US Attorney General: Mickey Mouse with a gun; our nation has been infiltrated by soccer mom terrorists

by Jon Rappoport

October 13, 2021

(To join our email list, click here.)

John Taylor Gatto: “Our form of compulsory schooling is an invention of the State of Massachusetts around 1850. It was resisted — sometimes with guns — by an estimated eighty percent of the Massachusetts population, the last outpost in Barnstable on Cape Cod not surrendering its children until the 1880s, when the area was seized by militia and children marched to school under guard…”

I was there last week. I saw 13 vicious soccer moms sail through the door into a Podunk school board meeting in an old WW2 PT-Boat and kidnap three glowing angels of mercy from the heavens (board members) and take them away to their Moonshine Militia base in the hills of Tennessee.

You would think this sort of thing is actually happening, because US Attorney General Merrick Garland has ordered the FBI to investigate a “‘disturbing spike in harassment, intimidation, and threats of violence’ against school administrators, teachers and school board members,” the NY Post reports.

Garland has offered no details corroborating this “spike.”

The Post also mentions: “Attorney General Merrick Garland is under scrutiny after a parents group revealed that his daughter is married to the co-founder of an education company funded by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg that allegedly employs critical race theory in its work, according to a report.”

Parents across America ARE entering school board meetings and protesting against: the teaching of critical race theory (‘all white people are racists’), the use of books that contain overt descriptions of sex acts, and mandatory masks and vaccines.

US Attorney General Garland is viewing these parent protests as borderline terrorism.

Well, sure. Why do parents think they have the right to say a word about how their children are educated and indoctrinated?

These children belong, first and foremost, to the State. Right?

How dare the parents try to meddle. Controlling young minds is a delicate and sophisticated process, and to obtain the desired result, parents have to be kept at a considerable distance.

The parents are only there to begin with, because the State doesn’t possess the facilities to house, feed, and train all the children.

Public education is MKULTRA for the kiddies, and Merrick Garland is Mickey Mouse waving around a gun to ensure the program moves forward.

For gain and glory, I myself am submitting a report to the Department of Justice titled: In Keeping with Current Progressive Trends Celebrating Favored Groups, Positions Vacated by the Resignations of Harassed Teachers Should Be Filled by Non-White Pedophiles Who Are Vaccinated.

A mere hour of home-school a day would be much safer than the fare offered by the US Department of Garland Education.

All right, let’s get down to brass tacks. American public education is a training ground. That’s how it’s built. Currently, the basic themes are:

All whites are devils, all blacks are victims;

Gender and sexuality are fluid, all sexual practices are permitted, and young children must be immersed in that river;

Medical dictates are paramount and must be obeyed, particularly if they lead to harmful destructive health effects.

Putting aside how these themes benefit special-interest groups, the overall outcome is the mental, emotional, physical, and spiritual collapse of generations of the young.

And that goal is fundamental to bringing about the collapse of the country.

This is called a clue, to anyone paying attention.

As I’ve been saying for the last 20 years, a Globalist Elite views America as the last outpost of resistance against the installation of one governance-system for the whole planet. Therefore, America must be taken apart and taken down.

We urgently need thousands more parents entering school board meetings across the country, come hell or high water, and exposing these themes of education-mind-control and revolting against the school boards and replacing them.

Replacing them with sane parents whose children attend these warped schools.

And we need thousands and thousands more parents who home school their children.

Honest FBI agents must stand up publicly and resist the orders of Merrick Garland.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Is Attorney General Barr a coward?

Has he sold out?

by Jon Rappoport

December 11, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election,” Barr told the AP. [1]

That’s because he isn’t looking. Here are several sites, among hundreds, that carry evidence of vote fraud on a continuing basis: American Thinker [2], Infowars [3], Gateway Pundit [4], Revolver.news [5], the Air Vent blog [6].

Barr has now appointed a special counsel, John Durham, to look into…what? Russiagate? The man in the moon? Richard Nixon? I’m sure we’ll get a report by 2026.

Slick Willie Barr’s remark to AP sent a signal to judges and lawyers: the Justice Department isn’t active, relax, no need to rush, feel free to dismiss cases, you won’t be risking adverse consequences.

That, from the number-one law enforcement man in the nation.

Meanwhile, if you visit those sites, I just mentioned, you’ll find all sorts of evidence of fraud. Ballot stuffing. Invented ballots. Backdated ballots. Failure to allow observers to monitor massive amounts of vote counting. Statistical anomalies showing impossible vote results. Vote switching. Electronic machine vulnerabilities. Software back doors. Fractional vote counts instead of raw number counts. Dominion and Smartmatic connections to foreign entities. The vote-count apparatus connected to the internet and therefore vulnerable to switches in numbers. Battleground states stopping the vote count on election night, after which huge numbers of votes changed from Trump to Biden. Alarming numbers of affidavits from poll workers attesting to fraud. Boarded up windows to block observers from watching vote counts, even from a distance. Observers intimidated and ordered to move away from vote counting personnel. Reputable data analysts stating vote fraud was occurring on a large scale.

Other than THAT, not a hint of impropriety. Nothing to see, forget about it.

And Barr didn’t need to say he was sure the election was a fraud; he only needed to say there was reason for the DOJ to do an immediate and far-reaching INVESTIGATION.

But he wouldn’t even say that.

And lest we forget, this election was CALLED BY THE NEWS NETWORKS. That’s what “election result” MEANS so far. That’s all it means.

Some of the networks take their election information from the Associated Press. But the AP is a consortium OF those same networks.

In other words, the news networks take their election information from themselves.

And on the strength of THAT, Attorney General Barr believes the result of the election has been decided; and there is no reason to mount an all-out investigation of the “result.”

Pundits are worried that Trump’s attack on the outcome makes the US look like a banana republic, in the eyes of the rest of the world.

Sorry, too late for that concern. When news networks call the election based on projections from themselves, we’re looking at a closed system, a bubble, a banana 3000 miles long.

Barr is a banana plantation boss, protecting the terminally corrupt territory from prying eyes.

In an act of extreme kindness, he should be busted down to hosing off dust and sand from cop cars in Death Valley.

He’s made himself into—or he already was—a double agent. While professing support for the president, he was preparing to undermine him.

Trump, throughout his term in office, has shown an uncanny ability to choose key people who are actually out to destroy him. I believe he thought Mike Flynn would be his main protector and buffer, and when Flynn was taken down, Trump didn’t know where to turn. He was at sea. A CEO or Commander-in-Chief is supposed to be better than that.

Barr’s refusal to declare an all-out war on election fraud creates a gigantic confusion. While court cases and state legislative hearings move along, and evidence of fraud piles up, the DOJ stands aside, as if these momentous events are of no more interest than a spring baseball game.

CRIMINAL CHARGES are at the bottom of this national disgrace. And there are no criminal charges.

Although extreme dereliction of duty ought to be a felony, Barr has a built-in protection. Prosecutorial discretion. It means a government lawyer can pick and choose his cases. He can go to court or not go to court.

“Let’s see. We have the murder weapon. The suspect’s prints are on the gun, which the cops found in his hand as he was standing over the dead body of the victim. We have surveillance video which shows the suspect shooting the victim. But you know what? We’re going to pass on this case. The killer has no previous record. He’s from a good family…”

For readers, and for Slick Willie Barr, I want to describe one expert witness to fraud who has already stepped forward. He is just one of a number of such witnesses. Just one. But if he doesn’t sound alarm bells for the Justice Department, indicating that an IMMEDIATE investigation must be launched yesterday, nobody will sound those alarms.

Navid Keshavarz-Nia. His credentials include extensive work for the US intelligence community. This is not necessarily a positive recommendation. However, such people are often cited as reliable by the press and the government. They’re courted and coddled and quoted and used to make cases.

Andrea Widburg, writing at American Thinker, headlines her piece, “The ‘smartest man in the room’ has joined Sidney Powell’s team”: [7]

“Dr. Kershavarz-Nia’s name may not mean a lot to you, but it’s one of the weightiest names in the world when it comes to sniffing out cyber-security problems.”

“We know how important Dr. Kershavarz-Nia is because, just two and a half months ago, the New York Times ran one of its Sunday long-form articles about a massive, multi-million-dollar fraud that a talented grifter ran against the American intelligence and military communities. Dr. Kershavarz-Nia is one of the few people who comes off looking good”:

(Quoting the Times) “Navid Keshavarz-Nia, those who worked with him said, ‘was always the smartest person in the room.’ In doing cybersecurity and technical counterintelligence work for the C.I.A., N.S.A. and F.B.I., he had spent decades connecting top-secret dots…”

Widburg continues at American thinker: “Not only does Dr. Kershavarz-Nia have an innate intelligence, but he’s also got extraordinary academic and practical skills in cyber-fraud detection and analysis…”

“His qualifications include a B.A., M.A., and Ph.D. in various areas of electrical and computer engineering. In addition, ‘I have advanced trained from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), National Security Agency (NSA), DHS office of Intelligence & Analysis (I&A) and Massachusetts Institution of Technology (MIT)’.”

“Professionally, Dr. Kershavarz-Nia has spent his career as a cyber-security engineer. ‘My experience,’ he attests, ‘spans 35 years performing technical assessment, mathematical modeling, cyber-attack pattern analysis, and security intelligence[.]’ I will not belabor the point. Take it as given that Dr. Kershavarz-Nia may know more about cyber-security than anyone else in America.”

“So what does the brilliant Dr. Kershavarz-Nia have to say? This:

1. Hammer and Scorecard [an alleged package of CIA vote-hacking programs] is real, not a hoax (as Democrats allege), and both are used to manipulate election outcomes.

2. Dominion, ES&S, Scytl, and Smartmatic [electronic vote-systems companies] are all vulnerable to fraud and vote manipulation — and the mainstream media reported on these vulnerabilities in the past.

3. Dominion has been used in other countries to ‘forge election results.’

4. Dominion’s corporate structure is deliberately confusing to hide relationships with Venezuela, China, and Cuba.

5. Dominion machines are easily hackable.

6. Dominion memory cards with cryptographic key access to the systems were stolen in 2019.”

“Although he had no access to the machines, Dr. Kershavarz has looked at available data about the election and the vote results. Based on that information, he concluded:

1. The counts in the disputed states (Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia) show electronic manipulation.

2. The simultaneous decision in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia to pretend to halt counting votes was unprecedented and demonstrated a coordinated effort to collude toward desired results.

3. One to two percent of votes were forged in Biden’s favor.

4. Optical scanners were set to accept unverified, un-validated ballots.

5. The scanners failed to keep records for audits, an outcome that must have been deliberately programmed.

6. The stolen cryptographic key, which applied to all voting systems, was used to alter vote counts.

7. The favorable votes pouring in after hours for Biden could not be accounted for by a Democrat preference for mailed in ballots. They demonstrated manipulation. For example, in Pennsylvania, it was physically impossible to feed 400,000 ballots into the machines within 2–3 hours.

8. Dominion used Chinese parts, and there’s reason to believe that China, Venezuela, Cuba interfered in the election.

9. There was a Hammer and Scorecard cyber-attack that altered votes in the battleground states, and then forwarded the results to Scytl servers in Frankfurt, Germany, to avoid detection.

10. The systems failed to produce any auditable results.”

“Based on the above findings, Dr. Keshavarz-Nia concluded with ‘high confidence that the election 2020 data were altered in all battleground states resulting in a [sic] hundreds of thousands of votes that were cast for President Trump to be transferred [sic] to Vice President Biden’.”

—end of quotes from American Thinker article—

Here’s a question: If you’re William Barr, what else do you want, in terms of qualifications, from an expert witness?

From all appearances, Navid Keshavarz-Nia is exactly the sort of person you would be looking for in serious cases.

Except, perhaps, in THIS case. Because this case not only cuts across the grain, it proposes a titanic refutation of the announced result of a presidential election. And not only an election, but one in which the sitting president is despised by the press, millions of Democrats, untold numbers of government employees, foreign government leaders, and rioters-in-waiting, who would stage mass destruction in cites, if the election is resolved in favor of the sitting president.

So, Mr. Barr, in this case, who qualifies as an expert witness, to whom very close attention should be paid? Or does the qualification of a witness come down to WHAT he will say?

Are you calculating which threat from which side of the political spectrum can visit the greater harm on you?

Have you already sold out? If so, to what or whom?

Your own fear?

“Yet panics, in some cases, have their uses; they produce as much good as hurt. Their duration is always short; the mind soon grows through them, and acquires a firmer habit than before. But their peculiar advantage is, that they are the touchstones of sincerity and hypocrisy, and bring things and men to light, which might otherwise have lain forever undiscovered. In fact, they have the same effect on secret traitors, which an imaginary apparition would have upon a private murderer. They sift out the hidden thoughts of man, and hold them up in public to the world.” Thomas Paine, The Crisis, December 23, 1776.

Your move, Mr. Barr.


SOURCES:

[1] https://apnews.com/article/barr-no-widespread-election-fraud-b1f1488796c9a98c4b1a9061a6c7f49d

[2] https://www.americanthinker.com/

[3] https://www.infowars.com/ and https://banned.video/

[4] https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/

[5] https://www.revolver.news/

[6] https://noconsensus.wordpress.com/

[7] https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/11/the_smartest_man_in_the_room_has_joined_sidney_powells_team.html


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Fake science in the Oklahoma Bombing

How official “science” is deployed to advance a political agenda

by Jon Rappoport

November 22, 2019

(To join our email list, click here.)

The public wants to buy every official scientific claim the mainstream press pounds into their brains—whether the issue is vaccine safety, global warming, the “overwhelming success” of medical drugs, the Big Bang theory of the universe’s origin…

For most people, the notion that a political agenda underlies such scientific pronouncements is unthinkable.

So as an example, a very specific example of fake science, let’s look back at the attack on Oklahoma City.

On April 19, 1995, one-third of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City blew up, killing 169 people and wounding 680 others.

Three men were arrested and convicted: Tim McVeigh, Terry Nichols, and Michael Fortier. McVeigh was put to death on June 11, 2001, Nichols is currently serving multiple life sentences without the possibility of parole, and Fortier was sentenced to 12 years (he served that term and was released).

The official narrative of the bombing stated: A Ryder truck parked at the curb outside the Murrah Building contained barrels of ammonium nitrate plus fuel oil (ANFO bombs), and their coordinated explosion occurred shortly after 9AM on the morning of April 19th.

In addition to the deaths and the woundings, the explosion impacted 324 buildings and 86 cars in the area.

(In my 1995, book, “The Oklahoma City Bombing, the Suppressed Truth,” I laid to rest the claim that ANFO bombs could have caused that much damage; and more importantly, I showed that an explosion coming out of a Ryder truck at the curb could not have caused the particular profile of damage sustained by the Murrah Building.)

The vaunted FBI lab decided that, indeed, all the damage and death HAD been caused by ANFO bombs in the Ryder truck.

But wait.

Buckle up.

Two years after the bombing, on March 22, 1997, we had this from CNN: “The Justice Department inspector general’s office has determined that the FBI crime laboratory working on the Oklahoma City bombing case made ‘scientifically unsound’ conclusions that were ‘biased in favor of the prosecution,’ The Los Angeles Times reported Saturday.”

“…[FBI] supervisors approved lab reports that they ‘cannot support’ and…FBI lab officials may have erred about the size of the blast, the amount of explosives involved and the type of explosives used in the bombing[!].”

“…harshest criticism was of David Williams, a supervisory agent in the [FBI] explosives unit, the paper [LA Times] said. Those flaws reportedly include the basis of his determination that the main charge of the explosion was ammonium nitrate. The inspector general called such a determination ‘inappropriate,’ the Times said.”

“…FBI officials found a receipt for ammonium nitrate at defendant [Terry] Nichols’ home and, because of that discovery, Williams slanted his conclusion to match the evidence.”

And with those revelations, the case, the investigation, the court trials, and press probes should have taken a whole new direction. But they didn’t.

The fake science was allowed to stand.

Therefore, other paths of investigation were abandoned. If bombs did, in fact, explode in the Ryder truck, but didn’t cause the major damage, then those bombs were a cover for other explosions of separate origin—for example, charges wired inside the columns of the Murrah Building, triggered at the exact moment the Ryder Truck explosion occurred.

Now we would be talking about a very sophisticated operation, far beyond the technical skills of McVeigh, Nichols, and Fortier.

Who knows where an honest in-depth investigation would have led? The whole idea of anti-government militia terrorism in the OKC attack—symbolized by McVeigh—was used by President Bill Clinton to bring the frightened public “back to the federal government” as their ultimate protector and savior.

Instead, the public might have been treated to a true story about a false flag operation, in which case President Clinton’s massaged message would never have been delivered.

But the fake crooked science pushed by the FBI lab was permitted to stand—despite exposure as fraud—and the story of militia terrorists trying to bring down the federal government was allowed to stand as well.

The year 1995 was rife with anti-government sentiment in America. This wasn’t merely a bunch of militias talking about insurrection. This was widespread dissatisfaction, on the part of many Americans, who were seeing federal power expand beyond any semblance of constitutionality.

As an object lesson, the Oklahoma Bombing was: “You see what happens when crazy people are allowed to own guns and oppose the government? Stop listening to anti-government rhetoric. It’s horribly dangerous. We, the government, are here to protect you. Come home to us. Have faith in us. We’ll punish the offenders. We’ll make America safe again. Let’s all come together and oppose these maniacs who want to destroy our way of life…”

The lesson worked.

Many scared Americans signed on to Clinton’s agenda.

And fake FBI science was used to bolster that agenda.

Even when exposed as fake by mainstream press outlets—however briefly, with no determined follow-up—the federal brainwashing held. The myth was stronger than reality.

If the federal government can egregiously lie about an event as huge as the Oklahoma Bombing, using fake science as a cover—what wouldn’t they lie about?

That’s a question which answers itself.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Bombshell accusation: Hillary never had a State Department email address; all emails were sent to her at her private unsecured email

by Jon Rappoport

June 25, 2018

Many people have been led to believe Hillary had two separate email accounts. One was a traditional, secure, State Department address, where she received most of her classified information; the other was her personal, sloppily run, wide open, unsecured email, where she received some classified information. But wait.

Paul Sperry (NY Post) has the explosive story. Or, rather, he had it on January 31, 2016. That’s when it was published. What happened to it?

Sperry/2016: “The State Department is lying when it says it didn’t know until it was too late that Hillary Clinton was improperly using personal emails and a private server to conduct official business — because it never set up an agency email address for her in the first place, the department’s former top watchdog says.”

“’This was all planned in advance’ to skirt rules governing federal records management, said Howard J. Krongard, who served as the agency’s [State Department] inspector general from 2005 to 2008.”

“The Harvard-educated lawyer points out that, from Day One, Clinton was never assigned and never used a state.gov email address like previous secretaries.”

“’That’s a change in the standard. It tells me that this was premeditated. And this eliminates claims by the State Department that they were unaware of her private email server until later,’ Krongard said in an exclusive interview. ‘How else was she supposed to do business without [an official State Department] email?’”

“He also points to the unusual absence of a permanent [State Department] inspector general during Clinton’s entire 2009-2013 term at the department. He said the 5½-year vacancy was unprecedented.”

“’This is a major gap. In fact, it’s without precedent,’ he said. ‘It’s the longest period any department has gone without an IG’.”

“Inspectors general serve an essential and unique role in the federal government by independently investigating agency waste, fraud and abuse. Their oversight also covers violations of communications security procedures.”

“’It’s clear she did not want to be subject to internal investigations,’ Krongard said. An email audit would have easily uncovered the secret information flowing from classified government networks to the private unprotected system she set up in her New York home.”

“He says ‘the key’ to the FBI’s investigation of Emailgate is determining how highly sensitive state secrets in the classified network, known as SIPRNet, ended up in Clinton’s personal emails.”

“’The starting point of the investigation is the material going through SIPRNet. She couldn’t function without the information coming over SIPRNet,’ Krongard said. ‘How did she get it on her home server? It can’t just jump from one system to the other. Someone had to move it, copy it. The question is who did that?’”

“As The Post first reported, the FBI is investigating whether Clinton’s deputies copied top-secret information from the department’s classified network to its unclassified network where it was sent to Hillary’s unsecured, unencrypted email account.”

I did a bit of further searching, and came across a nugget buried in a CNN article, dated 3/3/15, “Team Clinton: ‘Nothing nefarious’ at State,” by Dan Merica and Laura Koran. Here it is:

“On Tuesday, Marie Harf, a deputy State Department spokeswoman, said… ’While Secretary Clinton did not have a classified email system, she did have multiple other ways of communicating in a classified manner, including assistants printing documents for her, secure phone calls, and secure video conferences,’ Harf added.”

Did you catch the key phrase? WHILE SECRETARY CLINTON DID NOT HAVE A CLASSIFIED EMAIL SYSTEM.

What does that indicate? It appears to confirm that Clinton NEVER had a secured, protected, official State Department email address. Therefore, despite denials, she must have been conducting classified government business through her own unsecured email account.

Was this issue ever brought up during interviews the FBI conducted with Hillary? If so, what were her responses?

For example, did she say, “Back off and ease up, boys, we’re all in this together”? Did she say, “We all know I’m trying to shield the Clinton Foundation operations and money”?

She never had an official State Department email account? She conducted all her classified email communication on her unsecured home server? There was no permanent inspector general at the State Department during her tenure as Secretary of State? The State Department lied when it said it only discovered her private email account late in the game?

She’s clean as a whistle. Nothing to see here. Don’t worry, be happy.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Say hello to the FBI mole inside the Trump campaign

Say hello to the FBI mole inside the Trump campaign

by Jon Rappoport

May 21, 2018

Well, you see, the mole wasn’t a spy, he was an informant. Aha. Let’s use a microscope to tell the difference.

The mole: Stefan Halper, a Cambridge professor.

Supposedly, Halper was gathering information for the FBI about a suspected Trump-Russia connection.

Well, what else has Halper done? At The Intercept, Glenn Greenwald reports: “Four decades ago, Halper was responsible for a long-forgotten spying scandal involving the 1980 election, in which the Reagan campaign – using CIA officials managed by Halper, reportedly under the direction of former CIA Director and then-Vice-Presidential candidate George H.W. Bush – got caught running a spying operation from inside the Carter administration. The plot involved CIA operatives passing classified information about Carter’s foreign policy to Reagan campaign officials in order to ensure the Reagan campaign knew of any foreign policy decisions that Carter was considering.”

Oops. That doesn’t smell good. CIA operatives, managed by Halper, infiltrated the presidential campaign, spied on Jimmy Carter and his advisors, and relayed information about Carter’s foreign policy to Reagan’s team.

But we’re supposed to believe, without evidence, that in 2016 Halper was only trying to dig up information on a Trump-Russia connection.

What more do we know about Stefan Halper, the mole for hire? Breitbart: “Halper…served as an assistant to all three of President Gerald Ford’s Chief of Staffs — Alexander Haig, Donald Rumsfeld, and Dick Cheney…” Quite a trio of politicians. I don’t think you’d want to list them on your resume, if you were applying for a job with an organization that showed a shred of ethics.

And then there is this: In 1984, Halper was the chairman of the Palmer National Bank. Breitbart: “White House official Oliver North wired loaned funds from the Palmer National Bank to a Swiss bank account, which were later used to aid the [Nicaraguan] contras.” The contras, backed by the CIA, were trying to derail the Sandinista government, and in the process, reportedly carried out over 1000 terrorist attacks. Transferring funds from the US to the contras was illegal.

Glenn Greenwald: “…the CIA operative and FBI informant [Stefan Halper] used to gather information on the Trump campaign in the 2016 campaign has, for weeks, been falsely depicted as a sensitive intelligence asset rather than what he actually is: a long-time CIA operative with extensive links to the Bush family who was responsible for a dirty and likely illegal spying operation in the 1980 presidential election.”

But don’t worry. Nothing untoward is going on here. The FBI merely needed a man on the inside of the Trump campaign, to make sure Russia wasn’t exercising undue influence on the 2016 presidential election. Nothing more. No problem. Just ask the FBI. They’ll confirm this. The FBI high echelon is squeaky clean. They never lie.

One other thing. Stefan Halper’s father-in-law was Ray Cline, an infamous CIA agent. From Wikispooks: “Cline has been an outspoken proponent of disinformation and direct manipulation of the press by the CIA. In testimony before the House Select Committee on Intelligence, Cline defended the use of such covert devices as black propaganda and the funding of journalists, arguing that ‘the First Amendment is only an amendment’.”

“He [Cline] later became director of the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (1969-73), where he helped coordinate the CIA’s destabilization and eventual overthrow of the Allende government in Chile.”

But again, no problem. Why would we even suspect Halper was engaged in anything illegal during his time as a mole inside the Trump campaign?

The FBI is pure as the driven snow. So is the CIA. All is well.

If you buy that, I have condos for sale on the dark side of the moon.


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Secret House memo released: the fallout, the lies, and the bigger picture

Secret House memo released: the fallout, the lies, and the bigger picture

by Jon Rappoport

February 5, 2018

The House Intelligence Committee’s 4-page memo has been released.

The hullabaloo about the memo unfairly “damaging the reputation” of the FBI and the Dept. of Justice is a joke.

The same types of Democrat ideologues who are spouting that line, now, were screaming at the FBI, decades ago, when COINTELPRO, the Bureau’s op to place spies inside dissident Left groups across the US, was exposed. But suddenly, now, the FBI is pure as the driven snow, and its reputation must not be besmirched; otherwise, Democracy itself could collapse.

And in more recent times, the mainstream Left press, without an ounce of regret or remorse, exposed monumental fraud and incompetence at the FBI’s vaunted forensic lab and stuck a dagger in its heart:

Washington Post, April 18, 2015: “The Justice Department and FBI have formally acknowledged that nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000…the cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death…Of those, 14 have been executed or died in prison…”

So forget the idea that the Left is valiantly trying to protect the FBI’s reputation. The Left is trying to say Trump is a crook and a traitor; and whatever works toward that end—including spreading praise on the FBI as a holy church—is in the game plan.

At the heart of the House Committee memo is the charge, boldly expressed, that FBI/DOJ spying on the Trump team was launched or expanded after obtaining a FISA court warrant.

And that warrant, opening the door to spy on Trump team member, Carter Page, was granted based on the notorious Trump dossier, compiled by ex-MI-6 agent, Christopher Steele.

But wait. The dossier was bought and paid for by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton camp. And therefore, in effect, a political op, launched to win the election for Hillary, helped start the ball rolling against Trump and his supposed Russian connections.

That’s bad enough, but that’s not all.

The focus comes back to the Trump dossier. Was it fake or real? Was it accurate or cooked up? If it was fake, a whole pillar of the FBI/DOJ investigation of Trump—including the Mueller probe—collapses.

Many observers have thrown dirt on the dossier, but they are missing one point that stands out like a mountain on a clear day. I’ll explain.

The Trump dossier: what no one is talking about

A British spy’s fantastical story.

First, a bit of background.

The dirty Trump dossier made several claims:

One: Russia had strong blackmail material on Trump and COULD THUS CONTROL A SITTING PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES;

Two: Most damning in that material, Trump used prostitutes while he was in Russia, and paid several of them to urinate on a hotel bed Obama had once slept in;

Three: Russia hacked DNC (Democratic National Committee) emails and passed them on to WikiLeaks, who published them. The emails were damaging to Hillary and helped Trump win the election;

Four: Russia obviously wanted Trump to win the election.

British ex-spy, Christopher Steele, who put together the dossier, once worked in Russia and allegedly had many connections there.

Steele assembled the Trump dossier after consulting with a number of Russians and spreading some money around.

Steele claims, in the dossier, that he was talking with well-placed Russian officials. That’s where he obtained his information.

What??

Why would these Russians speak with him? Why would these Russians expose a purported plot to hand the election to Trump?

If such a Russian plot existed, it would be a tightly held secret. VERY TIGHTLY HELD. BECAUSE IT WOULD BE THE NUMBER-ONE RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE OP.

AN OP FOR THE AGES.

THE HOLY GRAIL.

BLACKMAIL CONTROL OVER A SITTING US PRESIDENT.

Yet, here are Russian intelligence people spilling the beans to Steele, a former British spy.

And by spilling the beans, they’re pretty much committing suicide, because their Russian colleagues and superiors will be able to track them down and identify them, since they’ve had connections to Steele in the past.

Steele goes to Russia, sits down with a number of Russian intel people, asks them questions, and they tell him all about a top-secret plot to sway a US election and CONTROL THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. No problem.

OR…Steele never accumulated all the information in the Trump dossier. He made unwarranted leaps of inference. He invented key facts. He wanted to satisfy his employers, Hillary Clinton, and the DNC. They wanted dirt on Trump, and he gave them dirt.

Daniel Craig could play the Steele role in a Netflix series.

I’m working on a script. Here are the first few lines:

Steele: Hi, Ivan, remember me?

Ivan: Why, it’s Chris Steele! Haven’t seen you in years. Let’s see, you were working for MI-6 in the old days here in Moscow, right? Pretending you were a diplomat. Yes, we had a few lunches back then.

Steele: Right. Look, I was wondering whether you can tell me about a super-secret file you guys are building on Donald Trump. This is the off the record, of course.

Ivan: Sure. We’re blackmailing him. If we can help him win the election, he’ll be under our thumb, completely. This is a Putin operation. It’s a little noisy here in the restaurant. Why don’t we go over to my office and I’ll show you all the data.

Steele: That’d be great.

Ivan: Putin wants Trump to win. I don’t like Trump. I prefer Hillary. I assume you do, too.

Steele: Well, sure. I’m working for her. That’s why I’m here.

Ivan: Wonderful…

It’s a sure-fire hit.

It’s so believable.

Now to the bigger picture: to what degree is the secret House memo, just released, a limited hangout?

If the FBI/DOJ offered up a fake dossier to the FISA, in order to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump team, what else did they do?

The FBI, CIA, and NSA form a blanket of surveillance across America, collecting billions of messages. Are we supposed to believe the FISA warrant was the only effort to gain permission to spy on Trump? Or that legal permission was an issue in the first place?

Of course it wasn’t. The House memo focuses on the legal side of things as a smokescreen.

A politicized group of spying agencies would go a lot further in spying on Trump—but beyond that, we’re talking about spying on all citizens, including Congressional and other government officials, regardless of party affiliation.

There is only one barrier the NSA, CIA, FBI, and other intelligence agencies face: when they use surveillance-material in criminal ways, how can the material be released and falsely attributed to other sources?

This is analogous to “parallel construction.” If a law-enforcement agency tries to use illegally obtained evidence as a basis for prosecution, a court will disallow the evidence. Therefore, the agency must concoct a “parallel” investigation that arrives at the desired goal through another route.

In the case of spying on government officials, this “parallel” is rather easy to pull off. It’s accomplished, for example, by anonymous leaks to the press.

You could call this meta-government. Officials are threatened, blackmailed, smeared, and controlled by intelligence agencies.

It works. There is no need for a Steele dossier that blames Russia and Putin or any foreign actor. Actually, placing blame on the Russians—with enough press support—deflects attention from ongoing home-grown operations.

The Trump-FISA-dossier scandal is just the tip of an exceedingly large surveillance iceberg.

An American iceberg.

William Binney, cryptanalyst-mathematician, served 30 years at the NSA: “The FBI has access to the data collected, which is basically the emails of virtually everybody in the country. And the FBI has access to it. All the congressional members are on the surveillance too, no one is excluded. They are all included. So, yes, this can happen to anyone. If they become a target for whatever reason – they are targeted by the government, the government can go in, or the FBI, or other agencies of the government, they can go into their database, pull all that data collected on them over the years, and we analyze it all. So, we have to actively analyze everything they’ve done for the last 10 years at least.”

That’s a lot more spying than three warrants granted by a FISA court to surveil the Trump team. But you’re supposed to look at the warrants and how they were obtained, and not look at the wall-to-wall spying on every American.

You’re supposed to get embroiled in the Republican members of the House Intelligence Committee vs. the Democrat members, as they fling accusations at each other.

You’re not supposed to realize the NSA already has thousands of Trump-related documents, illegally obtained over a long period of time, as well as Obama-related documents, and documents on anybody and everybody who communicates electronically.

The endless spying is not for the purpose of catching terrorists. Ultimately, it’s not even for blackmail. It’s for implementing a long-range plan to profile and track and control every person— the Technocrats’ wet dream—and the real-time ongoing energy consumption of each human will be radically diminished, with quotas numerically assigned From Above, and regulated, at automated choke-points, in the Brave New World of promoted and fabricated Scarcity.

“We’re saving the planet. Thank you for your (enforced) participation. Be happy. Feel inspired.”

You’re definitely not supposed to look at that and resist it.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Are FBI “patriots” getting ready to expose the corrupt Mueller probe?

Are FBI “patriots” getting ready to expose the corrupt Mueller probe?

by Jon Rappoport

December 25, 2017

There are two parts to this article. Part one was written before the recent wave of Mueller-FBI demotion, retirement, and reassignment among key personnel. Part one is a kind of roadmap for whistleblower groups. A way to succeed.

Part two comments on the extraordinary “downsizing” of Mueller-FBI personnel, and its possible connection to FBI whistleblowers within the Bureau.

To paraphrase the Ben Bradlee character in the film, All the President’s Men, nothing much is riding on the Mueller investigation, except the presidency; the role of the mainstream press in politicizing and editorializing its coverage of the White House; the immediate future of US-Russia relations; the future of the Clintons in politics; and the intervention of the Surveillance State in the day-to-day activities of a president and his team.

PART ONE

Did the gunslinger Trump collude with Putin in a secret underground cave, thus placing Hillary on a cross of pain? Did the Clinton Foundation make slimy palm-greasing deals all over the world with high-level crooks and launder their money? Will the knight-puppet Robert Mueller uncover any part of the truth? Will His Excellency, Jeff Sessions, stir from his self-induced narcosis, look around, and find out what’s going on?

—We’ve heard a certain tune before: Honorable government employees will soon expose the crimes of such-and-so, they’ll present the evidence and testimony, and they’ll bring down the house on the heads of corrupt agencies. And then…it doesn’t happen.

At infowars, Paul Watson reports on what former FBI Assistant Director James Kallstrom has told Fox Business: “…patriots within the FBI are about to go public with huge new revelations that could sink the credibility of the ‘Russian collusion’ investigation.”

Against these patriots, “Kallstrom said that a ‘5th estate’ [within the FBI] has been working to sabotage President Trump, led by ‘a bunch of sycophants in the FBI’ who are guilty of ‘obstruction of justice’.”

“He [Kallstrom] added that the goal from the outset was to ‘destroy the presidency of the United States,’ a claim backed up by the revelation that top anti-Trump FBI agents had settled on an ‘insurance policy,’ namely the ‘Russian collusion’ investigation, to topple Trump if he defeated Hillary.”

“The former assistant director [Kallstrom] then dropped a bombshell, suggesting that insiders within the FBI are about to go public with new revelations about Mueller and Comey.”

“’I think recent events, that I’m aware of, are going to improve that, because there’s going to be something actually something that’s going to happen in my view,’ he said.”

“’I think there’s a lot of patriots [within the FBI] that have just had it up to here, with what’s going on. And they’re to step forward and tell people what the shenanigans have been, how they shut down the Clinton Foundation investigation, how other things, you know, were done that are so anti what the FBI and United States is all about,’ Kallstrom added.”

If Kallstrom is correct in his prediction, and this isn’t just another dud, certain tactics will need to be deployed. Because there is no guarantee that major news media will cover the revelations of “disgruntled FBI agents.” In fact, major media will do everything possible to ignore, downplay, and discredit these whistleblowers.

One: The FBI whistleblowers will need to produce documents wherever possible. Memos, emails, reports, recordings.

Two: The FBI whistleblowers will need to step out into the light and reveal themselves. They will need to do this as a group.

Three: They will need to do as many press interviews as possible, and also hold their own press conferences.

Four: In all these actions, their personal security and protection will have to be very capable.

Five: They must make reference to specifics, revealing FBI actions to: 1) squash investigations into the Clintons, and 2) promote a fake hypothesis that Trump and the Russians colluded to steal the election of 2016.

Six: Generalities won’t do. They can be shot down in minute as “unfounded opinions.”

Seven: The whistleblowers must compose and build their case in honest and compelling fashion.

Eight: They must be relentless. Despite hostile criticisms and other efforts to silence them, they must persist and weather the storms. They must create enough pressure to force a breakthrough—meaning the mainstream press can no longer resist covering their revelations.

Nine: Once they go public, they must acquire support from as many members of Congress as possible.

Ten: I re-emphasize security and protection. The whistleblowers must assume they are under surveillance—with all that implies.

Eleven: They must assume their own backgrounds and personal and professional histories will come under extreme scrutiny—and lead to accusations and defamation—including fake stories.

Twelve: They should obtain the service of an excellent whistleblower attorney, who will file a lawsuit against the FBI on their behalf—even if the suit never gets off the ground.

Thirteen: By the sheer number of their press interviews (with all levels of media), they need to garner as much support as possible from the American people. This is crucial.

Fourteen: They must be able to refer the American people to the specific crimes created by this “fifth column of traitors” inside the FBI, in order to reject the notion that mere “mistakes were made,” or there were simple “errors of judgment,” or different agents “have honest differences of opinion.”

Fifteen: The one or two busiest spokespeople from the whistleblower group must be able to connect with the public. They can’t be cold fish and they can’t be blowhards slinging charges like hash in a diner.

Sixteen: The whistleblowers must insist on testifying before Congress under oath—whether or not this comes to pass. On the other hand, they can’t put all their eggs in that basket. Relying on Congress would be a huge miscalculation.

Seventeen: The whistleblowers must, wherever possible, present evidence that—in addition to squashing investigations into Clinton crimes—the specifics of these crimes were known to the FBI. And “here those specifics are.”

Eighteen: Do whatever is possible to ensure the whistleblower group isn’t infiltrated by an agent(s) from “the other side.”

As you can see, these points are applicable to many situations, where whistleblowers would step out of the shadows and level charges against their employers and colleagues.

Many of the points loosely fall under the heading of “public relations”—in the authentic, not the fake meaning of that term.

Some whistleblowers unfortunately assume that, because “they have the goods,” the truth will carry the day. This is a serious misreading of the way things work.

In a different arena—attempts to pass state measures mandating the labeling of GMO food—I wrote articles criticizing the “label-it” leaders. They were, in a general sense, “whistleblowers,” who were exposing Monsanto and other biotech firms. But their pro-labeling public relations campaigns were poorly executed, and as it turned out, they had been infiltrated at the highest levels. The truth about GMOs was never communicated with any power. The label-it forces had the goods; they just didn’t know how to use them.

You can be an expert at putting the truth together, but if you’re an amateur at putting it across to the public, things fall apart in the blink of an eye.

FBI “patriots” should take a page from the playbook of the reluctant CDC whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson, who, in 2014, stated that he and his research colleagues falsified a key study on the effects of the MMR vaccine, thus hiding its connection to autism. Thompson acquired legal representation from a whistleblower attorney, Rick Morgan, and posted his confession on Morgan’s web page. That was step one. It gave Thompson a certain level of protection.

These FBI agents, by positioning themselves as whistleblowers, with an aggressive attorney (better yet, a large team of attorneys), can create the best possible situation for themselves.

—Press conference, a lawyer steps to the podium: “Today, our firm, representing the men and women behind me, all agents of the FBI, are filing several whistleblower suits against the FBI, the Justice Department, and members of the Mueller special probe…these honorable and courageous agents are putting their careers and their lives on the line to serve their country, as their oath demands. The American people must know what is being done in their name, what crimes have been committed against their interests…we call on the people to rally with us as we seek justice…we also call on the Attorney General of the United States, Mr. Sessions, to support us and protect these lawsuits as they move forward…”

There is a 1960s technical term for this strategy: Heavy Shit.

You might wonder whether the FBI and various players at the Justice Department would let things get to this point. We could make all sorts of guesses and predictions.

Regardless, when whistleblowers exist, if they have vital information, they plan how to go public. If the former Assistant Director of the FBI, Mr. Kallstrom, was doing more than blowing smoke the other day when he spoke with FOX, such whistleblowers exist now inside the FBI. Whatever truth they have, they are thinking about how to proceed.

Truth, Justice, and the American Way, right?

Wherever it leads.

“Sir, what do you know and when did you first know it?”

“In my case, it was when we, at the Bureau, were looking into the Clinton Foundation and when the initial charge was made that the Russians were trying to get Mr. Trump elected. Would you like me to tell the whole story and present my documents?”

“Yes, I would.”

“All right, here we go. Get ready for a few surprises.”

Sheer fantasy? It’s always fantasy until individuals turn it into reality.

We’ve heard stories before about brave patriots working within major institutions of government—groups of patriots, not lone individuals—who are fed up with corruption and lies and cover-ups—who have proof of major crimes, and who are ready to step forward.

Is this FBI scenario just another story, a wishful hope?

Or is it something more?

Working as a reporter for the past 35 years, I’ve had occasional contact with whistleblowers—individuals and groups. The lone individuals tend to be smarter. The groups often come up with a strategy that is unworkable and foolish. That’s the liability of having a group. People lend to sink to the lowest common denominator. What they manage to agree on is a function of “what they believe they’re supposed to do”—a template snatched from various fantasies which will have very little PENETRATING AND LASTING IMPACT.

PART TWO

Among the Mueller-FBI personnel, a rather remarkable downsizing is occurring.

Peter Strzok: This FBI agent was a key figure in investigations of the Hillary Clinton email server, and the purported Russian influence in the 2016 US presidential election. Strzok was the lead FBI agent on Muller’s team probing the Russian-influence theory. Muller fired Strzok from his team, when Strzok’s anti-Trump text messages surfaced.

Andrew McCabe: The deputy director of the FBI has just announced he will retire. He has been under fire, amid charges he was biased in favor of Hillary Clinton during the FBI investigation of her private email server. McCabe’s wife, in her run for a seat in the Virginia State Senate, received a donation of $675,000 from “the Virginia Democratic Party and Common Good VA, the political action committee of [Terry] McAuliffe, a longtime friend and supporter of both Hillary and Bill Clinton who is now the outgoing governor of Virginia,” the Washington Examiner reported.

Jim Baker: He has been “reassigned.” The Examiner: “Baker, who became general [FBI] counsel under [FBI Director James] Comey, has come under scrutiny by congressional Republicans investigating whether he leaked information [to the media] from the infamous Trump dossier, which contains unverified claims about Trump’s deep ties to Russia.”

Bruce Ohr: FOX: “A senior Justice Department official was demoted…amid an ongoing investigation into his contacts with the opposition research firm responsible for the anti-Trump ‘dossier,’ the department confirmed to Fox News.”

There is increasing pressure on other FBI-DOJ-Mueller officials—including Mueller himself—because of conflicts of interest and/or concealment of the roles they’ve played in the Clinton email and Trump-Russia investigations, as well as the Uranium One deal.

It is possible that FBI insiders/agents, who are fed up with political bias inside the FBI-DOJ-Mueller nexus, have assisted in the effort to downsize the Mueller forces.

If so, this would be another whistleblower strategy, a covert one. Instead of stepping out of the shadows as a group, these agents would leak information to loyal Trump appointees, who in turn would take action.

An internal struggle is taking place.

However, covert insider actions, such as these, are only valuable in the short run. If the corruption within the FBI and the DOJ are going to be exposed at a deeper level (and there may be no bottom, when all cards are laid on the table), whistleblowers will have to come out into the open, with a large and coherent case.

The Trump, anti-Trump situation is but the latest in a long line of clues about federal law-enforcement bias. For example, here is one thread among many:

In 2014-15, stories appeared in the press about the phenomenal corruption of the FBI evidence lab. But since then, there has been very little follow-up. I find no compelling evidence that the federal government has fixed the problem.

April 20, 2015, The Atlantic: “…the Washington Post made clear Saturday in an article that begins with a punch to the gut… ‘Nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000,’ the newspaper reported, adding that ‘the cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death’.”

August 12, 2014, New Scientist: “…the initial results were released of an ongoing review of thousands of criminal cases in which FBI scientists’ testimony may have led to wrongful convictions – including for some people now on death row…[an FBI source states] ’we teach these people [lab techs in training] for two weeks, and they would go back to their laboratories with a certificate of completion and be told: Great you’re qualified to do this [analysis of evidence] – here’s your caseload.’”

Two years after the Oklahoma City Bombing bombing, on March 22, 1997, we had this from CNN: “The Justice Department inspector general’s office has determined that the FBI crime laboratory working on the Oklahoma City bombing case made ‘scientifically unsound’ conclusions that were ‘biased in favor of the prosecution,’ The Los Angeles Times reported Saturday.”

“…[FBI] supervisors approved lab reports that they ‘cannot support’ and…FBI lab officials may have erred about the size of the blast, the amount of explosives involved and the type of explosives used in the bombing[!].”

“…harshest criticism was of David Williams, a supervisory agent in the [FBI] explosives unit, the paper [LA Times] said. Those flaws reportedly include the basis of his determination that the main charge of the explosion was ammonium nitrate. The inspector general called such a determination ‘inappropriate,’ the Times said.”

“…FBI officials found a receipt for ammonium nitrate at defendant [Terry] Nichols’ home and, because of that discovery, Williams slanted his conclusion to match the evidence.”

Let that one sink in.

The deeper you go, the more crimes you find.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Mueller and fake news charges against Manafort

Mueller and fake news charges against Manafort

by Jon Rappoport

October 30, 2017

Here we go. Special counsel Mueller and his team have filed the first federal charges against Trump-campaign officials Paul Manafort and Rick Gates.

CNN is running the headline: MANAFORT, GATES CHARGED WITH CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE US.

Other press outlets are following suit, emphasizing the “conspiracy against the US.”

CNN writes: “The indictment against the Manafort and Gates contains 12 counts: conspiracy against the United States, conspiracy to launder money, unregistered agent of a foreign principal, false and misleading US Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) statements, false statements, and seven counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts.”

—But here is the real takeaway, and of course MSM outlets are ignoring it: the conspiracy charge is a piece of federal boilerplate. Alongside the basket of other charges mentioned above, conspiracy is a general category that is tacked on. It isn’t a specific singular charge. It definitely isn’t “these two men conspired with Russia to hand Trump the election.”

In fact, CNN adds: “The charges do not cover any activities related to the campaign, though it’s possible Mueller could add additional charges.”

But when MSM outlets blare “conspiracy against the United States,” most readers and viewers will assume this does mean a charge of working with Russia to make Trump president.

It’s a nice little devious trick.

Of course, the Mueller indictments are also being used to blot out the Clinton Uranium One scandal and the Trump dirty dossier scandal, both of which involve the Clintons, and Mueller as well, since he was the head of the FBI when the Bureau discovered all sorts of corruption and bribery involving Russia’s nuclear industry, during Uranium One negotiations, and either failed to disclose the findings, or failed to use them to make an impact on Obama.

Today, it’s all about “conspiracy against the United States,” and the mainstream news audience who thinks and comprehends and talks in terms of vague generalities—like thirsty travelers in the desert spotting the mirage of an oasis.

“OH, CONSPIRACY AGAINST AMERICA, WELL THAT’S IT THEN, THEY NAILED THEM.”

That and $2.75 will get you a ride on the New York Subway.

In case you haven’t read my piece on the Clintons and the Uranium One scandal—which most definitely DOES connect Bill and Hillary to corrupt dealings with the Russians, and which hasn’t been “debunked,” as MSM outlets keep insisting, here it is:

—Cue the dawn sunrise and violins for the beautiful first couple of American politics (the Clintons).

But what about the uranium scandal?

The what?

Before I quote a NY Times piece on this—suppose, just suppose the beautiful first couple, Bill and Hillary, have been running a parallel operation to the government, in the form of a Foundation that is taking in major chunks of cash from people who want (and get) serious political favors.

Well, current news stories confirm that. We already know that.

But uranium?

Consider this plot line. Follow the bouncing ball.

Putin wants 20% of uranium on US soil. That 20% is already owned by a Canadian mining company.

The Canadian executives want to sell it to Putin.

But because uranium is a US “national security” product, various US federal agencies have to OK the deal. One of those agencies is the US State Department.

The State Department is headed up by Hillary Clinton. Her Department says yes to the uranium deal.

The kicker? Those Canadian mining executives, who wanted the sale to Putin to go through, donated millions to the Clinton Foundation.

Getting the picture?

On April 23, 2015, the NY Times ran a story under the headline: Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal.

The bare bones of the story: a Canadian company called Uranium One controlled a great deal of uranium production in the US. It was sold to Russia (meaning Putin and his minions). So Putin now controls 20% of US uranium production.

From the Times: “…the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.”

The Times: “The [Pravda] article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company [Uranium One] with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.”

“But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.”

“At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.”

“Frank Giustra…a mining financier, has donated $31.3 million to the foundation run by former President Bill Clinton…”

“Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal [to sell Uranium One to Putin] had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.”

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.”

If you’re Putin and you’re sitting in Moscow, and the uranium deal has just dropped this bonanza into your lap, what’s your reaction—after you stop laughing and popping champagne corks? Or maybe you never really stop laughing. Maybe this is a joke that keeps on giving. You wake up in the middle of the night with a big grin plastered on your face, and you can’t figure out why…and then you remember, oh yeah, the uranium deal. The US uranium. Who’s running the show in America? Ha-ha-ha. Some egregious dolt? Maybe he’s a sleeper agent we forgot about and he reactivated himself. And this Clinton Foundation—how can the beautiful couple get away with that? Can we give Hillary a medal? Can we put up a statue of her in a park? Does Bill need any more hookers?

You shake your head and go back to sleep. You see a parade of little boats carrying uranium from the US to Russia. A pretty line of putt-putt boats. You chuckle. Row, row, row your boat…merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily…life is but a dream.

Good times.

Final note: there is a great deal of difference between a major outlet like the NY Times running their Clinton/uranium piece for one day—and pounding on it for weeks and months. In the latter case, they would let loose the hounds, who would probe and push and interview relevant people and get confessions and parlay those confessions up the food chain—blowing the story into an enormous scandal—which it is.

The Times had its hands on a volcanic piece…and they let it drop. Because the ceiling and the limit had been reached. The Times basically executed what’s called a limited hangout, a partial exposure of a story that was getting too hot to suppress entirely.

The limited hangout allows the venting of steam—and then nothing more. In this case, the Clinton camp denies there was any quid pro quo, they assert Hillary had nothing to do with the uranium deal, and the curtain falls.

Thus you have the reality which the major media did expose, vs. the reality they could have exposed. The “could have” part would have changed current history—but it was squelched, and put under wraps.

Tossed on the junk heap.

—end of my 2016 article—

Now, the Senate Judiciary Committee and Chairman Chuck Grassley are looking into these crimes, because new reports of corruption are surfacing:

FOX News: “The Hill reported that the FBI had evidence as early as 2009 that Russian operatives used bribes, kickbacks and other dirty tactics to expand Moscow’s atomic energy footprint in the U.S. — but the Obama administration approved the uranium deal benefiting Moscow anyway.”

“Grassley on Wednesday [raised]…the question of whether the [US government] committee that approved the [uranium] transaction [in 2010] was aware of the FBI probe. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) [which approved the uranium deal] included then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”

As Newsweek reports, that early FBI probe was launched under FBI Director Robert Mueller. Mueller is now trying to dig up (or invent) every tidbit he can about Russian collusion with…Trump in the 2016 presidential election. My, my.

Newsweek contacted the FBI a few days ago, asking whether Mueller had informed the Obama White House about his old FBI probe that uncovered Russian corruption relevant to the uranium deal that was being put together at the time.

Newsweek: “The FBI said it had no comment to Newsweek questions about whether Mueller alerted senior Obama administration officials, including Clinton, about the [FBI] investigation before they brokered the [uranium] deal.”

BOOM. Are you kidding? No comment? That’s tantamount to admitting, “Look, either way we answer that question, we’re screwed or the Obama White House is screwed, so we’re remaining mum. We’re protecting VERY IMPORTANT PEOPLE and the truth doesn’t matter.”

This should be the subject of screaming headlines from mainstream news around the world: FBI CLAMS UP ON URANIUM DEAL. FBI REFUSES TO SAY WHETHER BOSS MUELLER TOLD THE WHITE HOUSE ABOUT RUSSIAN CORRUPTION IN URANIUM DEAL. FBI COVERING UP CORRUPTION IN CLINTON OBAMA RUSSIAN URANIUM DEAL.

However, the FBI refusal is buried deep in mainstream stories.

But wait, it gets even better:

FOX: “[Grassley] is calling for the Justice Department to lift an apparent ‘gag order’ on an FBI informant who reportedly helped the U.S. uncover a [2009-10] corruption and bribery scheme by Russian nuclear officials but allegedly was ‘threatened’ by the Obama administration to stay quiet.”

“Victoria Toensing, a lawyer for the former FBI informant, told Fox News’ ‘America’s Newsroom’ that her client has ‘specific information about [Russian] contributions and bribes to various entities and people in the United States’.”

“She said she could not go further because her client has not been released from a nondisclosure agreement but suggested the gag order could be lifted soon. [It was lifted a few days ago.] Toensing also claimed that her client was ‘threatened by the Loretta Lynch Justice Department’ when he pursued a civil action in which he reportedly sought to disclose some information about the case.”

The gag order and the non-disclosure agreement are nonsense. They don’t apply when enforcing them would cover up a major crime.

I have suggestions for the FBI informant’s lawyer Toensing, if she’s playing it straight.

Hire at least four top-flight private security firms to guard your client around the clock, and hope these firms don’t have strong ties to government law-enforcement.

Issue a firm declaration from your client stating he is in good health and has no intention of committing suicide.

Do these things yesterday.

After all, it’s the Clintons we’re talking about, and Obama and the FBI.

And the Clintons.

And, of course, the Clintons.


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Boom: the Clintons, US uranium, Putin, and the FBI

Boom: The Clintons, US uranium, Putin, and the FBI

by Jon Rappoport

October 23, 2017

In 2016, long before the current news story broke about the FBI concealing a multi-year investigation into Russian bribery, the Clintons, US uranium, and Russia, I wrote about the scandal and spelled it out in simple terms.

A writer for the Washington Post then called me and tried to extract a statement he could use to discredit the story. I declined to give him anything, except a link to a key 2015 NY Times piece, which he said he’d “read many times.” I’m not sure why he had to read it more than once. Perhaps he suffers from a mental deficit.

Anyway, here is the piece I wrote then. It’s more relevant than ever. Then I’ll make some comments on the present situation.

—Cue the dawn sunrise and violins for the beautiful first couple of American politics (the Clintons).

But what about the uranium scandal?

The what?

Before I quote a NY Times piece on this—-suppose, just suppose the beautiful first couple, Bill and Hillary, have been running a parallel operation to the government, in the form of a Foundation that is taking in major chunks of cash from people who want (and get) serious political favors.

Well, current news stories confirm that. We already know that.

But uranium?

Consider this plot line. Follow the bouncing ball.

Putin wants 20% of uranium on US soil. That 20% is already owned by a Canadian mining company.

The Canadian executives want to sell it to Putin.

But because uranium is a US “national security” product, various US federal agencies have to OK the deal. One of those agencies is the US State Department.

The State Department is headed up by Hillary Clinton. Her Department says yes to the uranium deal.

The kicker? Those Canadian mining executives, who wanted the sale to Putin to go through, donated millions to the Clinton Foundation.

Getting the picture?

On April 23, 2015, the NY Times ran a story under the headline: Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal.

The bare bones of the story: a Canadian company called Uranium One controlled a great deal of uranium production in the US. It was sold to Russia (meaning Putin and his minions). So Putin now controls 20% of US uranium production.

From the Times: “…the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.”

The Times: “The [Pravda] article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company [Uranium One] with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.”

“But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.”

“At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.”

“Frank Giustra…a mining financier, has donated $31.3 million to the foundation run by former President Bill Clinton…”

“Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal [to sell Uranium One to Putin] had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.”

“And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.”

If you’re Putin and you’re sitting in Moscow, and the uranium deal has just dropped this bonanza into your lap, what’s your reaction—after you stop laughing and popping champagne corks? Or maybe you never really stop laughing. Maybe this is a joke that keeps on giving. You wake up in the middle of the night with a big grin plastered on your face, and you can’t figure out why…and then you remember, oh yeah, the uranium deal. The US uranium. Who’s running the show in America? Ha-ha-ha. Some egregious dolt? Maybe he’s a sleeper agent we forgot about and he reactivated himself. And this Clinton Foundation—how can the beautiful couple get away with that? Can we give Hillary a medal? Can we put up a statue of her in a park? Does Bill need any more hookers?

You shake your head and go back to sleep. You see a parade of little boats carrying uranium from the US to Russia. A pretty line of putt-putt boats. You chuckle. Row, row, row your boat…merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily…life is but a dream.

Good times.

Final note: there is a great deal of difference between a major outlet like the NY Times running their Clinton/uranium piece for one day—and pounding on it for weeks and months. In the latter case, they would let loose the hounds, who would probe and push and interview relevant people and get confessions and parlay those confessions up the food chain—blowing the story into an enormous scandal—which it is.

The Times had its hands on a volcanic piece…and they let it drop. Because the ceiling and the limit had been reached. The Times basically executed what’s called a limited hangout, a partial exposure of a story that was getting too hot to suppress entirely.

The limited hangout allows the venting of steam—and then nothing more. In this case, the Clinton camp denies there was any quid pro quo, they assert Hillary had nothing to do with the uranium deal, and the curtain falls.

Thus you have the reality which the major media did expose, vs. the reality they could have exposed. The “could have” part would have changed current history—but it was squelched, and put under wraps.

Tossed on the junk heap.

—end of my 2016 article—

Now, the Senate Judiciary Committee and Chairman Chuck Grassley are looking into these crimes, because new reports of corruption are surfacing:
FOX News: “The Hill reported that the FBI had evidence as early as 2009 that Russian operatives used bribes, kickbacks and other dirty tactics to expand Moscow’s atomic energy footprint in the U.S. — but the Obama administration approved the uranium deal benefiting Moscow anyway.”

“Grassley on Wednesday [raised]…the question of whether the [US government] committee that approved the [uranium] transaction [in 2010] was aware of the FBI probe. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) [which approved the uranium deal] included then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”

As Newsweek reports, that early FBI probe was launched under FBI Director Robert Mueller. Mueller is now trying to dig up (or invent) every tidbit he can about Russian collusion with…Trump in the 2016 presidential election. My, my.

Newsweek contacted the FBI a few days ago, asking whether Mueller had informed the Obama White House about his old FBI probe that uncovered Russian corruption relevant to the uranium deal that was being put together at the time.

Newsweek: “The FBI said it had no comment to Newsweek questions about whether Mueller alerted senior Obama administration officials, including Clinton, about the [FBI] investigation before they brokered the [uranium] deal.”

BOOM. Are you kidding? No comment? That’s tantamount to admitting, “Look, either way we answer that question, we’re screwed or the Obama White House is screwed, so we’re remaining mum. We’re protecting VERY IMPORTANT PEOPLE and the truth doesn’t matter.”

This should be the subject of screaming headlines from mainstream news around the world: FBI CLAMS UP ON URANIUM DEAL. FBI REFUSES TO SAY WHETHER BOSS MUELLER TOLD THE WHITE HOUSE ABOUT RUSSIAN CORRUPTION IN URANIUM DEAL. FBI COVERING UP CORRUPTION IN CLINTON OBAMA RUSSIAN URANIUM DEAL.

However, the FBI refusal is buried deep in mainstream stories.

But wait, it gets even better:

FOX: “[Grassley] is calling for the Justice Department to lift an apparent ‘gag order’ on an FBI informant who reportedly helped the U.S. uncover a [2009-10] corruption and bribery scheme by Russian nuclear officials but allegedly was ‘threatened’ by the Obama administration to stay quiet.”

“Victoria Toensing, a lawyer for the former FBI informant, told Fox News’ ‘America’s Newsroom’ that her client has ‘specific information about [Russian] contributions and bribes to various entities and people in the United States’.”

“She said she could not go further because her client has not been released from a nondisclosure agreement but suggested the gag order could be lifted soon. Toensing also claimed that her client was ‘threatened by the Loretta Lynch Justice Department’ when he pursued a civil action in which he reportedly sought to disclose some information about the case.”

The gag order and the non-disclosure agreement are nonsense. They don’t apply when enforcing them would cover up a major crime.

I have suggestions for the FBI informant’s lawyer Toensing, if she’s playing it straight.

Hire at least four top-flight private security firms to guard your client around the clock, and hope these firms don’t have strong ties to government law-enforcement.

Issue a firm declaration from your client stating he is in good health and has no intention of committing suicide.

Do these things yesterday.

After all, it’s the Clintons we’re talking about, and Obama and the FBI.

And the Clintons.

And, of course, the Clintons.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Vegas shooting: concert workers’ phone footage wiped clean by FBI

Vegas shooting: concert workers’ phone-footage wiped clean by FBI

What??

by Jon Rappoport

October 13, 2017

Paul Watson at infowars has the story:

“Workers at the Route 91 festival during which Stephen Paddock unleashed his massacre have reportedly been given back their phones and laptops by the FBI only to discover that all messages and videos from the night of the attack have been wiped clean.”

“According to a Las Vegas resident who posted a status update on Facebook, ‘A bunch of people that worked the Route 91 [concert] said they got their cell phones back today. They all said that all their phones are completely wiped clean! All messages and info from that weekend are completely gone. Anyone else experience this’?”

“’A few different people who were vendors there are all saying the same thing,’ the woman later comments.”

“Later in the thread, a Route 91 worker confirms the story, commenting, ‘Of course. It’s an active federal crime scene. They can wipe it clean. I was the beverage manager for the entire event. My laptop is wiped clean’.”

What?

First of all, in a recent article, I demonstrated in detail why you can never trust what the FBI says about evidence in any investigation. There is a notorious history of the Bureau cooking and slanting and inventing data to support prosecutions.

Second, who says the FBI can take people’s phones and laptops, watch and copy the video footage, and then wipe it all away before returning the devices to their owners?

The FBI literally owns the crime scene AND any record of what happened at that scene? Baloney.

The obvious reason for wiping out the footage: it contained evidence that contradicts the official scenario. And most likely, that evidence revealed multiple shooters.

As Vegas cops, the FBI, and the owners of the Mandalay Hotel have changed and massaged the official narrative, one assertion has remained constant: there was only one shooter, and he was Stephen Paddock.

Law-enforcement pounced on that claim early on, without the slightest justification. Without interviewing multiple witnesses who state they saw other shooters.

“Okay, the mass shooting happened yesterday and we know there was only one shooter. That’s it. Don’t ask us any questions about this. Anyone who disagrees with us is spreading rumors and impeding the investigation.”

Admitting multiple shooters is admitting there was cooperation, collusion, conspiracy, a plan, and a purpose for that plan beyond “the lone gunman was crazy.” This is the door law-enforcement keeps slamming shut every time it opens.

And now we have reports that the FBI has wiped witnesses’ phones and laptops. No more footage of the shooting. No more evidence.

Let’s be clear: the FBI is impeding the investigation.

There is no Constitutional rule that states private citizens can’t investigate crimes. There never was. There never will be.

Law enforcement doesn’t OWN investigations.

If they did, every time a journalist probes beneath the surface of a crime and uncovers important information, the FBI could say, “Well, we just opened an investigation of that very crime, and therefore we want all your notes and we want you to cease and desist your inquiry. Shut up and go cover Sunday picnics.”

In most cases, law-enforcement doesn’t have to worry about mainstream reporters. Those denizens simply take dictation from local cops and federal cops and their stories appear in papers and TV news broadcasts wiped clean of independent thought.

That leaves the truth a wide open field.

Private citizens and non-mainstream journalists own that field, not through edict, but through default. Don’t blame us. If you were doing your jobs, we wouldn’t have to do them for you.

Your first rule would be: stop lying.

Destruction of evidence is a felony. Those concert workers whose phones and laptops were wiped clean had a felony committed against them. By agents of government who have sworn to uphold and protect the Constitution.

Thousands of smart lawyers out there will say, “Come on, there’s no way you could make a charge like that stick.” Well, maybe there would be a way, if enough of you decided there has been enough destruction of the Constitution and it’s time to stand up and be counted, come hell or high water.

Meanwhile, whoever can look past the lies and fabrications and distortions of a criminal investigation can say something because they saw something.

Here is a quick excerpt from my recent piece about the FBI’s stance on crime probes. It should give you a clue about the Bureau’s attitude and reputation:

April 20, 2015, The Atlantic: “…the Washington Post made clear Saturday in an article that begins with a punch to the gut… ‘Nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000,’ the newspaper reported, adding that ‘the cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death’.”

In the Vegas shooting case, the FBI is saying: Trust us. We’re the pros. We do investigations the right way. Now give us your cell phone so we can look at video footage of the shooting and make a copy and wipe your phone clean and give it back to you.

Don’t worry, be happy. All is well. The centurions are on duty.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.