Tag: fbi

Posted on

Rep Liz Cheney Discusses Primary Loss, Future Plans On ABC’s This Week Show

$upport via Cash App

Rep Liz Cheney(R-WY) sat down for an interview with ABC’s Jonathan Karl, three days after her landslide primary loss to Trump-backed challenger Harriet Hageman, to discuss her future political plans. The interview aired on ABC’s This Week show (08/21/22) and as many expected, Cheney’s lopsided loss was in no way shape or form, an end to her political career, but rather, a beginning of a new political chapter.

Rep Cheney said this moments after her loss to Hagenan on 08/16/22: “We must be very clear-eyed about the threat we face, and about what is required to defeat it. I have said since January 6th, that I will do whatever it takes to ensure Donald Trump is never again anywhere near the Oval Office, and I mean that.”

Asked whether she regretted the fact that her staunch opposition to former President Trump had cost her a leadership position in the House and eventually her seat, Rep Cheney responded (2:51): “No regrets. You know, I feel sad about where my party is, I feel sad about the way that too many of my colleagues have responded to what I think is a great moral test and challenge of our time, a great moment to determine whether or not people are going to stand up on behalf of the democracy, and on behalf of our republic.” Rep Cheney added that she has heard from several prominent leaders after her primary loss, thanking her for putting the country over her party. One such call, she said, came from President Biden.

Asked what Trump’s continuing grip on the GOP says about the party, Rep Cheney said the party, both at the state and national level, “is very sick.” She specifically said(4:11):“I think one, it says that people continue to believe the lie, they continue to believe what he’s saying, which is very dangerous. I think it also tells you that large portions of our party, including the leadership of our party, both at the state level in Wyoming, as well as on a national level with RNC, is very sick, and that we really have got to decide whether or not we are going to be a party based on substance and policy, or whether we are going to remain as so many of our party are today, in the grips of a dangerous former president.”

Asked about the argument by former President Trump and others, that her landslide primary loss is proof that the principles she is fighting for are not shared by the GOP, Rep Cheney responded (5:03): “Well, doesn’t that tell you something? What I’m fighting for is the Constitution. What I’m fighting for is the perpetuation of the republic, what I’m fighting for is the fact that elections have to matter, and that when the election is over and the courts have ruled, and the electoral college has met, that the president of the United States has to respect the results of the election, and if Donald Trump’s spokesman says that those are principles that are inconsistent with Donald Trump’s views, and inconsistent with the Republican Party’s views, I think that ought to give every American pause about who Donald Trump is, and about what the Republican Party stands for today.”

Asked about what her new political organization is going to focus on, Rep Cheney said one of her primary objectives will be to campaign against “election deniers”.

Asked about her views on House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, and specifically, whether he should become Speaker if the GOP takes over the House, Rep Cheney said (6:22): “My views about Kevin McCarthy are very clear. The Speaker of the House is the second in line for the presidency. It requires somebody who understands and recognizes their duty, their oath, their obligation, and he’s been completely unfaithful to the constitution, and demonstrated a total lack of understanding of the significance and importance of the role of Speaker, so I don’t believe he should be Speaker of the House, and I think that’s been very clear.”

Asked whether she would support Trump’s acolytes like Senator Ted Cruz(R-TX) or Josh Hawley(R-MO) if one of them secured the GOP presidential nomination in 2024, Rep Cheney responded (9:50): “It would be very difficult when you look at somebody like Josh Hawley, or somebody like Ted Cruz, both of whom know better, both of whom know exactly what the role of Congress is in terms of our constitutional obligations with respect to presidential elections, and yet both of whom took steps that fundamentally threatened the constitutional order and structure in the aftermath of the last election, so in my view, they both have made themselves unfit for future office.”

Asked about Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who many view as the number two contender for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination after Trump, Rep Cheney said(10:28): “DeSantis is somebody who is right now campaigning for election deniers, and I think that is something that people have to have real pause about. Either you fundamentally believe in and will support our constitutional structure, or you don’t.”

Asked whether if she runs for president in 2024, it will be out of a genuine desire to win, or simply sending a pro-democracy message, Rep Cheney responded in relevant part(10:59):“Any decision that I make about doing something that significant and that serious, would be with the intention of winning, and because I think I would be the best candidate.” She punted when asked whether running as an Independent remained an option for her saying(11:19), “I’m not going to go down that path anymore in terms of speculating.”

Bottom line folks, Rep Liz Cheney is not going anywhere. Her primary loss will free her from the bondage that is Trump’s GOP, and allow her to pursue loftier goals–the fight for democracy. She said one of her primary goals will be to defeat “election deniers”, which Yours Truly hopes includes one Senator Ted Cruz, who is up for reelection in 2024. We’re going to need you Liz, in the Lone Star state.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

Trump’s Attorney Christina Bobb Addresses Bombshell News Of Nuclear Documents At Maralago

$upport via Cash App

Former President Trump’s Attorney Christina Bobb appeared on Fox News’ Ingraham Angle (08/11/22) to address the bombshell revelation by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, that among the documents sought by the FBI at Trump’s Maralago residence, were classified documents related to our nuclear capabilities, which of course have serious national security implications.

Asked to confirm whether there were classified nuclear documents at Maralago, Christina Bobb said she didn’t think so, but wasn’t sure because she had not spoken to former President Trump about the issue–a strange answer indeed.

Host Ingraham(1:18): “Okay Christina, just so I’m clear about this, I want to be really clear. Is it your understanding that there were not documents related to our nuclear capabilities, or nuclear issues that had national security implications in the president’s possession when the agents showed up at Maralago?”

Christina Bobb:“That’s correct, I don’t believe they were…”

Ingraham: “Well, do you know for a fact? Do you know for a fact they weren’t? Have you spoken to the president about it?”

Bobb: “I have not specifically spoken to the president about what nuclear materials may or may not have been in there. I do not believe there were any in there. The legal team had done a very thorough search, and had turned over…everything that we found, that we had, so it’s my understanding on very good belief, based on a thorough investigation, that there was nothing there.”

Any reasonable person presented with Attorney Christina Bobb’s remarks on the Ingraham Angle show, would find it very strange that she went on the show to discuss the bombshell news of possible nuclear documents at Maralago without first discussing the matter with her client(Trump). That just doesn’t add up, and to her credit, host Laura Ingraham’s tone suggested that she wasn’t buying it either.

The interview then moved on to the other big topic as to whether the feds provided Trump’s attorneys with a copy of the items taken from Maralago, the so-called “inventory list”. This is important because another Trump attorney, Lindsey Halligan, had stated on Fox News’ Hannity show the day before, that the feds never provided the inventory list. Trump’s daughter-in-law, Lara, had also said on various TV shows that Trump’s attorneys told her, they were not shown the warrant during the FBI raid.

Asked about her on-scene interaction with the feds, Christina Bobb responded(8:17): “Well, initially, it started out a little heated. I was upset and they were not excited to see me, so we had a little bit of an incident initially, just me wanting access to the warrant. They didn’t believe they needed to even show me the warrant so we fought about that, not for very long, maybe a minute, not more than two, and I did have an opportunity to see it. They didn’t give it to me…”

So she clearly admits that she was shown the warrant(read it), something the other lawyer and Lara Trump say never happened. Also, crucially, the fact that she was shown the warrant means that she knows exactly what criminal statute is at play here.

Then this interesting exchange took place. Host Ingraham(9:13): “Did they give you the inventory list before they left, or while they were doing the raid that they don’t want to call a raid?”

Christina Bobb:“Yes…we do have the inventory list as you can expect, it’s not particularly helpful so, yes, I kind of have the inventory list, they gave me the official receipt…”

So Christina Bobb clearly admits that she was shown the warrant, which means she knows exactly what the applicable criminal statutes are, plus she admits to having a copy of the inventory list, something Lara Trump and the other attorney(Lindsey Halligan) maintain they were not given. Folks, a total mess.

Bottom line folks, there’s a lot of confusion coming from Team Trump regarding the Maralago raid. First they said they were not shown the warrant, which apparently they were, then they said they were not given the inventory list, which apparently they were, and now they are denying that the search had anything to do with nuclear-related documents, something that must have been very clear to Attorney Christina Bobb from the warrant she was shown. Is this a case of innocent incompetence, or willful lying to the public? Hmm, as Trump famously used to say, “We’ll see what happens.”

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

Trump’s Attorney Says FBI Never Provided Copy Of Search Warrant For Maralago Raid

$upport via Cash App

Former President Trump’s Attorney, Lindsey Halligan, appeared on Fox News’ Hannity show (08/10/22) to discuss the recent FBI raid of his Maralago residence in Palm Beach, Florida. Halligan, who called the FBI raid “an appalling display of abuse of power”, further accused the feds of using a sealed warrant for the express purpose of concealing what it is they were taking from Maralago, or the specific criminal statute(s) Trump is suspected to have violated.

Hannity (video at 0:56): “Did you ever get a chance to read the warrant. Did you ever get a copy of it, did you ever get any other information, do you know, are you aware of what they took out of Maralago?”

Lindsey Halligan: “That’s the thing, they had unfettered access to the property. They looked at God knows what in there, and did God knows what in there. We have no idea. What the FBI did was an appalling display of abuse of power. All documents requested were previously handed over. President Trump and his team painstakingly reviewed every single document at Maralago, and gave the government what they requested. If they needed any other documents they could have just asked. The warrant was secured under seal, so they tried to get away with concealing this overreach by obtaining a warrant under seal. Nobody knew about it, they knew that President Trump was in Bedminster, hasn’t been at Maralago for some time. They thought they could sneak in, snoop around without attorneys present in case they walked out with nothing so that nobody would know they snooped to this degree, and it’s unprecedented in United States history. The government seems to be out of control. It’s plagued with manipulation, corruption, greed, deceit and fraud.”

There’s no other way to interpret Attorney Halligan’s remarks on Hannity other than, (I’ll be happy to stand corrected of course) because the feds got the warrant under seal, neither Trump nor his attorneys, know what documents were taken from Maralago, or what criminal statute formed the basis for the search warrant. As a matter of fact, Halligan accuses the feds of seeking a sealed warrant for the express purpose of keeping Trump and his attorneys in the dark as to what was being taken from Maralago, or the criminal statute he is alleged to have violated, conduct she describes as “an appalling display of abuse of power.”

Bottom line folks, the FBI’s raid on Maralago has created a firestorm among conservatives, who have always characterized former President Trump as a victim of the “deep state”— a supposed bipartisan cabal of establishment elites (both elected and unelected) who are terrified he is out to shake up the status quo in Washington, and dislodge them from their entrenched positions of power.

The counter narrative proffered by liberals for the FBI raid, has been that Trump and his attorneys know exactly what was taken from Maralago because he had to have been given a copy of exactly what the feds took from his residence–the so-called “inventory list”.

Where, as here, Trump’s attorney claims she has no idea what was removed from his residence, or the criminal statute he is suspected of having violated, reasonable people will agree that given the fact that the subject of the raid is the immediate former President of the United States, some kind of explanation of the raid by the Department of Justice, is in order.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

FBI Forwaded Tip Line Complaints About Kavanaugh To White House Counsel Without Investigation

$upport via Cash App

FBI Director Christopher Wray appeared for a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on 08/04/22. One of the most interesting moments in the hearing, especially for Supreme Court enthusiasts like Yours Truly, came during the questioning by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse(D-RI). Senator Whitehouse’s questions focused on the supplemental background investigation (B.I.), the FBI conducted on then Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, a topic that has been the subject of much speculation on social media.

Senator Whitehouse has been in a battle with FBI Director Wray since 2019, trying to get to the bottom of whether the FBI thoroughly investigated the numerous tips it received from the public regarding then Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

This intro by Senator Whitehouse is important for establishing the context for the ensuing questioning: “As you know, we are now entering the fourth year of a frustrating saga that began with an August 2019 letter from me and Senator Coons, regarding the Kavanaugh supplemental background investigation, and I’d like to try to get that matter wrapped up.”

Senator Whitehouse(video at 0:23): “First, is it true that after [Justice] Kavanaugh-related tips were separated from the regular tip line traffic, they were forwarded to White House counsel without investigation?”

Director Wray(0:47): “When it comes to the tip line, we wanted to make sure that the White House had all the information we have, so when the hundreds of calls started coming in, we gathered those up, reviewed them, and provided them to the White House.”

At that point Senator Whitehouse interjected, “Without investigation”, to which Director Wray responded, “We reviewed them and then provided them to the White House.”

Sen. Whitehouse:“You reviewed them for the purposes of separating them from the tip line traffic, but did not further investigate the ones that related to Kavanaugh, correct?”

Director Wray:“Correct.”

Senator Whitehouse: “Is it also true that in that supplemental B.I., the FBI took directions from the White House as to whom the FBI would question, and even what questions the FBI could ask?”

Director Wray:“It is true that consistent with the longstanding process that we have had going all the way back to at least the Bush administration, the Obama administration, the Trump administration, and continue to follow currently under the Biden administration, that in a limited supplemental B.I., we take direction from the requesting entity which in this case, was the White House, as to what follow up they want. That’s the direction we followed, that’s the direction we’ve consistently followed throughout the decades, frankly.”

Director Wray went on to add, “It is true as to the ‘who’, I’m not sure as I sit here, whether it’s also true as to the ‘what questions’, but it is true as to the ‘who’ we interviewed.” In other words Director Wray agreed that in a supplemental B.I., it is true that the White House tells the FBI who to question, he’s just not sure yet, whether the White House also tells the FBI what questions to ask the people they question.

Senator Whitehouse:“By the way, is it true that even today we have not been provided by the FBI, it’s written tip line procedures?”

Director Wray: “Senator, I know that we have provided a lot of information to the committee and to you. I would have to check on that specific item. I know there is some information that you have requested that is not our call to provide, that has to do with interaction, communication with the White House.”

There’s no other way to interpret Director Wray’s responses to Senator Whitehouse’s questions other than (I’ll be happy to stand corrected of course), during the highly contentious Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, the complaints the FBI received through its tip line regarding Kavanaugh, were not investigated by the FBI, but instead, forwarded to the White House Counsel. The White House Counsel then told the FBI who among the complainants, the FBI was to question, and possibly, even what questions to ask them.

Folks, no reasonable person presented with this information can ever conclude that the supplemental background investigation into Kavanaugh was “thorough”, as had been portrayed by Senate Republicans during his confirmation hearings. Director Wray argues that this is the same supplemental B.I. process the FBI has used for decades, but as we all know, none of Kavanaugh’s predecessors faced as many serious complaints about their character, requiring a thorough independent investigation. So, while Director Wray raises a valid point regarding consistent FBI practice, reasonable people will agree that Kavanaugh’s case was markedly different, and called for a thorough investigation by the FBI.

Bottom line folks, we’ll wait for Senator Whitehouse’s final report on this issue. As he indicated to Director Wray, he’ll give the FBI one more month to comply with his information requests, after which he will produce a final report on the Kavanaugh supplemental B.I. saga. One only hopes that if Senator Whitehouse’s investigation reveals that there were serious credible allegations against Kavanaugh that went uninvestigated, then an independent investigation will be launched into them immediately.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

Glenn Greenwald Says FBI Is Manufacturing Domestic Terrorism Cases

$upport via Cash App

Glenn Greenwald on Fox News’ Ingraham Angle (07/27/22)

Independent journalist and whistleblower Glenn Greenwald appeared on Fox News’ Ingraham Angle (07/27/22) to discuss the recent bombshell whistleblower revelation that the FBI is essentially manufacturing domestic terrorism cases to justify the Biden administration’s push to go after White Supremacists and other domestic violent extremists(DVEs) after the January 6th insurrection. 

Greenwald went even further than that, saying the practice of manufacturing domestic terrorism cases has been going on, even with the original war on terrorism that was launched after the 9/11 attacks–something Yours Truly has constantly screamed about, to your rolling eyes of course. 

This intro by host Ingraham is important in establishing the context for Greenwald’s interview (video at 0:34): “The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee[Rep Jim Jordan(OH)]told Fox Digital that new whistleblower documents allege that the FBI is pressuring[agents]to reclassify cases as domestic violent extremism, that are not examples of domestic violent extremism, and Jordan alleges that this is being done in order to justify the Biden administration’s push to focus on these cases and have a special unit focusing on them.” 

Asked by host Ingraham whether the FBI is making up domestic terrorism cases, Greenwald said (video at 1:13): “You know it’s not surprising…even though they now say January 6th is the reason they have to increase their attention to this problem, in fact, even before January 6th the Biden administration was saying one of its key priorities was to import the war on terror on to domestic soil and make that be a new war, only this time aimed at American citizens, and throughout 2021 there were so many instances where DHS issued one warning after the next…none of which materialized. You could see them exaggerating and inflating the threat the entire time because what they want to do is usher in all sorts of authoritarian attacks on civil liberties in the name of this domestic war on terror, and since they don’t have the cases, now they are just making them up, which is by the way what they did with the first war on terror as well.” 

Asked whether our intelligence agencies are abusing these tools to go after their political critics(something Putin and other autocrats are known for), Greenwald responded(video at 2:40): “You know we’ve obtained, and I’ve done reporting on the documents from Homeland Security where they identify the kind of people they regard as “domestic extremists”, and usually it’s just people with anti-establishment politics…people who are against the government, who question the legitimacy of government authority, even there are sometimes people on the left, say animal rights activists or environmental activists, and people on the right who are pro-life activists. It’s clearly aimed at any sort of exercise of free speech and free association and free political protesting that the constitution is supposed to guarantee, that they are going to say are just extremists and now should be regarded as terrorism.” 

Yours Truly has warned you about manufactured terrorism cases and importantly, how that is in itself, a threat to national security–to which you rolled your eyes of course. Here’s the point one more time, so that you finally get it. 

When these terrorism/ counterterrorism resources are abused by our Intel agencies to go after people they know, are not terrorists, and with seemingly zero pushback from Congress & MSM, sooner or later, the public loses confidence in our counterterrorism efforts/intel agencies.

Why is this a national security threat? It is a national security threat because when real domestic terrorism threats arise, like the one we have now with White Supremacists, and the intel agencies need more powers(statutes) and resources($$) to tackle the legitimate problem, the abuses end up ruining the reputations of such agencies so much, that the public(Congress) is unwilling to grant them the extra power and resources they need, even though everybody acknowledges the White Supremacy problem. In other words, the public knows there’s a legitimate White Supremacy/violent extremism problem, they just can’t trust the corrupt intel agencies with any more powers–therein lies the national security threat/problem—the understandable lack of faith. The same applies with the problems we recently saw with COVID vaccines–very skeptical public because of long-running and yet unaddressed questions (zero congressional hearings) about non-consensual human experimentation, primarily by the military industrial complex. 

Greenwald is somewhat of a polarizing figure so naturally, there will be efforts by his former liberal allies in the mainstream media to dismiss his manufactured terrorism charge. It is important to point out however, that other very respectable figures have long raised concerns about this very issue, chief among them former FBI Special Agent Mike German, currently a Fellow at the Brennan Center. This video, on how our intelligence agencies, and the FBI in particular, have become the biggest threats to democracy, is a must watch, and largely validates what Greenwald said on Ingraham’s show.

Bottom line folks, a wise man once said, “Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Ever since 9/11, we’ve given our intelligence agencies absolute power to prosecute the war on terrorism. There was a reasonable expectation from the public, that Congress and MSM, would act as checks to this absolute power, something we now know was a total fantasy. This absolute power has corrupted our intel agencies so absolutely, that now when they come begging for more tools to combat the legitimate threat of White Supremacy/domestic extremism, nobody wants to “extend them the extra line of credit.” This is just the latest example as to why strict oversight in instances where government agencies are granted immense powers over people’s lives, is not just good for the public’s interest, but also for the said agencies. 

Also, it cannot be left unsaid that even though the media and some in Congress are just now beginning to speak out about the abuse of our counterterrorism resources, they are yet to start addressing the equally important topic as to what is actually done to the said innocent manufactured terrorists–the so-called targeted individuals. Let’s just say, when that is finally exposed, hopefully soon, many will quibble with the notion that we are “the land of the free”.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

The Best Definition Of A Targeted Individual aka TI

$upport via Cash App

In the growing national debate about Havana Syndrome/directed energy weapons(DEW), you are increasingly hearing complaints of similar attacks from regular civilians (not govt employees)—the so-called targeted individuals(TIs)

The problem is that there are so many batshit stories on the internet re targeted individuals, most of them purposefully posted by the perpetrators, to make the average observer dismiss genuine TIs as fringe conspiracy theorists. It is therefore quite important that Yours Truly, a gentleman and a scholar, set the record straight as to what I am referring to when I talk about TIs.

The best definition yet, of a targeted individual(imho), is this one by Thomas Marshall, delivered more than a decade ago. It captures all the essential elements—Intel agencies, counterinsurgency/counterterrorism, and the crucial fact that the targets are almost always innocent dissidents, persecuted for their speech/activism—political, whistleblower, etc. Basically, people the government sets out to destroy/kill because they engage in speech/activism the government doesn’t want/like.

Below is an excerpt from Thomas Marshall’s presentation titled “The Theory of Electronic Harassment and Organized Gang Stalking”: “The U.S. intelligence agencies, in conjunction with DARPA, Stanford Research Institute Los Alamos National Laboratory, and companies like Raytheon and Lockheed, have set up a counterinsurgency war that is taking place on a worldwide basis, aimed at potential enemies such as political activists and whistleblowers. These targets are generally people with a very high IQ, who are capable of influencing the people around them, as well as having a history of political activism.” 

“This counterinsurgency war that is being waged against these individuals, is portrayed as a type of a stalking game, the most dangerous game, perhaps called “watch him run”, or some such game that is taking place on the internet, so that people can observe the targets using DARPA-created tracking technology, GPS technology and RFID, that follows the target everywhere they go, in their home, their car, their place of work, or even in cross-continental travel, anywhere on the surface of the earth. There is nowhere that targets can escape this game–the stalking game.” 

“These people who are being tormented, have been portrayed as criminals, however the opposite is the case. The targets of torture and intimidation and destruction, are the good guys. This tracking game relies on attacks using microwave weapons, as well as organized stalking, to make the life of the target a living hell, to where they eventually succumb physically and die from the effects of non-ionizing radiation, or due to the extensive, and never-ending torture, they are forced to commit suicide.” 

“The target experiences physical attacks on their body. Microwave weapons are placed in close proximity to where they live and where they work, and are even placed in their cars, if necessary. These miniaturized electronic devices, in essence, antennas, are capable of tracking and attacking the target with microwave frequency that can deliver shocks, stabs, or sub-dermal burns to their physical bodies in a continuous manner, or perhaps every few minutes. Their body experiences internal heating and burns, sleep disruption, sleep deprivation, as a primary tactic to slowly break them down. These types of physical attacks are complimented with attacks on the mind of the subject. Dr Jose Delgado perfected the use of a brain-to-computer-to-brain feedback loop, so that he was able to give a continuous stimulus and response time signal to his patients. This is exactly what is used to attack the target…”


For the record, any time you hear Yours Truly refer to targeted individuals, always know that I am referring to the Thomas Marshall theory. And folks, it is as real as a heart attack.

Bottom line folks, crimes against humanity like these, have zero place in “free”, “civilized” societies. Zero!!

For those of you out there (a MUST for TIs), interested in a REAL targeted individual case currently playing out in Houston, Texas, you can keep up with its latest developments via this link

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

Former Assistant AG Jeffrey Clark Discusses FBI Raid On His Home On Tucker Carlson Show

$upport via Cash App

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney General Jeffrey Clark, who’s currently a Senior Fellow at the Center For Renewing America, appeared on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson show(06/23/22) to discuss the FBI’s predawn raid on his home, which presumably, is related to his role in the fake electors scheme that was meant to thwart the certification of President Biden’s electoral college win.

Clark did not directly address the fake elector scheme during his interview on Tucker Carlson show and instead, attacked the time and manner of the FBI raid, which he shockingly referred to as “Stasi-like”. Stasi is of course the term that was used to refer to Adolf Hitler’s ruthless Ministry of State Security. He also characterized the raid as part of a coordinated nationwide political attack on him and other backers of former President Trump.

Clark told host Tucker Carlson(video at 1:38):“Yeah, I think this is highly politicized and it’s also part, Tucker, if you didn’t know it, of a nationwide effort yesterday. There were multiple states where multiple people were roughly simultaneously raided for their electronic devices, and that obviously requires a high level of coordination, and look, with the hearing[January 6th Committee]that was pointed at me, and targeting me today, with the special audience member of Sean Penn–so you know this is Hollywood– the very next day, you know, it looks highly coincidental. I just don’t believe in coincidences.”

There’s no other way to interpret Clark’s rambling and rather incoherent response other than, he is framing this as some sort of made-for-television political attack against him(the Senn Penn reference). This displays a shocking level of tone-deafness on his part, given the volume of evidence adduced so far, regarding the fake elector scheme. Clark may not realize this, but many consider him very lucky to have gone this far without any criminal prosecution for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. He is the last person who should be surprised about a search warrant being executed at their home, given the volume of evidence already out there regarding the fake elector scheme.

It also bears pointing out that at his testimony before the January 6th Committee, Clark responded to virtually every question by pleading the 5th(right against self-incrimination), which every reasonable person would agree, demonstrates at the very least, some consciousness of guilt on his part.

Interestingly, he never mentioned the fake elector scheme during his interview on the Tucker Carlson show. Most innocent people would use such venues to reiterate the fact that they did nothing wrong. Clark appeared only bothered by the fact that the FBI showed up at his house very early in the morning, before he could put on his favorite pants, and that they showed up with “electronic sniffing dogs”, which he claimed he has “never seen before, or heard of.”

Bottom line folks, reasonable people will agree that the January 6th Committee has provided enough evidence so far regarding Clark’s role in the fake elector scheme, to justify his criminal prosecution. As I stated earlier, Clark should consider himself lucky that he has not been criminally charged yet, and should be the last person surprised, or upset, by an FBI raid on his home.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@grassrootsdempolitics.com

Posted on

House Intel Hearing On Russia-Ukraine Provides Rare Oversight Of Our Intel Agencies

$upport via Cash App

Intel Chiefs from Left to right–Chris Wray(FBI), General Nakasone(NSA), Gina Haspel(former CIA Director), William Burns(CIA Director) and Lt. Gen Scott Berrier(DIA)

A House Intelligence Committee hearing on the Russia-Ukraine war provided a rare opportunity for members of Congress to conduct a backhanded oversight of our intelligence agencies. The hearing, which assembled all the alphabet agency chiefs(FBI, NSA, CIA & DIA) in one room(a very rare occurrence), afforded members of Congress a unique opportunity to raise other domestic issues of public concern regarding our intel agencies. Oversight of our intelligence agencies, as you may know, is an issue Congress has dragged its feet on, ever since the terrorist attacks in September 2001, so this was a breath of fresh air.

Rep Chris Stewart(R-UT) questioned FBI Director Wray about the controversial NSO Spyware Pegasus , which several media reports indicated last year, was being used by dictators worldwide, to illegally track/spy on political dissidents and even journalists. Rep Stewart wanted to know whether Pegasus was being used on U.S. persons for investigative purposes. Director Wray assured Rep Stewart that the FBI purchased Pegasus in 2019 only for “testing and evaluation purposes“, adding that it has never been used on any U.S. person for investigative purposes.

Rep Stewart then asked why the FBI would test a spying software if it didn’t intend to use it? Director Wray, acknowledging that this was a good question, maintained that Pegasus has never been used for investigative purposes on U.S. persons, and that FBI routinely tests products out there, that could be dangerous in the wrong hands.

Rep Joaquin Castro(D-TX) followed up on Rep Stewart’s questioning re Pegasus software. He wanted to know whether foreign governments have used Pegasus to target U.S. persons. Director Wray indicated that such a question would be better answered in a classified setting, so we are left hanging on that issue. Yay!!

Another interesting line of questioning came from Rep Elise Stefanik(R-NY) who brought up a very troubling case of an FBI counterterrorism informant, who was not only known to have violated the law multiple times, but whose Limo company led to the deaths of some 20 innocent New Yorkers, ruining the lives of their surviving family members. The crux of Rep Stefanik’s question, an excellent one that quite frankly isn’t asked often enough, was whether informants used in counterterrorism cases, are vetted to make sure they are not criminals. Director Wray assured Rep Stefanik that there are strict rules in place regarding the conduct of FBI informants, even when it comes to counterterrorism cases. This was a very important question because there is a widely held belief out there that in counterterrorism cases, “anything goes”, including the use of criminals/criminal gangs to go after/harass terrorism suspects–people who often times, have not been convicted of anything. A sad state of affairs indeed.

Bottom line folks, the hearing today showed just how important it is to have proper oversight of our intelligence agencies, something Yours Truly has been screaming about. There is absolutely no reason why questions about Pegasus spyware and other intelligence-related questions cannot be aired in a public forum like it happened today. Simply put, not every intelligence-related hearing has to be in a private setting. There are enough topics of public interest that can be safely discussed in public. Hopefully when U.S. Senators get their go-around with these intelligence chiefs, somebody will pop the $1 million question–the plight of targeted individuals in the U.S., which maybe, just maybe, may solve the Havana Syndrome mystery.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Posted on

OathKeepers Indictment Raises Serious Questions About Higher Up Involvement

$upport via Cash App

The bombshell seditious conspiracy indictment of 11 members of the militia group OathKeepers following their involvement in the January 6th insurrection, is raising serious questions as to how far up the law enforcement, military, and intelligence food chain, the conspiracy went. Specifically, given the level of tactical military sophistication they displayed on January 6th, there are valid questions as to whether Trump-allied senior members of U.S. law enforcement, military, and intelligence apparatus, gave material support, or even worse, are still members of this dangerous militia group that attempted to violently overthrow the government. A segment on CNN’s Outfront with Erin Burnett(01/13/22) delved into this very topic.

The full Outfront segment is available here, but the relevant clip is below.

Host Erin Burnett said in relevant part: “Prior planning, coordination, sedition, weapons. The 11 people charged today, were[in a]conspiracy, and they are not small fish, like many of the more than 700 people already charged, some of who may have been wrapped up in the moment. Not the case with these individuals. This group had a level of combat training, they were prepared to use force, they had a stash of weapons that they brought for that specific intent, and the question tonight is…now you’ve got a conspiracy, you’ve got planning, you’ve got it all laid out. How much higher does that go?”

Any reasonable person presented with the OathKeepers indictment would reasonably conclude, as host Erin Burnett did, that given the sophistication of their January 6th operation, people higher up in the law enforcement, military, intelligence and even political food chain, were providing material support to the OathKeepers. Providing material support to this dangerous militia group would also necessarily imply that they are members of the group–a scary thought indeed.

CNN’s Sara Sidner followed up with an in depth look at OathKeepers leader Stewart Rhodes in an appearance on New Day (01/14/22), where she dropped a bombshell that further bolsters the troubling prospect that the OathKeepers may have enjoyed material support from insiders within our law enforcement, military and intelligence ranks.

Sara Sidner said: “One of the things the OathKeepers do, is they try and recruit either current or former military, current or former members of law enforcement, current or former people who have been part of the intelligence apparatus in the United States, whether it be the FBI , CIA, anybody that they can get and bring into the organization, and when you think about that, it means that they have tactical training to do something like this[January 6th], and to plan something like this.”

This raises serious questions including but not limited to, what kind of arms and illegally acquired intelligence the OathKeepers currently have, whether in light of this indictment, it’s still okay to have active members of our law enforcement, military, and intelligence apparatus being active members of this violent militia group, etc.

Bottom line folks, Erin Burnett’s question as to how high up this conspiracy goes, is a very serious one, that needs to be seriously addressed by Congress, especially the January 6th Committee, and the mainstream media. For the record, this question has been raised before by concerned members of the public, including Yours Truly, but always treated as one requiring a voluntary answer from our law enforcement, military and intelligence brass. Given the seriousness of this OathKeepers indictment, this question should no longer be one that requires a voluntary answer. The mainstream media and Congress, preferably the January 6th Committee, must demand an answer from leaders in our law enforcement, military and intelligence agencies, as to how much the OathKeepers have infiltrated their ranks. This is a serious national security problem, and it should be treated as such. A major part of the January 6th Committee’s mission is to prevent another January 6th-type insurrection. Reasonable people will agree that rooting out extremism within our law enforcement, military, and intelligence ranks will go a long way in fulfilling that mission.

Specific emphasis should be placed on Trumper states like Texas, which has a heavy OathKeepers presence, and was involved all the way to the top(AG Paxton and other political leaders) in Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. What other nefarious activities are the OathKeepers enlisted for in such states? Did the Texas political establishment provide material support to the OathKeepers, for their January 6th operation?

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com

Posted on

Senator Shaheen Says Havana Syndrome Most Likely Caused By “Microwave Directed Energy Attacks”

$upport via Cash App

Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) appeared on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports (12/15/21), where she gave an update on the investigation into the causes/origins of Havana Syndrome. Senator Shaheen said Russia remains the chief suspect, adding that she agrees with the assessment of the National Academy of Sciences, that these are most likely “microwave directed energy attacks.”

Sen Shaheen said part of the defense authorization bill currently being debated in Congress, seeks to provide a coordinator who will look into Havana Syndrome cases across all federal agencies, and keep Congress apprised on any new findings.

Sen Shaheen told host Andrea Mitchell:“What we want is a coordinator, not just within the various agencies where they’ve had personnel attacked, but also someone who can coordinate the entire effort, and that’s part of the amendment that’s in the defense bill, as well as a regular reporting to Congress. We want to know exactly what’s going on so that we can respond. It’s very troubling that this happened years ago, five years ago, and we still don’t know who’s responsible, we don’t know exactly the cause of the attacks, and we’re not sure who’s doing it.”

Neither Senator Shaheen nor MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchel addressed the growing elephant-in-the-room question regarding directed energy attacks, and that is, growing complaints by regular civilians in the U.S.(not diplomats), who claim to be victims of directed energy attacks, leaving them with symptoms of Havana Syndrome–complaints similar to the one below. Will the designated Havana Syndrome coordinator also hear from such regular civilians and report back to Congress? Hmm

Bottom line folks, the U.S. constitution intended for members of Congress to function as representatives of their constituents. Where, as here, we have Congress totally ignoring cries from regular civilians(their constituents) of directed energy attacks, while at the same time enacting a scheme to compensate and treat similarly afflicted government employees, one can only conclude that the era of representative government is long gone–a sad state of affairs indeed. At some point, hopefully soon, Congress will have to entertain Havana Syndrome complaints from regular civilians. Then, and only then, will the public have confidence in the government’s investigation into Havana Syndrome.

For those of you very happy with @Emolclause’s activism don’t shy away from the “tip jar” below on your way out. You may also Cash App

You may reach the author via email at administrator@grassrootsdempolitics.com or author@emolumentsclause.com