At President Trump's speech last night, I was sitting right behind the Democrats in the gallery.
I had a perfect bird's eye view of everything.
No doubt very dramatic for all of those watching but there was so much more the cameras missed. 🧵
Not only did the Dems not applaud or stand for the stories honoring average Americans but neither did their guests in the gallery.
Even for the most heartwarming moments most stayed seated, very few ever applauded.
It was heart-breaking to see.
During these moments I could see entire rows of Democrats staring down at their phones.
I was close enough to see what they were looking at - most were texting or scrolling through social media feeds.
The only moment during the speech that generated enthusiastic, collective applause was when Trump mentioned spending hundreds of billions on Ukraine. There were 5 or 6 Dems that immediately pulled out Ukrainian flags and started waving them.
This was notable since their applause was not meant to celebrate any result of that spending (i.e. a tangible victory for Ukraine or benefit to America) but was in response to the mention of "spending" itself.
The fact that this was so natural and immediate was unnerving. It was the only thing that pulled their faces away from their phones.
Not the celebration of life in our homeland but death of hundreds of thousands in a foreign one.
Beyond the applause, there were a few other other notable observations.
After Al Green started yelling and shaking his cane at Trump, the first person security approached was not Green but Nancy Pelosi, almost like she was the pit boss for the Dem side.
I could tell she not pleased since I didn't even see her turn her head towards the security guard.
This would have required Pelosi to look towards her right side which was the direction where Green was embarrassing himself in front of the country.
Not really surprised by her reaction since this would have compounded the collective sense of defeat on the Dem side of the chamber.
While the cameras were focused on the characters on the chamber floor, they missed the ones in the gallery.
Like a young woman caddy corner to my left.
It looked like she was dressed in sweats and was fully passed out for the entire speech.
And it didn't seem like this was an act of protest or defiance but that she was actually sleeping, working her way through multiple REM cycles.
She even used the tight seating in the gallery to her benefit - relying on her neighbors' shoulders and arms to achieve the most comfortable position possible for an extended tiger snooze.
At one point I thought she was snoring. Unfortunately, I was too far away to obtain audible verification.
Then there was a young guy with a voluminous shoulder-length mullet, a Lieutenant Dan-esque military jacket, and blue jeans.
One of the guys sitting next to me said it was likely one of Peter Thiels famous tech prodigies.
Probably top three coolest people in the room I imagine.
Then there was the entire row of mainstream media journalists - about a dozen or so - directly behind Trump in the gallery.
What made this stand out was that they all had the same grey MacBook which formed a wall of apple logos.
It was too symbolic for the current moment in American history.
The irony was almost too much given the viral video earlier that day which showed over twenty Democrat senators reading the same script, using the same microphone, producing one of the most cringeworthy displays of shameless inauthenticity.
But the most remarkable part of it all was the indescribable energy coming from the Republicans.
It was truly a sight to see such an impressive group of people, from every possible background and every political persuasion coalesce around a shared vision.
One of the most important moments in American history and I was able to be a part of it. Will be forever grateful for Senator Hawley having me as a guest. @HawleyMO.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One year before Judge Hittner, a Regan appointee, took on my case, a well-known trans-activist/drag performer, Brigitte Bandit (they/them), was twerking in his courtroom.
Bandit and other trans activists, represented by the ACLU, were challenging SB-12, law passed by the Texas Senate which banned sexualized drag performances in front of children.
Hittner seemed to be quite moved by Bandit's performance because he ended up striking down SB-12, ensuring the twerking going on in his courtroom would also continue in front of children.
The story surrounding SB-12 is so important because it helps explain one of the main contradictions in my case - how was it possible that a seemingly conservative Judge allowed the DOJ to break every rule in the book to target a whistleblower who exposed a major hospital for lying about harmful transgender interventions?
A deep dive into the SB-12 hearings shows this was no contradiction. 🧵
1/
To start this off, consider Judge Hittner's response to the New Yorker after he overturned the bill. He was asked about his reaction to Bandit twerking in his courtroom.
They write, "The moment seemed to have impressed the judge. 'Darn it, it was interesting...you learn about different things and different folks and different science every day.'”
From this response you can see that Hittner seemed positively enamored. But what was it about this case that he was so interested in? What "science" was Hittner referring to?
2/
Was Hittner referring to the moment he asked the plaintiffs to explain what they meant by a "death drop?"
Which is when a when drag performer, sometimes dressed in string bikinis, bends one leg behind their exposed butt and does a split.
They go on to explain this is often associated with wardrobe malfunctions, resulting in exposure of the performer's genitalia to the audience.
Last week, a DOJ memo went out to all employees indicating that steps would be taken to restore faith in the DOJ after its weaponization under the corrupt Biden regime. 🧵
According to this memo, reports will be provided quarterly to President Trump. One of those reports includes "the retaliatory targeting and in some instances criminal prosecution of legitimate whistleblowers."
I realize quarterly is a pretty frequent basis. I figure why not give whoever is writing these reports a little bit of a head start so in this thread I included some questions that are in critical need of answers.
Is Tina Ansari, the former lead prosecutor, still employed as an AUSA after my attorneys wrote a letter to Congress detailing how she threatened my wife - who was just hired as an AUSA in the Northern District of Texas and undergoing a background check - during their first phone call?
Per their letter, Ansari claimed my wife was interfering with an investigation when she encouraged me to not speak with federal agents the first time they showed up.
She went on to say she wouldn't bring up my wife's behavior to background investigators "unless [Mrs. Haim] becomes difficult."
Is Tina Ansari still employed as an AUSA even though she unconstitutionally and in an unprecedented manner reinterpreted HIPAA to claim multi-billion-dollar hospitals systems have the same privacy rights as vulnerable patients?
This was the pretense used to try to send me to prison for a decade after exposing misconduct in TCH and Baylor - the very misconduct which was voted to become illegal the very next day in the State of Texas and is being outlawed throughout most Western countries.
Last month the DOJ's case was blown apart, the truth revealing the remarkable absurdity of their arguments. 🧵
This happened after the DOJ disclosed bombshell evidence to my legal team on September 13th. This came to us at 5:30 PM on a Friday which also happened to be the last business day before a critical deadline - we had to file our responses to their motions by that Monday.
We couldn't help but notice the irony that it was also Friday the 13th.
This disclosure showed that key factual evidence the DOJ was using in their indictment and all subsequent motions was egregiously false.
The story of how this played out is pretty unbelievable. Ryan Patrick, one of my attorneys, put it well - "How we've gotten to this place is beyond bizarre and in my nearly 20 years practicing criminal law, I have never seen a case play out like this."
I believe it's worth taking a deeper dive.
This is a thread of the basic summary from publicly available motions and statements from my attorneys (link to docket below). courtlistener.com/docket/6886091…
The cost of all of this has been astronomical given the complexity of this case. We can't do this alone so any donation can go to the legal fund (link below). givesendgo.com/texas_whistleb…
The Friday the 13th disclosure refuted one of the central claims in the DOJ's case - that I requested access to the TCH medical record system under false pretenses.
They spell out this claim very explicitly since it is the basis for the first of four felony charges.
In a motion from September 6th, they state "after January 2021, the defendant had no patients under his care at TCH."
In the same motion they go on to say, "On April 19, 2023, the defendant emailed an administrator at TCH urgently requesting that his login credentials be restored so he could access “operative cases” he was “covering.”
They emphatically state their conclusion in four words, "This was a lie."
Once we receive the DOJ's disclosure, it becomes clear many of the "facts" the DOJ were using were anything but factual.
First of all, the DOJ's claim that "after January 2021, the defendant had no patients under his care at TCH" was completely false.
The disclosure revealed that I was taking care of TCH patients (adult and pediatric) well after January 2021, all the way until April 2023.
And April 2023 is important because this is where they claimed I lied about needing to cover "operative cases."
Again, the opposite is true. It turns out I was operating at TCH in April 2023, the same time that I made my request for access.
A reasonable person might ask, how it is possible that the most powerful investigative agency in the history of the world, the FBI, could miss such basic facts? Did they even look into whether my requests were sincere, or did they simply assume I was lying?
I blew the whistle on @TexasChildrens secret sex change program and the @TheJusticeDept came after me for exposing the truth. After experiencing DOJ corruption we've decided to fight back. If you want to join the fight, donate below. givesendgo.com/texas_whistleb…
We realized our case is meaningless unless we go on the offensive to hold those accountable who have abused their authority. So that is exactly what we've done. Read the letter below.
I was the anonymous whistleblower in a story released by @realchrisrufo on May 16, 2023. Within 24 hours, the illegality of these interventions was strengthened with the bipartisan passage of SB-14, a law banning dangerous hormone-based interventions for children with gender dysphoria. city-journal.org/article/sex-ch…