Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

305
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/larry-johnson-hammer-scorecard-real/

(post is archived)

[–] • 1 pt

Montgomery has a checkered past:

Oh oh... I think I know where this is going.

The FBI has investigated him

Do we trust the FBI?

Montgomery's character was trampled by the Deep State when he blew the whistle on Obama, Clapper, and Brennan after he discovered that they had converted his HAMMER program into their personal surveillance/blackmail tool.

But Fanning is wrong. The real domestic surveillance tool was revealed in the summer of 2013 by Edward Snowden.

Snowden made his first leaks in June, 2015. Montgomery blew the whistle in August, 2014. Snowden is a CIA plant, and says a lot of things that aren't true.

Here is the image of Fanning’s data:

How was this obtained? I cannot think of a legal way such intelligence could be obtained by a private citizen.

Did Dennis grab it using classified tools he is not legally entitled to possess?

Montgomery supplied it. He wrote the HAMMER software, so he still had the classifications necessary to use it at the time that he obtained the 48 hard drives of data that he used to expose the surveillance system. What Snowden (and others like Kevin Schipp) have done to discredit Montgomery is build up a false case against him, which has been covered extensively by theamericanreport.org where Marie Fanning works. Montgomery later turned copies of the hard drives over to others in the Trump Admin, and this is undoubtedly where this data comes from.

Larry Johnson is another Kevin Schipp. Counter-intel. Kevin Schipp got outted so now Johnson is attempting to discredit him.

I wonder what Dave Janda, who knows Montgomery's story well, will say about this?

[–] • 0 pt

The one thing I noted is when he made this comment: Were the people producing this information using SCORECARD? If so, that is another redflag. It was collected illegally and CANNOT be used as evidence in a court case. This is a very important point. For evidence to be admissible in either a civil or criminal action, you must show chain of custody and must be able to defend against any challenge that the information was obtained outside legal channels.

That would be true for a civilian court, but the information could be used in a military tribunal, so his very important point is moot, just a thought....

[–] • 0 pt

The without proof argument again... These transactions are not proof, but it is a smoking gun showing that the entire election was a manipulated fraud. The only way to absolute proof is through the original ballots. That is why my state and every other one involved are absolutely refusing to allow them to be tested by a real audit team.