AKA: The dangers of centralized unjust system.
The establishment components have many ways of protecting and increasing power and assets. Their assets and power are based on taking votes from people and resources nationwide and overseas from people who are not part of the establishment. The way of maintaining control over constituency, bureaucrats, workers and military support and allegiance is by establishing and promoting agendas and narratives through actions, funding, judge and investigators appointment, myth spreading, lawmaking, “law enforcement” and prioritizing. The establishment has the following tools and modus-operandi:
- They can decide and promote current agenda in mainstream media coverage and what should be investigated in congress, senate, IG, AG and other agencies
- Control public opinion
- Conceal , burn. seal or steal evidence
- Overlook or take out of context evidence or classify it
- Giving awards and merits to future investigators and decision makers or law makers that would be biased towards the Establishment
- Appoint autocrats and bureaucrats
- Appoint minions in main institutions and investigation agencies. Usually those people would be labeled policy (Political) advisers or commissars that with a declared role of carrying policies for the good of the state while their real role is to carry agendas that are good for the Establishment.
- Divisiveness and Involvement in creation or escalation of a conflict inland or overseas for the good of the Establishment
- Take advantage of disasters
- Targeting individuals such as IRS audit or other law enforcement entities that seem to be compromising the Establishment
- Use of international and domestic charity organizations and ONGs, like International donations and deals that are exempted from disclosure
- Obstruction of Justice by bureaucrats including: harassment, abduction, Intimidation, murder or smear campaigns against whoever poses a threat, like witnesses, whistle blowers, evidence owners. Sometimes these acts are made by minions or bureaucrats who are directed to conceal their links or it can be done by the bureaucrats unknowingly. Like an IRS audit that was carried by a bureaucrat that was initiated by a decision maker,
Quote from Comey (https://youtu.be/QIh-CadZweI?t=234) : “The culture the we in the FBI and NSA treat personal information (referring to wiretapping) is obsessive, and I mean in a good way”
Eventually Comey overlooks on a “obsessive” misuse for the Establishment in cases were the wiretapped individual whose constitutional rights were infringed by the investigation agencies that issued a biased nonlegal warrants served to the FISA court in 2016-2017.
- Controlling oversight and supervision entities. The oversight entity doesn’t have all the information to assess the legality and fairness of a warrant or alleged misdeed since they don’t have all the information and because some of the oversight entity members (Like a senate commission) have the same agenda and bias as the bureaucrats/minions that performed a misdeed or covered-up a misdeed. Nevertheless, there is some value in democracies of oversight entities as opposed to autocracy. The supervising or oversight entity has some value because they can stop people or agencies that work on the premise that they can “fool all the people all of the time” when evidence is so clear and the corrupt Establishment member is too arrogant or greedy. Another advantage of having an oversight entity, is that establishment minions and bureaucrats use “insurance policies” against their colleagues ,subordinates or bosses. These minions become whistle blowers because of a business going bad that needs an escape-goat or because they don’t agree to “unfair” distribution of benefits and greed. Usually the whistle blower get reduced sentence a plea deal and the real handler is getting away while blaming another minion who gets the worst punishment. So is the case with the plea deal with the witnesses that destroyed the emails on behalf of HRC . The plead deals ended up in helping exonerate HRC and the DOJ and FBI decision makers controlling and gagging the witnesses and being complicit in evidence coverup and evidence destruction process, From the outome it may be concluded theat the witnesses were sent to do the destruction of evidence with a premeditated knowledge of their bosses that they would be able to use an insurance policy of the plea deals at the very bginning. HRC minions where the ones who controlled the investigation process and they were not accountable for the misuse of plea deals that should be used as evidence against the investigated and not as tools for protecting or a coverup. In that cas the s high handlerhs are position is high in the hierarchy they become more proteted or “Untouchable”, because of assets, power, political position and insurance policies and money they control.
FISC Judge Contreras influenced by FBI agents and recused
- Using Insurance Policies. Minions in the investigation agencies, including DOJ , IG and FBI, use Insurance policies that protect themselves and their handlers using pretexts and other methods to manipulate evidence, targeting, warrants, jury, media and potential and actual testimonials. If a fact may put a risk to power or assets it is very easy to convey directly or indirectly to the witness or jury or judge that if a desired outcome is not achieved this individual is putting himself at risk (life, livelihood, family member, social pressure). Also it is possible to contaminate evidence and say later on it is fruit of a poisoned tree or it was “not relevant in the time”. This is one end of the “carrot and stick”. The other end is when these minions are given an incentive like making an individual to act accordingly with their agenda with the belief or implicit understanding that cooperation might bring a contract deal, promotion, political position, bureaucrat position or any other benefit. Once the “carrot ” is given that individual may be converted into an asset for the establishment. In that scenario the individual is used as a sleeping or active agent and it is used again with a “stick” by means of implying that if that individual stops cooperating he/she might lose the position or benefit with whatever excuse.
More on that at “Secret Empires”: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption
The DOJ and investigation agencies have toolbox of tools to use and incline minions to work in their behalf knowingly and unknowingly:
Beria,stated : “Show me the man, and I will find you the crime”
The state knows that and uses it. there are thousands of regulations with criminal felonies attached that most citizens aren’t aware of them (with 3 times a day infringement average) . This fact makes every citizen criminally involved and can be used by the establishment to act in a biased way as well as people who are aware of crimes or misdeeds the are implicated in.
This is true for communist regimes and investigation agencies in the west as well.
In his book Three Felonies a day, Silvergate explains:
“Prosecutors are able to structure plea bargains in ways that make it nearly impossible for normal, rational, self-interest calculating people to risk going to trial. The pressure on innocent defendants to plead guilty and “cooperate” by testifying against others in exchange for a reduced sentence is enormous—so enormous that such cooperating witnesses often fail to tell the truth, saying, instead, what prosecutors want to hear”.
When a managerial or leading figure in an investigation is expressing his views on government devices and in person against an investigated target his subordinates act biased knowingly or unknowingly in the evidence collection and interpretation process. So if FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok is saying that it doesn’t change the outcome of the investigation or the integrity of the investigation because he is professional he is Lying. So does fired director Colmey the Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz saying that it wasn’t influencing the prosecuting process because unbiased conclusion and evidence integrity were at compromised.
The department of justice and investigation agencies are far away from equal justice because they are deciding in a biased way how, who and what law infringement to investigate and enforce accordingly with what they like or what the establishment likes
The over excessive use of funds by the FBI and Justice department to indict Dinesh D’souza for a small campaign contribution with no criminal intent because he made a documentary and disclosed some information on Obama and his administration. Rosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneelThree Felonies a dayRosie Od’oneelRosie Od’oneel walked away for the same misdeed 5 times because she was endorsing Obama’s party. Dinesh was targeted with the “Three Felonies a day” technique attaching irrelevant accusations like out of the context “mail fraud” which were not used against Rosie Od’oneel and the like. On top of that the judge tried to send Dinesh to a mental therapy which would label his ideas as unfit and restict his opinions acceptance and would obstruct his 1st amendments rights through acceptance in the mainstream media. Anderson Copper from CNN before interviewing Dinesh opened with the background tease marginalizing and trying to convince the viewer that Dinesh opinion is not acceptable with the mainstream thought. Anderson admitted that he didn’t know Rosie Od’oneel perpetrated the same misdeed in 5 times in a more sinister way because she used 5 names in 5 places and was not charged in even one district (This is what is known so far). Anderson mentioned that he didn’t know about Rosie’s case gravity which shows that him and the production of CNN had a biased narrative and a biased and unprofessional research before the interview. Dinesh mentioned that the judge didn’t allow Dinesh defense the discovery of documents and due process to show that the FBI and prosecutor where targeting him selectively because of an over funded political prosecution spree which was unveiled in the congress few years later when they unsealed the FBI files and that the plea bargain was made in a coercive way using the “Three Felonies a day” technique. The possibility that his lawyer was playing ball with the prosecutor is still unchecked, In any case at the end of the day his lawyer and the prosecutor got the exposure and other benefits and the American People paid at least $100,000 to bureaucrats in a selective proceeding funded and sponsored by Obama administration.
Related Sources & Links:
Bias on deciding what and who to investigate
The FBI’s Fake « Investigation » of Hillary Clinton’s Emails
Rosie ODonnell campaign contributions
Dinesh Dsouza Opinion