelligence Bulletin,” dated August 12,
2022, is attached in DeWitt’s email. The opening paragraph states:

> This _Joint Intelligence_ _Bulletin_ is intended to provide
> information on the potential for domestic violent extremists to
> carry out attacks on federal, state, and local law enforcement and
> government personnel or facilities. This Bulletin is being shared in
> light of an increase in threats and aces [sic] of violence,
> including armed encounters, against law enforcement, judiciary, and
> government personnel, in reaction to the FBI’s recent execution of
> a court-authorized search warrant in Palm Beach, Florida. It is
> intended to support the activities of the FBI and DHS and assist
> federal, state, local, tribal. and territorial government;
> counterterrorism, law enforcement, and court officials; first
> responders; and private sector security partners in effectively
> deterring, preventing, preempting, or responding to terrorist
> attacks against the United States.

An “Overview” section of the bulletin states:

> The FBI and DHS have observed an increase in threats to federal law
> enforcement and, to a lesser extent, other law enforcement and
> government officials following the FBI’s recent execution of a
> search warrant in Palm Beach, Florida. These threats are occurring
> [redacted]. The FBI and DHS would like to ensure that law
> enforcement, court, and government personnel are aware of the range
> of threats and criminal and violent incidents….
>
> The FBI and DHS are aware of an increase in recent threats and calls
> for violence against federal law enforcement, US Government, and
> judicial personnel in reaction to the FBI’s execution of a search
> warrant in Palm Beach, Florida on 8 August 2022. These developments
> highlight the heightened threat since 2020 by domestic violent
> extremists (DVEs) motivated by a range of ideologies, who have
> grievances against a variety of targets including law enforcement.

A footnote in the report defining “Domestic Violent Extremism”
notes: “The mere advocacy of political or social positions,
political activism, use of strong rhetoric, or generalized philosophic
embrace of violent tactics may not constitute extremism and may be
constitutionally protected.”

Further along the report cites one of the purported threats, noting:

> On 11 August 2022, Ricky Shiffer, Jr. [redacted] attempted to
> forcibly enter the FBI’s Cincinnati’s Field Office. When
> uniformed officers responded to Shiffer’s attempt to break a glass
> barrier, he fled the scene. A pursuit ensued, and Shiffer entered a
> standoff with FBI and law enforcement officers after firing multiple
> shots at responding officers from the Ohio State Highway Patrol
> (OSHP), with FBI SWAT support, attempted to arrest Shiffer,
> resulting in his death.

A section of the report titled “Outlook” states:

> In recent years, DVEs adhering to different violent extremist
> ideologies have coalesced around perceptions of government overreach
> and election fraud to threaten and conduct violence. As a result of
> recent activities, we assess that potential targets of DVE violence
> moving forward could include [redacted]. The threats we have
> observed to date, underscore that DVEs may view the 2022 elections
> as an additional flashpoint around which to escalate threats against
> perceived ideological opponents, including federal law enforcement
> personnel.

A subsection titled “Past Behaviors Associated with Radicalization
and Mobilization to Violence” notes:

> A body of court documents and press reporting reveals several
> observable behaviors that may indicate radicalization and
> mobilization to violence by DVEs. It is important to emphasize that
> many of the mobilization indicators may also relate to
> constitutionally protected activities. It is important to look
> critically and contextually at the specific actions of the
> individual and their intent. Law enforcement action should never be
> taken solely based on constitutionally protected activities; on the
> apparent or actual race, age, ethnicity, national origin, religion,
> gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity of the subject; or
> any combination of these factors. Individuals are encouraged to
> contact law enforcement if-based on these indicators and the
> situational context·-·they suspect an individual is mobilizing to
> violence or engaging in violent extremist activities.

Some of the examples of such activities they include are:

* Unusual purchase of military-style tactical equipment (for
example, body armor or personal protective equipment) in a manner that
raises suspicion of planning violence;”
* Communicating directly with, or seeking to develop a relationship
with violent extremists – or being contacted directly by them –
for suspected criminal purposes;”
* Unusual acquisition of weapons or ammunition for suspected
criminal purposes;”
* Unusual change in, or initiation of, physical or weapons training
for suspected criminal purposes;”
* Producing, promoting, or extensively consuming violent extremist
content online or in person, including violent extremist videos,
narratives, media, and messaging for suspected criminal purposes;”
* Expressing acceptance of violence as a necessary means to achieve
ideological goals (for example, communicating a desire for revenge
against ideological opponents) and saying that nonviolent means are
ineffective or unavailable;”
* Increasing or extreme adherence to conspiracy theories as
justification of violence against ideological targets;”
* Attempting to radicalize others – especially family members and
peers- to violence.”

We are in the forefront of the court battles for transparency
regarding the Biden-Harris administration’s targeting of former
President Trump and conservatives.

Judicial Watch recently sued
[[link removed]]
the
Defense Department for details of Army training materials that
designate pro-life organizations or individuals as “terrorists.”

In May 2024, Judicial Watch uncovered
[[link removed]]
a recording of a
phone message left by an FBI special agent for someone at the Secret
Service in the context of the raid on President Trump’s home in
Mar-a-Lago, Florida.

In March 2024, Judicial Watch sued
[[link removed]]
the U.S.
Department of Energy for records about the retroactive termination of
former President Donald Trump’s security clearance and/or access to
classified information.

In August 2023, Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the
National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for records of the
Archives’ role in President Trump’s White House records
controversy; whether it offered Trump a secure storage location other
than the National Archives; and if the Archives consulted with the
Office of the Director of National Intelligence regarding the
classification or declassification procedures of any of the alleged
classified documents found at Trump’s Florida residence.

In June 2023, Judicial Watch obtained DOJ records
[[link removed]]
that
showed top officials of the National Security Division discussing the
political implications of Trump allowing CNN to use closed-circuit TV
(CCTV) footage of the raid on his Mar-a-Lago home. The documents
confirmed that the Justice Department had asked that Mar-a-Lago CCTV
be turned off before the raid.

A separate Judicial Watch FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the
National Archives and Records Administration resulted in the release
of records about the unprecedented document dispute between the
Archives and President Trump. Click here
[[link removed]]
or here
[[link removed]]
to review the records.

In August 2022, Judicial Watch successfully sued to unseal
[[link removed]]
the
search warrant affidavit
[[link removed]]
used
to justify the unprecedented raid on the home of former President
Trump.

In September 2022, Judicial Watch filed
[[link removed]]
lawsuits
against the DOJ for its records and the FBI’s records.


JUDICIAL WATCH SUES FOR INFORMATION ON QATAR FUNDING U.S. UNIVERSITIES

We recently filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
[[link removed]]
on
behalf of the Zachor Legal Institute against the U.S. Department of
Education for records concerning Qatar’s funding and operations of
five U.S. universities – Georgetown, Northwestern, Cornell, Harvard,
and University of Michigan (_Zachor Legal Institute. v. U.S.
Department of Education_
[[link removed].
1:25-cv-00093)). We filed the lawsuit on January 14, 2025.

In February 2024, Texas A&M closed its campus in Qatar
[[link removed]],
following
disclosures from a Judicial Watch lawsuit on behalf of Zachor that
uncovered nearly half a billion in funding from the regime to the
university.

Qatar has given or contracted nearly $6 billion to American
universities since 2007, according to a February 2024 report
[[link removed]].
The money is said to have “enabled Qatar to have outsized influence
in American politics and academia, efforts [that] have mainstreamed
anti-Israel propaganda and silenced criticism about Doha’s
longstanding ties to Hamas, the Iranian regime, and other terror
groups.”

We sued after the Department of Education failed to respond to
Zachor’s March 20, 2024, FOIA request for:

1. Inquiries, reports and memorandum of the Department of Education
with regard to the funding and operations of Georgetown University’s
campus in Doha, Qatar;

2. Inquiries, reports and memorandum of the Department of Education
with regard to the funding and operations of the Georgetown Center for
Contemporary Arab Studies in Washington, DC, Qatar, which is funded,
in part, by grants from the United States Government’s Department of
Education;

3. Inquiries, reports and memorandum of the Department of Education
with regard to the funding and operations of Northwestern
University’s campus in Doha, Qatar;

4. Inquiries, reports and memorandum of the Department of Education
with regard to the funding and operations of Weill Cornell
Medicine’s campus in Doha, Qatar;

5. Department of Education correspondence with Harvard College
regarding grants, gifts and funding from Qatar Foundation and the
government of Qatar; and

6. Department of Education correspondence with the University of
Michigan, regarding grants, gifts and funding from Qatar Foundation
and the government of Qatar.

Zachor is a U.S.-based advocacy group dedicated to combating the
spread of anti-Semitism and has engaged in substantial activities to
raise awareness of Qatar’s influence in the U.S. and around the
world. Qatar controversially has aligned itself with Islamic
terrorists and extremists
[[link removed]]
which
has placed it at odds with the United States, Israel and other U.S.
allies in the Middle East.

A March 2024 Judicial Watch _Investigative Bulletin_
[[link removed]]
noted:

A metastasizing corruption scandal in Europe—dubbed “Qatargate
[[link removed]
by the local media—has engulfed politicians from Greece, Belgium,
and Italy, and shows no sign of slowing down. At the center of the
case: allegations that Qatar steered $4.3 million in bribes to
European Union officials to favorably influence policy toward the
wealthy Mideast nation.

The Biden administration was intent on hiding the truth about how the
Qatari government funds and manipulates American universities. The
Trump Education Department should expose the details of this foreign
influence operation as soon as possible.

Marc Greendorfer, president of Zachor Legal Institute said, “While
we were disappointed with the opacity and obstruction of the prior
administration, which seems to have had a policy of preventing the
American people from knowing what terror-supporting foreign actors
have been doing in our schools, we are thrilled to be working again
with the incredible team at Judicial Watch. We know that with the
combination of Judicial Watch and a new administration we will finally
have the transparency this issue needs.”

Judicial Watch and the Zachor – with the assistance of Jennifer S.
Riggs of Riggs & Ray, P.C. in Austin, Texas – previously spent more
than five years successfully fighting the Qatar Foundation in Texas
courts for information about the funding of Texas A&M. The records
that were produced showed that over $522 million was given by Qatar to
the state university from January 1, 2013, to May 22, 2018, including
more than $485 million
[[link removed]]
from the Qatar
Foundation In addition, because of Judicial Watch’s court victory,
Texas A&M produced contracts that suggest
[[link removed]]
Texas
A&M provided an assignment of sensitive intellectual property to the
Qatar Foundation.


JUDICIAL WATCH SUES FOR DETAILS OF BIDEN-HARRIS ‘INTERNET FOR ALL’
BOONDOGGLE

The Left is good at spending your money but terrible at making
anything happen.

We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against
the U.S. Department of Commerce for details of the failed “Internet
for All
[[link removed]
initiative led by
then-Vice President Kamala Harris (_Judicial Watch Inc. v U.S.
Department of Commerce et al._
[[link removed]]
(No.
1:25-cv-00071). The lawsuit was filed on January 10, 2025.

Assistant General Counsel Brian DiGiacomo, also named in the suit,
rejected our October 16, 2024, FOIA request to the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, a component of
Commerce, for records regarding from certain named officials
concerning implementing President Biden’s Infrastructure Law
“Internet for All,” including:

* Alan Davidson, Assistant Secretary
* April McClain-Delaney, Deputy Assistant Secretary
* Andy Berke, Special Representative for Broadband
* Sarah Morris, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary and Deputy
Administrator

We also requested records about the “Broadband Equity, Access, and
Deployment
[[link removed]
(BEAD), a component of the “Internet for All” initiative.

On October 4, 2024, _The Wall Street Journal _editorial
board published
[[link removed]]
an
article titled “The Harris Broadband Rollout Has Been a Fiasco,”
in which it reported:

> The 2021 infrastructure law included $42.5 billion for states to
> expand broadband to “unserved,” mostly rural, communities. Three
> years later, ground hasn’t been broken on a single project….
>
> Blame the Administration’s political regulations. States must
> submit plans to the Commerce Department about how they’ll use the
> funds and their bidding process for providers. Commerce has piled on
> mandates that are nowhere in the law and has rejected state plans
> that don’t advance progressive goals.
>
> Take how the Administration is forcing providers to subsidize
> service for low-income customers … bidders had to offer a
> specified “affordable” price. This is rate regulation.

***

> The Administration has also stipulated hiring preferences for
> “underrepresented” groups, including “aging individuals,”
> prisoners, racial, religious and ethnic minorities, “Indigenous
> and Native American persons,” “LGBTQI+ persons,” and
> “persons otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or
> inequality.”

This broadband project is ripe for being shut down by Congress,
President Trump and DOGE (the Department of Government Efficiency). In
the meantime, the Trump administration should disclose the details of
this woke black hole for taxpayer dollars.



Until next week,



[Contribute]
[[link removed]]


[image]
[[link removed]]


RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS IN PERIL

_"When it comes to fighting for the American people’s ‘right to
know,’ no one holds a candle to Tom Fitton and his team at Judicial
Watch"_ - SEAN HANNITY

Tom Fitton returns with an exhaustive investigation into the
progressive movement’s efforts to dismantle the venerable
institutions of American rights and freedoms.

Order Tom Fitton's Must-Read Today!
[[link removed]]

[32x32x1]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x2]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024

202.646.5172



© 2017 - 2025, All Rights Reserved
Manage Email Subscriptions
[[link removed]]
|
Privacy Policy
[[link removed]]
|
Unsubscribe
[[link removed]]

View in browser
[[link removed]]