Council Planning Smart Fees

The Campaign for Liberty has forwarded this warning about smart meters:

Memphis City Council (which must approve ALL MLGW funding) will SOON (in November) VOTE to ADD a $25 FEE every month to those who have (or will) OPT OUT ofthe very problematic SMART METER.

The FEE is set at $25 per month (continuously) beginning in January 2020.

This is being done “evasively” (to trick you!) by adding the charge into their 2020 BUDGET — without making a direct change to the current standing City Council RESOLUTION of October 2013 which gives FREE OPT OUT from smart meters at any time to ALL customers of MLGW!

This change is a DEVIOUS ACTION!

Immediately PLEASE begin calling and emailing your own Council Member (and ALL the Council Members) stating your DISAPPROVAL of overriding the 2013 Resolution which commits to FREE OPT OUT of SMART METERS at any time!

If you are an MLGW customer or not — PLEASE HELP!

Below you will find a list of all Council Members, email addresses and phone numbers to their staff members!

Here are some statements you can use (or change) in email or phone call:

Removing our FREE OPT OUT is dishonest, goes back on the decision in 2013 (by Resolution) to give MLGW customers the right to FREE OPT OUT at any time!

Citizens worked with City Council to assure our RIGHT to be FREE of the dangerous “smart” meter. In 2013 the customers of MLGW were heard!

Charging a FEE is punishment, is a slap in the face of those who DO NOT want a dangerous smart meter, with health hazards.

Health concerns, fire risk (from plastic, heat sensitive smart meters), issues of loss of privacy, with surveillance potential, and rising costs due to lower “life of use” of non-analog devices — ALL make me VERY concerned — thus I OPTED OUT! My OPT OUT IS FREE by Resolution!

To work “behind the back” of local citizens, HIDING a FEE change in a 300+ page MLGW Budget, is devious and a FRAUD! Shame on MLGW!

When the VOTE comes up, say NO — in behalf of many thousands of MLGW customers who have already formally OPTED OUT! There is report of over 100,000 opt outs!

There is good reason why we choose to OPT OUT. Our City Council should be DEFENDING OUR RIGHT to safety and to free choice to avoid smart meter RISKS!

PLEASE WRITE and/or CALL City Council Members!
Please share this information with ALL your friends, who will fight for our RIGHT to OPT OUT at NO COST!!

To send an email to all (blind copy is best) select the entire group of emails listed here and paste into your email address area:,,,,,,,,,,


The City Council employs several support staff members to aid the Council Members in their communications with their constituents. If you would like to contact your City Council representative, you may reach them by e-mail at their addresses below or through staff, using the contact information below.
Including Council Member, Staff Analyst, and Assistant email and phone numbers:

Sherman Greer (District 1)

Analyst: Ashleigh Hayes
(901) 636-6785
Assistant: Dynisha Clark
(901) 636-6775

Frank Colvett, Jr. (District 2)

Analyst: Ashleigh Hayes
(901) 636-6785
Assistant: Dynisha Clark
(901) 636-6775

Patrice Robinson (District 3)

Analyst: LaKevia Perry
(901) 636-6793
Assistant: Rebecca Garcia
(901) 636-6795

Jamita Swearengen (District 4)

Analyst: Sophia Wordlaw
(901) 636-6798
Assistant: Devon Thompson
(901) 636-6782

Worth Morgan (District 5)

Analyst: Ashleigh Hayes
(901) 636-6785
Assistant: Clay Wilson
(901) 636-6787

Gerre Currie (District 6)

Analyst: Brooke Hyman
(901) 636-6706
Assistant: Judy Milam
(901) 636-6799

Berlin Boyd (District 7)

Analyst: Brooke Hyman
(901) 636-6706
Assistant: Devon Thompson
(901) 636-6782

Joe Brown (District 8-1)

Analyst: Sophia Wordlaw
(901) 636-6798
Assistant: Rebecca Garcia
(901) 636-6795

Cheyenne Johnson (District 8-2)

Analyst: LaKevia Perry
(901) 636-6793
Assistant: Rebecca Garcia
(901) 636-6795

Martavius Jones (District 8-3)

Analyst: Brooke Hyman
(901) 636-6706
Assistant: Devon Thompson
(901) 636-6782

Kemp Conrad (District 9 -1)

Analyst: Juaness Keplinger
(901) 636-6797
Assistant: Judy Milam
(901) 636-6799

J. Ford Canale (District 9-2)

Analyst: Ashleigh Hayes
(901) 636-6706
Assistant: Clay Wilson
(901) 636-6787

Reid Hedgepeth (District 9-3)

Analyst: LaKevia Perry
(901) 636-6793
Assistant: Trudy Pope
(901) 636-6786

Uh-O Canada!

Justin Trudeau won reelection in Canada last night. The whole event didn’t get much attention in the U.S. even though the USMCA trade agreement hangs on the outcome. Now it appears dead.

Our media might have ignored the election, but I bet Obama and his minions did not. Obama loves to play king maker, sending his Plouffe and Axelrod cronies to help out Leftist governments. He tried (tries) it in Israel, has before in Canada, Ukraine and anywhere else it benefits Progressives.

Trudeau’s party eked out a victory even though his Liberals lost 21 seats, the New Democrat Party lost 15 and the Conservatives gained 27. Their candidate, a guy named Sheer was a McCain/Romney style wuss. A commentator noted, “Sheer was going to keep the dairy subsidies ‘supply management’, Paris climate accord, wanted to raise the age Canadians could start collecting Old Age Supplement (which is an extra payment in addition to their Canada Pension which is their Social Security), and reverse hikes to the CPP which would mean less money for future retirees.”

And, “Canadians voted to keep the illusion of the good times going. They voted for things they don’t have the money to pay for. Canadian households have the highest household debt ratio of any developed country, by a significant margin, and home to two of the biggest global real estate bubbles fueled by illegal foreign money (Vancouver and Toronto).”

Someone else commented on the dire facts of Canada’s future: “The 2016 census returned a result of 22% of the Canadian population as foreign born. 5% of that alone were people that identified as Chinese. That number will increase dramatically given the number of HK Chinese that hold “Safety passports” they paid for in cash at the turnover but didn’t take up Canadian residency, and that does not take into account the mainland Chinese that have a foothold through purchase of entrepreneur visas or the express train of Muslim refugees that have been permanently resettled in Canada by the Trudeau government.

“The 22% from 2016 – that percentage is significantly higher now, and centered in the urban centers, which control how the votes go. The situation in Canada is much different than the US. Trump is trying to prevent the US from becoming Canada in that respect. Scheer tried to run on a “Canada First” immigration policy, but it was half-hearted at best. I think the 2021 census is going to be a shocker for Conservative Canadians, but the Progressives (Liberals, NDP, Greens) will cheer.

“Canada delenda est.”

This is the reason we have the Electoral College. Leftists keep trying to take it down. That would give, as in Canada’s case, all the power to a few big cities. They would more or less enslave the rest of the country.

Yet the “empathetic, broad minded, liberal groups” are all for it as the way to express the will of the people. Somehow these new geniuses have realized things that escaped the notice of those ignorant framers. They know more and better than George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison etc.

One Canadian added, “Hopefully, that after a few more years of this BS, the country will Wake Up and Walk Away, just like Americans did after 8 years of Obama. Hopefully, somewhere in Canada there’s someone we don’t know about yet who can stir it up, like Trump did here.”

Glad I don’t live in Canada.

Pelosi Jr.’s Ukraine Problem

It hasn’t gotten much attention, but aside from Hunter Biden, another son of a powerful American politician has his mitts in the Ukraine pot.
Dean Garrison at DCclothesline writes:

Hunter Biden move over.

Now Nancy Pelosi’s son may be looking to take center stage with the Ukraine controversy.

Paul Pelosi, Jr. spent time in Ukraine in 2017.
What in the hell?

BOTH Biden’s and Pelosi’s sons have strong ties to Ukraine?

Who goes to Ukraine?

I’m sure most people reading this have sent their sons to Ukraine at some point.

I’m probably just being paranoid.

From National File:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s son Paul Pelosi Jr. visited Ukraine in 2017 to meet with government officials in connection to a business initiative. Now, unearthed records reveal that Paul Pelosi Jr. was an executive of a gas industry company that did business in Ukraine – and his mother Nancy Pelosi was featured in one of the company’s promotional videos.

Paul Pelosi Jr. traveled to Kiev, Ukraine in July 2017 in his capacity as executive director of the Corporate Governance Initiative, a position that he accepted months earlier in February 2017. Pelosi Jr. said that he was in Ukraine to discuss a youth soccer partnership with the government.
The American Mirror, which flagged Pelosi Jr.’s appearance in 2017, preserved a clip of Pelosi Jr. on the Ukrainian station following the video’s removal from YouTube.

On March 5, 2013, NRGLab New Technology posted two videos on Youtube. One video opened with a clip of Nancy Pelosi discussing energy-efficient technology, followed by a direct-to-camera statement from her son Paul Pelosi Jr., filmed in Washington, D.C. in 2010.

L.J. Keith at Communities DigitalNews adds, “Pelosi Jr. earlier had served as an executive just under Mike Mozilla with Countrywide during the height of the mortgage crisis of 2008. Countrywide being one of the worse abusers in the mortgage debacle that almost destroyed America’s, and the world’s, economy.

“Paul Pelosi Jr. made a fortune, walking away unscathed. This before starting a solar energy company to take advantage of huge Federal Government loan guarantees. Another money windfall for Pelosi, who walked away with a fortune when that company went bankrupt. Leaving the Federal Government and the taxpayers to make up for the losses.”

When will journalists start covering the corruption? Probably never. That’s why more people turn to the internet and YouTube to find out the truth.

The Capture

Sunday evening and Monday morning ABC News aired this video of what they said was the slaughter of the Kurds in Syria:

The Washington Examiner smelled something besides smoke in this. They questioned its veracity. Turns out they were correct. ABC News had to admit that it was video of a nighttime machine gun demonstration at the Knob Creek Gun Range in West Point, Kentucky, not an attack in Syria.

Now somebody at ABC knew that this was a fake.
They ran it anyhow.

We’ve gotten used to fake news reports in the media. Fake information, fake commentary, fake polls. Now they are taking the next step of faking video. It was logical that they would jump from fake words to fake video.

Logical and scary. Is there any doubt that the same media/deep state that twists words, suggests meanings or edits video to craft a message will take the next step and actually manipulate the video?

There is a six part BBC show that aired recently called The Capture. It’s perhaps one of the best shows about this topic that has been on TV or the movies.

The title refers to the capture of an act seen on surveillance camera. British cities are thick with cameras. The story opens with a soldier on trial for supposedly killing an Afghan without giving him a chance to surrender. It’s recorded on tape and looks undeniable. However, his lawyers show how the tape could be out of sync and not been an accurate portrayal of what happened. The soldier is acquitted.
After celebrating the victory at a pub, he follows his attractive barrister to offer to drive her home. They kiss, she declines and gets on a bus and he walks away.

But the video doesn’t show that. It shows him assaulting her. The police search for her and eventually find her body.

The detective involved follows the story to find that the tape has, indeed, been manipulated. How it plays out involves the CIA, British intelligence and radical groups. Intelligence analysts call such manipulation “a correction.” That gives you an idea of the evil and betrayal these groups engage in.

That so many entities would embrace faking a video is shocking, but not surprising. If ABC News can do this so flagrantly, how many other times have we watched fake videos and believed them?

The positioning of cameras around cities may seem to be a good thing against crime, but is it? Is it the police in China who benefit or the Deep State governmental officials. Just ask Hong Kong.

We are even thinking about surveillance cameras in Central Gardens. While they may seem innocent on the surface, could they ultimately be used against us?

Something to contemplate.

Citizens may feel they are innocent, but the potential for governmental abuse is huge.

If you get a chance, try and find “The Capture.” You won’t feel you’ve wasted your viewing time.

Is This the Whistleblower?

As Washington swirls with the question of who is the whistleblower prompting this insane impeachment inquiry, bloggers and citizen analysts have narrowed down the names.

One which pops up the most is Eric Ciaramella. Who is he? J.R. Dunn at American Thinker wrote, “The third name to attract attention is Eric Ciaramella, an intelligence officer specializing in Russia and Ukraine. He was a staffer on the National Security Council, where he was responsible for policy regarding Ukraine. He was H.R. McMaster’s personal aide and during the Obama administration had worked with Susan Rice. Ciaramella had gained a reputation as an inveterate leaker, which, he claimed, had resulted in ‘death threats’ from ‘right-wingers.’ This was the reason he gave for leaving the NSC in 2017.”

On Twitter, Seamus Bruner, author of “Compromised: How Money and Politics Drive FBI Corruption,” concurs. He says “Ciaramella (is a ) registered Democrat. He was Obama NSC holdover and when accused of sabotaging Trump, he left NSC and returned to ‘the Agency’… ie fits whistleblower bill of Ukrainian insider and CIA operative (with axe to grind). If it turns out Eric Ciaramella is Schiff’s informant people ought to know that billionaire Clinton donor Victor Pinchuk sent Ukrainian MP Bielkova to meet with him the same day she met with David Kramer and kicked Steele Dossier operation into high gear, i.e. ‘Whistleblower’= Dossier 2.0.”

Then he goes on to show in a series of documents, the guy’s ties to the whole stinking Ukrainian corruption in a series of tweets. Like the Russia hoax, you need a flow chart to keep track of them all.

“Note: Kramer likely discussed the now debunked ‘black ledger’ with MP Bielkova Clinton’s biggest Ukrainian donor: Billionaire Victor Pinchuk paid Clinton pollster Doug Schoen to set up meetings Team Obama. Together they pushed false narratives to influence 2016 election”

“As others have noted, Ciaramella linked to Nuland (who promoted Steele reports throughout State Dept. to influence 2016 election). This email directly related to Biden threatening to withhold Billion dollar loan guarantee (If not mistaken). Same timeframe as Pinchuk sponsored mtg”

“Full annotated Pinchuk lobbying disclosure that details Ciaramella, Kramer Ukraine meetings in April with relevant Kramer dossier datapoints (and other spygate docs) in Compromised: James Comey, Robert Mueller, Loretta Lynch, and Eric Holder financial disclosures and other documents. Bread crumb: Ciaramella attends a lot of Ukraine meetings with Liz Zentos. Here Zentos is with Hillary Clinton and P. Poroshenko in Dec. 2009 talking energy. Hillary sure seems like an expert on Uranium deals in the Fmr. Soviet Union… #HEU #UraniumTwo?…

“2017 Bielkova again attending a sponsored event alongside Burisma exec Gorbunenko talking Ukraine corporate welfare to oil and gas industry. And the Burisma announcement of favorable tax rates. Notably, Hunter Biden’s sole qualification is touted.”

“How do you say jackpot?

“To sum it all up, Ukraine pipeline magnate and Clinton donor dispatches Burisma-friendly
Ukraine MP Bielkova to DC to meet with Ciaramella, Zentos and McKramer at the same time Biden threatens to withhold Billion$ unless prosecutor investigating Burisma/son is fired. Dossier I & II stacked”

At American Thinker, Clarice Feldman found a great summation of the whole mess:

The DNC, Pelosi, Schiff, the media, progs in general and even the bureaucracy and FBI are in some respects a sideshow.

The real issue that ought to either-or-both frighten and enrage any honest American is that the “Intelligence Community” truly does now consider itself a law unto itself and has arrogated the power to actually decide who is a suitable president and who will be allowed to occupy the White House.

The genesis of Russia and the Ukraine has quite plainly been at its root the IC and especially the CIA.

They have, make no mistake, declared war on self-governance, unless we pick someone they approve of which is quite obviously not self-governance.

Thankfully the stupid bastards are remarkably incompetent and have been for decades but they still can, and are, causing a great deal of damage.

That is why, even though this is complicated, it is incumbent on American citizens to follow this story and know the facts. That’s what will save us.

T-ing It Up

Last night President Trump was on fire at his Minneapolis rally.

He straightforwardly exposed the chasm between the Deep State and American citizens. His plain spoken truth delights Americans who have had enough of political blather. Trump hopped into the impeachment fight and the exposure of the Biden family to corruption and greed. He wondered out loud if there was a “Where’s Hunter?” t-shirt expressing the media’s refusal to question the former Vice President’s son about his Ukraine shenanigans.

Shortly after that his campaign strategist, Brad Parscale, had this up on twitter:

The description reads:
Where’s Hunter? Tee
First he was fired by the Navy. Then, he made MILLIONS of dollars from overseas companies while his father was Vice President.
Now, he’s nowhere to be found! WHERE IS HUNTER BIDEN?
Get your LIMITED edition Where’s Hunter? Tee while supplies last!

Made in USA (not Ukraine or China)
No Prior Experience Required
No Actual Work Required

Very good.

Mr. Midtown Republican came up with his own version:

A close up:

In the coming days many more entries and memes will be made for Hunter.

Who Is This Man?

Who is the Inspector General of the Intelligence community, Michael Atkinson?

ICIG Michael Atkinson

It’s a question the media doesn’t really want to get into. Why?

First, you must realize that the group Lawfare is behind all these hoaxes hoping for Trump’s impeachment. No one has delved into Lawfare like The Conservative Treehouse. Here’s their synopsis:

Not enough people understand the role of the Lawfare group in the corruption and political weaponization of the DOJ, FBI and larger intelligence community.

What Media Matters is to corrupt left-wing media, the Lawfare group is to the corrupt DOJ and FBI.

All of the headline names around the seditious conspiracy against Donald Trump assemble within the network of the Lawfare group.

Three days after the October 21st, 2016, FISA warrant was obtained, Benjamin Wittes outlined the insurance policy approach. (Read the article here:

FBI Director James Comey, FBI Legal Counsel James Baker, Comey memo recipient Daniel Richman, Deputy AG Sally Yates, Comey friend Benjamin Wittes, FBI lead agent Peter Strzok, FBI counsel Lisa Page, Mueller lead Andrew Weissmann and the Mueller team of lawyers, all of them -and more- are connected to the Lawfare group; and this network provides the sounding board for all of the weaponized approaches, including the various new legal theories as outlined within the Weissmann-Mueller Report.

The Lawfare continuum is very simple. The corrupt 2015 Clinton exoneration; which became the corrupt 2016 DOJ/FBI Trump investigation; which became the corrupt 2017 DOJ/FBI Mueller probe; is currently the 2019 “impeachment” plan. Weissmann and Mueller delivering their report evolved the plan from corrupt legal theory into corrupt political targeting. Every phase within the continuum holds the same goal.

The current “impeachment strategy” is planned-out within the Lawfare group.

Once you understand that, it is easy to see how everything transpired.

CT further elucidates:

“The center of the 2016 Lawfare Alliance election influence was/is the Department of Justice National Security Division, DOJ-NSD. It was the DOJ-NSD running the Main Justice side of the 2016 operations to support Operation Crossfire Hurricane and FBI agent Peter Strzok. It was also the DOJ-NSD where the sketchy legal theories around FARA violations (Sec. 901) originated.”

Here’s where the ICIG, Atkinson, comes in:

Michael K Atkinson was previously the Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General of the National Security Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ-NSD) in 2016. That makes Atkinson senior legal counsel to John Carlin and Mary McCord who were the former heads of the DOJ-NSD in 2016 when the stop Trump operation was underway.

Michael Atkinson was the lawyer for the same DOJ-NSD players who: (1) lied to the FISA court (Judge Rosemary Collyer) about the 80% non compliant NSA database abuse using FBI contractors; (2) filed the FISA application against Carter Page; and (3) used FARA violations as tools for political surveillance and political targeting.

Yes, that means Michael Atkinson was Senior Counsel for the DOJ-NSD, at the very epicenter of the political weaponization and FISA abuse.

If the DOJ-NSD exploitation of the NSA database, and/or DOJ-NSD FISA abuse, and/or DOJ-NSD FARA corruption were ever to reach sunlight, current ICIG Atkinson -as the lawyer for the process- would be under a lot of scrutiny for his involvement.

Yes, that gives current ICIG Michael Atkinson a strong and corrupt motive to participate with the Pelosi-Schiff/Lawfare impeachment objective. Sketchy!

It now looks like the Lawfare network constructed the ‘whistle-blower’ complaint aka a Schiff Dossier, and handed it to allied CIA operative Michael Barry to file as a formal IC complaint. This process is almost identical to the Fusion-GPS/Lawfare network handing the Steele Dossier to the FBI to use as the evidence for the 2016/2017 Russia conspiracy.

This series of events is exactly what former CIA Analyst Fred Fleiz said last week. Fleitz has extensive knowledge of the whistleblower process. Fleitz said last week the Ukraine call whistle-blower is likely driven by political motives, and his sources indicate he had help from Congress members while writing it.

CT believes the “whistle blower” is Michael Barry.
The Deep State is like a cancer with evil tentacles infecting our body politic so deeply that it is hard to excise. Even another Trump term won’t be able to heal us. Unfortunately. But it can at least stop some of the malignant spread.

Did Atkinson Lie?

Many people think that in his testimony to Congress on Friday, he did lie.

Sean Davis at the Federalist explains:

In tense testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) on Friday, the inspector general for federal spy agencies refused to disclose why his office backdated secret changes to key whistleblower forms and rules in the wake of an anti-Trump whistleblower complaint filed in August, sources told The Federalist.

As The Federalist reported and the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) confirmed, the spy watchdog secretly changed its whistleblower forms and internal rules in September to eliminate a requirement that whistleblowers provide first-hand evidence to support any allegations of wrongdoing. In a press release last week, the ICIG confessed that it changed its rules in response to an anti-Trump complaint filed on August 12. That complaint, which was declassified and released by President Donald Trump in September, was based entirely on second-hand information, much of which was shown to be false following the declassification and release of a telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Michael Atkinson, the intelligence community inspector general, told HPSCI lawmakers during a committee oversight hearing on Friday that the whistleblower forms and rules changes were made in September, even though the new forms and guidance, which were not uploaded to the ICIG’s website until September 24, state that they were changed in August. Despite having a full week to come up with explanations for his office’s decisions to secretly change its forms to eliminate the requirement for first-hand evidence and to backdate those changes to August, Atkinson refused to provide any explanation to lawmakers baffled by his behavior.

When pressed on the curious changes and attempts to obscure the timeline of his revisions, Atkinson refused to explain why the forms were backdated to August even though they were not made until September. The ICIG previously stated that it changed its forms and guidance “in response to recent press inquiries regarding” the anti-Trump complaint, of which Congress was not even notified until the second week of September. The new forms, which were not uploaded to the ICIG website until September 24, nonetheless stated that the revisions were made back in August.

Lawmakers honed in on the discrepancy during Atkinson’s appearance on Capitol Hill on Friday. How could the forms have been changed back in August if they were changed in response to press inquiries that could not have been made until mid-September at the earliest?

“[T]he timing of the removal of the first-hand information requirement raises questions about potential connections to this whistleblower’s complaint,” three House Republican lawmakers wrote in a letter to Atkinson on September 30. “This timing, along with numerous apparent leaks of classified information about the contents of this complaint, also raise questions about potential criminality in the handling of these matters.”

In an interview with Fox News, Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., the top Republican on HPSCI, intimated the secret changes to eliminate the requirement for first-hand information were intentionally made to accommodate the anti-Trump complainant, who offered no first-hand evidence of wrongdoing by the president.

“This guideline, they changed it because of this whistleblower,” Nunes, who said on Fox News last week. “[Atkinson] admits it in his own press release.”

Outrageous! And even more outrageous is the mainstream press’ unwillingness to report news detrimental to their Leftist cause to remove the president.

Is the American public that gullible? I don’t think so.

The Whistle Blower Test

Doug Ross @Journal supposes what the whistle blower form looks like:

EXCLUSIVE: Official Democrat Whistleblower Complaint Form [TDS-17.4]
Discovered by Biff Spackle (@BiffSpackle on Twitter)

Official Democrat Whistleblower Complaint Form [TDS-17.4]
Name [will be held absolutely confidential until it’s necessary we leak it]:
Email address:
Cell number:

Type of Complaint:
(Note: if the nature of your complaint has to do with Trump’s tweets, please use form TDS-69.9)
Trump executed Muslims and put alligators in the Rio Grande to bite border-crossers
I am repulsed by Trump’s tweets
I’d like to find a way to stop Trump, can you connect me with a New York Times reporter
Adam Schiff is an inspiration, I would like to help him however I can
Orange Man Bad
Trump is investigating the origins of the 2016 Russia hoax
I’ll come up with something, trust me

Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the media?

Are you, or have you ever been, a Democrat member of Congress or a Staffer in Congress?

Are you a firsthand witness to the acts described in the complaint?
As far as you know
No, but I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night

Loyalty Test #1:
If Trump Were drowning in a swimming pool and you could jump in and rescue him, would you?
I would jump in with large rocks and place them in his shorts
I would wave goodbye while whispering ‘buh by’
I would call 9-1-1
I would call 4-1-1
None of the above

What is your party affiliation?
Democrat Party
Green Party
Communist Party
All of the above

How did you first become aware of the complaint?
I heard it from a friend, who heard it from a friend
I leaked it to The New York Times, and they reported it, so I could cite it in my complaint
Adam Schiff told me, verbatim, what the President said and did
I received an encrypted email from John Brennan, who seems very anxious of late
During the course of doing the New York Times crossword puzzle, the conspiracy became obvious to me

Loyalty Test #2:
Hillary’s deleted emails were
A national scandal
About yoga workouts
About Huma’s yoga workouts
About Chelsea’s yoga workouts to prepare for her wedding
What deleted emails?

When Donald Trump won in 2016, what was your first reaction?
I knitted a pussyhat
I screamed at the sky
I started shredding documents
I called James Comey and asked him what to do about our failed coup attempt
I began plotting his impeachment

If Biden Warren Clinton were to win in 2020, would you ever file a whistleblower complaint against that administration?
Hell, no
I’m with her

Under penalty of running afoul of AOC, Tlaib, Omar, Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler, I assert that the prior answers are truthful to the best of my knowledge, so help me Gaia.

Will Spygate Bring Indictments?

Tracy Beanz is part of a website called She and others have podcasts there.

Beanz has a very interesting twitter sequence regarding the whole Spygate mess and it’s interesting to read. Here it is:

Many of you know me well by now, and you know that I wouldn’t share what I am about to share unless I was CONFIDENT that the source could be trusted. Before I post this, I want to let everyone know that I trust this source implicitly. I was given this information several days ago.

Since receiving it, a number of wheels have already begun to turn which validate many of the points. The person got a bit of a bug and was sick for several days, but today provided me with a shareable write up. It is very clear. I don’t need to add anything.

As always, use your own discernment. I have used mine, gotten permission, and decided I am absolutely comfortable posting this. Please read and share should you find it valuable. What follows is directly from my source. Much of this seems to be in motion given recent events.

DISCLAIMER: I am not an insider.
I work an interesting job that has afforded me two luxuries: the time to dig/research/analyze/contextualize and discern what I believe to be truths about our world, government, and intelligence agencies; and the opportunity to talk to a lot of interesting people with diverse experiences in everything from the mundane to the … spooky, even paranormal. It was through some of these contacts, most established well before the events of 2015-2016, that my attention was drawn to the whole SpyGate saga in the closing months of 2016. Since that time, these sources have provided me with valuable context, confirmation, and – when needed – the debunking of my own theories and analysis of a very tangled web of spies, G-men, politicians, and their praetorian guard.
While I have developed several excellent sources who’ve proved their reliability and honesty over many conversations, none of these sources claim to have every answer, or to know every detail. Despite their access and professional duties, which outrank my own, they ultimately are not calling the shots.

Online I’ve operated under a strict Open Source policy. While I often entertain speculation, my own analysis and writing has always relied upon OS information rather than “trust me, I talked to an insider and this is what they say” approach to make my case. That, to me, is the most helpful way I can contribute. Which is why I hesitated to share any of this initially. This update is entirely anecdotal. Take this however you wish, it’s not meant to be a prediction only a reporting of the feelings of several individuals with direct knowledge of the SpyGate investigation. None of them are Trump, or in his closest circle, so ultimately none of them are in “the room” when the big decisions are made.
Still, in the week it’s taken me to get this out, several events have transpired which have
confirmed at least portions of what I was told. Which is what always happens when these people feed me information or nudge me to look in a certain direction.

So let’s get to it.

At the start of September I was asked to make a trip to DC to meet in person with several of my best sources. Most of these sources are/had become friends, so a request to come out wasn’t unusual.
When I mentioned that I might not be able to make it out until October I was told “Better not wait if you want to stay ahead of the news”.
So, I took that seriously and flew out there last week. I was not disappointed that I did.

Here’s a general overview of what was discussed:
INDICTMENTS: The subject of indictments of key SpyGate figures were discussed at length. Everyone I spoke with remained highly confident there would be indictments involving the DOJ/FBI.
Evidence from their day to day activities on their jobs, as well as upcoming calendar appointments were among the multiple ways they verified this to me. It was made clear to me that there are already several cases lined up ready to go. “A wave of them”, was the phrasing used.

The green light has not yet been given, but it is expected to be imminent. This from the grunts in the trenches, based on what they’re currently working on or being asked not to work on. I got the impression that McCabe should not be resting easy, nor should Mr. Comey.

SHIFTING FOCUS OF THE ROLL OUT: Much of our time was spent discussing the Ukraine, specifically the role of the State Department. Names like Nuland, Kerry, Clinton, McCain and others were discussed at length. I was told that the attention and focus is going to start to shift from the DOJ/FBI to State. This is because the FBI/DOJ side is just about ready to roll in terms of disclosure/indictments, but State is a different beast. According to what I was told, “the legal pathway to the biggest fish goes through the State Department and starts in the Ukraine.”

According to our discussions, the Ukraine was going to come into major focus because both sides of the establishment aisle got dirty in the Ukraine and left themselves exposed. It’s a “pathway” to the Clinton machine, the Soros machine, the neocon machine, the neoliberal machine – not to mention organized crime in both Russia and our own. *Note: This update was compiled on the 20th of September for reference. A bug knocked me on my ass – which delayed it going out. That’s regrettable only because of the week’s events regarding the Ukraine. It’s a bit of confirmation of the above.
NOT WITHOUT CONCERNS: For the first time in any of our discussions over the past several years, I detected some concern on the parts of the grunts in the field. The concern is not in being able to make the cases (most have already made), but in what the fallout will be once the partisan politics of the moment are inserted into the whole concoction.
This is important, so I want to expound as much as possible on this point. On prior occasions, the discussion of how to avoid using any of this as a political weapon in 2020 had been brought up.
In the past I was made to feel confident that the goal was not partisan but to actually clean up real problems within our system. I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS HAS CHANGED. On this trip I was told, explicitly, that “Trump and Barr have the establishment’s nuts in a vice” – not just SpyGate plotters, and not just our domestic establishment. I was told due to events in 2017 and into ’18 they now have more evidence than they originally anticipated when “the op” (their words) was put into motion. They expected to catch certain fish in their net – and did – but through events which I cannot get explicit about, a “treasure trove of shit” was uncovered/discovered which now allows them to go all the way up the chain in multiple 5Eye countries.
Now – this sounds GREAT, right? And it is. I am fully in support of exposing the whole sorted lot of snakes and believe, fully, that the people sharing this information with me want nothing more as well.
BUT there is a concern – and it’s this: How much can be exposed without undermining and imploding the very republic they’re trying to preserve? That’s always been the big question – but now there’s genuine consternation about it. This isn’t about protecting institutions, it’s about “what happens after you pull that pin?” I took all this talk as a bad sign at first. It was the first time they had talked about any hesitation to “go too far”.

But over the course of the conversation I was reassured. Will touch on this at the end. Apparently there are now two camps chirping in “the boss’s ear”: 1) those urging caution and taking the easy shots (the low hanging DOJ/FBI fruit – names we know but NOT the lieutenants or cabinet level) and 2) those who want to expose it ALL, consequences be damned. Almost everyone I’ve spoken with is in the latter camp, and they all believe the boss is too – but it’s clearly a conversation being had amongst those doing this work.

Here’s the rub: there’s not enough time between now and 2020’s election to get the job done. So how much justice can be doled out without falling into the trap of it all being painted as political persecution by the establishment media?
(Note: Again, just look at the Biden/Ukraine story which broke after I returned.) The consensus from these people used to be: “we need to get this all out before the 2020 cycle truly begins to make sure it happens”, and now there is at least a portion of them urging Trump to stretch out the indictments/disclosure over the next 10 months to score the maximum political impact because A) the cases are strong enough to sustain it and a second term is needed to complete the job.
I was reminded that if the internal debates are now about how to best roll out this evidence to secure 2020, then the cases they have must be locks.
They wouldn’t risk the political spin unless they knew they had the cases cold, especially the advisors thinking in terms of re-election.

Beanz note: I wouldn’t have shared this if I wasn’t SURE I could trust my source. I am, and so I did. I am but a vessel. Take this as you may.. Thanks guys!

ADDENDUM: the responses to this have been interesting – from pessimistic and angry to hopeful and excited. Many people aren’t reading the thread carefully and lots of people are mad at me for what it says.
Journalism isn’t holding things back so people feel better. It’s dropping it all even if you perceive it as painful, which some of you do. If I had hidden or held any part of this for the sake of feelings it would have been just like what we deal with now.
People are going to have to get used to hearing hard things sometimes, and also reading and responding carefully. Don’t jump to conclusions etc. I will never edit something so people feel better. I’m sorry. Not happening. It’s the truth or nothing. This was what I was given.