Who Controls the Past?

 1.  There is allegedly an Executive Order to the DOJ to destroy documents relating to your case.  Has that directive been completed as of this time?

Answer:  Not yet, no.  But the allegation is extremely concerning for the nation as a whole.  Who "owns" the documentation created by the U.S. Department of Justice?  The American people do.

And pertinent to this case and many other pressing concerns is whether the American people will retain access to our own history over time.

Will we be able to look back on this period in our history and understand the decisions that were being made on behalf of our people if our most critical documentation has been destroyed?

As George Orwell wrote in 1984, "Who controls the past controls the future."

We cannot allow our past to become falsified, because that loss would doom us to a likely future of disinformation as well.

2.  There is an interim Attorney General at this time.  Is that transition being utilized to achieve certain unlawful objectives?

Answer:  The danger is there.  And, I would observe, we now know that there have been fade deployments against the Executive Branch, so we cannot assume sovereignty within Executive Orders.  

How would we react if we knew that Russia, which has allegedly stolen vast sums from our National Treasury through this case, were ordering the U.S. DOJ to destroy its documentation proving those events?

No one should be rushing to erase proof of decisions of import and consequence for American sovereignty now or in the future.

3.  You have previously designated the Smithsonian Institution as a repository of documentation regarding your case.  Has there been an effort to transfer information relating to your case to the Smithsonian?

Answer:  I have made the point that the Smithsonian Institution needs to maintain an independent endowment in order to effectively preserve U.S. history.  A suppression of U.S. history by the opponents of Americans' long term human rights would have disastrous consequences for our understanding of the impediments to our most critical long term freedoms.

4.  How can we better understand the attempt to "curate" the past by those who stand against our freedom?

Answer:  We might consider the example of a baby being stolen from her parents at birth, and then having the kidnappers burn all evidence of the child's true origins.

Do we as Americans have the right to know where we came from?  Do we retain the right to reconciliation with the past?  Beyond omission and concealment, doesn't our history render our most remarkable future possible?

We all have a tremendous hunger for the truth, even the difficult truth, and as Americans, we have the courage to seek it out.

You asked earlier about the Smithsonian Institution, and I will say that I'm sure there will be an effort to preserve our history against the pressures of loss, politics, and time.

5.  Recently, information has come to light regarding fade deployments against U.S. leaders in the Congress and elsewhere.  Should the results of Congress' investigation into this matter be rendered public at some point?

Answer:  Without question.  American sovereignty can only be defended if this matter is investigated and fully characterized, with Americans' access to this information at the earliest possible time.

6.  Is it true that our own DoD has assisted in the dissemination of fades within the United States, but that it has done so under duress?

Answer:  That seems to be the case, yes.  But I think it's also necessary to point out that many of our military leaders have suffered from fade deployments as well.

7.  Do we have tests to measure retained sovereignty after fade deployments?

Answer:  Truthfully, I don't think traditional psychological and cognitive assessments are particularly reliable in this instance.  The critical steps involve fade withdrawals and sovereignty strengthening for all affected.  Beyond that, we need to ensure that this circumstance will never be repeated.

8.  Government facilities that store and disseminate fades are reported to be fairly evenly distributed throughout the United States.  These are typically metal-walled structures with metal doors, metal flooring and metal roofs.  Yet, most Americans have no idea what these facilities are doing.  Do you have any comment?

Answer:  Congress needs to obtain a comprehensive list of these locations, and to do so without delay, in my opinion.  Each of these facilities can be realistically viewed as a Trojan Horse sitting on U.S. territory.  There needs to be independent oversight of these locations so that they cannot be further utilized to harm the national security interest.

9.  Is it true that some of these facilities are concealed as metal-walled self-storage facilities?

Answer:  The Congress will assess that allegation, I'm sure.  What's clear is that the infrastructure that has allowed for broadscale dissemination of fades must be disrupted, with extensive oversight to ensure that it is not rebuilt elsewhere.

10.  Is there a peace to be made with fades and those who have demanded their deployments within the United States?

Answer:  Outwardly, by all means.  But privately, we need to understand that you can't negotiate with someone who wants your life.  Fades are designed to destroy human self-governance, human sovereignty, human identity, human memory, human depth, and human meaning.  That's a hugely damaging intent, and if we fail to grasp it, we will fail to counter the threat.

11.  Thank you for speaking with us this morning.

Answer:  You are most welcome.

Lane MacWilliams

Questions to Assist the United States Congress

 1.  It has been suggested that the Congress is weighing RICO prosecution of the manner in which your case is being manipulated for the profiteering of this administration.  May I know your thoughts?

Answer:  If RICO prosecutions have a four-year statute of limitations, as the Supreme Court has suggested, then such a prosecution could occur, yes.

2.  This administration has reportedly forged documents in your name, extended fake donations in your name, and committed other crimes in a scheme of sequestering large amounts from awards that have been extended to you.  Should all of that conduct come to light?

Answer:  You know, this is exceedingly difficult for people who feel that they are not accountable, but I am a person who upholds the truth.  I just do not believe we can rescue human sovereignty without a commitment to the truth.  Yes, the specifics should come to light.

If certain leaders have sustained fade deployments and other sovereignty violations, and these FBI aggressions have caused misjudgments and mistakes among our leadership, then we need to know it all.

But I think it's clear that we cannot rescue American sovereignty by hiding what has transpired.  We just need to be phenomenally courageous about it, and in this way, ensure that we have much more robust defenses against these violations in the future.

3.  What should happen to funds that were misappropriated through criminal conduct relating to your awards?

Answer:  I need to state once again that the risks to Americans' sovereignty that are present through the sequestering of funds by Vladimir Putin and other opponents of human freedom are profound.

Accordingly, we need to ensure that funds that were awarded in this case come back to the greatest extent possible.  We cannot have vast wealth being accumulated by the Txx Lxxxx types within the FBI and among its affiliates.  Their loyalties are with Russia.

Similarly, we cannot have our elected or appointed officials profiteering from the suffering of the public, because the incentives there are disastrous.

And I think that, as critical as the sovereignty concerns are relating to the misappropriations of  funds by the FBI and its affiliates, there are greater sovereignty concerns relating to fade deployments by the FBI, human trafficking crimes by the FBI, torture by the FBI, wrongful directives by the FBI, false reporting by the FBI, defamation by the FBI, concealed prosecutions by the FBI, and meting out of concealed sentences by the FBI.

4.  Successful RICO prosecutions would require the return of misappropriations of funds in this case.

Answer:  Then they should occur, and hopefully, the anticipation of that outcome would halt the outflow of funds based on current criminal schemes.  The National Treasury is not an ATM.  Russia's attempt to turn it into one are profoundly wrong and offensive.

5.  Are these acts of war by Russia against the United States?

Answer: They are better understood as acts of treason by the FBI, the CIA, and their affiliates, who are loyal to Russia.

There is a push for one world government.  The FBI and the CIA understand the origins of that impetus as residing with Russia and others, and so they feel their treasonous conduct can be justified.

6.  Do you disagree?

Answer:  I do.  I believe the American people deserve to know the truth of what is occurring on the world stage and the manner in which their lives will be affected.  Part of that picture is an inflationary policy that is utilizing my case as a conduit for vast money printing and misappropriations, over my strenuous objections and to my family's great peril and my own.  That is a Russian agenda, not a domestic one.

Now, with our understanding of the FBI's widespread fade deployments, we can get a clearer view into the manner in which the FBI and its affiliates have sought to perpetrate an invisible coup toward the nation as a whole.

7.  The Congress must be shocked over this disclosure.

Answer: Everyone should be shocked over this disclosure.

8. The Congress recently renewed the FBI's FISA 702, which allows the aggregation of communications of Americans through a large-scale surveillance program, but only for ten days.  What is your view of that decision?

Answer:  My praise to the members of Congress.  I believe our elected leaders are requiring an explanation from the FBI regarding fade deployments, and they're holding the agency's feet to the fire until they get the information they need.

9.  Are there specific questions the Congress should be asking?

Answer:  When J. Edgar Hoover died, it was discovered that he had directed and maintained extensive "Official and Confidential" files on virtually all members of Congress, and every President during his tenure as FBI Director, including "reams of information" about their families, their friends, and their contacts.

If I were a member of Congress currently, I would be asking for complete files about each member of the House and Senate.  Because, allow me to observe,  fade deployments are only perpetrated when the FBI is claiming that the intended "host" has done something wrong.

I have been speaking about knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting for a long time.  

The Congress should now see how it applies to them and to their families, not merely to me and mine.

10.  Are there any other specific questions they should be asking when it comes to fade deployments?

Answer:  Fade deployments are often first directed to the pet of a targeted individual, with a later transfer of the fade to the intended host.  So the Congress should be asking about deployments to their pets that may have later affected them.  The FBI will have all of these records.

11.  You have said that fade deployments serve to hollow out the victim's personality over time.

Answer:  That's true.  Over time there is reported to be a diminishment of affect, conscience, ethical engagement, higher order reasoning, the quality and character of decision-making, the depth of human bonds, the capacity to love others, loyalty toward others, the extent and quality of emotional memory and factual memory, and the boundaries that prevent reckless sexual or violent acts.

12.  Is the deployment of fades fundamentally intended to deconstruct human self-governance?

Answer:  Yes, it is.  It can be understood as an attack on the human race as a whole, and one that is not intended to be withdrawn.

It would be difficult to imagine an assault against our national security that was more serious.

13.  Will you be commenting further on fade deployments over this critical period of time, when the Congress is making urgent assessments as to the damage wrought by the FBI against our national security interests?

Answer:  Yes, certainly.

14.  Thank you for speaking with us this morning.

Answer:  You are quite welcome.

Lane MacWilliams

Fades Further Illuminated: Russian Origins of the "Existential Threat" to American Sovereignty

 1.  How do you respond to FBI allegations that your disclosures regarding the FBI's deployment of fades against U.S. leadership represents an "existential threat" to the nation?

Answer: Well, I think that's quite a projection.  For Vladimir Putin to attempt a hidden coup of the United States by directing the FBI to deploy fades against our Congress, our Supreme Court, our Executive Branch, certain members of the DOJ, the U.S. military leadership, and even certain key state governments -- this is the existential threat to our sovereignty.

2.  What about Russian threats regarding the deployment of non-conventional weapons?

Answer:  Vladimir Putin has often discussed the use of non-conventional weapons, but only in the context of other conflicts.  He always wants to project blame onto certain "radical factions" in order to absolve himself from the moral stain that history would attribute to him.  So, we need to be fully educated about his thinking in this regard, and maintain the pressure on him by letting him know he will be held fully accountable for any such acts.

The truth is that fades represent non-conventional warfare in and of themselves, and those within the FBI who have directed their deployment against U.S. leadership have engaged in treasonous acts.

3.  There can be no justification for the deployment of fades in this circumstance?

Answer:  Fades represent an enslavement of our leadership and our nation as a whole.  No, there can be no justification.

It's important to understand just how insidious fade deployments are.

The "hosts" of fade deployments ordinarily have no idea that they have been affected.  Even so, gradually, they are going to experience an erosion of their character, personality, identity, moral compass, empathy toward others, boundaries, ethical framework, decision-making and conduct.

They may recognize that there is a change in their decision-making, but they are highly unlikely to understand the origins of that change.

In other words, they still feel as though they are making independent determinations, even when they are not.

These are parasitic deployments that involve a gradual hollowing out of individual character.

So, they go right to the heart of who we are as human beings, including our ability to make the most important decisions affecting our lives and the lives of those surrounding us.

4.  Does the FBI need broad scale fade deployments to achieve its mission and objectives?

Answer:  Absolutely not.

Fade deployments against U.S. leadership have been perpetrated for the purpose of totalitarian control over the United States by a foreign adversary, and for no other reason than this.

5.  The FBI states that your sons have suffered "stacked" fade deployments involving ten or more fades each.  How much individual control over decision-making can an individual exert if they have suffered ten or more fade deployments?

Answer:  Zero.  It's just too great a burden for any one individual to sustain.  

6.  So, the individual's original character, personality, boundaries and decision-making -- in the event of such stacked deployments -- are effectively ...?

Answer: Annihilated.  They simply cannot defend against wrongful directives in that state.  

7.  And the FBI is fully aware of this?

Answer:  Oh, yes.  They extend these stacked deployments when they intend to render someone guilty of criminal acts that the handlers themselves direct.  It becomes a "Crime and Punishment" puppet show for the FBI, a stage play in which they exercise full control.

8.  And has the FBI demanded false witness statements from your sons when they have been burdened by these extreme "stacked" fade deployments?

Answer:  This is the FBI's allegation, yes.

9.  False witness statements regarding their childhoods?

Answer: Exactly so.  This is what the FBI has suggested.

10.  What are your thoughts about this?

Answer:  I know my sons extremely well.  I know the strength of their character.  They never would have signed false witness statements if they had been in possession of their sovereignty.

11.  What should happen next for your sons?

Answer:  The fades should be withdrawn in their entirety, and my sons should be allowed to give their true testimony as to the torture they have suffered at the hands of the FBI and its affiliates.  Whether or not that information is rendered immediately public is up to them.  But it needs to be documented as part of the formal record, because there is the possibility that great good can result from their accounts.

If we care about the long term sovereignty of Americans, then we need to hear from my sons and daughter-in-law.

12.  What about those who would wish to suppress that testimony, because they are concerned that they will be blamed for wrongfully authorizing these acts of torture?

Answer:  If they have suffered fade deployments themselves, then they are in a position to take the larger view for the good of the nation.  In other words, if their judgment could possibly have been compromised, then the truth about the perils for all of us regarding diminished sovereignty need to be openly evaluated.

Again, we cannot solve this problem without courage, honesty, integrity and disclosure.

We need to be stronger than our adversaries expect us to be.

The United States has always had a capacity for self-examination, and that might just serve to rescue the cause of human sovereignty.

This is tough territory.  Let's demonstrate that we're up to the challenge.

13.  How do you think about problem-solving in general?  Because these are unprecedented problems for our country, and yet you seem to hold to the belief that we can surmount them.

Answer:  I think about problem-solving in terms of transformation.  The hardest problems can be harnessed to their own destruction, in a way.  

Once we comprehend the means of attack with regard to a deployment such as that involved with fades, we can illuminate it and dismantle it by going after the origins and methods of dissemination.  Fades are not indestructible.  We need to demonstrate that we have greater resilience and adaptability than they do.

14.  Should the use of fades be prohibited as acts of war in both a domestic and international context?

Answer:  Without question.

15.  Once the U.S. Congress fully characterizes what has happened domestically with regard to fade deployments, should we notify other countries about these developments?

Answer:  This is a worldwide concern.  Yes.

16.  How are you yourself feeling, given that you have suffered stacked fade deployments in unknown number?

Answer:  I am feeling fantastic about having exposed this issue for our nation's sovereignty and the sovereignty of all those we will influence.  It just gives me great pleasure to be in the position to shine a bright light on this critical concern, knowing that now we will have the chance to defeat it.

17.  Who inspires you when you are required to stand alone on a critical issue?

Answer: My parents. My grandparents.  Many outstanding leaders throughout history, including Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, Jr., Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton.  

Leadership is not always about having a lot of company in the beginning.

Sometimes, it means that you are standing alone, speaking for the cause of freedom, not knowing whether anyone can hear your words.

But if we believe in the indomitable human spirit, we're going to try anyway, in the hope that, as Abraham Lincoln said, we can attain a "new birth of freedom," and that human sovereignty, with all its attendant gifts, "shall not perish from the Earth."

18.  Thank you for speaking with us this morning.

Answer:  You are most welcome.

Lane MacWilliams

Recent Emails to the OIG Hotline

 OIG Hotline, please see the following recent emails sent to the attention of your Office:

April 18, 2026:

• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Request for Formal Review By the Supreme Court, sent at 2:52 PM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Request for Information and Outreach Concerning 40 Gansett Rd., Woods Hole, MA, sent at 10:59 AM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: ATTN: Mxx Kxxxxx Re: Documentation for Delta Whistler Village Suites, Conditionally Confidential, sent at 5:31 AM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Alleged Stacked Fade Deployments Combined with Wrongful Convictions, sent at 3:53 AM Pacific time.

April 17, 2026: 

• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Update, April 17, 2026, sent at 6:21 PM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: The FBI Itself, sent at 5:09 PM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: ATTN: Management of Hilton Garden Inn, Flagstaff, sent at 4:24 PM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Modifications to Listing Agreement for xx xxxxx xxxxx Way, Confidential, sent at 2:13 PM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: xxxxx xxxxx Way Documentation, April 17, 2026, Conditionally Confidential, sent at 1:52 PM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Battling False Information, sent at 12:14 PM Pacific time.
• ATTN: OIG HOTLINE Re: Fwd: Request for Intervention from a Human Rights Advocate Visiting Arizona, sent at 10:48 AM Pacific time.

Update, April 17, 2026

1.  There appears to have been an Executive Order, allegedly originating with Vladimir Putin, to take your life on the basis of recent disclosures you made regarding the dissemination of fades in an extensive manner against U.S. leadership within the Congress, the Supreme Court, the U.S. DOJ, the Executive Branch, and even extending to the U.S. military leadership and certain agents within the FBI and CIA, as well as toward the American public.

May I have your response to this allegation?

Answer:  It's not unexpected, in that Vladimir Putin would be quite concerned about a Congressional investigation into the manner in which he has violated our national sovereignty.

2. Have you seen any signs of such an "assignment" in or near your hotel in Flagstaff, Arizona?

Answer:  There are a few suspicious characters wandering around with what seem like Eastern European-style backpacks who seem to do nothing but monitor the parking lot where my car is located.

3.  Should Vladimir Putin be directing President Trump to extend Executive Orders?

Answer:  The FBI indicates that Vladimir Putin directed at least one fade deployment toward President Trump himself, which stands as a great irony in this situation.  No, Vladimir Putin should not be directing our own President to extend Executive Orders.

4.  Where does your safety reside?

Answer:  It resides in this conversation, frankly.  The American public could have no greater confirmation of the urgent sovereignty crisis that Russia has imposed on our nation than further aggression against my family members or myself.

5.  So, what should happen to that alleged Executive Order?

Answer:  I think Vladimir Putin will understand that it is in his best interest to withdraw it immediately.

I intend to move around Flagstaff with freedom and safety, without others' entry to my hotel room or any targeted or environmental harms whatsoever, whether toward my dogs or myself.

6.  Will the Congress take up the matter of fades on an urgent basis?

Answer:  Oh, I believe so.  I'm sure the subpoenas are being prepared.

7.  What will happen when the list of fade deployments is determined?  Are there tests of autonomy and independent decision-making that can be utilized to assess the health of our leaders?

Answer:  I am under the impression that the FBI has made quite a study of individual sovereignty and its compromise.  My understanding is that complete recovery from fade deployment is dependent on the length of time that the fade has been present, as well as numerous other factors.

But certainly, the FBI is responsible for disclosing everything it knows about fade withdrawal and "hosts'" recovery.

8.  Why do you use the word "host"?

Answer:  Fades are parasites, and their victims are hosts.  Fades can be thought of as a low level of plasma energy that slowly feeds off of host tissue to survive.  That's problematic enough, because of gradual cortical atrophy, but the most pressing issue is the invasion of consciousness and decision-making while the host still perceives him or herself as independent.

9. Is the word "fades" an acronym?

Answer:  The FBI alleges so, yes.

10.  Do you know what the letters stand for?

Answer:  No, I do not.  

11.  To what extent are jellies also germane to this investigation?

Answer:  I think they should be included in every inquiry about these remote sovereignty violations.  Jellies are allegedly somewhat less dangerous, but I don't know the details.

12.  How quickly can our Congress get to the truth of this circumstance?

Answer: They can initiate their investigation very rapidly, I'm sure. In the meantime, the FBI should be sharing everything it knows about withdrawal and remediation for our leaders.

13.  Will you please continue to keep us informed about your wellbeing in Flagstaff?

Answer:  Yes, of course.

14.  Thank you for speaking with us this evening.

Answer:  You are most welcome.

Lane MacWilliams

A Letter to Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs

 

Sent to Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs via email on Friday, April 17, 2026 at 10:46 AM Pacific time, with receipt confirmed at 10:46 AM Pacific time.

Dear Governor Hobbs:

I am happy to be visiting Arizona for the first time in many years, currently staying in Flagstaff and considering a rental home here.

Governor Hobbs, you may know that I stand as a human rights advocate in an important federal case before the Supreme Court regarding human rights violations perpetrated by the FBI against the honorable American public.  I support the long term sovereignty of all Americans, despite astonishing incursions by the FBI and its affiliates into fundamental freedoms of United States citizens that are intended by the agency to represent indefinite losses.  Many of these FBI violations relate to knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting against the law-abiding American public, together with affiliated harm.

As a direct result of my ongoing support for our most fundamental freedoms, including freedom of speech, peaceable assembly, freedom of the press, and the right to own private property, I have drawn the special attention of the FBI, which appears to maintain a retaliatory perspective.

The agency has suggested that it will render it impossible for me to locate a rental home within Flagstaff, and that, even if I were to secure a home, the agency would perpetrate various environmental harms to the property that would render it an unsafe domicile -- this, as a supposed "national security" prerogative.

My point to the FBI has always been that totalitarianism, permanently ensconced in the architecture of the governance of the United States, is safe for no one.

One particular FBI agent with strong ties to Russia has suffered repeated disciplinary action by the DOJ as a direct result of his unwarranted false reporting regarding my human rights case, and he appears to be persisting in his wrongful assertion of authority within Flagstaff.

Specifically, my requests for rental housing tours remain unanswered, and the FBI appears to extend ongoing threats to harm any property I might secure, even for a stay of three to six months.

I am certain that such conduct violates Arizona's fair housing statutes, as well as federal law.  Accordingly, I wonder whether your administration might assist me in requesting honorable follow up to my housing inquiries to tour available rental homes at xxxx South xxxxxxxx Rd. and xxx xxxxx Rd.  My attempts to fill out housing applications online are being blocked altogether, so realtors may need to assist me with hard copy application forms.  My husband and I do own two homes and our joint income is high.

I do have my two beloved dogs, Poppy and Birdie, with me.  These trusted pets, on whose judgment I have come to rely, appear to love Flagstaff more than any other place we have visited over thousands of miles on our current travels.  They are never wrong about people or places, I find, and for this and many other reasons, they are cherished traveling companions.

Are there ways in which I might contribute to Arizonans' human rights if I am unable to remain in the state, with my safety reasonably assured?  I have no doubt that there are.

I have committed to advocate for Americans' futures in a bi-partisan way, because awards extended to me through the U.S. DOJ are very substantive, and I have allocated a portion of them to foundations for specific causes that will assist the nation as a whole.

But within this framework, there are myriad worthy and, indeed, transformative goals that can be accomplished.

Perhaps if I am supported in remaining in Arizona for a time, we can further explore the many ways in which I might support the future of Arizona as a whole.

Thank you for any efforts your administration might extend on my behalf in the meantime.

With kind wishes and best regards,

Lane MacWilliams

Congressional Investigation of Fade Deployments as an Urgent Matter

 1.  People appear to be upset with you, because of the fact that you have identified fades as having compromised both Democrats and Republicans.  Is that the case?

Answer:  It would appear to be the case, yes.  But I think that our leaders need to understand that the point of fades is total control over humanity in general.  Fades don't really care about your political leanings.  Fades are deployed for the purpose of co-opting the human will.  So, all of our leaders are going to find themselves affected, and if we didn't see compromised decision-making, compromised ethics -- that would be the surprise.

Our leaders need to ask themselves not whether the public might discredit them or discriminate against them if they have suffered fade deployments.  Rather they need to ask themselves whether they possess the moral courage to assess whether their decision-making has changed in any substantial way considering their long-held standards and values.

This isn't about popularity or campaigning or polls or legacy-shaping.  

This is about the future of human sovereignty and whether we are going to have any.

So, we need our leaders to be identifying themselves first as members of the human race who support the self-determination and freedoms that we hold as foundational to a meaningful human society.

Maybe later, we can talk about less critical matters like our children's Little League games, and our dinner recipes, and our political leanings.

2.  Is the Congress going to be able to subpoena information about the deployment of fades against the House and Senate, the Supreme Court, the Department of Justice, the Executive Branch, and others?

Answer:  I hope this will be considered an urgent matter for the Congress to take up, yes, and on both sides of the aisle.

3.  What about you yourself?  What is it like to know that fades have been deployed against you as a human rights advocate?

Answer:  Well, fades make it necessary to face the hardest things, because the reality is that they are deployed with the intention of killing their victims, but only after destroying their independence and sovereignty.  So, we have to look at those worst possible outcomes and we each need to make some decisions about our boundaries and our limits.  No one wants to have his or her identity stolen.  No one wants to be deprived of his or her God-given selfhood and ability to make decisions that derive from a lifetime of character-building.

4. You have repeatedly asked that the fades be withdrawn, but that hasn't happened.

Answer:  No, it hasn't.

5.  What is your feeling about that fact?

Answer:  It's extremely upsetting, of course, to know that one's government intends to commit first degree murder of a human rights advocate in this manner or any other.  After you get over the initial shock of that realization, you begin to ask about the most meaningful ways you can contribute to the future of human sovereignty with the sovereignty you have left.

But you don't take anything for granted.  And you really need to constantly engage in the evaluation of whether your decision-making adheres to your highest ethical and personal standards.

6.  Wouldn't you be able to perceive if you were departing from your previous ethical decision-making?

Answer:  I do think that people can perceive that they are changing in some manner, but mostly they don't understand the cause.  If you know you have suffered from one or more fade deployments, you can be quite rigorous about your self-evaluation.  But it slows everything down, and that alone is an unconscionable impediment to what should be freedom of decision-making.

7.  You have said you would die before you would compromise your ethics.

Answer:  Yes, and that is my own way of dealing with this assault to my sovereignty.  I don't think that many people would feel as strongly as I feel about this matter.  But my whole identity is built on the strength of my character, and I'm not willing to compromise that integrity for anyone under any circumstances.  Life and sovereignty are synonymous to me.  One without the other has no meaning.

8.  To be clear, you are in no way suicidal.

Answer:  No, I'm not.  I'm simply highly watchful and aware given the fade deployments I have suffered, which have not been withdrawn despite my requests.

9.  You are trying to make the point that fades are not political.

Answer:  Yes!  Exactly so.  If we cannot understand this fundamental point, then humanity will devolve into a lesser species.  That's foreseeable from this vantage.  So, we need to ask ourselves whether we are for or against the development of the human race to its fullest potential in the future.  That decision is being made right now, not at some future indeterminate time.

10.  What about people who feel criticized by your writings on this subject?

Answer:  If people feel concerned that they made have made unethical determinations regarding my case, then I think they should be keenly interested in whether they have suffered from fade deployments without their knowledge.  If there have been fade deployments against U.S. leaders or former leaders, then this would present a unique opportunity for them to express what happened from their own perspective in the cause of Americans' sovereignty in the long term.

Again, the stakes are so high in this situation that if we fail to demonstrate courage in speaking about this issue openly, we will fail in the defense of human sovereignty, and fail spectacularly.

The President who brings fades to the American public's awareness will be remembered as a staunch defender of human freedoms.

11.  What if there are restrictions that prevent this disclosure?

Answer:  Then we need to rely on those outside the government to say this is unacceptable.

12.  People like you.

Answer:  People like me.  Yes.  When the Executive Branch, the Congress, the DOJ and the Supreme Court are all being affected by fade deployments that cannot be discussed publicly, we have reached a crisis point in the sovereignty of the nation as a whole.

This is not a crisis that will be solved without investigative hearings, new legislation and continuous monitoring.

But when we say that our most profound problems are too confidential to talk about, we have lost the fight for our freedoms before we've begun.

If we can't name the problem, we can't solve it.

We need to have the courage to talk about this issue.

13.  What are the odds that you could be killed for talking about this issue publicly?

Answer:  Well, they're not zero.  I'm staying at the Marriott Bonvoy Springfield Suites in Flagstaff, Arizona, and my neighbors in Suite #209 seem to be taking an unusual interest in everything I do.

14.  That couldn't be by chance?

Answer:  The FBI says that I'm leading a convoy of travelers who plan to stay wherever I'm staying.  So unnatural interest is noteworthy.

15.  What are the greatest risks in such a circumstance?

Answer:  Dxx deployments and other non-conventional deployments during sleeping hours.

16.  And these could lead to further harm of your dogs or yourself?

Answer:  Easily.

17.  Of what kind?

Answer:  Brain damage, blindness, deafness (I have already lost half my hearing because of the FBI), organ damage, knee damage or damage to other joints (My dog Birdie is already limping with no discernible injury.) Other acute or chronic illnesses.  Stacked fade deployments designed to cause heart attack, stroke or aneurysm. Hotel fire. FBI planted explosive device.  Sniper assault.  It's a long list.

Lately the FBI has also threatened car theft.

18.  Does the FBI have the capability of restoring your hearing?

Answer:  Unknown.

19.  You were asked earlier today what you stand for.  What is the answer?

Answer:  I stand for the Truth.  I stand for the indomitable human spirit.  I stand for relentless courage in the face of long odds.  I stand for the long term human rights of Americans and all those we influence.  I stand for the sovereignty of the United States.  I stand for our deepest, most genuine bonds to one another.  I stand for generosity as an answer to defamation by the FBI.  I stand for good faith as an answer to cynicism. I stand for our ability to surmount extraordinary obstacles.  I stand for our capacity to transcend astonishing wrongs.  I stand for the greatness of human potential.  And I stand for our ability to begin again.

20.  Thank you for speaking with us this evening.

Answer:  You are most welcome.

Lane MacWilliams