All right. Joining us now is Marty Goddisfeld. And Marty has got a
lot of different social media acauns. I'll just ask him where he is.
He says he's trying to migrate everything to substack martyg dot substack dot com,
where you can find his writing. But Marty, and we've had Marty on
actually had his wife Dana for many years while Marty was in a communications management
unit. This is where they put political prisoners in the US right now.
It's where you will see Juliana Songe heading and so we want to talk to
him about what life is like there. It's very, very difficult. It
is there to manage and to shut off any communication to the outside world.
And so that's what they've designed this thing for and that's why they put dissonance
and political prisoners there. We do have political prisoners, a lot of them
in the United States. So joining us now is Marty Goddisfeld. Thank you
for joining us, Marty, thank you for having me tell us a little
bit about just give us an overview of the CMU. We can get to
your case in particular and why you were there, and of course it was
a great injustice and I've talked many times a day and about it, and
we'll talk about that and things that are still happening with your court case.
But you're out now. But tell us, tell us what the Communication management
unit is like. So it's a small, self contained prison unit. Guys
in the CMU do not get to go out to like the prison yard,
that do not get to go out to the other places inside the prison that
the average federal prisoner, uh you know, gets to go. They keep
it self contained in a very small area so that they can cramp down on
communications, make sure that like you can't pass another prisoner a note or have
another prisoner call somebody on your behalf right. They keep even the laundry within
the unit. The rest of the prison conflext sends their laundry out right like
a senseral laundry place, but they're worried that, you know, it's just
an example. Prisoners will notes to the guys working in the laundry and then
be able to get communications out that way. So I actually keep even the
laundry right inside the unit. And like when you buy a commissary, right,
for the most part, it's prisoners who pack the commissary bags, but
not for CMU prisoners. Only staff can pack a commissary bag for CMU prisoner,
which you know, sometimes makes it harder to even get your commissary if
it's like a busy week, right, like, they might not have the
staff to actually pack the bags for the CMU guys. When I got there
April first, twenty nineteen, to the CMU in Terahoe, Indiana, and
then there are two run by the Bureau of Prisons, which is a federal
agency of the Justice Department. Right, so the war is in Terahoe,
Indiana. That's the original facility was opened around two thousand and six during the
wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The wars provided the financial justification for the unit.
The idea was that they would lock up like Al Qaeda guys, you
know, high guys there, and they would monitor their communications and they would
mind those communications for Intel to use in the war efforts. A few years
later, they opened up a second communications management unit at the United States Penitentiary
in Marion, Illinois. I spent about a year in that unit as well,
so I've been to both CMUs. They justified the second unit as they
didn't have enough room you know, in the first one, and after they've
been running the first one for a while, they had guys who had like
keep separates, right, like, they can't put this guy with that guy,
or they'll attack each other on site. So they needed someplace that they
could, you know, resolve those kinds of problems. The second unit basically
doubled the cd budget. The mass capacity of either unity had given times about
fifty sixty guys when I first got there. They were running in about half
that capacity. At any given time. There was probably a little fewer than
half. Are you know, it's hard to even call them real terrorist cases,
but there are these cases that have some nexus to something causnssable as terrorism.
There tend not to be the really high profile cases though that the really
high profile cases they go to the supermax in the federal system in Florence,
Colorado. So it's important to understand that this is not These are not the
only places where they can hold actual terrorists. Right, Like El Chapel will
never see a CNU, Right. He went from mcc New York, the
high security lock up in Manhattan right straight to the supermax in Colorado. Right,
So this is not where there is no justification to keep these UITs running
for prisoners like that. This is where they put up like, you know,
a twenty year old kid who gets in doctorate on the internet where it
gets entrapped by the Justice Department. Were both who gets caught on like a
plane to Syria or on like a cruise ship to Syria to try to fight
on the other side of a geopolitical dispute, you know, in which the
United States takes an interest, right, those tend to be the so called
terrorism cases there. The Bureau of Prisons gets millions and millions of dollars,
tens of millions of dollars to run these units. They take prison guards with
no intelligence training with you know who would not be able to cut the mustard
at State Department or CIA as intelligence analysts, and they waited an intelligence analysts.
They give them six figure salaries and then their job essentially becomes to give
people like me and Julian a hard time. Yeah, yeah, well it's
interesting, you said, El Chappa. Will you not find him there?
I guess some would They send the Cycler family there for their opioid No,
they're not going to go to right, so yeah, but you know that.
But those types of people if they if they were in prison, right,
It's it's a very real possibility. You know, I think I'm not
trying to, uh, you know, be hyperbolic, but you know,
if the fans were locked up Trump for instance, right, if any of
these cases against Trump result in a prison term, you know, even a
prison term penning appeal. I'm not saying, you know that he wouldn't have
pellot pounds or whatever. But if he does do any time in the federal
system, the CMU is a likely place the terpet built as well. Yeah,
yeah, yeah, keep him from communicating with the outside. They take
away his cell phone, tweet with they're worried about us followers, They're worried
about his right. He can make life very difficult on a CEO. If
you were to say, you know, I have a problem with this particular
cl mister Smith, right, that would the Bureau of Prisons would take very
unkindly to that, and he'd likely find himself in the CMU. And so,
like so many other things, like the Patriot Act itself, we see
something that's set up to house people that are violent parists, and instead this
thing then turns against In many cases, people who are dissidents, people who
are opposing their narrative, people or political opponents. Shaeffer Cox of for example,
isn't one of these. He's not a terrorist, he's not a threat
of violence to anybody else. But they want to make sure that they cut
off his communications because he has influence and he can influence people against the government
narrative that they want to maintain. So Shaeffer Cox, was he there to
mention a one of his case was concocted? Yeah, we are a few
doors down from each other. His case. It's almost laughable, I mean,
and it would be laughable if they hadn't hmm him up for for so
long on it. You know that the appellate court largely stillized his case when
they when they reversed it and took away most of his sentence, and that
was the Ninth Circuit Us Court of Appeals. You know, it's a very
liberal for the court that did not you know, found the government's theory in
that case, you know, kind of at the periphery of what a jury
could reasonably convict under. Yeah, when we talked about when we talk about
Trump and lawfair and things like that, I mean, this has been going
on for very long time to other people like Schaefer Cox, but they do
they have the ability to completely shut him down because he doesn't have a big
following. He doesn't have a billion dollars or several billion dollars, and so
what they've done to him is horrific. And they put him into one of
these communication management units that are there. Now, this is as you're pointing
out, you're not going to drive to tear Hote, Indiana and you see
a sign out there that says Communications Management Unit. It's a small part of
the prison that is there, and a small part of the one that is
in Illinois as well, Right, so this is a subset of that.
Yeah, and so the terrible CMU is actually the old federal death row.
They built a new federal death row elsewhere in the compound, and then they
use the old death row as the CMU. So I've been inside, Timothy
mcmay sell. And then they leave up like some of the placardic from what
it was the death row, and it's kind of like an obmous morning,
like, keep doing stuff we don't like, and we're going to move you
about. The find way to concoct something and move you down the road.
Like there's a lot of subtle coercion, right you mentioned before, the coercion
is a far of force, and you know they have to try to maintain
the appearance that you know, there's a real public interest in running these units.
And that's why, in my opinion, you do have the thirty to
forty five percent kind of like terrorism material support cases that are there. Those
are the excuse, right, and prisoners like myself, like Julie Massange,
we're the real reason. And so when you're there, like you, if
you're me right, when you are on the phone with the journalists, they
just hang up the phone, take your phone away. If your wife points
you to the press, which data did with me, you know they throw
you in solitary. I have all the paperwork to prove this. I've spoken
recently in a few places about what mister Assange can expect to face in the
CMU. And I think I was the federal prisoner with a course of conduct
most similar to mister Massanges because I was published right. You guys in prison
in prison do right, and Julian also he does publish right. They hate
prison of lawsuits out of the CMU so they retaliate against any kind of litigation
to uphold your First Amendic rights. You know, first they kind of they
squelch your First Amendment rights, and then if you try to go to court,
they retaliate against you further right. And I think that's something that mister
Assans, unfortunately, can expect. When I was preparing a file of lawsuit,
they said that my attempted lawsuit was extortion, and they threw me in
solitary even though courts all around the country have ruled that. You know,
to try to say that litigation is extortion is frivorous. It's patently frivolous.
It doesn't matter because no one is prepared in the Bureau of Prisons or in
the local US district courts to be fair to you once you're placed in a
CMU. Unfortunately, in this country, most of our federal judges are former
DOJ prosecutors, right, and they get spun that, you know, these
are terrorists, this is the terrorism unit. So you're dead on arrival in
court. You know, even before you get there, the courts are going
to want to hear it. I'm out now. Before I was out,
I had a federal habeas pending in the U. S. District Court for
the Southern District of Indiana. It was fully briefed. It's been fully briefed
now since July, and the court has not ruled on it. Right,
And I had pro Boto Council helped me with that case. It's a very
well prepared case, but they did, you know, And under the rules
and the statutes in the federal courts, federal habeas is supposed to jump to
the front of the line. It's supposed to be the very first thing on
which a court rules because it affects somebody's literate right, and the liberty interest
is one of the highest interests, if not the highest interest you can have
in the law in this country. But if you're filing a habeas from a
CNU, the court just doesn't rule on it until you're already out, and
then they can say it's moved. You know, you're already out, but
they avoid having any ruling or they avoid having the majority of rules that could
go against the CNU on First Amendment grounds or on due process grounds. Right.
So this is something that you filed up, this is something you filed
while you were still a prisoner. There is that correct, and they still
have not heard of anything. You expect they're going to delay this and then
say it's a mood issue. Yeah, I mean that's part of the course
unfortunately. But at the same time, you have a federal statute and we
actually put it on the docket to the judge and asked him to rule.
He said, look, no, look, under the rules, this is
supposed to be the very first thing the court here's and that will put that
on the docket. And you know, a few months ago and still so
let's you know, and I want to get to your case and let you
tell what happened with your case and because you were there under these conditions,
and Dana was working very hard to get information out about this and to get
the information about the way they abused your case. How you're a political prisoner.
But do you think you mentioned the supermax prisons. Do you think that
they're going to send Julian assigns to the supermax to the CMU And what is
the difference between the two in terms of prisoner population. Well, I think
they'll send them to the CNU. The Justice Department has already made what I
believe was an unqualified assurance to London that they would not, under any circumstances
send assage to the supermacs. Right, they've kind of said that they will
initially put him under what are called Special Administrative Measures or SAMs, which is
kind of like the highest classification of communication restrictions a federal prisoner can be under.
But you don't need to be under SALES to be at the CMU.
I was never understands. But it's a distinction largely without a difference, right
right, Like it doesn't you don't need to be under STAMS. The problem
for them with SAMs is it would cause a diplomatic uproar, and the Attorney
General of the US Attorney General would actually personally have to sign off on it,
right, so there is some accountability there where he could later requestion this
to why he signed off on this communication restriction, whether it was constitutional,
you know all that. To put you in the CMU, they only need
to sign off from the associate director of the Bureau of Prisons. It's nowhere
near as high level and official, and those associate directors are like toilet paper.
They get changed often and pretty much for the same reasons. So you
know, it's way more likely that he will end up in a CNA.
And they claim that the CMUs are general population units, that there's nothing atypical
or significant about the hardships in the CMU. They've made these claims to the
US courts. The US courts uplarly credited those claims. The reality is,
of course, though it's not a general population Theoretically, I was supposed to
get two fifteen minute phone calls each week while I was in the CMU.
I was supposed to be allowed to call the media, you know, and
I didn't even get those. But you know, compared to that, right,
the average federal prisoner, depending on his or her exact circumstances, and
this is in flux now with some of the prisoner form stuff going on,
but they get three hundred to five hundred telephone minutes per month, right and
CMU prisoners get most thirty a week, and a lot of the times they
don't even get that for various reasons. They can just lock the unit down
without providing a reason and give no on their phone calls. And that goes
for days on end. If you if you miss your calls through no fault
of your own, like if there's a technical issue with the equipment, which
which has happened. Uh, you know, you just don't get your call
and there's there's no makeup call. You have no in person contact business.
So in the CNU, whereas in the rest of federal prison contact business.
So Dana was unable to hug me for four years. And then after NBC
dropped the four part document series on my case and Justina Peltier, the Bureau
of Persons simply deleted data from my contact information, would not allow me to
readd her never served me any paperwork to say that you know, I did
anything wrong or Data did anything wrong. Uh. And I was not able
to speak to Data for the last seven or eight months. Wow that I
was going to see and news. And then when I was speaking with John
Herriaku, who is the CIA whistle blower who exposed the Bush torture program,
I was discussing a different case that we get into that uh effects Operation Fast
and Fear, so the efforts to investigate Operation Fast and Ferience. So I
was talking with John, they didn't They clearly didn't like that they heard Fast
and Ferience. They cut off my call of him. Would now let me
call him again? I have a nephew who is an attorney, so he
was kind of my last resort. I thought, okay, they really should
mess with calls to a licensed attorney. My nephew was trying to help me
with my case, trying to help me find counsel in the area. The
calls were of legal nature. I was discussing the restrictions and when they had
been applied, and you know the facts upon which there are reasonable inferences of
retaliation, a very similar set of circumstances to what unfortunate mister Assaungs can expect
to experience himself. And they just cut off by calls to my nephew,
would let me call him any So for my last several months in the CMUs,
I couldn't call anybody. They just deacted me to my phone account.
They never said that I built the rule. They never gave me any kind
of hearing of any kind, right, And that's part of the course when
you do things that upset them. But Dana quoted me to a reporter of
RT, and RT ran an article with my quotes, right, and they
took my phone away for nine months and added twenty seven days to my sense
for being pal by media. Right, and these these are just these are
just some examples, right, And this is unfortunately what he's going to run
into. And he's not the type to the client. Yes it was off
and I get that, but unfortunately that means he's going to run into this
retaliation over and over and over. So they can make the pledge that there's
not going to he's not going to be put in a supermax. They can
say that he's not going to get the special administrative things that Sam and uh.
And yet you know why they don't. We're not going to put it
in a c what's that said, They're not going to put Yeah, that's
right. Nobody knows about the CMU. Really, it's that that is not
out there. And so it's like, oh, okay, well, I
guess we got all the bases covered. No, they're not talking about the
CMU. They're keeping that kind of quiet, and that's likely to be what
he's going to get there. And so, and just to give you an
example of Dad, right when I was in the CNU, the SAMs guys
got their phone calls, but I did not, even though I was never
on SAMs. Derek, there was this period of the cut Dana and they
just you know, wouldn't let me speak on the phone. All the activated
my phone account because I was talking about Fast and Curious. The guys on
Singers you are getting their phone. I was not. They actually treated me
harsher, the guys who were on SAMs. But there arguably, I think
a lot of you those cases are focused too. But where there's arguably some
national security basis right where the US attorney gentleman saw signed off and said this
prisoner presents national security threat. Those guys are getting their calls and I was
not getting one. And the most amazing thing about it is in your case,
this is not it wasn't an allegation of violence or national security threat or
any that kind of stuff. What it was was a case of medical kidnapping
that you worked to expose against Harvard's Children's Hospital. And because they're so heavily
connected with government, they used the government to punish you for that, which
is which is truly amazing. And I want to get to that as well.
But you mentioned and I want to talk about this Fast and Furious thing
and what John Kyaku was talking to you about. What is going on with
the Fast and Furious? What is this information and how did you come by
him? So there's a prisoner in the terre Haute CNU right now named Donald
Reynolds Jr. And his case. He didn't realize that first. So he's
a firearms collector. He was when he was out. He was a firearms
collector. He had several historically significant pieces. He had a browning from World
War Two. The government approached him and they asked him to be an informant,
and they had no leverage over him. He was not a criminal.
They didn't. It wasn't like they had him on something small or trying to
turn him or anything like that. So he refused, right, so the
feeds show up. They raided his house, they raided his parents' house.
They find nothing rog drugs. All the firearms are legally licensed. He's got
his Class three stamps, right, he's got his com paramat. He's a
compliance with state law, federal law and everything. But they can cot this
drug case, this drug trafficking case against him, even though they've they've found
no drugs and they've never found any drugs, and they used that to kind
of silence him. As the years go by, they give him life plus
seventy five. Wow, in this case is the first time non violent offender
with no drugs found give life plus seventy five. In comparison, el Chapel
got life plus fifteen right, So they actually gave Donnie a Marshers sentence that
el Chapel. As the years go by, Donnie starts putting stuff together,
the names and dates in his case right, and he went to trial.
He forced them to go to trial like any in this advent ordered you to
assume any in this advanak And he starts to realize that all the names and
the dates overlapped with fast periods, and it took years for the information had
come out right. And so then I write about his case from inside the
CMU, which was difficult to do, but I got it done. And
the American Conservative did a month long investigation. They published a feature under the
headline the Knoxville Kingpin. Who Wasn't They go all of Donnie's case, They
go all the names and the dates. They conclude in the end that this
case is, you know, certainly adjacent to fast and furious. The names
and the dates everything lines up, and they recommend clemency for Donnie because of
the prosecutorial irregularities, and they found several witnesses and I'm sure this doesn't surprise
many in your audience, but it would surprise it like the average member of
the public. They found several instances where federal prosecutors filed affidated saying this this
person told us X. Our federal agent says, this source claimed X.
They then compared the trial testimony of these witnesses, who sang a very different
team to trot right. So either the prosecutor was lying or the source was
never credible in the first place. And that's kind of the story of Donnie's
case. And he's been fighting to try get out, fighting to try to
expose this, and they threw in a CMU and they retaliate against him viciously,
right. And my theory on it is, you know, the US
House of repersitives during the Obama administration issued a subpoena to the White House for
records on Operation Fast Experience. Obama asserted executive privilege to quash that subpoena,
and we never got the records from the White House about Fast Experience, Fast
and Furious. For those who don't know, the Justice Department allowed high power
under penetrating firearms and ammunition to go to walk from the United States to the
Mexican drug cartels, the Mexican drug cartels that used those firearms to massacre people,
Mexican nationals, and also three federal agents when were shot by these webons.
Okay, yeah, and that was actually something I'm interested interjected, that
was something that actually a gun walker program began under Bush. Yeah, and
then Againe receiver. Yeah, it became fast and furious under Obama. So
it really is you know, the atf through both of these administrations. As
you see over and over again. You know, whether it's a Republican Demo
or Democrat that is in office, these same types of things are happening.
And it was really to carry the water for the UN Arms Trade Treaty,
which wanted to make it they wanted to make a case that you had small
arms that we would you know, typically keep pistols and rifles and things like
that. Small arms are going back and forth creating this this this crime problem
in Mexico, and the UN Arms Trade Treaty was saying we've got to stop
that trafficking in arms across the border, which means that you're going to have
have to have every piece of firearms or ammunition or whatever identified and recorded in
the United States. That was their end goal. That was the UN gun
control move, the UN Arms Trade Treaty, and that's what this was all
set up to support. And I think even the New York Times after this
all blew up and they had these federal agents get killed. I think even
the New York Times said that this was a false flag. Everybody understood it
was a false flag. Okay, yeah, yeah. So so Donnie,
right, he puts this outget and trying to get out. He's try to
get back into court. The Obama administration had the PS quashed under executive privilege,
right, which a president can claim whatever the US Attorney General briefs some
on the matter. It's analogous roughly to regular attorney client privilege, except between
the president and the attorney general. Right. The problem for Donnie and for
the Justice Department rise is because Donnie's defense was entitled under the Fifth Amendment and
under Brady v. Mearat, that's the discovery case where the government's got turnover
all all this evidence to your defense council, including evidence that speaks to your
innocence, evidence that is not favorable to the prosecution. The prosecution doesn't just
get to bury that thing have to turn over to the defense. So this
information was never turned over to Donnie's defense. Nothing about Fast inferiors was turned
over to Donnie's defense. This isn't appellation, right. If it's proven that
thing with hell this information, Donnie's conviction gets reversed. He gets to come
back into court, and as long as his liberty is on the line,
they cannot use executive privilege to quash Brady because the liberty interest trump's the executive
privilege interest, though the congressional legislative interest does not trump executive privilege. But
Donnie's liberty interest dots right. And so if he ever gets back into court,
they're either going to have to drop the case, but the truth about
Fast and Faari's is going to come out, right, and so he like
myself and I feared julianaissance right. This is a great example of the type
of case that's in the CMU, that is that there's no purpose to protect
the public. There's no public safety interest, there's no compelling interest to protect
prison authorities. Donnie has never been violent, he's not accused of violence,
and you know, but they'll they'll use the CMU in his case and in
Juliet's case, and in my case, in Shafford Cox's case. And there's
another gentleman, marriamed Kurt Johnson. Kurt's a great guy. He interceded to
stop a murder in the CNU after they had already been one murder. There's
a second, and mister Johnson stepped in and stopped it. He was suing
big banks on behalf of homeowners in two thousand and eight before the financial crisis.
Second, with the loans for print. It's preying a bell. Yeah
right, Yeah, he gets sentenced, you know, a few months before
the crisis. Uh, everything hits the fan, right, And if his
case had then a few months later, maybe it would would work out very
differently. Right. But that's another guy who was there in the CMU.
And again it would be very embarrassing for the system. And you know who
went to jail over the two thousand eight financial prices, the wisdom, that's
right, only the whistle blower went the prison. Right. So these are
the types of cases that are in the CMUs. Wow. Wow. And
of course John Kiriaku, the whistleblower about the torture. Did they not have
the CMUs at that point in time? I know where did they put him
when he was in? So he has written, I'm not allowed to have
any direct communication with Mistercurity since I'm still on supervised release, right, so
I have to preface with that, right. But h I do recall that
while I was all my way to the CMU, uh, mister Carrier who
brought wrote about my case and he said that he was he had been placed
in a modified CMU at f c I and the REDA painted And I have
not heard that there was a modified CMU. There No one else that I
know if has heard about that. But given that he was ci A,
it's certainly very it's certainly possible, if not likely, that they did something
very special with him, even by CMU standards. Oh yeah, yeah,
they probably. Yeah, they probably did their own his own individualized CU just
for him. That's that's probably exactly what happened. Well, let's talk a
little bit about your case, because I think it's interesting to see the links
that they will go to to put somebody in and to severely restrict their communications
to punish you. As you pointed out, if somebody does an article about
you, or you have a communication you were trying to You were able to
kind of some of your legal proceedings, were able to get some information out
that way to your wife, but they pretty much kept everything excuse me about
this sneezer, They pretty much kept everything under control. And tell us a
little bit about why you got there, because it truly is your case is
truly astounding. You are not a threat to anyone other than a very highly
political, politically connected, and very powerful wealthy organization. And so we could
see this type of thing happening. For example, if somebody were to expose
and be a whistleblower about Pfizer or something like that. Right, because these
people are very highly it doesn't even have to be a health issue. It
could be any kind of a whistleblower who was exposing information about a politically connected
organization or corporation. So tell us a little bit about the background of your
case. So there was at the time she was fourteen years old, a
girl named Justina Pellettier. She has might adrial disease, which is, you
know, a congenital genetic condition that's degenerative, progressive and sadly often fatal.
It's the same condition that baby Charlie Guard had, or the same type of
condition that baby Charlie Guard had in the UK, and there was a more
recent instance of another child in the UK who had this condition, and they
effectively just pulled the plug on them. They would not allow the parents to
seek the experimental therapies to try to help these kids. Justina has a subthing,
more survivable form of it. Mitochondrial disease is like an umbrella term for
a bunch of different genetic disorders, so no tube cases are really the same.
Her gastro enterologists had moved from Tuft's University Medical Center to Harvard's Boston Children's
Hospital, and Justina caught the food and the flud causes severe complications for mitochondrial
disease patients because Nida was none of your cells and your body have a hard
time converting food into chemical energy to run the body systems. So then when
the patient gets the food and has nausea and has a hard time eating,
right, you're compounding this metabolic problem because you know the food that was getting
in already had a hard time being converted to energy. Now you're stopping the
food from getting in in the first place, right, So her primary mino
doctor, renowned guy named doctor Corson at Tufts, refers to Steena to see
her gastonerologists, who you know, the month before was working at Tufts,
and this would have been no problem. She would have gone right in the
toughs and seen him. But he had moved to Boston Children's Hospital. I
think it was to presume to pursue a grant. So he refers to her
to Boston Children's Hospital to see her gastonerologists. This is a doctor who had
been with her for years. This gastrent urologist had actually operated on her to
put her in pecostomy too, to help her use the bathroom. But she
gets to Boston Children's Hospital via ambulance like three o'clock in the morning on a
Sunday during the blizzard that the gas parentologist is not there. She gets seen
by a young neurologist a few months out of his medical training. He doesn't
believe that Justina has mitochondrial disease. He refers to parents for medical child abuse,
basically munchause and syndrome by proxy, where the his theory effectively, it
seemed to be that Justina's parents were seeking attention and making her sick just to
kind of bring attention onto themselves. It ignored the diagnosis. It ignored the
fact that Justina's older sister also had MITO and was successfully treated for mito.
And again, this is a genetic condition, so it tends to run in
families. It tends to be passed down the maternal line. So he either
didn't know or ignored those facts. Sent Justina for a form of psychological therapy
for what they call somatophone disorder or like psycho semantic disorder, where like you
think you're sick and your brain then kind of makes you sick or your symptoms
fit your her own perception of your illness. Right, they took Justina off
all her mito treatments, right, And that was when her parents, you
know, really expressed severe Lauren, because again, this is a degenerative and
awful fatal illness. You take her off of her treatments, there's going to
be severely percussions. And we've seen that there in fact, were you know,
she was walking, she could at least feel her legs when she walked
into Boston Children's Hospital. She was having some trouble ambulating because of the fluid
and the lack of energy. But you know she certainly she she was ice
skating six weeks earlier. Yeah, I remember seeing the pictures of her inned
skills. Yeah. Now she's crippled. Now, she can't walk right,
and it's because they took her, in my view, because they took her
off of these minotherapies, and we don't know if she'll ever walk again,
unfortunately. So at the height of this case, right, the government alleges
that I launched the largest distributed Niland service attack, a DDoS attack that they
had ever seen, and I basically sent too much away from here. I'm
interjecting her for a second, because this went on for quite some time,
and she's degenerated throughout all of that. Yeah, a clear case of medical
kidnapping. And there's been other allegations of medical kidnapping by other people over and
over again from this particular institution. And so this has gone on for quite
some time before these allegations came out. But go ahead. What they had
a word for it at Boston Children's Hospital, they called it a parent dectity.
R appendectinity is removal of the appendix. A hysterectomy is removal of the
uterus, right, like a parent dectity, removal of the parents. Right,
that's what these doctors called it. That came out of the Boston Globe.
Wow. And at one point, so Boston Children's Hospital is monitoring,
or between Loston Children's Hospital and the state, they're monitoring Justina's communications. They're
clamping down on Justina's communications. It was almost like she was in her own
little CMU inside Boston Children's Hospital. Yeah, she couldn't discuss her care or
treating with her parents if they would terminate the call or terminate the visit.
They limited the parents to one twenty minute one call a week, and I
think one in person visit for like forty minutes or an hour or something like
that, and again control the topics of conversation to prevent anything from getting out.
They would not allow the parents to photograph Justina, so they couldn't document,
right, and show the public that she was deteriorating. Right, They
couldn't show the public what she looked like now versus what she looked like before.
Right. So at the kind of the height of this, Justina's parents
published a handwritten note by Justina where she talked about the kinds of things that
the psych where people had done her right, and it was they hurt me
all the time. They don't let me sleep very much, please Harry,
right, and so like that note comes out like the day before, the
government alleges I launched this huge distributed denial of service, and basically the charges
against me amount to sending too much internet traffic at somebody's networks. Right,
that's what we're no, that's what we're talking. Never claimed that I this
happened, is that the patient information that I have repenetrated the system broke into
anything, you know, did anything. What I did was I took down
their donation fort That's right. That was the allegation. Yeah, taking down
their donation thing. Not that that anybody was harmed by this, but just
taking down their donation thing during a fundraiser event. They alleged that people were
harmed or could have been harmed, but the jury would have convict on it
when all the facts, when all the facts were aired at court, they
did not obtain a conviction. Uh. They tried, and under the Federal
Wall, the bar is so low for them. All they had to prove
was that I potentially not even actually but potentially impacted the medical diagnosis, treatment
he care of one individual. And they couldn't meet that book. They failed
to meet that ball in federal order with the pro government judge. Yeah,
everything going forward them, and they would not allow me to plead defense of
another Like if I'm in a dark gay and I see someone being attacked with
a knife or with a gun, right, and I shoot the assampl right,
and then they charged me with murder. Right, in the United States,
you're supposed to be able to plead defense of another. Right. It's
just like self defense if someone were to attack you and you were to take
action and defend your own life. If someone were to attack your wife and
you took action to defend your your wife's life. Where someone wanted to attack
your child, you were to take action to defend your child's life. Right.
So they just would ut me argument. They took it away, they
took it out of the jury's purview. They told the jury instead that my
good motive was no excuse for the crimes charged. Wow. Right, And
then we find out that the federal judge who sits on my case U is
a Clerk, shareholder director of a for profit family seafood business called Slave Burgen
and Code Bank, that Slave Gurgling Codeinc. Donates to Boston Children's Hospital.
That Boston Children's Hospital publicly thanks Slave Burden and Kobank on the very same website
the government alleges I brought down. We find out that the Harvard hospitals that
were all eventually affected by the didas do industry research for Slave Gorgon and Kobeank
and an industry trade group called the Seafood Nutrition Partnership to market the company's products
to the public as part healthy We find out that the judge was a board
member and a member of the corporation of an organization called the New England Home
for Little Wanderers, that his brother was also a board member of this organization,
and that this organization since two thousand and three is partnered with Boston Children's
Hospital to divert juvenile psychiatric inpatients to outpatients stay, which is what they were
trying to do with Justina as soon as she became hot potato, right.
And then we find out that one of my jurors in this case majority that
was supposedly drawn randomly was an accountant for the Home for Little Wanders. And
she steps forward on the first day of trial and says, hey, I
was an accountant for the moving them home for the Little Wanders. I learned
this might cause of this truck. And we moved to dismiss this juror.
And the judge refuses, and the judge never disclosed it. Yeah, and
he never discloses that he was a board member at the Nengland Home for Little
Wanners. Then we find out that the first witness in the case, the
government's first witness, was a contractor with an agency that actually did the it
work for the Marlin Home for Little Wanders. Wow. And the judge never
discloses this and and never never re chooses from the case, right, and
the number of the connections, I mean, this is just stretching the surface
in my case. And I have all the documents to prove it. And
you mentioned that there's a new filing in my case. I've moved to vacate
the conviction. You get one chance after your appeals, and then you get
one further chance in the federal law to attack the conviction. And I've moved
to do that. And the filing is pending in the US District Court in
Boston right now, but unfortunately it's pending before the very same district judge,
the same the same person all these confidence and interest gets to decide, you
know, whether the conviction should be overturned. Wow. And when we look
at Julian Assigne, I didn't get into this earlier in the program, but
the judge where there's two judges that are residing over the saying, one of
these two judges has a very very long history with British Intelligence, the Ministry
of Defense. He has even been involved in enhanced interrogation cases and things like
that. Just like, oh yeah, and so I mean he's got a
very very long history with the very people who are coming after Juliana science just
like this judge in your case and songs will be tried in the Eastern District
of Virginia over here in the United States. That's the jurisdiction where they indicted
him. That's known as the intelligence pool, right to people like John carry
Akou, Everett Snow and Julian Assings. Right, that's where they bring all
these intelligence cases. And basically your jury pool is Alexandria, Virginia, your
jury pool is pulled from these very same federal agencies and the US judges,
Unfortunately, they don't disclose largely. The Wall Street Journal a couple of years
ago published a front page expose. They found that one hundred and thirty one
US federal judges had sat over six hundred and fifty presided over six hundred and
fifty cases in which the judge owned an equity interest in one of the parties.
So that's like Microsoft sues Amazon. The judge owned stock in Microsoft,
and the judge does not disclose, right and does not recuse himself right.
And to put that into perspective because the Wall Street Journal, I don't know
why they didn't, they never did. The US doesn't have that many federal
judges. One hundred and thirty one federal judges is about one six. It's
about one six for the federal judges. So with a very uh, you
know, I mean less than comprehensive, I mean it was. It was
good work that the Wall Street Journal did, and I'm not trying to impute
it, but their search was just like surfacelel right, and with a comprehensive
and that they went over and they judges disclosures, but they didn't look too
deeply into each particular judge situation. They found that one in six US judges
broke the law when it comes to recuse it. Right. Now, imagine
what a deeper analysis would do. And imagine Julian's judges in the Eastern District
of Virginia, right, who likely have serious ties to these contractors like we
own uh stop right in companies like wlfurd Bumman right, and the other defense
contractors right, the people who sold sold the tanks, right, the people
who sell the weapons, you know, to the military. Uh. And
you know, Julian arguably cost him a lot of business because he made it
a lot harder to continue to prosecute before the rack in Afghanistan, they lost
a lot of money. Yeah, because of his reporting. Yeah. Well,
it truly is amazing. And of course you're talking about a surface looking
at conflict of interest. They wouldn't have probably discovered the kind of connections that
you discovered with this judge if they just did a service analysis. Exactly.
It was a couple of different levels deeper than just the surface. Yeah,
and that's exactly my point. And you know, they discouraged attorneys from looking
into these issues, and most attorneys, like my attorneys, would not find
to recuse my district judge. They feared him so much they feared retaliation from
him. At least That's the only logical ext a nation that I was ever
able to conjure, was that they feared this guy so much they will not
brief the issue. And so I was I was about to do it from
say and then you know, if you if you brief something like this,
I represented they you know, they try to act like you're some crack pop,
right, like the lawyer who has himself for a client as a fool,
right, But like at the same time they make sure that none of
the quarticoined attorneys are ever going to brief this, and they did it very
elected that even a product retained attorney whatever brief this. And then you try
to brief it yourself, even if you have all the documents, all the
evidence, right, they say you're something that because you represent yourself, well,
you really are a fighter, and it is truly. I'm sorry for
what happened to you. But how long were you And you went into the
supermax in twenty nineteen, so you were there a little bit less than five
years. How long were you in that not the Supermax and CMU? Yeah,
how long are you? I was never in the Superman? How long
were you incarcerated? For sure? So I was in the CMUs one way
or another from April first, twenty nine team to June ninth of twenty twenty
three, so really more than four years. I was split between the two
facilities. I did time in both. If I've seen both, there are
some meaningful differences, but nothing really that you know, would affect Julian or
or nothing that would affect his extradition case, right, Like the bottom line
is that they're going to put in all of these units. They're going to
do so for unconstitutional reasons. They're going to violate his constitutional rights. There's
there's really no reason that Britain should extradite him, and there is no representation
from the US government that is credible right in terms of preserving his rights.
And if we're just real here, he's only being prosecuted because he told the
truth. Right. People found that embarrassing and it went against you know,
powered moneyed interests. And there used to be a time, I feel in
this country where that wouldn't be an issue where they wouldn't be able to go
after you like this and with a saget in particular. Right, they agonized
for Britain this case because you know the verifications of the about administration. They
called it the New York Times problem. How are they going to justify prosecuting
Massage but not prosecuting the New York Times. And the thing is, now,
we're just very selective. Federal laws are written in such a way that
they can pick on anybody that's right. Right, Well, well, I'm
starting to see what we're starting to see is in the UK they said,
well, if you're an accredited organization, you know, you get a different
standard. So we have a dual standard for so called non accredited non establishment
media than there is for other people and for anybody who is exercising their free
speech. And as Ed Snowden pointed out, he said, what he's being
accused of are crimes against a state, and the extradition treaty between the US
and the UK specifically excludes somebody from being extradited for crimes against the state.
Most extradition treaties have carbots for political offenses or that kind of thing. That's
something that you expect to see in an extradition treat Yeah, and yet what
we have now is all of the Western governments are rapidly moving towards criminalizing descent.
And that is what's so concerning about this. They're moving against the press,
the independent press, they're moving against individuals exercising their free speech. But
it is all about criminalizing descent and criminalizing information. It's not enough for them
to ban people, it's not enough for them to financially deprogram people. They
have to now move to criminal penalties. We see this happening throughout Europe.
There's the movement towards this in the US as well. It's a very foreboding
harbinger of what is on its way when they can do this to Julian Assige
and you point out the New York Times problem, going back to the New
York Times and the Washington Post and Pentagon papers, they didn't come after the
press people. It's one of the reasons why they're alleging that he had incentivized
somebody to get these papers. And is so tenuous what they're coming after for.
It's pretty transparent that this is political persecution. Yeah, I mean,
what journalists would not encourage a source to come forward, and how explicit does
that encouragement have to become before it's a problem, you know, I mean
the conspiracy laws of the United States, even a tacit agreement they call it
an unspoken tacit agreement, is enough to find a conspiracy. So under this
theory, really any journalist who runs a secure drop box right could be could
be said to be tacitly encouraging people to violate the classification the espionage right.
And so you know, it's it's just it's a very simpler stop. But
I agree to wholeheartedly with your comment about the way the scent is being criminalized,
and I think it really on the other side of it, right,
it shows that for the most part, these government narratives are so weak,
so flawed, that they know they cannot stand the scrutiny. But when you
feel it's really confident about your perspective about what you're doing, your actions,
right, you don't mind the scrutiny. I have no It never bothers me
to get a top interview question about Justina, about like what if this had
done whatever. I'll answer those questions. I don't mind being in the hot
seat and answer a difficult question, because I truly knave you what I did.
I think it passes must right. But when you know your argument is
weak, that's when you can't have people question that's right. And we've seen
this with the so called science behind climate change. It's so called science behind
the pandemic and everything. Oh, you can't see my data, I'm not
going to you dare not question me about this. And so immediately when somebody
shuts this thing down and they don't want to show you their data, if
they're talking about science or they want to shut down anything that is about dis
scent and claim national security of some sort, we know exactly what is happening
with it. And as you point out, they're very they're very fearful about
this. They understand now how weak they are in this. But it is
also something that makes them a lot more dangerous because they're going to start lashing
out in new ways against people in terms of punishments and even imprisonment for this.
And it is really sad to see how every aspect of the First Amendment
is actually being just trashed and treaded with these actions. Yeah, and if
they succeed in expediting massage, right, then the message really is that they
can get any whistle lower anywhere. Yes, this is this is a test
case, right, right, If they succeed in getting hammed, right,
that means that they can get you in the UK all the common donations,
they can get you anywhere in asient, they can get anywhere where they have
influence, anywhere they're able to hold aid or cooperation or any of these kind
of uniladel of bilateral diplomatic arrangements. Right. And the US does by influence
all over the world. You know, all that aid we give, we
don't do whatever the business of our hearts. And you know we do that
to buy influence. And you know, at the same time, you have
a foreign corpt practices act like I can't bribe a customs agent. You know,
if I went on vacation at the Bahamas and I'm going to get some
liquor or something I'm not supposed to bring in, if I still think I
had twenty right, I've committed a felony ate practice. But if the US
government gives some country a billion dollars worth of day, say the fire and
prosecutor looking Ato, you know, suck on some that's perfectly meaning that's perfectly
leading. Yeah, so twenty I'm going to person. He does twenty to
my animal which I paid taxes. Yeah, I'm going to prison. He
does it with a billion dollars voo moning. Uh don't even don't you dare
ask? Oh? Yeah, yeah. It's amazing that the double standards and
just the corruption, the corruption, the ruthlessness as we turn more and more
authoritarian in terms of what is happening with your case now, uh you got
this uh this action that is pending. There is that uh what I know
that Kariaku served his time and was released. He wanted to get a pardon
because if you've got a criminal record that uh uh limits you during certain things,
certain activities. U. In his particular case, it was keeping him
from getting his pension, and of course the interesting story that he had about
Rudy Giuliani wanting a couple of million dollars to do that for him with Donald
Trump. But apart from that, I mean, is that in play with
the filings that you have, there is that part of it. So clemency
comes later or usually flatter. It can be granted at any time. But
one of the arguments that they try to use against you when you when you
go for a pardon, right, is that you have to exhaust everything at
the courts. Right. They don't. They're not trying to preempt the courts,
Jenny, Right. The president has the progative to do whatever he wants.
But the kind of accepted practice going back many decades is first to exhaust
everything in the courts. You give the courts the opportunity to do what's right.
Right. So I'm still kind of at that stage. And but if
this fan is, then yes, the next thing, next thing up would
be would be a pardon. I feel I'm a good candidate for that,
especially given what happened to Justina, what Loston Children's Hospital Bill has been seen
doing after Justina. They really have kind of committed themselves as a partisan political
organ that comes with benefits the institution, but it also comes also has other
verifications, right, which which means that you know, my case might be
viewed in parts of the light because of the partisanship of this of the other
actor. So yeah, I mean, my effort, my focus, first
and foremost has to be the litigation at least for now, and then we'll
see what happens after that. Well, I certainly I wish you the best
with that, and again I appreciate your tireless efforts to help other people and
the CMU that are unjustly convicted, that are political prisoners, to expose this
kind of incarceration that is directed towards political prisoners enemies of the state for whatever
reason. And we've seen this net continue to get wider and wider, going
after parents who speak out at a school board meeting, for example. It
is absolutely insane to see the way they are extending these borders of people that
they alleged to be threats to them, extremists, terrorists and all the rest
of this stuff. It is they have more to support their the that's right,
yeah, yeah, they are desperate. And so people can find you
again at substack martyg dot substack dot com. And of course, while you
were still incarcerated, your wife Dana ran a lot of social media platforms on
Facebook and other places that were under free Marty g. And those are still
available as well. People can find you also on Twitter at Marty goddessfeld G
O T T E, S F E l D. But again, Martig
dot substack dot com is really probably the best place for people to find you,
isn't it? Because yes, good, thank you, Thank you so
much, Marty, thank you for the work that you do. It is
very important people need to understand what is happening with us. The David Night
Show is a critical thinking super spreader. If you've been exposed to logic by
listening to The David Night Show, please do your part and try not to
spread it. Financial support or simply telling others about the show causes this dangerous
information to spread. Father people have to trust me, I mean, trust
the science. Wear you mask, take your vaccine, don't ask questions using
free speech to free minds. It's the David Night Show. Its gable fas