Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Brooklyn Attitude
This guy has his own blog website that he talks about all sorts of "deep state" goings on.

https://www.deepcapture.com/

and here is his blog entry on Hillary:

https://www.deepcapture.com/2020/10/finale-the-deep-states-hillary-clinton-bribery-blackmail-sting-the-maria-butina-rape-murder-gambit/

In late 2015, two Men in Black from my distant Wall-Street-fighting past and the then-ongoing Maria Butina matter told me, “We need you to shift to working on something more important. The Bureau is setting Hillary Clinton up in a sting. We need you to facilitate a bribe for her.” They explained using legal jargon (that will be useful for me later):

There are two groups in the FBI investigating the Clintons. There is a group looking into Hillary’s emails, but we think that is a whitewash. Yet there is a group of agents in New York City looking into her finances, and they want to put her ass in stir.

They walked me through the principles distinguishing a good sting from entrapment: An undercover cop can’t just walk down the street, go up to a stranger, and say, “Hey, do you want to buy some cocaine?” That would be entrapment: the target would have been drawn into a trap of committing a crime that likely would not otherwise have happened. Instead, the prosecutor needs to be able to show that the accused already had a prior disposition to buy the cocaine, which is done by proving that the person had already performed one or more predicate acts, such as, “He pulled his car over at a street corner known for drug distribution, he put his car in park, he rolled down his window…” These predicate acts demonstrate that the accused was already disposed to buy the cocaine, and so when the undercover cop approached and sold some to him it was not entrapment, but a crime that was going to happen anyway, so it is a good bust.

Comey had been blocking such “aggressive investigative techniques” (e.g., a sting) on Hillary, the Men In Black told me, claiming there were insufficient predicate acts to establish that she had the prior disposition.

Recently information had come in, however, that Hillary had accepted a bribe in the low tens of millions of dollars. They told me who it was from (a foreign government) and how it was done. The FBI agents in New York had leveraged that information to force Comey to sign off on setting Hillary up in a bribery sting, these agents explained.

Now those New York agents were asking for my help. It was believed that a different foreign government (of a country to which I had never traveled) wanted to pay Hillary a bribe (in the teens-millions) in return for having Hillary privately pledge what one aspect of President Hillary’s policy towards their nation would be. My assignment was the create the following end-state: within two months, Hillary Clinton and that government’s bagman are to be somewhere together alone in a room for 10 minutes. You take it from there, Byrne.


18 posted on 09/15/2021 6:50:53 AM PDT by Yo-Yo (is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Yo-Yo

Color me skeptical..... the bribes go to the “Clinton Foundation” where underlings can wash the money and take the fall if the scheme falls apart.

The Clintons always have plausible deniability that having their every need being paid for by the “charity” was wrong or somehow violated IRS law. I bet neither one of them has handled a checkbook in 20 years.

They live like the top echelon of the top 1% without ever touching the money.


22 posted on 09/15/2021 7:39:41 AM PDT by volunbeer (Find the truth and accept it - anything else is delusional)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson