by Sharon Rondeau
(Aug. 26, 2022) – In an interview Wednesday with WVW host Brannon Howse, The American Report’s Mary Fanning again attempted to make the case that former government subcontractor Dennis Montgomery possessed, or currently possesses, incontrovertible evidence of the U.S. government’s warrantless surveillance of its citizens (see video/audio on right).
The interview occurred three days after the conclusion of “The Moment of Truth Summit” hosted August 20 and 21 by MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, with whom Fanning was affiliated last year in the production of a video series, “Absolute Proof.”
The day after the summit concluded, Howse recapped his history with Fanning and Lindell in a 90-minute broadcast.
In the first video of the “Absolute Proof” series, Fanning heavily promoted the claim that China launched a “cyberwarfare” attack on the 2020 election, changing the winner of the presidential contest from Donald Trump to Joe Biden, allegedly captured in real time by Montgomery. Lindell eagerly embraced the information, later saying he “validated” it multiple times.
Fanning has not appeared on Howse’s show for many months and is no longer working with Howse or Lindell. However, of Montgomery’s longstanding claim to have amassed proof of government surveillance, she told Howse on Wednesday, “The evidence…” “is so bombshell they put it under the care of Charles McCullough, the IG of the intelligence community, for security purposes. So anyone who says the evidence does not exist – it’s in court documents from Judge Richard Leon.”
Her remarks related to a 2017 lawsuit Montgomery filed against FBI Director James Comey after the FBI allegedly failed to act on his report of illegal government surveillance. Represented by Atty. Larry Klayman, the case was heard by U.S. District Court for the District of Washington, DC Senior Judge Richard Leon, who had previously ruled in Klayman’s favor in a case challenging the NSA’s warrantless collection of phone records on average citizens in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Klayman’s initial suit had the significant effect of enacting a change to the U.S. Patriot Act, passed by Congress in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks, eliminating the NSA’s ability to collect “bulk telephony metadata,” as Leon stated in his opinion in the Montgomery case.
While bolstering her argument with Leon’s statement that the materials Montgomery provided would be placed in safekeeping with the Intelligence Community inspector general, I. Charles McCullough, III, Fanning nevertheless neglected to say that Leon dismissed the case, ruling in favor of the defendants and terming it “largely frivolous and duplicative of ones I have already found to be insufficient in Klayman I and Klayman II.”
Fanning and co-author Alan Jones began writing about Montgomery’s numerous claims of government surveillance and election-tampering on March 17, 2017. Montgomery’s ongoing allegations often relate to current news events and an interview he had with the FBI in late 2015, the results of which were never made public.
Montgomery’s meeting with the FBI came approximately a year after the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) closed a yearlong probe arising from Montgomery’s having approached the office in October 2013 claiming to have evidence of government bank-account breaches of local residents.
After interviewing Montgomery with others present, then-MCSO Sheriff Joseph Arpaio hired him to serve as a confidential informant to produce the evidence he claimed to have.
After almost a year, former detective Mike Zullo, who Arpaio asked to supervise Montgomery’s efforts, wanted to have Montgomery’s work product validated by an outside party with applicable experience. With Arpaio’s permission, he and Det. Brian Mackiewicz took 47 hard drives Montgomery produced to three former NSA officials for data analysis. In the presence of Zullo and Mackiewicz, the three derided the data as worthless, Zullo said, with two declaring it in a formal report to be nothing more than “evidence of an outright and fraudulent con on the government for personal gain and cover.”
In other litigation, Klayman represented Montgomery when he sued former New York Times journalist James Risen, who in 2015 authored the book, “Pay Any Price: Greed, Power, and Endless War” and included a chapter focusing on Montgomery’s claims made to the government which were found to be without merit.
Risen discusses the book here, detailing the government’s findings on Montgomery at the 0:44 mark.
Montgomery’s lawsuit against Risen and his publisher alleged defamation. During the course of litigation, however, Montgomery failed to produce the software at the heart of Risen’s reporting that Montgomery’s claims to have invented a program able to detect hidden codes in Al Jazeera broadcasts were unsubstantiated.
Although ordered to produce the software so the court would have something to consider, Montgomery claimed to have given his only copy to the FBI and that its production in any event would be “irrelevant litigation.” Approximately two months later, Montgomery changed his story and claimed, according to the transcript, “…upon searching my memory I do not believe that I have had access to any of the subject software, nor did I provided to the [FBI] when I turned over the drives.” [sic]
Judge Rudolph Contreras felt compelled to rule in the defendants’ favor, with an appeal in 2017 meeting the same fate. “This is Montgomery’s defamation case—he chose to bring it,” the three-judge appellate court wrote in its opinion. “To sustain it against a motion for summary judgment, he would have had to marshal sufficient evidence to create a triable issue for a jury as to each element of his claim. The district court held that he failed to take the basic steps necessary to do so. Critically, he produced virtually no evidence of the software’s functionality to factually rebut Risen’s statements that it never worked as Montgomery said it did.”
Fanning has omitted any reference to Montgomery’s work for the MCSO or his unsuccessful litigation in which he failed to produce evidence on her website and in interviews.
Fanning’s “cyberwarfare” narrative regarding the 2020 election emerged only after she first reported on October 31, 2020, with Montgomery her only source, that a computer system Montgomery claimed to have constructed while performing government work, “The Hammer,” was activated by unnamed U.S. government personnel to alter vote tabulations in eight key states.
Software Montgomery allegedly invented, dubbed “Scorecard,” Fanning and Jones wrote in their article, was the program “The Hammer” utilized to tamper with the election and change its outcome.
Fanning never explained, nor has she been asked to explain, the reason her narrative changed from her initial claim of U.S. government tampering to one of Chinese “cyberwarfare” which Howse gladly publicized despite lacking any corroboration.
Last August, Lindell hosted a “Cyber Symposium” at which he promised to release packet data, or “PCAPS,” allegedly collected in real time from the 2020 election by Montgomery and provided by Fanning. Lindell never released the promised information, proffering the explanation that the data was infused with a “poison pill” from intruders and therefore contaminated.
After the three-day conference, Lindell claimed he had “multiple sources” who corroborated Montgomery’s findings and that he considered Montgomery and Fanning “heroes.”
At last weekend’s “The Moment of Truth Summit,” citizens from all 50 states described their grassroots efforts to improve the accuracy of voter rolls, eliminate machine-generated and other election errors, and hold public officials to account when necessary. Other segments featured sheriffs, electronic voting systems experts and elected officials, including Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who gave an animated speech in which she expressed her certainty that Trump won the electoral votes from her state, contrary to what Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger certified.
For the close of the conference on Sunday, Lindell launched a lengthy and perhaps unexpected soliloquy in which he defended Dennis Montgomery, describing him as “one of the smartest men who ever walked the earth.” Lindell indicated he had spurned numerous attempts from various individuals cautioning him about Montgomery’s unsubstantiated claims and remained steadfast in his belief that Montgomery’s claims and data were valid.
After approximately 20 minutes, Lindell’s attorney, Kurt Olsen, read from a typographical-error-riddled “Declaration” he claimed Montgomery swore to under oath as to his computer expertise, contractual experience with the U.S. Department of Defense, and data he claimed to have acquired from government servers demonstrating the government’s illegal activity against U.S. citizens.
Breathtakingly, neither Lindell nor Olsen revealed the other side of Montgomery’s history, with Lindell instead decrying that Fanning had “been attacked,” apparently for her reporting about Montgomery.
In her interview with Howse, Fanning repeatedly named “Mike Zullo” as the alleged force behind what Howse described as a “smear tactic” against Montgomery but provided no background as to Zullo’s intimate knowledge of Montgomery, including Montgomery’s denial to the MCSO of having “built” “The Hammer” while he was engaged in government work.
“It was already there,” Montgomery said in a declaration prepared for the MCSO.
Howse did not ask Fanning to elaborate as to who “Mike Zullo” is or explain any of the history for his listeners/viewers.
In the past, despite requests, Howse has declined to interview Zullo or anyone with contrary information to Fanning’s claims.
From the beginning, Fanning did not divulge that the source of “The Whistleblower Tapes” about which she and Jones have written extensively are recordings Zullo made of Montgomery and an associate, Tim Blixseth, in an official capacity for Arpaio which were leaked to a media outlet as part of a civil-rights case against Arpaio.
As to Fanning’s repeated claims that Montgomery was recorded “illegally,” Zullo, a former detective himself, responded that Montgomery was fully aware he was being recorded, demonstrating that awareness in a video in which Montgomery assented to being video-recorded in his Seattle home as long as his “grandkids” were not captured in the footage.
Neither Fanning, Howse nor Lindell seems to be aware, or to believe it to be germane, that a magistrate judge formerly ruling in Montgomery’s favor in an earlier, unrelated matter referred him to the Department of Justice for “perjury.”
In relation to Montgomery’s government work, in December 2009 NPR interviewed author Aram Roston about his upcoming article in Playboy Magazine, “The Man who Conned the Pentagon,” in which he detailed the December 2003 “Code Orange” called by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) after Montgomery warned of an impending terrorist attack.
The alarm prompted the grounding of inbound international flights and the ramping up of alert levels in major cities, particularly New York.
“Dennis Montgomery… is an unusual man,” Roston wrote. “In court papers filed in Los Angeles, a former lawyer for Montgomery calls the software designer a ‘habitual liar engaged in fraud.’ Last June Montgomery was charged in Las Vegas with bouncing nine checks (totaling $1 million) in September 2008 and was arrested on a felony warrant in Rancho Mirage, California. That million is only a portion of what he lost to five casinos in Nevada and California in just one year. That’s according to his federal bankruptcy filing, where he reported personal debts of $12 million. The FBI has investigated him, and some of his own co-workers say he staged phony demonstrations of military technology for the U.S. government.”
The Las Vegas Review-Journal has also reported Montgomery’s history, including his leveling of what turned out to be a false claim of bribery against then-Nevada gubernatorial candidate Jim Gibbons.
The case arising from Montgomery’s gambling debts remained open for more than a decade, with the judge dismissing it on June 6, 2022, according to the Clark County district attorney’s office on Thursday. On May 23, 2022, the case docket shows, a “settlement with the casinos” was reached by Montgomery’s defense attorney.
To Howse’s question at the end of Wednesday’s segment, “So, Mary, if it’s not true, number one, why would he have two immunity deals? Number two, why would this information be secured by the IG with the Intelligence Community?” Fanning responded, “Common sense, Brannon; you’re exactly right, of course.”
Howse can be heard laughing as he announced a shift to another topic.
Howse, Fanning and Jones, are currently defendants in a case alleging defamation brought by The Gateway Pundit, Joseph Hoft and XRVision founder Yaacov Apelbaum, with oral arguments scheduled next month. Fanning, Jones and Howse are quoting extensively in Dominion Voting Systems, Inc.’s $1.3 billion lawsuit against Lindell, which remains pending.
The claims Fanning made in the book she co-authored with Jones titled, “THE HAMMER is the Key to the Coup: The Political Crime of the Century: How Obama, Brennan, Clapper, and the CIA spied on President Trump, General Flynn … and everyone else” against him are defamatory, Zullo has told The Post & Email, and legally actionable.
Update, Aug. 29, 2022: The full interview between Howse and Fanning is here.