1. The FBI alleges that your older son is being extended extremely violent messaging from his handlers. Is that the case?
Answer: Yes, it is.
2. And what does "violent messaging" mean?
Answer: It typically means that his handlers are extending to him an ultimatum that he can either cause harm to others or harm to himself.
3. Is it now risky for you to speak to your own son over the phone?
Answer: Apparently, because a perfectly normal phone call I had with my son a few minutes ago is now alleged to be in the process of falsification through AI-audio by the FBI and its affiliates.
4. Is your son being prevented from attesting that your phone call was perfectly normal, cogent, lawful and honorable?
Answer: Yes, he seems to be prevented by his handler from extending that truthful verification about our brief discussion.
5. What did your phone call consist of?
Answer: I asked my son whether he would like to come over to our house this afternoon and help me take the dogs for a walk. He stated that I could do that task by myself. I responded that I receive many kidnapping threats, so would appreciate his presence. He cast doubt on the risk of kidnapping. I stated that the probability was admittedly quite low, but the downside risk was substantial. And I observed that risks needed to be assessed through both probability and severity evaluations.
Beyond this, I asked him whether he might skip a LaSelva event this afternoon. He stated that he had committed to be there. I asked him how he would like to verify his safety during the time frame in which he was supposed to be part of a larger meeting. (In the past the FBI has allegedly forced him to attend Happy Hour at a gay bar in San Jose during this time frame, in addition to allegedly forcing him to engage in human trafficking activity against his will.). He responded that he could text upon his arrival.
I suggested that we should keep in close contact. He agreed that that would be helpful.
This is an accurate summary of the conversation.
6. This sounds perfectly logical to me.
Answer: Yes, it was a perfectly logical dialogue.
7. Do you have a recording of your side of the conversation?
Answer: I do because I always have audio recording proceeding in the background during my time at home.
8. So, you could provide this as evidence to the OIG Hotline if requested to do so.
Answer: Most certainly.
9. The FBI appears to state that, on the basis of one or more falsified conversations with your son, President Trump has ordered a new investigation of you. Do you have any idea what the false allegations are?
Answer: Absolutely none. I can observe that the FBI appears to be targeting me on the basis of the fact that I am a registered Democrat, which at this point means that the agency is extending knowingly false charges of radicalism and communism.
10. Does this apply to all Democrats?
Answer: It does, yes.
11. Have you contributed through ActBlue recently?
Answer: No, because I was aware that the FBI was using ActBlue to advance false accusations of fraud. So, I have not been able to contribute through ActBlue for a long time.
12. Is it possible that the FBI extended a fraudulent contribution through online impersonation of you?
Answer: Oh, yes. This is the type of crime the FBI appears quite comfortable with.
13. What about Attorney General Pam Bondi? What is her role in the FBI's commission of knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting against your family?
Answer: She certainly knows it is occurring by this late date.
14. Is she allowing it?
Answer: There's no question but that she is allowing it to continue.
15. Is she authorizing improper harm of your family members and yourself at certain times?
Answer: I think she is authorizing improper investigations and wrongful judicial proceedings which in turn lead to our harm, yes.
16. Is Pam Bondi concerned about her legacy regarding her actions in this case?
Answer: She has got to be concerned about this, yes.
17. To what extent has profiteering from your case extended into the DOJ?
Answer: This is an important question, and it's one to which the American people deserve a clear answer.
18. What is your perspective on the fact that certain material pertaining to the Epstein files was withheld by the U.S. DOJ?
Answer: You know, I myself have been so often wrongfully accused, I would just encourage people not to rush to judgement. Certainly we need to be extremely concerned if material was improperly withheld, because this speaks to corruption of judicial process, a development which could cause extensive harm to our country. Beyond this, people should seek to evaluate the facts on their merits, and I'm certain they will do so.
19. What if an Attorney General were improperly shielding the Executive Branch, in defiance of a Supreme Court ruling?
Answer: We have arrived at a point in American history where many Supreme Court rulings are being ignored, and I just need to express to the people as a whole that we need to return as quickly as possible to a perspective of respect for the weight and dominance of the rulings of our Highest Court.
Is there despair among Supreme Court Justices with regard to the contempt being demonstrated toward them, as well as the dishonesty regarding the FBI's presentation of false evidence before the Honorable Justices? I cannot fathom that they would not feel despair at these developments. We truly need to explain to the American people why the Supreme Court needs to be upheld, respected and preserved as one of the most important branches of our government.
In answer to your question, if an Attorney General were improperly shielding the Executive Branch, this would be a matter for the Supreme Court to assess thoroughly and rule on as quickly as possible. After that, it would be up to everyone to ensure that the Supreme Court's ruling on the matter was upheld.
20. To what extent is Attorney General Pam Bondi shielded from prosecution by the FBI and by the Executive Branch?
Answer: Are there behind-the-scenes deals conferring immunity from prosecution for the AG? Frankly, this is almost certainly in place.
21. What recourse do the American people have if this is the case?
Answer: The spoken truth. Appointed officials do worry about their legacies, and elected officials do worry about public opinion. So, the spoken truth is quite powerful in these instances, and I think we need to remember that fact as we are proceeding.
22. Can the American people demand a change in the Attorney General's conduct?
Answer: Without doubt, they can. And I, in this documentation, am doing so.
23. What do you need from the Attorney General in order to have your standards met regarding your case?
Answer: I need provision of my investigative reports and my settlements through in-person dialogue, and I need assurances that settlements entrusted to me are not being invaded. I need a full accounting, because I need to assess the amount of funds that may have been misappropriated by the opponents of human sovereignty for Americans over the long term. And I need serious discussion about the problem of knowingly falsified law enforcement reporting by the FBI and its affiliates. I need honorable discharge for my sons and daughter-in-law on an immediate basis. And I need exoneration of my family members and myself across the board. There are other considerations, but this is a reasonable starting point.
24. Most immediately, isn't it necessary to halt the torture being inflicted upon your children and daughter-in-law in order to compel false witness statements and other acts of harm?
Answer: The answer is an emphatic yes.
25. Is Congress capable of halting this horrific abuse of power against your family?
Answer: It is, yes. The Congress can oppose Executive orders by insisting that they be adjudicated by the Supreme Court. Beyond this, those rulings need to be provided to me so that I can ensure that they are duly enforced.
26. And in that notification, would the AG again be playing a central role?
Answer: Yes, the Attorney General needs to insist on that provision.
27. Before we close, what was your impression of the boycott of the State of the Union speech by some Democrats on Tuesday?
Answer: I was very sad to see this take place, frankly. Behind the scenes, the FBI had directed some Democrats to be absent, and this is how half the chamber appeared to be empty.
But the symbol of a Congressional Chamber largely empty of Democrats was intended as a preview for the nation of a country in which the two-party system could soon be disallowed. The Democrats did not quite understand the manner in which they were participating in the harm of their own Party by telegraphing their absence from the halls of government.
The visual image, which appeared to represent a half-empty chamber during a critical speech by the President, was alarming to me.
As an elected official, it's your job to be in the room during a State of the Union speech. You effectively promise your constituents that you will be present. And these promises to the public should never be broken.
28. What should the Democrats have told the FBI in this case, when the agency suggested the boycott?
Answer: The Democrats needed to tell the FBI "No." A democracy is participatory. The Democrats should never have been directed not to participate.
29. Are we moving toward a single-Party nation politically?
Answer: The risk is that Democrats who remain will be compromised. We're in danger of having our democracy be performative, with tight control of votes and policies by those who have not been elected at all. And in fact this is already transpiring to a degree.
30. How so?
Answer: Our military and the intelligence agencies are now making governance decisions over and above elected officials at the federal level. This shift has already occurred. The question is whether we can return to the architecture of democratic governance and in what time frame.
31. To return to your case for a moment, how important is this matter to the future of the nation in the long term?
Answer: Any case that determines whether Americans will emerge as a free people -- with conscientious stewardship of the environment, but substantively sovereign -- is critical for the wellbeing of the nation as a whole.
32. Thank you for speaking with us this afternoon.
Answer: You are quite welcome.
Lane MacWilliams
No comments:
Post a Comment