General George's Testimony Before Congress

 1.  I would like to revisit the concerns pertaining to General George's recent departure as Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army.

Answer:  Please go ahead.

2.  Have you received any information that General George refused to deploy drones or explosive devices against you at others' directives?

Answer:  Multiple times, yes, although I must point out that I am not in a position to confirm the veracity of those claims.

3.  Have you received any allegations that General George declined to deploy various forms of violence against you, including kidnapping and sexual violence, at the directive of others?

Answer:  Yes, I have.

4.  And have those claims been substantiated?

Answer:  The only substantiation I have of those claims is the fact that I have been fairly aggressively stalked in hotel settings since General George's departure.

5.  Does this mark a change in your experience lately, given that you have been traveling since March 27th?

Answer:  It does mark a notable change in my safety, yes.

6.  And have you received any allegations that General George declined to deploy Pxxxxxx Program personnel against you in an assassination order when others favored that aggression?

Answer:  I have.

7.  Do you feel markedly more endangered since General George left his position as Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army last week?

Answer:  Without question, I do.  I have a strong suspicion that General George was not caving in to those who support the gratuitous harm of honorable Americans for profit and entertainment.  

8.  You believe he disagreed with unethical harm toward the American people -- harm that stands separate and apart from mission and objectives.

Answer:  I do.

9.  Is it your hope and expectation that Congress will investigate this matter thoroughly?

Answer:  Yes, I would like to see that thorough illumination in closed sessions, allowing General George and other military personnel to speak freely to members of Congress about their experiences.

10.  Is there further information you would like to add?

Answer:  I think there are other deployments affecting my family members and myself that General George also opposed, and I hope the whole truth will be disclosed for the United States Congress as soon as possible.

My sons have reportedly been subjected to repeated sovereignty violations, so this represents an extremely serious area of concern.

As a nation, we need our military leaders to insist that military standards be upheld and preserved, even under great pressure to abandon them.  So, we need to recognize that, when our military leaders are being forced to retire or resign their commissions due to ethical concerns regarding departure from mission and objectives, the circumstances for our nation are extremely serious.

We need to establish a means by which our military leaders can fully document their objections to directives that diverge from their mission and objectives in an effort to discourage civilian leaders from exercising wrongful authority.

11.  Is history insistent on justice?

Answer:  We always need to be careful about who is writing our history.  If the facts have been documented in meaningful ways, then history is remarkably insistent on the truth.

When our leaders feel that they will be accountable to the truth of their conduct over the long reach of history, then the American people will be experiencing a higher standard of governance.

We need to do everything possible to ensure that we are supporting our military leadership in facilitating that documentation.

12.  Is there critical documentation that needs to transpire with regard to the ethical stance of General George in insisting that gratuitous harm not be perpetrated in this case?

Answer:  There is, without question.

13.  Are you specifically requesting that Congress illuminate the ethical concerns involved in General George's departure?

Answer:  I am, yes.  I think his departure signals a profound challenge to the sovereignty of military leadership within the United States, and I think the American people need to come to a clearer understanding of what has occurred.

14.  Is that possible to do without divulging protected information?

Answer:  Congress should have access to all information about this matter, and with regard to the public, yes, a much clearer comprehension of the pressures on our top military leadership can be achieved.

15.  Is there an alternative to closed session hearings regarding this matter in the U.S. Congress?

Answer:  No, I don't think so.  This issue is too important for half-measures or lassitude.  We need Congress to take the reins here and to wield them well.

16.  Will you please keep in close communication with us, given ongoing threats to your safety?

Answer:  Of course.

17.  Thank you for speaking with us this morning.

Answer:  You are most welcome.

Lane MacWilliams

Regarding General George

 1.  Quite a few military leaders have recently been forced to retire due to alleged conflicts with the Department of Defense, most recently Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army, General Randy George, who, by all accounts, demonstrated great fealty to the President's directives.  What are your perspectives about the loss of these experienced leaders from among our military ranks?

Answer:  The allegation was that General George attempted to defend the planned promotion of four officers to the rank of one-star generals, although there was an alleged attempt to obstruct their advancement due to race and gender.

2.  In fact, that obstruction did take place, didn't it?

Answer:  I would assume so.

3.  What does it say to you that qualified military personnel are being held back on the basis of race and gender at this time?

Answer:  It says to me that the FBI and the CIA are pulling rank over our military leadership, frankly.  Military officers and enlisted service members who are women or people of color, or both, are being overtly marginalized at this time, a change we can ultimately expect to see reflected in American society as a whole.

Those who are students of history will recognize that victimization follows marginalization, so the Department of Defense is now signaling that military or law enforcement personnel who are women or people of color will not be protected in the future.

Military leaders who stand for their own provenance over their ranks are continuing to be forced out, leading me to conclude that rules of military engagement are likely to be summarily and consistently violated by the FBI and CIA.  In other words, there will be no further rules of war, consistent military chain of command, or military justice that will be recognized as valid by the intelligence agencies.

4.  Is this conflict over promotions reflective of the only disagreement between General George and the Department of Defense?

Answer:  Almost certainly not.

I remain deeply concerned by the architecture of totalitarianism that may not be able, through reasoned and thoughtful engagement, to be deconstructed at any time in the future.

Alongside damage to our internal military governance, civilian structures of governance will be yet further decimated, to be certain.

5.  What are the risks for us?

Answer:  The risks include the vast diminishment of the level of human civilization -- not merely in our numbers, but in our determination to stand separate from barbarism, and our ability to rise above barbarism once it fully manifests.

6.  Do you see other warning signs?

Answer:  It is notable that, whatever one may think of their performance, two high-level female staff members have recently been forced out of their positions:  Attorney General Pam Bondi and Secretary Kristi Noem.

There are five other women in the President's Cabinet, but as women's human rights become more endangered within the United States, the FBI may dictate their removal as well.

7.  Secretary Hegseth's minister reportedly disapproves of women's right to vote.

Answer:  Duly noted.

8.  Is this an insignificant detail pertaining to governance within the United States currently?

Answer:  No.  It represents radically regressive ideology that may well have dramatic effects on our nation as a whole.

9.  How would you characterize the FBI's misogyny?

Answer:  As murderous.  Fairly frequently, if my hair is not perfect or I haven't applied my makeup, the FBI will send a death threat to my phone:  "All dogs go to Heaven."  In other words, if you're a woman, any worth you might have from the FBI's perspective depends on your attractiveness on any given day.  Of course, if a woman is too attractive, she might be murdered on the basis of her appearance as well.  So, the FBI regularly signals a mindset that involves the stalking and killing of women for entertainment, at least in the context of threats sent to me.

10.  Do you think General George would have approved of that mindset?

Answer:  I do not.  I think General George likely demonstrated superior character and integrity throughout his long career, and I think he would have made that clear.  Beyond that, I think his expectations for the conduct of his troops manifested meaningful standards for ethical conduct in every way possible.  That personal and professional honor may have made the FBI uncomfortable.

11.  What would you do if you were a member of the United States Congress at this point?

Answer:  I would be interested in hearing from every high-level military leader who has been forced to retire or resign over the last year.  I would want Congress as a whole to be asking difficult questions in closed sessions with these individuals so that I could gain a clear picture of what has occurred here.

I think we need to understand that when our military leaders are holding the line in matters of ethics and integrity, we need to be supporting their ongoing service to the nation.

If the FBI is even partially involved in dictating the removal of certain military leaders -- and I do believe this is a concern, given alleged communications between military intelligence and the FBI -- then we need to halt that overreach.

12.  Should certain military leaders be reinstated?

Answer:  Congress has a critical role to play in insisting that our military leaders have the freedom and authority to uphold ethical standards and military codes of conduct without losing their commissions.  The Congress as a whole needs to determine how they will support the military leadership in this regard, but I do think they need to consider meaningful steps that will guarantee that our military leaders can safely raise objections to misconduct, overreach, or gratuitous harm.

We are depending on our military to exercise restraint when restraint is possible.  That means we need to give them the standing to do so.

Without this, our whole society will suffer declines from which our long term recovery is deeply imperiled.

13.  Your father served in the U.S. Army, did he not?

Answer:  Yes, he did.  And I think he felt that the military reinforced his sense of innate discipline and integrity throughout his illustrious scientific career.

14.  Does it surprise you that our military leaders may be holding the line when it comes to critical matters being discussed behind the scenes?

Answer:  Not at all.  But again, we need to ensure that our elected officials defend them in turn.

15.  Today is Easter Sunday.  Do you have any words for us on this occasion?

Answer:  Happy Easter for all those who are celebrating.  We draw hope from the knowledge that, despite great travails, we can find sustenance and renewal in benevolence, generosity, compassion and abundant good faith with one another.

16.  Thank you for speaking with us this evening.

Answer:  You are most welcome.

Lane MacWilliams

Emails Sent to the OIG Hotline on April 4, April 5, and April 6, 2026

 OIG Hotline, please see the following emails sent to your attention on the following dates.  Please note that this list will be updated.

April 4, 2026:

• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Update, April 4, 2026, 9:48 PM Central time, sent at 9:50 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Update, sent at 4:36 PM and 7:08 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Boys, please respond as soon as you can, sent at 1:36 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Battling False Information, sent at 1:32 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Update Regarding April 3 and April 4, 2026, sent at 12:15 PM Central time.

April 5, 2026:

• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: von Herzen/MacWilliams Cape Cod Property, Conditionally Confidential, sent at 10:56 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Boys, please respond as soon as you can, sent at 8:36 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Regarding General George, sent at 8:13 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Battling False Information, sent at 6:39 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: EV Charging Stop, Conditionally Confidential, sent at 11:21 AM Central time.

April 6, 2026:

• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Battling False Information, sent at 12:17 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: A Reflection on What Lasts, sent at 12:11 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: General George's Testimony Before Congress, sent at 7:57 AM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Front Desk Assistance, sent at 12:08 AM Central time.

What the Constitution Left Out

Our Constitution represents a brilliant delineation of our civil liberties as Americans.  Regarded the world over as a model of a people's foundational rights, it is viewed by many as divinely inspired.  

Our rights to free speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom from unlawful search and seizure, freedom of religion, separation of Church and State, in addition to our rights to privacy, our rights to own private property, and, indeed, many other fundamental liberties we hold as necessary for the congress of our worthy nation, our close-knit communities, and our meaningful individual aspirations as proud citizens of the United States, are guaranteed within the Constitutional articles and amendments upon which we all rely.

The founders were balancing myriad concerns in 1787, when the Constitution was composed, including the balance between state and federal governance, the rights of slaves and the critical question of their future, the place of women in the workings of the nation, the methods by which the co-equal callings of the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government could check one another when necessary, and much more.

So, we can forgive them for what they left out.  The task of identifying what is missing from the Constitution now falls to us to determine, with wisdom, courage, and clarity of purpose.

And good people, it is this:

Our rights are of inestimable worth to the future of our people and the sovereignty of our nation.

But they will all go away if we do not formalize the responsibilities on which they rely.

In addition to upholding our human rights, we must fully comprehend the requirement that we stand as much better stewards of the environment of the Earth.

Without our understanding that our freedoms depend on our responsibilities to steward the environment, we will lose everything we set out to preserve.

Without breathable air, clean water, pristine land, and a thriving wilderness, we have no rights at all -- nothing to bequeath to our children and grandchildren, no legacy we would wish to claim.

And this is the unsayable thing.

We have overtaxed the environment to such astonishing degree that we are now risking the future of humanity, and all of our beloved freedoms alongside this future.

Because we have not yet understood the seriousness of the manner in which our rights and our responsibilities are inextricably bound to one another, we are seeing serious losses of environmental resources around the globe, alarming loss of diversity of wildlife, the extinction of whole species and ecosystems which developed over thousands of years.

Humanity is part of this narrative, not separate from it.

Human populations are so high at the current time that the global environment is facing stressors that are unsustainable.  And that climate crisis is happening now, not fifty years from now.

As a direct result, we are seeing broad movements toward totalitarianism worldwide.  With these changes, we will experience not only a broad decimation of our human rights.  Totalitarianism also brings other losses, more shocking, more historic, and more indelible.

Good people, as tragic as this territory is, it was foreseeable.  And, in fact, it was foreseen.

What messaging did we need that we didn't have?  We needed the military to be assigned a forward role in speaking to the American public, and indeed, to other nations, about goal-setting regarding climate markers, so that all of us could have engaged in assiduous efforts to change our way of life early and profoundly in defense of the environment as a whole.

Climate change will never be a politically easy topic for elected officials to address.  The oil companies are too powerful for meaningful transitions in energy consumption to be made without de-politicizing the issue through coordination with our military leaders.  Entrenched interests easily create enough uncertainty regarding climate science for the public to be distracted, polarized, and conflicted regarding critical requirements for change.

So, we needed our most respected Generals to stand before the public as early as possible in explaining that the Earth's environment doesn't care whether Americans are Democrats or Republicans.  It doesn't care about our race, our gender, our religion, or our personal orientation.  In making critical changes, it is our commitment to our families, our communities, our national security, and the world as a whole that matters, not the superficial differences that can serve to divide us.

Such a course of guidance from our military would not have represented an autocratic course, but rather one that assigned politically fraught but critical issues to those required to stand separate from the political sphere.

And this should have occurred beginning forty to fifty years ago.

In many ways, we required a companion document to the Constitution, one which formalized our responsibilities in reaching climate sustainability and in maintaining it indefinitely.

We still need this document to guide us in the future toward humanity's preservation, alongside the realization of our greatest potential.

Without it, we will not succeed.

At this moment, our task is to identify every possible inflection point regarding the environment's trajectory and to intervene in it with the highest quality of leadership, wisdom, commitment, courage, and integrity we can muster.

Part of that analysis involves identifying critical environmental inflection points that were missed over the past forty years.

Our current challenges are immense and immediate, but they are not insurmountable.

We need all of our talents, gifts, insights, knowledge, creativity, resourcefulness and acumen in establishing a better way forward that seeks to reclaim Americans' human rights in the long term, and that seeks to rescue our national sovereignty at the same time.

Those approaches will not be conventional, predictable or assured, just as any moonshot endeavor is not a humble or meager attempt to change the course of our reach into the future.

But they must now occupy our hearts and minds in forming our unified resolve to manifest them.

And we must ensure that we have all the resources necessary to bring them to fruition.

My case before the Supreme Court continues to gather those resources.  Let's ensure that they are preserved for this most urgent task.

Lane MacWilliams

Emails to the OIG Hotline on April 2 and April 3, 2026

 OIG Hotline, please see the following emails, sent to the attention of your Office on April 2 and April 3, 2026. Please note that this list will be updated throughout the day today:

April 2, 2026:

• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: VonHerzen Trust Doc, Additional Background, sent at 11:26 PM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Addendum to Health Update, April 2, 2026, Conditionally Confidential, sent at 11:01 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re:Alleged Tax Preparation Concern, sent at 9:05 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Property Showing This Evening, sent at 8:47 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Locked Storage Facility, sent at 6:21 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Battling False Information, sent at 6:06 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re:Request for Injunctive Relief Re: Alleged Plans for Increased Aggression from..., sent at 6:00 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re:Fwd: Confirmation of Our Trip Details, sent at 3:11 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re:April 2, 2026, 12:07 PM Pacific time, sent at 12:54 PM Central time.

April 3, 2026:

• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Boys, please respond as soon as you can, sent at 11:36 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Courteous Language, sent at 10:09 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Battling False Information, sent at 9:35 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Request for Protection from..., sent at 2:21 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: KPM Texts, Confidential, sent at 2:05 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Request for Injunctive Relief Re: Propagation of DOJ Cases Relating to Knowingly Falsified Law Enforcement Reporting, sent at 1:05 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: What the Constitution Left Out, sent at 12:48 PM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Addendum to Health Update, April 3, 2026, Conditionally Confidential, sent at 11:42 AM Central time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Real Estate Representation, sent at 12:23 AM Central time.

Request for Injunctive Relief Re: Alleged Plans for Increased Aggression from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche

1.  It has been suggested that the departure of Attorney General Pam Bondi was timed to coincide with an Executive Order prohibiting the release of investigative reports to you, as required by the Supreme Court.  Is this your understanding?

Answer:  Yes, it is.

2.  The FBI is also alleging that an Executive Order has been extended which specifically calls for your arrest on false charges.  Is that so?

Answer:  The agency appears to be making this claim.

3.  What about threats of sexual harassment, sexual assault, kidnapping and/or first degree murder that have also reportedly been authorized at the highest level?  Are those plans meant to apply to you?

Answer:  This is what the FBI appears to suggest, yes.  It is important for me to document that I have not received independent verification of any of the threats mentioned here.

4.  Have you received any settlements associated with your case?

Answer:  None.

5.  Have you received any assets associated with settlements awarded to you?

Answer:  None.

6.  Have you received any direct communication about awards extended to you in the adjudication of your case?

Answer:  None.

7.  Is it possible that there is an intention on the part of the FBI to use Executive Orders to take the lives of your entire family during a period in which there is an Acting Attorney General, previously the President's personal attorney, who has been provided with immunity from prosecution regarding illegal and unconstitutional acts relating to your case?

Answer:  Yes, this tactic is entirely possible.  This would represent a highly opportunistic plan, and this type of high level personnel change is often something the FBI and its affiliates aggressively exploit.

8.  Was Attorney General Pam Bondi holding the line regarding upholding the Supreme Court's determination that investigative reports should be released to you?

Answer:  I believe she was, yes.  She possessed immunity from prosecution in this matter, but she likely was unwilling to violate the Constitution by ignoring the Supreme Court ruling regarding the release of information.

9.  What about Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche?  Will he have any compunctions about violating the Constitution in the interests of wrongfully profiteering from your case, to the detriment of the American people?

Answer:  I think some people are concerned about their place in history, because they recognize that the truth of their conduct may rise into public view.  So over and above individual ethics and professional boundaries, the manner in which certain officials are shaping the history of the United States is now becoming one of urgent importance.

10.  Is the FBI, along with its affiliates, effectively advancing a Russian agenda in influencing governance within the United States at this time?

Answer:  It appears to be doing exactly this, much to our detriment.

11.  And do you believe that the FBI and its affiliates are directing the Executive Branch with regard to the timing of Executive Orders, high level personnel changes, etc.

Answer:  I do think the tail is wagging the dog in this period of time, yes.  We appear to have lost sovereignty within our elected government.  The FBI does not want to be held accountable to the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice, the American public, the United States Congress, or anyone else.  So, I expect that the agency is dictating the manner in which this case is currently being handled, including directing Executive Orders that appear to be originating with the President.

12.  If this is true, then we have a corruption problem in which FBI personnel are directly profiteering from their own crimes against you and your family.

Answer:  Yes.  That problem appears to be front and center right now.

13.  In the past, when the FBI has been caught in this level of corruption, they have resorted to heightened aggression, haven't they?

Answer:  There are many instances in which this has been the case, yes.  The FBI appears to believe that all of its problems can be solved by targeted assassinations toward the honorable public within the United States and elsewhere.

14.  What are the odds that Vladimir Putin and other foreign adversaries may be profiteering from the raiding of awards extended to you, and the U.S. National Treasury as a whole?

Answer:  One hundred percent, in my opinion.

15.  What is the appropriate response from the United States?

Answer:  I would suggest that the Supreme Court prevent any and all decisions from the DOJ pertaining to this case during the period of time in which an Acting Attorney General is standing in for a permanently appointed official in this critical role.  If it is possible to file a request for injunctive relief safeguarding my family members and myself while ensuring the preservation of awards in this case, that would be highly appropriate.  Recent physical harms, which I will delineate for the OIG Hotline in detail, should be reversed in their entirety.

Next, I would ask the United States Congress to prioritize confirmation of a candidate for Attorney General who will be bound by the requirements of the Constitution in defending the interests of national security, even when those determinations may oppose the Executive Branch.  

Further, I would request that the Executive Branch withdraw any and all Executive Orders that would violate the Supreme Court's rulings in this case, that would place my loved ones or myself in jeopardy in any context, that would support the proliferation of knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting within the United States or spurious investigative efforts within the Department of Justice, that would wrongfully place my records into the public sphere without my participation or consent, or that would wrongfully implicate my family members or myself of wrongdoing.

Outreach from an honorable intermediary needs now to occur, and I ask that this initiative be prioritized on an urgent basis.

16.  You see the departure of Attorney General Pam Bondi as an ominous sign that you and your family members could experience greatly heightened risks to your safety and security.

Answer:  Decidedly so.

17.  Thank you for speaking with us this afternoon.

Answer:  You are most welcome.

18.  Please keep in close communication with us, given the circumstances at hand.

Answer:  I will, of course.

Lane MacWilliams

April 2, 2026, 12:07 PM

 1.  Your sons are allegedly both being directed to perpetrate assassinations as part of the Pxxxxxx Program in the near future.  Is that the case?

Answer:  This is the allegation I have received, yes.

2.  Are these "assignments" intended to coerce your own actions in some manner?

Answer:  I have no doubt that there is a punitive component vis a vis my recent revelations about the apparent plans of the FBI and its affiliates.  And certainly, the FBI and its affiliates have desired to silence me in general.

But I think it's important to recognize that these agencies appear to have asked for silence at the same time that they have furthered plans to take the lives of my whole family.

This is a consistent pattern for the FBI.  The agency extends an apparent plea for confidentiality, even while plotting first-degree murder toward those who might comply.

3.  Having said that, you are not disclosing everything you know about the plans of the FBI and its affiliates.

Answer:  No, I'm not.  I am making ongoing assessments about what disclosures are in the best interests of the nation.  And if the FBI and its affiliates have forgotten their commitment to serve the United States, I have not.

4.  Your younger son has been allegedly forced to engage in drug trafficking at FBI directive, and your older son has been allegedly forced to engage in weapons trafficking at CIA directive, with the CIA acting as FBI contractor in this particular case.  What is the purpose of these activities?

Answer:  Basically, the FBI uses the activities the agency itself has directed for the purposes of blackmail and coercion.  Once the agency forces an individual to break the law in any context, FBI personnel make it clear that they can sacrifice that individual at any time by turning around and prosecuting them publicly.  The agency pleads "national security concerns" before a judge, while simultaneously explaining to their victims that it is elementary for the agency to have people killed in a prison setting.  And off the individual goes to jail for a long sentence.

5.  In this specific case, however, you are well informed about the agency's stratagems.  So doesn't that render them ineffective?

Answer:  Yes, if the FBI or its affiliates attempted to prosecute my sons, they would be wading into deep waters, given the crimes the agencies have already committed against my family members.  The FBI and its affiliates can threaten these steps, but I don't think they can actually take them.

The greater risk is out and out murder of my family members, and, obviously, I face the same threat myself.

6.  By the FBI?

Answer:  By the FBI and its affiliates, yes.  The agency has made clear to me that it has bribed certain elected and appointed officials repeatedly regarding this case.  So, the agency can further plans of first-degree murder by referring to legacy concerns for highly placed leaders.  And this was their objective from the beginning:  leverage and control.

7.  What should happen to the plans of the FBI and its affiliates regarding current "assignments" to your sons and perhaps even your daughter-in-law?

Answer:  They should be canceled immediately.

8.  And what about the apparent demands of the FBI that you hold silent at this point?

Answer:  Again, I need to point out that I am not disclosing everything I know about the FBI's conduct outside of its mission and objectives, or even its activities within the framework of its central approved tasks.

But complete silence is not possible due to allegations of ongoing attempts to harm my loved ones.

I am endeavoring to ensure that my voice reflects wisdom, courage, discernment, insight, and often restraint.

9.  What is your take on the FBI's attempt to duplicate and expand on AI-generated false reporting investigative efforts as a means of inflating the currency and enriching a handful of officials who would be regularly siphoning off funds derived from spurious judgements?

Answer:  This would represent an unforgivable distortion of the intent of my case, which is to defend the long term human rights of all Americans, not to render that defense impossible.

10.  Does Attorney General Pam Bondi have an important role to play in refusing to allow that approach?

Answer:  Yes, her role is critical.  She needs to be able to insist that knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting will not become further entrenched because of my case, but rather to ensure that the opposite will occur.

11.  You have been traveling over the last five days, so your time has been limited.  Will you now have the opportunity for more discussion about matters of importance regarding the country as a whole?

Answer:  I plan to make the time expand, because these issues are so critical to our shared future, yes.

12.  Thank you for speaking with us this afternoon.

Answer:  You are most welcome.

Lane MacWilliams