1. You do not support political violence in any form. Is that correct?
Answer: Yes, you're correct. I do not support violence in any circumstance.
2. May I please know your response to the events at the White House Correspondents Dinner last night?
Answer: You know, this entire incident is extremely worrisome for the United States as a whole. We need to know that our elected officials are safe, and we need to know that our journalists are protected as well.
I will also say that I thought that what was most revealing about the entire circumstance was disclosed afterwards, in the details the FBI chose to provide to the public today.
3. Can you please elaborate on that observation?
Answer: The FBI has characterized the individual responsible for this incident as a Democrat, someone who participated in a "No Kings" rally recently, someone who is characterized as a "radical," and someone who hid weapons on his parents property without their knowledge or consent.
4. What is unusual about this set of facts?
Answer: The FBI left out whether or not the individual involved has an FBI handler, and I think this is a critical omission.
And I only raise this possibility because my older son's handler has reportedly directed him to hide weapons on our property without our knowledge or consent as well.
And I must observe, what a gambit! The FBI can take out a whole family that way with very little effort. Everybody in the family is implicated of wrongdoing, radicalization, or terrorism, while the FBI directed every single wrong involved.
5. When did your older son's handler most recently direct him to move or hide weapons, presumably with Executive authorization?
Answer: Allegedly on Friday afternoon, April 24, 2026.
6. Two days ago?
Answer: Two days ago, yes.
7. And what could happen as a direct result of that handler-directed conduct?
Answer: My whole family could lose our lives. Nothing less.
But we're actually looking at circumstances controlled entirely by the FBI and its affiliate agencies.
8. You have been urged recently to change political parties, ostensibly by certain members of the FBI itself. Is there an explanation for that communication?
Answer: Apparently, the FBI is preparing to engage in mass arrests at some point in time, and primarily of Democrats, who are being wrongfully characterized by the FBI as Communists and radicals across the board, at least according to those who have discussed these stratagems of false reporting.
9. What do you think is the likelihood that President Trump knew about the planned disturbance ahead of time regarding the White House Correspondents Dinner?
Answer: My understanding is that the White House Correspondents Dinner is typically quite a roast of the sitting President.
This involves a myriad of critical barbs at which the whole world appears to be laughing.
President Trump has previously commented that the event is "negative" and "boring," and he did not attend for multiple years of his last presidency.
His announced attendance this year was considered a surprise.
I think the odds that he knew about this in advance are stunningly high.
The incident garnered understandable sympathy for him while endangering everyone present; and it completely disrupted the evening, so the President did not have to sit through it. In real terms, the message to journalists might be understood as "don't criticize the President or you will be placing your life at substantive risk."
10. What era are we moving into in terms of press freedoms?
Answer: They don't exist now, and the question is whether they will be reclaimed at some future time. But the press is already being tightly controlled by the FBI and its affiliate agencies.
11. You submitted a civil rights complaint to the Arizona Attorney General's Office recently regarding misconduct by the FBI and its affiliates.
Answer: Yes, I did.
12. Will the Arizona Attorney General be following up with an interview regarding that submission?
Answer: By law, the Office is required to do so, yes.
13. As part of that process, will the Arizona Attorney General, and to be specific, this is Kris Mayes -- be obtaining a full copy of investigative reports from the OIG Hotline of the U.S. DOJ?
Answer: I certainly hope so.
14. Was the directive to your older son -- conveyed to him by his handler on Friday -- to move illicit weapons of some kind from one location to another intended to prevent the provision of investigative reports to you?
Answer: I believe so.
I have also been informed that recent false reporting concerning my husband, my younger son and my daughter-in-law has been intended to prevent that provision of information to me.
15. Should the judicial denial of the provision of that material to you be immediately appealed?
Answer: Urgently, yes.
16. Why urgently?
Answer: Because I am currently receiving apparent bomb threats and sniper threats from the FBI. So action on behalf of my family members and myself needs to be immediate.
17. Would you request that the Supreme Court rule on this matter?
Answer: The Supreme Court has already ruled that the reports should be provided to me. But yes, an appeal of wrongful convictions by a lower court could be extended to the Supreme Court, certainly.
18. Presuming that the Supreme Court is presented with sufficient facts to exonerate you and your family members, what should the Arizona Attorney General's Office do to facilitate this documentation being provided to you?
Answer: They should make haste. And I hate to say this, because we all know the reasons for the well-known adage, "The wheels of justice grind slow, but exceedingly fine."
We're just not within that era of justice at this moment in American history.
Right now, the FBI cannot be allowed any slack time in which to create more false accusations against my family or myself.
We simply need immediate outreach and urgent provision of the reports, because the window of time in which this conveyance can be made may be quite narrow.
So, people need to move with alacrity and conscience, knowing that I will immediately respond.
19. To be clear, you continue to serve as a human rights advocate by engaging in the highest character and integrity at all times and in all settings? Is that correct?
Answer: Emphatically so. I am advocating for the sovereignty of the nation, and I possess that role as my highest priority.
20. Thank you for speaking with us this afternoon.
Answer: You are most welcome.
Lane MacWilliams