Monday, August 22, 2011

High Crimes and Misdemeanors: Re. Hostage Oliver Garrett

So where is the FBI's big hostage team.

Oh, I forgot. They were in on it.

I forgot, I forgot! They colluded with criminals and put themselves in a tight spot.

So what is a "high crimes and misdemeanor" and how does one reconcile this with black ops and underground research?

Would, maybe, having the Portland FBI tell the Portland police Sgt. Austria not to investigate a crime or misdemeanor...and then giving him a raise and promotion...does this constitute


Does attempting to slander and defame a woman and collude to have her falsely arrested, to take her son...

Is this "treason"?

What is "treason" exactly?

Because I get "bribery" and "fraud" but what amounts to treason against the country's interests?

Is treason when someone rats out dirty and corrupt officials for torturing others?

Or is treason when the U.S. government allows officials and others to torture a citizen and violates their mandate and oath to serve and protect?

Bring it on assholes.

For the reader's information, the U.S. has been burning the living hell out of me all day, through laser and other technology.

So that is why I wrote bring it on assholes, because I wrote the sentence above it and someone surged the burning against me even more.

So bring it on assholes because I'm not quitting until you return my son you fucking criminals.


What is treason?

I am seriously examining what the laws are surrounding "high crimes and misdemeanors" and then the idea of "treason" comes to mind.

When I first read about high crimes and misdemeanors, which is basically crimes that an ordinary citizen could commit but which are elevated due to position in the government, I thought, okay, check for bribery, check for fraud...I understand, and then I stopped at treason.

And at first I thought, "I guess everything except treason?" but then I was thinking, if a high crime is the violation of an oath or mandate to responsibly hold an office and obey the Constitution, rather than factional groups, that is maybe actual treason.

I was led to believe, or think, "treason" is when one person injures the country by giving information to the enemy. Or betrays the country by doing something that will harm the country and the citizens living in it. So, "rats", "espionage",...everyone knows what "treason" is supposed to mean if it's a charge against a military worker who reveals information that is "top secret".

However, when I read what the definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" was, I was thinking "treason" also can be applied to an entire agency. It can apply to a group of persons who work in the government or to an entire bureau or agency, or just to a few people, or to even a handful of State workers.


Treason is when the Constitution is disgraced by an intentional and willful act against the country and citizens which causes serious harm or is likely to cause harm.

When faith in the country is harmed, because of illegal acts coming to light, this can be treason.

When government workers commit the harm and violate their oaths to "defend" and "protect" and "serve" the interests of the Constitution and the citizens, sometimes, if it's bad enough, it can amount to treason.

When I repeatedly went to the FBI for help, and when it was discovered they were not only a part of the injury to me and my son, but were defending those who were committing treason, they are liable to be charged with treason.

When the FBI is found to have offered and taken bribes, it is a high crime and might not only be bribery but "treason".

When the FBI knowingly protects those who have used technology and medications and drugs to harm me and my son, it is a high crime and amounts to treason.

When the FBI is discovered to have colluded with another country...

MAJOR high crimes and misdemeanors.

It is one thing to commit treason with other U.S. citizens and employees, in the U.S. It is even worse, to engage in crimes with the cooperation of a completely different country.

It is high crimes and misdemeanors to actively block and slander the person who is attempting to report these crimes and has asked for an investigation.

Who is the "traitor"? In a court of law, who is the traitor if one must choose?

Is the "traitor" the one who exposes high crimes and misdemeanors?

If exposing the high crimes and misdemeanors further injures the country or its interests, is that the fault of the person who speaks up? Are they the traitor? Or is the fall-out from the officials who committed the original crimes and tried to conceal them from others?

You cannot call someone a "spy" or "traitor" who gains information about unlawful actions and crimes committed by U.S. employees and agencies.

They may want others to think they could be charged with treason, but no. You cannot charge an informant who exposes high crimes and misdemeanors of treason against the citizens of this country, with treason.

It is NOT treason to reveal a source or person or official who makes orders against civilians, to harm them on U.S. soil.

The informant isn't creating the harm. They are only bringing harm to light and if there is fall-out, the blame is with those who are breaking the law and violating the Constitution in the first place.

It is like my telling the truth. If I hurt your feelings, you can't blame me if what I say is true and your response is a reaction to your own actions and the fact that I have now talked about it.

I did not cause the hurt feelings. You incurred them and had them in store for yourself.

It's like exposing negatives. Or making photos from the negatives.

They're there. The roll of film is right there. The photos were already taken. Whatever you did, is captured there on the photos. And if someone comes along to develop the photos, they are not commiting treason by exposing what events were taking place.

The FBI wrote out an entire contract with invisible ink. They don't want anyone to see that contract, because what they did, they already know, was illegal and violated the Constitution.

If someone comes along and reveals the message, that person is not guilty of treason. They have only exposed and revealed the treason that was committed by an agency.

You cannot call someone a traitor who has exposed treasonous acts by government officials.

If a choice has to be made, the acts of high crimes and misdemeanor and treason, these always come before the act or choice of a few individuals who simply know that revealing this might add to the harm already incurred.

If a government official or agency or employee, State or Federal, has committed acts of treason by harming Cameo and Oliver Garrett through violating an oath to uphold and defend all of our rights contained within The Constitution, which we have already contracted with upon our birth into this country, then any whistleblower who exposes the treason is not a traitor. They are not guilty of treason. They are a whistleblower. They might be a rat, or an informant or a whistleblower for a good cause, but they are not traitors and they cannot be found guilty of treason.

What those who have committed high crimes and misdemeanors want to do, well, what would this kind of criminal do?

They would use blackmail to protect their own interests, families, jobs, and agencies.

They are already going to know that if they get caught they may be facing long prison terms. So what to do?

What is the only thing that a government worker in this position might do?

Frame and blackmail anyone who could potentially be a risk to their reputation.

If you can't frame or blackmail them, what would be the other tactic a criminal might try? A smart criminal? or group of them?


You tried to frame someone. You tried to set them up. You tried to scare them. You tried to kill them but nothing went down very well and further attempts might call more attention to yourself or your group. What is left to try?

This person, imagine yourself in this situation...You know that someone, this woman, is about to testify against you and your entire family could be called into question. You will lose your job. You might be charged with crime. You can't risk letting it even get to an investigation becasue then something might be in a file that could arouse the curiosity of someone in the next 8 years. You know what prison looks like because you send people to prison yourself. You have someone breathing down your neck saying the entire country will be at risk. There might be riots. There could be a serious control problem. Your wife is biting her nails and gritting her teeth and as you get home from work with your briefcase, you look at your kids who are all school-aged while your partner or coworker is doing the same thing, but getting a call from his son who is in college and so excited. He is ecstatic to be in school and he's doing really well. Your little girl is twirling in her new dress and asks if you like it. After your son who is in college hangs up you get a call from your daughter who just got a job with the State. You're so proud of her.

If anyone gets even slightly suspicious, all of this is jeopardized.

You cannot afford to even allow it to get to the point where someone might take this woman's testimony or witness seriously. She can't be killed because then it would be a manhunt and someone is always caught. She's not committing suicide even after all the death threats and scare tactics. She's squirmed out of a set up and no one was able to blackmail her or entrap her.

What is the ONLY thing you have left in your arsenal for discrediting the woman?

"We have to say she's nuts."

"Okay, how are we going to do that? She has friends and goes to college and she doesn't have any kind of behavior or symptoms of mental illness."

"Has she ever been diagnosed with anything? I mean anything."


"Does she have anyone in her family with a mental illness problem?"

"I don't think so. We might check around a little more, but no, not that I know of."

"Any crime, even when she was juvenile? Have you checked the juvenile court records?"

"Yeah, we checked." "Hey, by the way, is this really necessary? I mean, what does she have on us anyway?"

"Do you really want to wait and find out?"

(long silence)

"I guess not." "What if she doesn't have anything though? She said some things, but maybe she's bluffing."

"Maybe she's not bluffing. Do you want to take that risk? How much money does she have?"

(rifling through papers)

"...Um, she has $_______ in a checking account and $______ in savings at ______."

"What about IRAs, trust funds, swiss account, anything else?"

"No. If she does, it's hidden well. I don't think so. We've been looking into it for a long time. I guess we could always put the squeeze on her and see where she goes. If she really needs it, and it's there, she'll lead us to it."

"Okay, this is what we're gonna do. This girl doesn't have anything to fight with--"

"--There's a problem."

"What's that?"

"She's honest. She's honest, she doesn't have any enemies, she's never been diagnosed with mental illness, she doesn't act nuts, she goes to church, she doesn't have a bad credit history, she's never been charged with a crime. There is NOTHING on this girl. NOTHING. And she has a clean record and a good reputation to back her up."

"Well we're going to take care of that."

I could continue but right now I'm taking a break.

After trying to set me up and blackmail me or entrap me, what's left but to make an honest person look less honest by coming up with false witnesses to make false charges? and then, when all else has failed, and there is no cause to say she's nuts, and zero symptoms of mental illness, what else is left except to deliberately create conditions which will reliably cause her to sound mentally ill?

And if the girl is not nuts, and has no symptoms of mental illness and if it's pretty much impossible to make a healthy person act or sound like a mentally ill does one get someone who is perfectly healthy and sound-minded to sound seriously mentally ill?

Break her heart? does that work for some people?

No comments: