Make a Difference For Positive Change

Kidnapped by Government Gangsters

The Case Against William E: Political Persecution or Miscarriage of Justice?

The legal battle surrounding William E (name changed), a pro-Trump inventor and businessman, raises serious questions about political motivations in federal investigations. Was he unfairly targeted for his political beliefs, or was this a legitimate case of financial misconduct?

The following timeline outlines key events that suggest an attempt to undermine a pro-Trump entrepreneur through legal maneuvering and overreach.

The Rise of William E and the Origins of the Investigation:

In 2016, William E, a dedicated Trump supporter, built an online community and launched a campaign urging people to “Pray for Trump to be President.” Deep State agent Bob Screwdiv (name changed) received both an email and letter supporting Trump, prompting him to search for ways to shut down William E’s operations under the Obama-era Financial Crimes Task Force. William E was a prolific inventor, securing multiple trademarks and a patent while working to build his company. A devoted family man, he had been married for over 20 years and was a father to three children. He was also a frequent guest speaker at his children’s Christian school, reinforcing his strong community presence.

(This video is unrelated to William's case, but deals with the issues Present)

The Business, the Investors, and the Government’s Case:

William E hired lawyers, accountants, and a management team to ensure full transparency in building his patent project. He granted them full access to records, receipts, and bank accounts, contradicting any notion that he was operating a fraudulent scheme. Following legal guidance, William E accepted investor money, though he was reluctant to handle other people’s finances. His understanding was that investors were contributing to the patent project’s development—not typical of what you might find on the show American Greed. Actually fraud accusations typically involve individuals failing to deliver on promises, but in this case, William E’s product was successfully published on the Apple App Store, where it received a 95%+ five-star rating. William E has consistently upheld legal and ethical financial practices and has the utmost respect and reverence for the rules of society.

The Changing Legal Landscape and Its Impact:

On July 11, 2018, President Trump revoked Obama’s Executive Order 13519, which had been used to justify investigations like the one against William E.

Trump’s Executive Order 13844 shifted prosecutorial focus toward securities fraud and crimes affecting the general public. Key Fact: William E’s alleged fraud was neither securities nor commodities fraud, meaning the case against him should have lost legal standing under the new order. The app published by William E’s company was not available for general public use—it was exclusively for wealthy accredited investors, further disproving claims that the case involved fraud affecting the general public.

The FBI’s Role and Bob Screwdiv’s Investigation:

Special Agent Bob Screwdiv, a government accountant groomed under the Obama administration, saw his world change on July 11, 2018, when Trump’s order threatened his job and enforcement powers. Less than a month later, Screwdiv took aggressive action against William E’s business, actively contacting investors in an attempt to build an indictment. In August 2018, Investor Kathleen Adeleson (name changed) was approached by the FBI, but despite this, she transferred $300,000 into the patent project—a move contradicting claims of fraud. A phone conversation between William E and Adeleson further proved no guarantees were ever made to investors, discrediting prosecution claims that investors were unaware of risks.

Key Presidential Requests and Evidence Presidential, Congressional and Judicial Notice Requested:

Evidence shows Kathleen Adeleson stated for the record that William E never guaranteed any returns on investments. The FBI allegedly instilled fear among investors, encouraging them to pull their money out—a move that ultimately sabotaged the company. Armed FBI agents raided the patent company’s office, shutting it down without an indictment, an act that violated legal protocols. Overt Act: It was illegal for the FBI to spook stakeholders and shut down the company before an indictment was issued. Overt Act: Federal Law prohibits any agent of the government from using a patent or trademark in a way likely to cause confusion for users or customers (USCS TITLE 15. SECTION 1125). More Evidence: Kathleen Adeleson further confirmed that the FBI was intentionally creating a panic, which ultimately led to the business collapsing due to investor fear—not due to actual fraud. FBI documents confirm that William E defended the agency during his conversations with investors—contradicting any claim that he attempted witness tampering or manipulation.

Final Questions for the President, Congress and the American Public:

Should Special Agent Bob Screwdiv be held accountable for attempting to circumvent Trump’s Executive Order by aggressively pursuing a case that no longer held legal standing? Why did the FBI spend $5 million in taxpayer money on an investigation that should have ended after discovering the company was legitimate and that no fraud affecting the public had occurred? Why did prosecutors attempt to classify William E’s actions as securities fraud when the company’s investment model did not legally fall under that category? If Special Agent Bob Screwdiv had not interfered, would the patent company still be thriving and creating jobs today?

Final Thoughts:

What happened to William E appears to be more than just a routine investigation—it looks like politically motivated persecution by a government official trying to protect his own job at the expense of an entrepreneur. The story gets even worst: William E was taken from his family by force and has been incarcerated for more than two years. The case raises serious concerns about federal overreach, misuse of bureaucratic power, misuse of taxpayer dollars, and the selective application of justice.

If a Trump-supporting businessperson OR citizen could have his life derailed despite following the law, what does that mean for the future of politically neutral law enforcement?

********************************

TOGETHER, WE CAN MAKE A STRONGER CASE FOR CHANGE
Share this petition with others to increase its impact