1. You have not heard anything from the Southern Poverty Law Center, the ACLU, or any other attorneys who might be representing you before the Supreme Court, despite what is almost certainly the Highest Court's decision to uphold Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, stipulating that outreach to you would be required.
Answer: No, I have not.
2. As a result, you extended a request to the OIG Hotline today, defining yourself as joint counsel with whomever is representing you, asking for an update on the investigation.
Answer: Yes. Due to the fact that it appears that lawful outreach from my attorneys is being blocked, I am placing myself in the role of joint counsel to ask for an update on this case.
3. Do you feel that you will receive outreach of some kind on this basis?
Answer: I believe that the lead investigators within the OIG Hotline are people of great substance, so I believe they will move Heaven and Earth to facilitate outreach to me through lawful means. I don't know their names. I have never had a dialogue with them of any kind. But I don't think my family members and I would be alive without them. I believe they have exhibited great courage in advocating for my family, at the same time that they have advocated for America's families.
4. What is your proof of that advocacy?
Answer: As I said, we're alive. Against all odds, we're alive. So, I know there are people of great character and integrity who have joined this effort from afar. And I suspect that the lead investigators within the OIG Hotline represent people who have made that heroic choice.
5. You characterize their efforts as heroic.
Answer: Without question. When you place yourself in a position of defending the truth in a circumstance such as this one, you're making a heroic choice. It takes immense strength of character to persist in that effort, and I believe the OIG Hotline has done so.
6. So you know nothing about these people, but you stand in profound admiration of them.
Answer: That's deeply true.
7. What has kept you going in your own efforts?
Answer: Partly, it has been knowing that there are other people of high character out there striving for the freedom of Americans along with me.
And partly, it has been the hope of making a substantive contribution to the sovereignty of all Americans, both now and in the future.
It's not possible to undertake a struggle this arduous of this duration if you're only laboring for yourself. You have to have a hope of helping many vulnerable people who are without voice. And I have had that hope, and I still have it now.
8. In response to your email to the OIG Hotline today, the FBI suggested that the White House had approved further aggression toward you of some kind. Do you know what that aggression is?
Answer: The FBI appeared to suggest that there was to be an attempt at a knowingly false accusation of fraud, on an entirely non-existent basis. But the agency also appeared to suggest the use of non-conventional vectors against me, and alternative vectors against my family members, in order to cause grievous harm.
9. Through a virus of some kind?
Answer: Yes, through some type of unusual virus deployed against me, and through other modalities deployed against my family members.
10. Is the White House still advancing a knowingly false narrative regarding your family members' conduct?
Answer: The FBI suggests that this is the case, yes.
11. And the CIA has allegedly been busy in arranging many false witness statements and AI-generated video and audio during one of your family member's travel, allegedly.
Answer: This is what has been alleged, yes.
12. Part of this planning allegedly involves an AI-generated film of a romantic liaison. Is that what has been conveyed to you?
Answer: Yes, even before he left on this business trip, that film had allegedly been prepared.
13. How is that possible?
Answer: His hotel room had allegedly been identified, and the agencies had enough background surveillance video to create the AI-generated video in advance of the trip.
14. So, this is intended as yet another means to discredit your family?
Answer: Well, I think more than that, the FBI and its affiliates intended it as a way to gather false reporting pertaining to the conveyance of sensitive information. If the FBI can show a salacious film impugning a person's character with regard to their loyalty to their family, then the FBI can more easily cast aspersions on their loyalty to their employer or their nation.
15. So, the White House is simply threatening to put your family members in prison if they don't like your outreach to the OIG Hotline?
Answer: Fundamentally, yes. They're probably pursuing a strategy of hurrying the preparation of knowingly false accusations to justify the delay of direct communications with me.
16. So this is, in its essence, a criminal administration that is unwilling to allow the rule of law to prevail, unwilling to allow due process to be upheld in any manner pertaining to this case.
Answer: The FBI has suggested that President Biden is implicated by a text conversation that has now been incorporated into materials due to me under the Freedom of Information Act. If that assertion is true, we can certainly see that the President will fight the lawful provision of that report through any means available to him.
17. The FBI has alleged that the President has authorized the harm of your children during their accessing of medical care that is meant to restore them to health. Is that the case?
Answer: That allegation has been made to me repeatedly.
18. Yet, it is the FBI and affiliated agencies that have intentionally harmed their health to begin with, isn't it?
Answer: That is correct.
19. So the promise of the restoration of their health would now be used as an opportunity to cause egregious harm to them?
Answer: This is what the FBI has alleged, yes.
20. And you are talking about both of your sons?
Answer: Both of my sons and MX as well.
21. There is allegedly still a focus on the part of the White House and others regarding the desire to confiscate your documents. Is that true?
Answer: According to the FBI, this remains a high priority for the White House.
22. Would this attempt be made during a raid against your home that was ostensibly pertaining to another family member?
Answer: That's highly likely -- the idea that everything would be swept up in some need to be thorough regarding an unrelated matter, when in truth the objective would be to appropriate my documents the whole time.
23. To what extent does this renewed aggression relate to your recent writings about President Biden's plan to pardon Brandan Pesa, who has played a central role in the harm of your family members and yourself from the very beginning?
Answer: I'm sure this is a factor.
24. Shouldn't these people be motivated to allow the reports to be provided to you as rapidly as possible, given that you will be writing about them extensively if they don't?
Answer: From my perspective, it would be much wiser for them to allow the documents to be provided to me, yes.
25. Why?
Answer: Because, according to the FBI, the question isn't whether they're guilty.
26. So the follow on events now depend on what exactly?
Answer: That remains to be determined. I haven't seen the evidence, so I cannot comment on it other than to say that I'm looking forward to evaluating it in its entirety.
27. You have asked for all false reporting against your family members and yourself to be halted on an immediate basis, and that includes the demand for knowingly false witness statements from both of your sons and MX. Is that correct?
Answer: It is, yes. Neither my sons nor MX should be experiencing demands of any kind from any government personnel or affiliates or any government programs at this time.
28. Why not?
Answer: Because such pressures are typical of failed nations, and if we want to be more, we need to conduct ourselves at a governmental level with fealty to the truth and a vigorous defense of those who speak it.
29. Whistleblowers included.
Answer: Most emphatically.
30. Will you please keep us apprised of how your family members and you yourself are faring?
Answer: I certainly will.
Lane MacWilliams
P.S. -- Please allow me to once again extend the disclaimer that some threats received by me and extended by the FBI are unsubstantiated by me at this time. I regret that I am unable to assess the credibility of every threat extended by this agency or its affiliates, and also that I am not in a position to judge the likelihood of manifestation. Having said that, many of the FBI's threats toward my family in the past have manifested in real-world harms. As a result, I believe that FBI threats extended to me must be viewed as potentially substantive.
No comments:
Post a Comment