Tag: trump derangement syndrome

Crooked FBI Special Agent Who Investigated Trump-Russia Hoax Faces Additional Prison Time — Sentenced to Over 2 Years for Concealing Payment from Albanian Businessman

Charles F. McGonigal, a former high-ranking FBI official who once played a pivotal role in the controversial Trump-Russia collusion investigation, was sentenced on Friday to an additional 28 months in federal prison.

McGonigal, 55, faced the judicial consequences for failing to disclose a substantial sum of $225,000 he received from an Albanian businessman connected to the Albanian government.

The sentencing was made public by U.S. Attorney Matthew M. Graves, alongside FBI Assistant Directors Donald Alway of the Los Angeles Field Office and David Sundberg of the Washington Field Office.

U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly handed down the sentence, which also includes a three-year term of supervised release after McGonigal’s imprisonment.

McGonigal was previously the Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s New York Field Office, a role in which he was responsible for, among other duties, counterintelligence investigations.

In September, McGonigal admitted that he received at least $225,000 in cash from a person with whom he also traveled internationally, during which they met with foreign citizens. This person later became an informant for the FBI in a criminal case concerning foreign political lobbying, a case over which McGonigal had supervisory authority.

The court recognized that his actions significantly obstructed the administration of justice.

As the Special Agent in Charge for the FBI’s New York Field Office, McGonigal had a significant role in overseeing matters of national security and counterintelligence from August 2017 until his retirement in September 2018.

“During this time, McGonigal concealed from the FBI the nature of his relationship with a former foreign security officer and businessperson who had ongoing business interests in foreign countries and before foreign governments. Specifically, McGonigal hid from the FBI that he received at least $225,000 in cash from the individual and traveled abroad with him and met with foreign nationals, in-part to advance their private business interests,” according to the DOJ.

This sentence follows his prior conviction for charges unrelated to the current case.

Keep reading

Over Half of Fani Willis’ Campaign Contributions Allegedly Tied to Illegal Money Laundering, New Complaint Claims

Soros-funded Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is now at the center of a scandal involving her campaign finances.

A new complaint filed alleges that nearly half of Willis’ campaign contributions, amounting to approximately $168,000, are linked to illegal activity, including money laundering and identity theft.

The Gateway Pundit first reported Fani Willis’ money laundering network way back in September 2023.

A bombshell investigation has uncovered jaw-dropping connections between Fani Willis and a sprawling web of election fraud and money laundering activities.

The investigation, which spans across multiple states and multiple jurisdictions, has revealed a complex network of illicit operations aimed at undermining the very foundation of our Constitutional Republic and the rule of law.

Sources close to the matter suggest that Willis was a massive beneficiary in the Federal and Georgia RICO enterprises. It appears that she is currently playing a key role in orchestrating a systematic scheme to manipulate election outcomes, casting doubt on the integrity of the entire electoral process.

In the lead up to the 2022 midterm elections, my team uncovered a massive money laundering network of campaign finance contributions being made via ActBlue. One of the top beneficiaries of this money laundering RICO enterprise was none other than Georgia Senator Raphael Warnock. The Gateway Pundit was the first news organization to cover the massive money laundering network that financed the Raphael Warnock campaign.

As our investigation progressed, we expanded our efforts into other states such as Missouri, Maryland, Wisconsin, Arizona, and then into every single state.

Working with the Epoch Times investigative journalist Steven Kovac, we made a stunning find. Many of the top ActBlue “Contributors” never made the individual contributions. Many of these “Not Employed Individual Contributors” were the victims of a highly sophisticated money laundering scheme.

The scheme was further exposed when I provided the data to James O’Keefe and his people at O’Keefe Media Group who captured many unwitting “Money Laundering Smurfs” in Maryland.

This massive ongoing money laundering operation involves wire fraud, evasion of campaign finance limits, structuring of financial transactions, tax fraud, non profit fraud, identity theft, and elder abuse.

The RICO operation is still in operation today. Using the identities of unwitting elderly, and other democrat voters, this massive RICO money laundering enterprise is the fuel for the entire election fraud RICO operation.

The information on Fani Willis campaign contributions was obtained directly from the State of Georgia campaign finance database “HERE”.

The first item we identified in the Fani Willis campaign finance report was that there were 222 contributions to her campaign that had ZERO donor information.

You can check the names for yourself using the FEC campaign finance database “HERE”.

Keep reading

Our Democracy™: The Democratic Weaponization Of Government And The Need For Decentralization

Reading Matt Taibbi’s summary how the Democrats weaponized the government against Donald Trump, starting before the election of 2016 and proceeding right up to the present moment, I am reminded once again that the issue is not democracy but “Our Democracy™.”

That is, the Democrats and their deep-state allies in the media and the myriad bureaucracies that actually run the country believe that democracy means “rule by Democrats.”  As Taibbi puts it, “To ‘protect democracy,’ democracy is already being canceled. We just haven’t admitted the implications of this to ourselves yet.”

This is true. Hence the plethora of handwringing articles warning that Donald Trump is a “dictator”-in-waiting, a new Hitler, a refurbished Mussolini who, should he be reelected, will mobilize the military to impose his will on a hapless American populace. Taibbi quotes from a December 2023 “strategy memo” in which Biden’s puppeteers describe Trump as “an existential threat to democracy.”

It sounds absurd.  It is absurd.  But, as I and many others have pointed out, that is the story we are being asked to swallow. This is the logic:

Trump is a “threat to democracy.”

Ergo, we must use “any means necessary” to keep him off the ballot.

Otherwise, people might vote for him, and that would be “bad for democracy.”

The arrogance of this gambit is breathtaking. It assumes, with Liz Cheneyesque smugness, that ordinary people cannot be entrusted with so important a task as electing their leaders. Only anointed saviors like Liz Cheney can do that. But alongside the arrogance of the we-have-to-destroy-democracy-in-order-to-save-it mindset is the chilling revelation of the extremes to which the people in power are willing to go in order to preserve their prerogatives. They will, for example, censor any opinion they do not like as “malinformation,” i.e., an opinion that might be true but is not consistent with The Narrative. It all adds up to what I have called “the Sovietization of America.”

What, as Lenin famously asked, is to be done?

Keep reading

CIA Officials Implicated in Secret Plot to ‘Get Rid’ of President Donald Trump

In January 2017, an “all-hands” National Security Council staff meeting  was convened for the explicit purpose of scheming to “get rid” of then-President Trump.

Donald Trump, the duly elected president, was already in the midst of a Russia collusion hoax accusing him of high treason, which was orchestrated by defeated Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee.

Trump’s political opponents weaponized the false accusation of Russian collusion using Russian disinformation in the Steele dossier. This had led to 2016 Trump campaign surveillance and the undermining of his first presidential term with the ensuing Mueller investigation. It was the consummate act of “election interference.”

This 2017 NSC meeting involved a figure that Americans would come to learn more about during the first impeachment imbroglio, based on hearsay that Donald Trump was attempting to procure “dirt” on future president Joe Biden from the Ukrainian president.

His name? The accused “whistleblower” Eric Ciaramella.

A 2020 Real Clear Investigations article sets the scene:

Barely two weeks after Donald Trump took office, Eric Ciaramella – the CIA analyst whose name was recently linked in a tweet by the president and mentioned by lawmakers as the anonymous “whistleblower” who touched off Trump’s impeachment – was overheard in the White House discussing with another staffer how to remove the newly elected president from office, according to former colleagues.

Sources told RealClearInvestigations the staffer with whom Ciaramella was speaking was Sean Misko. Both were Obama administration holdovers working in the Trump White House on foreign policy and national security issues. And both expressed anger over Trump’s new “America First” foreign policy, a sea change from President Obama’s approach to international affairs.

“Just days after he was sworn in they were already talking about trying to get rid of him,” said a former White House official who overheard their conversation.

“They weren’t just bent on subverting his agenda,” the former official added. “They were plotting to actually have him removed from office.”

It is important to note here that both Ciaramella and Misko were implicated in the plot to remove Donald Trump in the first impeachment hearing.

Misko left the White House last summer to join House impeachment manager Adam Schiff’s committee, where sources say he offered “guidance” to the whistleblower, who has been officially identified only as an intelligence officer in a complaint against Trump filed under whistleblower laws. Misko then helped run the impeachment inquiry based on that complaint as a top investigator for congressional Democrats. […]

The coordination between the official believed to be the whistleblower and a key Democratic staffer, details of which are disclosed here for the first time, undercuts the narrative that impeachment developed spontaneously out of what Trump’s Democratic antagonists call the “patriotism” of an “apolitical civil servant.”

Two former co-workers said they overheard Ciaramella and Misko, close friends and Democrats, discussing how to “take out,” or remove, the new president from office within days of Trump’s inauguration. These co-workers said the president’s controversial Ukraine phone call in July 2019 provided the pretext they and their Democratic allies had been looking for.

“They didn’t like his policies,” another former White House official said. “They had a political vendetta against him from Day One.”

Furthermore, the documentation that shows how Rep. Adam Schiff’s office was contacted by the “whistleblower” was reported as being “Secret.”

The investigators say that details about how the whistleblower consulted with Schiff’s staff and perhaps misled Atkinson about those interactions are contained in the transcript of a closed-door briefing Atkinson gave to the House Intelligence Committee last October. However, Schiff has sealed the transcript from public view. It is the only impeachment witness transcript out of 18 that he has not released.

Schiff has classified the document “Secret,” preventing Republicans who attended the Atkinson briefing from quoting from it. Even impeachment investigators cannot view it outside a highly secured room, known as a “SCIF,” in the basement of the Capitol. Members must first get permission from Schiff, and they are forbidden from bringing phones into the SCIF or from taking notes from the document.

But a new Judicial Watch lawsuit seeks to uncover the documentation of the NSC meeting

Keep reading

NBC News Admits ‘Deep State’ Exists… To Save Us From Trump’s Return

The last time Donald Trump got within striking distance of the Oval Office in 2016, the Clinton campaign, the Obama administration, and various foreign accomplices invented a hoax accusing the real estate tycoon of being a secret Russian agent, who would use the power of the United States to do Vladimir Putin’s bidding (Which begs the question; why wouldn’t Putin have just invaded Ukraine when his ‘puppet’ Trump wouldn’t have waged a proxy war?).

And when Donald Trump asked Ukraine about obvious corruption by the Biden family, one of the key ‘deep state’ players in his impeachment behind the scenes was none other than Mary McCord – who went from taking down Michael Flynn after the FBI set him up, to helping Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) to peddle a “whistleblower” complaint about Trump’s Ukraine call.

McCord is back with a new hoax to peddle, telling NBC News that the Deep State is preparing for Trump’s return – and is taking action to limit his ability to ‘become a dictator’ and use the military to those ends.

Keep reading

Fani Willis Secretly Colluded with January 6 Committee; Could Blow Up Case

Fulton County, Georgia, District Attorney Fani Willis secretly colluded with the one-sided, Democrat-run January 6 Committee to obtain tips that would help her prosecute Donald Trump — and tried to keep it out of court, and public view, using a procedural trick.

The revelation could upend the prosecution of Trump and 18 co-defendants because the evidence was concealed to keep it away from discovery requirements that would allow defense lawyers to see what was shared, and the extent of the collaboration.

Politico reported Wednesday:

Committee staff quietly met with lawyers and agents working for Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis in mid-April 2022, just as she prepared to convene a special grand jury investigation. In the previously unreported meeting, the Jan. 6 committee aides let the district attorney’s team review — but not keep — a limited set of evidence they had gathered.

…

The committee aided Willis’ nascent probe even as it rebuffed the Justice Department’s requests for material in the separate federal criminal probe of Trump’s election subversion. At the time, one reason the committee was more inclined to cooperate with the Fulton County team than with the federal prosecutors was that federal prosecutors might have been required to disclose the evidence in ongoing criminal cases related to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

…

Jan. 6 committee chairman Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) had previously described “staff-level contacts” between his panel and Fulton County prosecutors. In early April 2022 — nearly two weeks before the panel’s staff met with Willis’ team — Thompson told reporters he wasn’t aware of how extensive those contacts were. And on Wednesday, Thompson told POLITICO that he did not know about the in-person visit that spring.

The lawyers from the January 6 Committee shared evidence with Willis when she was convening a “special purpose grand jury,” prior to the criminal grand jury. Since there were no defendants, Politico notes, there could be no defense motions for discovery.

Because the January 6 Committee later destroyed its records — ironically, given that President Donald Trump faces a separate prosecution for mishandling government documents — it may not be possible for the defense to obtain all evidence against it.

Keep reading

Maine Secretary of State Claims Politics Played ‘No Role’ in Booting Trump Off Ballot

Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows has denied that politics played any role in her unilateral decision to bar former President Donald Trump from the state’s presidential primary ballot, as she faces backlash that includes a push for her impeachment.

Ms. Bellows, whose office oversees elections in Maine, ruled on Dec. 28 to disqualify President Trump, who currently leads the Republican primary race, from the state’s 2024 presidential primary ballot on the grounds that he supposedly incited an “insurrection” when a crowd breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Her decision was based on an interpretation of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which bars people from holding office if they’ve engaged in an “insurrection or rebellion” against the U.S. government. President Trump, who has denied such allegations, has not been charged with insurrection.

While Ms. Bellows has been accused of making a politically-driven decision to interfere in the election, she denied that her decision to disqualify President Trump from the ballot was political.

“Politics and my personal views played no role,” Ms. Bellows, a Democrat, claimed in a Jan. 1 interview with NPR. “I swore an oath to uphold the Constitution, and that is what I did.”

Despite such denials, Ms. Bellows has faced sharp criticism.

Keep reading

‘Significant Problem’: Ex-CIA Analyst Warns Intel Agencies Will Meddle in 2024 Election to Stop Trump

A former CIA analyst is sounding the alarm about plans by intelligence agencies to get politically involved in the 2024 election to stop the Republican candidate.

Dr. John Gentry, a Georgetown professor who spent 12 years as a CIA intelligence analyst, said the politicization of intelligence agencies in the age of Trump has become a “significant problem” and is confident they will interfere in the 2024 election.

“My guess is that the the proverbial Deep State within the intelligence community will reemerge because presumably a Republican candidate will again be seen as a threat to the internal policies that many intelligence people like,” Gentry told Fox News.

Gentry pointed out how the CIA in a “clearly political” move days before the 2020 election with the “intent to help the Biden campaign” approved a letter penned by 51 former intelligence officials falsely claiming the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop published by the New York Post was “Russian disinformation.”

Gentry said he expects intelligence agencies to resume similar political ploys ahead of the 2024 election.

Keep reading

Secretary Of State That Kicked Trump From Maine Ballot Wants ‘Better Leaders’ In Power To Prevent ‘Election Sabotage’

The precedent being set by states like Colorado and Maine could change the political landscape of America forever if allowed to go unchallenged.  Removing presidential candidates from the ballot based on unilateral opinion rather than any kind of legally arbitrated decision or criminal conviction is the most slippery of slopes for a number of reasons.  The most dangerous implication being that a handful of officials can decide for the entire population of their states (or the entire population of the country) what leaders they are allowed to vote for based on a “guilty until proven innocent” ideology.

Meaning, all they have to do is make accusations of criminal behavior or criminal intent and then remove a candidate based on those accusations alone. 

No person or group should have that power.

One could argue that this is already the case and that the two party system filters out candidates on a regular basis.  However, the notion of state ballot removal is a decidedly leftist/Democrat affair clearly engineered to benefit the progressive power structure for many years to come. 

It’s not only about Donald Trump – Woke bureaucrats could use this trend in the future to deny ballot access to any conservative candidate on the grounds that they “might” represent a “threat to Democracy.”

This is essentially the message conveyed by Secretary of State Sheena Bellows, now well known as the person responsible for single-handedly removing Trump from the 2024 election ballot in Maine. 

Keep reading

Was the Capitol Riot an ‘Insurrection,’ and Did Trump ‘Engage in’ It?

“It’s self-evident,” President Joe Biden told reporters on Wednesday. “You saw it all. He certainly supported an insurrection. No question about it. None. Zero.”

Biden was referring to the Colorado Supreme Court’s recent ruling that Donald Trump is disqualified from that state’s presidential primary ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which was originally aimed at barring former Confederates from returning to public office after the Civil War. As relevant here, Section 3 says “no person shall…hold any office, civil or military, under the United States…who, having previously taken an oath…as an officer of the United States…to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same.”

Biden, whose reelection bid would get a big boost from Trump’s disqualification, takes it for granted that the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol qualified as an “insurrection” under the 14th Amendment, and he says there is “no question” that Trump “engaged in” that insurrection. But the Colorado Supreme Court’s reasoning on both of those crucial points is iffy, and I say that as someone who thought Trump richly deserved his second impeachment, which was provoked by his reckless behavior before and during the riot.

On its face, that impeachment supports the court’s decision, which was joined by four of seven justices. The article of impeachment, after all, charged Trump with “incitement of insurrection” and explicitly cited Section 3. But that debatable characterization was not necessary to show that Trump was guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Trump’s misconduct included his refusal to accept Biden’s victory, his persistent peddling of his stolen-election fantasy, his pressure on state and federal officials to embrace that fantasy, the incendiary speech he delivered to his supporters before the riot, and his failure to intervene after a couple thousand of those supporters invaded the Capitol, interrupting the congressional ratification of the election results. All of that was more than enough to conclude that Trump had egregiously violated his oath to “faithfully execute” his office and to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.” It was more than enough to justify his conviction for high crimes and misdemeanors in the Senate, which would have prevented him from running for president again.

Achieving the same result under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, by contrast, does require concluding that Trump “engaged in insurrection.” But in reaching that conclusion, the Colorado Supreme Court never actually defines insurrection.

“At oral argument,” the opinion notes, “President Trump’s counsel, while not providing a specific definition, argued that an insurrection is more than a riot but less than a rebellion. We agree that an insurrection falls along a spectrum of related conduct.” But the court does not offer “a specific definition” either: “It suffices for us to conclude that any definition of ‘insurrection’ for purposes of Section Three would encompass a concerted and public use of force or threat of force by a group of people to hinder or prevent the U.S. government from taking the actions necessary to accomplish a peaceful transfer of power in this country.”

That description suggests a level of intent and coordination that seems at odds with the chaotic reality of the Capitol riot. Some rioters were members of groups, such as the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, that thought the use of force was justified to keep Trump in office. But even in those cases, federal prosecutors had a hard time proving a specific conspiracy to “hinder or prevent the U.S. government from taking the actions necessary to accomplish a peaceful transfer of power” by interrupting the electoral vote tally on January 6. And the vast majority of rioters seem to have acted spontaneously, with no clear goal in mind other than expressing their outrage at an election outcome they believed was the product of massive fraud.

Keep reading