1. It is alleged that you have been "on trial" for the last several weeks regarding your case. Have you participated in your own defense? Have you been empowered to speak directly to attorneys defending you? Have you been able to answer false claims by the FBI?
Answer: No, I have no idea what the false charges are, and I have not been able to see the false evidence. All of this is proceeding without my input, my guidance, or my exculpatory documentation, of which I have a great deal.
2. There has been an allegation that AI-generated "deep fake" films have been presented to a Grand Jury as purported evidence over the course of this proceeding. What is your view of that suggestion?
Answer: Sometimes it seems as though everyone in the world has been privileged to see deep fake material bearing my likeness except for me.
I cannot begin to express how wrong this whole process is.
If we want to prohibit the utilization of deep fake material, both video and audio, by corrupt law enforcement agencies, then we need to actually gather the courage to show the victims what false material was created without their knowledge or consent.
Without this critical step, the discussion is moot.
In this case, there needs to be accountability that involves me, given that I have been the one affected by the FBI's crimes in this regard.
3. The FBI seems also to have alleged that the agency has put forward falsified DNA evidence of some kind. Would you like to weigh in on this allegation by the agency?
Answer: Almost everything I would say to exonerate myself is considered a "national security secret" by the FBI. If I were contacted by the Grand Jury, I would give them a sample of my DNA that dates back ten or more years, for the simple reason that any claims of differences between an older sample and current samples are one hundred percent due to misconduct by the FBI itself.
But all of that evidence would probably be presented under seal in a courtroom setting, because the FBI is quite guarded regarding its "sources and methods" when it comes to framing the innocent.
So, this is a big deal, and it should not be evaluated or resolved without my direct participation.
4. Why not?
Answer: Because without the truth of the matter, false convictions become more than a risk. They become a likelihood.
5. And what do false convictions translate to for a person in your position, who has been a tireless advocate for the long term human rights of Americans, as well as an unyielding supporter of the sovereignty of the nation as a whole?
Answer: In this case, where there is so much at stake financially given the awards that have been extended to me, false convictions translate to a death sentence.
6. A death sentence in absentia?
Answer: Yes, this is the astonishing nature of concealed judicial proceedings. The accused have no knowledge of the charges, nor do they have any opportunity to disprove them.
7. And what would happen if such a wrongful sentence were carried out?
Answer: Massive theft of awards extended to me in this case -- settlements about which I have not yet been properly informed.
8. So there is an overwhelming motivation on the part of the FBI to allege your guilt, or your family members' guilt, surrounding crimes of which you have no knowledge whatsoever.
Answer: Oh, yes. The conflict of interest for the FBI and its affiliates is astounding.
9. You have expressed a great deal of concern regarding the FBI's establishment of the architecture of false reporting for the nation, because these structures will be exceptionally difficult for us to unmake later.
Answer: I have, because falsified law enforcement reporting is not needed for the FBI's mission and objectives. Rather, it represents the architecture of totalitarianism, and, because of the manner in which AI is generating false information about all Americans, we need to be deeply concerned about the ways in which these falsehoods will be misused in the future.
If you knew that the FBI could falsely accuse you of the most serious crimes possible at any time, would you still exercise free speech?
Most people, understanding the danger, would not. So, the fundamentals of our freedoms are dismantled by falsified law enforcement reporting. The Constitution is simply erased as an enforceable document under these circumstances.
And that is the intent of falsified law enforcement reporting: total control over the public at all times.
Remarkably, it's not the most dangerous sovereignty violation for the nation. But all by itself, it represents a stunning violation of the human rights we hold sacred. So, we need to consider if this is the best we can do for our family, our friends, our neighbors, our nation and ourselves.
I think we're worthy of much better governance.
But we need to engage with this issue or the inflection point will pass us by.
10. What does that mean in terms of your "trial" about which you know no substance?
Answer: It means that I had better be exonerated of all wrongdoing, as should my family members. And it means that if that doesn't happen, I should be contacted right away in order to participate in my own urgent appeal.
It also means that I need to be provided with outreach, investigative reports, and awards extended to me so that I can make the difference for the nation that I am intended to make.
11. Thank you for speaking with us this morning.
Answer: You are most welcome.
Lane MacWilliams
No comments:
Post a Comment