Apparently, the jury was deadlocked with 7 jurors saying not guilty and 1 juror saying guilty.
ARIZONA – […] Jurors in the murder case against a Nogales-area rancher accused of killing an unarmed migrant on his property were unable to reach a unanimous verdict and remained deadlocked on the charges.
After more than 15 hours of deliberation, Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge Thomas Fink declared a mistrial just after 4:30 p.m. The court scheduled a status meeting for 1:30 p.m. April 29 to allow the Santa Cruz County Attorney’s Office to decide if it wants to retry the case.
“They won’t wear me down,” rancher George Alan Kelly told reporters after the mistrial was declared.
The trial centered on the Jan. 30, 2023, death of Mexican migrant Gabriel Cuen Buitimea, who was found shot after Kelly fired warning shots into the air, his defense attorney said. (read more)
COMMENT:
The illegals committed felonies when they broke into the USA illegally. They committed criminal trespass when they entered Mr. Kelly’s ranch. The illegals were carrying weapons. Someone died while the illegals were committing felonies. The illegals should be charged with felony murder.
Before getting into bigger picture analysis and intellectual discussion about FISA and the 702 reauthorizations, let me just reveal some inside DC crap that drives me nuts and at the same time will help y’all understand the nonsense.
First, the Intelligence Community (IC) tells congress, particularly the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, that all hell will break loose if they don’t reauthorize full electronic surveillance of Americans. Congress is petrified of the IC.
Speaker Johnson and all of the key participants are totally siloed from understanding that 702 has nothing to do with incidental collection of American data whilst the honorable IC were doing foreign intercepts. Johnson and most republicans believe the IC nonsense. They really do.
The politicians and their key staff cannot fathom how the FBI, DOJ, NSD, DHS and Contractors use this database to conduct political and “other” (think corporate espionage for sale) surveillance. They really do think the IC is full of honorable rank-and-file. They are inside a DC bubble.
Second, the IC argument is now something akin to we have let thousands of terrorists into the country through the southern border crisis. They say: “my god, we need to monitor the terrorists, and if you take away 702 the foreign terror cells will activate and start killing us all. Do you want that blood on your hands?” You cannot take away surveillance tools.
Third, FISA 702 reauthorization is used as a bargaining chip by people who don’t want to get caught up in the surveillance.
The DC conversations are something like, “ok, we’ll reauthorize it, but you cannot use it against us – and all the sex parties and perverted stuff we do when no one is around, you must promise to keep our secrets hidden“… Yes, this is why the IC agree to accept a reauthorization that exempts congress. The IC keep the blackmail, just promise not to use it.
We The People do not have any friends in DC on this issue. The democrats will reauthorize 702 to continue exploiting surveillance authority – don’t forget over 10,000 log-in portals with access to the NSA database exist, including the workstation at Perkins Coie that ties into the NSA database {GO DEEP}.
President Trump finally opposes the FISA system – writ large – and THAT is progress.
More soon….
(An Accurate Depiction )House Speaker Mike Johnson
President Donald J Trump seeks optimal solutions for all challenges. Internally he has his own set of standards and crystal-clear understanding of what he would want in any given situation; this is not difficult for a clear brain to accomplish.
However, in the world of multi-interests and larger group needs, in this case an entire nation of individuals and groups, President Trump knows that optimal solutions are best found closest to the work, closest to the source of the individual hearts. Pragmatic leadership is often about optimal solutions. WATCH:
He/We will win.
They are increasingly desperate. The need for control is a reaction to fear. The next week to 10 days is critical.
I have much to share with our fellowship. You will journey with me.
Watchdog group Judicial Watch has received 44 pages of government records showing a close collaboration between Department of Homeland Security (DHS’s) Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and the leftist Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) to engage in “real-time narrative tracking” on all major social media platforms in the days leading up to the 2020 election.
The records discuss “takedowns” of social media posts and the avoidance of creating public records subject to FOIA.
The records also show that the EIP, which was initially called the Election Misinformation Partnership in the days leading up to the November 3, 2020, election, tasked staffers with monitoring online election content 24 hours a day with a priority being “disinfo that is going viral.”
Judicial Watch is asking for the following information:
All records of communication between the CISA and the EIP. This includes all “tickets” or notifications to the Partnership regarding election-related disinformation on any social media platform.
All records regarding the July 9, 2020, meeting between DHS officials and representatives of the EIP.
All records of communication between the CISA and the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public and/or Stanford University’s Internet Observatory regarding any of the following:
The consortium is comprised of four member organizations: Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO), the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public, the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab, and social media analytics firm Graphika. It set up a concierge-like service in 2020 that allowed federal agencies like Homeland’s Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and State’s Global Engagement Center to file “tickets” requesting that online story links and social media posts be censored or flagged by Big Tech.
Three liberal groups — the Democratic National Committee, Common Cause and the NAACP — were also empowered like the federal agencies to file tickets seeking censorship of content. A Homeland-funded collaboration, the Elections Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center, also had access.
The newly obtained records include an undated PowerPoint presentation titled “Election Misinformation Partnership.”
There are several pages in the presentation discuss “takedowns,” including the examples posted below.
Example Flow 5: Sourced from Platform [formatting in original]
Days after 11/03, Facebook notifies EMP of an impending takedown of a group of pages exhibiting coordinated inauthentic behavior. Since the election, these pages have consistently pushed a narrative encouraging Americans in key states to call for invalidation of election results. Facebook will take these pages down in one hour, and is already briefing relevant state and local election officials.
***
Notes: Given that information is platform-verified, and Facebook has a direct relationship with local election officials, EMP’s involvement can be smaller with the initial dump. EMP should follow up with election officials and the platform in case either stakeholder wants for further research.
The presentation discusses the avoidance of creating public records subject to FOIA:
Best way to collaborate
What’s the best way to collaborate?
CISA can’t create their own Slack channels, but can participate in others’.
Listservs are bad (public records requirements).
Jira is fine.
CISA has privacy concerns: can’t monitor people’s individual accounts; ensure CISA doesn’t participate in discussions or notes concerning U.S. persons.
Setup:
SIO will have dedicated Slack, something like Jira or Salesforce (will ask for donation), separate from Stanford and destroyed once over.
We’ll intake info by email, but direct people to private forms SIO and CISA have distributed.
Info from there will go into queue -> be triaged, assigned SLA.
A slide in the presentation titled “Stanford Internet Observatory Calendar” details its monitoring plan: “November: Full Time, Election: 24/7 monitoring in shifts. Heightened monitoring during voting times. Emphasis on voter suppression tactics. Election November 3, 2020. December: Full Time, Post-Election: Full time monitoring continues, but not 24/7. Emphasis on narratives around election legitimacy (EX: mail in ballot theories). Release brief post-mortem.”
A portion of the presentation labeled “Summarized notes” states:
Overview: CISA has limited capabilities to identify, track disinfo narratives + attempts to undermine confidence in elections
SIO does = good partnership
Major goal: prevent a crisis of confidence in 2020 elections
E.g., where Russia doesn’t change any votes (or changes just a few), but claims they changed many more and hysteria is blown out of proportion
Scope: Keep scope narrow: focus on election-related disinfo that has the potential to impact the public’s voting patterns
Mutual trust is key: don’t want to need NDAs, legal red tape.
Need to build out workflow management system: JIRA/Slack/other communications channels, shared processes and definitions, etc.
[Redacted] envisions Tier 1 and Tier 2 partners:
Tier 1 is intake (of tips, disinfo reports, etc.): consisting of people either digging for narratives, or processing info received from other partners.
Think students, election officials, etc. who are looking for disinfo.
Workflow: check that info against protocols, do some initial data aggregation, triage it into the workflow management system.
o Tier 2 is the 4 orgs [redacted] I team at Stanford, Graphika, etc.
Workflow: take stuff off the workflow management queue, process it.
Need to sketch that out.
SLA for different times of the calendar based on the level of severity obtained by triage.
E.g., a report from the general public will have less priority than a report from an on-the-ground election official; a report for disinfo that is not popular will have less priority than disinfo that is going viral.
General public = more turnaround time, but election officials = less turnaround time: need to get back to them fast.
· SIO has good relationship w/ platforms who already care.
See the Secondary Infektion (Russian disinfo op) report.
Think through all the platforms that might have been useful there (e.g.,
communicating with Twitter at stage x would have stopped the spread).
Meanwhile, CISA has strong relationships w/ election officials.
CISA is happy to introduce SIO to them, do outreach.
Just keep CISA in the info-sharing pipeline.
***
CISA’s concern starts 45 days out operationally, when military/overseas voters start mailing.
Start hunting, messaging at beginning of September.
Lower SLA (higher turnaround time/less priority), but start looking for search terms and taking tips.
The days leading up to/right after Election Day will be much more intense.
It’ll be an effective SOC, maybe a physical one, but in a much larger space.
A July 10, 2020, email sent from a redacted sender to CISA officials Allison Snell, Brian Scully, Matthew Masterson, Geoffrey Hale, and several other persons whose names are redacted, states:
July will be big to get things going on both the CISA and SIO front, so we will be sure to keep open lines of communication. Thank you again for everyone’s help in getting this going, looking forward to getting to work here!
The Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO) is a cross-disciplinary program of research, teaching, and policy engagement for the study and abuse in current information technologies, with a focus on social media.
Key capabilities:
Experienced disinformation research team of analytical and technical talent.
Real-time narrative tracking capabilities for all major platforms (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Reddit, potential for TikTok).
Additional API or historical access to ‘fringe’ platforms (Gab, Parler, 4Chan).
Established and collaborative node within the third-party misinformation research ecosystem.”
The presentation gives an example of a scenario the CISA-EIP collaborators could be faced with:
Example Flow 3: Stickier [formatting in original]
#BidenStoleMichigan is trending on Twitter on election day. Groups of seemingly-local accounts tweet @MISecofState to demand the Michigan election results be declared invalid, citing a fresh Epoch Times article alleging shady connections between Michigan’s SoS, Bill Gates, and Joe Biden. Their tweets are relatively few, but see high engagement shortly after posting and spread around right-leaning Twitter. Researchers trace the origin of the article to posts on 4chan and Parler encouraging Michiganders to confront @MlSecOfState on Twitter over the story and calling for the Michigan results to be declared invalid.
***
Notes: This scenario has a geographical component, but seems targeted to ideological groups online. While particular election officials are targeted, the political nature of the content makes counter-messaging difficult. A government-only response would be even stickier however.
In a June 26, 2023 report, the Committee on the Judiciary and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government writes about CISA:
Founded in 2018, CISA was originally intended to be an ancillary agency designed to protect “critical infrastructure” and guard against cybersecurity threats. In the years since its creation, however, CISA metastasized into the nerve center of the federal government’s domestic surveillance and censorship operations on social media. By 2020, CISA routinely reported social media posts that allegedly spread “disinformation” to social media platforms. By 2021, CISA had a formal “Mis-, Dis-, and Malinformation” (MDM) team. In 2022 and 2023, in response to growing public and private criticism of CISA’s unconstitutional behavior, CISA attempted to camouflage its activities, duplicitously claiming it serves a purely “informational” role.
“These records show the lengths to which a ‘Homeland Security’ Deep State agency went in its effort to censor and suppress Americans during and after the 2020 election. That it took a federal lawsuit to extract these disturbing records should raise additional worries about what else this Biden administration is up to.”Tom Fitton, Judicial Watch President
History of Judicial Watch’s filings and actions posted below.
Separately, in August 2023, Judicial Watch filed two FOIA lawsuits against the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies for communications between the agencies and Facebook and Twitter regarding the government’s involvement in content moderation and censorship on the social media platforms.
In June 2023, Judicial Watch sued DHS for all records of communications tied to the Election Integrity Partnership. Based on representations from the EIP (seehere and here), the federal government, social media companies, the EIP, the Center for Internet Security (a non-profit organization funded partly by DHS and the Defense Department) and numerous other leftist groups communicated privately via the Jira software platform developed by Atlassian.
In February 2023, Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Department Homeland Security (DHS) for records showing cooperation between the Cybersecurity and Information Security Agency (CISA) and social media platforms to censor and suppress free speech.
Judicial Watch in January 2023 sued the DOJ for records of communications between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and social media sites regarding foreign influence in elections, as well as the Hunter Biden laptop story.
In September 2022, Judicial Watch sued the Secretary of State of the State of California for having YouTube censor a Judicial Watch election integrity video.
In May 2022, YouTube censored a Judicial Watch video about Biden corruption and election integrity issues in the 2020 election. The video, titled “Impeach? Biden Corruption Threatens National Security,” was falsely determined to be “election misinformation” and removed by YouTube, and Judicial Watch’s YouTube account was suspended for a week. The video featured an interview of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. Judicial Watch continues to post its video content on its Rumble channel (https://rumble.com/vz7aof-fitton-impeach-biden-corruption-threatens-national-security.html).
In July 2021, Judicial Watch uncovered records from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which revealed that Facebook coordinated closely with the CDC to control the COVID narrative and “misinformation” and that over $3.5 million in free advertising given to the CDC by social media companies.
In May 2021, Judicial Watch revealed documents showing that Iowa state officials pressured social media companies Twitter and Facebook to censor posts about the 2020 election.
In April 2021, Judicial Watch published documents revealing how California state officials pressured social media companies (Twitter, Facebook, Google (YouTube)) to censor posts about the 2020 election.
A very strong and deliberate interview of Representative Clay Higgins (R-LA) by Lara Logan. Rep Higgins has been very critical of DHS, DOJ and FBI conduct in the January 6th insurrection narrative. {Direct Rumble Link}
In this interview, Representative Higgins gets very deliberate and stern about “uncharted waters, as it relates to the weaponization of government.” The tone of Higgins is in direct proportion to his anger at those within federal law enforcement who have usurped the constitution. As a result, Higgins himself has become the target by those in the administrative state who participate in the weaponization. WATCH:
(MSM) – Republican Congressman Clay Higgins issued a warning to FBI officials investigating the Capitol Riots, saying that they are “going down.”
Higgins, a Louisiana Republican, has been a vocal proponent of the theory that federal agencies planted people at the scene and provoked the riot as an excuse to arrest conservatives.
Speaking to Lara Logan, a former CBS News correspondent turned right-wing commentator, Higgins, a former law enforcement officer himself, advanced his theories, claiming the FBI is tracking Trump supporters who were in Washington over the days leading up to the Capitol Riots and treated as suspected terrorists. He said those on a supposed list are still tracked by air marshals to this day despite not being convicted of crimes.
“We are in uncharted waters as it relates to the weaponization of our government against American people,” he said, adding: “I am not frightened of these people. “They are not going to take us without a fight. I am going to fight legally and peacefully and within the parameters of the U.S. Constitution.
“But they’re going down. These men in their high perch and their position of power and authority that are walking upon our entire history, our deepest core principles. They’re not going to get away with it.” (read more)
Georgia Gov. Kemp’s legal staff has notified Ga Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger that 17,852 invalid 2020 votes were counted in Fulton County, GA, alone.
A public meeting will be held next week at the Georgia State Capitol building.
Joe Rossi talks on the election fraud and the meeting here:
I will say it until people understand. Lawfare is a specially constructed approach to weaponize the judiciary to create narratives for public consumption; it is the abnormal and twisted application of granular legal language, and as a result it requires oddball motions to support it.
The DOJ previously filed a motion for “Special Conditions of Release” to restrict President Trump’s defense from knowing or discussing the super-secret evidence and witnesses the special prosecutor plans to use against him. The motion was essentially that if President Trump refused the super special terms and conditions of the motion, then Judge Cannon should put him in leg irons in federal prison until he can be tried and convicted.
The special counsel wants everything kept under seal, quiet and invisible to the public so the omnipotent arbiters of justice can appropriately shape the narrative they prefer.
The Jack Smith team cannot have President Trump being all uncontrolled, willy-nilly and making fun of their case, while talking about his targeting in such a manner as their super-secret witnesses would be exposed to such duplicitous snark and horrible influence.
To maintain the evolving narrative du-jour, a special motion to make President Trump double-secret probationary swear to the special rules is required.
Trying to trick President Trump into signing an agreement never to expose the witnesses to his horrible, terrible, defensive statements, essentially forbidding him from doing anything that would lead to the witnesses being exposed to his words, ie. block him from public or television appearances lest the witnesses are exposed to his statements, the special prosecutors wanted a signed statement they could use against him if he spoke about stuff at a rally or event.
Thankfully, Judge Cannon saw through the stupidity of the Lawfare effort. Her paperless retort is essentially, ‘just use the ordinary legal motions please‘.
“PAPERLESS ORDER denying without prejudice Government’s Motion to Implement Special Condition of Release. The Government seeks an order implementing a special condition of bond related to Defendants’ (Trump and Nauta) communication with eighty-four listed witnesses about the facts of the case, except through counsel.
The Government conditions its request on the filing of the non-exhaustive list under seal. Defendants take no position on the Government’s seal request but reserve the right to object to the special condition and the manner by which the Government intends to implement it.
In the meantime, numerous news organizations have moved to intervene to oppose the Government’s Motion to File Witness List Under Seal, citing the First Amendment and related legal principles.
Upon review of the foregoing materials, the Government’s Motion is denied without prejudice, and the Motion to Intervene and accompanying Motions to Appear Pro Hac Vice are denied as moot.
The Government’s Motion does not explain why filing the list with the Court is necessary; it does not offer a particularized basis to justify sealing the list from public view; it does not explain why partial sealing, redaction, or means other than sealing are unavailable or unsatisfactory; and it does not specify the duration of any proposed seal. The Clerk is directed to return the Pro Hac Vice fees to the filing attorneys. Signed by Judge Aileen M. Cannon on 6/26/2023.
Another Hunter Biden WhatsApp message was released by the GOP House Oversight Committee on Tuesday.
In a WhatsApp exchange dated August 3, 2017, Hunter Biden told CEFC associate Gongwen Dong: “The Biden’s are the best I know at doing exactly what the Chairman wants from this [partnership].”
The “Chairman” is Ye Jianming, a Chinese billionaire tied to a CCP-intelligence gathering agency.
Ye Jianming is presumed dead after he ‘disappeared.’
The latest Hunter Biden WhatsApp message comes just a week after an IRS whistleblower revealed Hunter was threatening a Chinese business associate to pay up or else.
IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley revealed Hunter Biden demanded payment from his Chinese business associate over WhasApp messenger.
Hunter Biden demanded payment and threatened Henry Zhao, a Chinese Communist Party official and director of Harvest Fund Management.
Hunter Biden demanded payment and threatened Henry Zhao, a Chinese Communist Party official and director of Harvest Fund Management.
Harvest Fund Management had previously invested in Hunter Biden’s firm, BHR Partners – a private investment fund founded in 2013 that is co-owned by the Bank of China.
The July 2017 WhatsApp message Hunter Biden sent to Henry Zhao is as follows according to the IRS whistleblower:
“I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my directions. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.”
A few weeks later Hunter Biden received a $5 million wire from a Chinese firm.
On August 8, 2017, $5 million was wired from a CEFC-affiliated investment vehicle (Northern International) to the bank account for Hudson West III, which spent the next year transferring $4,790,375 million directly to Hunter Biden’s firm, Owasco.
Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY) said on Monday that Congress has evidence Joe Biden was in the room with his son Hunter Biden when Hunter sent a threatening WhatsApp message on July 30, 2017 from the Biden family home in Wilmington, Delaware.
On Monday afternoon Special Counsel Jack Smith illegally leaked more information from his ongoing investigation of President Donald Trump to the far-left media.
Smith leaked highly edited audio to CNN of President Trump discussing classified documents of General Milley’s wackadoodle plan to use tens of thousands of US soldiers to invade Iran.
Author, attorney, and TV and radio host weighed in on the latest DOJ leak to the Trump-hating media.
Mark Levin called for Trump’s attorneys to immediate file a motion to toss the case due to prosecutorial leaks and misconduct.
Mark Levin: There must have been several scores of leaks against Trump involving testimony, documents, audio, etc., and they’re all obviously coming from the government. Trump’s lawyers need to file an immediate motion, with the long list of leaks as an exhibit, asking that the entire case be dismissed because of prosecutorial misconduct and the government’s effort to influence the jury pool. Moreover, I would insist that the court determine whether DOJ has opened investigations into these felonies. THIS NEEDS TO HAPPEN NOW!
A second Hunter Biden whistleblower, “Mr. X” has come forward claiming US Attorney David Weiss was not making decisions and was not really in charge.
Mark Lytle, an attorney for IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley told Fox News host Martha MacCallum that US Attorney David Weiss, the Trump-appointed Delaware prosecutor assigned to Hunter Biden’s case, said he had no power to bring charges against Hunter Biden.
Hunter Biden was ultimately given a sweetheart deal by prosecutors and hit with two misdemeanors related to his tax crimes.
Whistleblower Gary Shapley said David Weiss disclosed this to him on one of his in-person meetings with the US Attorney.
“United States Attorney Weiss was present for the meeting. He surprised us by telling us on the charges, quote, ‘I’m not the deciding official on whether charges are filed,’ unquote.”
A second, anonymous whistleblower came forward and corroborated Shapley’s claims Dave Weiss had no authority to charge Hunter Biden.
Via Fox News:
🚨 BREAKING: A second IRS Whistleblower has come forward corroborating Gary Shapley’s claims that David Weiss was not allowed to make key decisions about the Hunter Biden case.
David Weiss signed a June 7 letter claiming he had been granted “ultimate authority” over the Hunter Biden case.
“Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss told the House Judiciary Committee he had “been granted ultimate authority” over prosecutorial decisions related to the criminal investigation into Hunter Biden in a June 7, 2023, letter obtained by The Federalist. However, Weiss’s letter to Congress — and Attorney General Merrick Garland’s earlier testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee that Weiss had “full authority” to charge Hunter Biden — directly conflicts with statements Weiss made to senior members of the team investigating the Biden son.” – The Federalist reported.
Who told Weiss to sign the letter?
New whistleblower evidence, including multiple contemporaneous e-mails from IRS investigators, strongly suggests that Weiss lied to Congress in that letter.
So who told Weiss to sign that letter, and who actually wrote it for him and made him send it? https://t.co/ngOckUk7f8
US Attorney General Merrick Garland however has insisted David Weiss had full authority to bring charges against Hunter Biden.
In March Garland said under oath that Weiss had full authority to charge Hunter Biden.
“The U.S. Attorney in Delaware has been advised that he has full authority … to bring cases in other jurisdictions if he feels it’s necessary,” Garland said.
“Weiss said he tried to go to the DC US Attorney’s office and they wouldn’t approve it. And he was trying to go charge it elsewhere in California – and he was trying to seek special counsel authority and that got denied and so this was a shocker to the agents who were present,” Mark Lytle told Fox News.
Merrick Garland last Friday said during a press conference that Weiss had full authority to decide to prosecute in any district he wanted to.
“As I said at the outset, Mr. Weiss was appointed by President Trump as the U.S. Attorney in Delaware and assigned this matter during the previous administration and would be permitted to continue his investigation and to make a decision to prosecute any way in which he wanted to and in any district in which he wanted to,” Garland said on Friday.
Who is telling the truth?
House Speaker McCarthy on Monday appeared on Fox & Friends and said House Republicans will start an impeachment inquiry on Merrick Garland if what Weiss said is true.
“By July 6, because of the allegations from the IRS, because of the whistleblowers and the DOJ – Garland, what he is saying, and what David Weiss are saying privately are two different things, and if it comes true what the IRS whistleblowers are saying, we’re going to start impeachment inquiries on the Attorney General,” McCarthy said.
The Ring of Truth – “I am too well accustomed to the taking of evidence not to detect the ring of truth.” 1908, Edith Wharton
Much has been made of the events of January 6, 2021, and with the latest broadcast of CCTV video from inside the Capitol Hill complex, more questions have been raised.
Within the questions: the FBI and government apparatus had advanced knowledge of the scale of the J6 mall assembly yet doing nothing? Why were the Capitol Hill police never informed of the FBI concerns? Why didn’t House Speaker Nancy Pelosi secure the Capitol Hill complex, and why did she deny the request by President Trump to call up the national guard for security support? Why did the FBI have agent provocateurs in the crowd, seemingly stimulating rage within a peaceful crowd to enter the Capitol building? There have always been these nagging questions around ‘why’?
Long time CTH reader “Regitiger” has spent a great deal of time reviewing the entire process, looking at the granular timeline and then overlaying the bigger picture of the constitutional and parliamentary process itself. What follows below is a brilliant analysis of the federal government motive to create a J6 crisis that permitted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to trigger an emergency session and avoid the 2020 election certification challenges.
Those congressional floor challenges, known and anticipated well in advance of the morning of January 6, 2021, would have formed a legal and constitutional basis for ‘standing’ in judicial challenges that would have eventually reached the Supreme Court. The certification during “emergency session” eliminated the problem for Washington DC.
I think most, not all, but a large number of people, are totally missing what happened; and why this happened on Jan 6th. I am going to try my best to outline the events that day, blast past the commonly held assumptions and get right down to the core corruption.
I will present this as a series of questions and answers.
♦ Q1: How do you prevent congress from delaying the certification of state electoral votes?
A: It requires a crisis. A crisis that creates an “emergency” …An “emergency” that invokes special house rules.
FACTS: Remember carefully, focus please. Just moments, literally 3 minutes before two representatives issued a vote for motions to suspend the certification, the House members were “informed” by capitol police and other “agents” that a protest was about to breach the chambers. It was at this time that key people: Pence, Pelosi, Schumer, Mcconnell can be seen being walked out and escorted from the chamber. This effectively halted the Entire Chamber Process.
♦ Q2: Why was it necessary to halt the chamber process?
A: The crisis was created to eliminate the motion challenges to halt the certification and to begin voting to look into voting irregularities and fraud
FACTS: The two motions were completely legal and constitutional under at least two constitutionally recognized procedures… procedures that would REQUIRE the house to pause the certification and then vote to determine whether the motions of suspend could move forward.
♦ Q3: What was so important to refuse this motion and the subsequent votes to suspend the electoral certification?
A: It was important to remove that process entirely and continue the fraud and certify the fraud with no detractors on record. This effectively gives no standing for a SCOTUS ruling appeal! Understand this. If those two motions, even just one had successfully been voted EVEN IF THE MOTIONS were DENIED IN VOTE, this gives those who presented them with STANDING FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL LEGAL ARGUMENT BEFORE SCOTUS.
♦ Q4: Could this have been done some other way other than creating a crisis/protest?
A: Unlikely. In order to prevent those two motions, requires that speaker of the house, minority leaders, and the president of the congress (vice president of the United States: Pence), to NOT BE PRESENT IN THE CHAMBERS.
Once the capitol police and other “law enforcements agents” informed the speaker and these three other individuals, Pelosi UNILATERALLY UNDER EMERGENCY RULES, suspended the business of the congress. This protest was necessary. The crisis was created because there is no other way to suspend the business of certification UNILATERALLY. By creating a crisis invokes emergency procedures. No other circumstances other than war or mass simultaneous explosive diarrhea can create such unilateral speaker delivered suspension of the certification.
♦ Q5: Why did the motions, once that the speaker RECONVENED congress, move forward back again to the floor for votes? Why were members disallowed to even consider putting forward ANY motions to the floor in when the chamber business was reopened?
A: The Speaker initiated the NEW sessions under special emergency rules. These rules abandon and make it clear that the ONLY purpose of the new session was to EXPEDITE the certification and dismiss all prior regular session procedural rules. This is why those two motions to table votes to consider a debate and pause to the certifications of state vote electors never happened later that evening when the house business was reconvened!
♦ Q6: Other than new rules, emergency rules, what other peculiar things occurred when the speaker reconvened?
A: Members were allowed to “vote” in proxy, remotely, not being present. You can use your imagination about what conditions were placed on ALL members during this time to prevent anyone from “getting out of line”.
Also clearly, it was at THIS NEW SESSION that VP Pence, President of Congress, would also have no ability to even consider pausing the electoral certification, because there were no motions of disagreements on the matter. So, in a technical legal claim, he is correct that he had no constitutional authority to address any issues of fraud or doubts about electoral irregularities. But this completely dismisses the FACT that congress created rules in this crisis/emergency that never allowed them to be floored!
Understand what happened in Jan 6, 2021. Don’t get hung up on Viking impostors, stolen Pelosi computers, podium heists, and complicit capitol police. Understand the process and what happened and what WAS NOT ALLOWED TO HAPPEN.
This was a coup….it was a very organized and carefully planned coup. VP Pence without a doubt as well as most members of the house were quite aware of how the certification was going to be MANAGED. It would require new rules to prevent the debate clause from occurring! New rules that ONLY AN EMERGENCY CRISIS COULD CREATE! So, they created an emergency.
•NOTED: I understand why many people have great interest in debunking the j6 event. I get that. I think it is important to dissect and examine the events of that day but please, step back and understand WHY these things happened. Examine the chain of events in congress. Why those two motions that would have at least paused the certification THAT WOULD GIVE VP PENCE THE CONSTITUTIONALLY RECOGNIZED POWER TO MOVE TO SUSPEND THE ELECTORAL CERTIFICATION AND THEN EXAMINE THE IRREGULARITIES AND CLAIMS OF FRAUD!
At the very center of this coup stands Mike Pence, the same individual who also spoiled President Trump’s first opportunities in the earlies hours of his Presidency just 4 years prior, when he created and facilitated the removal of Lt General Michael Flynn. I will not spend much time on this thread explaining why Lt Gen Flynn was so important to President Trump and why the IC was so afraid he would have advisory power to the President. That I will leave for another day, another time. But understand this clearly: MIKE PENCE WAS AND IS WORKING FOR THE MOST CORRUPT CRIMINAL TREASONOUS PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT.
•PRO TIP: If you really want to get a true understanding of this matter videos of protesters walking in the capitol is not going to address them. Actual video and timeline records of events and the specific actions taken by the speaker just moments before TWO MAJOR ELECTORAL ALTERING MOTIONS WERE ABOUT TO BE FLOORED.
This crisis was developed just in time with a precise coordination to prevent those two motions to be entered into the chamber record. The two motions do not exist. The emergency powers established in the new session made sure they never could be entered. The emergency powers could never happen without a crisis.
NOTE: “Under this scenario, the J6 pipe bombs were the insurance policy, in the event the feds couldn’t get the crowd to comply with the FBI provocations. If no one stormed the Capitol, the finding of the two pipe bombs would have then been the emergency needed to stop the process.” Which explains why the FBI has no interest in the DC pipe bomb suspects. ~ Sundance
Note from Author: “I started this effort years ago. To date, no one and I mean no one has replied. It’s as if everyone that can expose it that has a larger platform is either disinterested, or suspiciously withdrawn from the issue. I made several comments about this over the years right here at CTH, on article threads that are relevant to the topic.
I was watching the certification live that day. I recorded it ALL on every channel. I was doing this because no matter what happened that day, I KNEW IT WOULD BE A PROFOUND AND SIGNIFICANT EVENT TO REMEMBER. I never in my wildest imagination (and I have a pretty vivid imagination, always have), expected to see the unmistakable perfectly timed “coincidences” that occurred.
One member raises a motion (with another in waiting for his turn) those two motions were well known and advertised. These were motions to vote for a pause in the certification to examine electoral vote fraud and irregularities. I can’t speak to the veracity and substance of those motions. They were never allowed to even be floored. it was at that exact moment that the house chambers were suspended and 4 of the key members, Pence, Pelosi, Schumer and McConnell were escorted OUT right after initiating the end of the session.
Effectively, this resulted in that motion never being floored at all. Then, when reconvened under special emergency rules, inexplicably those two motions (and perhaps more – we will never know – or will we?) were not even attempted to be motioned. That was not just peculiar to me.
It all started to make more sense when I did some study on constitutional law AND THE HISTORY of specific special authorities given to president of the congress, Pence in this case. Not only did he have the authority and power to suspend the certification, but the duty to address the motion in the same sense that it becomes vital to the debate clause.
There really is no higher significance of weight given to the debate clause than the certification of the votes. This was more than odd to me the way that the media and pence framed their narrative: Pence would not have the constitutional power to suspend certification. Then it hit me, like the obvious clue that was there all the time. He was right. But the reason he is right, is because there WAS NO MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO CAUSE HIM TO SUSPEND!
Understanding this, happened for me about 4 or 5 months after this Jan 6 day. I took me this long to examine the facts, look at the video again, compare it to the arguments made by several leading constitutional academics, and again, inexplicably even some that I respect seemed to dodge that central reality. The motions were never allowed to be floored in the re-convened house rules later that evening. Most would not even venture to address the exotically coincidence that the moment those two members would stand to place the motion before the house, that the House Speaker Pelosi AND Pence ended the session, effectively blocking the motions from being heard in normal house rules.
It’s been a journey for me. A journey that was initiated because I am just a simple but curious person. Perhaps even to a point where I get obsessive in those efforts. Many days and nights combing over the details. praying and trying to make sense of what makes little sense. With over 6 states having serious well known and obvious defects in the voting process, some more credible to believe – some less, but one would not expect the house would be so deliberate in marching past the motions that were definitely going to be present to slow this process down and take the time to get it right. Even IF the claims never reached an intersection that would change the outcome.
There are two possibilities: Millions of people, against all the odds, hitting all-time records even past Obama and Clinton, voted for a naval gazing ambulatory pathological racist moron. And chose Joe Malarkey as their leader. Or this was a coup, a conspiracy, and a treasonous manipulation regime change because President Trump could not be controlled by the deep state and globalists who OWN AND OPERATE WASHINGTON DC.
BOTH POSSIBILITIES ARE TERRIFYING.
The only way for THE PEOPLE to gain power in this country is to force the transfer of it. If truth isn’t the fuel and vehicle, we will just be replacing deck chairs and hitting the next series of expected ice bergs.
Knowing the truth is not enough; however, it is truth that makes it a righteous cause.
Julie Kelly – […] Just as the first wave of protesters breached the building shortly after 2 p.m., congressional Republicans were poised to present evidence of rampant voting fraud in the 2020 presidential election. Ten incumbent and four newly-elected Republican senators planned to work with their House colleagues to demand the formation of an audit commission to investigate election “irregularities” in the 2020 election. Absent an audit, the group of senators, including Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) pledged to reject the Electoral College results from the disputed states.
The Hail Mary effort was doomed to fail; yet the American people would have heard hours of debate related to provable election fraud over the course of the day.
And no one opposed the effort more than ex-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
During a conference call on December 31, 2020, McConnell urged his Republican Senate colleagues to abandon plans to object to the certification, insisting his vote to certify the 2020 election results would be “the most consequential I have ever cast” in his 36-year Senate career.
From the Senate floor on the afternoon of January 6, McConnell gave a dramatic speech warning of the dire consequences to the country should Republicans succeed in delaying the vote. He downplayed examples of voting fraud and even mocked the fact that Trump-appointed judges rejected election lawsuits.
“The voters, the courts, and the States have all spoken,” McConnell insisted. “If we overrule them, it would damage our Republic forever. If this election were overturned by mere allegations from the losing side, our democracy would enter a death spiral.”
Roughly six hours later, McConnell got his way. Cowed by the crowd of largely peaceful Americans allowed into the building by Capitol police, most Republican senators backed off the audit proposal. McConnell, echoing hyperbolic talking points about an “insurrection” seeded earlier in the day by Democratic lawmakers and the news media, gloated. “They tried to disrupt our democracy,” he declared on the Senate floor after Congress reconvened around 8 p.m. “This failed attempt to obstruct Congress, this failed insurrection, only underscores how crucial the task before us is for our Republic.”
Congress officially certified the Electoral College results early the next day. (read more)
The J6 pipe bombs were the insurance policy, in the event they couldn't get the crowd to comply with the FBI provocations. If no one stormed the Capitol, the finding of the pipe bombs would have been the emergency needed to stop the process. https://t.co/JqVcGROAPN
A POWERFUL OPEN LETTER To MI Lawmakers As They Vote This Week To Destroy Every Last Hope For Election Integrity: “The greatest threat to the survival of our children and grandchildren is systemic election corruption”
100 Percent Fed Up reports – Election integrity activists across Michigan are deeply concerned. Your Senate and House Democrats’ Blitzkrieg of Prop 2 bills — and bills put forth under cover of Prop 2 — threatens to alter the fabric of our election system. Democrat strategists are directing you to rush these bills through in hopes of blowing past any debate in what appears to this election integrity activist to be a thinly-veiled plan to facilitate election fraud in this state. Of course, you won’t be committing the fraud, but your legislation will greatly increase its likelihood and extent.
Is that a fair characterization? Not absent a review of what’s in the bills and how they might be expected to harm election integrity in Michigan. So, let’s test the hypothesis that you are, whether knowingly or not, facilitating election fraud in the state of Michigan.
Democrat House and Senate election bill analysis
Hypothetically, If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might write, sponsor and gavel through bills that, at every phase of the election process, made things easier for organized vote fraud perpetrators. Is that why your 8 bills voted on last week and 4 more in the on-deck circle do just that? If these are all signed into law, it will make Michigan even more vulnerable to existing systemic election corruption.
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might extend even beyond their authority under the Michigan Constitution to weaken the State’s election laws. Is that why you took legislative license, far over-extending the breach Prop 2 made in our election security guardrails?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might stretch out the voting process from a single Election Day, making it impossible to staff the polls with enough challengers, who, unlike poll workers, are unpaid volunteers. Is that why your bills permit from 9 to 29 days (clerk’s choice) of “early voting,” turning Election Day into “Election Month”?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might funnel as many voters to the voting method most susceptible to fraud: voting by mail. Is that why your HB 4699 created a single application for voters to automatically receive absent voter ballots for all future elections, as long as they live, unless they submit a signed request to rescind it or stop voting for 6 straight years?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might make it easier for organized vote fraudsters to bring Third-World-style ballot stuffing to America. Is that why you sponsored SB 0372, which not only mandates the placement of drop boxes in every community, it will remove the existing video monitoring requirement and change it to clerks “may” video monitor drop boxes? And could that be why you removed the requirement that clerks count and log the number of ballots arriving from those drop boxes each day, making it impossible for challengers to spot suspicious spikes in drop box usage?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might remove current mandates that require posting the total number of AV ballots received in the election by the close of polls. This law (violated by Detroit on November 8th, 2022), when followed, prevents “extra” ballots from being quietly added to the totals in the early morning hours after the polls close. Is that why SB 0372 also removes the current requirement that clerks post the total number of AV ballots returned in the election before 9 pm on Election Day?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might allow the use of insecure methods to transmit ballots from military and non-military Americans overseas. Is that why your HB 4210 would allow not only uninformed but any qualified overseas voter to email (that’s not a misprint) their voted ballot to their Michigan clerk? The bill explicitly requires a disclaimer be signed by the overseas voter accepting that “the secrecy of the absent voter ballot may be compromised during the duplication process.” Maybe this disclaimer is required because the co-chair of Michigan’s Cybersecurity Advisory Committee, U of M Prof. J. Alex Haldeman, testified last week that “HB4210 would seriously undermine the security of MI elections”.
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might reduce the number of challengers watching each AV ballot counting board, making it harder for them to identify fraud or other violations of election law. is that why your Senate Bill 0387 reduces the number of challengers permitted to oversee election workers to a ratio of one challenger per 6-8 election inspectors? This will make it impossible to have one challenger per counting board table per political party, as in the past. Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, who, per Democrat Sen. Jeremy Moss, assisted in the drafting of these bills, is still appealing her loss in court that blocks her attempt to make challengers subject to the whims of election inspectors (instead of unfettered observers of their work).
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might try to counter the challengers’ victory in court (under appeal) to permit the use of video/audio recording inside a counting board by cynically changing the law. Is that why you’re SB 0387 slips an added clause into the oath challengers must take: “…I shall not photograph or audio or video record within the counting place…”?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might want to reduce nosey challengers’ rights any way they could. Is this why your SB 0387 struck from the law the challengers’ rights protected under 168.730-168.734 during the crucial ballot pre-processing period? [The pre-processing was itself an outrageous security lapse passed last October (the Ann Bollin Law) that allows ballot envelopes to be slit open and remain vulnerable to potential tampering two nights in a row right before the election. Challengers’ rights should apply during ALL phases of the election process]
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might pass legislation to threaten challengers with prosecution for merely doing their jobs, making them less likely to volunteer in future elections. Is that why your HB 4129 would make it a felony if you do or say something that frightens an election worker or makes the worker perceive (in the worker’s own mind) that he or she is being harassed, thus placing an innocent challenger at the mercy of an overly sensitive (or malicious) election inspector?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might remove the challenged ballot requirement for voters who don’t show ID. Is that why HB 4567 does exactly that? So even if the clerk’s staff identifies a suspected ineligible voter, his or her vote will still be counted. Good luck to canvassers seeking to delete those votes when at least one jurisdiction (Detroit, November 2022) refused to follow Michigan Election Law’s challenge procedure of writing the ballot number on the challenged ballot before the stub is removed. This ensures that the ballot can never be found and “backed out” of the vote count if the voter later proves to be ineligible. [Added bonus: this will continue to let all those thousands of Detroit ballots that don’t show up in the poll books (as in 2020 and 2022) go effectively unchallenged].
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might restrict signature verification to inside the clerk’s office only — where they don’t permit challengers — and prohibit any further signature evaluations by other workers, such as at the AVCB (where challengers are present). Is that why SB0387 explicitly prohibits any additional signature verification of AV ballots by election inspectors at counting boards or precincts?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might relax the ID requirements where possible. Is that why SB 373 relaxes the photo ID requirement to include IDs from ANY “educational institution”?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might pass provisions that centralize the counting of votes. Is that why you made no limit to the number of precincts present at an AV counting board location, paving the way for more townships and cities to send their ballots to large counting boards and away from the local citizen volunteers counting the votes? Is that also why you increased the number of active registered voters in a single election precinct from 2,999 to 5,000 active registered voters?
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might make auditing election results more difficult. Is that why your SB 0387 would require tabulators to accept ballots from any precinct in the jurisdiction? Of course, jumbling up ballots from multiple different precincts makes the paper trail that much harder to follow.
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might keep incarcerated people on the voter rolls. Is that why you’ve introduced SB0033, which would do just that, enabling perpetrators of organized fraud to keep the voter rolls brimming with ineligible voters whose voting identities can be stolen via utilization of their names on illegal ballots, which can then be placed in drop boxes, no questions asked. [Maybe that’s why our SOS used taxpayer dollars to fight in court against a non-profit trying to remove 27,000 confirmed dead people from our QVF voter roll?]
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they might keep the ballot harvesting laws in place (preventing other people from collecting and delivering your ballot). This, is in spite of all the rhetoric about the need to make it “easier to vote,” setting up unsuspecting Republicans – many of whom have been told Prop 2 made ballot harvesting legal — for selective prosecution. Is that why, despite all the rhetoric about making it easier to vote – the prime pretext for most of the above bills — none of them are designed to legalize ballot harvesting? (Interesting!)
If the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they would fear exposure of these bills to public debate. Is that why you rammed them through, presenting the bills only 24 hours before their committee meetings with no chance of public review, debate or feedback from election integrity groups?
Lastly, if the Democrats sought to facilitate fraud, they would fear those legislators of either party, who might attempt to organize opposition to their bills. Is that why you reportedly limited the time allotted for some committee members to view substitute bills to as little as 75 minutes before the meetings?As I read through and analyzed your election bills from the House and Senate, they made me ill. It’s that sick feeling one gets when one realizes there are individuals in high positions of power who have a free hand to do great harm to your state, your nation, and your freedoms. The greatest threat to the survival of our children and grandchildren is systemic election corruption, which this legislation will codify into law.
To Democrat members: your actions provide clarity. More of us than ever before now know, beyond a reasonable doubt, that you are following a coordinated, systematic plan to weaken our election security, which is itself a matter of state and national security. To members of the Republican Caucus: you should be reminded that some of you have over the years – and even this year — broken ranks to vote with the Democrats. At this crucial juncture, just voting “NO” is not enough. You are expected to speak out forcefully against this assault on our election laws, being remorselessly advanced by your Democrat colleagues.
To the citizens of Michigan: it’s past time we, the people of Michigan, raised up a ragged coalition of downhearted, disillusioned, and disengaged Republicans, impartial Independents, and honest Democrats who all share one thing in common: they expect and demand honest elections. We invite voters from these disparate groups to become informed and engaged so that together we can remedy the rampant, systemic election corruption that is moving our state and nation rapidly toward ruin.
Sincerely,
Philip O’Halloran, MD Chairman Election Integrity Committee Michigan Republican Party Phil@MIGOP.org
For a summary and analysis of these bills, see MFE’s detailed report: https://www.mifairelections.org/post/call-to- action-contact-your-representatives-senators-about-these-election-related-bills
NarrowPathMinistries 
