That Whitmer kidnapping trial looms
I’ve covered this topic already in many posts, but here’s a newer article that focuses on some of the corruption of the FBI agents and informants involved in entrapping the Michigan Whitmer kidnapping defendants. I use the word “entrapping” purposely, because I have become convinced that’s what went on.
Here are two sentences from the article that I want to highlight:
That situation is complicated by the fact that the case has become a political lightning rod, with right-wing commentators calling it a prime example of government overreach. Some even baselessly assert that the Michigan investigation was a test run for what they claim was a false flag operation conducted on Jan. 6.
Typical, typical. We call it “baseless,” so just trust us – we don’t actually have to look to the stated basis for the claims to which we refer. Plus, “right-wing commentators” – say no more; must be false, right?
But if you’re been following the case, the main go-to guy for the entrapment claims is Glenn Greenwald, who is anything but a “right-wing commentator.” In fact, if he has any political leanings at all, he’s always been on the left, although he’s primarily libertarian (but a left libertarian). And you be the judge as to the strength of his thesis about entrapment, the Michigan plot, and the January 6th demonstrations. I find his arguments quite compelling; for example, please read this, and he’s written plenty more on the subject. You can also find many of my own posts about the issue here.
The word “baseless” and the contention that it’s only “right-wing” people making this claim acts as a signal to readers to ignore any such claims. We see the use of that technique many times, because it’s a favorite of the left and the MSM – and it works.
Some of the Whitmer kidnapping defendants seem to be facing possible life sentences. The defense of entrapment – which I assume they will raise – is very hard to prove; the law favors law enforcement (the FBI) in such cases. It’s a golden opportunity for government to launch the infiltration of marginal groups, encourage foolish young men (it’s usually young men) who otherwise would not be committing crimes to plan said crimes, led and egged on by the FBI and their informants, and then to slam them with the possibility of very serious prison time. It’s been going on for a long long time – even back when I was in law school, and it disturbed me then. Back then the targets were on the left, after 9/11 they were Muslims, and now they’re white guys on the fringe right.
When it comes to the FBI, Buzzfeeds claim that FBI corruption is baseless could be because the FBI is refraining from filing sexual assault of a minor charge on one of their reporters or producers. We now have facts that the FBI sat on evidence of sexual assault of US Women’s gymnastics olympiads, which has many members under 18. And now we know the FBI sat on evidence of sexual assault of a minor by a CNN producer for over a year. The FBI is still ignoring Hunter Biden’s laptop, but they were right on doing something about legally reporting a girl’s lost diary.
Steven D’Antuono was promoted, by the corrupt Christopher Wray (whom Trump should have fired, along with Fauci), to DC, following his “successful” foiling of the evil plot against the saintly Whitmer. The only proper approach to the FBI would be that which the Romans once applied to their enemies in Carthage.
The sad fact is the courts and statutes have rigged the definition of entrapment so that short of a police gun being held at your head, nothing police do, no lies police tell, no crime the police commit, will ever constitute entrapment.
And the Patriot Act was W acting in favor of enlarging the state, giving the state more power, and ramping up fear – all to close the barn door after the horses left.
All part of the left’s strategy to intimidate any who oppose it into going quietly into the night. Examples must be made if the message of fear is going to be taken to heart.
I agree that this largely began with the Patriot Act which authorized many of these abuses by the feds. I have a daughter who is an FBI agent and a hard lefty. We avoid politics when we see each other.
Is there anyone in the FBI that could be characterized as ‘hard right’?
Is there anyone in the FBI that could be characterized as ‘hard right’? Assuming we were forty years younger, would you or I be able to get a job at the FBI? My guess is probably not.
When younger, my son was quite wild – whether trouble followed him around or he asked it along, they were constant companions. In his college years, we had to retain an attorney to extract the boy from a nasty set of circumstances. By sheer good fortune, this attorney was a wonderful asset to my son and all ended well.
The lawyer had served as both a prosecutor and a judge in this particular community before starting his own practice, doing mostly defense work. So he had been on all sides of the law in the community and he was wired to everyone and everything in this town. Further, he was a diligent and skilled lawyer.
So to the point at hand here – the attorney told me of all the people he knew for a fact had spoken dishonestly under oath on the stand, by far the majority were policemen. This guy was no anti-police zealot, he just said it in a matter-of-fact manner like “Well, this is what I’ve seen”.
Sadly, I am deeply skeptical of many layers of law enforcement and the legal infrastructure in this once-great country.
Some of the Whitmer kidnapping defendants seem to be facing possible life sentences. The defense of entrapment – which I assume they will raise – is very hard to prove; the law favors law enforcement (the FBI) in such cases.
The burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defence.
Robert Shotzberger:
Of course the burden of proof is on the prosecution, in terms of proving the defendants were involved in some such plot. I believe they have plenty of proof of that for most if not all of these defendants.
But even with such proof, entrapment is a defense available to the accused. The defense must be affirmatively proven, however – it is not assumed, and it’s hard to prove. Read about it here. Also see this:
“[T]hat entrapment can only occur with a government official, such as an FBI official or a police officer, not a private individual.”
And that is why the FBI uses non-FBI, just FBI directed, people to do the actual entrapment. The informant will be the one that proposes and entreats the targets to do the illegal act.
geoffb:
If I’m not mistaken, once a person becomes an FBI informant – especially a paid informant – that person is subject to the entrapment rules because the person has become a person acting under the direction of law enforcement (see this). Problem is, entrapment is hard to prove, and the burden is on the defendant.
Thank you Neo for the explanation. I’d hoped that was how it worked but feared that it didn’t. But then again they can just lie about what they did too. Testi-lying works and is rarely punished as Scott spoke of above.
Does the FBI not have enough crimes to investigate? Do they have too much time on their hands?
Neo: thanks for the link and excerpt on the entrapment defense. They make it all sound so clean and logical and susceptible to proof. All you have to do is show you had no “predisposition” to do the bad thing; and that the government “induced” you. Such fine words! But the minute you start thinking about the evidence you would need to establish –out of a hazy mass of he-said and she-said (all rigged by the government from the get-go to produce the desired scalp)– you realize what an uphill climb it is. Every word you said to the instigator (and every failure to object) will be carefully fitted into the mosaic of culpability. Every attempt to show the instigator’s bad faith and compromised status, will be met with objections that you are blackening the good name of an honest witness. Etc etc.
Horrible stuff.
“…with right-wing commentators…”
This, right here, is prima fascia proof of the leftward bias of our news media.
Have you *ever* heard them refer to a “left wing” commentator?
The only time I have ever heard one of our MSM outlets refer to a “left wing” at all, it was a story about an airplane.
“Theo, you ask for a miracle. I give you the Eff Bee Eye.”
https://youtu.be/JI5gblI82rg
and in this corner
https://www.revolver.news/2021/12/damning-new-details-massive-web-unindicted-operators-january-6/
Thanks, miguel, that is sick!
Bush ii and patriot act did not exisut during nixon and cointelpro.
People will need to dig deeper than this if they want to oursue thr fbi s dark state origin