Marjorie Taylor Greene Wagging The Dog

 Sunlit7 op

I knew about the time I deleted most the deep dive stuff I did back when Trump was president and it became a huge issue it'd somehow resurface to be a huge issue again. I could recall quite a bit of it off the top of my head to know that Marjorie Taylor Greene is gaslighting Americans. Not that the Biden's are innocent, they aren't anymore innocent than the oligarchs that have exited Ukraine with unknown billions of dollars over the years. Not that I relished having to deep dive all this stuff again to update my memory bank on all of it, there were a few comical moments involved with my favorite being that they had what they termed a "human" source as their informant. I was really relieved I wasn't going to have to find out what GI Joe had been up to lately. Or that Ken and Barbie had transitioned into anything other than the LGBTQ+ crowd for all that matters. It does though really make you wonder why the "human" distinction was listed.

Now I have a better understanding as to why they put MTG on the house oversight committee, or should I say that was part of the negotiations between the Trump MAGA team and McCarthy. The Trump administration had investigated many of the corruption issues with Ukraine. It was those investigations that led Comer to come out and say that most the informants are in court, in jail or missing. Outside of Dennis Archer who got a year in jail due to testimony from informants the rest were small fish in the pond of corruption, the big fish got away, like Hunter. I don't think he necessarily meant others were in court as much as getting the evidence needed to get it to court. Which is the case involved here. It doesn't do diddly squat to have an informant who says someone told them something no matter how credible that informant is, it's even less likely to hold up knowing the informant was a paid informant. Without actual proof, like written statement, audio recording, etc., it's simply just hearsay. Here's another clincher in all of it, the credible informant was from the intelligence community, the same intelligence community that Greene and others within the MAGA party are telling you you can't trust. I am not saying the information isn't credible just pointing out the irony involved here.

So let's get this straight here. A whistleblowers called Senator Grassley, “We had whistleblowers approach Senator Grassley about their concern that there was this form 1023 in existence and the FBI had never investigated it,” Comer said. “Senator Grassley and I got on the phone with Director Wray, and Senator Grassley told Director Wray that both Senator Grassley and myself had already read the form 1023 from a whistleblower, so we knew darn well it existed.” That's the part they don't expect the ordinary citizen to understand the complicated process it would have taken to investigate this one particular 1023. Outside of the informant having some sort of written statement, bank records or audio recording, which we know he did not because Mykola Zlochevsky said and MTG repeated, that the informant was informed by Zlochevsky it'd take ten years to track down how the money was launder to the Bidens. Zlochevsky isn't going to voluntarily give himself up for prosecution so this is a nothing burger. If they can't find a way to hang Zlochevsky for any criminal act that might be able to bargain with, barring any other solid provable evidence this case is sitting where it needs to be not because the FBI is hiding it from the American people. They are protecting it if such a day arises they have enough evidence to proceed with it. Like any normal law enforcement investigation there is no protocol that says evidence collected prior to court proceedings must be presented to the public. Actually it runs counter to an investigation because than the perp knows what the enforcement agency is up and can destroy the evidence. Not to mention it can get informants killed.

Often what stands out the most in all this because I had spent considerable hours sorting out who was who and who did what to who was that Viktor Shokin actually ended up getting a raw deal out of all this thanks to Biden. The man barely had his feet on the ground when Biden demanded in the now infamous video the prosecutor get fired. It all went back to Britain demanding documents from Ukraine on Mykola Zlochevsky, the owner of Burisma, who Britain had frozen his assets due to money laundering concerns. At that time the case was assigned to Vitaly Kasko, who did do an investigation and forwarded information to Britain, that information, according to the assigned judge in the case in Britain wasn't enough to counter a letter sent by Kasko's boss without Kasko's knowledge to Zlochevsky attorney's that said Zlochevsky wasn't under any criminal investigations in Ukraine. Britain was forced to release the money. Sounds complicated, and it was, like I said I spent hours on it, probably why things weren't adding up when Madge hit the stage with her late breaking news. The letter sent off by Kasko's boss frustrated him to the point he resigned. That's when Shokin came aboard. Britain though was so upset about what had taken place they went to the UN and demanded answers. That pressure ended up re-opening the investigation and Shokin got handed the case. That's when Biden did his I'll give you this much time to fire the prosecutor stint. So Shokin didn't even have time to get his feet wet.

Just to give an idea of how hard it really is to get evidence to prosecute these people there is four, five paragraphs out of this long read article from the Guardian that depicts not just the Zlochevsky case with Britain but highlights others and the roadblocks that prosecutors willing to prosecute face trying to get evidence:

Zlochevsky is not the only former Ukrainian official to have assets frozen abroad. As part of western assistance to the new Ukrainian government, European countries have blocked the assets of Yanukovich and a couple of dozen others. The asset freeze was intended to give Ukrainian prosecutors time to investigate and prosecute, and thus prevent the individuals involved burying assets in their favourite tax havens. The totals involved – around £220m in cash and property – would buy a lot of medicine and build a lot of roads.

The man in Ukraine responsible for gathering the evidence against many of the individuals whose assets have been frozen abroad is Sergei Gorbatyuk, head of the prosecutors’ special investigations department. When we met in April last year, he looked tired and crumpled in a baggy grey suit; it was late in the evening, the only time he had free after a long day. Unusually for a high-ranking official in the prosecutors’ office, he has a reputation for honesty, which is why several anti-corruption activists recommended that I talk to him.

“Our main problem is that these high-ranking officials’ assets are all registered abroad, in Monaco, or Cyprus, or Belize, or the British Virgin Islands, and so on, and we write requests to them, we wait for three or four years, or there’s no response at all. And that’s that, and it all falls apart,” he said. “The asset has been re-registered five times just while we’re waiting for an answer.”

Even when foreign officials did reply to his letters, Gorbatyuk explained, he then had to find a way to understand what they had written. The authorities in Monaco for example had forwarded him 4,000 pages of documentation relating to one oligarch in French, Arabic and English, which he had received eight months previously but was yet to read. The official translators had waited for four months to tell him they were too busy to do the job, then an outside contractor proved incapable of managing it, and, he says, his bosses kept blocking the other suggestions he brought them. “This is the insanity of our whole system, this is everywhere. I get the impression no one wants anything to happen,” he said.

And if previous cases are any guide, progress will continue to be slow. In one of the few examples of a Ukrainian corruption-related charge that has gone to court, ex-Prime Minister Pavlo Lazarenko was found guilty in California in 2004 of money laundering, and sentenced to 97 months in prison. Lazarenko had fled Ukraine back in 1999, when he fell out of favour with the then-president. He tried to claim asylum in the United States but instead became the first foreign leader convicted of laundering money through the American financial system.

Although the conviction was successful, the asset recovery process remains blocked. A total of $271m of Lazarenko’s money is frozen in Guernsey, Antigua, Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Lithuania, but Washington has been unable to recover it for a decade. And this is not an unusual case. The World Bank has an asset recovery database, which shows that cases have dragged on in western courts for more than 10 years in connection to money from Liberia, El Salvador, Kenya, Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Philippines, Zambia and elsewhere.

In evidence submitted to a parliamentary committee last year, the Serious Fraud Office said the obstacles put in its path by offshore jurisdictions were a key cause of these delays. “Top tier defendants are highly sophisticated and operate internationally. They are likely to be acutely aware of those jurisdictions with an environment that is favourable to them, and from which it is very difficult (and in some cases impossible) to either trace benefit or recover assets,” the SFO said. “Such defendants are also likely to be astute in their use of financial products and other devices which they use to disguise their economic benefit from any crime.” 

I recommend reading the article, saves you hours of research that leads to the same conclusion.

Marjorie Taylor Greene is telling you to trust whom she'd normally be telling you not to trust but in reality the people you shouldn't be trusting is the MTG's of the world. There's a reason she, as I said, was put on that committee. So this wagging of the dog was pre-planned in advance of the Trump indictment. My opinion would be that the whistleblowers who called Senator Grassley are within the Trump camp itself. Hence why they needed a MAGA rep on that committee who could go in and retrieve the information known sitting inside the SCIF and come out claiming a political prosecution of Trump was taking place and here is your proof. They than had Donald Trump Jr. hit twitter and tweet:

"On the same day that a story broke about a whistleblower alleging Joe Biden took a 5 million dollar bribe from Burisma in Ukraine, Biden's corrupt DOJ decides to indict Trump over BS charges," Trump tweeted. "Do you really think that's a coincidence?"

Considering the nothing burger thus far the informants statement contains in any prosecutorial way does anyone believe that MTG being assigned to the house oversight committee is a coincidence? Than to add insult to injury the Trump camp goes on a political prosecution tour advising the American people it's not Trump they are after it's you.

Trump in Georgia: It's not me they are after it's you!

I mean this stuff is sad, sad that the American people can't see what's transpiring here. Over the weekend Kari Lake spoke at one of the events and she had this to say:

Kari Lake speaking in Georgia tonight says to get Trump Merrick Garland will have to go through seventy five million Americans, and must of us are card carrying members of the NRA. That's not a threat, that's a public service announcement.

I am not a card carrying member of the NRA nor do I plan on going to die on any hill for Trump as seems to be what they are advocating for. Besides he'd desert you faster than you could rip up your MAGA membership card. The MAGA leadership know that people are catching on that we are not winning as depicted by MTG on Laura Ingraham the other night. We've been losing and losing big time. Don't let them wag a piece of paper in front of your face and say it's a case of political prosecution when it's clearly a case that's more complicated than ordinary citizens have the time or inclination to get a grip on. Just like a lot of people don't understand that in PA people file LLC's because it's nearly impossible to get information on them from the state. That's why you see what they do have has a lot of redacted information, you can't just put people's names out there without solid proof, as such it shows PA didn't get to bulk at government investigators. They had to give it up but it wasn't enough to file a case. That's all this is really about, lacking proof and the intelligence community smart enough to secure what they do have so it doesn't disappear. It doesn't mean it's not being looked at, still being investigated, it's sitting in the highest security level if that moment in history ever comes where that missing link(s) comes to fruition. Don't let them drive you to violence over it, that's what they want.

Links to information in the article can be seen at the original posting here:  
https://hive.blog/deepdives/@sunlit7/marjorie-taylor-greene-wagging-the-dog