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

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

Former AG Holder: Americans Should Prepare For An “Ideologically Driven” Supreme Court Not Tethered To Precedent

$upport via Cash App

Former AG Holder on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports show(05/12/22)

Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appeared on MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell Reports show (05/12/22) to discuss his new book “Our Unfinished March”. During his interview, he was asked about the controversy caused by the leaked draft Supreme Court majority opinion dealing with abortion, to which he gave a very interesting response. He said while the leak itself was a serious issue, the bigger problem Americans need prepare themselves for, is an “ideologically driven” Supreme Court, that will have little regard to precedent–an issue Democrats need to focus on as we approach the midterm elections.

Former AG Holder(video at 0:35):“I think the leak is unprecedented both in its breadth, its scope, and its completeness. We’ve heard rumors before about where the court is going to go, how the justices perhaps were aligned, but never actually seen a draft opinion, and that’s serious. That’s something that needs to be addressed. But what we really need to focus on is what’s contained in that leaked opinion, and where the court appears to be lining up. Looks like they are going to overturn Roe v Wade, inconsistent with the notion that you adhere to precedent that people have relied on over the course of the last 50 years. It’s an attack on the right to privacy, and so the question has to be asked, is it only going to be abortion that is going to be at risk, or is same sex marriage going to be at risk? The regulation of contraception, is that going to be at risk? Even interacial marriage. All of these things are based on the right to privacy, which this opinion in its form as we saw it, really goes after that right to privacy.”

Holder added that people need to get prepared for an “ideologically driven” Supreme Court, that is “not going to adhere to the extent that they should, to precedent.” This is of course very troubling given the weighty issues the high court is getting ready to deal with–affirmative action, gun cases, voting rights, etc. Democrats can capitalize on this Supreme Court issue, but only if they present it in AG Holder’s terms–an untethered high court that threatens many of the legal precedents we have come to rely on. This approach will likely drive more people to the polls this Fall, as opposed to only presenting it as an abortion/reproductive rights issue.

Bottom line folks, Dems sucking at messaging is nothing new. “Leakgate” presents them with an opportunity to drive Dem voters afraid of an untethered Supreme Court, to the polls in record numbers, and bucking the midterm election trend which typically favors the party out of power(GOP). Hopefully Dems will get their Supreme Court messaging right this time around by railing against the MAGA Supreme Court as an affront to all the legal precedents we have come to rely on for decades.

It’s also worth noting that former AG Holder, a self-described “institutionalist”, said that after initially being opposed to a criminal prosecution of former President Trump, he now believes, given the revelations about his efforts to overturn the 2020 election results, that he needs to be held accountable. Surely, current AG Garland has to take this seriously, coming from a former prosecutor, who recently held his position.

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