patrick.net

@AlexJonesMW3 Remember when the @CIA / @FBI got caught bragging to an undercover journalist about how they set up @RealAlexJones with Sandy Hook?

FBI Whistleblower Urges Americans to Vote, Arm Themselves, Stock up 3-4 Months Supply of Food and Water, and Pray.

June 12, 2020
Director Christopher Wray
Federal Bureau of Investigation
935 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20535
Director Wray:
We are writing to address the situation that occurred on June 4, 2020 in which Agents of the
Washington Field Office knelt at the demand of protestors in the District of Columbia. We feel it
necessary to voice our opinions of this event, for we believe to abstain from doing So would be a
disservice to our organization and mission.
There are two lenses in which one can choose to view this situation. The first is that the Agents
who knelt did so under duress, for fear that failing to kneel would insight violence by the
protestors. is The second is to view the Agents as making a choice to kneel, either as a political
statement or for the convenience of following the social pressures of the time. It is our belief
that in either event, the Agents ended up making a profound public political statement on behalf
of the Bureau.
After viewing all available video and photographs of this event, it is evident the Agents' actions
were not taken under duress, but rather by choice. The Agents' lack of duress can be seen clearly
in the photos and videos as the group smiled, clapped, and even fist pumped in solidarity with
the protestors. Further, photographs of the incident show clear path of escape for the Agents if
they had in fact been under duress. Additionally, one other FBI squad had patrolled a nearby area
on the same afternoon and met with the same group of protesters at much closer proximity. This
squad did not succumb to demands to kneel and those agents were not met with violence.
Public Statements
Per the Office of Integrity and Compliance, Policy on Freedom of Expression, "employees may
participate in matters of public interest, including social or political advocacy, in manner that
does not compromise their efficiency or integrity as an employee or NEUTRALITY, efficiency
or integrity of the FBI." Further, the policy states, "[employees] may not engage in expressive
speech or association in [their] official capacity."
By choosing to kneel while on duty and wearing FBI placards, the individuals in question have
clearly compromised the FBI's need to appear neutral and our organization's ability to remain
politically agnostic. As the lead agency in charge of Color of Law investigations, it is imperative
the FBI remain neutral in fact and appearance in all matters involving civil rights and abuse of
power. By choosing to kneel, these individuals have fundamentally damaged the ability of the
FBI to appear neutral when investigating cases of alleged police brutality.

A strong argument can also be made that these Agents acted in violation of The Hatch Act of
1939, which prohibits employees from using their Bureau employment to engage in activity
undertaken in concert with a partisan political group. The key term being "in concert," meaning
to act together in harmony. As the protests in the District of Columbia were supported heavily by
partisan political parties through outreach and recruitment efforts, a statement of solidarity by
FBI Agents clearly constitutes action "in concert," with these groups.
Compromise of Values
As Special Agents of the world's premier law enforcement agency, we are held to a higher
standard than the average
American. Although we retain our right to free speech, we are
expected not to engage expressive speech or association using our FBI affiliation. By
representing the FBI in this way and creating a powerful and lasting image, the kneeling Agents
have committed a major breach of the FBI's values. They have disregarded their oath to Fidelity,
Bravery, and Integrity, opting instead for the more politically convenient actions of Individuality,
Cowardice, and Appeasement. In doing so, these Agents turned their backs on all law
enforcement officers who have stood their ground in the face of adversity, many of whom have
their names inscribed on the Law Enforcement Memorial in Washington, D.C.
In a time of great adversity, these Agents chose to surrender to the demands of what was
politically convenient. In choosing to bow to the demands of protesters they have compromised
the neutrality of the FBI, harming our reputation and our mission.
These values must be upheld and defended. It is self-evident that times like today act as a
challenge to what we hold dear. However, if we as an organization choose to ignore this
improper public action, we fear we have lost our way.
Many within the FBI still vehemently subscribe to the values of Fidelity, Bravery, and Integrity,
and they are deeply troubled by the actions of the Agents in question. Allowing these actions to
go unaddressed would clearly compromise our integrity. It is for this reason we believe: full
investigation of this incident should be conducted by the Office of Professional Responsibility or
the Inspector General.
As our Director, we respect the difficult job you have undertaken in these unprecedented times.
We further trust you will take our concerns into consideration as you determine the best path
forward to lead our organization to continued success.
Respectfully,
Special Agent
Washington Field Office
23-cv-342(FBI)-85

I better be on that list!

What, did Tony Hinchcliffe text a bunch of Puerto Ricans or something?

What is this, FBI? And I guess the obvious question is ...

Are you serious?? Instead of looking for real criminals you're looking for racist text messengers?

In related and highly timely news, the New York Post ran a deplorably predictable story yesterday headlined, “FBI seizes Polymarket CEO’s phone, electronics after betting platform predicts Trump win: source.” Yep. It’s true. They just can’t stop themselves.

PolyMarket has repeatedly and recently graced Coffee & Covid’s posts, since it seemed to be, and was proven to be, a far more accurate electoral predictor than the traditional polls. So of course it must be destroyed. Early yesterday morning, around 6am, the FBI raided the Manhattan apartment of Shane Copeland, 26, Polymarket’s CEO, and rudely confiscated all his electronics.

Sound familiar? It’s like a recurring nightmare, except we’ve had it so many times now it’s becoming more like the predictable punchline to a bad dad-joke. And then the FBI raided everybody!

The Post reported that one anonymous French trader earned a whopping $85 million betting on Trump, a vast wealth transfer from progressives to Trump supporters. PolyMarket itself charge no fees and does not bet or engage in any betting itself. Shane was not arrested, not informed of charges, and not even told what the raid was even about.

I’d be speculating if I opined about what the feds might be looking for. But we sort of already know, don’t we?

The Biden-Harris administration’s FBI has raided the home of Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan a week after the betting platform predicted the landslide victory for President Donald Trump.

Unlike corporate media polling, which predicted a “close race” between Trump and Kamala Harris, Polymarket used betting averages to predict the outcome of the election.

As a result, Polymarket accurately predicted Trump’s historic win over Harris.

Law enforcement recovered a cellphone and other electronic devices from the 26-year-old’s Manhattan apartment, the New York Post reported.

The FBI must be ended. It is a purely criminal organization now. Maybe it always was.

Former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, who was fired for lying under oath, spent $70,000 in taxpayer dollars on a conference table. The FBI also redacted the conference table’s steep price tag from documents that members of the Senate Judiciary Committee requested, in an apparent attempt to hide it from Congress.

In a letter sent to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Wednesday, Sen. Chuck Grassley revealed that the FBI had redacted the cost of the table from a document he and his fellow members of the committee requested to see. Grassley said many of the redactions within the documents made no sense, nor were they made to protect national security secrets.

“Congress, and the public, have a right to know how the Department spends taxpayer money,” Grassley wrote. “I am unaware of any legitimate basis on which the cost of a conference table should be redacted. Embarrassment is not a good enough reason. The manner in which some redactions have been used casts doubt on whether the remaining redactions are necessary and defensible.”