Tag Archives: Lawfare group

Jan 20 2024

Atlanta DA Fani Willis Just Stepped on a Rake Accusing Lover’s Wife of Conspiracy – The Wife Responds with Receipts of Fani Willis’s Adultery and Ethical Violations


Posted originally on the CTH on January 19, 2024 | Sundance

January 19, 2024 | Sundance | 349 Comments

Boy howdy… when things get interesting, they REALLY get interesting.

In an effort to deflect attention from the gross corruption she initiated in the prosecution of Donald Trump, Atlanta District Attorney Fani Willis stepped into the middle of a contentious divorce between Willis’s married lover and appointed Special Prosecutor, Nathan Wade, and his wife, Joycelyn Wade.

After discovering details of the relationship between Nathan Wade and Fani Willis, lawyers representing Mrs. Joycelyn Wade wanted a deposition of Fani Willis.  At issue are the finances in the marriage and Mrs. Wade’s discovery that her husband, Nathan Wade, and Fani Willis had been living a life of indulgence from the marital income received (more than $650, 000) as a result of DA Willis hiring Nathan Wade to prosecute Donald Trump.

In an over-the-top court filing trying to avoid the deposition, the Fulton County’s district attorney accused the estranged wife of conspiring to undermine the Trump prosecution by seeking her testimony.  Fani Willis does not deny the affair; instead, she accuses Joycelyn Wade of coordinating with Trump people and co-defendants to interfere with the prosecution.

(VIA AJC Politics) – Fulton County’s district attorney on Thursday fired back at allegations she has engaged in an “improper” relationship with her top deputy, accusing his estranged wife of trying to obstruct her prosecution of Donald Trump and his allies. (more)

That approach by Fani Willis opened up a can of worms the district attorney likely didn’t expect.  Because Mrs. Jocelyn Wade has credit card statements and receipts showing how her husband booked and paid for lavish travel, expenses and indulgences using Fani Willis’s real name as his companion. [pdf response motion].

[Source pdf, with attachments]

The details and credit card statements are attached to the filing, which substantiates and supports the originating court filing by one of the co-defendants who made the allegation against Fani Willis and Nathan Wade.

(via AJC Politics) […] The records have emerged as part of the Wades’ contentious divorce proceedings in Cobb County Superior Court and have rocked Fulton’s sweeping racketeering case against the former president and 14 remaining defendants. One defendant is seeking to disqualify Willis and her office because of her alleged “improper, clandestine personal relationship” with Wade.

♦On Oct. 4, 2022, Wade purchased American Airlines tickets to Miami for himself, Willis and Clara Bowman, who is believed to be Wade’s mother and who traveled from Texas. The three tickets cost a combined $1,367. That same day, he paid more than $2,600 to Royal Caribbean Cruises.

♦On Oct. 5, Wade spent approximately $3,800 with Vacation Express, a company that offers vacation packages and tours. Wade, Willis and Bowman arrived in Miami on Oct. 28, according to flight records reviewed by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The records also show that Wade paid for airfare to travel with Willis from Miami to Aruba. Bowman stayed in Miami and returned to Texas on Oct. 31, flight records show.

♦There were additional charges on the card of $370 for the Hyatt Regency in Aruba on Nov. 4 and $3,173 to Norwegian Cruise Line on Nov. 7. It was not clear who took either of the cruises or who stayed at the Hyatt.

♦On April 25, 2023, Wade purchased $817.80 in Delta Air Lines tickets to San Francisco in both his and Willis’ names, although they do not show when the flight was taken. They also show that on May 14, Wade spent $840.22 for what appears to be a stay at the DoubleTree hotel in Napa Valley.

Allegations of a romantic relationship between Wade and Willis first surfaced in a court filing by Ashleigh Merchant, attorney for Trump defendant Michael Roman, earlier this month. She contended that the relationship was improper because Willis financially benefited from the vacations paid for by Wade, who has been paid more than $654,000 in legal fees for his work on the election interference case against former President Donald Trump and others.

Roman, a Trump campaign operative, has asked for the charges against him to be dismissed and for Willis and her office to be removed from the broader case.

Clark Cunningham, a law professor at Georgia State University, said the disclosure of Nathan Wade’s bank records appear to substantiate, at least in part, the allegations in Roman’s motion.

“Willis may want to consider taking a leave from the DA’s office, allowing one of her chief deputies to assume control over the election interference prosecution,” Cunningham said. “That chief deputy could determine whether to continue the contract with Nathan Wade.” (read more)

Nathan Wade was a lawyer specializing in family matters prior to being appointed by District Attorney Fani Willis.  Mr. Wade never prosecuted a single felony case in his legal career.  Judge Scott McAfee ordered District Attorney Fani Willis to file a written response by Feb. 2. He said he will hold a hearing on the allegations on Feb. 15.

[Source Link]

Additionally, according to White House visitor logs, Mr. Nathan Wade visited White House lawyers prior to the indictment of President Trump.  Also, DA Willis met with staff (Mary McCord) from the January 6 Committee prior to the indictment.

The Georgia prosecutor meeting with Biden lawyers, prior to the indictment against Biden’s political opposition, is a big issue that has yet to surface in front of Judge McAfee.

Something is going to change in this case as a result of these explosive findings.  I suspect by Monday of next week Ms. Fani Willis will have to remove herself from any involvement in the case.  Something substantive is going to change in Atlanta as a result of the discovery of her grossly inappropriate/unethical conduct, and the now exposed financial and personal relationship with the prosecutor she hired, Nathan Wade.

The scale of Lawfare stupid, perhaps driven by hubris and/or an entitled sense of just being above the rules, is simply off-the-charts.

Crazy stuff.

.

Jan 19 2024

After Vowing No More Continuing Resolution Spending Bills Last Year, Guess What the Republican Majority UniParty Just Passed


Posted originally on the CTH on January 18, 2024 | Sundance 

Yup, another kick-the-can continuing resolution spending bill has passed the House.  This extension lasts until March 1st and 8th.

The short-term CR negotiated in part by House Speaker Mike Johnson, passed the House on a 314-108 vote margin.  207 Democrats and 107 Republicans voted for it.  Yes, that’s correct; more democrats supported the CR than republicans, and this is with a republican house majority.

It’s a Democrat CR bill being brought up by a Republican House Speaker and passed by the UniParty.  Almost half of the Republicans voted against it (106), while just 2 Democrats voted no.  The DC UniParty in its full glory.

“Our Speaker, Mr. Johnson, said he was the most conservative speaker we’ve ever had, and yet here we are, putting this bill on the floor,” said. Rep. Eli Crane of Arizona in a floor speech ahead of the vote, adding that the situation is what “led to us to vacate Speaker McCarthy in the first place.”

WASHINGTON DC – On a 314-108 House vote, Congress just bought six more weeks to continue the fiscal 2024 funding fight. But even the new March government shutdown deadlines are going to be a challenge to meet.

STEP 1: ANOTHER NUMBERS DEAL — Top Hill leaders might have agreed on overall spending levels nearly two weeks ago, but appropriators can’t get to work writing legislation until the two appropriations chairs — Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) — work out their own deal on how to divvy up the topline number among the 12 individual bills, setting what’s known among wonks as the 302(b)s.

It’s been slow going, and other top appropriators are growing impatient. “I have no insights as to why it’s taking so long,” said Senate Appropriations Vice Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine). “I’m very concerned.” As to whether there’s enough time for Congress to meet the split March 1/March 8 deadlines: “I think there is if we get the allocations promptly next week,” Collins said.

People familiar with the process have stressed that negotiating subcommittee allocations typically takes a while. Speaking before the Senate passed the latest stopgap earlier this afternoon, Murray said she’s “working nonstop” with her House counterparts to keep things “moving as quickly as we possibly can.”

STEP 2: ENTER THE SUBCOMMITTEES — Once the 302(b)s are set, the 12 appropriations subcommittee chairs and ranking members will start trading offers on how to distribute their allocations among each department, agency and program in their jurisdiction, while also haggling over potential policy stipulations.

For several of the bills, that’s going to be a challenge, considering the vast differences between the measures that the House and Senate each pumped out last year.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.), chair of the State-Foreign Operations panel, told us that he and GOP counterpart Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.) have a lot of daylight to close in negotiations with their peers across the Capitol. “Lindsey and I work well together,” he said. “But the gap between our bill in the Senate and the House is pretty significant. So once we have allocations, there’s still a lot of work to do.”

STEP 3: RIDER TIME — House conservatives, who’ve failed for months to secure steep spending cuts, say they’re hellbent on securing major policy wins, such as anti-abortion provisions and immigration restrictions that are dead on arrival for the Democratic-controlled Senate. They have backing from Johnson, who just last Sunday said the new funding patch will buy time to fight for “meaningful policy wins” while cajoling Republicans to support the latest stopgap.

As our Alice Miranda Ollstein and Meredith Lee Hill report today, House Freedom Caucus chair Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) said many in the House Republican conference will be “disappointed and upset” if the speaker doesn’t win on anti-abortion language, arguing that House Republicans “should get at least half of what we want.”

STEP 4: PASS IT OR BUST — If lawmakers fail to pass full-year appropriations bills over the next six weeks, senior appropriators are warning that will mean yet another continuing resolution — this time, through the rest of the fiscal year. They are counting on the threat of flat budgets and potentially devastating cuts to avert that outcome.

A continuing resolution through Sept. 30, for instance, would cut non-defense budgets by a total of $73 billion from current levels. Separately, lawmakers are facing another potential “sequester” scenario, thanks to a provision baked into the debt limit package passed last year. If the government is operating under any short-term CR come April 30, there will be a $10 billion cut to the military’s budget and a $41 billion cut to domestic programs. (MORE)

Madness…..

Complete and utter dysfunction.

Jan 19 2024

Georgia Judge Orders DA Fani Willis to Respond to Allegations of Impropriety by Feb 2nd


Posted originally on the CTH on January 18, 2024 | Sundance

In a court filing two weeks ago [SEE pdf HERE], one of the co-defendants in the Fulton County election case against President Trump presented very specific details of an intimate relationship between District Attorney Fani Willis and Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade.  Among the allegations are claims Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade had extravagant vacations together as a result of payments made for legal services.

Nathan Wade was a lawyer specializing in family matters prior to being appointed by Willis.  Mr. Wade never prosecuted a single felony case in his legal career.  Additionally, Mr. Wade is currently in divorce proceedings and making matters more complicated for DA Willis, Mr Wade’s wife is seeking to unseal the details of their current divorce battle and force a deposition from Ms Willis.

Judge Scott McAfee ordered District Attorney Fani Willis to file a written response by Feb. 2. He said he will hold a hearing on the allegations on Feb. 15.

[Source Link]

Additionally, according to White House visitor logs, Mr Wade visited White House lawyers prior to indictment of President Trump.  Also, DA Willis met with staff (Mary McCord) from the January 6 Committee prior to the indictment.

The Georgia prosecutor meeting with Biden lawyers prior to the indictment against Biden’s political opposition is a big issue that has yet to surface in front of Judge McAfee.

Things are getting very interesting.

This is actually a good segment for context of the issues:

.

Jan 17 2024

Hate Speech Imprisonment Coming to a Theater Near You


Posted originally on Jan 16, 2024 By Martin Armstrong 

The Irish government wants to pass a law that could see you or your loved ones jailed for the mere possession of memes, cartoons, or any content that could be deemed “hateful” unless you are a Neocon promoting hate speech to incite war with Russia. The Bill includes no definition of hate and is wide open to abuse by bad actors. This is a blueprint for hate speech laws the West wants to impose on everyone. You are only allowed to hate people they justify. They call Trump a liar, a dictator, a traitor, a Putin Puppet – none of this is hate speech as long as the government says it.  The guys who created memes on Hillary were sent to prison for 7 months, calling it election interference. All the things they hurl at Trump in elections are not interference or hate speech – it’s amazing how many dimensions we have to law.

Defend free speech – say no to this legislation. Sign the petition: https://freespeechireland.ie/TakeAction/ #BinTheBill

Jan 17 2024

Four Judges of DC Circuit Court of Appeals Excoriate Prior Executive Privilege Ruling, and The Admitted Scheme of Special Counsel Jack Smith


Posted originally on the CTH on January 16, 2024 | Sundance

In a 14-page opinion and ruling today [SEE pdf HERE] four judges from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals deconstruct the previous ruling from their own court as well as the DC judge beneath them that gave Special Counsel Jack Smith access to President Trump Twitter account data and then enforced a non-disclosure order.

There are multiple layers to this story, but the substantive part is the scheme and the construct of how the Lawfare took place.  There’s no way this was coincidental; I’ll explain why.

First, there are only 7 members on the full DC Circuit Court of Appeals.  When the Twitter case to gain access to President Trump communication came to the appellate level, somehow all three of the most left-wing judges were assigned to hear the appeal.

An “en banc” review would have included the full 7 members.  However, that review was made moot by the release of the information (a result of the appellate decision).  The release itself was done with the use of a non-disclosure order, hiding the ruling in secrecy and keeping President Trump from knowing about it.  Once the other four members of the DC CCA eventually found out about the case and the ramifications for ‘executive privilege’ their opinion lambasting their own court is released.

As noted from the panel, “the court here permitted a special prosecutor to avoid even the assertion of executive privilege by allowing a warrant for presidential communications from a third party and then imposing a nondisclosure order.”

The Circuit Court justices note that Jack Smith could have gone to the National Archives for the information as they held the same set of documents and information.  However, Smith didn’t want to go that route because the National Archives would inform President Trump as customary and provide him the ability to assert executive privilege over any of the 32 Direct Messages requested.

Jack Smith didn’t want President Trump to know the prosecution was looking through his Twitter metadata and personal communication, so they went to district court under seal to file their search warrants in secrecy; then banning Twitter (the third party) from telling President Trump about it.   The four justices from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals are furious the other three members of the court went along with this precedent setting usurpation of authority.

President Trump could not appeal any part of this process because he was unaware it was taking place.  In essence, a star-chamber of secrecy was established and the majority on DC Circuit Court of Appeals is not happy about it.

Jack Smith gained access after Twitter lost the 3-judge Circuit Court appeal decision. So, an en banc full 7-member ruling is essentially moot.  The information was released, and Smith had access without President Trump or the White House having any option to assert privilege.

…”While a Twitter account primarily consists of public tweets, it may also include some private material, such as direct messages between users, drafts, and personal metadata. In fact, the material produced by Twitter included several dozen direct messages written by a sitting President. The district court afforded no opportunity for the former President to invoke executive privilege before disclosure, and this court made no mention of the privilege concerns entangled in a third-party search of a President’s social media account. This approach directly contravenes the principles and procedures long used to adjudicate claims of executive privilege.”  [pdf HERE]

The ruling provides no remedy other than public scrutiny and perhaps fuel for Florida Judge Aileen Cannon who already has Special Counsel Jack Smith on his heels after several rulings in the Mar-a-Lago documents case.

What the publicity does is highlight to the world just how politically motivated all of this aforementioned action really is.  Lastly, what are the odds of the random 3-judge panel to approve it.  Even the DC Circuit Court itself seems to imply this was a structured outcome, which is even more infuriating to the majority within the court.

Jan 15 2024

Atlanta DA Fani Willis Plays the Race Card Giving Proactive Speech at Big Bethal AME Church


Posted originally on the CTH on January 14, 2024 | Sundance

Two high level takeaways.  First, please pay attention to the venue {GO DEEP}, as CTH has documented for 10+ years the AME church network is the epicenter of racially driven political influence.  BLM are the activist foot soldiers; AME are the network organizers.  BLM harvest the ballots; AME are the precinct workers who scan them as many times as needed.  This is the “Atlanta way,” that duplicates in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore and Madison.

Second, Fani Willis must anticipate a major problem with her case and conduct if she is proactively going to the crew who will be tasked with circling the wagons on her defense.  In this video soundbite Fani Willis plays the race card to her audience at Big Bethal AME church in Atlanta. WATCH:

Fani Willis’ full speech was 35 minutes long and filled with racially driven context.

The AME church network is the same political system used by Barack “if I had a son” Obama, Benjamin Crump, Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin in Miami-Dade/Orlando. The same network in Ferguson Missouri (Mike Brown), the same network in Baltimore, Maryland (Freddy Gray), and on it goes.

The AME network is a system built on the guise of religion, but fraught with politics, racial division, the retention of pretenses and massive fraud.

.

Jan 15 2024

NBC Admits Deep State Exists – Key Operative, Mary McCord


Posted originally on the CTH on January 14, 2024 | Sundance

NBC published an extensive article outlining how the DC administrative state is responding to the potential for another President Trump victory [SEE HERE].

Once again, a very specific name surfaces who is part of the organizational effort to stop Donald Trump.  {EMPHASIS mine}

(NBC) – […]  Now, bracing for Trump’s potential return, a loose-knit network of public interest groups and lawmakers is quietly devising plans to try to foil any efforts to expand presidential power, which could include pressuring the military to cater to his political needs.

Those taking part in the effort told NBC News they are studying Trump’s past actions and 2024 policy positions so that they will be ready if he wins in November. That involves preparing to take legal action and send letters to Trump appointees spelling out consequences they’d face if they undermine constitutional norms.

“We’re already starting to put together a team to think through the most damaging types of things that he [Trump] might do so that we’re ready to bring lawsuits if we have to,” said Mary McCord, executive director of the Institution for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law.

Part of the aim is to identify like-minded organizations and create a coalition to challenge Trump from day one, those taking part in the discussions said. Some participants are combing through policy papers being crafted for a future conservative administration. They’re also watching the interviews that Trump allies are giving to the press for clues to how a Trump sequel would look. (more)

There she is again, Mary McCord, the former head of the DOJ National Security Division, and the one specific functionary that is found at the epicenter of every single deep state Lawfare operation against President Trump.   However, that citation is not the biggest reveal in the past several days….

Pay very close attention to these next two citations:

November 3, 2021 – In Washington DC – “Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and the House Jan. 6 Select Committee has tapped Mary McCord, who once ran the Justice Department’s National Security Division, for representation in its fight to obtain former President Donald Trump’s White House records. (read more)

Then consider:

January 10, 2024 –  Georgia prosecutors probing Donald Trump’s effort to subvert the 2020 election got an early boost in the spring of 2022. It came from another set of investigators who were way ahead of them: the House Jan. 6 select committee.

Committee staff quietly met with lawyers and agents working for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in mid-April 2022, just as she prepared to convene a special grand jury investigation. In the previously unreported meeting, the Jan. 6 committee aides let the district attorney’s team review — but not keep — a limited set of evidence they had gathered. (read more)

The “J6 committee staff” that led the conversations with Fani Willis is a person, and that person’s name is Mary McCord.  As the lead in the J6 staff effort, there is simply no way to believe the committee staff that met with Fani Willis did not include McCord.

You know what seems bizarre to me?

What seems bizarre is how I began writing about the detailed activity of Mary McCord FOUR YEARS AGO.  Literally four years ago last Friday, and everything that has followed from her activity in October 2016 through to the present day is singularly focused on the removal of President Trump.  Yet, almost no one seems to connect the obvious dots.  Why?

What is it about Mary McCord and Washington DC circles that pundits and political researchers fear?

You read me writing about the key functionaries inside the system.  To give you an idea of the scope of influence of Mary McCord as a key functionary, consider what we can document.

♦ McCord submitted the fraudulent FISA application to spy on Trump campaign.

♦ McCord created the “Logan Act” claim used against Michael Flynn and then went with Sally Yates to confront the White House.

♦ McCord then left the DOJ and went to work for Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler.

♦ McCord organized the CIA rule changes with Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.

♦ McCord led and organized the impeachment effort, in the background, using the evidence she helped create.

♦ McCord joined the FISA Court to protect against DOJ IG Michael Horowitz newly gained NSD oversight and FISA review.

♦ McCord joined the J6 Committee helping to create all the lawfare angles they deployed.

♦ McCord then coordinated with DA Fani Willis in Georgia.

♦ McCord is working with Special Counsel Jack Smith to prosecute Trump.

In short, Mary McCord is the lawfare string that winds through every legal ‘stop Trump’ effort; yet no one ever calls her out?

Jan 14 2024

1.3.24: INFO Flood incoming! CEOS departing in droves, Flight logs, Lawfare, Cali Ballots, Celine, Be ready, Pray!


Posted originally on Rumble By And We Know on: Jan 3, 2024 at 12:45 pm EST

Jan 10 2024

Pretrial and Detention in Florida – Guilty Until Proven Innocent


Posted originally on Jan 9, 2024 By Martin Armstrong 

Rule of Law Justice

State laws should be viewed with a watchful eye as we move toward the next election. I often speak highly of Florida state laws, but make no mistake – Florida’s state government is still a GOVERNMENT but the lesser of multiple evils. Nearly every state quietly passed new legislation on January 1, and Florida’s new rules regarding pretrial release and detention are concerning.

SB 1534 regarding pretrial and detention now state that only a judge may set bail.

Section 1. Subsections (4), (5), and (6) are added to

   48  section 903.011, Florida Statutes, to read:

   49         903.011 Pretrial release “Bail” and “bond” defined; general

   50  terms; statewide uniform bond schedule.—

   51         (4) Except as authorized in subsection (5), only a judge

   52  may set, reduce, or otherwise alter a defendant’s bail. Upon

   53  motion by a defendant, or on the court’s own motion, a court may

   54  reconsider the monetary component of a defendant’s bail if he or

   55  she is unable to post a monetary bond.

   56         (5)(a) Beginning January 1, 2024, and annually thereafter,

   57  the Supreme Court must adopt a uniform statewide bond schedule

   58  for criminal offenses not described in subsection (6) for which

   59  a person may be released on bail before and in lieu of his or

   60  her first appearance hearing or bail determination. The Supreme

   61  Court must make the revised uniform statewide bond schedule

   62  available to each judicial circuit.

Judges will have the ability to raise bail, but they may not lower it. If convicted, not charged, with the following crimes, you will be detained until a judge can hear your case:

(6) A person may not be released before his or her first

   93  appearance hearing or bail determination and a judge must

   94  determine the appropriate bail, if any, based on an

   95  individualized consideration of the criteria in s. 903.046(2),

   96  if the person meets any of the following criteria:

   97         (a) The person was, at the time of arrest for any felony,

   98  on pretrial release, probation, or community control in this

   99  state or any other state;

  100         (b) The person was, at the time of arrest, designated as a

  101  sexual offender or sexual predator in this state or any other

  102  state;

  103         (c) The person was arrested for violating a protective

  104  injunction;

  105         (d) The person was, at the time of arrest, on release from

  106  supervision under s. 947.1405, s. 947.146, s. 947.149, or s.

  107  944.4731;

  108         (e) The person has, at any time before the current arrest,

  109  been sentenced pursuant to s. 775.082(9) or s. 775.084 as a

  110  prison releasee reoffender, habitual violent felony offender,

  111  three-time violent felony offender, or violent career criminal;

  112         (f) The person has been arrested three or more times in the

  113  12 months immediately preceding his or her arrest for the

  114  current offense; or

  115         (g) The person’s current offense of arrest is for one or

  116  more of the following crimes:

  117         1. A capital felony, life felony, felony of the first

  118  degree, or felony of the second degree;

  119         2. A homicide under chapter 782; or any attempt,

  120  solicitation, or conspiracy to commit a homicide;

  121         3. Assault in furtherance of a riot or an aggravated riot;

  122  felony battery; domestic battery by strangulation; domestic

  123  violence, as defined in s. 741.28; stalking; mob intimidation;

  124  assault or battery on a law enforcement officer; assault or

  125  battery on juvenile probation officer, or other staff of a

  126  detention center or commitment facility, or a staff member of a

  127  commitment facility, or health services personnel; assault or

  128  battery on a person 65 years of age or older; robbery; burglary;

  129  carjacking; or resisting an officer with violence;

  130         4. Kidnapping, false imprisonment, human trafficking, or

  131  human smuggling;

  132         5. Possession of a firearm or ammunition by a felon,

  133  violent career criminal, or person subject to an injunction

  134  against committing acts of domestic violence, stalking, or

  135  cyberstalking;

  136         6. Sexual battery; indecent, lewd, or lascivious touching;

  137  exposure of sexual organs; incest; luring or enticing a child;

  138  or child pornography;

  139         7. Abuse, neglect, or exploitation of an elderly person or

  140  disabled adult;

  141         8. Child abuse or aggravated child abuse;

  142         9. Arson; riot, aggravated riot, inciting a riot, or

  143  aggravated inciting a riot; or a burglary or theft during a

  144  riot;

  145         10. Escape; tampering or retaliating against a witness,

  146  victim, or informant; destruction of evidence; or tampering with

  147  a jury;

  148         11. Any offense committed for the purpose of benefitting,

  149  promoting, or furthering the interests of a criminal gang;

  150         12. Trafficking in a controlled substance, including

  151  conspiracy to engage in trafficking in a controlled substance;

  152         13. Racketeering; or

  153         14. Failure to appear at required court proceedings while

  154  on bail.
Judge

Now, you may read through this list, nodding your head in agreement that anyone who commits a violent crime is a danger to our society and should be locked away. However, the legal system was designed so everyone is viewed as INNOCENT until proven guilty. This method enables the law to detain people who have not been charged with a crime and may be innocent.

Read the list a bit closer, and you will notice there are non-violent offenses that could land you in jail without bail. Inciting or participating in a riot means you are guilty until proven innocent. There WILL be riots after the election regardless of who wins, and everyone who participates may be held. You are unwise if you believe this will only benefit your political party. All the new arrivals to Florida could flip it blue, and “riots” like the Black Lives Matter wave will be considered OK, as the blue states deemed them, while conservative rallies will lead to domestic terrorism charges.

Conspiracy is also on the list if you read it carefully. So, if they simply THINK you may have committed a drug-related crime, you will be locked away until a judge can hear your case. We know that three-letter agencies have planted drugs on innocent people in the past to get that conviction. They do not even need evidence, as this is opening Pandora’s box to permit the government to detain citizens before trial.

Look at what happened over COVID. The courts closed due to the pandemic, and people living in states that did not offer bail were stuck behind bars for months until a judge could take their case. In New Jersey, for example, people awaiting trial were not even permitted to go outside for months on end, and the time they spent awaiting trial was not reduced from their sentence if found guilty. The judge is not required to take your case immediately, and they could potentially delay it for as long as possible, as they did during COVID.

Jan 10 2024

Very Revealing – Supreme Court Refuses to Permit Twitter to Outline Scope of FBI/DHS Unlawful Domestic Surveillance


Posted originally on the CTH on January 9, 2024 | Sundance 

If you understand how the Dept of Homeland Security and FBI access and ultimately control the content of social media platforms, specifically the public opinion square of Twitter, then you can start to understand a much bigger aspect to this hidden court case.

KEY CONTEXT – During the Twitter File releases, existing DHS/FBI guidance controlled what the Twitter legal team was allowed to share with researchers.  The Twitter File group gave Twitter search terms, and the Twitter team entered the search words/phrases and generated results.  However, the Twitter legal team then had to filter that information against the instructions of DHS/FBI to determine what the research group was allowed to know; ultimately, what was allowed to become public information.

This reality stimulates the question: where/when did that prior guidance from DHS/FBI originate?   The answer to that question is discovered in a little-known lawsuit by Twitter against the U.S. government.  Please do not overlook the dates here.

Back in 2014, Twitter sued the government, “seeking to make public the number of times the FBI requested user information from the company in connection with national security investigations.” {link} Why?  Because during the Obama administration, Twitter “was blocked from publishing the quantity of requests in its biannual online “Transparency Report,” claiming the government unlawfully restrained its speech.” {link}

In essence, DHS/FBI were weaponizing Twitter data and demanding information on specific users, specific inquiry about issues of greatest concern to the Obama administration.  The Obama administration then told Twitter they were not permitted to talk about their demands due to “national security” issues.  Twitter was barred from telling the public what was happening.

Keep in mind, the lawsuit by Twitter against the Obama administration (DHS/FBI) was in 2014, so the demands from government were ‘prior to’.   Now, does my prior outlining of “Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop” start to make more sense?  [Keep in mind, I received a ridiculous subpoena for writing about this.]

The Twitter lawsuit against the government wound its way through the lower courts and various levels of appeal.  Each lower court ruled against the release of the information, forbidding Twitter from releasing the information.  Why? Because the executive branch, in this example Obama DHS/FBI, have unilateral authority to determine what constitutes a “national security” issue.   If DHS/FBI says the issue is a “national security” threat, the judicial branch is not prepared to challenge that definition.

Ultimately the lawsuit ended up at the doors of the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court refused to engage the question thereby supporting the rulings of the lower court.  You can read about THAT PART HERE.  However, there’s another layer to this story that needs to be accurately understood, because this deference by the judicial branch to the executive branch is part of how the system is weaponized.

You might remember this 11th circuit court of appeals ruling against Trump; it essentially encapsulates the issue:

These rulings are essentially correct, as following the process within a constitutional republic. However, here’s the rub.  The weaponized Deep State are using this deference, as a tool in their Lawfare arsenal.

If the Deep State can unilaterally determine what constitutes “national security,” and if the judicial branch is not going to review or challenge those determinations, then the executive branch can target people, target institutions, and/or conduct domestic surveillance while hiding their conduct behind the shield of national security.

That’s exactly what the weaponized institutions (DHS, DOJ, FBI) have been doing.

That’s exactly the process that Barack Obama and Eric Holder created.

That’s exactly the motive for Eric Holder creating the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD).

Now, can you see the bigger issue, as presented by the Twitter case against government, that was just highlighted by the Supreme Court decision not to get involved.

The DOJ-NSD is the targeting mechanism for corrupt interests in our government to target us.  The Dept of Homeland Security and the FBI unite in the process and provide the results to the DOJ-NSD for action against the targets.  The collaboration then uses “national security” as the technique to stop those being abused by the targeting system from ever finding out, and the judicial branch cannot provide oversight.

Hopefully, this helps people put the scale of the ‘weaponization of government’ issue into a context.

That’s how they are carrying out Lawfare.  That’s why there’s no process to impede them within the ordinary structures of constitutional protection.

Their ability to use “national security” as the justification for all of the corrupt targeting and surveillance is ultimately the source of power for the Fourth Branch of Government.