The Investigation of Pepe Chavez Et Al (series)

You can stonewall, stonewall as much as you want...but understand this. Truth eventually seeks transparency.

Judicial Watch

Reminder: Judicial Watch announced back on April 18, 2014, that it obtained 41 new Benghazi-related State Department documents. They included a newly declassified email showing then-White House Deputy Strategic Communications Adviser Ben Rhodes and other Obama administration public relations officials attempting to orchestrate a campaign to “reinforce” President Obama and to falsely portray the Benghazi consulate terrorist attack as being “rooted in an Internet video, and not a failure of policy.” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said at the time: “Now we know the Obama White House’s chief concern about the Benghazi attack was making sure that President Obama looked good. And these documents undermine the Obama administration’s narrative that it thought the Benghazi attack had something to do with protests or an Internet video. Given the explosive material in these documents, it is no surprise that we had to go to federal court to pry them loose from the Obama State Department.”

Jun 21st 4:38pm • No Comments

The definition of “FACTS”: It’s been a pet vexation of mine for years of liberals who profess no “absolutes”. What of the contrast between the definition wrested by the “left” vs. the definition proffered by the “right”. When the word “fact” is evaluated by the left, it’s with a “viewpoint”, “belief”, and/or “attitude” vs. by the right, with “objectivity”, “exactness”, and “rest”. No doubt, as I see it, the definition of the word “fact” has been re-characterized/ reassigned into the “philosophical art” of liberal culture.

Charlie Gerow

The difference between each party's definition of "facts" is growing...

Jun 20th 4:36am • No Comments

What say you Obama voters? Please answer with some semblance integrity and honor, or don't answer at all!

Judicial Watch

BREAKING: Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton: "Believe it or not, key Obama spying scandal documents are over at the Obama Presidential Library. We just learned that from the National Security Council, who told us in response to our request for documents about Susan Rice’s unmasking of the Trump Team, the DNC hacking, and the Russia story. They told us that they moved those documents over to the Obama Presidential Library. Well, we’re considering our legal options to get them, and I suggest the Special Counsel and Congress consider their legal options and get those documents too."🔎
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-obama-nsc-advisor-susan-rices-unmasking-material-obama-library/

Jun 19th 10:39pm • No Comments

The Investigation of Pepe Chavez Et Al (series) shared Judicial Watch's post.

Judicial Watch

BOMBSHELL: Judicial Watch today announced that the National Security Council (NSC) on May 23, 2017, informed it by letter that the materials regarding the unmasking by Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice of “the identities of any U.S. citizens associated with the Trump presidential campaign or transition team” have been removed to the Obama Library. The NSC will ***not*** fulfill a Judicial Watch request for records regarding information relating to people “who were identified pursuant to intelligence collection activities.” Specifically, the NSC told Judicial Watch: 'Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library. You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, Presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.' Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said: “Prosecutors, Congress, and the public will want to know when the National Security Council shipped off the records about potential intelligence abuses by the Susan Rice and others in the Obama White House to the memory hole of the Obama Presidential Library. We are considering our legal options but we hope that the Special Counsel and Congress also consider their options and get these records.”

Jun 19th 9:44pm • No Comments

Here's a newsflash for you Sen Al Franken...https://youtu.be/oExqdrjQ0DA?t=127

Attorney General Jeff Sessions Delivers Opening Statement

youtube.com

In his first public testimony since his confirmation hearing, Attorney General Jeff Sessions delivers an opening statement before the Senate Intelligence Com...

Jun 14th 12:26am • No Comments

The Senate Intelligence Committee met today with DOJ Attorney General Jeff Sessions in response to his request to testify in effort to set the record straight as to:

1. Democrat allegations that Sessions colluded with Russians and their interference in the 2016 US elections.
2. Democrat allegations that Sessions participated in the firing of FBI Director James Comey, thereby obstructing justice by interfering with the investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 US elections.
3. Democrat allegations that Sessions lied to Congress (Senator Al Franken) about meetings with Russians.

Democrats pursued questioning with innuendo, unsupported by any factual foundation. Democrats failed to develop ANY evidence supporting any/ all of their allegations, and now are left with personal attacks, questioning the Attorney General’ honesty and integrity. Shame on these Dem Senators for unprincipled politics under the guise of vacuous investigation.

Jun 13th 10:04pm • 1 Comment

Police & politics....

Los Angeles Police Commission Tells Officers To Run Away from Armed Suspects

bluelivesmatter.blue

Los Angeles Police Commission Tells Officers To Run Away from Armed Suspects Los Angeles, CA - The Los Angeles Police Commission who is tasked with setting policies for the police department, has decided that if an

Jun 3rd 7:20pm • No Comments

(PLEASE SHARE) From My Book 1, The Investigation of Pepe Chavez et al, Chapter 3, pgs 19-22. This excerpt, I provide as reference and explication to sections in Phil Stanford's latest book, Rose City Vice.

"3: Drugs and Vice
Division Operations

DVD was proud of its comeback. The Oregon Narcotics Enforcement Association (an association of investigators from agencies throughout the state) voted the Portland Police Bureau’s drug unit
the best in the state in 1981. The next year was a record statistical year in terms of search warrants served and arrests made. Indeed, the bureau was quickly reestablishing its credibility and respect in drug enforcement, and division morale was at a peak.

It was not always so. In December, 1979, Case # 79-90173, a PPB narcotics officer planted dope and stole liquor from the subject of a search warrant—a known two-bit doper who had been a thorn in the side of law enforcement for many years. The officers arrested and later convicted the subject of the
search warrants. He received three years probation. In January 1980, Case # 80-4729, another PPB narcotics officer planted dope on the subject of an investigation—also a known two-bit doper who had eluded justice. The officer arrested and convicted the doper. He received five years probation.

In March 1980, more corruption. Case # 80-17682, four PPB narcotics officers searched the residence of a two-bit narcotics dealer. It was a dirty search warrant, based on a fictitious informant and falsified information. The officers stole $10,000 from the residence; they arrested and convicted the dealer. The defendant received five years probation and a fine.

The echelons of law enforcement discovered the corruption in May of 1980 after sixteen citizen complaints about five dirty PPB narcotics officers. And so began a secret investigation into the Special Investigations Division. I was a member of that secret team of investigators and prosecutors. After
a year, investigators found one hundred five tainted cases in which persons were falsely arrested for narcotics crimes. They found evidence of improper documentation, poor accountability, and more.1 The official report from the investigation describes the corruption in detail:

Theft of SID Evidence Funds
SID officers commonly received narcotics from informants who had been requested to purchase drugs from suspected dealers. The purpose of such buys was to establish the reliability of the confidential informant. The informant is provided with city funds by the officer to make such purchases. The SID officer receiving drugs under these circumstances was responsible for having them marked and placed in the property room or destroyed. However...officers on occasion withheld a portion of the narcotics received. The ‘excess’ retained would be used at a later time by the officer to obtain city evidence funds unlawfully. This was accomplished by falsifying a voucher with the informant’s name indicating that the informant later had been paid a dollar figure for his services in making a ‘reliability’ buy. The ‘excess’ drugs withheld earlier would be presented as evidence of this new buy. The officer in turn would receive from SID evidence funds an amount equal to that he stated on the new voucher. The officer receiving the additional funds simply pocketed the money. No new reliability buy requiring payment to an informant had actually occurred…

Planting of Narcotics
...Drugs would be planted on a suspect when a search failed to produce the variety of narcotics police generally associate with the individual. The narcotics used for such plantings came from earlier seizures
in which officers had failed to destroy or mark as evidence the entire quantity seized...

Unlawful Search Warrant Affidavits
...On occasion information attributed to a confidential reliable informant in a sworn affidavit came from a tip from someone else. The false information in the affidavit would provide the basis for a judge to authorize service of a search warrant. It would not have been issued had the true source of the facts been known.

And what of the five corrupt officers? Confidential informants refused to talk. The police officers, likewise. And right or wrong, investigators and prosecutors decided to consider immunity for the renegade officers.2

Immunity From Criminal Prosecution
...Most officers suspected of wrongdoing had obtained legal counsel. The attorneys involved would not allow their clients to make incriminating statements without some assurance of immunity for criminal conduct. If the task force were to pursue criminal prosecution three obstacles would have to be overcome. First, allegations of criminal conduct would have to be proved by testimony of confidential informants. Previously the taskforce had assured these sources that their identity would not be
disclosed. This assurance had been made to the informants by the police bureau. Secondly, assuming an informant would be willing to reveal his identity and testify in court, the witness’s credibility would be subject to attack. Most jurors would view the world of a typical narcotics informant with suspicion...that
would present the most difficulty for the prosecution in a criminal trial.... It would be difficult to prove that an anonymous informant listed on an affidavit for a search warrant was nonexistent based on the accounting procedures employed by SID. Without the cooperation of the suspect officers it was apparent that the task force would be unable to discover all cases infected by police misconduct.... Even successful prosecution of the officers would not have revealed all prior searches or arrests which had been tainted by police misconduct. Balancing the interests of the community in a thorough airing of the controversy against the potential value of criminal prosecution, the task force chose to grant immunity for nonviolent crimes.

Indeed, after grants of immunity, four officers cooperated with the investigation. All said and done, the four corrupt police officers resigned the police bureau and were not charged with crimes. One other was charged. He pled guilty and received two three-year prison terms for his crimes. And what of all the corrupted criminal cases? In the end, thirty-five cases were dismissed by judges pre-trial (resulting in no detention), and fifty-eight convictions were reversed—all sentenced persons pardoned—including in
one case a suspect who killed a police officer. In addition, twelve corrupted cases were dismissed because a suspect officer was involved (although no misconduct was found to have occurred in these cases, the mere fact that the corrupted officers had participated in these cases was enough to prejudice
the evidence against the arrested parties). In addition to resolution, there was recompense. Several of the wrongfully prosecuted filed lawsuits against the City of Portland. The city paid.

The scandal of ’80 and ’81 was an example of all that was bad about the soiled environment of drug investigations. That corruption would linger in the minds of many police officers and citizens for years. Narcotics investigators would be watched with ever more suspicion and scrutiny. The police bureau would need a skilled hand to overcome the taint and bring narcotics investigation back to a principled and productive operation."

Jun 1st 2:04am • No Comments

IF you really want to know how federal complex criminal investigations (Clinton, Trump, etc) are intended to work, and, in hind sight, via my experience, how they can be derailed...read my books. Amazon.com.

May 30th 1:54am • No Comments

No brainer! Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein should be nominated by Pres. Trump for the position of FBI Director immediately! As recently as two to three weeks ago he appeared before the Senate for their “Advice and Consent” to his nomination to the position he now occupies. He was approved with over 90% bipartisan support! How could Dems change their support for Rosenstein to assume the FBI Director position? Ah yes, they will try. Given the Dems proclivity for hypocrisy—and their insusceptibility from its implications—sure as hell, they will try to impugn any/all Trump nominations. Still, if Rob Rosenstein is Trump’s nomination, it will be interesting to watch the Dems (and the media) struggle.

May 12th 12:42am • No Comments

The media are missing the keys to the timing of firing of Dir Comey. Comey has said for the first time (Senate Hearing last week) that the final straw in his decision to jump his boss, Atty. General Loretta Lynch because of her visit with Bill Clinton. Bottom line, he took the fall for Lynch and then Pres. Obama. Moreover, given DOJ's refusal to impanel an investigative Grand Jury, he knew there would be no prosecution of Hillary Clinton. He also knew there was a case, despite what DOJ said. Given the circumstances, he had three choices: shut up and be complicit in the Obama administration malfeasance; resign and be silent, under threat of prosecution if he revealed any of the evidence and/ or internal DOJ/FBI discussion re the investigation (whether remaining in the FBI employment or not); or take control of the prosecutorial decision using the questionable / unethical Lynch/B. Clinton meeting as his reasoning.
DIR Comey chose the third option, exposing H. Clintons' “criminal” activity, but at the same time taking the fall for Lynch/ Obama, by concealing the reason for usurping the DOJ shortcomings and lack of intention to file indictments.
The outcome: 1) Democrats say he interfered with the election; 2) Pres. Trump now-given the Senate hearing testimony re Comey's “last straw” reasoning for the first time-understandably thought of Comey as withholding the Lynch/ Obama conspiracy from him and fired him. 3) Clinton, Lynch, Obama were never held accountable for malfeasance in their respective offices.

May 10th 12:16am • 1 Comment

Re President Trump’s undertaking to deal with the influx of Mexican drugs: Free advice to President Trump.
1. Build the wall and maximize efforts to minimize and police drug trafficking at the border.
2. As what semblance of rule of law erodes because of the internal conflict (cartel corruption v. government institutions) that most certainly will ensue in Mexico—prepare to assist the remnants of Mexico government’s cry for help.
3. They will call. Send our DEA, Special Forces to “liberate” Mexico.

Mar 8th 1:05am • No Comments

Heard tonight that one of the key co-conspirators and family successfully turned their lives around to legit normalization-- after experiencing the tribulations of the investigation, and reading my books that detailed for them, the full breadth of the criminal enterprise. So gratifying to hear that we in law enforcement could exact the very outcome we aim to achieve!

Jan 23rd 4:23am • No Comments

“Past is Prologue”, William Shakespeare. Want to know how the FBI/ Department of Justice investigative process works-or doesn’t. Get my books on Amazon.com. My two books non-fiction series details the process step by step in an actual federal investigation of an international drug smuggling and distribution conspiracy in the 1980s. My tome has all the elements of the current Bill and Hillary Clinton investigations—Multiple federal crimes, and conflict between the multi-agency law enforcement organizations, the politicians, and the federal prosecutors. Read about my experiences and you will witness Shakespeare’s perception. Check out “The Investigation of Pepe Chavez et al” series.

Nov 5th, 2016 12:14am • No Comments

Terrorists in our midst? Can't be anything but a passing zing. Never will be a long lasting problem in our nation. And as Attorney General Loretta Lynch says "love" is the answer now if we just listen. All will be okay...

Well, I say not. Violent middle east Arab extremists, along with some international Muslim sects, and jihad extremist sympathisers are now aligned in the model of the anti-israeli '60, '70 (evermore, today) Palestinian terrorist model.

Any doubts? Read "Mossad" by Ronald Payne. Let me know if you see any strategic similarities. or parallels.

Jul 4th, 2016 1:23am • No Comments