The Rebellion Is Alive and Thriving
June 17, 2023 | Sundance |
We live with a new type of tyranny, where we find ourselves dissidents. It is not like any previous tyranny. It is not revolutionary in nature. Instead, it operates very scientifically and technocratically by convincing those it tyrannizes to demand their own enslavement, under the guise of comfort.
Prior dissidents were at least dissidents of a tangible, kinetic revolution. We are dissidents of what the willfully tyrannized perceive as their secure position within the rightful order of things. This needs to be factored into how we think about “converting” and “awakening” others amid the ongoing insurgency.
(Via Daily Mail) – A Fox News producer who resigned over a chyron that described Joe Biden as a ‘wannabe dictator’, has broken his silence.
Alexander McCaskill posted a photo of himself on Instagram holding a cardboard box outside the corporation’s New York offices.
He told his followers ‘Today was my last day at Fox’ and described his time there as a ‘wild 10 years’.
McCaskill is thought to have been responsible for the chyron which claimed President Biden was intent on locking up his 2024 rival, Donald Trump on Tuesday.
Fox had it on screen for less than 30 seconds, and then apologized. Dailymail.com has approached Fox News and McCaskill for comment.
Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson claimed the producer had resigned during his new show, now being broadcast on Twitter, on Thursday.
He did not name the producer but The Daily Beast reported that it was McCaskill, who worked with Carlson on Tucker Carlson Tonight for many years.
McCaskill seemed to confirm news of his resignation on his private Instagram account in a lengthy post.
‘Today was my last day at FOX. It was a wild 10 years and it was the best place I’ve ever worked because of the great people I met,’ he wrote.
‘But the time has come. I asked them to let me go, and they finally did. To all my friends there: I will miss you forever.’ (read more)
Well done Mr. McCaskill, well done!
The rebellion is alive and well!
It Begins: 20 Heavily Armed IRS and ATF Agents Raid Great Falls Gun Store, Seize Firearm Purchase Records
By Jim Hoft Jun. 16, 2023
In an unprecedented move, twenty armed Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) agents carried out a raid on a gun store in Great Falls, Montana, seizing all Form 4473 – documents that record buyer’s information during firearms transactions.
Tom Van Hoose, owner of Highwood Creek Outfitters, alleges that he has been under constant surveillance by state and federal agencies for over two years, KRTV reported.
On Wednesday, the gun shop owner reported an unexpected visit from 20 heavily armed IRS and ATF agents at his store.
The agents reportedly arrived at the shop early in the morning, as Van Hoose was opening for the day.
“We have now confirmed that both the IRS and the ATF were at Highwood Creek Outfitters in Great Falls around 7 am this morning. Both the IRS and ATF would not say why they were there,” KMON Radio reported.
“A spokeswoman for the IRS would only say they were there on official IRS business. The ATF says it was providing assistance to the IRS. We attempted to enter the store today and were stopped by agents at the door who would only say that the gun store is closed and will reopen tomorrow,” the news outlet added.
According to Hoose, the federal scrutiny began two years ago and has involved various agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, the Department of Homeland Security, and now, the Internal Revenue Service.
“They must think we’re making a fortune in the gun business to investigate us like this, assuming we’re hiding thousands, hundreds of thousands, even millions of dollars. However, anyone familiar with gun business profit margins would know that’s not the case,” Van Hoose told MTN News.
Van Hoose claims that he was simply told his business had been reported, although he remains in the dark about who reported it or why. He believes the whole episode was politically motivated.
“I can only assume that it’s because of the style of weapons that we have and the press that’s so against them,” said Van Hoose. “The current administration seems to be hell bent on getting those guns out of the hands of average Americans.”
The day’s operations were disrupted, leading to a significant loss of revenue.
“I had about 30 minutes to operate, making just a single $16 sale,” Hoose said.
Highwood Creek Outfitters is America’s largest online firearms and accessories mall, according to its website. The store is known for selling what Van Hoose calls “fun guns,” including AR-15’s and AK-47s.
WATCH:
caution language
The Great Falls Police Department confirmed it was informed about the investigation and provided security, according to KRTV.
Although the Montana Department of Justice claimed no involvement in the incident, an IRS spokesperson confirmed their presence at Highwood Creek Outfitters but refrained from providing further details.
The recent incident has attracted political attention, with Congressman Matt Rosendale expressing his concern over the IRS and ATF’s actions, interpreting them as another example of the Biden regime’s weaponization of federal agencies against hardworking Americans.
“I’m incredibly disturbed by initial reports that the IRS and ATF closed Highwood Creek Outfitters without any warning today,” said Rep Rosendale in a statement.
“This is yet another example of the Biden Administration weaponizing federal agencies to target and harass hardworking Americans. We cannot allow Biden to continue expanding these agencies to infringe on our liberties,” he added.
On Friday afternoon, the congressman announced he sent a letter to ATF Director Steven Dettelbach and IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel, asking for answers.
“The weaponization of our government must be STOPPED, which is why I sent a letter to ATF Director Dettelbach and IRS Commissioner Werfel demanding answers about this outrageous attack and have used every tool available to me to remove funding for the 87,000 additional IRS agents!” Rep. Rosendale said.
Read the full letter here.
Rep. Matt Rosendale joined Chris Salcedo to discuss the incident.
“Here’s what they took out. IRS – financial records, accounting, making sure what transactions were taking place. No, they took all of the 4473 forms. The 4473 forms are what everyone fills out when they go to purchase a firearm,” said Rosendale.
“And it’s just a big disclosure to make sure that you don’t have a criminal background or other reasons where you should not be purchasing a firearm. So the IRS took every single one of the 4473s that Tom Van Hoose had in his possession there at Highwood Creek Outfitters,” he added.
20 armed IRS agents raid Great Falls gun store.
They didnt take any financial records, accounting or tax statements.
But they did take all the 4473 forms. (Buyer’s Information)
Now we know what the 87,000 IRS agents are for.#614clinton pic.twitter.com/uJCTfcJfIK
— Clinton (@614clinton) June 17, 2023
Rep. Rosendale tweeted a photo of himself with Hoose, who confirmed that all 4473 forms were confiscated by federal agents.
I met with Tom Vanhoose this morning after 20 armed IRS agents raided his store in Great Falls earlier this week.
Tom informed me that these agents confiscated all the 4473 forms, none of which contain any financial information; instead, the IRS now has access to these forms… pic.twitter.com/HPFEgZedKI
— Matt Rosendale (@RepRosendale) June 16, 2023
IRS Agent Uses Fake Name to Enter Taxpayer’s Home – Then Threatens Her to Cut a Check
By Jim Hoft Jun. 17, 2023
Jim Jordan and the Weaponization Subcommittee released new information on Friday night.
The House Judiciary Committee and its Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government are conducting oversight of federal agencies’ commitment to protecting civil liberties.
In the subcommittee’s latest report released Friday they discovered that the IRS is using fake names to enter taxpayers’ homes and harass homeowners.
And in this Ohio case, the IRS agent threatened police when he got caught.
Here’s the unbelievable story of government abuse from The Weaponization Subcommittee:
We have recently received allegations that an Internal Revenue Service agent provided a false name to an Ohio taxpayer as part of a deception to gain entry into the taxpayer’s home to confront her about delinquent tax filings. When the taxpayer rightfully objected to the agent’s tactics, the IRS agent insisted that he “can … go into anyone’s house at any time” as an IRS agent. These allegations raise serious concerns about the IRS’s commitment to fundamental civil liberties.
On March 27, 2023, the Committee previously wrote to you and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen about an IRS agent visiting unannounced and unprompted the home of journalist Matt Taibbi. Incredibly, at the time of the visit, Mr. Taibbi was testifying before the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government about how the federal government pressured, coerced, and even directed technology companies to take certain actions related to digital content. The Committee is continuing to investigate the IRS’s reasons for visiting Mr. Taibbi’s home and whether the visit was conducted in an attempt to intimidate a witness before Congress.
Since then, the Committee has learned of another instance in which an IRS agent performed an unannounced field visit to a taxpayer. The details of this field visit are bizarre. On April 25, 2023, an IRS agent who identified himself as “Bill Haus” with the IRS’s Criminal Division visited the home of a taxpayer in Marion, Ohio. Agent “Haus” informed the taxpayer he was at her home to discuss issues concerning an estate for which the taxpayer was the fiduciary. After Agent “Haus” shared details about the estate only the IRS would know, the taxpayer let him in. Agent “Haus” told the taxpayer that she did not properly complete the filings for the estate and that she owed the IRS “a substantial amount.” Prior to the visit, however, the taxpayer had not received any notice from the IRS of an outstanding balance on the estate.
During the visit, the taxpayer told Agent “Haus” that the estate was resolved in January 2023, and provided him with proof that she had paid all taxes for the decedent’s estate. At this point, Agent “Haus” revealed that the true purpose of his visit was not due to any issue with the decedent’s estate, but rather because the decedent allegedly had several delinquent tax return filings. Agent “Haus” provided several documents to the taxpayer for her to fill out, which included sensitive information about the decedent.
The taxpayer called her attorney who immediately and repeatedly asked Agent “Haus” to leave the taxpayer’s home. Agent “Haus” responded aggressively, insisting: *I am an IRS agent, I can be at and go into anyone’s house at any time I want to be.” Before finally leaving the taxpayer’s property, Agent “Haus” said he would mail paperwork to the taxpayer, and threatened that she had one week to satisfy the remaining balance or he would freeze all her assets and put a lien on her house.
Following the visit, the taxpayer contacted the Marion, Ohio Police Department (MPD) to determine whether the visit was part of a scam. The MPD ran the license plate of the car that Agent “Haus” drove, and learned Agent “Haus” had used an alias. The officer called Agent “Haus” to verify his identity, and the agent who identified himself as an IRS agent admitted to using an alias. Believing Agent “Haus” was trying to scam the taxpayer, the MPD advised him not to go the taxpayer’s home again or he would be arrested. Agent “Haus” then filed a complaint against the officer with the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA). The MPD later learned Agent “Haus” was a legitimate IRS agent after contacting TIGTA to respond to his complaint.
On May 4, 2023, the taxpayer spoke with the supervisor of Agent “Haus,” who clarified nothing was owed on the estate. The supervisor even admitted to the taxpayer that “things never should have gotten this far.” On May 5, 2023, however, the taxpayer received a letter from the IRS- the first and only written notice the taxpayer received of the decedent’s delinquent tax filings addressed to the decedent, which stated the decedent was delinquent on several 1040 filings. On May 15, 2023, the taxpayer spoke again with supervisor of Agent “Haus,” who told the taxpayer to disregard the May 5 letter because nothing was due. On May 30, 2023, the taxpayer received a letter from the IRS that the case had been closed.
This behavior from an IRS agent to an American taxpayer providing an alias, using deception to secure entry into the taxpayer’s home, and then filing an Inspector General complaint against a police officer examining that matter is highly concerning. As the Committee continues to examine how to best protect Americans’ fundamental freedoms and to assist the Committee in its oversight, we ask that you please provide the following documents and information:
1. All documents and communications referring or relating to the IRS’s field visit to the residence of taxpayer [redacted] on April 25, 2023, located at [redacted], including but not limited to the IRS’s reasons for conducting the field visit and prior efforts to contact taxpayer [redacted];
2. All documents and communications between or among the IRS, Treasury
Department, and any other Executive Branch entity referring or relating to the IRS’s field visit to [redacted] residence, [redacted] role as executor of the estate of decedent
estate, or outstanding balances or taxes owed by decedent [redacted];3. All documents and communications sent or received by Agent [redacted] referring or relating to the taxpayer [redacted], Officer [redacted] of MPD, the decedent [redacted], or, [redacted] estate.
Please produce all documents and information as soon as possible but no later than 5:00 p.m. on June 30, 2023. In addition, please treat these discovery obligations as ongoing and applicable to any information generated after receipt of this letter.
Pursuant to the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on the Judiciary has jurisdiction to conduct oversight of matters concerning “civil liberties” to inform potential legislative reforms. In addition, H. Res. 12 authorized the Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government to investigate “issues related to the violation of the civil liberties of citizens of the United States.”
This is only the beginning.
The Biden regime hired 87,000 new agents to harass taxpaying Americans. This is only going to get worse. Watch and see.
Why is the IRS using fake names to harass Americans?
New from @Weaponization here: pic.twitter.com/AYiruOs5lm
— House Judiciary GOP 🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryGOP) June 17, 2023
It Begins, DOJ Files Motion to Limit President Trump’s Ability to Defend Himself
June 17, 2023 | Sundance |
One of the ways you can immediately detect federal Lawfare deployment is to look at how media articles are written when they outline court filings without direct citation for review. The Hill began SEE HERE. The New York Times is similar, SEE HERE.
Notice both national publications talk about a DOJ court filing, presumably made under seal, that limits President Trump’s defense access to materials and documents used in the case against him. Notice the media do not say how they gained insight into the details of the sealed filing itself; nor do they provide any source context for how their reporting is structured. Nothing like, “according to sources with familiar with the matter” or anything similar. Just nothing; no attribution at all.
That media context is a BIG red flag indicating the need to ‘create a narrative’ is more important than the actual substance of the evidence material underpinning it.
Both stories hit on the issue of the DOJ filing a (presumably sealed) motion with the Florida court, to place limits, rules and restrictions on evidence against President Trump, that limits his ability to review it, talk about it and/or provide context for it. THIS IS A LAWFARE MOVE. This is what happens in the prosecutorial star-chambers where they hide information in order to create the appearance of something nefarious, where nothing nefarious exists.
When we see this legal approach, we can be assured the case that uses the evidence is built upon fraud and pretense. Do not be afraid to tell your family, friends and others about this dynamic. President Trump is being accused of the crime of violating 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a violation of the espionage act, and the DOJ is requesting that President Trump must not permitted to defend himself by discussing the evidence against him.
The DOJ wants to limit public knowledge of the material evidence, not because it would harm national security – but rather because the nature of the evidence itself would highlight to the nation how fraudulent the targeting is. This is the guaranteed DOJ motive, that’s why everything is under seal and even the media will not talk about how they are gaining their leak knowledge. This is LAWFARE narrative engineering at its apex deployment.
WASHINGTON DC – The Justice Department on Friday filed a motion seeking to block former President Trump from releasing any classified materials that will be shared with his legal team during his prosecution for the mishandling of records at Mar-a-Lago, noting that some are still being used in the course of their investigation.
The documents “include information pertaining to ongoing investigations” which could be used to further cases against uncharged individuals, the Department of Justice (DOJ) wrote.
The suggested protective order, which will be reviewed by Judge Bruce Reinhart, would allow Trump to review the 31 documents the DOJ is using in the case only while in the presence of his attorneys.
“Defendants shall only have access to Discovery Materials under the direct supervision of Defense Counsel or a member of Defense Counsel’s staff. Defendants shall not retain copies of Discovery Material. Defendants may take notes regarding Discovery Materials, but such notes shall be stored securely by Defense Counsel,” the DOJ wrote.
It also includes similar language to a protective order agreed to in another Trump case that bars the former president from disclosing evidence in the case. New York state prosecutors made that request as they pursue a 34-count indictment of Trump relating to a hush money scandal.
“The Discovery Materials, along with any information derived therefrom, shall not be disclosed to the public or the news media, or disseminated on any news or social media platform, without prior notice to and consent of the United States or approval of the Court,” the department wrote. (read more)
Watch this interview with Devin Nunes and Kimbery Guilfoyle – Start at 06:40 listening to Nunes:
I am correct about the documents grabbed.
I am correct about the nature of the DOJ/FBI intentions and motives.
I am correct about the Lawfare manipulation of the material to present the illusion of illegal where nothing illegal is taking place…
…and I am increasingly certain that Mary McCord is part of TEAM Jack Smith!
Wait for it!
The first two defense approaches will likely be: (1) the Presidential Records Act supersedes the issues of document holding as noted in the use of the Espionage Act. (2) However, if the Espionage Act [Statute 793(e)] has to be defended, the originating issue of “unauthorized possession” will be the second approach heading to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
Some baselines are needed to understand what is happening.
First, the National Archives and the DOJ did not demand a return of Classified Documents. They requested a return of documents containing classification markings. These are two entirely different things.
Most documents containing classification markings are not classified documents; yet, most classified documents contain classification markings. Additionally, one of the documents used by Jack Smith in his indictment [COUNT #11] contained no markings at all.
Second, it is critically important to remember that throughout the legal issues in the aftermath of the Mar-a-Lago raid, the DOJ has viciously denied any responsibility to describe the classified documents they claim to have retrieved. In fact, the DOJ has fought against any entity, including the court appointed “special master”, from being able to look at the documents the DOJ *previously* claimed were either classified, or, vital to national security. {GO DEEP}
Because there is a very specific type of Lawfare taking place with words, it is critical to see the value in what former HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes has stated about the way the language is being deployed. Now we turn to the testimony of the national archivist office, and here is where it gets really interesting.
♦ During testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) officials were asked specifically about Trump documents and how they could *KNOW* fulsome return of documents had not taken place. The response from the NARA officials is enlightening:
[Source pdf, testimony transcript – page 43 and 44]
Notice that NARA had knowledge these documents were in the possession of Trump and were pertinent to their archive retrieval. It was interesting at the time that NARA would know the content of the President Obama letter, and further interesting they would know there was more than one piece of correspondence between President Trump and Chairman Kim [Jong-un]. CNN even wrote about it HERE.
[Irrelevant note: Mr Bonsanko got the name wrong, Jong-il is dead]
Reminder, keep in mind the DOJ ferocity in not wanting anyone to know what documents they retrieved and/or defined.
We know, from President Trump describing the letter left to him by the former president, that Obama told Trump in the letter that the number one foreign policy and intelligence threat perceived by Obama (at the time of his exit) was a nuclear armed North Korea. This is where you overlay the Jack Smith writing in the indictment of national defense secrets and nuclear security issues.
We know, from President Trump speaking publicly about his communication and diplomacy with Chairman Kim Jong-un, that the two leaders exchanged letters relating to aligned national security interests that centered around DPRK nuclear ambitions and status.
Trump and Kim formed a geopolitical truce, a friendship of sorts, based on respect and trust around the nuclear issue. Chairman Kim decreased hostilities; President Trump no longer used inflammatory language about “Little Rocket Man.” A diplomatic détente was created.
NARA was looking for the letter written by Obama that described DPRK nukes, and NARA was looking for letters between Trump and Kim that touched on DPRK nukes.
Now, does the wording in the Jack Smith indictment that pertains to “nuclear concerns” and “national security matters” make more sense?
Would all of this “nuclear national defense” hullaballoo really stem from President Trump not giving up personal letters written to him by President Obama and Chairman Kim? YES! Would President Trump even characterize those letters as government property? NO!
♦ The indictment accuses President Trump of withholding documents containing “classified markings,” a very specifically deployed obtuse wording intended to create the implication of something nefarious where nothing nefarious exists. It is entirely possible for a person, any person, especially a person who follows the news, to possess documents containing “classified markings.”
There is a big difference between a classified document and a document containing classified markings. As an example, anyone who has looked at the Carter Page FISA application, made public in July 2018, has reviewed a document containing “classified markings.” When a document is declassified, they do not remove the markings.
This language is the underpinning of the entire DOJ/FBI framework that predicated the raid on Mar-a-Lago. Specifically, neither NARA nor the DOJ-NSD requested President Trump or his team to return Classified Documents. The DOJ demanded the return of any documents that contained “classified markings.” [SEE BELOW]
Because the verbiage is so intentionally obtuse (ie. Lawfare), a fulsome production in compliance with this DOJ demand would include any newspaper or magazine articles that had a picture of the Carter Page FISA application, or any printed online article that might contain the same or similar elements. There is a big difference between asking for a classified document return, and asking for a return of documents that contain “classified markings.”
Can you see the way it unfolds? Of course, when you apply the Lawfare lingo, an approach entirely based on maintaining the targeting of Trump, then suddenly the seemingly innocuous becomes horribly nefarious.
In order to pull this off two things would be needed: (1) the DOJ would need to write about it in a certain way in the indictment√; and (2) simultaneously, the DOJ would need to stop anyone from viewing the actual documents, as they misleadingly described them√. Hey, wait… that’s exactly what they did.
♦ In a previous court ruling by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, the court ruled in favor of the U.S. Dept of Justice – National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), and blocked the lower court order instructing a Special Master to review the DOJ claimed, “classified documents.” [pdf Ruling Here]
Essentially the order of the appellate court was based on the DOJ defining Trump’s Mar-a-Lago documents as “classified” and “vital to national security”, and the court’s determination said they have no authority to question the decision of the executive branch when it comes to how they DEFINE matters of national security.
The court (judicial branch) openly stated they defer to the DOJ (executive branch) regarding any/all claims of harm to national security that may be caused by a review of documents the DOJ-NSD determined, on their own authority, to be identified as classified or matters of “national security.”
In the prior opinion of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, if the DOJ states sharing the “classified documents” with a special master may harm national security, the court must accept that position without challenge and stop the special master review.
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals did what the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) does with the DOJ-NSD and any matters defined by the originating Main Justice officials as “national security.” The 11th Circuit is deferred to the DOJ.
The DOJ was granted legal benefit of the doubt on all matters of national security, which puts the DOJ-NSD in ultimate control over the star chamber they operate.
This ridiculous ruling meant the DOJ could define any document as a document of “national security interest” and there is no countervailing review of their definitions. As soon as this decision was reached the DOJ then moved to appoint a special counsel. Can you see how this works?
With this ruling in his briefcase, Special Counsel Jack Smith could now define the Mar-a-Lago documents according to the legal intention of his targeting. That’s exactly what he did. The case against Trump is not a case about classified documents, it is a case about the DOJ defining unilaterally what documents are considered “vital to national security.”
With the DOJ getting to define those documents, the special counsel then moves to claim national security threats created by Trump’s ownership. The overlay of “vital to the nuclear capabilities of the defense dept,” can then be shifted to include letters from President Obama and Kim Jong-un about DPRK nuclear capabilities.
Related
NarrowPathMinistries 