Are Bad Actors Still Running the Show?
What are the REAL reasons J6 hostage and FBI whistleblower Jeremy Brown has not been released? Enquiring minds want to know. Getting to the bottom of why it is that J6 political hostage and FBI whistleblower Jeremy Brown has not yet been released shouldn't be as confusing as trying to figure out "Who's on First?" "They" WANT to keep you confused. But you don't have to be. Read on. And then if you are still confused, at least you'll have a better idea of the right questions to ask.
Retired Green Beret Jeremy Brown should have been released immediately per Trump's orders signed on Inauguration Day. And, per Trump's orders, I have been told (and it would appear to read that way in the actual document from Inauguration Day) that the US AG should pursue dismissal of the federal case (not a state case) that was brought against Jeremy Brown in a Florida court. The two cases brought against Jeremy Brown are, without a doubt, 100% related to J6. He would not be in jail right now if not for J6. That is indisputable.
Yes, two short-barreled weapons were part of what was seized in the unconstitutional raid of his home, during which time, grenades were planted--and the forensic analysis (which Jeremy himself asked to be done) showed that the DNA, carpet fibers, and pet hair on those grenades DID NOT trace back to him in any way whatsoever. So whose DNA was on those grenades? And why didn't the FBI care to find out? Listen to Jeremy speak to @laralogan about the grenades at the link below.
Jeremy has never denied owning the two short-barreled weapons that were seized during the unconstitutional raid of his home, which was necessary--says the weaponized government--on the basis of suspicions that American hero Jeremy Brown might be a domestic terrorist. Give me a break. The FBI themselves have ALWAYS documents that Jeremy Brown posed ZERO threat. You can listen for yourself and hear the two agents who tried to recruit him to spy on Americans in the days leading up to J6 say that, on a threat level of 1-10, Jeremy was a ZERO level threat. And the FBI's own eGuardian system did investigate Jeremy Brown and issued a report AFTER J6 (on 01/13/21, I think), stating that Jeremy posed no threat.
Listen to audio of Jeremy's conversation with the two JTTF agents who tried to recruit him at the following link. You'll hear them say that Jeremy was a ZERO level threat.
https://www.whoisjeremybrown.com/who-is-jeremy-brown
He was absolutely, 100% targeted and set up by weaponized government for telling the American people the TRUTH about J6. THAT is why the Trump administration is likely running into all sorts of resistance from within when it comes to releasing Jeremy Brown. So which side will win? Will Trump's order signed on Inauguration Day be followed? Or are the bad actors still running the show?
As Jeremy describes in the video of his interview with Lara Logan (linked above), Jeremy was offered a deal BEFORE being sentenced for these weapons charges. All he had to do was admit that he was guilty of owning the two short-barreled firearms--which no one would have ever known that he had if his home had not been unconstitutionally raided. Jeremy Brown is an unapologetic defender of the Second Amendment, and so that is why he refused to admit guilt for having failed to register and pay a tax to own those two firearms--one of which was used by his brother to take his own life.
Is a government who is truly concerned about Jeremy Brown being a domestic terrorist going to offer a plea deal to let him go if they the genuinely believed him to be a threat? ("Hey, let's just let bygones be bygones and forget about those grenades that we planted.") What you have to understand is that the plea deal would have been a significant win for them. The plea deals come with strings attached that allow the government to control the ENTIRE narrative about you. Wouldn't they have loved to have been able to say that 20-year Special Forces MSG Jeremy Brown admitted guilt and was the threat that they always claimed that he was. Jeremy Brown would never give them the satisfaction of tarnishing his name with their LIES.
As for the firearms that were seized, they were sitting, unused, in his home. They were not suspected to be part of any criminal activity. Do you believe that weaponized government should have the right to enter your home to shop around for what you may or may not have that they can use to frame you for whatever crime it is that they claim you are guilty of? I'm a hell of a lot less concerned that two short-barreled firearms were found in Jeremy's home than I am about the fact that we have government who thinks they have the right to show up to your door to "clear your name" (listen to the whistleblower recording) for what they CLAIM you have posted online and to raid your home without even stating what it is that they are there to find. ("We'll know when we find it," is the answer they gave when raiding Jeremy Brown's home.)
The smarter thing for us to do isn't to debate whether or not the weapons charges should be the deciding factor in the release of Jeremy Brown. If we were wise, we would focus on the fact that the raid of his home was unconstitutional from the very beginning. To argue anything else is to support the weaponized government's position that they are entitled to enter your home and search your property to try to FIND (or PLANT) a reason to lock you up. Don't think they won't do it to you, too.
Now, back to the pardons order that was signed by Trump on Inauguration Day:
"I further direct the Attorney General to pursue dismissal with prejudice to the government of all pending indictments against individuals for their conduct related to the events at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021. The Bureau of Prisons shall immediately implement all instructions from the Department of Justice regarding this directive."
What I have been told is that what should have happened is that the U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Florida should have mirrored what took place with regard to trespassing charges that Jeremy faced in D.C. The U.S. Attorney in D.C. filed to have those charges dismissed with prejudice--and it was done. The U.S. Attorney in the Middle District of Florida should file to vacate the appeals case and to have it sent back to the originating court for dismissal. This, obviously hasn't been done, or Jeremy would be free right now. And to be clear, both of Jeremy's cases are FEDERAL cases.
So the real question is this: Why hasn't that been done? Has US AG Bondi issued the directive to the U.S. Attorney in the Middle District of Florida to do this? (The acting US AG could have done it prior to her being confirmed, I think.) And, if the directive hasn't been given, then why not? Did anyone ever instruct the BOP to release Jeremy Brown? They can't just turn inmates loose. Were they ever asked to release him is the question? And if they weren't, then who is standing in the way? #FreeJeremyBrown
Read more about the two cases the U.S. Government brought against Jeremy Brown here: https://www.whoisjeremybrown.com/free-jeremy-brown
