When the Twitter files hit in December of 2022, they revealed that the Biden administration had paid Twitter at least $3.4 million between October 2019 and February 2021 to reimburse the pre-Musk, left-leaning social media giant for a flood of requests.
During this period, the Biden DOJ was going after vaccine skeptics, lab-leak proponents, 2020 election ‘deniers,’ Catholic parents, Hunter Biden laptop / Burisma content, and conservative news outlets. We also learned that the FBI’s Elvis Chan and crew were holding weekly meeting with Twitter on “misinformation,” and flagged thousands of accounts for the above.
Days after the Twitter files were released, watchdog group Judicial Watch sued the Biden DOJ, which oversees the FBI, over a FOIA request demanding to know how much the FBI paid Twitter from 2016 onward. The FBI initially refused, but eventually released 44-pages of documents with the key payment details redacted – claiming the data was protected under FOIA’s “Exemption 7(E),” which lets agencies hide info about law enforcement methods if releasing it could help criminals or enemies dodge detection.
Judicial Watch then narrowed their claims to just those redacted payment amounts (JW dropped other issues such as vendor names), however in December of 2025, the Trump DOJ asked Judge James Boasberg for a Motion for Summary Judgement to deny Judicial Watch’s request – effectively concealing the extent to which the FBI, under Trump and Biden, was going after Americans.
In its request for summary judgement, US Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s office (say it ain’t so!) argued that revealing payments that are tied to real investigations could reveal super secret investigative methods – such as how much the FBI is “engaging” with Twitter vs. other platforms, which could lead to ‘bad guys’ (criminals, hackers, foreign spies) to switch to platforms with less FBI activity, and that it might reveal shifts in FBI priorities over time.
Revealing the quarterly totals could also betray “mosaic theory,” where seemingly harmless info (like one quarter’s payment) can be pieced together with public data (e.g., Twitter’s transparency reports) to form a big picture of FBI strategies.
Earlier this month, Boasberg agreed – ruling that revealing the payments could expose FBI “techniques and procedures” (how they monitor online threats) and help bad actors figure out what the FBI is focused on, allowing them to adapt and change strategies.
Boasberg wrote in his opinion that the 7(E) exemption is valid because it could “risk circumvention of the law.”
So @JudicialWatch sued to find out how much the Deep State/Biden FBI was paying Twitter (now @X) to censor and spy on Americans. Kash Patel’s FBI and Pam Bondi’s Justice Department told a federal court we shouldn’t get even summary quarterly totals of the payments because it… https://t.co/6P6oqQDxDj
— Tom Fitton (@TomFitton) February 18, 2026
What the actual…
.@FBIDirectorKash this was probably handled by lower-levels — a personal intervention on this one, which impacts 100 million voters & is critically important for Americans to restore trust in the bureau, at zero cost to FBI time or resources, would be greatly appreciated https://t.co/aHwXCi9h55
— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) February 19, 2026
Maybe Elon can just give Tom Fitton the deets?
The filings for your reading pleasure…
DOJ request to deny Judicial Watch:
Judicial Watch Inc v Us Department of Justice Dcdce-23-03004 0024.0 by Zerohedge Janitor
Boasberg’s opinion granting the DOJ request:
Judicial Watch Inc v Us Department of Justice Dcdce-23-03004 0027.0 by Zerohedge Janitor
Loading recommendations…
Read the full article here