This is so outrageous that Supreme Court justices are permitting this hoax to go on. The position of a Supreme Court justice is not a “franchise” where the human is interchangeable with another human.
After you see the evidence that paulmuaddib61 has compiled, we must demand proof of life of Ruth and if a “Ruth” is presented to us, we must insist that she be examined medically to determine if she is the actual Ruth Ginsberg (DNA, blood tests, whatever) and whether she is mentally fit to perform her duties.
Aren’t you getting tired of this BS? If we find that the justices are in on this hoax, we will hold them all responsible. They will then need to be tried for treason. We the People put them on notice. Keep an eye out for any and all suspicious activities at the Supreme Court.
The post below came to us as an email attachment without source references. However, the AIM Conclave has vetted it and recommended it for posting as further education about golden shares. The post met the AIM “Good Housekeeping” Seal of Approval.
In 2011, Rolls-Royce, the UK aerospace and defence group and the second-largest engine manufacturer globally, was granted approval from the City of London to appoint a foreign chairman or chief executive for the first time in the group’s 100-year history. Following this approval, the company will now ask investors to sanction a change to its articles of association concerning the ‘unforeseen resignation’ of the chief executive or chairman.
Whereas one of the stipulations of the concession remains that at least one of the top two positions within the company must be held by a British national, the development nonetheless represents a significant change in the regulations that govern UK companies, as it sees the relaxation of the so called ‘golden share’ agreement that has protected businesses such as Rolls-Royce from foreign takeovers.
Over the years the UK government has been extremely reluctant to allow foreign nationals to run home-grown prize assets, and has been particularly keen to retain home-ownership in the case of businesses which are closely linked to the defence and security industries, such as Rolls-Royce.
In the 1980s and early 1990s, the government purposefully took shareholdings in certain UK businesses. Golden shares were designed to protect newly privatised companies against a takeover. The rationale behind this was to protect the company, as a temporary measure, from an overseas acquisition, principally on the grounds of national security. This was a means of helping management to adjust to the circumstances of its new private sector ownership.
Typically, the golden share grants the Secretary of State (as the holder of the share) a 15 percent shareholding in the company, and consequently the ability to block any potential takeover of the business.
Today, Rolls-Royce – privatised in 1987 – is a key UK player in the construction of the power plants, and as such one which is key to the government’s national defence programme, most notably in providing vital components in operations, which ranged from Typhoon fighters to nuclear submarines.
Furthermore, it continues to be a very successful British business. In 2012 it contributed approximately £7.8bn of the UK’s total GDP. It is still one of the country’s biggest employers, with a staff base of 22,000 people in the UK, and there is almost the same figure employed in its overseas operations. In terms of its international operations, some 85 percent of its sales are in the export market.
In the 1980s and early 1990s, the government purposefully took shareholdings in certain UK businesses. Golden shares were designed to protect newly privatised companies against a takeover
In terms of the British defence strategy, some 400,000 members of the armed forces rely on Rolls-Royce’s technology to keep them airborne and operational. Furthermore, Rolls-Royce’s order book currently stands at some £62bn – nearly four times the value of the Royal Bank of Scotland. It is also notable that Rolls-Royce has recently signed an agreement with the French Government, which will mean that it is now scheduled to build key parts for the next generation of Anglo-French nuclear power stations over the next 10 years.
Given these stats, the UK government is still keen to hold on to its star performer. In early 2011, the Prime Minister David Cameron descended on its Derby-based aviation plant, holding an impromptu Cabinet meeting. This is a clear indicator of how important Rolls-Royce is to the government.
In late 2012, the Department for Business announced the government had agreed that the terms of the golden share could be amended in the event of special circumstances, provided that the shareholders of Rolls-Royce agreed to them.
A highly political backdrop
In the early 1990s, Britain’s leading industrial companies were ICI and GEC. Rolls-Royce completed this triumvirate. All three were governed by golden share agreements. However, ICI and GEC have both gone under. Rolls-Royce, meanwhile, has gone on to prove itself as one of the last success stories of British industry. Since 2002, approximately one-fifth of listed companies have de-listed from the London Stock Exchange, meaning that the UK today has virtually no home-grown quoted company in the fields of car construction, chemical or building materials. These formerly British-owned businesses are now controlled by overseas investors.
More recently, there have been other developments. In 2012, the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD), which holds golden shares in a number of UK defence companies, agreed to modify the golden share rule on one of its businesses – QinetiQ – a business that provides technical and engineering services to the MOD, meaning that the government forfeited its right to veto transactions. Whereas the MOD retained voting rights, it lost its power to block an investor from building up a stake in the company, which could result in a future takeover.
The EU’s standpoint
However, recent EU Legislation has challenged the legality of the golden share, which could open the floodgates for large corporates to appoint outside shareholders, and ultimately, become independent of government control.
The European Commission (EC) has a long history of challenging golden shares, referring them to the European Court of Justice. In recent years the EC has instigated proceedings against Italy, Portugal, France, Belgium, Spain, the UK and Germany in relation to their golden shares. In 2010 Portugal exercised its golden share rights in order to attempt to block the sale of Portugal Telecom’s stake in Vivo – a Brazil-based telecommunications company – to Telefonica in Spain. In a further case against Portugal that year, the ECJ confirmed its earlier rulings on golden shares.
Also, the German Government has held a golden share since 1960, in a law that privatised Volkswagen. The EC successfully challenged the law in 2007, which forced the German government to make limited amendments to the transaction. However, as a precedent, in 2003, the European Court of Justice drew on the EU principle of the free movement of capital ruled against the Spanish government for holding golden shares in a number of privatised companies, including Repsol and Telefonica.
Golden share exemption
In the UK, the government previously held a golden share in BAA Systems, the airport operator which controlled Heathrow and Gatwick. BAE’s strategy was to merge its operations with EADS, the France-based owner of Airbus, and although BAE protested that the defence part of the business would remain in London as opposed to Paris, the UK government exercised its right to enforce the golden share rule.
However, in 2000 the EU ruled that the golden share rule contravened current EU Legislation, and subsequently revoked the share. From a purely financial perspective, Rolls-Royce’s full-year results for 2012 saw an increase rise of eight percent to £12.2bn, this – in addition to pre-tax profits by nearly one quarter on the previous year, to £1.4bn. This is a real success story, and one which the government understandably wants to boast about.
Financials aside, today Rolls-Royce is now a global business and one that is aiming to access a global pool of talent as the business continues to expand. According to a recently-issued press release, the company says, “As such, the company has set its sights on establishing a security committee of UK nationals to decide on sensitive technology and security matters should a foreigner be appointed CEO.”
Another factor in the relaxation of the golden share rule is that Rolls-Royce is struggling to compete in the international market when it comes to CEO wages. For instance, the current CEO earns just over £800,000 a year. Whereas this sum seems huge in comparison to the common man, to put it into perspective, W James McNerney, the CEO of Boeing, was paid in the region of $2m last year.
Furthermore, Rolls-Royce estimates that the demand for military engines over the next 20 years could total around $155bn, and in addition to this, its services and support equipment could tally as much as $260bn.
In today’s market, civil aviation looks set to reach new highs. According to data from the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), some 2.9 billion people used air transport in 2012. The highest growth was seen in the Middle East and the ICAO expects the industry will see six billion people flying each year by 2030.
Substantial growth is also expected in the company’s marine business, where it makes systems for offshore oil and gas, merchant and naval vessels. Its power-generation business – which designs and manufacturers turbines for nuclear – oil and gas power plants, is also expected to boom as energy becomes a more valuable commodity.
In view of the recent regulatory challenges by the EU – especially in connection with the BAA ruling – the UK Government has reluctantly agreed to relax the golden share rule. As a twist of irony, Rolls-Royce recently appointed the Oxford-educated Ian Davis – formerly Chairman of McKinsey – and a British national, as Chairman.
In order to compete in the global market place, Rolls-Royce needs to exploit the opportunities that are presented, not just in terms of the booming aviation sector, but also national defence. However, it could be argued that the UK Government is holding it back. Whereas the Government is keen to hold on to one of its last-remaining home-grown success stories, it also appreciates that in order for it to compete in the global market place it needs to be content in a global market, and against companies that are not tied to a golden share agreement.
The legal angle
Historically, golden shares were purchased by the UK Government for a nominal value, at as little as £1.
This agreement means that the UK Government continues to retain a stake in the company, essentially holding the right of veto in the event of a potential takeover from an overseas acquirer.
The golden share effectively means that the UK Government can block any deal that would lead to companies operating in the UK’s defence sector becoming owned by overseas owners.
No other investor is permitted to acquire more than a 15 percent stake in the company.
Sambir or Sambei denies having spoken to the press, yet hundreds of news outlets carried hers and FBI Mueller quotes, with plenty of nice juicy detail, including naming the four he is alleged to have trained. Proven to be totally FAKE NEWS.
“The Court document makes reference to a Guardian Unlimited quote of Sambir: “It is no secret that we are looking at charges of conspiracy to murder…”
Magically, those are almost the identical words Sambir used in the Chicago Tribune coverage (also cited below):
Indeed, these are just two of hundreds of articles that that appeared on Sep. 29, 2001 with heavy quotes from Arvinda/Arvinder Sambir/Sambei as well as FBI Robert Mueller. They even name all the hijackers that Raissi allegedly trained. What amazing investigative detail (!), and discovered so quickly too. Is this the same FBI that closed the Law Vegas investigation after two years without even identifying a motive?
Here are just a few more of the hundreds of quotes of Sambir/Sambei (that she told the Feb. 14, 2008 Appeals Court that she never made):
Bessemer is a Clinton Foundation donor and partner. Bessemer participated in the $1 billion Hillary Clinton’s give away of American technologies to the Russians through Skolkovo technology campus with Cisco, IBM, Microsoft, Raytheon and Google. After this give away, the Russians paid Bill Clinton $500,000 for a single speech to Moscow’s Renaissance Capital. Millennium gave a “BUY” recommendation to the Uranium One sale immediately.
Bessemer also founded Verisign (encryption keys) in 1998 that is controlled by Hillary and Bill Clinton. Verisign’s co-founder D. James Bidzos who helped organize the weaponization of the Internet at John Podesta’s and James P. Chandler’s FBI encryption key conference on Jun. 07, 1993.
In addition, Virtru’s end user license agreement is a mine field of exceptions that give them license to read your content any time they want . . . at the end of this long, dense Restrictions paragraph. We will highlight the double-speak mines written by their scum bag lawyers meant to lull users into a false sense of security and privacy:
2.2 Restrictions. Customer shall not, without the prior written consent of Virtru:
(a) copy all or any portion of the Materials or Virtru Services;
(b) decompile, disassemble, scrape or otherwise reverse engineer the Materials, Virtru Services or any portion thereof, or determine or attempt to determine any source code, algorithms, methods or techniques embodied in the Materials or used in the Virtru Services or any portion thereof;
(c) modify, translate or create any Derivative Works based upon the Materials or Virtru Services;
(d) distribute, disclose, market, rent, lease, assign, sublicense, pledge or otherwise transfer the Materials, in whole or in part, to any third party or export the Materials outside the United States;
(e) engage in any activity that interferes with or disrupts the Virtru Services (or the servers and networks that are connected to the Virtru Services);
(f) remove or alter any copyright, trademark, trade name or other proprietary notices, legends, symbols or labels appearing on or in copies of the Materials or the Virtru Services;
(g) perform, or release the results of, benchmark tests or other comparisons of the Materials or Virtru Services with other programs or services;
(h) transfer the Materials to any computer other than a computer owned by Customer and used by Customer in Customer’s operations;
(i) permit the Materials or Virtru Services to be used for processing the data of any third party; [OPEN ENDED, SUBJECTIVE, SELF-SERVING TERM]
(j) incorporate the Materials, Virtru Services or any portion thereof into any other program, product or service, or use the Materials or Virtru Services to provide similar services or functionality to third parties; [OPEN ENDED, SUBJECTIVE, SELF-SERVING TERM]
(k) provide any third party with access to the Virtru Services other than as expressly permitted herein; [OPEN ENDED, SUBJECTIVE, SELF-SERVING TERM]
(l) trade or resell the Materials or Virtru Services for any purpose;
(m) use the Materials or Virtru Services for any unlawful or tortious purpose; [OPEN ENDED, SUBJECTIVE, SELF-SERVING TERM]
(n) use the Virtru Services to transmit Customer Content that is illegal or that infringes or misappropriates any third party’s privacy or intellectual property rights; [OPEN ENDED, SUBJECTIVE, SELF-SERVING TERM]
(o) use the Virtru Services to transmit any viruses, worms, time bombs, Trojan horses or any other harmful or malicious code; [OPEN ENDED, SUBJECTIVE, SELF-SERVING TERM]
(p) use the Materials or Virtru Services for any purpose where an accurate verification of identity has critical or life-threatening consequences; or [OPEN ENDED, SUBJECTIVE, SELF-SERVING TERM]
In short, Virtru will do whatever the hell they want (please excuse the French) to with your “encrypted” data simply by having their corrupt Deep State lawyers (like the ones who have attacked President Donald Trump in the Russia HOAX) fabricating a charge against you.
Note: PROTON MAIL, another supposed encrypted email service has a similar corrupt pedigree and is run out of ZURICH, SWITZERLAND.
Here’s a great alternative to these ‘big brother’ email accounts.
A first revelation from our review is that as early at Sep. 16, 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was using Lanny J. Davis as a secret back channel to India and Pakistan. Davis is Michael Cohen’s current lawyer. The task was so secret that the DOS CLASSIFIED it before this Judicial Watch release. Tellingly, just 14 days later on Sep. 30, 2010 Hillary secretly paid $250,000 and hired Facebook’s Russian manager Dmitri Shevelenko for a second tranche to create a “template for election winning.” Shevelenko’s own Linked In page says he moved to India to write the program. Apparently, Lanny J. Davis and the Department of State itself was being used to rig American elections by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. This Facebook contract occurred just two months after the Leader v. Facebook trial which was going to appeal at the time. Such tampering with witnesses in an active litigation is obstruction of justice by Hillary Clinton herself, not even counting treasonous election meddling.
Indra Nooyi has a globalist NWO resume: Pepsi, Boston Consulting Group, Booz Allen Hamilton, Motorola, ABB, Yale
NEW JUDICIAL WATCH Mar. 22, 2019 FOIA TRANCHE: Michael Cohen’s attorney Lanny J. Davis was a CLASSIFIED Hillary Clinton secret back channel to India, Pakistan and the Middle East using Pepsi’s Indian-American CEO Indra Nooyi as early as Sep. 16, 2010.
State Department CLASSIFIED a Hillary Email to LANNY J. DAVIS, Michael Cohen’s attorney!
LANNY J. DAVIS was a HILLARY CHANNEL TO INDIA AND PAKISTAN via Pepsi CEO Indra Nooyi
U.S. State Department FOIA PART I. (Feb. 01, 2019). Judicial Watch v. U.S. Departmentof State, Case No. F-2016-07895, Doc. No. C06162980, Date: 09/26/2018, emails Oct 18 00687-1, pp. 293-297. Judicial Watch.
Proof Peter Strzok mislead (lied) to Congress about when Hillary Clinton set up her private email server.
Peter Strzok big fat FBI lie about the reason for the set up of the private email server. The FBI knew years before they released tranches of Hillary’s emails starting in Sep. 2016. Tellingly, he volunteered this explanation even though he wasn’t asked about WHEN.
Peter Strzok. (Jun. 27, 2018). Peter Strzok TRANSCRIPTION of Interview with Peter Strzok released by Rep. Doug Collins (GA 9th), Committee on the Judiciary, pgs. 312. U.S. House of Representatives.
Every single one of Robert Mueller’s important investigations has ended in failure and disaster. Robert Mueller specializes in thwarting justice while giving the appearance of legitimacy.
With a large swathe of the country finally realizing what millions of Americans have already known for years, Robert Mueller has “botched” yet another important investigation. Like allowing Jeffrey Epstein to openly operate as a pedophile pimp in exchange for information; the “frame job” in the Anthrax investigation that was used to assert greater authoritarianism in America; or managing to see to it that they left the curious and unsolved collapse of a whole building out of the 9/11 Commission report; Mueller has been faking investigations his entire career to cover for high level corruption.
Soros is the top of the pyramid for a giant RICO conspiracy.
A black market uranium smuggler was caught with uranium on its way from Novosibirsk (Rosatom’s chemical concentration plant) to Iran. The Russians refused to help the Georgian authorities, who had to let the smuggler walk after a short time in jail. Georgia, then asked for the US to help in the investigation where they sent a sample of the HEU, enriched just under weapons grade. Mueller, himself, rather than admit where the uranium came from RETURNED THE EVIDENCE HIMSELF TO RUSSIA, hand delivering the HEU sample on a TARMAC in Russia. Here is the cable that proves it:
In the Middle of the Russian “Reset”, Mueller was already protecting the Uranium One.
Mueller has been investigated his own crime and pinned it on Manafort, while purportedly giving the Podestas immunity. They worked for Russia under the guise of the European Center for a Modern Ukraine to infiltrate the Ukrainian government.
Paul Brennan, who approved all the “Saudi Hijackers” visas at Jeddah Station also contributed to an alarming number of coincidences that deserve attention.
Robert Mueller is a criminal. His primary job is to cover for crimes being committed by the CIA and he accomplishes this by running his investigations as limited hangouts, where only the minimum amount of justice is applied in order to protect those who are paid into the protection racket. The Clinton Foundation is a payment receiving arm of a deep state sponsored protection racket that specializes in forensic interruption, using the media to work in tandem with law enforcement agencies and the court system through “fusion” projects that allow a complete infiltration of everyday life and normal organizations by our intelligence agency. Worse, is that these services are for sale to anyone with enough money, regardless of the laws that apply to you or me.
The FBI has a history of participating with media outlets to stage news narratives to sway the populace in favor of policies that are not in their best interests. A lot of those tricks the movies and TV shows feature are, in reality, unreliable.
One thing the FBI protects above all others, is the illusion that they are an authority on solving crimes, even though their actions prove that they are primarily concerned with covering them up. I posit that is because the CIA has riddled the FBI leadership with corrupt infiltrators who are not there to serve the country, but to protect clandestine activities. They aren’t “botching” investigations, they are using it as a cover for corruption.
James Comey operates under the exact same MO. He investigated Marc Rich, gave the appearance of justice, then let him go with a last minute pardon from his friends, the Clintons.
One early limited hangout of Robert Mueller’s was creatively letting his fellow Marines in the Hell’s Angels off the hook by failing to prosecute dozens of known criminals and using no evidence except witness testimony that was paid for. Even the 5 that were convicted were let go on appeal.
In a remarkable coincidence, Mueller was also made head of the FBI one week before the 9/11 attack, where we see he botches another investigation in favor of his friends in the Muslim Brotherhood, and where he botched the Anthrax attack that was used to pass legislation to spy on the American people, when even 9/11 proved not enough to sway the public. Later, these same friends would be involved in the Gulftainer deal that installed a great deal of foreign power next to important military assets in Florida.
While Mueller runs cover for the Russians, the same way Comey and the Clintons ran cover for Marc Rich, who was selling uranium to the Russians, Mueller and his law firm are putting in place a troubling national security threat where Islamic terrorism was allowed to take hold at Pt. Canaveral.
Mueller was meeting Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, then client of Paul Manafort. The meeting took place in Kyiv. The pair met about two months after the Boston Marathon bombing.
“I would like to focus on the most important issue for us – the issue of combating terrorism,” Mueller said, according to a Ukrainian Embassy’s Facebook post. “I would like to say thank you for the assistance provided to us after the Boston Marathon.”
In fact, there were a number of concerning aspects about the Boston Marathon Bombing and the coverage, at the time. Cover up after cover up; no one has explained how the news made this mistake, yet:
The Obama appointee, Aimen Mir, who also approved Uranium One with no paperwork in record time, also approved the questionable Gulftainer deal to buy Port Canaveral’s cargo container terminal to the Middle eastern company, which partners with the Russian state-owned firm ROSTEC, overseen Putin. So, not only are these traitors in government selling out to Russia, they are also selling out to organizations with known terrorist ties.
Robert Mueller wants terrorism. Robert Mueller wants nuclear terrorism. Robert Mueller is helping the media stage these events so that the Deep State can gain consent from the populace for asserting authoritarianism and subverting the Constitution.
Gulftainer is run by the brother of Saddam Hussein’s nuclear weapons chief. Let that sink in. He is friends with Obama, Clinton and Muelelr. ROSTEC owns the company that exports the Russian missile-launch container known as Club K. Obama and Clinton’s collusion with Russia undermined national security.
We put together this media kit for your independent information network. The videos are fun and short. Make sure to access the link below which contains all of these images, plus a template for you to make your own “most wanted” posters
BRITISH-AMERICAN ESPIONAGE-TREASON ON FULL DISPLAY AT “DINNER WITH THE OHRS”
Alison Saunders, CB, the Queen’s top prosecutor came to dinner at Bruce and Nellie Ohr’s home four days before the infamous Trump Tower meeting
Election interference by a Queen’s agent is espionage and for the Americans who helped is treason
(MAR. 21, 2019)—Following a month-long investigation—aided by a Judicial Watch Mar. 7, 2019 release of more stonewalled DOJ FOIA releases—the long held suspicions of many that British Privy Council intelligence, technology and banking interests are behind the attempted coup d’état of President Donald J. Trump can now be confirmed, in our minds anyway, beyond doubt.
What moved our thinking from circumstantial evidence to fact?
“Dinner with the Ohrs” —A secret Jun. 05, 2016 dinner meeting between Alison Sanders and her entourage at the home of Bruce and Nellie Ohr’s in McLean, VA on .
That was just four days before the infamous Trump Tower meeting.
She is a British barrister (lawyer) who at the time of the Ohr dinner was the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for the Crown Prosecution Service (CCP). In short, she was the Queen’s top prosecutor. She held a roughly equivalent post to U.S. deputy attorney general Sally Yates—Bruce Ohr’s boss.
On the surface, one might think that such contacts are not uncommon. After all, lawyers and law enforcement officials the world over compare notes. So what was different about this meeting?
A closer look at Saunder’s past and her conflicting relationships shows that she was on a secret mission by her Privy Council handlers to stop Donald Trump. The “Why?” will become obvious as this evidence unfolds.
The circumstances of “Dinner with the Ohrs” were suspicious on their face.
As Judicial Watch just uncovered, the Ohrs started planning this dinner party with Alison Saunders a month earlier, on or about May 06, 2016. Anecdotally, Peter Strzokrefused all House questions about the activities of this May-Jun 2016 time period. He even said that his reason was to protect a “very sensitive source.”
At least six people dined at the Ohrs: Alison Saunders, her executive assistant, Helen Kershaw, Sue Patten and Patrick Steves, Bruce Ohr and Nellie Ohr. Saunders also had MI-6 security with her. We do not yet know who attended on the American side besides the Ohrs.
From a protocol perspective, this meeting was a non-starter. First, Saunders was meeting with an underling of her professional equivalent, Sally Yates. Second, being there under diplomatic immunity begs the question:
What did Saunders bring with her to give to the Ohrs? McVities, tea, crumpets, money, non-traceable gems, documents, weapons, drugs, what? Both Saunders and Ohr were international organized crime experts, so they would certainly know the opportunities that such a secret meeting provided. It appears that they were engaging in their own organized crime this time.
So, thanks to Judicial Watch, we have proof that American Bruce Ohr, one of the DOJ’s paymasters for Obama’s stay behind 10,000-man army innocuously named the Senior Executive Service (SES) Performance Review Board, is having a secret meeting with the Queen’s top Crown prosecutor.
Hindsight being 20-20, we can now look back to the date of the Dinner with the Ohrs, Jun. 05, 2016, and then see that the Trump Tower meeting occurred just four days later on Jun. 09, 2016.
It makes sense. Saunders’ American assets, the Ohrs, Strzoks, Comey, Mueller, Lynch, Page, McCabe, etc. were committing treason, and the Privy Council was anxious to make sure they would execute on the plan to frame the Trump campaign with their phony Steel “dirty dossier.”
Before we draw any conclusions regarding this suspicious timing, we need to review Alison Saunders’ background.
This same dinner occurred on September 1, 1933 at the nome of Alice Barrows, and employee of the Department of Education. The home was located in a Virginia suburb of Washington, D.c. In attendance were: Rober Breuere, a member of hte New Deal Textile code Advisory Board and a WWI supporter of the revolutionary IWW movement; David Cushman Coyle, and employee off the Public Works Administration(PWA ); Lurence Todd, Washington representative of the Soviet news agence, TASS, and a former official of the American Civil Liberties Union; Hildegarde Kneeland, and employee of the Department of Agriculture, amember of the ACLU, and the person Dr. Wirt claimed did most of the talking about the communist plans to take over the New Deal; and Mary Taylor, also an employee of the department of Agriculture.”
If each of these names were to be researched and traced to the origin, one Harry Hoppman, the first U.N. representative and controller of the flow technology and arms, including ‘yellow cake’ through Alaska, whose purpose was to ‘balance’ the planned cold war between ‘Soviet Union’, ‘Communist China’, and ‘America’…with enormous profits for the same ‘globalists’. The same agenda, the same purpose, the same ‘British Crown’.
Peter Strzok’s big fat FBI lie about the reason for the set up of the private email server. The FBI knew years before they released tranches of Hillary’s emails starting in Sep. 2016. Tellingly, he volunteered this explanation even though he wasn’t asked about WHEN. Whoops.
Peter Strzok. (Jun. 27, 2018). Peter Strzok TRANSCRIPTION of Interview with Peter Strzok released by Rep. Doug Collins (GA 9th), Committee on the Judiciary, pgs. 312. U.S. House of Representatives.