Author: Stanley Bolten
In 2014, Attorney Sue Basko had filed a Declaration under penalty of perjury in Brian’s federal criminal case declaring Brian D. Hill innocent of his wrongful conviction in 2014. Brian was formerly of USWGO Alternative News. This article will show evidence and different videos of people which will help demonstrate that Sue Basko was right all along when she claimed that Brian was innocent.
Attorney Sue Basko was right all along when she gave legal advice to Oath Keepers in 2013 and to Luke Rudkowski about the child porn set up scheme going on. Political Hackers Squad set up operations, which is what we at this blog call a “Deep State” plot to frame up patriots with sex crimes including child pornography and false rape allegations. These type of plots had been revealed by folks like Sharyl Attkisson and a former CIA case officer who was interviewed by Glenn Beck about the Deep State coming after him. This former CIA case officer admitted to Glenn Beck that the CIA has the capability to frame up people and paint/putting somebody in a weird way. Sharyl Attkisson admitted that the FBI threatened to frame up her husband with child pornography.
100 that was an Intel collection operation yeah there’s no doubt in my
mind Ingrid and look to give CIA credit there’s a lot of these type of things
they do which benefit our intelligence understanding uh whether it’s you know
framing people or putting them in a weird way the the benefit exists the problem is
the CIA because it’s not held accountable for a lot of these things
because they could stamp covert action on the document they could literally classify anything
at any time period they want where nobody because it’s a compartmentalized
operation nobody will have access to that it’s called a special Access program I mean there I’ve been involved
in special access programs in the military were only a handful of people in my own organ organization knew about
Just the first page pretty much sums up what is going on here. Attorney Sue Basko had originally claimed that Brian was innocent, and brought up that Brian was involved with others in alternative media who were almost framed with child pornography. That later included Alex Jones in the sandy Hook case.
Brian actually had the proof of his innocence when the discovery evidence material is entirely put together, every document in all from the Search Warrant to the police raid, and all the way up to Brian’s false confession and then theState Bureau of Investigation documenting what appears to be a frame up operation to where it continually downloaded after Brian’s computer was seized to make his false confession look accurate by matching the download dates with his confession statements. The grand jury who indicted Brian Hill for one count of child pornography did not ever read the Search Warrant because that warrant and it’s execution date by the Mayodan Police Department (August 28, 2012) contradicts the download dates (July 20, 2012, and July 28, 2013). That was reported by We Are Change and it’s cache of documents they had available.
Attorney Sue Basko did claim that Brian was innocent but yet Judge Osteen threatened her with perjury because that crooked judge was shocked that somebody actually stood up for this innocent man. Of course there wasn’t even any investigation into whether she actually lied under oath or not. In fact Brian’s public defender was asked if she had communicated with Sue Basko and he said he he hadn’t even communicated with her. How very convenient. They never asked her what evidence she had that Brian was innocent. Because the truth is, the U.S. Attorney and the Pre-Sentence Investigation final report shows contradicts favorable to Brian Hill being innocent, and that supports Sue Basko’s testimony and claims.
Let’s see if she was right that Brian Hill is innocent.
First of all, let’s show the download dates from the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation report case file. First there is the leaked SBI case file photographs showing the download dates as to allegedly claiming possible child porn was downloading for 11 months when in the custody of law enforcement after it was seized from Brian Hill by the cause of the Search Warrant, and then the Internal Affairs complaint filed by Brian Hill with the U.S. District Court (Exhibit 1 — Document #136, Attachment #1) also addressing the download dates. It was labeled confidential at one time by Brian Hill but when they did absolutely nothing about Brian’s complaint, Brian filed it with the Federal Court again documenting the download dates. The Internal Affairs complaint was filed by Brian Hill under penalty of perjury (Declaration — Document #136) in his first 2255 case.
Not even We Are Change had a copy of the Internal Affairs complaint filed by Brian Hill. A lot of documentation under penalty of perjury. It was entirely ignored by the U.S. District Court. However the download dates would support Brian’s innocence because if child porn theoretically downloads on a computer after being seized by law enforcement, then it isn’t the suspect who is downloading it because it downloads on a computer not in the custody of the suspect. If the suspect was trying to download child porn files off of the internet, then why does it download after being seized and continues downloading after being seized until a certain period of time had lapsed???
Attorney Sue Basko was RIGHT.
Then there is the Pre-Sentence Investigation report. There are legal arguments Brian had made about what was in the PSI in his sentencing phase of his case. It claimed that Brian had NO VICTIMS. That the alleged child pornography was of an unknown serious according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) which made no sense when the police claimed a known series was being downloaded, yet the NCMEC said the total opposite.
Page 34 of Document #143 in 2255 case:
That therePage 34 of Document #143 in 2255 case
was no proven child pornography to have been found and verified. The PSI
report contradicts the claims of Detective Robert Bridge. They didn’t actually
prove that child pornography had existed to have warranted the criminal charge.
They had mainly relied on Petitioner’s false confession and shown random
keyword names but didn’t specify which file, directory, or registry it may have
been found in. The entire forensic report is shoddy and does not show the
existence of computer viruses and malware or even rootkits when the claims of
Petitioner says otherwise. Anybody with P2P file sharing software had viruses
and spyware. Anybody using the internet period or even using pirated software
has computer viruses and malware. Computers that do not have security
software updated have a higher risk of getting computer viruses and hacker
attacks than those that do have totally updated security settings. “Files of
interest” are not verified to being of actual child pornography. If there is no
actual child pornography then there is no guilt at all. When Petitioner’s
confession statements do not match the shoddy forensics and are contradictory
then the confession is false due to Petitioner’s Autism Spectrum Disorder and
Type | Brittle Diabetes. Being questioned around lunch time is not the right step
to take under the Americans with Disabilities Act, Title II. Petitioner has clearly
demonstrated enough facts of innocence to warrant an evidentiary hearing to
compel the Government under the Criminal Justice Act (“CJA”) 21 Voucher to
pay for expert witnesses to demonstrate that Petitioner is factually innocent.
That to me sounds like FRAUD. It is fraud when they cannot verify whether files of interest are of child pornography. No wonder Brian had no victims. The entire child pornography case was a fraud, and they used Brian’s false confession to justify getting an indictment. It is easy to obtain a false confession as documented by The Innocence Project. Those statements about the sealed PSI report were made in another court filing. So we get a glimpse into the weird fraud and abnormalities of Brian’s criminal case.
See page 20 of Document #134, under penalty of perjury which was mailed to Donald Trump’s office of The White House. The same affidavit or similar affidavit which Roger Stone had tried to give to President Trump before he left The White House in 2021.
Page 212 - Declaration of Iunocence for The White House - 01/22/2017 4. The whole forensic work done by North Caro|ina State Bureau of Investigatiou (SBI) Special Ageut (S.A.) Rodney V. White, is questionable There has never been any confirmed child pornography lt just simply says that they had found “iiles of interest” in different storage mediums, as so they had claimed. Then of course child porn had downloaded up until July 28, 2013, when that very Laptop was seized on August 28, 2012. l tried to bring up those dates in letters to law enforcement such as the SBI and another agency. Nobody is giving me any explanation as to why those download dates are in S.A. White's report That is odd. 5. The Presentence lnvestigation (PSI) report even admitted that no supposed victims were even identified. l personally do not know who they are, I dou't know their uames, their ages. I don't even know what they look like. That is because l was framed with child porn. It stated, Citing Document #33, Filed 09/16!14, Page 6 of 26, "According to the government, none oftke children have been identified depart of a known series by the National C'enter for Mz'ssing and E.q:»!oited Children (NCMEC), " and "However, the victims in this case have notj‘iled o daime restitution " The only victims that I am personally aware oi` and have knowledge of, is _si_u '_" __l._'_ '_ _I, _\._l r_l___ ;__1_;1_=__ ' =.____-._.__ __ __: __ __ about the -; ' _ _ '_‘ ‘ _- ' .~ ;~__a_' _+_.I don't even know ifthe supposed “liles f interest” child porn claims are really even of children, there is no verification as to if they really are child para or just files of interest to the Bnrean.https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4304407/134/united-states-v-hill/
Again, it seems like the entire child pornography case against Brian Hill was a fraud. If the American people read his Pre-Sentence Investigation report and the SBI report and verifies what Brian had claimed, then Brian was telling the truth and this PROVES Attorney Sue Basko was correct except she didn’t know a fraud was perpetuated by the federal prosecution, a fraudulent child porn charge. This is worse then planting child porn to obtain a conviction. A fraud is defamation, a fraud is a lie, it is bearing false witness.
Did Attorney Sue Basko bear false witness when claiming that Brian D. Hill is innocent??? NO, the evidence points to Brian’s innocence. No victims, download dates being 11 months after computer was seized. This is more believable then a tormail.org email message. Brian has the proof he was innocent and it was in the very prosecution’s case all along. Brian was convicted by a fraudulent prosecution and dirty tricks.
Attorney Sue Basko was RIGHT, she was right all along. She never lied in her affidavit. She probably had a gut feeling that Brian was innocent and a woman’s gut is never wrong. If Brian was a predator wanting to hurt children, women would get a bad gut feeling from Brian and want to stay away from him including Brian’s own mother. That is not the case at all. Brian’s family defended Brian and even filed affidavits in his case. So Attorney Sue Basko was right all along and when a woman has that gut feeling that Brian was framed, he was set up, she might just be right about that. The evidence supports her claims under oath.
Also the CIA can frame people, it was admitted in a Glenn Beck interview. Again that former CIA case officer said: “and look to give CIA credit there’s a lot of these type of things they do which benefit our intelligence understanding uh whether it’s you know framing people or putting them in a weird way the the benefit exists the problem is the CIA because it’s not held accountable for a lot of these things“.
Sue Basko at one time was hoping our FBI was honest and cared about other people. In her post about the child porn frame ups, she responded to a comment about the FBI framing people and she responded personally to that comment. See her post at https://web.archive.org/web/20130810170911/http://subliminalridge.blogspot.com/2013/07/child-porn-emailed-to-activists-to-try.html.
Actually the CIA may be the perps. The CIA probably has a child porn collection file library of possibly trillions of gazillions of files. The CIA probably has every child porn file/photograph/video which had ever existed. The NSA and CIA has the child porn and the capability to plant that filth on any of us for whatever reason. National Security and all!!!!