The Public Sphere

1.  What is your experience traveling through public spaces at this time?

Answer:  It's challenging.

2.  In what regard?

Answer:  Yesterday, I traveled to a FedEx in Sunnyvale in order to post on my blog and prepare a number of affidavits for notarization.

3.  Did you engage in any dialogue with members of the public?

Answer: A stranger approached me while I was typing on the computer to say that he heard me working with my "flying fingers of doom," and he wished he could work that fast.

4.  That's the language he used?

Answer:  Verbatim.  Word for word.

5.  What did you make of that comment?

Answer:  Highly unusual.

6.  Did you respond to him?  

Answer:  I did not.

7.  There is always the possibility that someone like this man is trying to provoke a reaction.

Answer:  It's best to remain impassive, because any verbal engagement can be misreported.

8.  What would be the objectives of corrupt FBI reporting at this time?

Answer:  To discredit a whistleblower of the FBI's malfeasance.  In general, they're going to be repeating their old standby assertions.

9.  They tend to call whistleblowers crazy, unbalanced, angry, etc.

Answer:  Yes.

10.  UPS is signatory to Infragard, is it not?

Answer:  It is.  

11.  You experienced obstructed notarization attempts at two UPS stores yesterday.

Answer:  I did, yes.  Of interest, one notary revealed that UPS' "notary waiver," which I believe is likely an unlawful document, has only been extended in the state of California, and only quite recently.

12.  What does this waiver say?

Answer:  In part it says, in all capital letters, the following:

• WE ARE WAIVING THE RIGHT TO HAVE A TRIAL BY JURY TO RESOLVE ANY DISPUTE BETWEEN OR AMONG US, THE UPS STORE, INC., ITS AFFILIATES OR RELATED THIRD PARTIES.
• WE ARE WAIVING THE RIGHT TO HAVE A COURT, OTHER THAN A STATE COURT OF LIMITED JURISDICTION AS DEFINED ABOVE, RESOLVE ANY SUCH DISPUTE.
• WE ARE WAIVING THE RIGHT TO HAVE A COURT REVIEW ANY DECISION OR AWARD OF AN ARBITRATOR, WHETHER INTERUM OR FINAL, EXCEPT FOR APPEALS BASED ON THOSE GROUNDS FOR VACATUR EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN SECTION 10 OF THE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT.
• YOU AND WE AGREE THAT WE ARE WAIVING THE RIGHT TO SERVE AS A REPRESENTATIVE, AS A PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, OR IN ANY OTHER REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY, JOIN AS A CLASS MEMBER, AND/OR TO PARTICIPATE AS A MEMBER OF A CLASS OF CLAIMANTS IN ANY CLASS, MASS, CONSOLIDATED OR COMBINED ACTION OR ARBITRATION.

13.  What is your impression of this language?

Answer:  My impression is that UPS's management is fully aware that this "UPS Store Electronic Waiver for Notary Services" is fundamentally illegal.  UPS wishes to void any notarization they wish to void, without accountability.

14.  Why would UPS only have extended this waiver in the State of California?

Answer:  Why indeed?

15.  On another subject, Wells Fargo Bank is removing significant customer privacy protections on May 24, 2023.  

Answer:  They are, yes.  This change in policy is leading me to leave Wells Fargo.

16.  Your concern is that Wells Fargo, which is signatory to Infragard, could abuse customers' trust by aggregating and disseminating defamatory information about them as directed by the FBI.

Answer:  I believe the obligations of consumer banks to their customers' privacy to be binding.  A bank is in no position to determine what information is true or false.  That's a matter for the courts.

17.  You will leave any bank that erodes customers' privacy protections in cooperating with third parties to aggregate and disseminate customer information in cooperation with the FBI/Infragard.

Answer:  Speedily.

18.  Will you be preparing affidavits to address your recent experiences at UPS and FedEx?

Answer:  Yes, I will endeavor to do so.  Ultimately, freedom means not living in fear of the public being pressured by FBI personnel to prepare falsified witness statements at every turn.  Every human interaction is predicated on good faith.  Democracies require honesty and benevolence in order to be sustained.

19.  You would like to see falsified witness statements be provided to the victims of that false reporting through rigorous enforcement of the Freedom of Information Act -- or a Constitutional amendment that gives FOIA greater enforceability.

Answer:  Yes.  The secrecy provisions currently wielded by the FBI have allowed these abuses to occur, endangering the fundamentals of our democracy.  The Freedom of Information Act is the public's greatest defense against lying by predatory law enforcement.  Transparency is necessary for our civil liberties to be preserved.

20.  How long has falsified reporting been transpiring through the FBI's unconstitutional "target of interest" program?

Answer:  Too long.

21.  Did you ever contact the ACLU about this issue?

Answer:  Multiple times.  The FBI disables the ACLU quite rapidly when they falsely claim that a complainant represents a national security concern.

22.  Is the ACLU signatory to Infragard in any capacity, thus allowing the FBI to effectively determine which cases the ACLU is permitted to accept?

Answer:  This is a reasonable question to ask.  The ACLU is dependent on donor funding, so one must contemplate the implications of an Infragard that donates a sufficient amount to keep the ACLU afloat, but barely.  I think the prospect of ACLU case interference by the FBI, even at the level of individual attorney communications, raises serious concerns.

23.  The loss of the ACLU as an independent check and balance on falsified and withheld FBI reporting is significant.

Answer:  Without question.  I'm not certain FBI personnel should be permitted to have any pass-through communication to ACLU staff.

24.  But you believe that may be happening now.

Answer:  Far right FBI personnel are not limiting their actions to certain spheres or certain ethical standards.  So, yes, this interference is quite possible.

24.  Do you hereby certify that the foregoing is true and correct?

Answer:  I do.

Lane MacWilliams