205
Dennis Montgomery/Mike Lindell. Analysis plus minor update. BIG BRAINS IN HERE
posted ago by simon_says ago by simon_says +205 / -0

Dennis Montgomery/Mike Lindell. Analysis plus minor update.

This is for all the marbles. All of them. For those of you who are unfamiliar with this matter, please see my write-up here: https://greatawakening.win/p/15JnYrQlIR/dennis-montgomery-mike-lindell-a/

If you haven’t seen my explanation of legally what is going on, see here: https://greatawakening.win/p/15K6JSzFb9/dennis-montgomery-and-mike-linde/

Let’s begin with a minor legal update.

The judge has not issued a ruling on Mr. Lindell’s motion.

In federal court, a typical motion practice proceeds as follows: (1) a memorandum in support of a motion is filed with the court; (2) a memorandum opposing the motion is filed by “the other side”; (3) a reply to the opposition memorandum is filed by the moving party; (4) the court holds a hearing at which there is oral argument; and (5) the court rules on the matter.

Some steps don’t actually have to occur. A motion doesn’t have to be opposed – maybe both parties agree. Also, a reply brief doesn’t have to be filed, although I’ve not seen an instance where one isn’t filed. …When I wrote my previous legal explanation, my understanding was that Mr. Lindell’s attorney had indicated that the judge had issued a ruling lifting the protective order (i.e., the “gag order”). When I had checked the court’s docket on the morning I wrote the summary, I saw that the last item on the docket was the memorandum in opposition (filed by the United States). Given my understanding that a ruling had been made, I assumed that perhaps no reply brief was going to be filed, and that perhaps the judge had ruled from the bench at a hearing concerning the matter – and the ruling hadn’t yet been reduced to writing and entered in the docket.

Late that afternoon, I saw that the docket had been updated to include a court order allowing Mr. Lindell’s attorney an extension of time to file his reply memorandum. That means we are at step #3 in the process I outlined above. The deadline for the reply brief is tomorrow, October 21, 2022. So that is when it will be filed.

One more thing: the judge assigned to the matter is Miranda Du – an Obama appointee. I don’t know anything about her other than that.

OK… Now on to some speculative analysis.

Listen to these breathtaking recordings when you can. They are a little long. Pour yourself a bourbon and listen tonight.

https://soundcloud.com/theamericanreport/pt-1-blixseth-on-montgomery-i-hacked-into-all-of-america-for-brennan-clapper-trump-zillion-times?in=david-broyles-327307388/sets/dennis-montgomery-joe-arpaio

https://soundcloud.com/theamericanreport/pt-2-blixseth-says-they-tried-to-destroy-cia-contractor-montgomery-then-hired-him-back-in-2009?in=david-broyles-327307388/sets/dennis-montgomery-joe-arpaio

These recordings appear to have been made covertly. I’m not certain on that point. They include Tim Blixseth (a billionaire who made his money in land/timber), Sherriff Joe Arpaio, and a third gentleman that appears to be a prosecuting attorney representing Maricopa County. From one of Montgomery’s declarations, I understand these recordings to have been made in 2013. The topic relates to Montgomery having approached Blixseth with data proving that Clapper and Brennan (among others) were abusing Hammer. There are other topics discussed too – Obama’s birth certificate, for example.

Here's a small portion of what I take from them:

-Hammer was developed by Montgomery, as I stated previously.

-Hammer uses “brute force” (among other methods?) to find the private asymmetric key of a target server. With that key, the subsequent exchange of the symmetric key used to secure the rest of the SSL (HTTPS) session is compromised. Thus the session can be listened in on.

-By virtue of eavesdropping on targeted HTTPS sessions, the CIA observed people entering their usernames and passwords to access various systems – that’s how the database with millions of Americans’ user names and passwords (to access their bank account information) was obtained.

-From 2004 to 2009, Hammer was run out of a server center in Reno, NV. In 2009, the CIA took it in-house to Fort Washington, MD at a “naval research center” that actually housed a custom-built supercomputer center to operationalize Hammer.

-You can hear that John Roberts was targeted, as was the head of the FISA court. This was in 2013 that the recording was made. So even back then, they wanted to abuse the FISA court to conduct illegal surveillance of political opponents, etc.

-My take on John Roberts. He was targeted because the Chief Justice has the sole, unfettered authority to place judges on the FISA court. That’s what Obama and crew wanted: they wanted corrupt judges on the FISA court, and needed Roberts to put them there.

I know this is a bit confusing because I’m sort of combining topics. I’m in a hurry today – my apologies.

I’ll conclude here, for now. This could use other ears and minds. Please assist with ears and bourbon tonight.

EDIT: THIS POST IS - FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF EFFORT AND STYLE AND CLARITY - NOT UP TO MY USUAL STANDARDS. MY APOLOGIES, THIS WAS A VERY BUSY DAY FOR ME AND I WANTED TO GET THIS INFO OUT.

I WILL FOLLOW UP AGAIN LATER WITH A POST THAT IS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF MY USUAL TONE, VOICE AND INFORMATIONAL DENSITY AND PACE.

95 comments
95 comments share save hide report block hide replies