Republican U.S. presidential nominee Donald Trump listens as Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton answers a question from the audience during their presidential town hall debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, U.S., October 9, 2016. REUTERS/Rick Wilking - RTSRIR9

Former President Donald Trump filed an amended version of his RICO lawsuit against Hillary Clinton, the DNC, and a constellation of other anti-Trump conspirators only weeks before the FBI’s raid of Mar-a-Lago.

This is a revealing development that’s received virtually no media coverage.

Trump’s amended complaint was filed on June 21 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Floridadocket by Trump lawyer Alina Habba.

Epstein-linked magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart had recused himself of Trump’s RICO case the day after Trump filed the amended lawsuit —then 44 days later signed off on the Mar-a-Lago search warrant on Aug. 5.

The FBI raided Mar-a-Lago on Aug. 8.

Trump’s amended RICO lawsuit points to a curious codename Clinton and government officials used to describe their subversive plot to create the narrative that then-presidential candidate Trump was colluding with the Russian government to steal the 2016 election: “Crimson Rhino.”

From p. 33 of the 193-page suit:

In or around July 2016, Perkins Coie, Elias and Sussmann, acting on behalf of and at the direction of the Clinton Campaign and the DNC, tasked Joffe to exploit his access to the information gathering services and non-public data of Neustar and the Tech Companies to dredge up confidential, proprietary, non-public information, data and/or records relating to Donald J.Trump, the Trump Campaign, and the Trump Organization, in the hopes that the data would reveal wrongdoing that could be used to create an injurious falsehood to harm the political reputation of Donald J. Trump.

The Clinton Campaign, the DNC, Fusion GPS, and Joffe further agreed that, if no such damaging information could be found, that the ill-obtained data would be falsified and/or presented in a fraudulent manner to create an ‘inference’ of wrongdoing.

The above-named Defendants referred to this project as “Crimson Rhino.”

The name was used to avoid having the name “Trump” bandied about, and its purpose was to link certain individuals listed in a tasking document all of whom were associated with the Trump Campaign — with Russia.

Notably, the “Crimson Rhino” file was brought up in May in the case against Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who was accused of lying to the FBI and acquitted.

One America News reported:

Its origins come from tech executive Rodney Joffe who was tied to the Hillary Clinton campaign and was a confidential human source for the FBI. He ordered client Jared Novick who ran a data analysis firm to do research on several people tied to then candidate Trump. He also said he felt uncomfortable doing the work because he knew it was opposition research for a political campaign.

Joffe is named as a defendant in Trump’s RICO case, along with other familiar and powerful Democrat names who are alleged to have been involved with pushing the debunked claim that Trump colluded with Russia to steal a presidential election:

It’s worth noting that on Aug. 4, Trump’s legal team had responded to the judge’s decision to grant the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case regarding five defendants: former FBI Director James Comey, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Stzrok, and FBI lawyers Lisa Page and Kevin Clinesmith.

As previously mentioned, the Mar-a-Lago search warrant was signed off on Aug. 5.

The validity of Trump’s case against Clinton and her cohorts is difficult to refute; it cites facts directly from documents he declassified as president and from Special Council John Durham’s court filings related to his ongoing investigation into the origins of the Russia collusion hoax, with many more citations than Trump’s original filing from March 24, 2022.

The timing of this legal battle between Trump and Clinton coinciding with the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid is far too suspicious to be simply coincidence.

Could the FBI raid of Mar-a-Lago have been, at least in part, a smokescreen to seize documents related to Trump’s RICO suit by tying them up in an “ongoing investigation” in order to keep them from becoming public?

So far, the Justice Department has refused to release its affidavit citing probable cause in the FBI’s Mar-a-Lago raid, but Judge Reinhart ruled Thursday that the DOJ must release a redacted form of the affidavit to assuage public concern that the raid was not politically motivated.

Government prosecutors have until Aug. 25 to share their proposed redactions.

Read the lawsuit:

gov.uscourts.flsd.610157.17… by Jamie White


Help us stay in the fight with a monthly subscription on SubscribeStar

Follow us on TRUTH SOCIAL @LaunchLiberty

Join Our Telegram

Follow us on Gab

Follow us on Gettr

Subscribe to our channel on Rumble to get great video content!





Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here