Sunday, November 20, 2022

NY AG Lawsuit Against Trump Should Be Dismissed As Politically Punitive And An Unethical Abuse Of Power By Gregg Jarrett

Source: https://thegreggjarrett.com/ny-ag-lawsuit-against-trump-should-be-dismissed-as-politically-punitive-and-an-unethical-abuse-of-power/
September 22, 2022


Once again, the invectives hurled by the attorney general against Trump constitutes strong evidence that she specifically targeted him in an unequal way

The splashy lawsuit filed Wednesday by New York Attorney General Letitia James against Donald Trump and his children is not just frivolous, it is politically punitive and grossly unethical.

What the case lacks in merit it tries to compensate with sheer volume. But the 220-page civil complaint is, from beginning to end, not worth the ink and paper on which it is printed. Naturally, that did not stop two inveterate Trump-haters from prophesizing the demise of the former President.

New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman called it a “sweeping condemnation” and predicted it is “going to sting” more than any other Trump investigations. Not to be outdone, CNN host John King accepted without question James’ accusations by declaring that “the Trump Organization is a sham built on lies.” Yet, neither journalist is a lawyer. They are incompetent to assess whether the lawsuit is sturdy as steel or weak as a dry sandcastle. It is the latter.

The attorney general alleges that Trump committed fraud by inflating or overstating the value of his real estate holdings, businesses, and personal assets to secure loans from banks. But such valuations are notoriously subjective. In appraising his holdings, seeking loans, and filing tax statements, Trump has always relied scrupulously on the judgment and advice of real estate experts, lawyers, and tax accountants. Banks conducted their own due diligence by using separate appraisers and lawyers before approving the loans. Thus, proving that he somehow defrauded lenders by following the counsel of experienced professionals is a high burden that James will struggle to meet.

Try as she may, the attorney general could never find any evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Instead, she resorted to a civil action claiming financial fraud. But in such cases the plaintiff must necessarily prove that a victim was harmed in some economic or non-economic manner. Here, there are no known victims who were injured. Indeed, just the opposite occurred. The banks who loaned Trump money profited handsomely from the transactions when they were repaid with substantial interest. They never sued because they were never harmed. Civil fraud is not a victimless offense.

As I wrote in a column more than a year ago, the behavior of attorney general James is an affront to justice. Before she was even elected, she vowed to exploit the immense powers of that high office to investigate and prosecute then-President Trump. Never mind that she was not privy to any evidence or documents showing that he had violated a single state law. Bereft of facts did not deter her from accusing Trump of “defrauding Americans.” She publicly denounced him as an ‘illegitimate president” and constantly repeated her campaign pledge to take him down.

James’ bitter crusade has always been an investigation in search of a crime or some civil wrong. She prejudged the merits of a case she had yet to bring and promised an outcome that was preordained. The attorney general is under the mistaken impression that her prosecutorial power is an omnipotent weapon that can be used selectively to punish a political nemesis and to advance her own partisan aspirations. Her malign behavior is profoundly unethical.

Under the code of conduct that governs prosecutors in New York, James is duty-bound to be fair and impartial. She must refrain from methods that are calculated to produce prejudice. Her decisions cannot be driven by political bias. Her neutrality must be beyond question such that even the appearance of a conflict of interest is grounds for disqualification.

Throughout her campaign speeches and post-election remarks, James committed herself to a legal course of action against Trump regardless of whether it was warranted and well before she gained access to any relevant evidence or facts. She suffused her campaign rhetoric with strident anti-Trump diatribes. She accused him of conspiring with foreign governments, obstruction of justice, and a “pattern and practice of money laundering.”

James vowed to relentlessly pursue Trump, his organization, his family, and anyone in his orbit. “Taking on President Trump and looking at all the violations of law I think is no match to what I have seen in my lifetime,” she proclaimed. This was before she was even sworn into office.

Compare her remarks to the American Bar Association’s ethical standard 2.1 which reads: “When deciding whether to initiate or continue an investigation, the prosecutor should not be influenced by partisan or other improper political considerations…or hostility or personal animus toward a potential suspect.”

No reasonable person can believe sincerely that James has not breached her ethical duty under this strict professional standard. To the contrary, she obliterated any semblance of fairness and impartiality with a pernicious investigation driven by prejudice. Her hatred of Trump is palpable and laid bare for all to see in her many condemnations of him before she ever opened her investigation.

In response to the lawsuit, Trump’s legal team should move to dismiss the case due to overwhelming evidence of bias. James has flagrantly violated the former president’s due process rights which are designed to protect citizens from abusive legal proceedings. Her own incriminating words can be used against her.

If a motion to dismiss is not granted, Trump could argue what’s known as “selective prosecution” as a procedural defense. That is, he was singled out by James for political and personal reasons, thus violating the guarantee of equal protection under the law.

Once again, the invectives hurled by the attorney general against Trump constitutes strong evidence that she specifically targeted him in an unequal way compared to countless other developers who have utilized the identical methods of calculating real estate values, loans, and tax breaks. In several cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has reminded government lawyers that they are constitutionally forbidden to bring actions “that are motivated by a discriminatory purpose.”

For four years, Attorney General James has been waging an implacable political and personal vendetta against Trump. In so doing, she has sullied her high office and debased the rule of law that was founded on the principle of fundamental fairness.



The FBI Put A $1 Million Bounty On Trump As The Bureau Sought To Frame Him By Gregg Jarrett


Source: https://thegreggjarrett.com/the-fbi-put-a-1-million-bounty-on-trump-as-the-bureau-sought-to-frame-him/

October 12, 2022

James Comey and his crooked cronies at the bureau were so desperate to topple Trump that they put the equivalent of a a taxpayer-funded bounty on the president’s head to frame him.



An FBI analyst dropped a bombshell in a Virginia federal courtroom Tuesday: the FBI secretly offered Christopher Steele $1 million if the ex-British spy could only corroborate his phony dossier that accused Trump of colluding with Russia.

Think about that. James Comey and his crooked cronies at the bureau were so desperate to topple Trump that they put the equivalent of a a taxpayer-funded bounty on the president’s head to frame him. Bring us the evidence, and we’ll make you rich!

The stunning revelation came on the first day of the criminal trial of Igor Danchenko who is charged by special counsel John Durham of lying to the FBI about the dossier.

Of course, Steele could not possibly prove any of his dossier because it was pure fiction —totally made up. And the FBI knew it almost from the outset because Steele’s primary source told them so. Early on, Danchenko confessed to the FBI that the document was utterly bogus. He admitted to agents that it was nothing more than a devious composition of rumors, innuendo, multiple hearsay, and outright lies.

Declassified documents show that the entire collusion smear was invented by Hillary Clinton herself in the summer of 2016 and funded by her campaign. Independently, the agency had already debunked it but told no one.

The falsity of the dossier didn’t stop the FBI from exploiting it to go after Trump with a vengeance. The fraudulent document fueled the FBI’s dishonest investigation against the president. The bureau also used the dossier to lie to FISA court judges to gain intrusive and lawless warrants to spy on Trump associate, Carter Page.

Comey, Andrew McCabe and others assured the court under oath that the dossier was credible and that Steele was reliable when they knew that both were untrue. Indeed, Steele had been fired from the FBI payroll for lying, but that vital fact was carefully concealed from the court.

Steele wasn’t the only one the FBI was funneling money to. Danchenko was also a paid informant for the bureau to drum up evidence against Trump, even though the Russian national was considered to be a counter-intelligence threat. Again, Comey’s machinations demonstrates just how frantic top officials at the FBI were to bring down Trump —doling out large sums of taxpayer money to nefarious people to support their spurious case against him.

The mainstream media that convicted Trump in the court of public opinion for more than two years are still serving up a goulash of lies. On NBC News Tuesday, a reporter told viewers that the FBI never used the dossier in the Trump probe. That is utterly untrue, as demonstrated by the FBI’s own records that have been made public. So, don’t expect truth, accuracy, and fairness from the Trump-hating media in its coverage of the Danchenko trial.

As the testimony unfolds we can expect to learn even more about the malevolence, depravity, and corruption that has infected the FBI. Stay tuned.



TRUMP IS RIGHT: THE DOUBLE STANDARD IN CLASSIFIED DOCUMENT TREATMENT BETWEEN PRESIDENTS IS GLARING By Summer Lane


Source: https://www.rsbnetwork.com/news/trump-is-right-the-double-standard-in-classified-document-treatment-between-presidents-is-glaring/

October 13, 2022

Photo: Alamy

President Trump smacked down the shameless double standard of treatment between former presidents like George W. Bush and himself during an electric Save America rally in Mesa, Arizona, last week. “Just look at how every other president has been treated when they left office – they’ve been treated beautifully,” he said.

Trump’s comments came on the heels of an intense battle over allegedly classified documents that the FBI seized during an August raid on his private Florida home, Mar-a-Lago.

Since the seizure, the debate over how former presidents have handled possession of supposedly classified documents and records has intensified, drawing attention to the double standard.

“There is no ‘crime’ having to do with the storage of documents at Mar-a- Lago, only in the minds of the Radical Left Lunatics who are destroying our Country, and were just forced by the Courts to give me back much of what they took (STOLE?) during their unprecedented and unnecessary break in of my home,” Trump wrote in a post shared to Truth Social this week, eviscerating the narrative that he had done anything out of the ordinary.

Trump’s claim of innocence has plenty of facts to back it up.

Bill Clinton and His Socks

President Trump has referenced Bill Clinton several times to illustrate the justice system’s hypocrisy in classified document treatment, alluding to the Judicial Watch v. National Archives and Records Administration case that arose several years ago.  

According to a report from John Solomon for Just the News, the case revolved around audio tapes that were kept in Clinton’s sock drawer while he was in the White House. Per the memorandum opinion, U.S. District Judge Jackson ruled that the decision to “segregate personal materials from Presidential records is made by the President, during the President’s term and in his sole discretion.”

President Trump took to Truth Social to comment on the 2012 ruling. He wrote, “The Clinton ‘Socks Case,’ which is law, says it all belongs to ‘the President,’ NO CRIME, and the Presidential Record Act is simple, ‘negotiate,’ and NO CRIME. These people are CRAZY!!!”

According to the search warrant used to raid Trump’s home, the FBI was primarily looking for classified documents and information, as previously reported by RSBN. However, the judge in the Clinton “Socks Case” established that documents could be declassified by the President of the United States when he deemed it necessary to do so.

This begs the question: why did the FBI raid Trump’s home for documents that were, as Trump has previously stated, already “declassified”? Trump has also said that the documents were well-secured and kept under lock and key, at the request of the DOJ.

Millions of Missing Bush Emails  

In Arizona, Trump told a crowd of eager rallygoers that former President George W. Bush had stored 68 million pages of documents in a Texas warehouse and that he had also “lost” 22 million “White House emails.”

A 2016 article from Newsweek referenced by Trump on Truth Social alleged that during Bush’s administration, the White House reportedly lost 22 million emails written during the chaos of the Iraq War.

President of Judicial Watch, Tom Fitton, comments on the double standard at the DOJ.

Further, the outlet reported that the Bush White House supposedly used a private email server that the Republican National Committee owned, claiming that not only were millions of emails lost but that there were “email system blackouts” as well as periods when then-Vice President Dick Cheney had no record of archived emails at all.

“When will they investigate and prosecute Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, George Bush, and look into what took place with George Bush’s father and the warehouse of documents had by Barack Hussein Obama?” Trump remarked last week.

Nobody can seem to answer that question.

Obama Lost a Few Things, Too

Former President Barack Obama’s administration reportedly fumbled the ball a few times when it came to properly transferring records to the National Archives. A 2018 report from Real Clear Politics (RCP) revealed that when David Ferreiro, the then-archivist of the U.S., was moving the Obama administration’s records into the archives, he realized that an enormous number of records were missing.

Trump points out the glaring double standard in document treatment between presidential administrations.

The RCP report alleged that Obama’s administration destroyed government records, despite Obama’s move in 2014 to sign the 1950 Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments that would supposedly safeguard digital classified records from being removed without authorization.

The report stated:

“And yet the accumulation of recent congressional testimony has made it clear that the Obama administration itself engaged in the wholesale destruction and ‘loss’ of tens of thousands of government records covered under the act as well as the intentional evasion of the government records recording system by engaging in private email exchanges.”

Trump has also claimed that “Barack Hussein Obama moved more than 20 truckloads of over 33 million pages of documents – both classified and unclassified to a poorly built, totally unsafe…a furniture store located in a rather bad neighborhood in Chicago.”

Regarding government records and emails, the bottom line is obvious: former presidents are generally free to do as they wish.

That is, until Trump, of course.

Trump and the Presidential Records Act

In 1978, the Presidential Records Act was established, which, per the National Archives, “changed the legal ownership of the official records of the President from private to public, and established a new statutory structure under which Presidents, and subsequently NARA, must manage the records of their Administrations.”

Via Newsweek, the PRA essentially required all presidential and vice-presidential records starting in 1981 (during the Reagan administration) to be preserved. However, former presidential administrations reportedly did not always comply with the PRA in terms of preserving their emails, as demonstrated in the case of the Bush White House.

If Trump’s claims, for example, that Obama did indeed remove documents to a private location in Chicago that was “poorly built” and “totally unsafe,” are true, then why hasn’t Obama been scrutinized as heavily as Trump has for “removing” classified documents?

Why has Bush escaped criticism? Why hasn’t Bill Clinton garnered national media attention for the same thing?

“They could have had it [documents] anytime they wanted – and that includes LONG ago,” Trump stated in August. “ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS ASK.”

So, why didn’t the Justice Department “ask”? Why did they find it necessary to raid the home of a former president who, broadly speaking, should enjoy the same treatment of privilege and power to declassify documents as any other president that came before him?

Clinton, Bush, and Obama were never substantially criticized, severely legally attacked, or questioned for taking documents with them when they left the White House. This duplicitous treatment from the Justice Department sadly demonstrates a chilling double standard of political deference that has left Americans’ trust in the U.S. justice system in tatters.



In Danchenko Trial, Durham Exposes How Corrupt FBI Framed Trump: If nothing else, the Danchenko trial has solidified proof that the FBI is the personification of corruption in government. By Gregg Jarrett


Source: https://thegreggjarrett.com/in-danchenko-trial-durham-exposes-how-corrupt-fbi-framed-trump/

October 17, 2022

Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images

The FBI was so desperate to topple Donald Trump that it secretly dangled an exorbitant reward of $1 million to disgraced ex-British spy Christopher Steele if he would corroborate his dossier that the bureau already knew was phony. It was the equivalent of a bounty on the head of Trump —an outrageous financial incentive to a notorious fabulist to spin even more lies.

That is just one of shocking revelations in the federal trial of Igor Danchenko —Steele’s primary source— who is charged with lying to the FBI about the dossier. In the grand scheme of the elaborate and despicable Russia Hoax, it matters little whether the defendant is convicted by special counsel John Durham. Danchenko is merely the facade. Behind it, the FBI is on trial for its corruption, malfeasance, and malevolence.

Steele, who was already on the FBI payroll to target Trump, was double-dipping. He was also being paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign to create the dossier, which was nothing more than a collection of rumors, innuendo, multiple hearsay, and outright lies. The FBI knew this. By early October of 2016 it had largely debunked the specious document. But then-FBI Director James Comey and his cronies were frantic to falsely incriminate Trump as a supposed Russian asset or, at the very least, convict him in the court of public opinion. They exploited the fictive dossier in an attempt to frame the Republican candidate and eventual president for unidentified crimes he did not commit.

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Of course, Steele never collected his $1 million bonus because he could not possibly prove the truth of his smears. But that did not stop the FBI from using the dossier as the basis for an intrusive and lawless warrant to spy on Trump campaign associate, Carter Page. In his supporting affidavit to the FISA court, Comey vowed under oath that the contents of the dossier were “credible” and that Steele was “reliable”, omitting the crucial (and inconvenient) fact that the former spook had been fired by the FBI for lying. Indeed, Steele was not reliable at all, nor was his work remotely credible. Compounding the government’s duplicity, an FBI lawyer doctored evidence submitted to the court. In a total of four successive warrants, the FISA judges were deceived and defrauded by both the FBI and the Department of Justice, which also had ample reason to suspect the dossier was demonstrably false.

In January of 2017 —a mere four days after Trump was inaugurated— the FBI further confirmed what it already knew when it interviewed Danchenko who served as Steele’s primary source. The Russian national living in Virginia, who had worked for the liberal think tank Brookings Institution in Washington DC, confessed that the dossier was pure fabrication. It was totally made up, he said. But he also allegedly lied by denying that his disinformation came from a Clinton crony, Charles Dolan, Jr., who has close ties to the Russian government. At trial on Thursday, Dolan admitted he gave phony info to the defendant, but he described it as merely an “embellishment.” Right. Danchenko also blamed businessman Sergei Millian for conveying the salacious claim about Trump and prostitutes in a Moscow hotel. Durham intends to prove there was never any contact between the two men.

As the Trump-hating media ran wild with the published dossier by assuring their audiences that it was all true, Comey and others at the bureau remained conspicuously silent. They did not disclose that Danchenko had exposed the document as political chicanery devoid of any truth. Instead, behind the scenes the FBI spread its own disinformation that the dossier was completely credible while concealing exculpatory evidence that Trump was innocent. Meanwhile, special counsel Robert Mueller worked sedulously to hide the Clinton-Steele-Danchenko-FBI delusion. You won’t find a word of it in his report, even though Mueller was privy to all of it. During Danchenko’s trial, an FBI agent revealed that Mueller refused to even interview Dolan, much less investigate him, for furnishing some of the damning lies. It seems that Democrats receive special dispensation.

The current Virginia trial has also exposed sleazy FBI payola beyond the $1 million bounty offered to Steele. It turns out that Danchenko was also on the financial take. In addition to Clinton cash funneled through Steele, he pocketed more than $200,000 in U.S. taxpayer money over the course of three years as an FBI “confidential informant.” He was tasked with digging up dirt on Trump. In other words, the FBI paid the guy who exposed the lies in the dossier —and allegedly lied in the process— to conjure up more of the same. But there appears to have been a secondary benefit to paying off Danchenko. He kept mum to the public and press that the dossier was bogus. It’s hard to believe that the FBI would hire a man they previously investigated as a national security and counterintelligence threat, but that’s how it goes at the Hoover Building these days.

If nothing else, the Danchenko trial has solidified proof that the FBI is the personification of corruption in government. Current Director Christopher Wray is preoccupied with covering up misconduct and has done nothing to cleanup his cesspool of an agency. It needs to be torn apart —deconstructed from top to bottom— and reconstituted into a new agency that adheres to its original principles of a neutral and apolitical law enforcement agency dedicated to upholding the law.

As I wrote in my book, Witch Hunt, when the law enforcers become the law breakers it breeds contempt for the law. Democracy is threatened. Reverence to the rule of law is lost.

Some Bush White House Tapes Lost, Archivists Say By John O'Neil

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/14/us/some-bush-white-house-tapes-lost-archivists-say.html
March 14, 1993

A report by the Federal archivists who collected thousands of White House computer tapes in the waning hours of the Bush Administration indicates that several sets of the tapes, ordered preserved by a Federal judge, have been lost.

A Feb. 16 memo from the National Archives panel that gathered the material said "many dates are missing" from the piles of computer tapes hastily collected in the final 18 hours of the Administration.

A lawyer involved in the case that led to the judge's order said it appeared that "several sets of tapes had been erased, perhaps inadvertently." The lawyer, Cheryl Walter, also said some hard disk drives that were removed from White House computers when the Bush Administration left office may have been damaged by sloppy handling in the transfer. She said the drives, which also contain data, were "thrown in a box with no padding" as the archivists hurried to gather the material before the Clinton Administration took over on Jan. 20.

All told, 4,000 to 5,000 backup tapes from the Bush and Reagan Administrations were collected; such tapes were made every night. The recent losses, reported Saturday in the Washington Post, might amount to a few days' worth, Ms. Walter said. The loss is in addition to about two weeks of Reagan Administration tapes that were found to be missing or erased in an inventory last fall.

In January, Judge Charles R. Richey of Federal District Court ordered the Bush Administration and the National Archivist to save the tapes, which contain records of computer files and electronic-mail messages. The order came in response to a long-running suit by Ms. Walter's group, the National Security Archive, a private organization that collects Government documents, and several public-interest groups seeking to preserve the tapes.

Computer messages provided important evidence in the Iran-contra trials of Oliver L. North and John M. Poindexter, a national security adviser in the Reagan Administration.

The White House tapes were collected in the final hours of the Bush Administration in accordance with an unusual agreement between the National Archivist at the time, Don W. Wilson, and President George Bush giving "exclusive legal control over all Presidential information" to Mr. Bush.

The memo from the archives panel describes in dry detail the frustrations its members faced in Mr. Bush's last hours in office as they hurriedly collected years' worth of classified White House communications even as President Clinton was making his way up Pennsylvania Avenue after his swearing-in. At several points the memo describes long waits for doors to be opened and difficulties in parking the archivists' truck.

Mr. Wilson and the agreement on the tapes came under criticism after the Archivist announced that he would head the Bush Presidential library in Houston. The plaintiffs in the case have also said that they would challenge the agreement in court.

Michael Tankersley, a lawyer for another plaintiff, the public-interest group Public Citizen, said the problems were a result of the "unnecessary" speed dictated by the agreement, which "made for the improper transfer of material." The only reason for the haste, he said, was the desire of Bush officials to keep Clinton employees from having access to the computer files.

Ms. Walter said the problems indicated the need for guidelines on handling computer records, a major goal of the lawsuit.



Court: Cheney can decide what records to save: A federal judge ruled Monday that Vice President Dick Cheney has broad discretion in determining what records created during his eight-year tenure must be preserved.


Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna28738473

The Associated Press
Jan. 19, 2009

A federal judge ruled Monday that Vice President Dick Cheney has broad discretion in determining what records created during his eight-year tenure must be preserved.

Absent any evidence that Cheney's office is failing to safeguard records, it is up to the vice president to determine how he deals with material, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled.

"Congress drastically limited the scope of outside inquiries related to the vice president's handling of his own records during his term in office," the judge said in a 63-page opinion.

The Presidential Records Act "provides only narrow areas of oversight," the ruling added.

At issue is whether Cheney had impermissibly limited the scope of the Presidential Records Act, a post-Watergate law aimed at protecting White House records.

Cheney has taken the legal position that his office is not part of the executive branch of government, triggering a lawsuit by several groups including three organizations of historians and archivists concerned that the record of Cheney's time in office might not be adequately safeguarded.

Last summer, Cheney chief of staff David Addington told Congress the vice president belongs to neither the executive nor legislative branch of government, but rather is attached by the Constitution to Congress. The vice president presides over the Senate.

The lawsuit alleges that the Bush administration's actions over the past eight years call into question whether the White House will turn over to the National Archives a complete record of the activities of Cheney and his staff.

The ruling means that there is little room for the courts or the U.S. archivist to ensure that records are being protected.

"This is a huge loophole in the Presidential Records Act and Congress needs to address it immediately," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a watchdog group that was one of the plaintiffs in the case.

CREW tried but failed to get permission from the judge to question Addington about Cheney's record-keeping practices.



President Bill Clinton Lost Nuclear Codes While in Office, New Book Claims: Fmr. Chairman of Joint Chiefs says nuclear "biscuit" went missing for months. By John Donvan


Source: https://abcnews.go.com/WN/president-bill-clinton-lost-nuclear-codes-office-book/story?id=11930878

October 20, 2010

When you're President of the United States, you can lose a vote, you can lose popular support, and you can lose a round of golf. But you're never, ever supposed to lose the biscuit.

That's what they call the card the president is meant to keep close at hand, bearing the codes that he has to have in order to launch a nuclear attack. And for several months during the Clinton administration, a former top military officer says they lost the biscuit.

Watch "World News with Diane Sawyer" for more on this story tonight on ABC.

Gen. Hugh Shelton, who served under Clinton as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, tells the story in his just-published memoir, "Without Hesitation: The Odyssey of an American Warrior."

"At one point during the Clinton administration," Shelton writes, "the codes were actually missing for months. [...] That's a big deal -- a gargantuan deal."

Similar Story Told By Air Force Man

Shelton claims the story has never been released before, but Ret. Air Force Lt. Col Robert Patterson told a very similar account in his own book, published seven years ago.

Patterson was one of the men who carried the football, and he says it was literally the morning after the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke that he made a routine request of the president to present the card so that he could swap it out for an updated version.

"He thought he just placed them upstairs," Patterson recalled. "We called upstairs, we started a search around the White House for the codes, and he finally confessed that he in fact misplaced them. He couldn't recall when he had last seen them."

In Patterson's telling of the story, the President lost the biscuit in 1998, but according to Shelton, the card went missing in 2000.

President Sends the 'Biscuit' to the Cleaners?

If the facts seem murky, that's not unusual when national security matters are involved. Consider the old story that Jimmy Carter left his biscuit in a suit that got sent to the dry cleaners. Today, no one will confirm the story, but no one will deny it either.



22 Hillary Clinton Emails Dubbed Top Secret By Carrie Johnson and Jessica Taylor


Source: https://www.npr.org/2016/01/29/464811045/as-iowa-caucuses-near-clinton-email-probe-persists

January 29, 2016

Hillary Clinton at a campaign event Thursday in Newton, Iowa.
Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Controversy grew on Friday over emails from Hillary Clinton's private server she used while at the State Department, with the agency announcing several documents would be withheld because they had been deemed top secret.

"We can confirm that later today, as part of our monthly FOIA productions of former Secretary Clinton's emails, the State Department will be denying in full seven email chains, found in 22 documents representing 37 pages. The documents are being upgraded at the request of the intelligence community because they contain a category of top secret information," State Department spokesman John Kirby said. "These documents were not marked classified at the time they were sent."

Kirby reiterated that he would not comment on the content or subject of the blocked documents.

The new revelations come at a particularly politically damaging time — just days before the Iowa caucuses on Monday, where the former secretary of state is neck and neck with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Clinton's campaign responded that the new roadblock "appears to be overclassification run amok" and that it will "pursue all appropriate avenues to see that her emails are released in a manner consistent with her call last year."

"After a process that has been dominated by bureaucratic infighting that has too often played out in public view, the loudest and leakiest participants in this interagency dispute have now prevailed in blocking any release of these emails. This flies in the face of the fact that these emails were unmarked at the time they were sent, and have been called 'innocuous' by certain intelligence officials," Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon said. "We understand that these emails were likely originated on the State Department's unclassified system before they were ever shared with Secretary Clinton, and they have remained on the department's unclassified system for years. And, in at least one case, the emails appear to involve information from a published news article."

Clinton told NPR's Ari Shapiro last week that was the case in at least one instance, following an initial report that some of the emails had been marked top secret.

"As the State Department has confirmed, I never sent or received any material marked classified, and that hasn't changed in all of these months," Clinton maintained. "This seems to me to be, you know, another effort to inject this into the campaign. It's another leak."

An additional 18 emails, including eight distinct email chains, between Clinton and President Obama will also be withheld under executive privilege. They are not classified, Kirby said, and will eventually be released under the Presidential Records Act.

The announcement of the top secret emails comes as the agency is already behind on its monthly production of emails. The State Department has already made public 43,000 pages of Hillary Clinton's emails, and 1,000 more pages are supposed to come out Friday evening. In a late-night court filing this week, authorities said about 7,000 more pages are not yet ready for release.

"State has moved diligently to process the documents and send them to the appropriate agencies for review, a process that was interrupted by the blizzard that struck Washington, D.C.," the court filing said.

That means at least one more Clinton email dump is coming, after primary voting is underway in several states.

And Clinton also fighting multiple investigations into her decision to use a private email server as secretary of state.

The FBI investigation into Clinton's email has been underway for months now. And while the Justice Department and FBI have been keeping a close hold on information, the probe appears to involve whether any government secrets were compromised and how that came to happen.

The inquiry involves not just Clinton, but some of her close aides who sent her messages. Clinton recently told reporters that she has not been interviewed by federal agents, but that is something that typically occurs near the end of an investigation.

Republicans quickly seized on the revelation of the new top secret emails, saying they "once again raise serious legal questions given the fact Hillary Clinton signed a legally binding agreement obligating her to protect classified material regardless of whether it was marked."

"With even more emails on her secret server found to contain 'Top Secret' information, Hillary Clinton has removed all doubt she cannot be trusted with the presidency," Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement. "Hillary Clinton's attempt to skirt government transparency laws by relying exclusively on an unsecure email server in her basement put our national security and diplomatic efforts at risk. And rather tell the American people the truth, Hillary Clinton, her campaign, and her friends in the Obama Administration have obfuscated and misled at every available opportunity. If this isn't disqualifying I don't know what is."

Earlier this week, Clinton told the Quad City Times that her use of a private email server had become a distraction.

"It was a mistake because who wants to put people through all of this?" Clinton said. "I don't want to go through it; I don't want to put a lot of my friends through it. So it was a mistake."

Clinton has said she never sent or received any messages marked classified.

That FBI investigation is far from the only scrutiny the Clinton emails are getting. Reporters and conservative public interest groups have filed federal lawsuits to get copies of those messages.

And Republicans are taking notice. Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey — who served in the George W. Bush administration — published an op-ed accusing Clinton of mishandling classified information, a violation of the law.

Presidential candidate and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio brought up the issue Thursday at the Fox News Channel debate.

"Hillary Clinton is disqualified from being the commander in chief of the United States," Rubio said. "In fact one of her first acts as president may well be to pardon herself. That's because Hillary Clinton stored classified information on her private server."

The email issue is on the agenda in Congress as well. Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, who leads the Judiciary Committee, has sent two binders full of letters to Clinton, the State Department and the Justice Department.

He wants to know what the FBI is doing, whether it is going to grant immunity from prosecution to the information technology aide who helped set up Clinton's private server, and whether federal agents are investigating dealings between the State Department and donors to the Clinton foundation.



Crisis at the National Archives By Thomas Lipscomb


Source: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2018/06/10/crisis_at_the_national_archives_137241.html

June 10, 2018


In the middle of directing the difficult task of transferring the historically important records of the Obama administration into the National Archives, the archivist in charge, David Ferriero, ran into a serious problem: A lot of key records are missing.

A first-rate librarian, Ferriero has been driving a much-needed digital overhaul and expansion of the National Archives over the nine years of his appointment. This will greatly improve the ability of digital search locally and remotely, as well as accessing the files themselves. 

To support this effort, in 2014 President Obama signed the Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments. For the first time electronic government records were placed under the 1950 Federal Records Act. The new law also included updates clarifying "the responsibilities of federal government officials when using non-government email systems" and empowering "the National Archives to safeguard original and classified records from unauthorized removal.” Additionally, it gives the Archivist of the United States the final authority in determining just what is a government record.

And yet the accumulation of recent congressional testimony has made it clear that the Obama administration itself engaged in the wholesale destruction and “loss” of tens of thousands of government records covered under the act as well as the intentional evasion of the government records recording system by engaging in private email exchanges. So far, former President Obama, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Attorney General Lynch and several EPA officials have been named as offenders. The IRS suffered record “losses” as well. Former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy called it “an unauthorized private communications system for official business for the patent purpose of defeating federal record-keeping and disclosure laws.”

Clearly, America’s National Archives is facing the first major challenge to its historic role in preserving the records of the United States. What good is the National Archives administering a presidential library, like the planned Obama library in Chicago, if it is missing critical records of interest to scholars? And what’s to prevent evasion of the entire federal records system by subsequent administrations to suit current politics rather than serve scholars for centuries to come?

The National Archives in Washington has evolved from a few dusty shelves in 1934 to an independent agency with over 40 facilities nationwide.  These include field archives, military records, Federal Records Centers, 13 presidential libraries, the Federal Register, and the National Historical Publications and Records Commission.

Its electronic records system alone, which only began in 2008, has already compiled close to 1 billion unique files from over 100 federal agencies totaling well over 400 terrabytes. The archive describes itself as “the U.S. Government's collection of documents that records important events in American history. … the Government agency that preserves and maintains these materials and makes them available for research.”

Federal records have solved historical mysteries and provided key information ever since the archive’s founding. Adm. Hyman Rickover’s investigations there proved his suspicion that the U.S. battleship Maine had not been sunk by a Spanish mine, but rather an explosion caused by careless proximity of gunpowder storage to coal bunkers.

And in my own research, I found a detailed report of the debriefing of Nazi Deputy Reichsfuhrer Rudolf Hess by MI6 the day after he parachuted into Scotland -- a report that was not in the British Archives. It established that in May 1941, over seven months before the Wannsee Conference formalized the Nazis’ “Final Solution,” Hess had told the British: “We are exterminating the Jews.” It established as lies the Allies’ claims they only learned about the Holocaust later.

The archive sensibly only collects a fraction of the federal records for its permanent archive. That number varies between 2 percent and 5 percent of the total. That can be a good thing, according to historian Arthur Herman. “In studying a bureaucracy, too much evidence may be a greater danger than too little,” he said. “The amount of material often seems to be inversely proportionate to the value of its evidence.”

And Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Joseph J. Ellis points out that it is not always the record itself that is key: “Sometimes it is the marginalia. There were 28,000 notations in the John Adams collection that were critical to my interpretation of the relationship between John and Abigail Adams.”

And marginalia may be the key to solving the puzzle of just what the late Sandy Berger, acting as former President Bill Clinton’s representative, was destroying during his 2005 trips into the National Archives, where he stuffed papers into his clothing. Berger only got away with this twice before archive personnel kept tabs on him, but the first trips involved as yet uncatalogued material so no one really knows what he took. But there seemed to be copies in the archive of everything they caught him with. And archival libraries dependent upon physical papers are vulnerable.

Every archive in the world suffers attacks, resulting in the theft of its records, the amending or destroying of them, and the archive has had five it knows of since Berger. Digital storage and authentication will be a great help in securing all holdings.

Berger was supposedly reviewing records for a Clinton response to the 9/11 Commission’s considerations of mistakes made leading up to the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Dean Emeritus of Boston University Law School Ronald Cass wonders if there was telling marginalia by Clinton or others on some of these documents that were not on the file copies. The Clintons seemed to have a longstanding problem with records, since the disappearance in 1994 and reappearance in 1996 of the subpoenaed Rose Law Firm files in the Clintons’ private White House quarters.

Now the National Archives is faced with Hillary Clinton’s history-making assault on government records while secretary of state, which Cass describes as fitting a pattern of “destroy, deny and corrupt the process.” (This is no doubt why Harvard just awarded her the Radcliffe Medal citing her “transformative impact on society.”)

How does David Ferriero plan to deal with this unique challenge to his institution? First, it’s not just his problem, although he must address the realities of gaps in the record and how it will affect plans for the new Obama presidential library. But will there be penalties for violating the 2014 law? Is it even possible to continue the great tradition of maintaining an authentic record center for the United States that President Franklin Roosevelt founded 83 years ago, if that law is not supported?

Thomas H. Lipscomb is the founding publisher of Times Books. His news reporting has appeared in the Chicago Sun-Times, New York Sun and other papers. As a digital entrepreneur he has founded and served as CEO of two public companies based upon his patents.



What’s That Building? Why This Hoffman Estates Warehouse Stores Barack Obama’s Presidential Papers By Dennis Rodkin


Mar. 14, 2019

The front entrance to the facility that temporarily houses the future documents for Barack Obama's online presidential library. Jason Marck / WBEZ

If you drove past this suburban building, you likely wouldn’t suspect it houses the classified and non-classified documents from Barack Obama’s eight years as president.

More than 20 truckloads of papers were brought from Washington, D.C. to this shuttered Plunkett furniture store in Hoffman Estates in early 2017.

Those documents will eventually be digitized and made available to the public in a different way from past presidential libraries. The Obama Presidential Library won’t be a physical building — it’ll live on the internet.

Barack Obama’s presidential papers are currently housed across the street from a McDonald’s. Jason Marck / WBEZ

A digital library saves the Obama Foundation some money

The facility that may come to mind when you think “Obama Presidential Library” — the one that’s proposed for a site in Jackson Park and currently in limbo because of a lawsuit — is the Barack Obama Presidential Center. If it gets built, the only library there will be a new branch of the Chicago Public Library. It’ll also be home to a museum, a forum space, and a public plaza.

Former President Barack Obama points to a rendering of the future Barack Obama Presidential Center at the South Shore Cultural Center in May 2017. Nam Y. Huh / AP Photo

In May 2017, the National Archives announced Obama’s library would be entirely digital. The physical documents that traditionally fill a presidential library would instead be digitized, and ultimately stored outside of Illinois. It’s a move that saves the Obama Foundation quite a bit of money.

This security gate is one of the only signs that something interesting is going on inside this former furniture store. WBEZ / Jason Marck

When ex-presidents build their presidential libraries, they are required by law to provide an endowment to the National Archives, the agency that manages presidential libraries. Today, that endowment must equal 60 percent of the cost of the library. That means that if the Obama Presidential Center included a library, the Obama Foundation would also have to raise tens of millions more for the endowment.

Where will Obama’s papers end up for good?

The documents won’t stay in Hoffman Estates forever. Under the digitizing plan, the National Archives will get custody of all the physical papers once they’ve been put online. The unclassified documents will go to a National Archives storage facility near Kansas City, Mo. and the classified ones will go back to Washington, D.C.

Until the digitizing work begins, the documents will stay in Hoffman Estates behind the the small security gate installed at the parking lot entrance.

Dennis Rodkin is a real estate reporter forCrain’s Chicago Business and Morning Shift’s “What’s That Building?” contributor.

Monday, October 17, 2022

5 Big Election Fraud Stories Breaking Just Before The 2022 Midterms By Emerald Robinson

Source: https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/5-big-election-fraud-stories-breaking

Oct 15, 2022

The 2022 elections are going to be the least secure elections since 2020!

#1 — Why are election officials in Delaware County (PA) illegally mailing out ballots for the 2022 midterms before the logic and accuracy tests have started?

Emerald Robinson’s The Right Way
"They Will Steal The Midterms"
Thanks to the authors of The Parallel Election for sending me the following information about election fraud being prepared for the 2022 mid-terms in Delaware County, PA. First, read this announcement…
Read more

#2 — How come a Dominion Voting machine “error code” that was found in Tennessee’s machines was also found in 97% of the counties in Georgia?

The State of Tennessee, the EAC, and the two accredited entities that test voting machines, Pro V&V and SLI Compliance, investigated the anomaly and were able to repeat the problem but were not able to determine the root cause of the anomaly.

Kanekoa News
Bombshell Dominion 'Error Code' Uncovered in 97% of Georgia Counties
In a podcast episode released last week Thursday, David Cross and Kevin Moncla of the Election Oversight Group reveal that open records request from 64 of 66 Georgia counties show the same security error “QR code signature mismatch” and warning message…
Read more

#3 — Why did Fulton County (PA) file a lawsuit against Dominion Voting Systems for breach of contract last month?

Fulton County has made a very simple and very effective argument: if the Halderman Declaration is accurate — and neither the federal government’s own cybersecurity agency nor Dominion Voting Systems have claimed otherwise — then Dominion Voting Systems could not have delivered properly certified machines according to the contract.

Emerald Robinson’s The Right Way
Fulton County Sues Dominion Voting Systems!
On September 20th, Fulton County (PA) filed a lawsuit against Dominion Voting Systems for breach of contract and breach of warrant. Need I tell you, dear reader, that America’s corrupt corporate media ignored this landmark lawsuit? Here’s page 13 of Fulton County’s 29-page lawsuit …
Read more

#4 — Why did the FBI try to hide that a Chinese CEO of an election software company in America was breaking the law?

Kanekoa News
FBI Conceals Chinese Infiltration of U.S. Election Software
In a live chat released on Monday, Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips appeared together on “truethevote.locals.com” to discuss their 15-month involvement with what was characterized to them as a “counter-intelligence operation” with the Federal Bureau of Investigation into American election company Konnech Inc…
Read more

5 — How is it possible that a well known cyber security expert identified “a critical privacy flaw in the election infrastructure sold by Dominion Voting Systems” in the United States just this week?

Here’s the Twitter thread on this “critical flaw.”

What is Luciferase? How a firefly enzyme that glows might herald the end of the world By Emerald Robinson

Source: https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/what-is-luciferase

Nov 4, 2021

As most of my followers on social media and Substack must know by now, I have spent a considerable amount of time the last two years trying to discover the actual ingredients of the new COVID vaccines. The reason is simple: Big Pharma has gone to considerable trouble to hide them.

Do the Big Pharma companies want to submit the vaccines to independent analysis? They do not! Do the Big Pharma companies want to disclose all the ingredients? They do not! Do the Big Pharma companies have any liability for lying to the public about the proprietary ingredients in their vaccines? They do not.

We have a leaked copy of the legal agreement that Big Pharma companies (allegedly) have forced nation-states to sign in order to get the new COVID vaccines. These contracts include indemnification clauses that no sane human being would ever sign. This copy leaked from Albania:


One thing is certain: Big Pharma is not standing behind these products. They're totally experimental and untested and so forth -- so why are the world's governments so hellbent on injecting their citizens with this stuff?

I received a tip regarding some of these ingredients, and so I did what nobody in American corporate journalism does anymore: I checked the primary sources.

Allow me to share my secret and very profound methodology:

1) I went to the MODERNA website.

2) I clicked to the PATENTS page.

3) I found PATENT US 10,703,789

4) I conducted a keyword search for something called: Luciferase.

Such are the complex technical skills which have been lost by corporate journalists. So what did I find there? Well, sitting on page 46 in table 4, you will see that I found something called Luciferase:

What’s Luciferase?

Luciferase is an enzyme that can produce bioluminescence. (It can make things glow, basically.) That’s why Luciferase is commonly used in the biomedical industry. It’s used to tag very tiny things like cells or proteins so that you can track them.

It tags things so you can track them.

Was Luciferase listed as an ingredient in the COVID vaccines by Big Pharma? No it was not. (You can check here at the CDC website.) So the next question becomes: why would Big Pharma not disclose that Luciferase is an ingredient in the vaccines - since it’s clearly listed (in at least one patent from one company) as being used?

The reason is rather ominous: Big Pharma has big plans for Luciferase and Big Government has big plans for it too. The U.S. military’s technology arm DARPA is currently fighting with Moderna over the ownership of the COVID vaccine because DARPA has “funded an implantable biochip” that could be used “to deploy” it:

Despite this, however, one obstacle to the deployment of Moderna’s vaccine is the method of delivery. While Moderna is developing its own system, it’s unlikely to get Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval any time soon. Enter Profusa, which is developing a nanoscale biochip that can detect symptoms of an infection.

Profusa’s biochip is made using a technology called “hydrogels” that were a product of the “In Vivo Nanoplatforms” (IVN) program that DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office (BTO) launched in 2014 to develop implantable nanotechnologies.

These hydrogels are soft, flexible nanomachines that are injected beneath the skin to perform monitoring. This hydrogel includes a specially engineered molecule that sends a fluorescent signal outside the body when it begins to fight infection. This signal can then be detected by a sensor attached to the skin that can then be sent to an app or even to a doctor’s website.

Why is the U.S. military working with vaccine companies to create micro-chips (that’s “hydrogels” or “nanotech”!) that will send a “fluorescent signal” (that’s Luciferase!) detectable by an app on your smartphone? When did DARPA get involved in public health policy exactly? That strange question leads to other strange questions like: why did the Pentagon fund the Wuhan Lab of Virology to “study” weaponizing bat coronaviruses? Neither DARPA nor the Pentagon are well known for being leaders in health care, to say the very least.

In fact, Big Pharma and Big Government have big plans for future vaccine shots that have “dissolvable needles” and quantum dot tattoos along with other amazing technology like embedding vaccine records beneath the skin of your children with invisible ink. According to one article: “Along with the vaccine, a child would be injected with a bit of dye that is invisible to the naked eye but easily seen with a special cell-phone filter, combined with an app that shines near-infrared light onto the skin.” That article was written in 2019: that’s just before the COVID crisis. That leads me to another thought: COVID-19 seems to be a very convenient “accidental lab leak” from China for introducing new technology.

Under the cover of vaccinating people, we are really preparing to tag and track people. The once free nations of the West are testing a new authoritarian system of total control under the guise of public health. Just look at Australia or New Zealand or Canada or Italy to see how basic civil rights have been suspended indefinitely and a pseudo-medical tyranny has been installed. The Great Reset is being implemented with the lie that it’s all about “protecting your health.” Our military and intelligence agencies are not confronting China — they're copying China. A totalitarian nightmare is being imported into free countries through surveillance technologies.

You don’t have to be a Christian to understand that such technology will be used to build a global surveillance state. The vaccine mandates have already led to vaccine passports. The vaccine passports are basically QR codes to track you by connecting to your smartphone. This will inevitably lead very soon to biometric ID embedded into your body. You won’t be able to enter restaurants or buy groceries or go to work without it. As the Bible says: no one will be able to buy or sell anything except those that have the mark. You will know the mark by its name, which is the name of the beast: the enemy of all mankind who, before he fell, was an angel of light named Lucifer. That’s why “Luciferase” should send a chill down your spine.

So I sent out the following tweet to my followers (with a video showing the Luciferase patent information) earlier this week:


This one tweet was sufficient, apparently, to get the word “Luciferase” trending on Twitter. (I didn’t notice at the time because I was busy covering the Glenn Youngkin victory on election night.) It was not until the next day that it became clear this one tweet had stirred up all the Big Pharma bots working remotely from Beijing.

The largest producer of misinformation in America, The Washington Post, ran a piece on my tweet where I was branded a “COVID conspiracy theorist.” The Daily Beast ran a piece and then ran a second piece. Something called The Hill ran a piece. The forgotten boomer finance magazine Forbes got involved. Vanity Fair, the perfume ad magazine, did a little column on it. Then it became an international thing with The Independent and The Daily Mail chiming in.

Now you have to ask yourself: are my tweets about vaccine ingredients really making headline news around the world? I checked with my husband first to see if I was indeed that famous. His response was disappointing. He told me: “At best, you’re semi-famous.” When corporate media outlets around the English-speaking world all start to scream in such coordinated fashion, you know you’ve hit a nerve. Why would they suddenly go crazy over the COVID vaccine ingredients?

It’s because Big Journalism is being paid by Big Pharma to not disclose the truth. In fact, Big Pharma is paying Big Journalism to actively hide the truth around the world. Why do you think the COVID journalist Alex Berenson got kicked off Twitter? Why did the corporate media unleash a hate campaign against feminist icon Naomi Wolf? Why isn’t ex-Pfizer chief scientist Dr. Michael Yeadon allowed to speak? How is it possible that the inventor of mRNA vaccines himself, Dr. Robert Malone, is not a household name around the world? You know the answer: they have all warned us about the dangers of the new COVID vaccines. They have been silenced by Big Tech and Big Pharma because they have all dared to tell the truth.

They are not alone. How many thousands have been banned or suspended already by Big Tech for questioning the COVID vaccines in our supposedly free nation? How many of your civil rights, your constitutional rights, can they trample before your very eyes? America is no longer a constitutional republic: it’s more like a corporate oligarchy where Big Pharma and Big Tech and Big Government tell you every day what you’re allowed to do on Zoom calls from the CDC with Dr. Fauci. They’re not even pretending anymore. This is something like Day 575 of “15 days to slow the spread.” Our so-called civil servants and elected officials are never going to give up their new “emergency powers” on their own. They mean to rule over us, and everybody knows it.

That’s why the COVID-19 pandemic is being used to force everyone to get the new vaccines. That’s why natural immunity doesn’t count to anyone in the medical community. That’s why religious exemptions have disappeared at your work, along with medical exemptions. That’s why Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine (and every other therapeutic drug) were swiftly outlawed. That’s why your 5 year old child will be “encouraged” and then coerced and then forced to take the jab, just as you were “encouraged” and then coerced and then forced to take the jab. That’s why the global vaccination campaign never stops when the already vaccinated start to get sick with COVID, or young boys suddenly die from heart inflammation, or world famous soccer players collapse on TV in the middle of games. That’s why health data (whether from Israel or Sweden or Florida or your local hospital) is totally irrelevant. The vaccine is being forced on everyone because the vaccine and the vaccine passport are the essential tools of a global surveillance system that will end everyone’s basic human freedom.

You have been warned.



Fox News & Newsmax Took Biden Money To Push Deadly COVID Vaccines To Its Viewers By Emerald Robinson


Source: https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/fox-news-and-newsmax-took-biden-money

Mar 5, 2022

Corporate news outlets did not disclose the money they took to push dangerous drugs to their conservative audience


Two days ago, Chris Pandolfo at Blaze Media revealed that his media organization had filed FOIA requests regarding the Biden Administration's covert funding of the deadly new vaccines and the American corporate media. What they discovered will certainly shock you -- and it's a crucial story that our corrupt media will work hard to make the least covered and least discussed news story of the year.


What did Chris Pandolfo find? He discovered that nearly the entire corporate media took money from the Biden Administration to push the vaccines to their audiences without disclosing it. More importantly, so-called "conservative" media organizations took money from the Biden Administration to spin positive stories about deadly and ineffective vaccines to their conservative viwers who were right to be suspicious -- and did not disclose it.

Fox News took the money and said nothing to its conservative viewers.

Newsmax took the money and said nothing to its conservative viewers.

In response to a FOIA request filed by TheBlaze, HHS revealed that it purchased advertising from major news networks including ABC, CBS, and NBC, as well as cable TV news stations Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC, legacy media publications including the New York Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post, digital media companies like BuzzFeed News and Newsmax, and hundreds of local newspapers and TV stations. These outlets were collectively responsible for publishing countless articles and video segments regarding the vaccine that were nearly uniformly positive about the vaccine in terms of both its efficacy and safety.

That is the largest and most comprehensive breach of journalistic ethics that has ever occurred. Almost everybody took the money. Almost everybody lied about the vaccines (knowingly or unknowingly). Almost everybody refused to report anything negative about the vaccines -- because they were paid to close their eyes. Almost everybody is implicated.

Now that the new COVID vaccines have been shown to be not only dangerous and ineffective but highly dangerous, the American public would naturally expect the American news media to do some investigation into the biggest medical experiment in the history of the world. That's not going to happen. The American corporate media has been paid off by the Biden Administration, and so they're running Ukraine war footage 24/7 in the hope that the American public will forget the last two years of media-manufactured COVID mania.

Let me add some personal details to the largest corporate media scandal of the year: I have been contacted by a whistleblower inside Newsmax who has confirmed the broad details of this story. That insider confirms: Newsmax executives agreed to take the money from Biden's Health and Human Services (HHS) to push only positive coverage of the new COVID vaccines.

Let me add another personal detail: I was contacted by top Newsmax executives and told to halt any negative coverage of the vaccines in 2021. I was told that "it was problematic" for Newsmax. I was given some version of this warning multiple times by multiple executives. Obviously, I did not heed their advice.

Of course, almost everyone else employed in the corporate media did keep their mouths shut. I discussed the outright ban on negative vaccine coverage with other Newsmax producers and top anchors at the time, and they were aware that they could not provide negative coverage of the news vaccines without repercussions from the network. I was contacted by PR experts who worked with Newsmax and was told that medical experts and doctors who might say negative things about the new vaccines would not be booked as guests at all.

In other words, the Biden Administration's money did not just pay for pro-vaccine advertising at outlets like Fox and Newsmax: it paid for an outright ban on any negative coverage. There's a word for that kind of thing, and the word is: propaganda. Corporate news executives with no medical training and no expertise began to make ludicrous announcements that were basically blanket endorsements of the deadly and untested vaccines. Pandolfo decribes this propaganda:

Other publications, such as the Los Angeles Times, featured advice from experts on how readers could convince vaccine-hesitant people in their lives to change their minds. The Washington Post covered "the pro-vaccine messages people want to hear." Newsmax has reported how the vaccines have "been demonstrated to be safe and effective" and "encouraged citizens, especially those at risk, to get immunized."

HHS did not immediately respond when asked if the agency used taxpayer dollars to pay for people to be interviewed, or for a PR firm to place them in interviews with news outlets.

Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy even wrote an op-ed to celebrate Joe Biden's vaccine rollout and praise Biden's high poll numbers. This op-ed was basically a personal plea for the American public to take medical advice from a news organization that was secretly taking money from the Biden Administration to say positive things about dangerous drugs. "At Newsmax, we have strongly advocated for the public to be vaccinated. The many medical experts who have appeared on our network have been near unanimous in support of the vaccine," Ruddy said. "I myself have gotten the Pfizer vaccine. There's no question in my mind, countless lives would have been saved if the vaccine was available earlier." 

Meanwhile, Fox News executive are continuing to enforce vaccinbe mandates with their own employees -- even though the mandates have been halted by the courts. Fox is even offering $500 to any employee, right now, who proves they got the jab.

We have just lived through the most extensive propaganda campaign in the history of the world and it was paid for with taxpayer dollars. You paid for it. I paid for it. We will probably never know how much money was spent because, according to a source familiar with the FOIAs, the Biden Administration won't release the amounts under their "trade secrets" exemption.

I've been telling people for the last two years that, when the truth comes out about the deadly COVID vaccines, it will topple the American corporate media.

Now you know what I was talking about.