White House's Orwellian attempt to alter record of Biden's 'garbage' smear might be criminal, say lawmakers



President Joe Biden upheld the long-standing Democratic tradition of belittling Republican voters this week, claiming in a videotaped call Tuesday with Voto Latino that Trump supporters are "garbage."

Keenly aware of how damaging Biden's remarks were to Democrats in general but especially to Kamala Harris, who has recently been juggling Nazi accusations and promises of unity, elements of the liberal media attempted to fudge the record. They were not alone, however.

The White House also tried to gaslight Americans into thinking the president said something else entirely. It turns out that doing so not only resulted in a discrepancy between public and official records but was likely illegal.

Citing two U.S. government officials on an internal email, the Associated Press revealed Thursday evening that the White House press office ultimately released a transcript different from that prepared by official White House stenographers.

According to an internal email from the head of the stenography office, the change was made after the White House press office "conferred with the president."

'The Press Office may choose to withhold the transcript but cannot edit it independently.'

In the email, the supervisor claimed that the press office's revisionism constituted "a breach of protocol and spoliation of transcript integrity between the Stenography and Press Offices."

Here is what the White House transcript claimed that Biden said when complaining about comedian Tony Hinchliffe's Puerto Rico joke at President Donald Trump's Oct. 27 rally at Madison Square Garden:

In my home state of Delaware, they're good, decent, honorable people. The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporter's — his — his demonization of Latinos is unconscionable, and it's un-American.

This is the version posted on the White House website and repeatedly shared online by White House senior deputy press secretary Andrew Bates.

The addition of an apostrophe to "supporters" radically changes the meaning such that in a world where there was no video of Biden's remarks, Democrats could argue, perhaps with greater success than they have this week, that the president was just suggesting Hinchcliffe's supposed demonization of Latinos was unconscionable garbage.

There is, however, video evidence of remarks, where Biden clearly says:

The Puerto Rican that that I know — or Puerto Rico where I'm fr — in my home state of Delaware, they're good, decent, honorable people. The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters. His, his, his demonization of Latinos is unconscionable, and it's un-American.

The Associated Press confirmed that "supporters" in the original transcript prepared by the White House stenographers contained no apostrophe.

"If there is a difference in interpretation, the Press Office may choose to withhold the transcript but cannot edit it independently," the supervisor noted in the internal letter. "Our Stenography Office transcript — released to our distro, which includes the National Archives — is now different than the version edited and released to the public by Press Office staff."

'The move is not only craven, but it also appears to be in violation of federal law.'

The stenography office supervisor reportedly wrote to White House communications director Ben LaBolt, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, and other Biden officials, "Regardless of urgency, it is essential to our transcripts' authenticity and legitimacy that we adhere to consistent protocol for requesting edits, approval, and release."

The supervisor apparently declined to comment, whereas Bates doubled down, suggesting, "The President confirmed in his tweet on Tuesday evening that he was addressing the hateful rhetoric from the comedian at Trump's Madison Square Garden rally. That was reflected in the transcript."

On Wednesday, House Republican Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) and House Committee on Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) penned a letter to White House counsel Edward Siskel, demanding that the Biden White House retain and preserve all documents and internal communications pertaining to the release of the doctored transcript.

Stefanik and Comer suggested that by releasing a false transcript, the Biden White House may have violated the Presidential Records Act.

"Americans were rightfully insulted when President Biden, seeking to boost Ms. Harris's presidential campaign, referred to an enormous swath of the country as 'floating ... garbage,'" the Republicans noted in their letter. "President Biden's vindictive words were unsurprising, given his previous statements regarding people who choose not to vote for his preferred candidate. Unsurprising too were the White House's actions after he said them."

"Instead of apologizing or clarifying President Biden's words, the White House instead sought to change them (despite them being recorded on video) by releasing a false transcript of his remarks. The move is not only craven, but it also appears to be in violation of federal law, including the Presidential Records Act of 1978," added the letter.

The lawmakers also demanded that the White House issue "a corrected transcript with the accurate words."

Biden and his allies should by now be accustomed to correcting the record.

The Biden-Harris FBI recently had to change its crime statistics for 2022. Whereas the bureau originally claimed that violent crime fell by 2.1% that year, it actually spiked by at least 4.5%.

Blaze News reported in August that the Biden-Harris Bureau of Labor Statistics came clean about overstating job gains by 818,000 and was forced to revise down the total in its preliminary annual benchmark review.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

KJP fails to land mental gymnastics routine when confronted over hypocrisy of Biden's accepted use of 'bloodbath'



The left's apoplexy over former President Donald Trump's recent of the well-worn term "bloodbath" continues to pay dividends.

The White House' repeated condemnations of the term exposed press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre to questions Tuesday about whether President Joe Biden's use of "bloodbath" was similarly deserving of a formal denunciation.

Jean-Pierre did not fare well in her attempt to reconcile Democratic outrage with Biden's culpability.

Quick background

On March 16, Trump used the word "bloodbath" in reference to the economic fallout of continued offshoring of jobs and automobile manufacturing plants under the Biden administration.

Trump addressed Chinese dictator Xi Jinping during his speech at the Dayton International Airport in Ohio, saying, "Let me tell you something ... those big monster car manufacturing plants that you're building in Mexico right now, and you think you're going to get that, you're going to not hire Americans, and you're going to sell the cars to us? No."

"We’re going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you’re not going to be able to sell those guys – if I get elected. Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s gonna be the least of it. It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That’ll be the least of it. But they're not going to sell those cars."

Blaze News previously reported that Democrats and the liberal media — including CBS News, Politico, NPR, Rolling Stone, the Los Angeles Times, and USA Today — rushed to mischaracterize Trump's remarks while glossing over their own use of the term in recent months and years.

The social media account for Biden's re-election campaign helped perpetuate the false narrative, posting a de-contextualized excerpt of the video with the caption, "Trump: If I don't get elected, it's gonna be a bloodbath. It's gonna be a bloodbath for the country."

Doubling down

Trump and the Republican Party doubled down on the use of the term this week, applying it in other contexts.

The Republican front-runner criticized the Biden administration's failed border policies while speaking to a crowd Tuesday in Grand Rapids, Michigan, at a podium emblazoned with a sign that read, "Stop Biden's Border Bloodbath," reported USA Today.

The Republican National Committee, similarly criticizing Biden over the fallout of his failure to secure the border, launched a website Tuesday entitled, "Biden Bloodbath."

The website claims that Biden "is allowing vicious criminals into the United States, and innocent Americans across the country are paying the price. Lethal drugs, cartels, gangs, and terrorists are taking advantage of the crisis to enter the U.S. and threaten America. This is an invasion aided and abetted by Joe Biden, supported by Democrats who vote for his dangerous and cruel policies. This is Biden's border bloodbath."

More mental gymnastics

When asked about Trump's latest use of the term bloodbath during the White House press briefing Tuesday, Jean-Pierre said, "We have to denounce any violent rhetoric that we hear, certainly from our leaders, right, that tears our country apart."

"Any type of violent rhetoric, we're going to denounce that," added Jean-Pierre. "It doesn't matter who it comes from, we're going to denounce it."

White House correspondent Peter Doocy sought clarification, asking Jean-Pierre, "So when Donald Trump is talking about a bloodbath, it is violent rhetoric. What was it when Joe Biden said in 2020, 'What we can't let happen is let this primary become a negative bloodbath?'"

Biden made the remark in March 2020 when campaigning against Sen. Bernie Sanders (I) in the Democratic primaries.

Doocy's question clearly put Jean-Pierre in a bind. After all, she had just vowed to denounce such "violent rhetoric" regardless of the source.

"So I'm going to be really mindful and careful about Donald Trump, but if you read — because he is a candidate — we're talking about a 2024 election, you should read what he said in its context. So you got to read what he said in context."

Doocy added, "I'm just saying, 'bloodbath' is an ugly word when Trump uses it. What is it when Biden uses it?"

"No, no, no," stammered Jean-Pierre. "Let's be very clear. You gotta actually ask me the question in the context of what it was said, right? And what was said when he said that, right, in his remarks, in his speech, right? And so that's being disingenuous in your question."

After Doocy followed up again with the direct quote from Biden, Jean-Pierre attempted to excuse the geriatric Democrat's language with the kind of context her allies previously denied Trump.

"He was talking about a group of people, a group of people," said Jean-Pierre. "That's what he's talking about. What the president was talking about during the primary was not to allow it to be the words and the primary and that election to become negative. Two different things. They're not the same. They're not the same, and your question is disingenuous."

While refusing to denounce Biden's use of allegedly "violent rhetoric," Jean-Pierre stressed that such denunciations were nevertheless important.

Before executing the in-person equivalent of an abrupt hang-up, the press secretary suggested that Trump's use of the word "bloodbath" in relation to the automotive industry was more inflammatory than Biden's use "because we saw what happened on January 6."

Q: Why was it acceptable for Biden to use the term "bloodbath" in 2020, but not when President Trump uses it?\n\nKARINE JEAN-PIERRE: *brain breaks*
— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Biden’s Anti-Christian Easter Stunt Leaves No Doubt About Democrats’ Descent Into Paganism

The modern Democrat Party champions all the pagan impulses of leftism.

Biden White House successfully pressured Amazon to censor and suppress books: Emails



Newly released documents indicate the same Biden White House that routinely bemoans perceived threats to freedom and democracy hasn't just pressured social media companies to censor speech and hide conservative news — it has also gone after literature that contains disfavored views.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) revealed Monday that documents subpoenaed by congressional investigators indicate Amazon "bowed down to Biden White House pressure to censor BOOKS."

An internal Amazon email sent on March 9, 2021, regarding a meeting with the White House includes the question of whether the Biden administration was asking the company "to remove books, or are they more concerned about search results/order (or both)?"

Jordan indicated this question was a priority at Amazon because "Andy Slavitt — the senior Biden White House official who demanded that Facebook censor a meme and true information — was pressuring Amazon at the same time."

Slavitt is the senior Biden adviser who helped steer COVID-19 policy, told Americans they "could have all done a little bit better" during the pandemic, and pressured Facebook to censor Tucker Carlson videos and memes about vaccine side effects.

Jordan indicated that Slavitt and other people in the Biden White House "ran keyword searches for controversial topics, such as 'vaccine,' and emailed Amazon when [they] didn't like how the search results appeared."

In an email sent on March 2, 2021, Slavitt pressed Amazon on who the White House could "talk to about the high levels of propaganda and misinformation and disinformation of [sic] Amazon?"

— (@)

Slavitt wrote in another email, "If you search for 'vaccines' under books, I see what comes up. I haven't looked beyond that but if that's what's on the surface, it's concerning."

Zach Butterworth, Biden's former public sector liaison, similarly hectored Amazon employees about books on the site, expressing concern in one instance that there was no Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warning label on the sales page.

Amazon initially refused to manually censor books for fear of drawing too much heat from the public.

The company's exchange administrative group noted in a March 2, 2021, email, "We will not be doing a manual intervention today. The team/PR feels very strongly that it is too visible, and will further compound the Harry/Sally narrative (which is getting the Fox News treatment today apparently), and won't fix the problem long-term problem [sic] because of customer behavior associations."

"If we completely remove customer behavior associations it will break the search," continued the email.

Rather than censor outright, the company decided — at least at first — to "widen the search light flag for COVID-19 CDC website re-direct so that it comes to the top of the page on more search keys."

Despite these efforts, the Amazon group conceded that "it won't be satisfactory. The WH will probably ask why we don't take the content like FB/Twitter do if we aren't taking it down. That is an option being explored by [sic] that we don't want to disclose to avoid boxing in."

On account of the Biden White House's pressure campaign to censor wrongthink, Amazon generated canned excuses, including:

  • "Our guidelines address content that is illegal or infringing, generates a poor customer experience, or that we otherwise prohibit, such as pornography. Our guidelines do not specifically address content about vaccines";
  • "We believe that retailers are different than social media communities which means we review the content we make available, where we make it available in our store, and how we address content that customers find disappointing"; and
  • "As a retailer, we provide our customers with access to a variety of viewpoints, including books that some customers may find objectionable. All booksellers make decisions about what selection they choose to offer and we do not take selection decisions lightly."

Amazon's canned responses evidently failed to satisfy the ruling power.

One week later, Amazon representatives "feeling pressure from the White House" met with members of President Joe Biden's cadre "to take a closer look at books related to vaccine misinformation and debating additional steps Amazon might want to take to reduce the visibility of these titles."

It appears the White House got what it wanted: more censorship.

"Starting March 9—the same day as its meeting with the White House — Amazon enabled 'Do Not Promote' for books that expressed the view that vaccines were not effective," said Chairman Jordan.

A March 12, 2021, internal Amazon email indicated that the company had "CRM review all titles mentioned and have worked with the teams who specialize on Search, Reviews, and Personalization tools."

"One book (out of 9) was found to violate our COVID policy and was removed," continued the damning update. "As a reminder, we did enable Do Not Promote for anti-vax books whose primary purpose is to persuade readers vaccines are unsafe or ineffective on 3/9, and will review additional handling options with these books."

Jordan denounced the Biden White House's coercive efforts during a committee hearing Tuesday, stating, "I've been thinking about it. Government pressuring Amazon to ban books. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube — all this big combination to impact [an] election and now we find the same thing was happening, the same dynamic was happening at Amazon."

None
— (@)

Concerning the new revelations about the state-driven censorship push at Amazon, Aaron Kheriaty, director of the Bioethics and American Democracy Program at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, tweeted, "More evidence of the reach of the federal censorship leviathan — not just social media but also books on Amazon."

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education noted, "If accurate, these new documents are yet another disturbing example of government pressure on private actors to suppress disfavored views."

Allum Bokhari, a journalist who has exposed various censorship efforts in the digital space, wrote, "The people who call their critics 'fascists' and enjoy cringe catchphrases like 'democracy dies in darkness' spent early 2021 using government pressure to ban books."

Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford School of Medicine and co-author of the "Great Barrington Declaration," wrote, "At this point, if the Supreme Court doesn't stop this Biden administration censorship nonsense (perhaps in the Missouri v. Biden case), the United States may as well apologize for its revolution, close up shop, and give itself back to the British Crown."

In August 2022, Bhattacharya joined Dr. Martin Kulldorff, Reopen Louisiana activist Jill Hines, and the states of Missouri and Louisiana in their legal effort to hold the Biden administration responsible for running roughshod over the First Amendment rights of critics and questioners of government COVID-19 policies.

U.S. District Judge Terry A. Doughty wrote in a July 4 ruling in their case that "if the allegations made by Plaintiffs are true, the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States' history."

Doughty issued a preliminary injunction against the Biden administration, barring its agencies and top officials from leaning on social media companies to remove, delete, suppress, or reduce "content containing protected free speech posted on social-media platforms."

However, a three-judge panel for the Fifth Circuit reversed the injunction for all officials save for the CDC, the White House, the surgeon general, and FBI.

The U.S. Supreme Court subsequently stayed the Fifth Circuit's order and is set to hear the case in the 2023-2024 term.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump prosecutors' meetings with Biden White House raise new concerns over Fani Willis' 'lawfare'



A motion was filed Monday to disqualify Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis from prosecuting the election interference case of one of former President Donald Trump's co-defendants in Georgia. The 127-page motion not only exposed Willis to a possible federal criminal investigation and threatened her case but has also prompted questions over whether the White House has been directly involved in efforts to prosecute President Joe Biden's top rival.

Willis and her alleged lover, special prosecutor Nathan Wade, apparently met with elements of the Biden White House before and after their recommendation of charges against Trump, giving greater weight to congressional lawmakers' previous concerns that the Georgia case against the Republican front-runner was "coordinated" with Democratic partisans and politically motivated from the start.

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and state Attorney General Christopher Carr have been urged to investigate Willis over the various damning allegations in the motion, including the White House visits.

White House meetings

The Monday motion to disqualify Willis highlighted a number of meetings that the Democratic DA's alleged lover, Trump prosecutor Nathan Wade, apparently had with elements of the Biden White House.

An invoice sent from Wade to the Fulton County DA's office in May 2022 — ostensibly paid for by Georgia taxpayers — requested $2,000 for an eight-hour meeting on May 23 labeled "travel to Athens: Conf[erence] with White House Counsel."

Another invoice to Willis' office in January 2023 requested a payment of $2,000 for an eight-hour White House meeting on Nov. 11, 2022, three days after Trump announced his bid for re-election.

— (@)

In addition to these supposed meetings with elements of the Biden White House, Wade's invoices indicated he met with elements of the Jan. 6 committee on at least four occasions in 2022 — April 18-21; on May 31; Sept. 7-9; and on Nov. 16.

Willis also brushed shoulders with those in Washington most desperate to see the Republican presidential candidate carted away.

Mike Howell of the Heritage Foundation's Oversight Project noted that Willis visited the Biden White House for roughly five hours on Feb. 28, 2023, months ahead of Trump's Georgia indictment. It appears that Willis met with Vice President Kamala Harris.

A grand jury in Fulton County recommended indictments in the Trump election probe just weeks prior, on Feb. 16.

— (@)

Former New York City police commissioner Bernard Kerik asked, "Why would Wade be meeting with The White House Council? Who is directing the Fani Willis investigation? The White House, the DOJ?"

Trump suggested the "purpose of the visit was to illegally coordinate the prosecution of your favorite President, Me!"

Investigating Willis

Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene filed a complaint with Gov. Kemp and Georgia AG Carr Wednesday, requesting they order "the immediate and formal criminal investigation into the alleged criminal misconduct" by Willis, along with Wade.

Greene highlighted various troubling allegations raised in the Monday motion to disqualify Willis, including the Fulton County DA's alleged "illegal conflict of interest."

Willis hired Wade, previously a middling associate municipal court judge in Marietta, Georgia, in November 2021 without the approval of the Fulton County Board of Commissioners as required by law, according to the motion. Wade, whose compensation — exceeding $650,000 since January 2022 — Willis authorized, is alleged to have taken his boss on luxurious vacations.

The motion alleged that Willis' "apparent intentional failure to disclose her conflict of interest to Fulton County and the Court, combined with her decision to employ the special prosecutor based on her own personal interests may well be an act to defraud the public of honest services since the district attorney 'personally benefitted from an undisclosed conflict of interest.'"

Greene noted further that "Willis even used taxpayer funds to pay Nathan Wade for two trips to coordinate with President Biden's White House staff before bringing her unprecedented indictment of President Trump, Biden's chief political rival in 2024."

The congresswoman suggested in her complaint that the allegations point to an effort to "illegally politicize and weaponize her public office to wage lawfare against President Trump for the purpose of interfering in the 2024 presidential election."

NBC News indicated Willis has not responded to the underlying claims in court filings or through requests for comment.

Democratic machinations

Willis' White House visits and alleged affair are not the only interactions that have raised eyebrows in recent weeks.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, noted in a letter to Willis last month that extra to "coordinat[ing] its politically motivated prosecutions with the Office of Special Counsel Jack Smith," her office "also coordinated its investigative actions with the partisan Select Committee to Investigate the January 6 Attack on the United States Capitol."

"To the extent that your politically motivated prosecutions are now relying in any way on records obtained from the partisan January 6 Select Committee, it only reinforces concerns about your commitment to due process and whether you have fulfilled your obligations to properly disclosed this material," wrote Jordan.

Jan. 6 committee staff reportedly guided Willis' team in the early days of its probe into Trump, with correspondence taking place over the course of several months.

Politico indicated the Jan. 6 committee was willing to help Willis' probe "even as it rebuffed the Justice Department's requests for material in the separate federal criminal probe of Trump's election subversion" because unlike the Fulton County team, "federal prosecutors might have been required to disclose the evidence in ongoing criminal cases related to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol."

In his Dec. 5 letter, Jordan requested documents and communications between the Fulton County District Attorney's Office and the Jan. 6 committee.

Willis refused to comply with congressional investigator's request, claiming in a Dec. 19 letter that the request "violate well-established principles of federalism and separation of powers."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Fani Willis’ Legal Team Billed Taxpayers To Meet With Biden White House About ‘Get Trump’ Case

Trump announced his 2024 candidacy three days before the second meeting between Willis' team and the Biden White House.

KJP cannot provide straight answer about whether Biden considers anti-Israel protesters 'extremists'



The Biden White House is quick to call its conservative critics and political opponents "extremists" but appears unwilling to go so far when it comes to fanatical anti-Semitic leftists.

Fox News' Peter Doocy asked White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Monday whether the anti-Israel protesters swarming college campuses and city squares across the nation constitute "extremists," at least where President Joe Biden is concerned. Although Jean-Pierre was prepared to slam former President Donald Trump and denounce anti-Semitism in the abstract, at no point during her labyrinthine answer could the press secretary bring herself to castigate potential Democratic voters.

A Massachusetts Institute of Technology campus group, the Coalition Against Apartheid, called the massacre of thousands of Israeli civilians earlier this month by Hamas a "response to the settler colonial regime." Other radicals at the university reportedly chanted, "One solution, intifada revolution," reported Fox News Digital.

Last week at New York University, hundreds of students including members of the Young Democratic Socialists of America staged an anti-Israel rally. Among the signs exhibited by demonstrators was one that said, "Where there is oppression, there will be resistance," insinuating that the Oct. 7 Hamas terror attacks were justified. Another sign showed a blue Star of David in a garbage can with the caption, "Please keep the world clean."

At least one Hamas flag made an appearance at another such rally in Minneapolis on Oct. 22, where an elderly man was viciously mobbed.

"Does President Biden think the anti-Israel protesters in this country are extremists?" asked Doocy.

"What I can say is what we've been very clear about this — when it comes to anti-Semitism, there is no place. We have to make sure that we speak against it very loud and be very clear about that," said Jean-Pierre.

The press secretary referenced the revisionist tale Biden often tells — in one instance twice in a row during the same fundraising speech — of how the geriatric Democrat decided to run for president after the August 2017 incident in Charlottesville, Virginia.

"He saw neo-Nazis marching down the streets of Charlottesville with vile, anti-Semitic, just hatred. And he was very clear then and he's very clear now. He's taken actions against this over the past two years. And he's continued to be clear: There is no place, no place for this type of vile ... and this kind of rhetoric," said Jean-Pierre.

Not having heard an answer to his question, Doocy noted that "extremists" is a word the Biden White House frequently employs, "usually about MAGA extremists."

For instance, on Sept. 1, 2022, Jean-Pierre felt confident telling the nation that conservatives with non-mainstream viewpoints are "extreme," captive to an "extreme way of thinking," reported the New York Post.

She went onto call "MAGA Republicans ... an extreme threat to our democracy, to our freedom, to our rights."

That night, Biden took the stage at Independence Historical Park in Philadelphia and claimed, "Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic."

Last month, Biden suggested Alabama Sen. Tommy Tuberville was an "extremist" over his principled stand against the Pentagon's abortion policy.

The president has also insinuated on multiple occasions that lawmakers' pro-life stances qualify them as extremists.

Doocy continued, asking, "So what about these protesters who are making Jewish students feel unsafe on college campuses? Are they extremists?"

"I've been very, very clear," said Jean-Pierre, who had yet to brand anti-Israel protesters with the term apparently reserved for pro-life lawmakers. "We are calling out any form of hate. Any form of hate. It is not acceptable. It should not be acceptable here, and we are going to continue to call that out. And let me be very clear, this is a president that has continued to have that fight in his office, in this administration, you know, when he repealed Trump's Muslim ban on his very first day in office."

"He also established an inter-policy committee to counter Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, and related forms of bias and discrimination," continued Jean-Pierre. "We have taken this very, very, very seriously from the president all the way on down."

Doocy changed tack, asking whether Biden regards the anti-Israel protests as a positive sign of youth engagement in politics or a harbinger of doom.

"Here's the thing. There's no place for hate in America," replied Jean-Pierre, reiterating that the administration condemns anti-Semitism and that no student should live in fear.

Karine Jean-Pierre: There is no place for antisemitismyoutu.be

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Biden staffers met with special counsel Jack Smith's aide ahead of Trump indictment, raising concerns about possible election interference: Report



Weeks prior to former President Donald Trump's indictment for allegedly handling documents much in the same way President Joe Biden is said to have done, elements of the Biden White House reportedly met with a top aide for special counsel Jack Smith — an aide who happens to have been one of the loudest voices in support of a raid on Mar-a-Lago.

The news of this curiously timed meeting has prompted additional concerns over whether the Biden administration and the Department of Justice might have colluded in an attempt to eliminate the Democratic president's top political rival from the running ahead of the 2024 election.

The New York Post reported that White House visitor logs indicate that Jay Bratt, the head of the DOJ's counterintelligence division who joined the special counsel team in November 2022, met on March 31, 2023, with Caroline Saba, deputy chief of staff for the White House counsel's office.

BlazeTV host Mark Levin highlighted that "Bratt is the senior DOJ official who insisted on securing a warrant and sending an FBI SWAT team to Mar-a-Lago" and "stands accused by Stanley Woodward, who represents Walt Nauta in the documents case, of extorting him."

Bratt has also fought against transparency concerning the probe into Trump, having strongly opposed the release of the affidavit used to obtain the warrant to search Trump's Florida resort.

An FBI agent at the Washington, D.C., field office joined Bratt and Saba at the 10 a.m. meeting.

Peter Carr, a spokesman for the special counsel, told the Post that Bratt was at the Biden White House for a "case-related interview."

The FBI declined to comment.

There is no publicly available transcript or other documentation concerning what was actually discussed during this meeting, noted Just the News.

Nine weeks after this meeting, Smith's office indicted Trump.

Although it was largely unknown at the time of the indictment that a top aide to the special counsel and a Biden staffer had touched base in advance, Republicans at the time nevertheless stressed that the DOJ had become weaponized against the Democratic president's opponents.

Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) said, "Biden is attacking his most likely 2024 opponent. ... He's using the justice system to pre-emptively steal the 2024 election. This is what's happening, plain and simple."

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said, "No one should be in doubt of what's happening tonight. Joe Biden and his cronies are trying to take out their chief political opponent.

Biden responded to the criticism, claiming, "I have never once, not one single time, suggested to the Justice Department what they should do or not do relative to bringing a charge or not bringing a charge. ... I'm honest."

Bratt's March rendezvous at the White House was hardly his first.

The Post reported that Bratt met with Saba in November 2021 around the time of Trump's vexatious negotiations with the National Archives concerning the documents he retained after leaving office. Bratt also came to Biden's stomping grounds in September 2021 to meet with an adviser to the White House chief of staff's office, Katherine Reilly.

Mike Davis of the Article III Project indicated Bratt's visits might constitute violations of long-standing rules about inappropriate communications with White House staff, as detailed in a July 21, 2021, memo from Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Jonathan Turley, law professor at George Washington University, suggested Bratt's March meeting "raises obvious concerns about visits to the White House after [Bratt] began his work with the special counsel."

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, recently booked in Georgia over his alleged role in the election interference case, told the Post, "There is no legitimate purpose for a line [DOJ] guy to be meeting with the White House except if it's coordinated by the highest levels. ... What's happening is they have trashed every ethical rule that exists and they have created a state police. It is a Biden state prosecutor and a Biden state police."

Mark Levin said that U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, who is overseeing Trump's classified documents case, should order from the bench "that all records related to Bratt's meetings and discussions at the White House be preserved and provided to the court."

Levin further stressed that the "outrageous news" about Bratt's White House meetings "adds to the overwhelming case for a special counsel, as this not only creates the impression of a conflict of interest but a conflict of interest in fact. The Biden administration cannot be relied on to truthfully explain itself. The standard for appointing a special counsel — a qualified lawyer from outside the government — has been met, again!"

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Washington Post’s New Hire Shows Media Will Never Hold Themselves Accountable

Should we even care that The Washington Post's new opinion editor is a walking journalism scandal?

Emails reveal that Biden White House pressured Facebook to censor vaccine memes, Tucker Carlson videos: 'Worse than anyone could ever have thought'



Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) provided new damning insights into the lengths to which the Biden White House has gone to suppress speech and views online that it has found undesirable or threatening.

The internal Facebook documents shared to Twitter Thursday were obtained via subpoena by the House Judiciary Committee, which Jordan chairs. They reveal Facebook and Instagram censored content online following "unconstitutional pressure from the Biden White House."

Among the damning documents was an April 2021 email circulated by a Facebook employee, ostensibly on behalf of company CEO Mark Zuckerberg and then-COO Sheryl Sandberg.

The email stated, "We are seeking your guidance on whether to take more aggressive action against certain vaccine discouraging content. We are facing continued pressure from external stakeholders, including the White House and the press, to remove more COVID-19 vaccine discouraging content."

The email specifies that the Biden White House took issue with a "vaccine discouraging humorous meme," which it told the social media company to delete.

The verboten meme in question used the "Pointing Rick Dalton" template, borrowing a still from the 2019 film "Once Upon a Time in Hollywood," where Leonardo DiCaprio's character points out something on television.

This meme, which the Biden White House wanted erased from the platform, was captioned, "10 years from now you will be watching TV and hear .... 'Did you or a loved one take the covid vaccine? You may be entitled ...'" and apparently shared over 385,000 times.

— (@)

Jordan noted that another April 2021 email sent by former British politician and Facebook president of global affairs Nick Clegg had captured the Biden administration's apoplexy over the company's tardiness in censoring this meme.

Clegg told his team that Andy Slavitt, who served as a senior adviser to Biden and helped steer COVID-19 policy, "was outraged — not too strong a word to describe his reaction — that we did not remove this post which was third most highly ranked post in the data set we sent to him."

Slavitt, who stepped down in June 2021, was the Biden official who enraged many Americans after telling them they "could have all done a little bit better" and sacrificed more during the pandemic, reported the New York Post.

Despite his company's apparent censorious reflex, Clegg indicated he "countered" the Biden administration's demands, suggesting that "removing content like that would represent a significant incursion into traditional boundaries of free expression in the US."

However, Clegg noted that Slavitt "replied that the post was directly comparing Covid vaccines to asbestos poisoning in a way which demonstrably inhibits confidence in Covid vaccines amongst those the Biden Administration is trying to reach."

Memes related to vaccines were not the only information the Biden administration was actively downplaying at the time.

TheBlaze previously reported that emails recently obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request revealed the Biden administration knew as early as January 2021 — one month after the Food and Drug Administration first granted emergency use authorization for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines — that there were "breakthrough" infections despite COVID-19 vaccination. The administration indicated otherwise and imposed mandates anyway.

The Biden administration apparently wasn't just intolerant of humorous memes but also of the free press.

Jordan noted that internal documents also revealed that the Biden White House pressured Facebook to censor a video from former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. The company appeared willing to at least meet the regime halfway.

One document marked "confidential treatment requested[,] not for distribution" contains talking points apparently drafted for Clegg to "appease the Biden White House," according to Jordan.

The document states that if Slavitt asks "How was this [Tucker Carlson] post not violative?" Clegg could answer, "While we remove content that explicitly directs people not to get the vaccine, as well as content that contains explicit misrepresentations about vaccines, we reviewed this content in detail and it does not violate those policies."

Despite this acknowledgment that Carlson had not violated the platform's policies, the talking points note that his content was nevertheless being suppressed.

"The video is receiving 50% demotion for seven days as it is in the queue to be fact checked," said the document.

Following Biden's July 2021 accusation that Facebook was "killing people" by carrying so-called COVID misinformation, a Facebook document from Aug. 2, 2021, indicates the company got to work brainstorming new rules and policies to impose on users "to be more aggressive against Covid and vaccine misinformation," admitting that "this is stemming from the continued criticism of our approach from the US administration."

Jordan concluded from these and other documents that "the Biden Admin abused its powers to coerce Facebook into censoring Americans, preventing free and open discourse on issues of critical public importance."

Facebook spokesman Andy Stone confirmed to Forbes that the company had provided these documents to the House Judiciary Committee.

This late bout of cooperation appears to have been what temporarily dissuaded Jordan from calling a vote to hold Zuckerberg in contempt of Congress after he had allegedly evaded a congressional subpoena.

Stone indicated the company "will continue to comply, as we have thus far, with good faith requests from the committee."

The New York Post reported that in the wake of these insights into the Biden White House's apparent clampdown on American free speech, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre defended the apparent censorship campaign, saying, "We have promoted responsible actions to protect public health, safety and security when confronted by challenges like a deadly pandemic and foreign attacks on our elections."

Jean-Pierre added, "We have consistently made clear that we believe social media companies have a critical responsibility to take account of the effects of their platforms that they have on the American people."

Investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald tweeted, "Dem spent years denying there is a system of the US Security State and WH to coerce Big Tech to censor political content they disliked, calling those of us who denounced it 'conspiracy theorists.' Now the evidence is dispositive - more here - so now they explicitly defend it."

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Biden's top Democratic rival going into the 2024 presidential primary, said, "These new documents obtained under Congressional subpoena show the shocking extent of Biden White House's contempt for the First Amendment."

Twitter CEO Elon Musk wrote, "Extremely concerning!"

Tom Fitton, the president of Judicial Watch, suggested the documents reveal "impeachable censorship violations of our civil rights by Joe Biden."

The Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government tweeted, "It was worse than anyone could ever have thought."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!