Two Families and the Whole World

 1.  You have wanted to speak in defense of President Biden's son, despite the wrongs that have been perpetrated against your own sons.  Why is that?

Answer:  I want people to understand that President Biden's son was tried for a crime that is seldom prosecuted within the United States.  And the manner in which that prosecution came about was highly unusual as well.

2.  You believe the lead up to the prosecution was almost certainly reflective of wrongful actions on the part of the FBI or its affiliates.

Answer:  I do, and to be more specific, I believe the lead-up to the prosecution almost certainly reflected lying by the FBI and their affiliates.

3.  Why do you feel this way?

Answer:  This is to delve into the specifics of the case a bit.  But at one point, it was alleged that Hunter Biden's family member placed a weapon, wrapped in another item and well-concealed in a trash bin.  

4.  Was their anything unusual about that allegation?

Answer:  No.  What was unusual was what followed, in my opinion.  The FBI alleged that a homeless person found the weapon in the trash bin and contacted the police.

5.  You do not believe that narrative?

Answer:  Knowing the tactics of the FBI, I do not.

6.  What do you believe actually occurred?

Answer:  I believe Hunter Biden's household was under close surveillance around the clock by the FBI or its affiliates.  The moment Hunter Biden's concerned family member sought to remove the weapon from the household by throwing it away, I believe the FBI or their affiliates swooped in and took possession of that item with a specific objective of future prosecution.

7.  What's wrong with that?

Answer:  So many things, it's hard to know where to begin.  Human beings are not perfect.  We are not designed to be living under a microscope of surveillance 24 hours a day in order to be the star of a veritable "Truman Show" produced by the FBI.  Clearly, the weapon should have been disposed of lawfully, but this was a family under duress, and they did not locate that option in the timeframe they needed for their loved one's safety.

8.  Isn't it fairly easy to dispose of a weapon lawfully?

Answer:  Truly, it is not.  My husband and I disposed of weapons lawfully, and it was necessary for us to make five or six phone calls before the appropriate process became clear.  This would be an easy miss, in my opinion.  But my real point is that the FBI took advantage of its position of surveillance over this household in order to capitalize on the opportunity to prosecute the son of the President.

9.  Why does this matter?

Answer:  It matters because our sovereignty as a nation matters.  And I am not overstating the importance of this issue.  We have all placed immense trust in the hands of the FBI, but we need to ask whether they are exercising their resulting authority with equanimity, restraint and wisdom.  In many cases the answer is an emphatic no, and I think this example illustrates one of them.  What is the potential result of an inappropriate prosecution of the family member of a sitting President?  A complete loss of sovereignty for the nation.  And that cost is unacceptably high.

10.  Why is this the potential result of such a prosecution?

Answer:  When the son of a sitting President is facing a sentencing of up to 25 years behind bars one month prior to a critical election, what do you think the pressures on the sentencing process might be?  Are they likely to be absent or neutral?  There is no possible way that that will be the case.

11.  You believe that such a circumstance represents the FBI's effective checkmating of a sitting President.

Answer:  The potential for that to be the case is high.

12.  What happens after that event?

Answer:  The FBI bargains for all the leverage and advantage it can behind the scenes.  Everything could be on the table in such a negotiation:  the budget of the agency, the budget of affiliated agencies, the handling of domestic or international concerns, the dispensation of condemnatory films, real or AI-generated, of the President's loved ones.

13.  The fate of an FBI whistleblower and her family members?

Answer:  There would likely be no limits for the FBI in such a circumstance.

14.  So then we would have the FBI exerting totalitarian control over two families, the leadership of which could have profound impacts on the freedom of mankind over time.

Answer:  That is correct.  Two families and the whole world.

15. Hasn't the FBI often threatened your own sons with arrest after coercing them into certain actions under threat of death?

Answer:  Frequently, and this has stood as an absolute abomination, in my opinion.  It's just a resounding indictment of the agency as a whole.

16.  What do we need to do differently?

Answer:  Realistically, we can recognize that the family members of a sitting President will almost certainly be surveilled to ensure that security risks to the nation are limited.  But what do we do when the those guardians themselves become the threat?  To quote from the Latin, Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?  Who will watch the watchers?

The FBI should not be allowed to undertake prosecutions of the family members of a sitting President unless the initiation of the prosecution was unrelated to the surveillance they initiated for other reasons.  In other words, the FBI should not be allowed to capitalize on its privileged position to take over the whole nation and the wider world.

17.  You would have extensive questions for the homeless person who supposedly found Hunter Biden's weapon in a trash bin on public property.

Answer:  Oh, yes, I would.  Over extensive interviews and over multiple days spaced generously apart.

18.  What if he could not be found?  

Answer:  If he could not be found, we might reasonably assume that falsified law enforcement reporting was involved and that the FBI had abused its position of authority in the matter.

19.  Do you think the FBI abused its position of authority in the matter?

Answer:  You know, my instincts about this kind of thing are based on long experience and deep insight.  The chances that the FBI engaged in falsified reporting regarding the homeless person who supposedly located the weapon in question are, in my opinion, close to 100%.

20.  So, what does it mean to you now, having seen these circumstances, when the FBI threatens to arrest your sons, cause brain damage or fatal disease for them,  or murder them?

Answer:  It means to me that Tom Lyons from the FBI and "Max" from the CIA should be the ones facing charges and indictment over their crimes.  It means to me that organized crime figure Bxxxxxx Pxxx should be facing charges and indictment.  It means to me that we need, as a society, to withdraw our trust from these agencies and reclaim the freedoms that belong to us.

21.  Do you think appropriate attention was given in the Hunter Biden trial to the likelihood of falsified law enforcement reporting by the FBI?

Answer:  I highly doubt it.

22.  Do you think you could have proven falsified reporting in this situation given the opportunity?

Answer:  I'm fairly confident at this point in my abilities to find inconsistencies and errors in a corrupt law enforcement narrative.  Yes, I think I could have located the origin of the abuse of power with regard to the supposed homeless person who located that weapon.

23.  Is falsified law enforcement reporting by the FBI an occasion for a mistrial?

Answer:  I have no doubt that it is.

24.  What can be done at this moment in time to protect your own sons and MG from further harms?

Answer:  First, we need the President and Vice President to disqualify all falsified law enforcement reporting against our family.  And second, we need the FOIA reports and the investigative reports from the ODNI and the OIG Hotline -- and all of these on an urgent basis.

25:  Do you hereby certify that the foregoing is correct to the best of your knowledge and belief?

Answer:  I do.

Lane MacWilliams