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