Read on Twitter
1) Sen. Lindsey Graham; Deep State Asset or Patriot Asset
November 23, 2019 by @davidjohnweave
Please RT – This is a rather long thread, I will add more later for your convenience
We will all know shortly if Sen. Lindsey Graham flipped to Patriot or not!
Please RT
November 23, 2019 by @davidjohnweave
Please RT – This is a rather long thread, I will add more later for your convenience
We will all know shortly if Sen. Lindsey Graham flipped to Patriot or not!
Please RT
2) Can We the People trust him to judiciously and ethically handle a Senate Judiciary Impeachment Trial of @realDonaldTrump or not?
It's been suggested that he was Flipped or Freed from Deep State control on April 30, 2018.
It's been suggested that he was Flipped or Freed from Deep State control on April 30, 2018.
3) For those of us that know Sen. Graham’s history as the side kick of NoName, this would be a major win for Trump and Patriots if true. Note for the record, Sen. Graham is the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and is briefed on ongoing DOJ & FBI Investigations.
4) On April 29, 2018, Sen. Graham gave this interview on Maria Bartiromo’s show Sunday Morning Futures:
At the 2:16 mark in the video, Sen. Graham states, “Comey said to Brett Bair, ...
At the 2:16 mark in the video, Sen. Graham states, “Comey said to Brett Bair, ...
5) ... “I didn’t know the Democratic Party and the Clinton Campaign paid Fusion GPS money to prepare the dossier. If you ask the FBI today (April 29, 2018) how much of the dossier is verified, almost none, and the verification comes from open media sources.
6) This dossier was prepared by a foreign agent paid by the Democratic Party and used to get a FISA warrant and the FBI; former FBI Director did not know that it was a political document paid by a political party. To me that is stunning...
7) ... Not only was the Clinton Email investigation a joke, the dossier was used inappropriately.”
Facts given to us in this statement:
•“Democratic Party and the Clinton Campaign paid Fusion GPS money to prepare the dossier [Steele].”
Facts given to us in this statement:
•“Democratic Party and the Clinton Campaign paid Fusion GPS money to prepare the dossier [Steele].”
8) •“How much of the dossier [Steele] is verified, almost none”
•“The [FBI] verification comes from open media sources”
•“This dossier [Steele] was prepared by a foreign agent [Steele] paid by the Democratic Party”
•“The dossier [Steele] was “paid by the Democratic Party”
•“The [FBI] verification comes from open media sources”
•“This dossier [Steele] was prepared by a foreign agent [Steele] paid by the Democratic Party”
•“The dossier [Steele] was “paid by the Democratic Party”
9) •“The dossier [Steele] was “used to get a FISA warrant”
•“Former FBI Director [Comey] did not know that it was a political document paid by a political party [Democratic Party].”
At the 4:09 mark in the video. Sen. Graham responds, ...
•“Former FBI Director [Comey] did not know that it was a political document paid by a political party [Democratic Party].”
At the 4:09 mark in the video. Sen. Graham responds, ...
10) “Does Brennan and Clapper sound like two people who would give Donald Trump a fair shake? Let me read a [sic] email exchange between the lead investigator [Peter Strzok] of the Clinton Email Investigation and a DOJ lawyer [Lisa Page], “I want to believe the path you [Page]..
11) ... threw out for consideration in Andy’s Office,” and who’s Andy [Andy McCabe], “that there’s no way he [Trump] gets elected, but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. ...
12) ... It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re forty. God, Trump is a loathsome human being. Trump is an ‘F’ idiot; is unable to provide a coherent answer.”
Facts given to us in this email:
Facts given to us in this email:
13)
•Brennan and Clapper are biased against Donald Trump
•“The lead investigator [Peter Strzok] of the Clinton Email Investigation and a DOJ lawyer [Lisa Page]” were conspiring against a candidate for POTUS prior to his election, “but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.”
•Brennan and Clapper are biased against Donald Trump
•“The lead investigator [Peter Strzok] of the Clinton Email Investigation and a DOJ lawyer [Lisa Page]” were conspiring against a candidate for POTUS prior to his election, “but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk.”
14) Graham continues, “These are the people in charge of Clinton Email Investigation; the dossier was prepared by a Foreign Agent [Steele]; paid for by the Democratic Party. This whole thing stinks. We should have a Special Counsel looking at DOJ corruption, looking at how ...
15) ... the dossier was given to the court. And, finally the number four person at the Department of Justice [Nellie Ohr], Mr. Bruce Ohr’s wife, worked at Fusion GPS, worked with Michael Steele who prepared the dossier and he was Steele’s handler...
16) ... If the shoe were on the other foot it would be front page news all over the world.”
Facts given to us in this statement:
•“These are the people [Strzok & Page] in charge of Clinton Email Investigation
•The dossier was prepared by a Foreign Agent [Steele];
...
Facts given to us in this statement:
•“These are the people [Strzok & Page] in charge of Clinton Email Investigation
•The dossier was prepared by a Foreign Agent [Steele];
...
17) ...
•“Paid [the dossier] for by the Democratic Party.”
Sen. Graham then calls for action: “a Special Counsel looking at”
•“DOJ corruption”
•“How the dossier was given to the court.”
He [Graham] also provides a connection between the married couple, Bruce & ...
•“Paid [the dossier] for by the Democratic Party.”
Sen. Graham then calls for action: “a Special Counsel looking at”
•“DOJ corruption”
•“How the dossier was given to the court.”
He [Graham] also provides a connection between the married couple, Bruce & ...
18) ... Nellie Ohr, and the dossier [Steele] and investigation [RussiaGate]. “And, finally the number four person at the Department of Justice [Nellie], Mr. Bruce Ohr’s wife, worked at Fusion GPS, worked with Michael Steele who prepared the dossier and he was Steele’s handler.”
19) At 9:57 am on April 30, 2018, Sen. Graham posted the following Tweet:
20) Graham doesn’t trust Comey. He thinks Comey “was part of an effort at the FBI to give Clinton a pass” regarding her home brew email server which broke many Federal Rules and Regulations regarding the handling of Classified Materials. And, Sen. Graham states ‘the head ...
21) ... investigator [Strzok] of the FBI hated Trump [and] liked Clinton.” In other words, the investigator was biased to help Clinton and biased to harm Trump.
Prior to this interview and tweet, Sen. Graham was for all intents and purposes a RINO, Republican in Name Only.
Prior to this interview and tweet, Sen. Graham was for all intents and purposes a RINO, Republican in Name Only.
22) His track record tends to be warmongering, heavy spending; constant partnering with the Democrats in a ‘bipartisan’ spirit; interestingly one NEVER sees a Democrat cross the isle to support a 100% Republican piece of legislation. He was ‘besties’ with Sen. NoName ...
23) ... over the last 17 years. Patriots tend to hate him for this. It’s difficult to trust him today. But, I endeavor to show you why you should for Trump’s sake.
24) Whether you believe the Q movement is fake or not, I will use information provided by the person or persons calling himself/themselves ‘Q’ for historical purposes. If the future plays out as Q has foretold, then this article will become a PROOF that the Q movement is real.
25) On 10:41 am April 30, 2018, 44 minutes after Sen. Graham’s tweet at 9:57 am, Q posted the following:
26) “No name out” refers to Sen. McCain’s resignation. “We love good singers” hints that Sen. Graham has spoken to the Federal Investigators and decided to go “States’ Evidence”. Q Anon is stating that Sen. Graham has been flipped or freed from control of the Deep State.
27) The Deep State is said to use blackmail, think Jeffrey Epstein audio and video tapes, similar to the Italian Mafia of US infamy. I am NOT claiming Sen. Graham was a pedophile or that he ever associated with Epstein, I am providing an example of one way to blackmail a Senator.
28) I have seen ZERO information suggesting Sen. Graham ever met with or associated with Epstein and his associates. Blackmail could me anything Sen. Graham didn’t want the Public or his Family and Friends to know.
29) The next major action by Sen. Graham occurred on September 5, 2018 during the Brett Kavanaugh’s Senate Hearing for appointment to the US Supreme Court. Q Anon posted the following at 5:33 pm the same day, providing a url to the 5 minute video of the interaction.
30) YouTube censored this video and has deleted it, but here is a link to the video on C-Span: https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4747307/user-clip-sen-graham-asks-military-tribunals. Since, YouTube has deleted the original url, and we must use C-Span the [26:00] minute time stamp is irrelevant.
31) Sen. Graham asks then Judge Kavanaugh the following at the 1:52 min mark, “so, when somebody says post 911, ‘that we’ve been at war, and it’s called the War on Terrorism, do you generally agree with that concept?”
Judge Kavanaugh, “I do Senator because Congress passed the ...
Judge Kavanaugh, “I do Senator because Congress passed the ...
32) ... authorization for use of military force which is still in effect. And that was passed on September 14, 2001 three days later.”
33) Sen. Graham, “Is there a body of law called the Law of Armed Conflict?”
Judge Kavanaugh, “There is such a body Senator.”
Sen. Graham, “Is there a body of law that’s called Basic Criminal Law?”
Judge Kavanaugh, “Yes, Senator.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “There is such a body Senator.”
Sen. Graham, “Is there a body of law that’s called Basic Criminal Law?”
Judge Kavanaugh, “Yes, Senator.”
34) Sen. Graham, “Are there differences between those two bodies of law?”
Judge Kavanaugh, “Yes, Senator.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “Yes, Senator.”
35) Sen. Graham, “From an American Citizen’s point of view do your Constitution Rights follow you. If you’re in Paris does the Fourth Amendment protect you as an American from your own government?”
Judge Kavanaugh, “From your own government, yes.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “From your own government, yes.”
36) Sen. Graham, “So, if you’re in Afghanistan do your Constitutional Rights Protect you against your own government?”
Judge Kavanaugh, “If you’re an American in Afghanistan you have constitutional rights as against the US Government…”
Sen. Graham, “Is there a long standing…?”
Judge Kavanaugh, “If you’re an American in Afghanistan you have constitutional rights as against the US Government…”
Sen. Graham, “Is there a long standing…?”
37) Judge Kavanaugh, “That’s long settled law.”
Sen. Graham, “Isn’t there also a long settled law, that, it goes back to the Eisentragor case, I can’t remember the name of it.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “Johnson versus Eisentragor.”
Sen. Graham, “Isn’t there also a long settled law, that, it goes back to the Eisentragor case, I can’t remember the name of it.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “Johnson versus Eisentragor.”
38) Sen. Graham, “Right. That American Citizens who collaborate with the enemy have considered enemy combatants?
Judge Kavanaugh, “They can be.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “They can be.”
39) Sen. Graham, “They can be.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “They can be... They’re often; they’re sometimes criminally prosecuted sometimes treated in the military system.”
Sen. Graham, “Well, let’s talk about “can be’. I think the…
Judge Kavanaugh, “Under Supreme Court president.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “They can be... They’re often; they’re sometimes criminally prosecuted sometimes treated in the military system.”
Sen. Graham, “Well, let’s talk about “can be’. I think the…
Judge Kavanaugh, “Under Supreme Court president.”
40) Sen. Graham, “Right. There’s a Supreme Court Decision that said that American citizens who collaborated with Nazi saboteurs were tried by the Military. Is that correct?’
Judge Kavanaugh, “That is correct.’
Judge Kavanaugh, “That is correct.’
41) Sen. Graham, “I think a couple of them were executed.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “Yeah.”
Sen. Graham, “So if anybody doubts there’s a long standing history in this country that your Constitutional Rights follow you wherever you go...
Judge Kavanaugh, “Yeah.”
Sen. Graham, “So if anybody doubts there’s a long standing history in this country that your Constitutional Rights follow you wherever you go...
42) ... But, you don’t have a Constitutional Right to turn on your own government collaborate with the enemy of the Nation. You will be treated differently.
43) What’s the name of the case, if you can recall, that reaffirmed the concept that you can hold one of our own as an enemy combatant if they were engaged in terrorist activities in Afghanistan? Are you familiar with that case?
Judge Kavanaugh, “Yeah. Hambi.”
Judge Kavanaugh, “Yeah. Hambi.”
44) Sen. Graham, “So, the bottom line is on every American citizen to know you have Constitutional Rights but you do not have a Constitutional Right to collaborate with the enemy. There’s a body of law well developed long before 911 that understood the difference between ...
45) ... basic criminal law and the law of armed conflict. Do you understand those differences?
What were the questions that Q Anon thought ‘interesting’? Most definitely! Sen. Graham starts off asking if Judge Kavenaugh knows that the US has been in a declared War. He wants ...
What were the questions that Q Anon thought ‘interesting’? Most definitely! Sen. Graham starts off asking if Judge Kavenaugh knows that the US has been in a declared War. He wants ...
46) ... to know if Judge Kavenaugh knows that Congress passed an authorization for use of military force on September 14, 2001 which is still in effect. This means we are at war, and that the Law of Armed Conflict applies to enemies of the US. Sen. Graham asks questions ...
47) regarding the bodies of law and their differences. He asks if US Citizens can be designated ‘enemy combatants’ and if they could be tried under the Law of Armed Conflict. He covers that the death penalty has applied to ‘enemy combatants’. He also focused on US Citizens ...
48) ... Constitutional Rights.
Are these type questions ‘normal’ during Senate Confirmation Hearings for Appointment to the US Supreme Court? I think not. It’s a difficult subject to research. I was unable to find anything on the Internet, but that doesn’t mean that ...
Are these type questions ‘normal’ during Senate Confirmation Hearings for Appointment to the US Supreme Court? I think not. It’s a difficult subject to research. I was unable to find anything on the Internet, but that doesn’t mean that ...
49) ... information is not located somewhere. I will leave this open at this time until someone enlightens me either way, or I come across evidence before that time.
Why would Sen. Graham want to discuss the difference between Military Law v. Criminal Law in regards ...
Why would Sen. Graham want to discuss the difference between Military Law v. Criminal Law in regards ...
50) ... to ‘enemy combatants’? Does Sen. Graham expect Military Tribunals to arise in the near future when a newly appointed Justice Kavanaugh will be serving in the Supreme Court of the US?
51) Why does he tell us to ‘think EO [Executive Order]’? As @POTUS, @realDonaldTrump, has the authority as the Commander in Chief of the Military and the Nation’s TOP Prosecutor to issue an Executive Order demanding certain ‘enemy combatants’ be tried by the Military the Law ...
52) ... of Armed Conflict, rather than in the US Criminal Courts; Basic Criminal Law.
What about telling us if we ‘think HRC [Hillary Rodham Clinton] [is] panic[ing]? Hillary Clinton may/might panic if she committed crimes whereby she could be named an ‘enemy combatant’ and ...
What about telling us if we ‘think HRC [Hillary Rodham Clinton] [is] panic[ing]? Hillary Clinton may/might panic if she committed crimes whereby she could be named an ‘enemy combatant’ and ...
53) ... tried by the Military. It’s highly possible with the developing crimes conducted by Hillary, the DNC [Democratic National Convention], and the Clinton Foundation regarding Ukraine and possibly many other nations e.g. Iran. Currently, there is evidence connecting HRC to...
54) ... Ukraine through the DNC and the Clinton Foundation. Who knows what other evidence has surfaced in the current and past investigations?
55) IS this line of questioning just a ‘coincidence’ or planned? This is definitely planned. Like Trump asking to be tried by the Senate if the House impeaches him. There is a well thought out plan to reclaim control of the United States from ‘enemy combatants’ who have been ...
56) ... and currently are in the process of removing President Trump from Office before he exposes all their current and past crimes to the Global Public. If you think otherwise, you will be surprised, possibly shocked, as the future unfolds.
...
...
57) This Q Anon, whether he is fake or not, leads one to ask some pretty interesting questions with definitive answers based on current US Basic Criminal Law and the Law of Armed Conflict. Finding the answers, any adult should have a well-informed understanding of the subject.
58) I must highlight some points made in the Supreme Court Decision Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U. S. 507 (2004).
1. Public Law 107-40 107th Congress Joint Resolution signed September 18, 2001:
Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) - Authorizes the President to use all ...
1. Public Law 107-40 107th Congress Joint Resolution signed September 18, 2001:
Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) - Authorizes the President to use all ...
59) ... necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any ...
60) ... future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations, or persons.
https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ40/PLAW-107publ40.pdf
1. Hamdi, an American citizen, was designated an “enemy combatant” for taking up arms with the Taliban. He was captured in Afghanistan.
https://www.congress.gov/107/plaws/publ40/PLAW-107publ40.pdf
1. Hamdi, an American citizen, was designated an “enemy combatant” for taking up arms with the Taliban. He was captured in Afghanistan.
61)
2. Hamdi’s father filed a habeas petition under 28 U. S. C. §2241, alleging that the US held his son in violation of the 5th and 14th Amendments. Hamdi’s father claimed that Hamdi went to Afghanistan to do “relief work” did not receive military training.
2. Hamdi’s father filed a habeas petition under 28 U. S. C. §2241, alleging that the US held his son in violation of the 5th and 14th Amendments. Hamdi’s father claimed that Hamdi went to Afghanistan to do “relief work” did not receive military training.
62)
3. The Government filed a declaration from Michael Mobbs (Mobbs Declaration). The Declaration alleged various details regarding Hamdi’s trip to Afghanistan, his affiliation with a Taliban unit , and his subsequent surrender of an assault rifle.
3. The Government filed a declaration from Michael Mobbs (Mobbs Declaration). The Declaration alleged various details regarding Hamdi’s trip to Afghanistan, his affiliation with a Taliban unit , and his subsequent surrender of an assault rifle.
63)
4. The District Court found that the Mobbs Declaration, standing alone, did not support Hamdi’s detention and ordered the Government to turn over numerous materials for in camera review.
4. The District Court found that the Mobbs Declaration, standing alone, did not support Hamdi’s detention and ordered the Government to turn over numerous materials for in camera review.
64)
5. The Fourth Circuit reversed, stressing that, because it was undisputed that Hamdi was captured in an active combat zone, no factual inquiry or evidentiary hearing allowing Hamdi to be heard or to rebut the Government’s assertions was necessary or proper.
5. The Fourth Circuit reversed, stressing that, because it was undisputed that Hamdi was captured in an active combat zone, no factual inquiry or evidentiary hearing allowing Hamdi to be heard or to rebut the Government’s assertions was necessary or proper.
65)
6. They concluded that the facts in the Mobbs Declaration provided a sufficient basis upon which to conclude that the President had constitutionally detained Hamdi, the court ordered the habeas petition dismissed.
6. They concluded that the facts in the Mobbs Declaration provided a sufficient basis upon which to conclude that the President had constitutionally detained Hamdi, the court ordered the habeas petition dismissed.
66)
7. The appeals court held that, assuming that express congressional authorization of the detention was required by 18 U. S. C. §4001(a)—which provides that “[n]o citizen shall be imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except pursuant to an Act of Congress”...
7. The appeals court held that, assuming that express congressional authorization of the detention was required by 18 U. S. C. §4001(a)—which provides that “[n]o citizen shall be imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except pursuant to an Act of Congress”...
67) ... The AUMF’s “necessary and appropriate force” (see number 1 above) language provided the authorization for Hamdi’s detention.
68)
8. It also concluded that Hamdi is entitled only to a limited judicial inquiry into his detention’s legality under the war powers of the political branches, and not to a searching review of the factual determinations underlying his seizure.
8. It also concluded that Hamdi is entitled only to a limited judicial inquiry into his detention’s legality under the war powers of the political branches, and not to a searching review of the factual determinations underlying his seizure.
69) Do you understand the MAGNITUDE of Sen. Graham’s LAST question?
He asked Justice Kavanaugh to confirm his statement that ‘you don’t have a Constitutional Right to turn on your own government collaborate with the enemy of the Nation.’
He asked Justice Kavanaugh to confirm his statement that ‘you don’t have a Constitutional Right to turn on your own government collaborate with the enemy of the Nation.’
70) Anyone who is declared an ‘enemy combatant’ is thereby open to capture, indefinite detention, and Military Tribunal under the Supreme Court Decision Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U. S. 507 (2004).
71) Here are the major points of Supreme Court Decision Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950) mentioned in the question line. Why is this particular case so important to Sen. Graham?
72) Sen. Graham wants to know if Judge Kavanaugh, at that time, knew the distinct differences between the two since the previous administration had allowed ‘enemy combatants’ to be tried in Civilian Courts.
73) Sen. Graham also wants the Senate and People to know the ‘Well Establish Law’ president that US Citizens can and have been named ‘enemy combatants’ and non-citizens have as well.
74) Here are the main findings of the case and the url to the Supreme Court document:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/339/763/
1. A nonresident enemy alien has no access to our courts in wartime.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/339/763/
1. A nonresident enemy alien has no access to our courts in wartime.
75)
2. These nonresident enemy aliens, captured and imprisoned abroad, have no right to a writ of habeas corpus in a court of the United States.
2. These nonresident enemy aliens, captured and imprisoned abroad, have no right to a writ of habeas corpus in a court of the United States.
76)
3. The Constitution does not confer a right of personal security or an immunity from military trial and punishment upon an alien enemy engaged in the hostile service of a government at war with the United States.
3. The Constitution does not confer a right of personal security or an immunity from military trial and punishment upon an alien enemy engaged in the hostile service of a government at war with the United States.
77)
4. The petition in this case alleges no fact showing lack of jurisdiction in the military authorities to accuse, try, and condemn these prisoners, or that they acted in excess of their lawful powers.
4. The petition in this case alleges no fact showing lack of jurisdiction in the military authorities to accuse, try, and condemn these prisoners, or that they acted in excess of their lawful powers.
78) 5. Since there is no basis in this case for invoking federal judicial power, it is not necessary to decide where, if the case were otherwise, the petition should be filed.
79) I believe that Sen. Graham and Justice Kavanaugh agree that the Supreme Court Decision Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950) applies to ALL ‘enemy combatants’ regardless of if they are ‘enemy aliens’ or US Citizens designated as such.
THIS IS HUGE!
THIS IS HUGE!
80) If President Trump issues an Executive Order naming anyone ‘enemy combatants’ since we are currently is a declared State of War. This would allow for Military Tribunals in lieu of US Criminal Trials.
81) It would also allow these people, if abroad, to be taken into custody and NOT returned to the US for trial. And, finally, it allows for the Death Penalty to be applied.
82) In an interesting side note, on July 25, 2019 Attorney General William P. Barr directed the Federal Bureau of Prisons to adopt an addendum to the Federal Execution Protocol and schedule the executions of five death-row inmates convicted of murdering children...
83) ...To us that means Federal Death Penalty is now in effect. It also tells us that murdering children is a Death Penalty crime. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/federal-government-resume-capital-punishment-after-nearly-two-decade-lapse
84) What also occurred on the 25th of July, 2019? The phone call occurred between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky which is currently being used to impeach the President.
85) It appears the House will impeach no matter what and that the Senate will take up the trial. Donald Trump has recently asked for a Senate Trial: “Frankly, I want a trial,” Trump said in an interview on Fox and Friends Friday, November 22, 2019.
