(This Section Is Currently Under Construction)
American National Service
Following the Moves and Counter-Moves On the GeoStrategic Chess Board
Background:
In the course of discovering and examining the moves and counter-moves on the geo-strategic chess board, the American National Service website has been providing its readers with a reality-based narrative versus the intentionally fraudulent narrative provided by a concealed, centuries-old, arch- criminal global cabal headquartered in the City of London and controlled by a clique of lower-order, sub-human, deadly and depraved foreign dynastic banking families who plunder the majority of all the nation-states and their populations. Long ago, this global cabal built a psychological warfare and mass mind-control system it employs to carry out its deadly global operations, the components of which are disguised as media, education, and entertainment to serve the public.
Long ago, this global cabal built satanic international pedophile rings to entrap and blackmail all its members to insure organizational discipline and strict obedience to the central goal of the cabal, to wit: the development of a single world government to guide a New World Order under its sole control and undertake a 90% reduction of the global population.
Essentially, the global public, including the population of the United States of America, is the target of a deadly global pestilence that must be eradicated. The members of this predatory cabal do not qualify to be classified as human beings; they are like deadly termites eating away at the civilized foundations of our human race.
Accordingly, nationalist groups across the world began to take form to eradicate the criminal global cabal, including the loyal part of the U.S. military and the loyal part of the U.S. intelligence agencies, working together with Donald J. Trump and his civilian supporters that culminated with the election of Trump as President of the United States of America on November 8th, 2016.
(End of Background)
Tell #17: “The 16 Year Plan To Destroy America” Presented In Q Drop Dated 01/21/18
Click the triangle button above to hear the “16 Year Plan” insights of “Praying Medic,” a well-respected journalist.
(End of Q Drop That Describes the 16 Year Plan To Destroy America)
Tell #16: Sealed Federal Criminal Indictments In U.S. District Courts That Began Accumulating Since October 30, 2017 In Unprecedented Manner Without Official Explanation, Which May Pertain To a Soon-Upcoming Public Round-Up Of Global Cabal Members, Domestic and Foreign
Public Access to Court Electronic Records (PACER) is an electronic public access service that allows users to obtain case and docket information online from federal appellate, district, and bankruptcy courts, and the PACER Case Locator. PACER is provided by the Federal Judiciary in keeping with its commitment to providing public access to court information via a centralized service.
Sealed Federal Indictments Reached 166,378 As Of 04/30/2020 Compiled By PACER
See expanded and updated sealed indictments list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kVQwX9l9HJ5F76x05ic_YnU_Z5yiVS96LbzAOP66EzA/edit#gid=281307671
(End of Pacer article)
Tell #15: On May 12th, 2020, Rush Limbaugh Predicts Maximum Turmoil Over Next Four Months—May to September–05/15/2020 to 09/15/2020
Limbaugh: Next Four Months Will Be War Like You’ve Never Seen, Dems Will Try To Keep Economy Shut Down
RUSH LIMBAUGH: I’ll tell you something else that’s starting to send red flags up. You probably have already noticed this. All these blue state governors that want to keep their states locked down, it’s purely political. But what are they depending on? They’re depending on the red states — the red states that are opening up! The red states are gonna get the economy kickstarted.
The red states are gonna create capital and money to transfer to pay these people their stupid welfare costs (and whatever else they’re using to bleed this country dry), while their population sits home, doesn’t work, waits for the federal check to show up — and they sit around and they trash the supposedly reckless red states. I cannot tell you how this irritates me.
The red state governors — like Kemp in Georgia and any number of these people — are doing the right thing. They’re trying to get their people back to work, for all the right common-sensical human and humane reasons — to protect lives — to protect livelihoods, the United States economy, the state economy. And then you go to a blue state, and it’s the exact opposite.
They shut down and lock down, and they want to remain locked down until July or August or whatever — and nothing’s gonna open and nothing is gonna happen. And they fully expect the red states to sit there and essentially pay for it. Folks, I’m gonna tell you, these next four months are gonna be a veritable war like we have not seen.
The American left and the Democrat Party is going to do its best to keep this economy shut down, to extend and expand that shutdown — and blow up their own country’s jobs — just to ensure that Trump loses. But here’s the thing about that. Let’s do a little hypothetical. Let’s say this continues as it is, and let’s say that more and more red states open up and the economy in these states starts to return and revive.
The blue states stay locked down. These are populous places — New York, Massachusetts, California. So they stay locked down all for the express purpose of canceling out the increase created by the red states. The economic activity that will happen from the red states going back to work, the blue state governors are gonna try to cancel it out by keeping their people at home.
They’re gonna wreck the economy. Their objective is to wreck the economy and get rid of Trump. So let’s say that… Well, hard as it is to imagine, let’s say they succeed. Let’s imagine they do this. They keep the economy in such bad shape that Trump is sent packing. What do they expect when that’s all over? Do they expect us just to forget it?
They expect all these red state people to say, “Oh, well, nice fair fight, you guys! Great to see you. We’ll see you the next election,” put all of it aside, and try to all just get along again? What do they expect is gonna happen with this effort of theirs to ruin the U.S. economy? Do they think people are just gonna sit by and let it happen?
And I’m telling you that they do. These are the same people that pass tax increases on the rich, and then end up shocked that the rich find a way around it. So here they’re gonna be engaged, these blue state governors and entire Democrat Party — and, by the way, we predicted this here. We predicted that it wouldn’t be long before the Democrats would start blaming Trump for the rotten economy because of the way he’s handled the virus.
And right on schedule, they’re now calling Trump Herbert Hoover. Have you noticed that, Mr. Snerdley? They’re all… Ed Markey, they’re all over the place. Trump is Herbert Hoover. Herbert Hoover was the Republican president at the time of the Depression. There’s no comparison. Unfortunately, because of the lack education of this country, nobody knows who Herbert Hoover is, particularly on the left.
But what do they expect to happen? They expect us to just watch them try to literally destroy this country’s economy and do nothing about it? They just expect us to just watch it and when the election’s over, wave at ’em and say, “Hey, guys, nice try!” What do they expect to happen here? They think they can ruin the economy.
They think they can go out and even try to ruin the economy — and at the end of it, we’re all just gonna be brothers and sisters and say, “Okay. Let’s now work together to heal.” I can’t believe that that’ll work, but time will tell.
(End of Real Clear Politics article re Rush Limbaugh)
Tell #14: Open Memorandum From Sidney Powell To Barack Obama Re Flynn Case–05/13/2020
Open Memorandum
To: Barack Hussein Obama
From: Sidney Powell
www.SidneyPowell.com
Date: May 13, 2020
Re: Your Failure to Find Precedent for Flynn Dismissal
Regarding the decision of the Department of Justice to dismiss charges against General Flynn, in your recent call with your alumni, you expressed great concern: “there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free. That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic — not just institutional norms — but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk.”
Here is some help—if truth and precedent represent your true concern. Your statement is entirely false. However, it does explain the damage to the Rule of Law throughout your administration.
First, General Flynn was not charged with perjury—which requires a material false statement made under oath with intent to deceive.1 A perjury prosecution would have been appropriate and the Rule of Law applied if the Justice Department prosecuted your former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe for his multiple lies under oath in an investigation of a leak only he knew he caused.
McCabe lied under oath in fully recorded and transcribed interviews with the Inspector General for the DOJ. He was informed of the purpose of the interview, and he had had the benefit of counsel. He knew he was the leaker. McCabe even lied about lying. He lied to his own agents—which sent them on a “wild-goose-chase”—thereby making his lies “material” and an obstruction of justice. Yet, remarkably, Attorney General Barr declined to prosecute McCabe for these offenses.
Applying the Rule of Law, after declining McCabe’s perjury prosecution, required the Justice Department to dismiss the prosecution of General Flynn who was not warned, not under oath, had no counsel, and whose statements were not only not recorded, but were created as false by FBI agents who falsified the 302.
Second, it would seem your “wingman” Eric Holder is missing a step these days at Covington & Burling LLP. Indelibly marked in his memory (and one might think, yours) should be his Motion to Dismiss the multi-count jury verdict of guilty and the entire case against former United States Senator Ted Stevens. Within weeks of Mr. Holder becoming Attorney General, he moved to dismiss the Stevens prosecution in the interest of justice for the same reasons the Justice Department did against General Flynn—egregious misconduct by prosecutors who hid exculpatory evidence and concocted purported crimes.
As horrifying as the facts of the Stevens case were, they pale in comparison to the targeted setup, framing, and prosecution of a newly elected President’s National Security Advisor and the shocking facts that surround it. This case was an assault on the heart of liberty— our cherished system of self-government, the right of citizens to choose their President, and the hallowed peaceful transition of power.
Third, the inability of anyone in your alumni association to find “anybody who has been charged [with anything] just getting off scot-free” would be laughable were it not so pathetic.
Many of your alum feature prominently in the non-fiction legal thriller published in 2014: Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice. A national best- seller, it focusses on the egregious prosecutorial misconduct of your longest serving White House Counsel, Kathryn Ruemmler; your counter-terrorism advisor Lisa Monaco; Loretta Lynch’s DAG for the Criminal Division Leslie Caldwell; and Mueller protégé Andrew Weissmann. While they worked as federal prosecutors on the Enron Task Force—under the purported supervision of Christopher Wray—they destroyed Arthur Andersen LLP and its 85,000 jobs; sent four Merrill Lynch executives to prison on an indictment that criminalized an innocent business transaction while they hid the evidence that showed those defendants were innocent for six years. Both cases were reversed on appeal for their over-criminalization and misconduct. Indeed, Andersen was reversed by a unanimous Supreme Court.
Fourth, even if your many alumni don’t remember multiple cases that had to be reversed or dismissed for their own misconduct, Judge Emmet Sullivan should remember dismissing the corrupted case against Ted Stevens. Judge Sullivan is the judicial hero of Licensed to Lie. It is that case that caused Judge Sullivan to enter the strong Brady order the Mueller and D.C. career prosecutors violated repeatedly in the Flynn prosecution.
Fifth, there is precedent for guilty pleas being vacated. Your alumni Weissmann and Ruemmler are no strangers to such reversals. At least two guilty pleas they coerced by threats against defendants in Houston had to be thrown out—again for reasons like those here. The defendants “got off scot-free” because—like General Flynn—your alumni had concocted the charges and terrorized the defendants into pleading guilty to “offenses” that were not crimes. Andersen partner David Duncan even testified for the government against Andersen in its trial, but his plea had to be vacated. Enron Broadband defendant Christopher Calger had his plea vacated. There are many others across the country.
Sixth, should further edification be necessary, see Why Innocent People Plead Guilty, written in 2014 by federal Judge Jed Rakoff (a Clinton appointee). Abusive prosecutors force innocent people to plead guilty with painful frequency. The Mueller special counsel operation led by Andrew Weissmann and Weissmann “wannabes” specializes in prosecutorial terrorist tactics repulsive to everything “justice” is supposed to mean. These tactics are designed to intimidate their targets into pleading guilty—while punishing them and their families with the process itself and financial ruin.
Most important, General Flynn was honest with the FBI agents. They knew he was—and briefed that to McCabe and others three different times. At McCabe’s directions, Agent Strzok and McCabe’s “Special Counsel” Lisa Page, altered the 302 to create statements Weissmann, Mueller, Van Grack, and Zainab Ahmad could assert were false. Only the FBI agents lied—and falsified documents. The crimes are theirs alone.
Seventh, the D.C. circuit in which you reside vacated a Section 1001 case for a legal failure much less egregious than those in General Flynn’s case. United States v. Safavian, 528 F.3d 957 (D.C. Cir. 2008). Safavian sought advice from his agency’s ethics board and did not give them all the relevant info. The jury convicted him on the theory it was a 1001 violation to conceal the information from the government ethics board. The court disagreed: “As Safavian argues and as the government agrees, there must be a legal duty to disclose in order for there to be a concealment offense in violation of § 1001(a)(1), yet the government failed to identify a legal disclosure duty except by reference to vague standards of conduct for government employees.” General Flynn did not even know he was the subject of an investigation—and in truth, he was not. The only crimes here were by your alumni in the FBI, White House, intelligence community, and Justice Department.
These are just a few obvious and well-known examples to those paying any attention to criminal justice issues.
Finally, the “leaked” comments from your alumni call further evinces your obsession with destroying a distinguished veteran of the United States Army who has defended the Constitution and this country “from all enemies, foreign and domestic,” with the highest honor for thirty-three years. He and many others will continue to do so.
1As a “constitutional lawyer,” surely you recall that perjury (or false statements) also requires intent to deceive. In Bronston v. United States, 409 U.S. 352 (1973), the Supreme Court reversed a conviction of perjury. In Bronston, the defendant’s answer was a truthful statement, but not directly responsive to the question and ultimately misled federal authorities. The Court determined: “A jury should not be permitted to engage in conjecture whether an unresponsive answer, true and complete on its face, was intended to mislead or divert the examiner; the state of mind of the witness is relevant only to the extent that it bears on whether “he does not believe [his answer] to be true.” To hold otherwise would be to inject a new and confusing element into the adversary testimonial system we know.” Id. at 359. The FBI agents who interviewed General Flynn specifically noted that his answers were true or he believed his answers to be true—completely defeating criminal intent. Furthermore, General Flynn knew and remarked they had transcripts of his conversations.
(End of Open Memo From Powell To Obama)
Tell #13: The Biggest Political Scandal Of Our Time—05/13/2020
‘Obamagate’ Isn’t A Conspiracy Theory, It’s The Biggest Political Scandal Of Our Time
When former president Barack Obama told supporters last week that the Justice Department’s decision to drop the case against former White House National Security Adviser Mike Flynn is a “threat to the rule of law,” he was relying wholly on the fiction, willingly propagated for years by a pliant media, that the Russia-Trump collusion probe launched by his administration was lawful and legitimate.
But of course it wasn’t. A string of recently released documents have confirmed that the entire Russia-Trump investigation, which eventually entrapped Flynn and forced then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself, was an unprecedented abuse of power that amounted to organized effort by the Obama administration to nullify the results of the 2016 presidential election. It was in effect an attempted coup.
If you haven’t picked that up from the news media, it’s not your fault. Instead of grappling with the implications of newly released details about what Obama officials were doing to undermine the incoming Trump administration during the transition, the mainstream media have fixated on Trump’s use of the term “Obamagate,” dismissing it as a conspiracy theory.
A Brief History of the Flynn Case
This is to be expected. For years now the media have done everything they can to push the Trump-Russia collusion hoax—even after a years-long special counsel investigation by Robert Mueller turned up nothing—using the complexity of the scheme to hide the greatest political scandal of our time in plain sight.
A key aspect of that scheme was—and is—to make the case against Flynn appear legitimate. Flynn faced trumped-up charges that he misled FBI agents about conversations he had with then-Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak in the weeks before Trump’s inauguration. (As the incoming national security advisor, Flynn was doubtless having conversations with numerous heads of state and ambassadors during this time, so there was nothing unusual about him talking to the Russian ambassador.)
The Obama administration already knew about the conversations with Kislyak because it had recordings of them thanks to a series of investigations it spun out of the Crossfire Hurricane counterintelligence probe of the Trump campaign. Crossfire Hurricane, launched in the summer of 2016, was itself a bogus investigation based on the Steele dossier—an entirely fraudulent document riddled with Russian disinformation and paid for by the Democratic Party.
So why did the FBI want to interview Flynn ahead of Trump’s inauguration in January 2017? Top brass at the FBI weren’t exactly sure about their approach, but they knew they needed to get Flynn out of the way. As the bureau’s former head of counterintelligence, Bill Priestap, recorded in his notes, “What is our goal? Truth/Admission, or to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired?”
Apparently the Obama administration settled on trying to entrap him in a lie. The recent disclosure of an early January 2017 Oval Office meeting attended by Obama, vice president Joe Biden, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and FBI Director James Comey, confirms the administration’s plan to hide the Russia probe from the incoming Trump team—including Flynn.
The idea was to use the Kislyak calls as a pretext to keep the Flynn investigation open, even though there was no reason to do so. After months of spying on him, the FBI had found nothing to indicate Flynn was conspiring with the Russians.
As Rice wrote in an email to herself after the meeting, “President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”
The point was to keep the Flynn investigation open as a way for Obama holdovers like Comey, Yates, and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to continue the Russia-Trump collusion probe even after Trump took office—and keep Flynn, Trump’s national security advisor, out of the loop. Since there was no reason to keep investigating Flynn, the Obama administration invented one: the preposterous notion that he intentionally misled Vice President Mike Pence about his conversations with Kislyak and then lied about it to the FBI.
There’s no evidence this happened, but even if there were it wouldn’t matter. As the Justice Department explained in its decision to drop the Flynn case, the investigation of Flynn was “untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation.”
Later, top FBI and Justice Department officials gave the House Intelligence Committee different answers about why they were pursuing Flynn. Comey, McCabe, Yates, and Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Mary McCord all gave conflicting testimony about the “primary purpose” of the FBI’s interview with Flynn, ranging from the outlandish notion that he violated the Logan Act—a constitutionally dubious 1799 law forbidding unauthorized citizens from negotiating with foreign governments—to the concocted charge that he lied to the FBI, which even the agents that conducted the interview with him didn’t believe.
Here’s Why Americans Need to Understand the Flynn Case
The Flynn case is just one piece of a much larger story about how the Obama administration—with the full knowledge and support of both Obama and Biden—targeted incoming Trump officials in a failed attempt to cripple the new administration with allegations it had colluded with Moscow.
The complexity of their scheme, and the efforts to hide it and mislead the American people, are frustrating. The cast of characters—from high-ranking Obama administration officials to relative nobodies loosely associated with Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign—is long, as is the timeline of events. Details have come out slowly, in fits and starts, over the course of years. Following all the leaks and declassified transcripts and congressional hearings requires constant vigilance, and if you don’t keep up with it you can easily lose the thread.
That all works to the advantage of those who perpetrated this hoax, because it’s easy to get overwhelmed and tune it all out, or simply accept the corporate media’s deceptive reporting. But the ongoing revelations about the FBI’s targeting of Flynn can’t be ignored. They demand a full accounting. If ever there was a threat to the rule of law, it was the Obama administration’s abuse of power and its weaponization of intelligence agencies in an attempt to take down Trump.
However convoluted it might seem, pay attention to it. It’s the biggest political scandal of our time.
(End of The Federalist article)
US President Donald Trump with Prime Minister Narendra Modi on his two-day visit to India
