What’s interesting connections about Brian Cates article: Consider Durham’s historical records of prosecuting racketeering; that seems to fits in with President Trump’s lawsuit against HRC, et al, of International Criminal Conspiracy RICO act. Durham is investigating, is everything Trump was suing for in his lawsuit to HRC and team. It fits in with the interesting theory (below) from Sundance isTrump filed the lawsuit in order to have the documents stolen by the DOJ and FBI, to get the evidence out there
1: Durham’s Prosecutions in Connecticut and elsewhere He is a master at prosecuting Criminal Conspiracy, Racketeering and RICO convictions, Think New England Mafia and various other cases. Mr. Durham served as Counsel to the U.S. Attorney; from 1989 to 1994, he served as Chief of the Office’s Criminal Division, and from 1982 to 1989, he served as an attorney and then supervisor in the New Haven Field Office of the Boston Strike Force in the Justice Department’sOrganized Crime and Racketeering Section. https://www.justice.gov/archives/usao-ct/meet-us-attorney-Durham
2: Durham Was Tasked With One Main Objective For His Special Counsel Investigation–. It’s the false statements trial of Igor Danchenko that will provide Durham with the opportunity to continue __mapping out that criminal conspiracy network at the upper level Durham’s Job Is To Find Out Who Subverted Every Single Safeguard That Should’ve Prevented SpyGate From Happening & Hold Them Accountable Durham is using false statement trials to map out the extensive criminal conspiracy so that everyone can clearly see it. https://briancates.substack.com/p/durham-was-tasked-with-one-main-objective
3:A Different Take on the Dismissal of the Trump v Clinton Lawsuit 9/11/2022 | Sundance
I realized Trump’s lawsuit, wasn’t a lawsuit per se’. The 108-pages I was holding in my hands was more akin to legal transfer mechanism from President Trump to lawyers who needed it. The filing was contingent upon a series of evidence to support the filing. However, the attachments and citations were missing. That was weird.That’s when I realized the purpose of the lawsuit. When the DOJ-NSD raided the home of Donald Trump, and suddenly the motive to confiscate the documents that would be the missing lawsuit attachments and citations surfaced. President Trump needed a legal way to secure and more importantly share the evidence. Trump, and any lawyer would need a reason to review the evidence. The Trump -v- Clinton et al lawsuit becomes that ‘reason.’ The FBI with the raid seized all the material of attorney client work product. Lawfully obtained, constitutionally declassified and legally protected material. This is where the ‘special master’ will play a key role. Q quote below, fits this scenario perfectly https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2022/09/11/a-different-take-on-the-dismissal-of-the-trump-v-clinton-lawsuit/
4: Q quote on how to introduce evidence legally
Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: 6e1ca8 No.1215845 1287
Apr 27 2018 19:27:33 (EST)
Cohen raid by FBI?
Public context: re: payment to Stormy Daniels?
SC & FBI raided POTUS’ attorney to pull Stormy Daniels payment info?
RR signed off?
What other docs were collected?
How many places raided?
Raid on the President of the United States’ attorney for payment details re: private case re: Stormy Daniels?
Think logically.
How do you introduce evidence into an investigation (legally)?
Who has everything?
Methods which info collected/ obtained?
Admissible in the court of law?
Insert Rudy.
First public statement.
“It shouldn’t take more than “a week or two” to come to a resolution on the probe.”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/20/rudy-to-rescue-giuliani-vows-to-wrap-up-mueller-probe.html
Think resignations.
Who has the POWER?
If POTUS was in a weakened position (about to be impeached/indicted) would ‘they’ resign?
Why are we here?
Public forum.
World watching.
Sharing of intel to bad actors?
Purpose?
Not confirming SC is on /team/.
Question everything.
Timing important.
Planned?
Q
5: DONALD J. TRUMP, Plaintiff, v. HILLARY R. CLINTON, HFACC, INC., etc Count I RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1962(C)) The RICO Enterprise 269. At all relevant times, the RICO Defendants, Clinton, the Clinton Campaign, the DNC, Perkins Coie, Elias, and Sussmann, constituted an association in-fact enterprise (the “Enterprise”) within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4). 270. Predicate Acts :278. Section 1961(1) of RICO also provides that racketeering activity