Tag Archives: corruption

Hunter Biden for Dummies: The Most Shocking Story Never Told

(Ryan DeLarmeHunter Biden’s infamous “laptop from hell” surfaced prior to the 2020 presidential election and should have been the bombshell that sunk Biden’s chances at winning. It was more than a bombshell, in fact, the story went nuclear; becoming so radioactive it pretty much killed any outlet that touched it.

Related EXPLOSIVE: Hunter Biden Maintained a Diary on His Laptop and It’s Full of Just Horrible Stuff

by Ryan DeLarme, April 12th, 2021

The New York Post reported last year that a laptop computer abandoned at a Delaware repair shop contains emails between Hunter Biden and various foreign actors offering him money to have access to his VP daddy Joe. According to The Post, the computer repair shop owner contacted the FBI and gave them Hunter Biden’s laptop in December of 2019.

After the media got ahold of the contents a handful of outlets and pundits began talking about it. Besides a trickle of watered-down reporting at Fox News, none of the legacy institutions would touch the story, it wasn’t in their marching orders. The 4 am talking points were already directing the talking heads to call it a “hack” or “Russian disinformation”. Soon any outlet that mentioned the laptop (and/or election interference) was purged from the dominant big-tech platforms (Google, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc). Even the PC repairman who discovered the laptop went missing amid death threats at this time.

The truth stayed obscured due to the big media conglomerates’ NEED for a Biden Administration and the psychological bullying from snarky commentators toward anyone who was still willing to talk about the laptop and its incriminating contents. If you haven’t heard or seen much of what was found then a disclaimer is in order: what the FBI discovered on the “laptop from hell” would be considered less than wholesome.

For the purposes of the article, we will focus more on the corruption aspect and omit the gratuitous videos and images depicting acts of extreme hedonism (which you should still be able to find, especially if browsing overseas), but we will mention and observe some of the more shocking things written in Hunter’s personal diary.

How the Story Progressed

Before we jump into what has occurred this week that has brought Hunter Biden’s name back out from under the rug, a refresher may be in order since the powers that be did everything in their power to squash the “laptop from hell” story as it was unfolding.

Shortly after the FBI took possession of Hunter Biden’s laptop, the New York Times (presumably a leak from the IC) ran a story claiming the Russians hacked Burisma searching for “potentially embarrassing material on the Bidens.” The New York Times offered zero forensic proof Burisma was hacked — they cited a Democrat security firm in Silicon Valley.

It was claimed that FBI Director Christopher Wray hid the evidence after it was first discovered in December 2019 but it is yet unknown whether or not this was intentional/strategic or out of a fear that the hammer would come down on him. Known flip-flopper and Twitter egoist Jack Posobiec of OANN broke a story about Wray hiding evidence

Here’s a brief timeline of events:

  • April 2019: A drunk Hunter Biden stumbles into a Delaware computer repair shop and drops off his MacBook Pro damaged by water
  • June 2019: Computer repair shop owner takes legal ownership of Hunter Biden’s MacBook Pro after several failed attempts to reach Hunter and contacts Senator Mike Lee’s office
  • October 2019: Hunter Biden resigns from Burisma Holdings
  • December 2019: FBI takes possession of Hunter Biden’s MacBook Pro (as Democrats launch impeachment proceedings against President Trump)
  • January 2020: New York Times publishes an absurd “Burisma hacked by Russians” story (presumably a leak from the IC) in order to run cover for the Bidens knowing the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop would be leaked.
  • Rudy Giuliani said the computer repair shop owner made copies of Hunter Biden’s hard drive and gave them to a couple of his friends just in case he was killed.

Around this time a Ukrainian lawmaker claimed that a second laptop had been recovered.

Read Developing: Ukrainian Lawmaker Says Government Has Seized Second Laptop Belonging to Hunter Biden’s Business Contacts

The “laptop from hell” coming out before the election caused the deep-state press wizards to work overtime in order to bury it. This is when Trump and the Patriots brought out Hunter Biden’s former business partner Tony Bobulinski, who Trump even invited to the second debate.

Bobulinski sat down to participate in a very revealing interview with Fox News’ Tucker Carlson:Tucker Carlson with Tony Bobulinski – Full video

In the interview, Bobulinski laid out in detail how everything went down. The response was that it was all simply disinformation, and that explanation was enough for most leftists. However, an email from Hunter’s laptop provides proof that the Bidens were paid to make the investigation of Burisma go away.

READ Smoking Gun Email from Hunter’s Laptop Proves Bidens Were Paid to Shut Down Burisma Investigation and Make It Go Away

Joe Biden even bragged about this to his CFR cohorts after he had the prosecutor removed in Ukraine:

The email from Burisma leaders says the ultimate purpose of the Bidens’ work is to “close down for any cases/pursuits against Nikolay[Burisma] in Ukraine”:

Then we have the alleged “Diary” of Hunter Biden, the contents of which were far more sinister and revealing than the evidence of political corruption. Keep in mind, as shocking as what you are about to read maybe, there are videos and images suggesting much worse.

According to Yaacov Apelbaum at The Illustrated Primer:

In intelligence analysis, a diary ranks supreme to most personal communications. It’s one of the best sources for primary material. A diary—in contrast to letters, emails, IMs, or phone calls, which always go through some form of refinements, filtering, and self-censorship—captures a person’s raw inner thoughts and feelings. Hunter wrote various such notes and recorded voice memos on a variety of topics and these are helpful in reconstructing his psychological profile and shedding some a light on Biden family dynamics. The topics he discussed range from his relationships with and opinions of his family (including his father, uncle, aunt, cousins, step mother, etc.), to sex, drugs, and money.

The picture that emerges from these composites is of a family that resemble a pack of ravenous wolves; cold blooded, calculated, and manipulative predators on an expedition of lies, abuse and binges of vice. If Caligula or Nero ever managed to get their hands on a time-machine and landed in the Biden household, they would have nodded in approval and felt right at home.

In one entry in his diary, Hunter shares this about his dead brother’s wife Hallie whom he was having an affair with while his brother was still alive:

… I believe from what I know that she (Hallie) was taken advantage of early in her life.  I think the way she handled that experience that a 28 man subjected a 12 year old to is to take back her power and tell the story as a seduction on here part.  She wasn’t t taken advantage of in her mind she was the seducer she was the little girl who had a special secret power over men. And it wasn’t wrong because it was exciting and it was dangerous and it was all hers and no one else had any access to that part of her because she loved being the opposite of you.  She said nothing told no one and while you needed the attention she knew that yours was nothing compared to the attention she could draw out of any man she set her eyes on.  Kermit would have never noticed Hallie if Hallie hadn’t wanted to prove to herself that she was more beautiful and desired than Jen Knox and Devon.

In another post Hunter talks about the size of his private part:

… she (Hallie) started to tear down my already fragile ego. “I only remember the big penises and the really small ones I cant tell the difference between all the average ones.”  I know its easy to point out how trivial and typical stupid guy only thinks of his penis that is, but the sadistic part about Hallie is that (1).  She knew how sensitive I was to that because when I was 14 and played varsity football but hadn’t reached puberty it was a horribly embarrassing time in my life that has stuck with me from this day and because of that  (2). I loved to be reassured that my 9 inch very big penis was actually big.  It may be funny to you but its body dysmorphia and the exact reason Hallie got breast implants.  I know my penis is almost twice the size of an average mans penis I know that she knows that and I know she knows because I’ve now told her 100 times to stop implying that no matter how obviously wrong she is because no matter how beyond the little boy you have grown its harder to put out of your mind that the person says it not once not twice not 10 times but over and over.  F***ing sadistic- and I really was going to not let my anger get the better of.  But you (Hallie) f***ing sick mean f***.”

Apelbaum notes:

Analyzing Hunter’s network linkages and imagery shows that Hunter’s binges, in addition to cocaine, were fuelled by prescription drugs that he regularly obtained legally. These ‘legit’ sources kept him well provisioned and ready for action.

In one especially abusive sex scene involving a prostitute, she can seen taking an ampule and a syringe in preparation for injecting it into his butt. Shortly afterword he passes out.

So, if you are curious about how our political, social, and media aristocracy gets their Rx fixes, check out the sample composite below. Apparently, they don’t have to buy their stash from some sleazy drug dealer at filthy bridge underpass, instead, they get it called-in by a celebrity MD at the local pharmacy.

David Harris Jr had more:

Do you know what the best source of evidence is> It’s not letters. It’s not email. It’s not even texting. It is called a diary. The reason for that is because a person is writing for their own benefit. They don’t expect anyone to ever see it. Therefore they don’t bother filtering it for the other party. In Hunter Biden’s case, the diary is indeed a great source of evidence into his soul.

He is a drug addict who doesn’t need to be worried about money since he has made a fortune off foreign countries when his daddy was vice president. He seems to be a sex-crazed loony as well as being a drug addict. One or the other would be bad enough but combine the two and you really have someone who is totally messed up.

The Illustrated Primer had the details and contents of Hunter’s diary:

In an entry date to 07/12/2018, Hunter writes about his father abandoning Beau at the hospital shortly after he had his stroke. He references a related conversation that he had with Hallie (his brother’s wife (with whom he was sleeping when his brother was still alive):

She (Hallie) used to tell the story of how when Beau had his stroke and Pop couldn’t deal and she didn’t want to decide a lone she told me she turned to me because that’s what Beau would have wanted.  I told that story to someone I think Rob’s friends in the Hamptons and when I finished the story and said “and when she told me that I knew I would love her forever” she said to the group- “actually the reason I turned to you was that there was no one else right there and Pop was totally out of it…”

Analyzing Hunter’s network linkages and imagery shows that Hunter’s binges, in addition to cocaine, were fuelled by prescription drugs that he regularly obtained legally. These ‘legit’ sources kept him well-provisioned and ready for action.

In one especially abusive sex scene involving a prostitute, she can be seen taking an ampule and a syringe in preparation for injecting it into his butt. Shortly afterword he passes out. These explanations will never do Justice to the digital circus contained on that hard drive, but you must be starting to get the picture.

A police report was that was released in 2019 also provides a glimpse into the Bidens dark world:

Fast forward to last week.

Hunter Biden is in the public eye once again. The controversial son of the current sitting president has recently made public appearances and released a book called “Beautiful Things”. Despite this “good guy” marketing campaign from the usual suspects, there seems to be new information coming that runs contrary to how the mainstream is trying to paint it.

Now the world is forced to recall the “laptop from hell”? Remember when the legacy media claimed it was “hacked” material, and their big-tech counterparts banned anyone who thought it worth reporting on? While this laptop business was making the rounds through media outlets and NOT being reported on, Hunter remained suspiciously absent from the public eye until he was asked in his first interview post-election, where he claimed the laptop “could be” his. He makes this claim despite the existence of signed receipts for the laptop’s repairs.

The truth keeps creeping closer, which explains why Biden has remained silent, telling a reporter: “I have no response!” to the Hunter Biden influence-selling story, which very clearly involves him. He’s maybe hoping to pull a Clinton, making the story of “the big guy” and his bagman son all go away.

Maybe that’s because, as Hunter’s emails (and Trump during the second debate) say, he’s “the big guy,” taking his fifty percent cut. A recent IBD/TIPP poll is showing that it’s a scandal that’s taking off for real on his presidential bid, with rapidly falling public support. It is, after all, classic high-level, and very naked corruption that can be explained in a sentence or two — Hunter Biden sold access to Joe Biden’s office for millions of dollars, payable in advance. He wants that out of the news entirely.

Rep. Adam Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, though, same as he did during impeachment, claims it’s Russian disinformation, assuming he can go to that well more than once. His New York Times media toadies are following.

Other members of the leftist press are, with JournoList-style echo-chamber talking points, calling it a “garbage fire.” See here and here.

Some leftists are claiming Photoshopping. Others are yelling partisan dirty tricks. Salon called it a “complete fabrication.”

These attempts to steer the narrative are often successful, but recent evidence is making the spin much harder to manage.

Now we have come to find out that with the emails on the Harddrive (as well as the Secret Service travel logs) pointing to evidence of Joe Biden’s involvement with the now infamous and lucrative Burisma dealings.

The corpo journo’s immediately began claiming that the meeting at the Whitehouse (WH) was for an “art project” but that narrative has been proven to be shotty damage control. As the emails and their attached files show, Hunter Biden and his former business partner/ whistleblower Devon Archer began receiving huge checks from the Ukrainian energy company Burisma after then-Vice President Joe Biden took a trip to Ukraine. Oddly enough, neither Archer nor Hunter Biden has any experience in energy, this looks like a blatant quid pro quo which is exactly what they tried to pin on Trump multiple times.

It looks like there is far more to this laptop than the legacy media institutions would have you believe. Oddly enough, even the DailyMail (the UK’s highest-circulated daily newspaper) is now reporting on what is quickly morphing into a huge story. Looks like the Book deal and marketing campaign weren’t enough to dissuade folks from looking any further, the fake narrative is being blown to smithereens.

And another piece via “Insider”:

It is likely that there will more damning evidence to come, updates will be provided.

The Stage Has Been Set For An Epic Battle Between Red States And Blue States At The Supreme Court

We have never seen anything like Texas v. Pennsylvania in the history of the Supreme Court.  A very large group of red states has lined up behind Texas, and a very large group of blue states is backing the other side.  I cannot recall another Supreme Court case in which so many states have sought to be involved on some level, and so to me it would be unthinkable for the Supreme Court to try to slap this suit away as if it was insignificant.  The U.S. Constitution gives the Supreme Court original jurisdiction over controversies between states, and so if the Supreme Court is not willing to properly deal with the grievances that the red states have there is no other place for them to go.

I believe that the Supreme Court is going to handle this case with the seriousness that it deserves, and that means that we are about to witness an absolutely epic legal battle between red states and blue states.

In an article that I published yesterday, I explained that the Court had required the states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia to file their responses by Thursday at 3 PM, and that is precisely what happened.

But a whole bunch of other parties decided to get involved in this case as well.  The following are all of the updates that were posted on the Supreme Court website on Thursday alone

Motion of State of Ohio for leave to file amicus brief not accepted for filing. (December 10, 2020) (corrected motion electronically filed)

Response to motion for leave to file bill of complaint and motion for preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order or stay from defendant Wisconsin filed.

Opposition to Texas’s motion for leave to file bill of complaint and its motion for preliminary relief from defendant Georgia filed.

Opposition to motions for leave to file bill of complaint and for injunctive relief from defendant Michigan filed.

Opposition to motion for leave to file bill of complaint and motion for preliminary injunction, temporary restraining order, or stay from defendant Pennsylvania filed.

Motion for leave to file amicus brief from the District of Columbia on behalf of 22 States and Territories filed.

Motion to Intervene and Proposed Bill of Complaint in Intervention of State of Missouri submitted.

Motion of State of Ohio for leave to file amicus brief submitted.

Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae and Brief for Members of the Pennsylvania General Assembly. as Amicus Curiae in Support of Plaintiff/Defendants of Members of the Pennsylvania General Assembly submitted.

Motion of Certain Select Pennsylvania State Senators for leave to file amicus brief submitted.

Motion of Christian Family Coalition for leave to file amicus brief submitted.

Amicus brief of Bryan Cutler Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and Kerry Benninghoff Majority Leader of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives submitted.

For Leave to File Complaint-in-Intervention of Ron Heuer, et al. submitted.

Motion of U.S. Representative Mike Johnson and 105 Other Members for leave to file amicus brief submitted.

Motion of Lieutenant Governor Janice McGeachin, Senator Lora Reinbold, Representative David Eastment, et al. (Elected State Officials) for leave to file amicus brief submitted.

Amicus brief of City of Detroit submitted.

Motion for Leave to File and Amicus Curiae Brief of Justice and Freedom Fund in Support of Plaintiff of Justice and Freedom Fund in Support of Plaintiff submitted.

Complaint in Intervention of Ron Heuer, et al. submitted.

Amicus brief of Ga. state Sen. William Ligon et al. submitted.

Motion of L. Lin Wood for leave to file amicus brief submitted.

Motion of Steve Bullock, in his official capacity as Governor of Montana for leave to file amicus brief submitted.

I have never seen a flurry of activity like this for any other Supreme Court case.

As you look over that list, you will see that there are all sorts of big names on there and nearly all states are represented in at least some capacity.

But there is one huge name that is completely missing.

For some reason, Joe Biden has decided not to be involved in this case at all.

I think that Joe Biden’s lawyers are telling him that it would give the case credibility if they got involved and they don’t want to do that.

But to me, this is a major tactical mistake on their part.  If Texas wins this case, Joe Biden will probably not be the one sitting in the Oval Office for the next four years.  With so much on the line, if I was a presidential candidate I would want to make sure that my interests were being represented properly in this case.

In any event, this case is moving forward, and the outcome will make history no matter which way it goes.

Needless to say, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia are very upset about the suit that Texas has filed.  In fact, Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro went so far as to call the suit a “seditious abuse of the judicial process”

The Pennsylvania AG’s office described the Texas suit as a crass political maneuver to extend Trump’s term.

‘Texas’s effort to get this Court to pick the next President has no basis in law or fact. The Court should not abide this seditious abuse of the judicial process, and should send a clear and unmistakable signal that such abuse must never be replicated,’ they urged.

Of course that is a bunch of nonsense.

As I detailed yesterday, Texas is alleging very serious violations of the Electors Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in all four states, and the evidence clearly shows that those constitutional violations did indeed take place.

Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia would have us believe that Texas and other red states were not harmed by these constitutional violations, and they would have us believe that the Supreme Court could not possibly take any action even if there were constitutional violations because that would “disenfranchise” millions of voters.

But it wouldn’t disenfranchise those voters if the Court ordered new elections in those four states, and that is what I believe is the appropriate remedy in this case.

I know that is a minority viewpoint, but I am sticking with it.

On Thursday, the District of Columbia, 20 blue states, the Virgin Islands and Guam filed an amicus brief in support of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Georgia.

An amicus brief had already been filed by a coalition of red states on Wednesday, and on Thursday six of them actually asked the court to allow them to become co-plaintiffs

Missouri on Wednesday led a group of 17 states in filing a brief that supported the Texas lawsuit, which alleges that the four key swing states that voted for President-elect Joe Biden violated the Constitution by having their judicial and executive branches make changes to their presidential elections rather than their legislatures.

But the Thursday filing led by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, which also includes Arkansas, Utah, Louisiana, Mississippi and South Carolina, would make those states parties before the court in the case rather than just outside voices weighing in. President Trump’s campaign did the same on Wednesday.

Subsequently, 106 Republican members of the House of Representatives filed an amicus brief in support of Texas.

That has got to carry a lot of weight with the Court.

At this point, the Court is essentially boxed into a corner.  If they throw this case aside very quickly, that will cause a massive uproar on the right.

But if they actually allow oral arguments and give this case the attention that it deserves, that will cause a massive uproar on the left.

Whatever they do, about half the country is going to be exceedingly angry.

And if Texas v. Pennsylvania ultimately results in Trump winning the election, we will witness a national temper tantrum that will shake our nation to the core.

We have reached one of the most critical moments in American history, and the future of our Republic hangs in the balance.

Historically, the Supreme Court likes to try to find an easy way out, and they may be very tempted to try to dispose of this case very quickly.

But that wouldn’t solve anything.  I think that it is a very ominous sign that there is so much open animosity between red states and blue states now.  Just like we witnessed prior to the Civil War, states are picking one side or the other, and talk of secession is starting to pick up steam.  In fact, it was the top headline on the Drudge Report on Thursday morning.

And if the Supreme Court ignores the clear constitutional violations that occurred during this election, that will only make things a lot worse.

As Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton stated in his complaint, either we have a Constitution or we don’t.

That is what Texas v. Pennsylvania is really all about, and in a few days we will have a clear answer to that question.

About the Author

About the Author: My name is Michael Snyder and my brand new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available on Amazon.com.  In addition to my new book, I have written four others that are available on Amazon.com including The Beginning Of The EndGet Prepared Now, and Living A Life That Really Matters. (#CommissionsEarned)  By purchasing the books you help to support the work that my wife and I are doing, and by giving it to others you help to multiply the impact that we are having on people all over the globe.  I have published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream and The Most Important News, and the articles that I publish on those sites are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.  I always freely and happily allow others to republish my articles on their own websites, but I also ask that they include this “About the Author” section with each article.  The material contained in this article is for general information purposes only, and readers should consult licensed professionals before making any legal, business, financial or health decisions.  I encourage you to follow me on social media on FacebookTwitter and Parler, and any way that you can share these articles with others is a great help.  During these very challenging times, people will need hope more than ever before, and it is our goal to share the gospel of Jesus Christ with as many people as we possibly can.

What TGP Found Out About Hunter Biden’s Apparent Fetish with the Finger Lakes Region of New York

Joe Hoft,
November 1st, 2020

What is behind Hunter Biden’s apparent fetish with the Finger Lakes region in New York state?

Yaacov Apelbaum at the Illustrated Primer reports:

Here’s a short review to help clarify some of the questions regarding Hunter Biden’s tattoo and it’s meaning. He does in fact have a tattoo on his back, he was inked in September of 2018.  The tattoo depicts the Finger Lakes, a group of long, narrow lakes that run roughly north–south in New York state.

One Internet sleuth surmises that Hunter’s tattoos might have some relationship with Hunter’s late mother:

But others on Twitter and other sites on the Internet have less innocent reasons for Hunter’s tattoo and his connections to the Finger Lakes region of New York.

One individual tweeted that the tattoo n Hunter’s back as well as a picture of the Finger Lakes region, includes a place labeled Lucifer Falls and Senaca Falls which are also mentioned.  Hunter has a company named Rosemont Seneca:

Some are concerned with Hunter’s tattoo because there is at least one recent report about human trafficking in the Finger Lakes Region per mpnnow.com:

Human trafficking is not a crime that happens only in large metropolitan areas or foreign countries. It’s becoming more common in suburban and rural areas, including the Finger Lakes region.

“It’s real, and it’s here,” said Ragan Stevens, a nurse at UR Medicine Thompson Health.

Stevens and fellow nurse Cristine Crawford are providing mandatory training for Thompson staff when it comes to treating victims of human trafficking.

They are helping staff members understand the ways in which victims of trafficking commonly present in healthcare settings, giving them the tools to recognize the red-flag indicators and making sure they know what to do if they suspect someone is a victim of trafficking.

The nurses also debunk common myths and misconceptions, such as U.S. citizens can’t be trafficked and the victims knew what they were getting into.

Human trafficking is defined as the trade of humans for the purpose of forced labor, sexual slavery or commercial sexual exploitation for the trafficker or others.

A 2017 survey report from the Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking found that over half of labor and sex trafficking survivors surveyed had accessed health care at least once while being trafficked.

Apelbaum shares that Hunter’s enterprise of companies is connected to his tattoo and he has been making recurring transfers to an individual who is a ghost with no Internet footprint, from Hunter’s company OWASCO which happens to be the name of another one of the Finger Lakes:

In terms of significance, the tattoo is tied to his enterprise of companies. One example of this linkage is reoccurring money transfers to an individual (POI-1) who has no visible history, nor background, nor internet footprint. These transactions involved a reoccurring six digit wire transfer from OWASCO P.C. OWASCO which happens to be both the name of one of Hunter Biden’s companies and the name of one of the Finger Lakes.

Here’s a copy of the money transfer:

What really is the reason for Hunter’s fetish with the Finger Lakes Region of New York and Hunter’s regular payments to an Internet ghost from one of Hunter’s Finger Lakes’ companies?

Joe Hoft

Joe Hoft is the twin brother of TGP’s founder, Jim Hoft. His posts have been retweeted by President Trump and have made the headlines at the Drudge Report. Joe worked as a corporate executive in Hong Kong and traveled the world for his work, which gives him a unique perspective of US and global current events. He has ten degrees or designations and is the author of three books. His new book: ‘In God We Trust: Not in Lying Liberal Lunatics’ is out now – please take a look and buy a copy.

Former Deutsche Bank Traders Convicted Of Fraud For Spoofing Precious Metals Between 2008 And 2013

Tyler Durden
SEPTEMBER 28, 2020

Former Deutsche Bank AG traders Cedric Chanu and James Vorley were convicted for manipulating gold and silver prices on Friday after three days of deliberation by a Federal jury in Chicago.

The two were accused of making fake trade orders between 2008 and 2013 to influence the prices of precious metals. Their trial was a week long and was the first of its kind since 2010, according to Bloomberg.

The convictions come as the result of a crackdown on “spoofing”, placing orders with no intention of executing them, in order to move the price of the underlying product. Spoofing works by fooling the market into thinking there are more bids or offers than are legitimately there. It has been illegal since 2010’s Dodd-Frank act.

Chanu and Vorley were said to have “weaponized” this tactic to mislead other traders, according to prosecutor Brian Young. The traders knew what they were doing, the prosecution argued, with Vorley even writing in a message to Chanu at one point: “This spoofing is annoying me. It’s illegal for a start.”

A co-worker at Deutsche Bank acted as witness during the trial and told the jury that Chanu and Vorley taught him how to manipulate prices by spoofing. The defendants didn’t call any witnesses but instead raised the issue of how difficult it was to try and prove criminal intent for “spoofing” in competitive global markets.

“If you fake a pass and run the ball, that’s competition, not fraud,” Vorley’s lawyer said.

Chanu was convicted on seven counts of fraud and Vorley was convicted of three counts. They were found not guilty on charges of conspiracy. The government has said they are going to seek about four or five years of jail for each person. Vorley said he will appeal and that he was trading “well within the law”.

Vorley’s lawyer said: “It was a compromise verdict by a jury that three times declared it was deadlocked, deliberating in the face of a Covid scare. The record is clear there was no fraud. The compromise conviction will not stand.”

Source: Zerohedge

Tennessee Woman Who Died in February Gets Letter Saying She Tested Positive For Covid-19 From a Test Taken in June

Cristina Laila,
September, 4th, 2020

A Tennessee man received a letter in mail claiming his mother, who passed away in February of this year from COPD, tested positive for Covid-19 from a test taken in June.

“I’m just having a hard time understanding how they can say someone has COVID-19 when they are not even alive,” Troy Whittington told WKYC.

Mr. Wittington said the letter arrived from Shelby County Health Department demanding his mother isolate because she had just tested positive for Covid-19.

“It’s been 6 months, almost 7, since she passed away. There was no testing that was done at that time. On her death certificate it was stated she died, what the cause of death was, and it was not COVID-19. It was COPD,” said Whittington.

Whittington said when he called the health department, he was told she took a COVID-19 test June 20th, which was clearly impossible. She was cremated.

“It’s impossible for someone to be tested on June 20, who passed away on February 16th,” said Whittington. “I tried to call the health department this morning, ask them why this was going on. She said she would have to get a supervisor. She was sorry for the mistake or she couldn’t tell me any information till she got a supervisor, and I haven’t heard back from them.”

Whittington said this situation makes him question not only the Shelby County Health Department’s COVID 19 statistics, but statistics across the country.

“I would just like for the health department to be more accurate.” He added, “They have a record of her death there. That is where I got the death certificate from and it’s in the same building they’re sending out saying she is positive, which is not possible.”

The Michael Flynn Saga Reveals Democrats’ Near-Coup Use Of Federal Power

Margot Cleveland
AUGUST 28, 2020


For the last year, the discussion of the Russia collusion hoax as it relates to Michael Flynn has focused on the criminal case against President Trump’s former national security advisor. Now, all eyes remain fixed on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Two weeks ago it heard, en banc, oral argument to decide whether to direct presiding Judge Emmet Sullivan to dismiss the criminal charge against Flynn.

To Flynn and his family, the criminal jeopardy he faced because of the perjury trap set by Obama administration holdovers is the most concerning. Reasonable Americans of goodwill should be horrified by the personal harm inflicted on the retired lieutenant general and his loved ones.

However, the criminal case is but half the scandal, and the mostly unexamined portion of the plot to force Flynn’s ouster from the Trump administration threatens a more lasting harm to our constitutional republic and the peaceful transition of power.

Political Opposition Sought to Decide a President’s Staff

That the Trump Resistance sought Flynn’s firing seems clear from the evidence. The day before then-FBI Agent Peter Strzok and his colleague Joe Pientka questioned Flynn about Flynn’s telephone conversations with the Russian ambassador, Sergey Kislyak, the Crossfire Hurricane team met to discuss the strategy.

On the morning of the interview, on January 24, 2017, Assistant Director of FBI Counterintelligence Bill Priestap apparently had second thoughts. “I believe we should rethink this,” notes from a follow-up meeting read. “What is our goal? Truth/Admission or to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or get him fired?”

It now appears the primary goal was the ouster of the newly appointed national security advisor. What is less clear, however, is who plotted this plan or knowingly participated in its execution.

A brief exchange between Attorney General William Barr and Fox News’ Mark Levin three Sundays ago suggested these lines of inquiry. About halfway through the hour-long interview, Levin asked the attorney general about the Flynn case. Barr explained how he had appointed U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen to review the Flynn case after Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell, began accusing the Department of Justice of misconduct.

“Everyone who knew anything about that case thought it was hinky,” Barr explained. “It didn’t all add up,” he continued, “because the call, on its face”—referring to the late December 2016 call between Flynn and the Russian ambassador—“was a perfectly legitimate call for the incoming national security advisor to make.”

Jensen, whom Barr stressed had 10 years as an FBI agent then another ten years as a career prosecutor prior to his appointment as a U.S. attorney, “found a lot of things that had not come to light before.” “For example,” Barr continued, the evidence “showed clearly that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not think he was lying.”

Significantly, Barr then added: “Now, this was later minimized in testimony as suggesting ‘Well, they meant he didn’t break out into sweat and his eye pupils didn’t contract, that’s all they were saying.’” “No,” Barr declared emphatically. “They were saying he didn’t believe he thought he was lying at the time.”

So, who stated in congressional testimony that the interviewing FBI agents, Pientka and Strzok, merely meant Flynn had not shown any indicia of lying? James Comey.

Comey Switches Testimony on Whether Flynn Lied

First, just a little more than a month after Pientka and Strzok interviewed Flynn, Comey testified before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. During his March 2, 2017 testimony, Comey stated, “I talked to them about this,” referring to their interview of Flynn, and “they discerned no physical indications of deception. They didn’t see any change in posture, in tone, in inflection, in eye contact. They saw nothing that indicated to them that he knew he was lying to them.” Comey added that after the interview, the agents “drafted a 302 and reported to me and the deputy director.”

Then on December 7, 2018, Comey testified before the House Committees on the Judiciary and Oversight. During that hearing, Comey was asked whether “either of those agents, or both,” had told him “they did not adduce an intent to deceive from their interview with General Flynn.” Comey said “no.”

Rep. Trey Gowdy then asked Comey what Pientka and Strzok had relayed back concerning Flynn’s intent to deceive. “My recollection was,” Comey stated, “the conclusion of the investigators was he was obviously lying, but they saw none of the normal common indicia of deception: that is hesitancy to answer, shifting in seat, sweating, all the things that you might associate with someone who is conscious and manifesting that they are being—they’re telling falsehoods. There’s no doubt he was lying, but that those indicators weren’t there” (emphasis added).

Comey added that he recalled telling the House Intelligence Committee earlier “that the agents observed none of the common indicia of lying — physical manifestations, changes in tone, changes in pace — that would indicate the person I’m interviewing knows they’re telling me stuff that ain’t true.” “They didn’t see that here,” Comey explained. Rather, “it was a natural conversation, answered fully their questions, didn’t avoid. That notwithstanding, they concluded he was lying,” Comey unequivocally affirmed.

When Comey told Congress that the FBI agents “concluded he was lying,” Flynn was on the cusp of being sentenced for supposedly lying to the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador. Just three days prior, the special counsel’s office had filed its sentencing memorandum with the court, maintaining that because of Flynn’s “substantial assistance and other considerations set forth below, a sentence at the low end of the guideline range—including a sentence that does not impose a term of incarceration—is appropriate and warranted.” For all intents and purposes, the Flynn case was over.

But when Flynn appeared before Judge Sullivan for sentencing on December 18, 2018, the judge exploded, suggesting the retired lieutenant general had sold out his country and possibly committed treason. Sullivan then suggested Flynn might face jail time if sentencing proceeded. Flynn wisely agreed to delay the sentencing hearing. Then, six months later, Flynn fired the attorneys who had represented him during the Mueller investigation and hired Powell.

Evidence Comey Never Thought Would Surface

Powell immediately demanded the DOJ provide all material relevant to the case against Flynn. Little of significance was forthcoming, though, until Barr tasked Jensen with reviewing the case. Jensen later released several pieces of exculpatory material that Comey likely never expected would see the light of day when he testified before Congress that the agents concluded Flynn was lying.

That evidence included handwritten notes dated January 25, 2017, that stated the FBI assessed that yes, Flynn made false and inaccurate statements, “but believed that Flynn believes that what he said was true,” and that the FBI concluded that Flynn was “largely telling truth as he believed it.”

A typed “Draft Work Product” dated January 30, 2017 was even more explicit, stating that on January 25, 2017, the FBI had briefed the National Security Division and Office of Deputy Attorney General staff on their interview.” The “FBI advised that they believed Flynn believed what he was saying was true.”

Was Comey present for the debrief at which these notes were taken? Did he receive the Draft Work Product that stated the FBI “believed Flynn believed what he was saying was true?” And what, if anything, did Strzok, Pientka, or others tell Comey?

While in his first time testifying on the Hill, Comey noted he had spoken with the agents, during his follow-up testimony, Comey said while that was possible, his recollection was that he had “spoke[n] to people who had spoken to the investigators themselves.”

Here, the recently declassified 302 interview summary of the special counsel’s July 19, 2017, interview of Strzok provides some help. According to the 302, Strzok stated that following the interview of Flynn, he and Pientka “both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.” Significantly, Strzok then told the special counsel’s office that after the interview, they “returned to FBI Headquarters and briefed [Andrew] McCabe and Baker on the interview. McCabe briefed Comey.”

So did McCabe mislead Comey, leading Comey to falsely testify that the FBI agents concluded Flynn “was lying?” Or did Comey know the truth based on his conversations with Strzok or Pientka, or reading the reports?

Comey and Yates Misinformed or Lying

These questions matter, and not merely because an affirmative to any of them would call into question the veracity of Comey’s congressional testimony. Rather, they also matter because someone (or many individuals) similarly misinformed Obama Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates: Yates apparently did not know that the agents who interviewed Flynn believed Flynn thought he was accurately recounting his conversations with the Russian ambassador.

Specifically, the 302 interview summary for Yates read: “Yates received a brief readout of the interview the night it happened, and a longer readout the following day. . . . Yates did not speak to the interviewing agents herself but understood from others that their assessment was that Flynn showed no ‘tells’ of lying and it was possible he really did not remember the substance of his calls with Kislyak. On the other hand, the DOJ prosecutors were very skeptical that Flynn would forget the discussion.”

The 302 summary of Yates’s interview further noted that Yates reiterated that, in hearing about the interview, “the DOJ prosecutors thought Flynn was lying, but the FBI didn’t say he wasn’t lying, just that he didn’t exhibit any ‘tells’ that he was lying.”

Yates’s 302 further noted that McCabe had discussed the FBI’s interview of Flynn with Yates. So, it would seem that McCabe also failed to tell Yates that the FBI agents did not think Flynn was lying. Given that Strzok and Pientka briefed McCabe after interviewing Flynn, it is inconceivable that they did not inform McCabe of their assessment that Flynn was not lying.

Did McCabe Lie, Or Did McCord, or Both?

But from declassified materials, it appears that it was not merely McCabe who failed to inform Yates of that important fact. Rather, Mary McCord, who served as the head of the DOJ’s National Security Division, appears to have likewise omitted this significant detail in briefing Yates.

McCord’s 302 stated that “following the Flynn interview, Priestap, Strzok, [Pientka], and FBI General Counsel went to the DOJ to brief them on the interview.” During this meeting, according to McCord’s 302 summary, “Strzok provided a readout of the Flynn interview, since he and another agent had conducted it.”

While McCord’s 302 statement was unclear on what exactly Strzok and Pientka told the DOJ representatives, declassified notes taken by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Tashina Gauhar reveal that during a read-out on January 25, 2017, Strzok and Pientka told McCord (and others) that the FBI assessed that “Flynn believes that what he said was true,” and was being forthright with the agents. The typed Draft Work Product also confirmed that during the January 25, 2017 briefing, the “FBI advised that they believed Flynn believed what he was saying was true.”

Yet it appears that McCord did not inform Yates of this significant fact because, as noted above, Yates’s 302 stated that Yates “did not speak to the interviewing agents herself but understood from others that their assessment was that Flynn showed no ‘tells’ of lying and it was possible he really did not remember the substance of his calls with Kislyak.” Significantly, Yates then said, “the DOJ prosecutors thought Flynn was lying, but the FBI didn’t say he wasn’t lying, just that he didn’t exhibit any ‘tells’ that he was lying.”

Not only did McCord apparently mislead Yates concerning the FBI agents’ assessment of Flynn’s veracity, according to Yates, McCord was “effectively ‘cross examining’ the statements Flynn made to the interviewing agents as compared to the transcripts.” But McCord did more than leave Yates uninformed or misled about the FBI agents’ view that Flynn had not lied: McCord inaccurately summarized the transcript of the calls between Flynn and the Russian ambassador for Yates.

According to McCord’s 302 summary, following Strzok and Pientka’s questioning of Flynn, “McCord reviewed the Flynn transcripts and pulled out excerpts for Yates to reference in the discussion with the White House Counsel’s Office, should they be necessary.” Then, on “January 26, 2017, McCord accompanied Yates to the White House, where they met with White House Counsel Don McGahn and another attorney from his office, James Burham.”

Another Lie: That Flynn Discussed Sanctions

McCord further stated, as summarized in the 302 summary, that Yates “told them that the conversations made it clear that there were discussions on Russian sanctions in those calls, contrary to what Vice President Pence had said on TV.”

But as all Americans (who don’t limit themselves to corporate media reporting) now know with the declassification of the transcripts of Flynn’s calls to Kisylak, Flynn did not discuss Russian sanctions with the Russian ambassador. So Flynn could not possibly have lied to the FBI or to Vice President Mike Pence about discussing sanctions with Kisylak.

So why did Yates think otherwise? Did McCord, who “reviewed the Flynn transcripts” and “pulled out excerpts for Yates” in preparation for the meeting, also mislead Yates about Flynn’s conversation with the ambassador? If so, was it intentional, or was McCord merely a victim of her own confirmation bias?

There is no doubt McCord held a bias: “When McCord left DOJ she was hired by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, serving ‘front and center’ in the whistleblower fraud run by Schiff that later led to the failed attempt to impeach president Trump.”

Intentional or not, Yates regurgitated the false claim to McGahn that Flynn had discussed sanctions with Kisylak and then implied that Flynn had lied to Pence about his conversations with the Russian ambassador. President Trump, believing Flynn had lied to the vice president, then fired Flynn, which was clearly the goal.

Another Tell in Comey’s Testimony

Comey unwittingly gave away the game when he testified before Congress that nothing had happened after President Obama raised Flynn’s conversation with the Russian ambassador during a January 5, 2017 Oval Office meeting also attended by Yates. Comey testified that the following day he had briefed Yates on the calls, and then “nothing, to my mind, happens until the 13th of January, when David Ignatius publishes a column that contains a reference to communications Michael Flynn had with the Russians.”

The reason “nothing happened” was because there was nothing wrong with Flynn’s calls. They were “legitimate,” as Comey put it at the time. It was the illegal leak of the classified intel to Ignatius of Flynn’s conversation with Kislyak that threatened Flynn’s position in the White House, and then only because the FBI questioned Flynn instead of asking him about the transcripts, or sharing the transcripts with the White House to allow the Trump administration to broach the issue with Flynn.

Flynn’s fate, however, was sealed when Yates conveyed to the White House that Flynn had lied to Pence and had been questioned by the FBI. Even then, had Yates conveyed the truth—that the agents believed Flynn had not lied—the Trump administration might have resolved the situation differently.

Instead, though, Obama administration holdovers and partisan career employees succeeded in causing the ouster of the new administration’s pick for national security advisor. And that plot only succeeded because of illegally leaked classified intel. These facts shake the foundation of our constitutional republic and threaten the peaceful transitions of power, and will be a blot on our country’s history long after Flynn obtains some semblance of justice.

Further, the targeting of Flynn was but one thread of the Obama-Biden administration’s attempt to interfere with the Trump administration. The spying on the transition team, the failure to provide Trump defensive briefings, the attempt to sidestep Trump’s attorneys general—successful with Jeff Sessions, but not Barr—and the weaponization of whistleblowing laws to impeach the duly elected president represent the most destructive attack on our government ever.

Come November 2020, Americans should make clear that such interference in their freely chosen commander-in-chief will not profit.

Margot Cleveland is a senior contributor to The Federalist. Cleveland served nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk to a federal appellate judge and is a former full-time faculty member and adjunct instructor at the college of business at the University of Notre Dame. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Nashville Man Told by State He’s Positive for Coronavirus; He Was Never Tested

Amanda Prestigiacomo,
July 21st, 2020

A Nashville man told his local news station last week that he received at least three calls from the state about apparently testing positive for the novel coronavirus.

The problem? He was never tested.

According to News4 Investigates, Brock Ballou, a resident of the Nashville suburb of Mount Juliet, said he was anticipating a call from a contact tracer after one of his coworkers tested positive for COVID-19. However, the tracer repeatedly told Mr. Ballou that he was positive for the virus, despite the fact that he was never tested, he says.

“She specifically said – I’m looking at it right here – you tested positive – this is a follow up call to see how your symptoms are,” Ballou told the news station.

Asked if he possibly misheard the woman on the phone, Ballou said she reiterated his supposedly positive test results multiple times.

“I’m 100 percent sure that’s what she said, she was looking right at it,” he recalled, “she told me I’m in the system – looking right at it that you’re showing positive.”

Over the following days, Ballou received more calls from the state about his COVID symptoms.

“(The contact tracer) said I’m still seeing that you’re positive. Courtesy call – checking your symptoms,” he said.

News4 Investigates said all three phone numbers used to reach out to Ballou have been confirmed by the news station to have come from workers with the state health department of Tennessee.

The apparent discrepancy has Ballou questioning the accuracy of the state’s COVID-19 case counts.

“I said I don’t know what’s going on, but it’s wrong. I’m just another number when I’m not.”

The Tennessee health department confirmed through a spokeswoman that they are investigating the discrepancy.

“I can also tell you there is no concern with our count of cases in regard to our reporting of those who test positive,” the spokeswoman said. “Those entries are based on lab results, not on information provided from the monitoring team.”

According to Ballou, he’s been told by the state that the calls made to him were done via a third party contracted by the health department.

As noted by The Daily Wire last week, the Florida State Health Department confirmed that some testing laboratories in the state have not been disclosing their negative novel coronavirus testing results accurately, skewing the positivity rates dramatically. At least two labs were discovered to have inflated their positivity rates of the virus by a factor of ten.

“Countless labs have reported a 100 percent positivity rate, which means every single person tested was positive. Other labs had very high positivity rates,” FOX 35 explained Tuesday.

It was uncovered that Orlando Veteran’s Medical Center’s reported positivity rate of 76% was actually around 6%, a spokesperson for the center revealed. FOX 35 added, “Orlando Health’s positivity rate is only 9.4 percent, not 98 percent as in the report.”

Netanyahu’s Corruption Trial to Hear 1st Witnesses in January

Staff Writer,
July 19, 2020

JERUSALEM—Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s corruption trial will begin in earnest in January with witnesses being heard three times a week, a court decided on Sunday.

(EDITORS NOTE: Hope the witnesses stick around!)

Lawyers for Netanyahu, the first serving prime minister in Israel to go on trial, had asked for a six-month postponement to prepare their strategy. They suggested it would be difficult to gauge the truthfulness of witnesses wearing anti-coronavirus masks, currently compulsory in Israel.

Netanyahu’s legal troubles have partly fueled mounting street protests against him, with demonstrators citing his alleged corruption and handling of the coronavirus pandemic, which has taken a turn for the worse in Israel.

Israeli police used water cannons to disperse demonstrators from outside Netanyahu’s residence in Jerusalem on Saturday, and in Tel Aviv, protesters blocking traffic clashed with police.

Netanyahu was not required to appear at Sunday’s court session.

The veteran leader’s trial formally opened in May in the Jerusalem District Court, where Netanyahu denied the charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust against him and his attorneys were given two months to study the material against him.

At Sunday’s hearing, Netanyahu’s lawyers asked for more time as they expected to file a series of pre-trial motions over witnesses and documents, and said masks would be problematic if sessions were held now.

“How can we carry out a cross-examination when I am in a mask, the witness is in a mask and I don’t know if Your Honor is angry or happy,” Netanyahu attorney Yossi Segev asked Judge Rivkah Friedman Feldman, who heads the three-justice court.

She replied that the defense, prosecution, and court would just have to cope should masks still be compulsory in January.

Netanyahu, 70, was indicted in November in cases involving gifts from millionaire friends and for allegedly seeking regulatory favors for media tycoons in return for favorable coverage.

In its ruling, the court said that as of January trial sessions would be held every Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.

Bribery charges carry a sentence of up to 10 years in jail. Fraud and breach of trust are punishable by up to three years in prison.

NBC Doctor Who Claimed He Had Coronavirus LIED – The Whole Thing Was Staged

Ethan Huff
July 16, 2020

Back in May, Dr. Joseph Fair, a virologist who is often featured on NBC and MSNBC, claimed that he had contracted the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19).

He was infamously seen lying in a hospital bed with breathing tubes up his nose, appearing to be suffering and in pain. But there was just one problem: The whole thing was faked.

If you can even believe it, Dr. Fair pretended to have the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) in order to scare the public into fearing this bogeyman contagion, as well as accepting the government’s response to it. But now the whole thing has been blown wide open as a hoax.Joseph Fair Coronavirus Lie Staged Fake News

Joseph Fair never had coronavirus

According to Dr. Fair’s own recent admission, he actually tested negative for the Wuhan coronavirus on multiple occasions, but still supposedly believed that he had it.

Dr. Fair also tested negative after taking an antibody test, further confirming that he did not have the novel virus.

But none of this stopped him from tweeting that he had come down with the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19), supposedly causing him to have to be hospitalized.

“I’m on the other end of it, but not out of the woods yet,” he wrote alongside a “selfie” picture of him with a ventilator over his nose and mouth.

“Please continue to social distance. I used max precautions, but still managed to contract it. Back as soon as I’m able, friends,” he further wrote, concluding with, “#StaySafe.”

Six days after being admitted to the hospital with what appears to have been a case of Munchausen’s syndrome, Dr. Fair was released with oxygen.

He thanked both NBC and MSNBC for their support, as well as his friends, family members, and various celebrities and fake news reporters for their prayers, messages, and faxes.

“Home to convalesce, but back as soon as my body permits,” he joked.

How Many “COVID Cases” Are Really Just Munchausen’s Syndrome?

Not even a month later, Dr. Fair took to Twitter once again, this time to fess up that he had fibbed about his supposed Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) diagnosis.

While he still claims to have believed that he contracted the virus, Dr. Fair now admits that he never actually tested positive.

“My undiagnosed / suspected COVID illness from nearly 2 months ago remains an undiagnosed mystery as a recent antibody test was negative,” he wrote.

“I had myriad COVID symptoms, was hospitalized in a COVID ward & treated for COVID-related co-morbidities, despite testing negative by nasal swab.”

Hilariously, this latter tweet received far fewer “likes” and retweets than his earlier one, which is probably due to the fact that Dr. Fair’s followers are now feeling as though they were sold a tall tale – which they were.

Dr. Fair followed up this tweet with yet another, which received even fewer likes and retweets. It reads:

“I am so grateful to you all for the ongoing support in my recovery. I am feeling back to normal & am thankful for my health, & to my caregivers for getting me through it. I hope the same outcome for those in care for COVID, about which we have yet so much to learn.”

Chances are that Dr. Fair was never actually sick. It was more than likely all in his head, possibly due to the media’s endless fear-mongering about this so-called pandemic, almost none of which seems to be panning out in the way we were told it would.

I think the real story here is that he was in a COVID ward for six days and still never contracted it,” wrote one Breitbart News commenter, making an interesting point.

Not only that, he blocked a legitimate CCP virus victim from that bed and life-saving treatment,” responded another.

The Roman Catholic Church Used Unprecedented Legal Trickery To Plunder The American Taxpayer For Billions In Coronavirus Aid Money

EDITORS NOTE: It’s gods will, let the $tacks swell.

HAF
July 12th, 2020

The U.S. Roman Catholic Church used a special and unprecedented exemption from federal rules to amass at least $1.4 billion in taxpayer-backed coronavirus aid, with many millions going to dioceses that have paid huge settlements or sought bankruptcy protection because of clergy sexual abuse cover-ups.

From its inception in the early 300’s in Rome, the Roman Catholic Church has always been about the money.

They invented the concept of Purgatory, a hold place where souls go while awaiting Heaven, so they could then sell indulgences to their bible illiterate followers to buy their loved ones out.

Where Do Church Donations Go? The Catholic Church Paid Nearly $4 Billion To Settle Pedophilia Lawsuits

The Roman Catholic Church Used Unprecedented Legal Trickery To Plunder The American Taxpayer For Billions In Coronavirus Aid Money

As recently as 2018, Pope Francis was busy selling these indulgences to Catholics who remain woefully ignorant of what the bible teaches. But their money heist in 2020 is one to break the bank, literally.

“How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.

“Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.” Revelation 18:7,8 (KJB)

How laughable it is that Roman Catholic priests take a ‘vow of poverty’ while all the while living like kings.

In New York City alone, the Roman Catholic Church took $28,000,000 just to finance its top executive officers, how does that line up with your ‘vow of poverty’?

The amount that the church collected, between $1.4 billion and $3.5 billion, is an undercount.

The Diocesan Fiscal Management Conference, an organization of Catholic financial officers, surveyed members and reported that about 9,000 Catholic entities received loans.

And how much money did you receive from the coronavirus stimulus bailout? Bless me father, for I have sinned…and they laugh themselves all the way to the bank.

AP: Catholic Church Lobbied For Taxpayer Funds, Got $1.4B

FROM THE AP: The church’s haul may have reached — or even exceeded — $3.5 billion, making a global religious institution with more than a billion followers among the biggest winners in the U.S. government’s pandemic relief efforts, an Associated Press analysis of federal data released this week found.

Houses of worship and faith-based organizations that promote religious beliefs aren’t usually eligible for money from the U.S. Small Business Administration.

But as the economy plummeted and jobless rates soared, Congress let faith groups and other nonprofits tap into the Paycheck Protection Program, a $659 billion fund created to keep Main Street open and Americans employed.

By aggressively promoting the payroll program and marshaling resources to help affiliates navigate its shifting rules, Catholic dioceses, parishes, schools and other ministries have so far received approval for at least 3,500 forgivable loans, AP found.

The Archdiocese of New York, for example, received 15 loans worth at least $28 million just for its top executive offices. Its iconic St. Patrick’s Cathedral on Fifth Avenue was approved for at least $1 million.

In Orange County, California, where a sparkling glass cathedral estimated to cost over $70 million recently opened, diocesan officials working at the complex received four loans worth at least $3 million.

And elsewhere, a loan of at least $2 million went to the diocese covering Wheeling-Charleston, West Virginia, where a church investigation revealed last year that then-Bishop Michael Bransfield embezzled funds and made sexual advances toward young priests.

Simply being eligible for low-interest loans was a new opportunity. But the church couldn’t have been approved for so many loans — which the government will forgive if they are used for wages, rent and utilities — without a second break.

Religious groups persuaded the Trump administration to free them from a rule that typically disqualifies an applicant with more than 500 workers.

Without this preferential treatment, many Catholic dioceses would have been ineligible because — between their head offices, parishes and other affiliates — their employees exceed the 500-person cap.

“The government grants special dispensation, and that creates a kind of structural favoritism,” said Micah Schwartzman, a University of Virginia law professor specializing in constitutional issues and religion who has studied the Paycheck Protection Program. “And that favoritism was worth billions of dollars.”

The amount that the church collected, between $1.4 billion and $3.5 billion, is an undercount.

The Diocesan Fiscal Management Conference, an organization of Catholic financial officers, surveyed members and reported that about 9,000 Catholic entities received loans.

That is nearly three times the number of Catholic recipients the AP could identify.

How Much Power Does The Vatican Have?

Power, Money, And Corruption In The Vatican Bank

A fast-paced exposé of the money and the cardinals-turned-financiers at the heart of the Vatican, by an acclaimed journalist.