Vigilant News

Eternal Vigilance is the price of liberty.

Law

Landmark Lawsuit Filed Against Joe Biden By Missouri AG for Colluding with Big-Tech

By ,

Ryan DeLarme
June 22nd, 2022

Back in May, Missouri’s Attorney General Eric Schmitt’s office filed a lawsuit against the Biden Administration. Naturally, the landmark suit was completely omitted from the mainstream media.

Just last week, AG Schmitt landed a big blow against Biden by filing a motion to prohibit the censorship conspiracy immediately.

You can read a copy of the lawsuit HERE

The AG’s suit against the Biden Admin. also sues some other deserving people and agencies, including:

  • Joe Biden, himself
  • Anthony Fauci
  • The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
  • The Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
  • DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas
  • The CyberSecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)
  • The Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
  • Former Ministry of Truth head Nina “Mary Poppins” Jankowicz
  • Former Biden Press Secretary Jen Psaki
  • And several more agencies and officials

The suit, brought along with the Louisiana Attorney General’s Office, is filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.

It’s certainly a long-overdue step in the right direction. Anyone who has dared to challenge the establishment narrative on things like COVID Lockdowns, election fraud, or the Hunter Biden Laptop has been met with outrageous censorship. It is not uncommon to see things like:

  • sudden account termination;
  • account suspension;
  • imposing warnings or “strikes” against accounts to chill future speech;
  • shadow-banning;
  • demonetizing content;
  • adjusting algorithms to suppress or de-emphasize speakers or messages;
  • promoting or demoting content;
  • placing warning labels on content (“This Article’s Claims are False”);
  • suppressing content in OTHER users’ feeds;
  • promoting negative comments on disfavored content; and
  • requiring additional click-throughs to access content, among others.

Let’s hope the Court appreciates the severity of the Constitutional deprivations that have occurred and continue to occur to millions of Americans on a daily basis.

Legal Experts Claim Indictment of Peter Navarro Suggests “Two-Tiered Justice System”

By ,

Ryan DeLarme
June 5th, 2022

Several Legal Experts have chimed in on the indictment of former Trump advisor Peter Navarro, going so far as to suggest that the January 6th committee and its legal maneuverings are evidence of a “Two-tiered Justice System”.

Navvaro’s indictment on charges of contempt comes after refusing to cooperate with a subpoena from the House Committee investigating the events of January 6th, 2020.  

When asked to provide a deposition and documents to the committee, Navarro refused. He now faces two counts of contempt, each carrying a possible sentence of 30 days to 1 year behind bars.

 

Newsmax reports:

He is the second Trump adviser to be charged with contempt of Congress for refusing to cooperate with the Jan. 6 committee. Navarro has claimed executive privilege, which the House panel has rejected, claiming its questions don’t violate any areas of privilege.

Navarro was serving as an official adviser to the president at the time of the Jan. 6 breach. That’s in direct contrast with Steve Bannon, who, like Navarro, has been charged, but was an outside adviser to Trump and not an official member of his administration at the time of the breach.

The House has also voted to hold former Trump aide Dan Scavino and former chief of staff Mark Meadows in contempt, but the DOJ has not prosecuted either of them to date.

John Tolley, a New York-based attorney and former prosecutor, called the indictment against Navarro “interesting because it does bring up some major constitutional issues.”

“He should have been held in contempt as opposed to criminally prosecuted,” Tolley said.

The reason experts are calling it a “two-tiered” system is likely due to the fact that if it were a democrat in Navarro’s position, they would fare much better in a DC court.

When Republicans controlled the House they held Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for failing to provide documents but a federal judge did not put him behind bars.

Attorney Michael Abramson, host of the “Advancing the Agenda” podcast claimed, 

“If it is a Bush DOJ, you want them to be acting the same way as a Biden DOJ would act so the principles of law are consistently applied… You want consistency. The law exists to protect people. Policies and procedures have to be followed for people to be treated fairly. When these policies and procedures are not followed you come into a situation where the rights of individuals may be attacked.”

 

Juscelino Colares, a law and political science professor at Case Western Reserve University, said that it “definitely seems like we have come to a point where we have a two-tier justice system” of “selected enforcement” when contempt charges are enforced when Democrats are in charge of the House but not when Republicans are.

“We can’t be a nation of laws and at the same time a nation where the laws are only enforced against one group of people,” Colares said. “That’s not conducive to building the public trust in our institutions.”

Navarro was reportedly furious after his arrest and indictment by the DOJ and expressed similar concerns.

“I told them [to] contact an individual that would discuss this matter. What did they do? They didn’t call me. I spoke to the FBI agent that arrested me. I spoke to him Wednesday night. I said, “Walter, whatever you need. You don’t have to come banging on my door like you did last week getting me out of bed. I’m here to cooperate.” What did they do? I was on my way to Nashville today to do a TV appearance with Mike Huckabee‘s show, all right?” he said.

“And instead of coming to my door where I live, which by the way is right next to the FBI, instead of calling me and say, ‘Hey, we need you down in court, we’ve got a warrant for you,’ I would have gladly come. What did they do? They intercepted me getting on the plane. Then they put me in handcuffs, they bring me here, they put me in leg irons stick me in a cell,” he argued.

“They responded with effectively the same kind of thing you’d see in Stalin‘s Russia or the Chinese Communist Party,” the former aide said. “I note interestingly for the record, the only two people that have been indicted on criminal charges are me and Steve Bannon.”

“There was no reason on God’s good Earth for what they did today to an American citizen. That did not have to happen. It’s terrorism, it’s coercion. There’s no excuse for what they did today. America needs to know this,” he said.

“Their mission, their clear mission, is to prevent Donald John Trump from running for president in 2024 and being elected president,” he said. “People like me are in their way and they’re not coming for me, they’re coming for you. All 74 million of you who voted for Donald John Trump.”

Kash Patel Suggests Durham Trials Should Take Place Outside Compromised DC

By ,

Ryan DeLarme
June 3rd, 2022

Former White House national security official and children’s book author Kash Patel has suggested that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) move its Russia hoax trials outside of the D.C. area to ensure an untainted jury and judge. This statement comes in the wake of Michael Sussmann’s acquittal on Tuesday.

Related: Michael Sussmann Found “Not Guilty”

For those who are still unfamiliar, Sussman was the former Hillary Clinton Campaign lawyer that the DOJ prosecuted on charges of lying to the FBI as part of Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the “Russia collusion” hoax. 

Sussman was a key player in promoting the “Russia collusion” hoax.

Patel is intimately tied to the case and was even brought up during the trial, his now 4-year-old interview with Sussmann was used as evidence from when he assisted then-Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) investigate the “Russia collusion” hoax while Nunes served on the House Intelligence Committee.

The former prosecutor said that after Sussmann’s acquittal, his faith in the Justice Department was “completely gone.” 

“I was the last man who had any faith in D.C. and the Department of Justice. It is now completely gone,” Patel said in a statement obtained by Breitbart News.

Patel has condemned the jury pool as being “tainted” and politically motivated. He has also called out the federal court system for allowing three pro-Hillary Clinton Democrat donors to serve on the jury.

He has also called on the DOJ to remove the hoax cases from D.C.’s jurisdiction.

“The DOJ needs to move these cases out of D.C. as it is 100% impossible to have a fair trial in the city. I am appalled at this verdict and appalled at our justice system,” 

The former prosecutor was recently interviewed by John Bachman of Newsmax, where he predicted that we will see two more indictments before the Igor Danchenko trial this October. When asked who he thought these indictments would include, Patel said: 

“I think it’s going to be an FBI agent who lied, and admitted it, if not one or two more. And I think that Fusion GPS is most certainly part of this conspiracy because they are all over the dossier…”

Patel also claimed that the FBI itself is under investigation for lying, and withholding evidence of innocence in regard to the Trump/Russia collusion smear.

FBI Kept Office at DNC Law firm Perkins Coie

By ,

Ryan DeLarme,
June 1st, 2022

Yesterday we reported that Hillary Clinton’s lawyer Michael Sussmann was acquitted in what appears to be the first in a series of trials regarding the Durham Probe. Last night, hours after the verdict, it was discovered that the FBI maintains an office at Sussmanss firm, Perkins Coie.

Further Reading: Michael Sussmann Found “Not Guilty”

The acquittal came despite text evidence, evidence that the jury was barred from considering. The texts show where Sussmann claimed that he was not representing the Clinton campaign when he presented false evidence to the FBI linking Trump to the Russian Alfa bank.  The FBI employee he met with also testified that he said he was not representing a client.

The acquittal may clear Sussmann in the minds of some, but to many of those who have been following the case for the last couple of years, there are a lot of red flags to consider. Potentially compromised Judge and Jury aside, certain political operative’s cozy relationship with the FBI still remains an issue.

Further Reading: Was the Trial Rigged from the Start? Sussmann Jury, Judge Accused of Having Conflicts of Interest

These fears were further stoked last night after Perkins Coie, the DNC law firm where Sussmann was employed, admitted that the FBI maintains an office at their workplace.

The admission comes after the law office responded to a letter sent by Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fl.) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Oh.)

This is important for several reasons; first, it highlights why the Durham probe was even necessary in the first place, due to the cozy relationship between Democratic political operatives and the FBI that investigated President Trump for collusion with Russia. 

Secondly, it shows that Democrat lawyers and political operatives possibly had access to FBI databases where they could perform search queries on American citizens.

The revelation is in line with past complaints about abuses by the FBI and other intelligence agencies of the FISA database.  FISA judge Rosemary Collyer discussed these abuses going back to 2012, saying that a shocking 85% of FISA searches by the FBI are unlawful.

Though Durham’s first trial did not secure a conviction, it has succeeded in further proving why this type of investigation is necessary. Information gleaned from this trial will be useful in future trials when painting the roadmap of criminal conspiracy.

Michael Sussmann Found “Not Guilty”

By ,

Ryan DeLarme,
May 31st, 2022

A federal jury has found former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann not guilty of lying to the FBI.  The verdict came midway through the second day of deliberations following a two-week trial on a single count of making false statements to a federal agent.

The prosecution sought to prove that Sussmann deliberately lied to then-FBI general counsel James Baker by claiming he was not acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign while providing him with data he said supported an alleged secret communications channel between the Russian Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization.

This “backchannel” was allegedly connected to the Kremlin.

The trial was held in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia before Judge Christopher Cooper and lasted 11 days, that is including jury selection and deliberations.

The Sussmann trial is only the first in Durham’s probe, which was created to look into the origins of the now-debunked Russia collusion plot.

“While we are disappointed in the outcome, we respect the jury’s decision and thank them for their service,” Durham said after the verdict. “I also want to recognize and thank the investigators and the prosecution team for their dedicated efforts in seeking truth and justice in this case.”

Prosecution attorneys said during the trial the material was “pure opposition research” and that Sussmann wanted an “October Surprise” in the 2016 presidential race.

Durham argued that Sussmann, who at the time was also a private attorney, was working on behalf of two clients, the Clinton campaign and former tech firm executive Rodney Joffe, when he presented Baker with two computer thumb drives of data and whites papers that Sussmann said support an alleged connection between the organization and the bank, which has connections to the Kremlin.

The next Durham probe trial will be in October in Virginia, this time for Igor Danchenko, a Russian analyst who is also accused of lying to the FBI in connection with the collusion plot.