patrick.net

https://babylonbee.com/cleanArticle/domestic-extremists-all-helpfully-label-themselves-for-fbi

https://slaynews.com/news/epstein-victims-sue-us-government-accuse-fbi-enabling-crimes/

A group of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. federal government over allegations the FBI enabled his crimes.

According to the lawsuit filed Wednesday, the FBI allowed and enabled Epstein’s sex trafficking operation for two decades.

The FBI had received credible tips about Epstein’s sex trafficking operation as early as 1996, the anonymous victims allege.

However, they say the Bureau refused to investigate Epstein. ...

“As a direct and proximate cause of the FBI’s negligence, plaintiffs would not have continued to be sex trafficked, abused, raped, tortured, and threatened,” the complaint states.

“Jane Does 1-12 bring this lawsuit to get to the bottom — once and for all — of the FBI’s role in Epstein’s criminal sex trafficking ring.”

Additionally, the lawsuit claims the FBI had evidence that Epstein was continuing to traffic underage girls to his powerful associates but refused to investigate further.

“During the FBI investigation, the FBI was complicit in permitting Epstein and co-conspirators to continue to victimize Jane Does 1-12 and other young women,” the lawsuit alleges.

“The FBI had photographs, videos and interviews and hard evidence of child prostitution and failed to timely investigate and arrest Epstein in deviation from the FBI protocols.”

Duh, why would they investigate their own entrapment operation?

Ishida is filled with a holy passion.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/greedflation-tuesday-february-27

The diligent team of crack law enforcement experts at the FBI created a massive ratio yesterday with a helpful public service advisory on shoplifting (a ‘ratio’ occurs when a tweet gets more comments than likes). The first problem was obvious, the FBI must have used Google Gemini to create an image of “shoplifters.” But an even bigger problem quickly emerged once I started looking at what the FBI was pushing.




What the FBI was really up to was shoring up Biden’s pathetic efforts to blame inflation on everybody but himself, by suggesting that higher food prices are somehow caused by sneaky white women stealing purses at Macy’s. But commenters to the tweet properly roasted the floundering federal agency, and helpfully offered FBI agents lots of photos of actual shoplifting, you know, in case they are confused. ...

So I thought, now we’re talking, let’s check them out! Maybe there was a good reason the FBI picked a photo of ladies probably named Katelyn or Lindsay or something, as the faces of “organized retail theft.” But then I immediately ran into my first obstacle: the FBI’s links to pages about the real organized theft cases unhelpfully included no pictures at all. So I expanded my search.

You’d be surprised how many news sites avoided picturing the convicted criminals. But here are the two men sentenced in the New York home improvement holdup case: Jalil MacIntyre, 31, a Jamaican national — immigration status unknown — and Deshun Jackson, 23, of Brooklyn:




It only took a little more digging to find the four heavily-hyphenized, “Ecuadorian Nationals” — in other words, illegals — indicted in Ohio for tuning up a national theft ring (of Apple products): Alexander Diaz-Remache, 38; Gustavo Daniel Vinueza-Bueno, 36; Jonathan Eduardo Remache-Diaz, 32; and Alvaro Oswaldo Loaiza-Alvarez, 27. Assuming those are their real names.




... So there you have it. Not only did the FBI’s own cited cases include no white criminals, there weren’t even any women! And as far as I can tell, only Deshun Jackson — one of seven — is an American. The FBI had real pictures of two black guys, four rough-looking hispanic males, and an Asian gentleman. So, why pick two manicured, coiffed, and well-dressed white women?

There is only one logical conclusion: the racist FBI hates all you white ladies and is trying to pin the blame for all these heists and capers on you.

https://notthebee.com/article/watch-biden-regime-arrests-blaze-reporter-for-covering-j6-events

https://babylonbee.com/cleanArticle/fbi-arrests-1-most-wanted-criminal-pepe-the-frog

https://twitter.com/_BruceBane/status/1773481338315616295

@_BruceBane

The ‘rank & file’ coming after a civilian for posting ‘F* Biden’ on Meta.

The FBI has become the Democrat’s personal Gestapo.

Video.

Patrick says

FBI created to fight organized crime? Odd, because from the founding days of the FBI, J Edgar Hoover denied that organized crime even existed.

Patrick says

The FBI was created under false pretenses, but Hoover won support for it by finding dirt on political opponents to the Wilson administration. (And every subsequent presidential administration.) The FBI has always drummed up more money and support by amping up the fear factor on whatever "threats" were in the popular imagination, or just the halls of Washington, D.C. federal bureaus and Capitol Hill. In the beginning it was foreign immigrant Anarchists, then it was the possible disloyalty of German Americans during WW1. The FBI hunted for "subversives" and spies during WW1, and beat the drums of international communism even before the Bolshevik revolution of 1917. After 1917 they had their favorite Fear Factor, which happened to be based on something real, the COMINTERN. But J. Edgar Hoover was the semi-annual guest of the mob in Florida, where he had his "bachelor" vacations and gambled on horses. He denied the existence of organized crime until widespread evidence forced his hand. Hoover always looked for opportunities to get his bureau more jurisdiction and power. So when the flamboyant thieves who used machine guns and fast cars became a thing during the 1920's and 1930's, (like Pretty Boy Floyd, Bonnie & Clyde, John Dillinger, etc.) he exploited that to the hilt. Because those innovative crooks crossed state lines.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/499586-new-fbi-document-confirms-the-trump-campaign-was-investigated-without/

New FBI document confirms the Trump campaign was investigated without justification

Patrick says

Probably what happened to me.

Patrick says

It depends entirely how influential that person might be. They check the comm nodes to see how stuff spreads.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/anti-social-tuesday-april-2-2024

In case the FBI is coming after anti-vaxxers next, here is a “field guide” to interacting with the FBI about your social media posts.

The basic rule is: don’t talk to the FBI at all. You aren’t legally required to talk to them without legal process (like a subpoena) or without your lawyer. So don’t talk to the FBI. This can be trickier than you think. One way you can accidentally get in trouble happens when you don’t even know you’re talking to an FBI agent. The second way — lying to a federal official — happens during your conversation with the agent.

Both ways are easy to avoid. Don’t ever talk to them unless legally required — and you will know when that is — and don’t ever talk to them without a lawyer. I’ll tell you how to handle both types of encounters.

Sometimes you might not know you are talking to an agent. An ‘act in furtherance’ is the entrapment path. Unless you are making specific threats against people, the things you say are protected by the First Amendment and can’t be criminalized. But an undercover FBI agent could try to convince you to do something, however small, “in furtherance” of a criminal act. It doesn’t take much. Then they can combine that act, however small, with your words, which are used as evidence of your criminal intent.

It’s not hard. Just don’t get involved in anything shady. Especially not if the idea comes from some new online contact. And not even if the act, whatever it is, however satisfying it might feel, seems distant from any actual crime. You don’t have to do the actual crime to be convicted of being an ‘accessory’ or a ‘co-conspirator.’

There doesn’t even have to be a crime! Or any real co-conspirators. Even if the rest of the ‘conspiracy’ group is all undercover feds, and even if no crime ever actually happens, or even gets close to happening, they can still charge you for the ‘attempt.’

An attempt carries the same punishment as actually doing the crime.

For example, patriotic anti-lockdown trucker Barry Croft, 47, got 19 years for co-conspiring in the Whitmer incident. Largely he was convicted for his words — “discussions” — about using explosions to divert federal officials during a potential kidnapping. Although the ‘discussions’ might arguably have been First Amendment protected, but Barry traveled to Michigan to scout out the scene. (Plus he wore a funny tricorner hat they really hated.) Regardless that the federal agents talked Barry into going to Michigan, they combined Barry’s words (talking about using explosives) with his act (traveling to Michigan) to establish the crime of attempted fednapping.

Most people reading this probably won’t have any trouble avoiding this category of potential risk. Just don’t do stupid stuff and don’t get involved with stupid people.

Second, don’t talk to feds especially when they identify themselves, like by unexpectedly visiting you or calling you on the phone for a chat. This second and more substantial risk of liability for your words arises from lying to a federal official. United States Code, Title 18, Section 1001, drops the hammer:

(a) Whoever, within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up … a material fact; (or)
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned (up to) 5 years or, if (it) involves … domestic terrorism, imprisoned (up to) 8 years, or both.
Since the FBI is within the executive branch, making any “fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation” to the FBI — even if not under oath — is a felony punishable with up to five years in federal prison (up to eight if they can say it “involves” domestic terrorism, like criticizing genderbending school board members).

Technically, section 1001 includes a “materiality” component — the lie must be somehow meaningful, not just about whether that dress makes your wife look fat — “material” is a super squishy legal term, and you don’t want to rely on the inability of creative FBI lawyers to convince a judge something you said was somehow “material.”

Not to mention the process is the punishment anyway. Even if you win your case, you still had to endure it. And unlike you, the FBI gets its lawyers for free.

But you argue, Jeff, I would never lie to the FBI in the first place. Of course not. Not on purpose. But why take an unnecessary risk of accidentally ‘lying’? Your memory isn’t perfect. And like everybody, you probably believe lots of stuff that isn’t true. And some things you think are just your opinion — like saying the 2020 elections were stolen or Nancy Pelosi is a lizardarian — could be whipsawed against you as “false facts.”

You can’t beat them. Don’t even try. FBI agents are trained law enforcement professionals with lots of practice from interrogating people every single day.

Take conservative fashion stylist Martha Stewart as an example. Martha spent five months tastefully decorating a federal prison cell for lying to investigators under 18 USC § 1001, not for “insider trading.” She was heavily fined and went to jail for stupid stuff she said...

Step one. When the FBI shows up at the door and introduces themselves, you should start recording. Do not record them secretly — that’s a felony in many states (including Florida). Be friendly. Ask them to wait a sec if you need to go get your phone. Once the recording is on, you can ask a few quick questions.

This is optional. But to get some useful information for the recording, ask their names, ask for their business cards, ask what office they’re from, and ask for their supervisor’s name. Then ask, “gentlemen, what’s this all about?”

Then you should politely and firmly say “I would love to talk to you boys about this, but I want to do it with my lawyer. I’ll have my lawyer call your office and set something up.” Then say goodbye and close the door.

You won’t need to call and follow up. They don’t want to talk to your lawyer anyway. Also, there’s no reason to demand to see their identification, which can be faked by bad actors anyway. If they are pushy, or won’t go away, call your local sheriff and say there are armed men standing around in your yard. Then start microwaving some popcorn.

Here’s a quick summary of the advice:

Record the interaction.

Refuse to speak to them without a lawyer.

Refuse to let them in the house (unless they have a warrant).

Don’t go outside of the house and keep the door closed.

It’s that simple, although you’ll probably feel nerve-wracked the whole time. Odds are that, if the FBI was really there just to talk to you about your social media posts, the case ends right there.

Still, I’d suggest that if it does happen, contact a lawyer to have on standby, just in case they decide to follow up.

By avoiding talking, you’ll avoid the trap of helping the FBI turn your perfectly legal words into a crime.

I understand the sentiment, because the FBI has proven that it is the enemy of the American people by conducting politically motivated investigations against Trump, people who speak up at school board meetings, and Catholics, (just a few examples) while obstructing justice for the obvious crimes committed by Hunter and the rest of the Biden Crime Family. Not to mention the Pelosi/FBI entrapment scheme on Jan 6th against innocent people legitimately protesting the obviously fraudulent 2020 election.

The FBI should not exist, and all of its current management should be in prison for their flagrant violation of the Constitution, human rights, and basic decency.