Whistleblower Provides Attkisson New Details to Name Rod Rosenstein and Shawn Henry (Crowdstrike) as Defendants in Lawsuit…


A very interesting development in the ongoing effort of former CBS investigative journalist, Sharyl Attkisson, to resolve the issue of who spied on her, planted spyware and infiltrated her computer systems for illegal surveillance.  [Attkisson website here]

According to a recent court filing [Source Here] a person who was engaged in the “wrongful activity” has come forward to provide Ms. Attkisson with details about the operation.  As a result of those whistle-blower revelations Attkisson is able to name specific individuals who were running the operation:

Former DOJ Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein is named as the person who was in charge of the operation; and the former head of the FBI DC field office, Shawn Henry is also outlined.

Mr. Henry is the head of Crowdstrike, a contractor for the government and a politically connected data security and forensic company.  Those who have followed the aspects related to the FBI use of the NSA database to illegally monitor U.S. persons; and those who followed the DNC cover story of Russia “hacking”; will be familiar with Crowdstrike.

According to the updated lawsuit (full pdf below) Rod Rosenstein, as the U.S. Attorney for Maryland, was in charge of the Obama 2011 and 2012 operation to monitor journalists specific to Ms. Attkissons reporting on Fast-n-Furious and Benghazi.

What I find additionally interesting is the overall timeline in the bigger picture.

In the April 2017 release from FISC Judge Rosemary Collyer outlining the abuses of the FISA-702 process by FBI “contractors”, where the NSA database was being use for unlawful surveillance of U.S. persons, Collyer specifically noted the findings of her review of the period from November ’16 to May ’17 (85% non compliant rate) was likely to have been happening since 2012. [Go Deep]

The “IRS Scandal” were the DOJ was creating a list of U.S. persons for political targeting, and requested CD ROM’s of tax filings, was the lead-up to the 2012 exploitation of the NSA database. [The Secret Research Project] So there’s a larger picture of government surveillance under the Obama administration that becomes more clear.

Political spying 1.0 was actually the weaponization of the IRS. This is where the term “Secret Research Project” originated as a description from the Obama team. It involved the U.S. Department of Justice under Eric Holder and the FBI under Robert Mueller. It never made sense why Eric Holder requested over 1 million tax records via CD ROM, until overlaying the timeline of the FISA abuse:

The IRS sent the FBI “21 disks constituting a 1.1 million page database of information from 501(c)(4) tax exempt organizations, to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.” The transaction occurred in October 2010 (link)

Why disks? Why send a stack of DISKS to the DOJ and FBI when there’s a pre-existing financial crimes unit within the IRS. All of the evidence within this sketchy operation came directly to the surface in early spring 2012.

This is the same time-frame when DNI James Clapper falsely denied to congress about the U.S. government -through the NSA- collecting metadata on all U.S. electronic communication.  This is the same time-frame where CIA Director John Brennan was monitoring the computer networks of congressional intelligence oversight staff.

When you overlay the new information from the Attkisson lawsuit, what emerges is the picture of an intentional effort by the Obama administration to weaponize the ability to collect electronic information on domestic political opposition.  It’s one long continuum.

Here’s the new Attkisson lawsuit (using new information from a whistle-blower):

.

.

Within the lawsuit the DOJ inspector general is identified as adverse to the interests of the case.  Meaning DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz was engaged in behavior to help the institution cover-up what independent computer forensic technicians were able to discover.   Employees from the IG’s office also told Ms. Attkisson they had received instructions from the DC offices adverse to the interest of truthful discovery.

In addition to the institutional cover-up effort; it would be worth noting that current DOJ and FBI officials, who have been identified as holding corrupt motives, are still being positioned at key offices.  An example is FBI Supervisory Special Agent David Archey (Mueller Team) being promoted to head up the Virginia FBI field office.

Obviously the DC institutional swamp is very deep and very corrupt.  Current and former politicians and federal officials who have engaged in corrupt behavior, or who have facilitated corrupt -potentially unlawful- surveillance activity, are still working within the system to avoid exposure.

Another recent example is former Christine Blasey-Ford hoax facilitator and Andrew McCabe attorney, Michael Bromwich, being hired by corrupt Chicago prosecutor Kim Foxx in an effort to protect herself from the outcome of the Jussie Smollett hoax in Chicago.  Why does a Cook County, Illinois, State Attorney need to hire a DC-based lawyer?

It was obvious early on the Jussie Smollett hoax was connected to several members of the Obama team and network.  Michael Bromwich is a former DOJ inspector general with ongoing direct contacts with corrupt DOJ and FBI officials inside the institutions.  Chicago State Attorney Foxx hiring Bromwich is yet another example of DC managing the cover.

Whether it’s the identified weaponization of NSA databases; or whether it’s corrupt FBI officials covering for each-other and the DOJ ‘declining to prosecute’; or whether it’s current AG Bill Barr covering for the transparently corrupt former DAG Rod Rosenstein; or whether it’s the institutional need to hide DOJ scope memos which initiated a false investigation of a sitting United States President; one thing remains brutally obvious….

Report: John Huber Completes Review of Clinton Foundation and Uranium One, Finds Nothing…


As with all things MSM it’s worth considering with a dose of salt. However, that said, media are now reporting that U.S. Attorney John Huber has completed his review of the Clinton Foundation and Uranium-One and found nothing worth pursuing.

This would be a major disappointment for Q-decoders and Trusty Planners who claimed John Huber had hundreds of investigators spanning several states and were forecasting: (1) a suspension of Habeas Corpus, (2) military tribunals, (3) mass arrests based on over 60,000 sealed indictments; and (5) pending incarcerations at Guantanamo Bay.

WASHINGTON – A Justice Department inquiry launched more than two years ago to mollify conservatives clamoring for more investigations of Hillary Clinton has effectively ended with no tangible results, and current and former law enforcement officials said they never expected the effort to produce much of anything.

John Huber, the U.S. attorney in Utah, was tapped in November 2017 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to look into concerns raised by President Trump and his allies in Congress that the FBI had not fully pursued cases of possible corruption at the Clinton Foundation and during Clinton’s time as secretary of state, when the U.S. government decided not to block the sale of a company called Uranium One.

As a part of his review, Huber examined documents and conferred with federal law enforcement officials in Little Rock who were handling a meandering probe into the Clinton Foundation, people familiar with the matter said. Current and former officials said that Huber has largely finished and found nothing worth pursuing — though the assignment has not formally ended and no official notice has been sent to the Justice Department or to lawmakers, these people said.  (read more)

Reuters

@Reuters

U.S. inquiry into FBI, Clinton spurred by Republicans ends without results: Washington Post https://reut.rs/2QEj3kT 

View image on Twitter
120 people are talking about this

As with all things MSM it’s worth considering with a dose of salt. However, that said, media are now reporting that U.S. Attorney John Huber has completed his review of the Clinton Foundation and Uranium-One and found nothing worth pursuing.

This would be a major disappointment for Q-decoders and Trusty Planners who claimed John Huber had hundreds of investigators spanning several states and were forecasting: (1) a suspension of Habeas Corpus, (2) military tribunals, (3) mass arrests based on over 60,000 sealed indictments; and (5) pending incarcerations at Guantanamo Bay.

WASHINGTON – A Justice Department inquiry launched more than two years ago to mollify conservatives clamoring for more investigations of Hillary Clinton has effectively ended with no tangible results, and current and former law enforcement officials said they never expected the effort to produce much of anything.

John Huber, the U.S. attorney in Utah, was tapped in November 2017 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to look into concerns raised by President Trump and his allies in Congress that the FBI had not fully pursued cases of possible corruption at the Clinton Foundation and during Clinton’s time as secretary of state, when the U.S. government decided not to block the sale of a company called Uranium One.

As a part of his review, Huber examined documents and conferred with federal law enforcement officials in Little Rock who were handling a meandering probe into the Clinton Foundation, people familiar with the matter said. Current and former officials said that Huber has largely finished and found nothing worth pursuing — though the assignment has not formally ended and no official notice has been sent to the Justice Department or to lawmakers, these people said.  (read more)

Reuters

@Reuters

U.S. inquiry into FBI, Clinton spurred by Republicans ends without results: Washington Post https://reut.rs/2QEj3kT 

View image on Twitter
120 people are talking about this

Iran!


The latest fireworks in the Middle East involved an Iranian-led attack on our embassy in Iraq.

 

Our military took out their leader shortly thereafter. I’ve heard some say Trump is keeping Americans safe. That’s great, but why are so many Americans still in Iraq after all these years? Why are we in Syria? Why are we allies with a backward kingdom named Saudi Arabia?

That country beheads people for merely questioning their government. They use their oil money to spread Wahhabism, a radical form of Islam that breeds terrorism.

Iran is our enemy because they practice a different form of Islam and they hate us because our CIA conducted a coup against their Prime Minister. Mosaddegh wanted to nationalize the oil companies operating in his country, so he had to go. He was replaced with the Shah, and his brutality led to a revolution in the late 1970s. Iran has been run by Islamic fanatics who hate America since then.

President H. W. Bush and his son W. were both Skull and Bones men and war criminals. They got American troops in the Middle East using false flags and blatant lies. Millions of lives and trillions of dollars lost later—we’re still there—and in Afghanistan as well.

Iranian citizens suffer from a poor economy and harsh repression. They are not happy, and so the ruling Mullahs keep the fires of hate against America burning as a distraction. They must also think America is weak. After all, Obama gave them billions of dollars and John Kerry was happy to genuflect to Iran’s rulers. They made a ridiculous deal in the hopes they could keep Iran’s nuclear ambitions in check. Of course Iran kept right on going with their nuclear weapons program—just like the North Koreans did after cutting a sweetheart deal with the Clinton administration.

Our founding fathers wanted us to avoid foreign entanglements. Leaders such as the Bushes ignored their advice and so now we have permanent war in an area with a history of tribal warfare going back centuries. Those conflicts will never end. We should not be in the middle of it all—we are supposedly energy independent now. It’s time to let the countries in the Middle East battle it out on their own without us paying for it with American dollars and lives.

Bring the troops home!

—Ben Garrison

Suffer any Wrong Rather than Go to Court


COMMENT: Judge Jackson & the Lack of Judicial Impartiality
Martin in this very illuminating post you say:
“Clearly, the most dangerous flaw appears to be intentional – Congress appoints judges not lawyers”.
You’ve missed an important point here.
At the time of the founding most judges were “appointed” by the people; through elections!
Yes, with the federal courts it doesn’t work that way. But, with the inferior courts at the state and local level it still does; though the right has been assailed and so somewhat curtailed.
Still, it is estimated some 50,000 judge-ships are subject to the ballot; a power, like so many others, fully squandered by the American people.
The implications of an electorate organized to exercise these powers would have serious implications at the federal level just the same and these facts should not be forgotten or dismissed.

H

REPLY: Yes, the state and local levels are varied. My discussion was confined to federal, which is what Ben Franklin was opposed to. There are many regions in the state and local level where the judges are elected by the people. This too I see as wrong for they are still being sponsored by the Republican or Democratic Party and are declared as members. This still intertwines politics and does not eliminate the problem of bias.

I believe that Franklin was correct. The judges should NOT stand for election for that will transform the law into just the will of the majority. There was a case Nix v. Williams, 467 U.S. 431 (1984) which resulted in changing our constitutional rights because politically they demanded that a black guy be found guilty for killing a white 10-year-old girl. The police could not simply transport him after his lawyer got him to self-surrender. The lawyer warned the police not to question him on the way to the jail. They did any way. The officers began a conversation with respondent that ultimately resulted in his making incriminating statements and directing the officers to the child’s body.

A federal court in a habeas corpus proceeding found that the police had obtained respondent’s incriminating statements through interrogation in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Brewer v. Williams, 430 U. S. 387. They had to put him on trial again using evidence concerning the body’s location. Legally, that should have never been allowed. But because this was a black man who had mental problems and a 10-year-old white girl, the thought of letting him walk was just politically unacceptable. The court thus created a rule known as the Inevitable Discovery Rule meaning that it was irrelevant that he showed the police where the body was buried, because the court ruled that they would have eventually found the body.

The impact of that political decision is that police really do not need a search warrant today, they merely have to sweep an unconstitutional illegal search and seizure under the table and rule that had they obtained a search warrant, they would have inevitably found the same evidence.

This is the problem when you mix politics with law. In order to make sure that this one black guy was punished, the entire society had to be stripped of our absolute right against illegal search and seizure. If the government wants you, you have no Constitutional rights whatsoever. Law has become the justification for legal persecution. Sir William Blackstone, upon whose seminal legal work was to found the foundation of American law, wrote:  It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer. That is the way the law is supposed to work. When you mix politics with judges, there is no rule of law that remains. The statue of justice is supposed to be blind symbolizing impartiality. That is merely fiction – like once upon a time.

The corruption of the Rule of Law was always an English past time, which the Americans inherited and greatly improved upon. The idea of justice is merely a fictional dream. Charles Dickens wrote in his introduction to Bleak House;

This is the Court of Chancery ..• Suffer any wrong that can be done you, rather than come here!

 

Pelosi’s New Years Eve Party!


PARTYING WITH PELOSI

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi loves money. That’s why she spends so much of her time fundraising. She is good at hitting up large corporations and wealthy donors.

As for her constituents? She spouts off the usual blue city leftist rhetoric to keep them placated. She represents California’s 12th congressional district, which mostly consists of the city of San Francisco. That city has degenerated under her rule. Its streets are littered with human feces and drug needles. The homeless don’t have money, so they don’t appear on Nancy’s radar.

Pelosi caters to the rich, limousine liberals who can afford to live there. She knows money is power and her wealth bought her a lot of influence in the Democratic Party. Just like Hillary did with her corrupt Clinton Foundation, Pelosi has amassed vast wealth as a politician—she’s worth well over $100 million. Some estimate her wealth is much greater than that. She made sure her son, Paul Pelosi Jr., got paid off, too. Like Hunter Biden, he was involved in kickbacks and Ukraine corruption.

It remains to be seen what Pelosi will do in 2020 to help thwart Trump’s reelection. Her Trump Derangement Syndrome will not be cured any time soon and her endless thirst for money will remain unquenched.

Happy New Year!

—Ben Garrison

Judge Jackson & the Lack of Judicial Impartiality


QUESTION: I get your point that Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson is predisposed to the Democrats and was considered by Obama for the Supreme Court. How would you reform such political cases? Do you believe she had any basis to honor the Subpoena?

JF

ANSWER: I find it very curious that the Democrats would seek a civil order to compel White House counsel Don McGahn to testify when it should have been a contempt of Congress and handed over to the Department of Justice.  There is such a thing as Attorney Client Privilege. But let’s put that aside. As far back as the 1790s, it was established that contempt of Congress was considered an “implied power” of the legislature, on the basis that such a power existed in the British Parliament despite the fact we had a revolution against British powers. Congress was able to issue contempt citations against numerous individuals for a variety of actions without express powers granted to it by the Constitution.

Robert Randal was held in contempt of Congress for an attempt to bribe Representative William Smith of South Carolina back in 1795. Bribing a politician was then seen as a contempt of the legislative power. If that was applied today with lobbyists, there would not be enough jail space to house everyone.

Then there was William Duane, who was a newspaper editor who had refused to answer Senate questions in 1800. The freedom of the press seems to have been ignored from very early on when it involved something government demanded. They did the same to Nathaniel Rounsavell  who was also a newspaper editor, for publishing sensitive information in the press back in 1812. He was finally released from custody on a house vote which took place on April 7th, 1812 after he agreed to answer the interrogatories.

In Anderson v. Dunn, 19 U.S. 6 Wheat. 204 204 (1821), the Supreme Court held that Congress’ power to hold someone in contempt was essential to ensure that Congress was “… not exposed to every indignity and interruption that rudeness, caprice, or even conspiracy, may mediate against it.” However, the case arose after the House of Representatives punished John Anderson for contempt but it did not identify his alleged offense, It was most likely attempted bribery. The Supreme Court ruled that contempt of Congress would be confined to simply imprisonment and that the person had to be released once the session of Congress was adjourned. They ruled out corporal and capital punishments as the penalty.

The Supreme Court has later warned Congress through its rulings on the use of contempt proceedings that it risked suppressing freedom of speech. Chief Justice Edward White extended protections of the 1821 Anderson v. Dunn ruling in the opinion of the Court in 1917 which ruled a contempt proceeding against a district attorney for statements he made about a House member went “far beyond Congress’ intrinsic power to protect itself.”

The theory that an attempt to bribe a politician was considered contempt of Congress was eventually abandoned in favor of criminal statutes. In 1857, Congress enacted a law that made “contempt of Congress” a criminal offense against the United States (Act of January 24, 1857, Ch. 19, sec. 1, 11 Stat. 155). Actually, the last time Congress arrested and detained a witness was in 1935. Since then, Congress has referred cases to the United States Department of Justice for prosecution. The Office of Legal Counsel has asserted that the President of the United States is protected from contempt by executive privilege. That makes sense whereby Congress could criminally then charge the President and that would then qualify them to be removed from office.

If we turn to Congressional Subpoenas, Congress claims that power is inherent in all of its standing committees as necessary to compel witnesses to testify and produce documents. A Congressional Committee rules provides for the full committee to issue a subpoena, and it authorizes subcommittees or the chairman (acting alone or with the ranking member) to issue subpoenas.

As announced in Wilkinson v. United States 365 U.S. 399 (1961), a Congressional Committee must meet three requirements for its subpoenas. First, the committee’s investigation of the subject matter must be authorized by its chamber. Secondly, any such investigation must pursue “a valid legislative purpose” although it need not actually involve legislation. However, it does not have to specify the ultimate intent of Congress. Thirdly, the specific inquiries must be pertinent to the subject matter area that has been authorized for investigation.

Here is the decision which I believe control. The Court held in Eastland v. United States Servicemen’s Fund, 421 U.S. 491 (1975), that Congressional subpoenas are within the scope of the Speech and Debate Clause which provides “an absolute bar to judicial interference” once it is determined that Members are acting within the “legitimate legislative sphere” with such compulsory process.

Under that Eastland decision, courts generally do not hear motions to quash Congressional subpoenas; even when executive branch officials refuse to comply. Courts tend to rule that such matters are “political questions” unsuitable for judicial remedy. In fact, many legal rights usually associated with a judicial subpoena do not apply to a Congressional subpoena. For example, attorney-client privilege and information that is normally protected under the Trade Secrets Act do not need to be recognized.

Here Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson in the district court in Washington ruled that McGahn must testify and that the Justice Department’s argument “is baseless, and as such, cannot be sustained.” The judge ordered McGahn to appear before the House committee and said her conclusion was “inescapable” because a subpoena demand is part of the legal system and was not the political process.

The Supreme Court has made it clear in the Eastland decision, that a Congressional subpoena is NOT judicial (legal) but it involves “political questions” not legal or judicial. I believe her decision is incorrect and it was politically motivated. On the other hand, the proper course of action by Congress should have been to turn it over to the Department of Justice to prosecute criminal contempt. They obviously did not do that and sought to get a judicial decision on a question that is clearly political. She was appointed as a judge by President Obama on September 20, 2012.

I oppose judges being appointed by politicians. I agree with Ben Franklin that the proper system for judges would have been the Scottish system where judges are nominated by fellow lawyers, not politicians to who they may be beholding. While legal scholars tend to look at Article III of the US Constitution as based upon the English legal system modeled on Blackstone’s famous Commentaries on the Laws of England, Franklin argued for the Scottish System that was far superior. Indeed, the Scottish judicial system provided an important, but overlooked, model for the framing of Article III.

Unlike the English system of overlapping original jurisdiction, the Scottish judiciary featured a hierarchical, appellate-style judiciary, with one supreme court sitting at the top and an array of inferior courts of original jurisdiction down below. What’s more, the Scottish judiciary operated within a constitutional framework — the so-called Acts of Union that combined England and Scotland into Great Britain in 1707 retained the independent legal structure of Scotland and prohibited the English courts from interfering with those of Scotland.

The influence of the Scottish judiciary on the language and structure of the US Article III legal framework is clear where there is a Supreme Court with multiple inferior courts that are subordinate to, and subject to the supervisory oversight of, the sole supreme court. The Scottish model thus provides important historical support for the supremacy of the Supreme Court, however, the blending of this with the English system rendered the inferiority in Article III to operate as textual and structural limits on Congress’ jurisdiction-stripping authority from the courts.

Clearly, the most dangerous flaw appears to be intentional – Congress appoints judges not lawyers. This allowed the English legal system to be politically manipulated whereas the Scottish System was really independent. This MUST be corrected to restore the rule of law.

 

Important Discussion – Col Douglas Macgregor Has Suspicions About Pompeo, Esper and Milley…


Well, well, well…. we are not alone in our suspicions of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Defense Secretary Mark Esper and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley.

Tonight Col Douglas Macgregor outlines his own suspicions about the U.S. military attack in Iraq and Syria that parallel our initial gut reaction.  Macgregor states his belief that President Trump is being “skillfully misinformed”.  WATCH:

.

POTUS has yet to make a comment about it.

James Bond’s License to Kill Upheld by British High Court


If you loved action movies, depending upon your age, then you may have grown up on James Bond films. The tagline was that James Bond had a license to kill. Interestingly, the British High Court has ruled that indeed British spies and their agents have a license to kill, just as portrayed in the James Bond Movies. They can kill in the line of duty without fear of prosecution provided they persuade police and prosecutors it was in the public interest. So the James Bond series is not altogether just fiction.

Of course, so far the count was 897 people were killed in the United States by police. On that basis, the High Court’s ruling in Britain should not be that unusual.

COMEY & the Unconstitutional Antics of the NY Courts


QUESTION: I remember watching a documentary about you where none other than James Comey put you in jail illegally and forced you to admit guilt to some nonsense. Similar to what happened to General Flynn in recent years. Now that the deep state is being dismantled, do you plan on filing a lawsuit against the government? Any comments at all one way or the other?

J

ANSWER: Actually, to my complete shock, the company was officially closed in 2009 yet they have kept the receivership going for 20 years. Republic National Bank and HSBC plead CRIMINALLY guilty and had to pay back all my clients because they were illegally trading in our accounts. The bankers were simply taking money illegally from our accounts using it as their capital and then put it back in the wrong account which how I caught them. They were using our funds as their own capitalization and were parking their trades in our accounts besides using our money like MF Global. Of course, like MF Global, New York always protects that bankers and nothing is ever done which has disgraced the United States in the eyes of the entire world.

Despite internal audits that showed we were indeed conservative using only 4% of cash for margin and were profitable into 1998. Nothing Republic alleged could be supported. They simply tried to cover-up their own illegal trading in our accounts. We dealt with Deutsche Bank and even had my own brokerage house. The only problem was at Republic New York Securities – no other institution.

 

 

(Go to Armstrong’s blog to hear audio)

Audio tapes which revealed the bank’s illegal actions were either deliberately withheld from the government by the receiver to keep his fees going for 20 years, or they claimed they were destroyed in 9/11 World Trade Center event. This is one copy I found in my mother’s basement when I got out. Did the government ever listen to the tapes? Or were the tapes withheld to protect the bankers and then the Receiver was made a board member of Goldman Sachs?

If the government never reviewed these tapes, then will they suddenly prosecute the receiver and his counsel? Or will the government concede they had them all along and still engaged in a fraudulent prosecution for political reasons to protect the bankers? Was Comey aware of this? Did he sanction it to protect the bankers as he protected Hillary? After all, it was the Clintons who gave a wink and a nod to the bankers trying to take over Russia by blackmailing Yeltsin after arranging a $7 billion theft of money from the IMF loans. (CNN Theft of IMF Money – Sep. 1, 1999)(CNN Russian money laundering probe widens – Aug. 26, 1999).

All phone lines are recorded in financial situations. The receiver threatened all my lawyers to throw them in contempt unless they handed over all the tapes. There were tapes where openly the bankers were asking me to joun them on a platinum manipulation. They paid bribes to Russian ministers to recall the platinum to take an inventory.  I stood up and stated that these tapes would reveal criminal activity on the part of the bankers. They somehow were conveniently destroyed in 9/11 to protect the bankers?

These are questions I would certainly love to have answered. But it is also why they used civil contempt to keep me in prison because you are NOT entitled to a public trial where I could have called the bankers to the stand. The prosecutors protected the bankers at every step of the way.

After the bank plead guilty and had to pay everyone back to escape even a fine, the receiver stood before the court and alleged there was another fraud to which I was never charged. No complaint was ever filed and they admitted in open court there was no criminal description of the allegation. Nevertheless, they just arbitrarily kept me in prison for 5 years without any justification whatsoever in complete denial of Due Process of Law like some corrupt third world country. That is supposed to be a violation of human right the USA accuses China of doing, yet New York does this routinely and the American press also protects the prosecutors.

The judge was even changing the transcripts, which is a criminal act by itself. The court reporter is supposed to swear under oath that the transcript is true and correct recording of the event. None of my transcripts were ever certified because the judge kept changing them. (Rule 5007(a) “The person preparing any transcript shall promptly file a certified copy.”). Even the court reporters conspire against you to deny you Due Process of Law in New York. Believe it or not, this was even address in the court of appeals in another case and the court said the judges should stop it, but they lacked the power to order them to obey the law.

“The Southern District of New York follows a practice that is unusual and perhaps unique. …  Because the parties receive only a printed transcript that incorporates the judge’s revisions, the parties are not informed of such revisions. … Courts do not have power to alter transcripts in camera and to conceal the alterations from the parties. Given the issues that arose in this case as a direct result of this practice, there appears to be little justification for continuing the practice in its present form. Nevertheless, whether we have the power to order a change in such a practice is unclear.  We review judgments, and our review of the convictions and sentences here may not be an appropriate vehicle for the fine tuning of this practice. However, we invite the judges of the Southern District to consider revision.”

see: US v Ziccetello

I wrote to the government and said what is the point of a trial when you people can simply alter a transcript and claim I confessed to even killing JFK and the press will NEVER question anything. I had even wrote to the ACLU, and they did not wish to take on the system in New York. They were just scared I supposed. Forget the press ever defending the people. They have joined the conspiracy against the people that allows government to act in this manner knowing they will never be questioned.

I did an interview with the Japanese press and told them to tell my clients to come sue the bank or they would NEVER see a dime. The bank was trying to claim their staff conspired with me which made no sense and they had to plead guilty. My clients did as I directed and filed suit against the bankers and I met with the lead attorney who said “you are collateral damage” and I said yes, I know. We agreed to cooperate and help each other. The government ushered in HSBC and then put a permanent gag order on me to prevent me from helping my clients. That was just unbelievable how far they will go to protect bankers.

Judge Lawrence McKenna was trying to protect me. The government removed him from my case behind the curtain without any hearing or allowing me to object or be advised what they were doing. That is completely illegal but they do whatever they want in New York City. They sealed all of those entries in the docket which were all ex parte so nobody can see the truth of how they were manipulating even the judges to get the result they wanted.

I refused to plead ever saying I took money or even tried to take money from my clients. They finally wrote a plea where all I had to say was I failed to tell my client over a weekend that the bank took money for its own benefit – not me.

Legally, if you enter a plea, the judge is supposed to make sure it is true and not coerced. Here I was not allowed to speak in my own words but had to read a script (allocution) written by the government and the judge even said you are to read a script no different than a hostage held by terrorists. It was after that when I believe they orchestrated to have me killed. I was in a coma for three days but survived to their dismay. I knew they would kill Jeffrey Epstein for that is what they do when they can’t take you to trial.

I had no restitution because the bank had to plead guilty and repay my clients – not me!

What people do not realize is that the ONLY reason they released me was because I got into the Supreme Court back in 2007. They released me and told the Supreme Court the case was moot because I was no longer in contempt.

After finding out that 20 years later and 10 years after the company was shut down, the Receiver still had millions of dollars he was siphoning off fees year after year to make sure he grabbed every penny. Everything he had been ordered to return he simply refused and was paying $5,000 in storage fees per month for 20 years. I filed an appeal trying to get my stuff back and of course the New York court always rules in favor of just the government as the Washington Post and CNN always write against Trump. What they count on is that it costs more than a quarter million just to appeal to the supreme court and out of thousands of petitions, they take about 100 a year. Since I got in the first time, they viewed the odds of the same case getting into the Supreme Court again was maybe one in billion.

Well, the Supreme Court has ruled that the government had to respond by December 2nd. They asked for an extension, and were granted until January 2nd. In my case, there are three main lines of cases the Supreme Court has already ruled are unconstitutional yet the New York courts just ignored the Supreme Court. The New York Court has simply refused to follow the Supreme Court despite the fact one came out even 6 months before my case. On top of that, there was never any statutory authority for a receiver. The SEC asked for that authority and was granted it only in 2010. The obvious question becomes, just how far will the Supreme Court go. There was NEVER any authority to have acted as they did.

It is now up to the Supreme Court to decide. I suspect the bare minimum is they will finally have to return everything they were supposed to do 20 years ago. If the Supreme Court goes fully ahead and orders oral argument, we may see a decision by March or June 30th, 202

Vaccines & Illegal Aliens Causing a Health Crisis?


COMMENT #1: I am about your age. 35 years ago my niece died 10 days after receiving the MMR vaccine at 18 months old. 2 years prior her sister nearly died 10 days after receiving the MMR vaccine, still with a disability. I asked many Doctors was it the vaccine they all said no. I found a Doctor in New Jersey and paid for a consultation and he said, of course, it was the vaccine, but he would not put in writing. My children never received the MMR vaccine and they both had measles. The Documentary Vaxxed documented the CDC Scientist, Williams Thompson covered up the risk to the MMR vaccine. Keep talking about this important subject.

Thank you.

GW

COMMENT #2: Hi Marty
The vaccine issue is complex and multi-faceted. As an RN I concur that the pharmaceutical lobby has a powerful grip on most medical providers in terms of incentives and kickbacks which in itself is corrupt. Big Pharma spends a lot of money to sway Congress to adopt laws that benefit their industry. It always comes down to money.

The other aspect which plays into the mix is illegal immigration. These children are entering the US with NO VACCINE/HEALTH RECORDS…so we do not know their history or what diseases they have had or are immune to. They may be harboring previously eradicated illnesses that have not been seen in first world countries for decades and/or illnesses that are not native to the US.

The government is well aware of that risk, and their answer is to vaccinate ALL CHILDREN. The vaccine issue and the illegal immigration issue go hand in hand. Until one issue is solved the other issue will persist. Corruption is rampant and nobody wants to deal with it honestly.

Btw, I signed up for Socrates and may be moving to your neck of the woods in 2020. Trying to escape NYC which is another can of worms!

KO

COMMENT #3 (From Australia): Martin,

Years ago, when our older children were toddlers, my wife did a ton of vaccine research, and we discussed her findings. We decided that we would opt out of Pertussis or Send hooping Cough (since the risk of severe side effects was sufficient for the government to have set up a relief fund for children adversely affected by the vaccine) and opt for the dead Polio vaccine since the live Polio vaccine runs a “slight” risk of Polio infection.

We changed pediatricians when we broached the subject with her because she was so adamant against it. We have heard horror stories about doctors bringing Child Protective Services in against parents on medical matters where doctors’ “livelihoods” are at stake, so we decided to part ways before things got nasty.

Even at other pediatricians, we had to special order the dead Polio vaccine because all that was typically carried was the live vaccine. Nurses looked at us like we were from another planet (we were–the non-socialist one). Anyway, we stuck to our guns.

In 1994, there was an outbreak of Pertussis in our church. Many children (including our only two children at the time) and several adults got it. Pertussis is a nuisance, but not very dangerous except for infants and the elderly. The strange thing is that the outbreak began with a girl right after she was immunized, and the pastor’s daughter, who was “immunized”, also came down with it.

Later, we discovered that the live Polio vaccine had been discontinued in favor of the dead vaccine. Apparently enough other parents saw the “slight” risk of infection as unacceptable.

Our next two children had very mild cases of Pertussis at 4 and 2. When one of our other children turned four, we decided that we would rather not risk another case with her. When we asked our pediatrician (yet another one, for we had moved) about the vaccine, she got up, closed the door, turned, and asked us, “Why are you vaccinating this child against Pertussis?” She proceeded to tell us what we already knew from my wife’s research years before. We smiled and knew we had found the right pediatrician.

She became a missionary to Australians in the bush.

Keep up the good work, and if I don’t say so before then, Merry Christmas to you, your family, and your staff!

DB

P.S., when the Chicken Pox vaccine came out, a friend of mine had their daughter immunized. This child was developmentally normal in every way. That night she became largely unresponsive. She did eventually get some interaction back but is largely Autistic to this day. She lives in her own little world, although is occasionally extremely affectionate even toward strangers. She had to be watched constantly because she doesn’t understand the dangers of life. It is very sad.

COMMENT #4: I have a small business near DC and one of my repeat clients came in to buy something for the holidays. He is a no-nonsense guy from Montana. As we were talking, I asked him what he did for a living. He said he was a lawyer and when I asked which area he specialized in, he said “vaccine cases.” I was surprised having only heard in the press about the rebellious backward-thinking folks that are stupid enough to refuse vaccines.

His whole career, it turns out, is representing the terribly sad stories of children adversely affected by reactions to vaccines. We talked a while and he explained the immunity granted to the vaccine companies. He said “Congress is well aware there are serious problems with vaccines. That is why they set up a fund in the 1980s specifically to pay off vaccine lawsuits.” Yikes! Really?!

Seeing my interest, he added that his second-largest client base in recent years is representing those who have reactions to flu shots and the various levels of paralysis and persistent pain that folks experience from improperly administered flu shots. Many poorly trained folks at the neighborhood drugstore, supermarket, or wherever, give improperly administered flu shots that end up penetrating the bursa layer of the shoulder and the resulting pain, in the form of chronic bursitis, often lasts without relief for years. Some folks have nerve issues, some can’t raise or use their arm. The pain is often intense and never-ending.

I had no idea! He said a flue shot properly administered by a professional would not likely have issues, but after all the things he’s seen, he wasn’t a big believer that the strain of flu the flu shot protected you from was likely to be the one you’d come in contact with and catch anyway. As it is now, without them knowing a year ahead which strain to make the vaccine for, it is not worth the risk he said. They had so many flu shot cases in his office they referred to a new one as “another Walgreen’s case.” Just thought you might want to mention to your loyal readers- if they are getting a flu shot, to get it from an actual doctor or nurse.

Thank you for all of your amazing work, insights, and the knowledge you share.

CE

COMMENT #5: Martin, you are on the right track on vaccines. Perhaps one of your researchers could look into this. I think you will find it interesting. One thing about people is their different genetics and due to genetic differences, some are not able to detox as well as others. A doctor in Virginia found this applied to molds. Some people have a really hard time and are sick in moldy houses while others are not. He found the sick ones had differences in genes from those that were okay with mold. He concluded the sick ones were prevented by their genetic structure from detoxing the mold toxins.

How does this relate to vaccines? The ones affected may not be able to detox well due to genetics. While genetics can be tested for, nobody is doing it in relation to detoxing and vaccines (I am not in the field so maybe they are, I wouldn’t really know for sure.) In the 1990s, at least in Canada, the government and vaccine companies took the mercury out of children’s vaccines. It was done quietly with no announcements.

My belief on this is that they found out the mercury in the vaccines was actually responsible for the increased autism in children and maybe other illnesses as well. The reason? Some children can detox the mercury and others can’t, and when they can’t it builds up and causes all kinds of problems including autism symptoms or maybe even autism itself.

Again, I am just a layperson and can’t prove any of this. But why did they take the mercury out for children’s vaccines? They were giving so many vaccinations to children in the 1990s compared to before which is caused by a flurry of health problems in children. Why did they allow mercury in the vaccines in the first place? It is called thimerosal. Well, it is because they then can have multiple doses in one vial and it costs less to have multiple doses in one vial instead of one vial per dose.

Governments are approving all this. In Canada, thimerosal is still in the flu vaccine and governments are okay because it costs less and flu vaccines are paid for by the government. But one can still get the non-mercury flu vaccine through some doctors but it costs extra for the patient.

I personally have no problem with vaccines including those with mercury. I detox well. But some people including in my family don’t detox well. For the parents of children now, how can they find out if their children detox well before giving them the vaccines?

Is anyone really talking about this? I appreciate your blog and hope you can find some help in exploring this subject and blowing it wide open. You have the resources to do this, which I don’t have. I’d do it if I could. Children are being sacrificed unnecessarily. We have the medical technology to do the testing but it is not being done.

Will genetic testing and screening help? I can’t prove it but there is enough information and work done to suggest it should be investigated.

WC

REPLY: This vaccine crisis is worldwide. Most vaccines carry a risk where you can contract the very disease that the vaccine seeks to prevent, albeit this happens in a small percentage of cases. But there are numerous cases on a worldwide basis. There should be more studies, for even in economics and physics there is the superposition principle where two cyclical waves exactly opposite of each other can cancel each other out. However, when two waves in the same direction join, that is when you get the rogue wave. These are basic principles in physics that apply to disease as well.

Any medicine often has instructions not to mix with other medicines. That seems to be missing from vaccines. Their 100% immunity from legal action is WRONG for it prevents them from finding out the solution.

Those who try to paint parents who do not trust vaccines as crazy people will usually point to the medical, pharmaceutical establishments, and mainstream media, are all in unison in their message that there are no real dangers with vaccines. We all know that the press can be bought and the pharmaceutical industry would not need absolute immunity if there was nothing to worry about. As for the medical industry, there are doctors who speak out behind the curtain and will warn you that the pharmaceutical industry is so powerful they can shut you down and even remove licenses. We all know how honest the bankers are and how banks that blew up the entire world economy 2007-2010 are also exempt from any prosecution.

I am well aware of the problem of allowing illegal aliens. Prosecutors are only interested in their careers. To prosecute someone, all other safeguards are eliminated. While in contempt of court, I contracted a parasite that went into my left eye. When I explained it to the doctor, she said I was wrong and didn’t know what I was talking about. Such things, she said, only existed in South America. Well, the vision in my left eye to this day is damaged. I was denied all medical attention by the government. When I got out, I saw a specialist in imported diseases. He just looked at my blood work and said you have a parasite. It took maybe three minutes. Allowing people from South America to come in has been importing diseases that were eradicated here decades ago.

There has to be some middle ground. The number of people writing in with horror stories is really mind-blowing. The doctors do not want to put it in writing because they are afraid of getting sued. This vaccine conspiracy is the same as global warming. They try to demonize anyone who opposes them.

The Democrats have demonized Trump as a racist over these illegal aliens. To cover up the crises of importing diseases, they then mandated vaccines. Once again, this comes back to politicians opposing Trump, and hiding the risk of importing diseases as a result.

I strongly suggest that everyone write to Trump. The reason the establishment hates Trump is that he cannot be bought. That is where to begin. It could become a campaign issue in 2020 if enough people write to the White House.