CIA’s Jeffrey Epstein Records

[INSIDE JW]

THE SUPREME COURT MUST END ILLEGAL VOTE COUNTING

[[link removed]]

In my op-ed
[[link removed]]
for _The Washington Times _this week, I write that ballot tallying
must conclude on Election Day:

> Under federal law, Election Day in the United States is not two
> days, two weeks or two months. It is a single day. That anyone might
> insist otherwise is difficult to imagine.
>
> Last week, the Supreme Court
>
[[link removed]]
heard oral
> arguments in _Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections_, a case
> challenging Illinois’ decision to count mail-in-ballots that
> arrive up to 14 days after Election Day. For 180 years, Election Day
> has been held on the same day in November. This date has been
> repeatedly reaffirmed by Congress and solidified into U.S. law. Yet
> in 2005, in flagrant violation of that law, Illinois began
> permitting the counting of mail-in ballots received up to 14 days
> after Election Day.
>
> It should be deeply concerning that in 2020 alone, Illinois received
> 4.4% of votes from November 3 to November 17, after Election Day.
>
> Fortunately, U.S. Rep. Mike Bost of Illinois and two Republican
> state presidential electors decided to challenge this policy in the
> courts, represented by my organization, Judicial Watch. They began
> by suing Illinois in May 2022.
>
> Their case should have been easy to decide, but shockingly, the U.S.
> District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and the 7th
> U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that neither Mr. Bost nor the
> electors had “standing” to bring the lawsuit. In short, the
> courts refused even to permit the plaintiffs a chance to challenge
> the counting of late ballots in court.
>
> That question has reached the Supreme Court
>
[[link removed]],
and the
> justices showed serious skepticism toward Illinois’ defense.
>
> Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. questioned whether the state’s
> position would force courts to step into election disputes “at the
> most fraught time” in electoral politics. He pressed the Illinois
> solicitor general on why a candidate should have to wait until an
> election’s outcome is uncertain to challenge an unlawful rule.
>
> Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh added that such a theory “depends on
> prognostication,” not law. Justice Neil M. Gorsuch warned that it
> would be “unseemly” for courts to predict a candidate’s
> chances of winning, a process that “itself might influence the
> election.”
>
> As Judicial Watch attorney Paul Clement argued to the judges,
> “candidates have standing to challenge the rules that govern the
> election.”
>
> Spending additional money and time to deal with illicit vote
> counting should be more than enough to give a candidate his day in
> court. Allowing late ballots to be counted extends Election Day for
> weeks and imposes significant and burdensome costs on candidates,
> who will be forced to extend campaigns well beyond the usual time
> frame. Candidates will also be required to foot the bill for
> representatives to oversee the counting of late-arriving ballots.
>
> Voters rightly expect prompt results after the democratic process of
> casting ballots. Voter confidence in election outcomes suffers when
> winners and losers are not promptly announced. If Americans do not
> have confidence in the results of our elections, our entire system
> of government is imperiled. The court’s decision in Bost will
> determine whether candidates, those directly governed by election
> rules, can defend the rule of law before Election Day chaos unfolds.
>
> If the justices rule for Mr. Bost, lower courts will finally have to
> judge Illinois’ 14-day counting window against the federal statute
> requiring a single, uniform Election Day. That could set a
> nationwide precedent, restoring the integrity of vote counting in
> every state.
>
> We should hear [very soon] whether the Supreme Court will take up a
> Mississippi case where the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled
> that Mississippi cannot count ballots after Election Day.
>
> All Americans deserve a system of integrity and transparency, not
> one that invites fraud and election rigging. The 5th Circuit has
> already agreed with Judicial Watch that counting ballots even five
> days after Election Day is unlawful. If the Supreme Court now
> confirms that principle and rules in our clients’ favor, we like
> the odds of ending this illicit vote counting in Illinois and across
> the nation.

JUDICIAL WATCH SUES CIA FOR JEFFREY EPSTEIN RECORDS

We went back to court in our effort to uncover what our government
knows about registered sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

We filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for records involving
any role Jeffrey Epstein might have played in connection with the
agency, his business dealings, travel, victim or witness information,
and records concerning his death (_Judicial Watch Inc. v. Central
Intelligence Agency_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:25-cv-03618)).

We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after
the CIA failed to respond to a July 9, 2025, FOIA request for:

* Intelligence activities and connections, including any records
indicating whether Epstein was ever an asset for any U.S. or foreign
intelligence agency and/or reports analyzing his potential connections
to foreign intelligence services.
* Financial and business activities, including analyses concerning
Epstein’s wealth accumulation, estimated at approximately $560
million at the time of his 2019 arrest.
* Associations and networks, including records documenting
Epstein’s interactions with high-profile executives, royalty, or
other prominent figures, where such interactions were of interest to
the CIA due to national security concerns. Also, records about his
so-called “Black Book” or contact lists, as well as his properties
that may have been referenced in CIA reports.
* Criminal investigations and legal proceedings, including records
about coordination with other federal agencies, such as the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Department of Justice (DOJ), or U.S.
Marshals Service, regarding Epstein’s criminal activities. Also,
records about his death in 2019 at the Metropolitan Correctional
Center in New York.
* Surveillance and evidence collection.
* Foreign connections and travel.
* Victim and witness information.

In May 2023, Epstein was reported
[[link removed]]
to have met “dozens of times” with former Israel Prime Minister
Ehud Barak between 2013-2017. Epstein reportedly donated
[[link removed]]
$110,000
to former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers wife’s online
poetry project in 2016 and held meetings with many other high profile
individuals “long after he was a registered sex offender. He had
pleaded guilty in 2008
[[link removed]]
to soliciting and procuring a minor for prostitution.”

Attorney General Pamela Bondi released a long-awaited
[[link removed]]

[[link removed]
of documents related to Epstein in February 2025, but “the
much-hyped, roughly 200-page document dump provided no big
revelations, instead listing celebrities and politicians who were
already known to have palled around with the notorious pedophile.”

America’s federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies need to
obey the law and provide some basic information about Jeffrey Epstein.
Our FOIA lawsuits for records are an important step toward
accountability.

In April 2025, we filed a related lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the U.S.
Department of Justice after it failed to adequately respond to four
separate FOIA requests for records regarding Epstein, including any
records on the identities of his clients or associates. In July, the
Justice Department reported to the court
[[link removed]]
that
it and the FBI were continuing to search for and review responsive
records. The Justice Department’s disclosure is at odds with the
leaked, unsigned and undated Justice Department/FBI memo
[[link removed]]
that suggests no
more Epstein records would be disclosed to the American public. The
memo was first disclosed late on July 6
[[link removed]].

In July 2025, we sued
[[link removed]]
the
Justice Department for all interviews, conversations and other records
provided to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) by Epstein
victim Virginia Louise Giuffre, who reportedly
[[link removed]]
committed suicide on April 25, 2025.

JUDGE RULES PRISON MUST GRANT SEX-CHANGE SURGERY FOR SERIAL CHILD
MOLESTER

Our courts are making gender surgery a constitutional right, as our
_Corruption Chronicles_ blog reports
[[link removed]].

> The state prison system, where a convicted serial child molester is
> serving a 40-year sentence for sexually abusing multiple kids over a
> decade, is violating the felon’s constitutional rights by refusing
> to provide him with costly genital surgery to treat his gender
> dysphoria, a federal judge has determined. The transgender inmate,
> Emalee Wagoner, was arrested in 2011 and charged with 50 counts of
> sexually abusing several children, including his stepchildren,
> biological daughter, and the daughter of a family friend throughout
> a 10-year period. He threatened to kill his underage victims if they
> told anyone about the pervasive abuse, official court documents
> reveal. In 2015 Wagoner pled guilty and was sentenced to 60 years in
> prison with 20 years suspended.
>
> At some point during his incarceration in Alaska the child molester
> began identifying as a woman and a few years ago started undergoing
> hormone therapy. He was subsequently diagnosed with gender
> dysphoria, a condition in which people reportedly experience
> distress because their gender identity differs from their biological
> sex. Alaska has a policy of locking up convicts based on sex
> assigned at birth, so Wagoner is serving time at a medium-security
> men’s prison called Goose Creek Correctional Center in Wasilla
> about 40 miles north of Anchorage. For several years the convicted
> child predator has been trying to get the Alaska Department of
> Corrections (DOC) to provide him with gender-affirming surgery to
> become a woman, but the state has refused after the DOC medical
> advisory committee determined there was insufficient evidence to
> affirm the inmate’s mental health and well-being will decline
> without the procedure.
>
> Wagoner’s attorney, who works for a nonprofit dedicated to
> promoting and litigating on behalf of LGBTQ+ rights, says
> gender-affirming surgery should be considered at the same level as
> cancer treatment
>
[[link removed]]

>
[[link removed]
> that if a prisoner needs it, they can immediately get it. According
> to court documents
>
[[link removed]],
> Wagoner started to “socially transition” while in prison in
> 2016, changing his external presentation by growing out his hair,
> changing his name, wearing makeup and otherwise presenting as female
> to the extent possible. The Alaska DOC subsequently confirmed the
> diagnosis of gender dysphoria and shortly later Wagoner tried to
> perform a “penile inversion surgery to create a neo-vagina on
> herself.” The child sexual predator continues to crush his
> testicles, the legal filing reveals, and receives women’s
> deodorant and cosmetics, feminine hair accessories, and styling
> instruments as well as women’s undergarments. State officials have
> clearly made efforts to accommodate the transgender inmate but drew
> the line at surgery, so he sued the prison system.
>
> It is not the first time a federal court determines that denying a
> sex-change operation violates the Constitution. Last year an
> Obama-appointed judge ruled
>
[[link removed]]
that the
> U.S. military’s health insurance plan is discriminatory and
> violates Equal Protection rights under the Fifth Amendment of the
> U.S. Constitution by failing to cover gender transition surgeries.
> The ruling was issued after two transgender women sued the
> Department of Defense (DOD) and its Tricare Health Plan over a
> provision that bans surgical coverage of procedures that improve
> physical appearance without a significant restoration of functions,
> including “sex gender changes.” The biological males, who want
> to be female, claim in their lawsuit that denying coverage of
> medically necessary gender transition surgeries violates their
> Constitutional Equal Protection rights, a guarantee that requires
> the government “to treat alike all persons similarly situated.”

Until next week,



[Contribute]
[[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]]
|
Unsubscribe
[[link removed]]

View in browser
[[link removed]]