TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @dustinkittle

Saved - March 15, 2025 at 12:02 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’ve been facing a tough situation with Farm Credit after exposing fraud within the U.S. Farm Credit System. They offered a seven-figure settlement, but it came with conditions that required my silence and prevented me from helping other farmers. I refuse to sign any confidentiality agreement. My life has been turned upside down, and I’m determined to expose the truth. I recently shared my story in a video, hoping to raise awareness about the struggles farmers face and the need for intervention from leaders like President Trump. I will continue to fight for justice.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🧵 You might be asking yourself — Why would Farm Credit not just resolve this matter with Dustin Kittle, given the fact he has recorded calls and documents showing he was extorted as a whistleblower after he reported fraud in the U.S. Farm Credit System? Well, they tried; in fact, they offered a seven figure settlement — but it was to be conditioned on the following … 🧵 1 of 6

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

1) I would be required to swear to full and complete confidentiality as to my personal knowledge of any fraud I had discovered in the Farm Credit System; 🧵 2 of 6

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

2) I was provided a list of my clients, other Farm Credit Borrowers, who I was told to advise that I could no longer represent them; 🧵 3 of 6

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

3) I was required to accept a paid legal consulting position in the Farm Credit System, in which I was told I would have to do nothing more than let people know I had a conflict of interest in taking on any “Farm Credit” clients; 🧵 4 of 6

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

4) I was required to agree that, if I were to breach confidentiality and spoke out about the fraud, they could sue and force me to pay back, as a penalty, all that “bribe” money they were offering. 🧵 5 of 6

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

My papers are in order. I will turn over any and all documents to @DOGE or @elonmusk’s Team; just in the hopes of resolving the four years of harm done to me and my family — but without illegal terms requiring the harm done to other Farmer Borrowers to be hidden by this corrupt federal agency. I would then be glad to work for free with @DOGE to show them each and every instance of fraud I am aware of in the U.S. Farm Credit System. I will never sign confidentiality. I had to sell my family’s home just to escape the living Hell of their extortionate scheme. My entire life has been upended, as they have put five law firms against us to try to break me — but they won’t. They might as well give up, or we can all settle in for what is the rest of our lives; Because I will see this through. 🧵 6 of 6

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

@DOGE @elonmusk The rest of the story —

@AnnaRMatson - Anna Matson

Months ago, @dustinkittle reached out to me to tell me how our farmers are losing their farmland and the government is allowing it to happen. Dustin was one of the inspirations for starting my show in the first place because I thought to myself, "if people only knew." Last week I drove down to Tennessee to film this episode of him telling his story. I know I am a very small fish, but I hope this reaches the right people to make a difference to save our family farms. Dustin is not just a farmer, he is also a very successful lawyer. If he can't stop this, our small farms have no chance. We need President Trump and congress to step in immediately. --- 01:18 Dustin’s Background 03:30 Buying a Farm 07:35 What is Farm Credit? 09:27 Farm Credit Administration 12:34 Getting a Loan 22:37 Farm Credit Goes After His Mom 41:09 Extortion 47:22 File Complaint with FCA 58:51 What the FCA Did 01:05:47 Why is this Happening? 01:10:38 Foreclosure 01:19:21 After the Loan was Paid 01:25:08 FCA Releases Findings 01:31:21 Dustin Kittle Sues the President 02:02:25 What can we do? 02:06:56 Why Dustin was Targeted 02:21:05 Keeping People Quiet 02:22:51 What can Farmers Do? 02:25:38 Farm Credit Sues Dustin 02:29:35 Threats Against Dustin 02:34:20 Suing Biden and Not Trump 02:36:32 Foreign Governments Buying Farmland 02:37:46 What Farm Credit Does with the Land 02:43:14 What can we do - continued Quick Hitters 02:51:52 Thoughts on Brooke Rollins 02:56:35 Subsidies 03:01:54 Bird Flu 03:08:34 Country of Origin Labeling 03:10:32 Pesticide Immunity

Video Transcript AI Summary
Dustin Kittle, a farmer and lawyer, discusses the crisis farmers face with Anna Matson on "If People Only Knew." Kittle grew up on a farm and financed his own farm in Tennessee through Farm Credit. He was initially approved, but things changed after a visit from Alabama Farm Credit's Chief Risk Officer, Jody Campbell, who questioned Kittle's representation of poultry farmers. Farm Credit then demanded a list of Kittle's clients, which he refused, citing ethical concerns. Subsequently, they withheld an appraisal, then froze his account, and threatened foreclosure, demanding he sign a legal release and confidentiality agreement, which would prevent him from representing other Farm Credit borrowers. Kittle alleges extortion and reports Farm Credit to the FCA. Kittle details how his mother was pressured into signing a mortgage on her farm, which was then used as leverage against him. He paid off his loans to avoid foreclosure but faced continued harassment. He then sued the Biden administration for failing to appoint a full Farm Credit Board, alleging this allowed corruption to continue. Kittle also discusses issues with the USDA, the bird flu response, and glyphosate immunity.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Welcome to If People Only Knew, the show that brings untold stories to light. I'm your host, Anna Matson. Let's get started. Welcome to this week's episode of if people only knew. And today, we have Dustin Kittle with us. Dustin is a farmer and a lawyer. You don't see that very often. We have been planning this episode for a really long time. I've been in talks with Dustin, and I am so passionate about this topic. And I hope you are too because our farmers affect everything. I mean, the food you eat, the clothes you wear, everything. So we cannot survive without our farmers, and our farmers are under attack today. And I am not someone who clickbaits or anything like that. If you've followed me, you know that I just give you the facts. And I'm telling you, we need to sound the alarm on this. This is a crisis going on today, and it has to change. It has to. You will be shocked by what Dustin tells you today. You would not think that something like this is allowed in America, but yet it is, and it has to change. So, Dustin, can you I I really like to start my episodes with just some background. So kinda tell us just, you know, how you kinda grew up. Did you grow up on the farm? How the hell did you become a lawyer? Speaker 1: Good. That's a very good question. First of all, I appreciate you having me on the show and appreciate your willingness to put a lot on this story because it's needed, not just for me but for farmers all across the country. A lot of farmers who were afraid to say anything for fear of retaliation. Yeah. But to tell you about myself, I grew up in an area of Sand Mountain, Alabama, not a typical background, probably for most attorneys. When I was born, my dad was a muskrat trapper and my mom worked at a gas station that was owned by her dad. And we ended up, when I was two years old, they purchased a farm in the town of Geraldine and we raised commercial poultry for a company called Gold Kiss. We had three poultry houses, so at any given time we would have 30,000 chickens there. And so I kind of got my feel for chickens, which is why I'm not raising chickens currently. And we also had a commercial cattle farm and we raised horses and my dad was big into hunting. We raised hunting dogs, tree and walkers, and so grew up there on the farm. I have one younger sibling who is autistic and still lives with my mother today on the farm in Alabama. But you know, as far as a background for an attorney in my doing agricultural law, certainly that background of growing up on the farm has been beneficial in the fact that I understand the practical side of agriculture as well as applying being able to apply the legal analysis to that. Speaker 0: Yeah. So at some point, you bought a farm. And what was your option for financing that farm? Speaker 1: So, you know, you fast forward to 2020 and COVID hit. I had lived in Alabama my entire life. By that point, I'd had my own law firm for ten years. We had had offices in Atlanta, Birmingham, Nashville, and still was helping to manage the farm in Northeast Alabama. My dad had passed away in 2014 and so I took on more of a role of being able to operate that farm. And when COVID hit and the courts shut down, it really was the first time I'd been able to take a breath in years. And I just made the decision that for the future quality of my life and trying to become more efficient in the work that I do, I really needed to consolidate everything to one location. And so I began looking to try to purchase a farm and I had decided that I really would like to move to the state of Tennessee. And you know, again I was turning 40 that fall or that November and I kind of felt like it was now or never if I was ever gonna move. And a few reasons why I wanted to move to Tennessee, but it really was centered around agriculture. When my dad had passed away and I took over our cattle business, we raised registered Gelvie cattle which is a pretty rare breed of German cattle. There's not just a ton of them in The United States, but we were selling more bulls into Tennessee than we were Alabama and that was because they had an ag enhancement program here that gave a benefit to the farmers in buying quality genetics. Speaker 0: Well, I can imagine that probably a lot of your clients are from the area too. Speaker 1: They are. Nashville at the time was the fastest growing city in The United States and of course Tennessee and in this area has been very strong as far as agriculture for centuries. And so I started looking earnestly trying to find a farm. Everything that's close to Nashville was unaffordable. Ended up settling on a farm that's about an hour from Nashville in the community of Santa Fe and I had owned a home in Birmingham. I had never owned a farm. Our home in Birmingham was in a subdivision on a lot and of course my parents had a farm, but I reached out first of all to the bank for our law firm and explained to them, you know, had good credit. I had good financials to show. And I said, I'm looking at a farm that's in Tennessee. It was 117 acres, historic farm, and I'm looking at financing options. And they said, Really private banks don't like to lend on farms and farmland. Who you need to talk to is farm credit. And to be completely honest with you, that was the first time I really even had any kind of relationship or even understood what farm credit was. Speaker 0: When you first reached out to me and started talking about farm credit, it was like, okay. I'm googling what the hell is farm credit. And then you we'll get into it more, but you started talking about the FCA. I'm like, what the hell is that? We spent all day together yesterday, and you explained everything to me. And, I mean, before that, we've probably been in talks for, I don't know, two to three months. And just doing so much research and really no one knows about this stuff unless you need it. Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: And I started looking because I actually would love to own some property and have, like, a homestead and stuff. So I'm like, okay. What are my options? You would think that, the USDA, the, you know, Department of Agriculture would have loans, and they do, but you can only take out a loan through them if you've proven to try to go elsewhere and were denied. So it almost forces you in the hand of farm credit. So can you explain a little bit more of what farm credit is? Speaker 1: Yeah. And, you know what I've come to find out since I've got pretty much a PhD in farm credit now after four years is they don't want to make too much noise. Know, they kind of know that they've got the market cornered as far as agriculture and if you look at the numbers, they control 46% of the agricultural debt in this country. I mean you talk about an antitrust issue and we're talking about a government sponsored enterprise in that, but if you need a loan, you go to Farm Credit, they have certain terms that can't be offered by a private bank and it's in part because they are a tax exempt entity and they are government sponsored and they have the government's backing. Now they have manipulated those rules to their advantage and the private banks have called them on it. But as we'll go into more detail later on, there's no oversight above them. But to explain kind of the broader look at farm credit, the farm credit system was created in 1916, and it was created in response to the fact that these private banks didn't have a lot of understanding for agricultural ventures. You know, you might have a good corn crop, for example, one year. The next year you might have drought, and so there were too many cases where farmers were being pushed off their land due to really no fault of their own. And so we created this farm credit system and back through the years we're talking about that there were 400 federal land banks across this country and so it wasn't as consolidated as it is today. Today there are only about 60 lenders in the farm credit system. They're serviced by four farm credit banks and then at the very top you have the Farm Credit Administration. The Farm Credit Administration was created by an executive order by FDR in 1933. So we operated for seventeen years in a farm credit system without any kind of government oversight. And kind of the key point to it all and this is what farm credit and when I say farm credit, I'm meaning the farm credit the executives that are over these lenders. What they don't want anybody to know is that still since 1916 up until current day, this entire time the system is owned by the farmer borrowers. People in the Farm Credit Administration, these people that are CEOs and executives that are getting multi million dollar compensation packages, they don't own anything. The farmers are their boss at the end of the day. And if the farmers wanted there to be a change to be made I mean we're talking about a group of shareholders, there's over 600,000 stockholders is my understanding in the farm credit If they all stood up tomorrow and said, every one of you are fired, that's just the way that it would be. But the problem is farm credit has flown under the radar. Like you talked about, if you don't need them, you probably haven't heard of them. They're not advertising because again they don't have any kind of competition. It's an antitrust issue from that standpoint. Speaker 0: And I will say too, it sounds like I'm pretty sure that's around the time the Federal Reserve was also created. Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: And the more I look into it, they are both the FCA and the Federal Reserve are both independent government agencies, and they don't get audited like nothing. So, if you're someone that, you know, you're against the Federal Reserve, this is very similar to it. That's right. And so farm credit is essentially a bank that farmers own. They own a share of the bank. Right? That's exactly right. In simplest terms. Speaker 1: Not given just a share of it. When they take that loan out, they have to buy stock in the farm credit system. So they, you know, it's not some gimme. They have skin in the actual game. But like you mentioned with the Federal Reserve, they're an independent agency. They answer to no one. They know they answer to no one. And it's, you know, it's kind of like that spoiled kid that's in the community that's parents would never spank them when they acted up. You know, eventually they realized it and they just terrorized the neighborhood. And, you know, farm credit has made it this far. They've had one kind of blip on the radar that was in the 1980s during the farm credit crisis, but they've really just kind of been able to escape any kind of accountability. Even in the 1980s while they rewrote the Farm Credit Act, when it comes to accountability and oversight, they have been able since 1933 to be able to stay completely out from under anybody's purview, who could act and regulate them. Speaker 0: It's crazy. So let's go back to your story a little bit because it really helps paint the picture of what's going on. So you're looking at this farm in Tennessee. You're told you need to go to farm credit. So I'm assuming they approved you. Like, what happened from there? Speaker 1: So I was approved, right away, and and, you know, kind of an interesting story as far as the way that it all unfolded was when I made the call to Farm Credit, the person that they put me in contact with who was at the time the the number two person in their Albertville Alabama branch, Her name was Amanda Simpson. Well, I'd known Amanda Simpson since I was four years old and in fact when we were in high school we were four H livestock judging teammates and thought the world of Amanda Simpson. And, you know, Amanda said, you know, Hey, I'm gonna look at everything. We'll take care of you on this. And, you know, kind of a unique angle to this is the fact that I owned these farms outright when I took them for financing. I was in a fortunate position to where I had paid cash and purchased this farm, and now there is a little bit of a story behind that to where Farm Credit, when I had originally reached out to them, drugged their feet a little bit, and I ultimately I decided well I'll just buy it with cash. Had a guarantee from them to refinance it to get it closed. But the relationship with Farm Credit at first was perfect They believed in what we were trying to do. We were looking to set up a farm that would be to expand on our work as far as agricultural law. We were going to have our law office there, but in addition to that we wanted to host junior programs. I'm passionate about getting youth involved in agriculture. I was a state FFA officer and you know I had spent since my dad had passed away I had spent about six years really building on his legacy and completing the legacy that I didn't feel like he got to complete in the cattle world. And in 2020, it had become more difficult for me mentally to be around the farm in Alabama because I just recall all the times, you know, when me and my dad were on the farm together when I was younger. And I felt like the time was right for me to kind of forge my own path and to start building on my legacy. And I wanted my legacy to be inspiring youth to be involved in agriculture and you know that went right along with what Farm Credit says that they stand for. And quite honestly, know, if this was all up to Amanda Simpson at the local level and this is the case for all of these local lenders there are good people that work at Farm Credit. It's at the higher up level where there is a problem and they force the hands of those in those local branches to do things that quite frankly are illegal. Speaker 0: Yeah. So at what point did things change? You took out your loan. You said it was fine at first. So what happened? Speaker 1: The the first event, and at the time, I I didn't even see this as being an issue In high with the benefit of hindsight now four years later, I have a little bit better grasp of how everything went down, but we had taken out the loans in mid-twenty twenty and in January of twenty twenty one I'd got a call from Amanda and she said the Chief Risk Officer Jody Campbell, Vice President of Alabama Farm Credit, he'd like to come up and take a tour of your farm. Well, you know, there's that was great. I mean, there was nothing that gave me more pride than going around showing people the animals that are on our farm. You know, we raise cattle. We raise Clydesdale horses. We have South Down sheep. Speaker 0: I got to meet the llama yesterday. Speaker 1: You got to meet Betty Huang, my llama. You know, it's it is a peaceful place. It is it is my vision of of perfection as far as what would draw interest to try to get a kid excited as far as agriculture. Speaker 0: Well, got this adult kid excited. I'm kind of a big kid too, so Speaker 1: but Jody Campbell came out and, you know, we toured the farm and then we went in the farmhouse and we all met and, you know, here's a guy that's a high up at farm credit, important guy, you know, we were trying to impress him and, there starts to be a lot of questions about our agricultural law practice and who we represent. And particularly one of our clients that I had represented for a decade, which was the Alabama Contract Poultry Growers Association. And you know, that was a natural fit for me as far as representation. I'd grown up working in these poultry farms. I knew the issues that these poultry farmers faced with integrators and you know, so we started doing that work really opened up my own law firm in 2010 and very proud of the work that we had done. We got some credit during 2020. We worked with the Department of Justice in rewriting provisions to the CARES Act so that it encompassed poultry farmers who were independent contractors. And so, you know, we were proud of that work. That work had received some notoriety, so he likely knew about that representation. And, you know, I I let him know how proud we were on it and how how much we appreciated the opportunity to to represent these poultry farmers. And in my head, in in hindsight, this looks silly, but in my head, my feeling was he's kind of interviewing us. He may want us to do some of their legal work, which would have been great. I mean, again, that would be right down our alley. So, you know, we didn't divulge any kind of confidentiality, but we talked a lot about the agricultural law work that we did. And so that really, in hindsight, was the first time that I think something was awry. If you fast forward to around June of that year, we get a letter from the bank and it asked us to turn over certain financial disclosures. And again, no big deal. We turned those financial disclosures over. But within that was a question and this is in writing. It's in a letter. They actually sent it multiple times. They actually threatened to default us on our loan if we did not go forward in producing this. But they asked me for a list of my agricultural law clients, which would have been completely unethical to turn over. And, you know, as soon as we saw that, I felt like either something is amiss or either they don't understand what an attorney's role is as far as protecting confidences with, their clients because essentially what they were asking for is a list of the poultry farmers that we represented. And if you look at Alabama Farm Credit, they're unique amongst the farm credit lenders in that they have about 3,000 stockholders, but over a third of them are poultry farmers. Northeast Alabama, Sand Mountain area where I'm from is the poultry mecca. You've got Tyson that has a processing plant there. Cook Foods is strong there. Pilgrims is strong there. Wayne Sanderson has been strong there in the past. And so you can just about throw a rock on Sand Mountain and hit a hit a poultry farm. And so we had a lot of commonality there. We said, No, we're not gonna we can't turn that over. We turned over all of our finances, but we didn't turn over the list of the agricultural law clients. So then you go about a month later and we were due to receive and it quite honestly was due to an error they made initially. We found out that they had withheld an appraisal from us. They had indicated that one of our properties was valued at $490,000 when in reality they had an appraisal on their desk that showed it was truly worth $1,200,000 And so once we found out about that, at the one year mark they said, Okay, you're right. You're entitled to more of your equity back under the loan to value ratio. And so we were supposed to get that check and I don't mind saying it was going to be $1,300,000. That's how much they had miscalculated it. And that we were going to get it in July of twenty twenty one. I received a call on a Friday night from Amanda Simpson. And again, my relationship with Amanda up to that point was still fantastic. And Amanda, I could just tell because I know her she was upset and she is a person that is a happy go lucky. Never seen a man in a bad mood, but I would, you know, in looking back, I would almost bet she had been crying before she called me. And she said she had been on the phone with Jody Campbell, the same gentleman that had come to our farm, and she basically said something is going on with your account. They're not allowing me to process this equity check. And she said they're telling me that the holdup is that they need something from the original appraiser. And she said, I have requested that they send this letter multiple times and Jody Campbell is keeping that letter from going out. And so she said, your account right now is effectively locked. And that stunned me, and it scared me. And Amanda also told me she said, You need to look at the records in DeKalb County, as far as your mother's loan with us. And that scared me tremendously because my mother didn't have a loan with Speaker 0: them. Wow. Speaker 1: And so I get off the phone and, you know, I paced the floor for about an hour. What what is going on here? Speaker 0: Yeah, I would be terrified. Speaker 1: It was because Amanda's a little bit of an unshakable personality and you could tell she was concerned. And I ended up sending an email to Amanda that night and the last communication I had with Amanda would come by text a few days later. That was on a Friday night when she gets back to work, I guess it was Monday. She sent a text and basically said, Dustin, Jody has read the email that you sent me requesting your loan file and I've been removed from your account and it's being turned over to Jody and ultimately was turned over to an attorney. I never have heard from Amanda Simpson again and again was someone that I considered a friend. And the one thing though that I will say for her is she did it probably as good of a favor for me as what anybody's ever before they removed her from my account she sent an email to me and she said Dustin I just want to document the status of your account. You've never missed a payment. You have a perfect payment history. This lender considers you a valuable customer. We know we owe you that check. And she said, We're just waiting on the last piece from the appraiser to give it to you. And but for that it would have created some question marks as far as what was, you know, what the status of my account was and that would become very important down the road. But you know, honestly knew as soon soon as I saw that email come through and read it, I knew we've got we've got trouble because I felt like it was an intentional documentation with her stating what the truth was while somebody else is pushing against her. Speaker 0: Yeah. Well, I hope she's okay today. Speaker 1: So as far as I know, she is okay. I have heard from other people that she, along with everybody in that branch, was forced to sign a confidentiality agreement, stating that not only would they never talk to me, but they would never talk about my case again. Speaker 0: Yeah. And that's just one of many reasons why a lot of people don't hear about this stuff is because I mean, we'll get into this more, but they're having everyone sign these confidentiality agreements, and you refuse to. Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: But we'll get into that more. So from there, what happened? Speaker 1: So from there, they turned me over to a a private law firm and just so happened to be a law firm that I that we had a little bit of a history as far as in litigation. But the attorney that they turned me over to was a guy named Chris Glynos. And things that I didn't know now that I know then, he was involved in a federal action to where there were allegations of extortion of another attorney, whose daughter had made a sexual harassment complaint against one of Glenos' clients. That case went all the way up to the eleventh circuit on opinions as far as some of the things that were done. Wow. Bradley Arant, who Chris Galenos works for, that's the biggest law firm in the state of Alabama. They're one of the biggest law firms in the country. And, you know I'll just tell you the way that it is when it comes to the Alabama State Bar. The Alabama State Bar is whatever Bradley A. Ramp wants it to be and Glenos has been a longtime partner there. He was involved back in probably been twenty years ago with the Health South case that involved Richard Scruci. He was one of the attorneys that was representing Health South related to that case. There have been a number of allegations of impropriety that had been made related to that. When it comes to the attorney that there were allegations of extortion that went to the eleventh circuit, they ultimately ruined that attorney. He had to end up filing for bankruptcy. He was a small town lawyer. He had to move and open his practice at another location. And it's amazing the power that a major law firm like that can wield. Speaker 0: So he didn't actually do it? Speaker 1: Say that again. Speaker 0: He didn't actually do it? Speaker 1: What? Speaker 0: Like, the allegations. Like, he didn't do any of it. They just went after him? Speaker 1: Yes. His his so his daughter had made a complaint of sexual harassment against an executive that worked at a bank which Glenos represented. They went after, her dad and filed, legal actions that the attorney had been doing legal work for that bank. They brought suit against the dad. They brought suit against the girl's brother. They brought suit against the girl's uncle. Ultimately pushed them, like I say, into bankruptcy, then brought a claim alleging bankruptcy fraud against them. And finally, that attorney and his family ended up getting the employment lawyer that was representing his daughter to file claims on their behalf and filed claims against the Bradley A. Rant law firm and it goes all the way up to the eleventh circuit. There are deposition transcripts where they talked to a bankruptcy clerk, I believe it was, that talked about as soon as that case came through when that attorney had to file for bankruptcy, Bradley Arant was calling them directly asking if they could represent like the bankruptcy trustee in the action. And it there's no way you could look at those depositions and Chris Glynos was deposed in that case. There's no way you could look at those depositions and walk away from it and feel like things were done the right way. And so this was an attorney that had a history. I didn't know Chris Glynos. And at first when they the first thing was we had a conference call and while I suspected something was going on, actually was okay with them bringing in an attorney at first because I thought, hey, this attorney will set them straight and tell them, No, you can't be involved in all this. Well, we got on that call, all of a sudden their tone changed. Now here I was. I'd been a perfect borrower. I'd made every payment, never opened my mouth about anything. They owed me this money. I'd waited and waited. They were supposed to be turning it over. And then all of a sudden it was switched into, well, why do you need this money And from that attorney. Speaker 0: Shouldn't you ask that question before you give someone Absolutely. Speaker 1: Absolutely. And that and then it became a situation to where I felt like, hey, now y'all just may not understand what's been going on with this. And so we try to explain that, hey, this this isn't some this has been planned for a year because of a mistake you guys made. Okay? And around that same time I start hearing from some of my poultry farmer clients about some things that were going on with Alabama Farm Credit. And in hindsight, I believe that they targeted me because of my representation of the poultry growers. And ultimately what they told me is you won't be able to do business with us again. You won't be able to so much as call your local branch if you don't sign a legal release of claims and swear to full confidentiality as to everything you know about farm credit. We'd end up finding out and this has just been a year ago that what that release ultimately was going to encompass was I had to sign an agreement saying that I wouldn't represent a farm credit borrower against them. And it set up for some things that they ultimately did with the poultry farmers that would be not just illegal, but in my opinion, as an attorney, was criminal. And, you know, we could talk about that in more detail. Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, just to put this into, like, just an example that most people would understand. It's like if you had a home mortgage, you're a lawyer. You have been paying up to date on your home mortgage for months, years, it doesn't matter. And all of a sudden, one day, they're like, hey. We wanna know who all your clients are. Like, that would never happen. Speaker 1: No. Speaker 0: That would never happen. Speaker 1: No. And, you know, there were so many moments there have been over the last four years to where my jaws dropped with just like, you know, some of the things that they've asked for. If if if I made some kind of request like that, they'd throw me under the jail. I'd lose my law license. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And for them to be so brazen And we reported them to the Alabama State Bar. I reported them to the Tennessee State Bar. Neither one took any action whatsoever. And ultimately, Alabama State Bar has pretty much told me don't call us anymore. And the thing of it is, is it involved more than just me. As I talked about earlier, when Amanda told me that I needed to take a look at my mom's property records, What I found out was that in January, within days of Jody Campbell coming to my farm and touring it and actually on the same day my mother lost her mother to cancer, a fact which they knew. I'd posted it on Facebook and actually got a condolences message from Amanda Simpson that morning. They had my mother go up there to sign something because she was a fiftyfifty owner in Kittle Farms LLC, which was part of my financials. They had indicated they needed her to sign something. So, you know, she's distraught that day as it is, but I said, you know, if you could go by there and get that signed. She goes in and from talking with her, she signed a paper. It was just there at the front desk. She said it looked like just a couple of pages. She asked them for a copy of it. They said we know your mother's passed away. We know you're upset. We'll mail you a copy of it. She she told me she's told me since and and and honestly has some guilt over said, I just took their word on what it was. I didn't look at it in great detail. But what it was was a two year mortgage on the farm in Geraldine, Alabama, the family farm I grew up in, that she owned free and clear. It was a two year mortgage to where in two years if she didn't pay them $750,000 they could foreclose on her And it included a cross collateral agreement where they could then foreclose on my farm in Tennessee. And here's the most remarkable aspect of that because there's probably people watching this. There's no way in hell. Speaker 0: There's no way. Mean, no way in hell. Speaker 1: I just. And listen, I you're exactly right. It's just I'd be sitting there saying to now this son of a gun, you know, he's really spinning a yarn here. She walked in there owning that property free and clear, signed a $750,000 2 year mortgage, which they used to extort me. Got nothing. Got no check. We've never got them. They refused to even explain what that where that $750,000 The only thing that they could even potentially argue is they slid $750,000 of my debt to her, but they refused to answer that. And at the end of the day, all that was for them was leverage. Because when I told them and quite frankly, I think this was the exact words when they start pushing me saying you've got to sign a release of claims and confidentiality and all that, I told them to kiss my ass. I wasn't signing anything. I'm not done anything wrong. Y'all owe me money. Speaker 0: Exactly. Speaker 1: And one of the first things they did was basically said, well, how about this? And they emailed me and it was the lien on my mother's property. And essentially said, now what are you gonna do? Speaker 0: See in a normal world if you want to refinance which is basically what your mom signed is a refinance you would go to the bank Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: And ask for for your home to be refinanced. They would do an appraisal. That's right. They would give you thirty years to pay it back, and then you would get a check for that money. Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: But she's just sitting at home, I'm sure crying her eyes out Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: Because she just lost her mom. Right? Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: And said, we need you to come to the bank and sign this. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: In what world does that happen? Speaker 1: It it should never happen. Speaker 0: And it was two years to pay it back, and she got zero money. Speaker 1: Nothing. Nothing. And here's the other part. You know, if anything, we she'd be tied in with me. I mean, we're talking about, like, the only thing that could even make sense is they said, okay, well, your son had a loan with us. And you know, when people might look at that and say, well, why would she go down there and sign something? When we originally took the loans out, she had had to sign something and it like a resolution on behalf of Kittle Farms that, you know, they're okay. She's okay with us using the financials because they wanted the financials from my law firm. They wanted it from any business I own. They wanted the individual. So just a formality as far as that goes. But that's what the expectation was there. And instead she signs a two year seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars mortgage. My name is on there nowhere as far as a signature line. Here's another thing. I know for sure because I have an email from Amanda Simpson because this is before, you know, is back in January before everything kind of falls apart that says your mother just left, came in and signed everything. And if memory serves, I'm almost certain on this, it was January 2021. The notary was an employee of Alabama Farm Credit and it's signed January 2021. In Alabama, mortgage is not effective unless it is notarized. Speaker 0: Well, Dustin got a little heated and made one of my cameras overheat. It happened. I've never had it happen yet, but I had one camera over heat. But we're back, and hopefully it doesn't happen again. But, it was okay. We stretch our legs a little bit, and we are back. So try to remember where you left off. Speaker 1: Yeah. And there were a lot of things that happened there in July and early August that just didn't make a lot of sense. You know, I talked about they had asked for my list of clients back in June. The the first letter we got from this new attorney, Chris Glenos, again, asked for our list of clients. And Ashley, is my law partner and and business partner and has been involved in this process. And she's also, you know, she's an attorney agricultural law. I told her immediately, something is going on here. I can if I have any skill as an attorney, it's being able to read people. And I have often described it to people as as long as I can talk to someone or I can see what they've put in their words, I can take their temperature and basically be able to see kind of what they're thinking. And I could tell with Chris Glynos that his motivations were not pure on this. He was not trying to figure out what was going on. He was not trying to figure out who was wrong and who was right. He had one goal. He had come in to be the fixer and he had- Speaker 0: Not for you though. Speaker 1: For me, but for the bank. And as it would turn out, to fix a problem that was way bigger than just me. But it involved a lot of other borrowers which I'll talk about and I really didn't understand that at the time. At the time I'm trying to figure out why are they targeting me? Do they want this farm? What what is going on here? So you go about three weeks in and all of a sudden he send he starts sending some letters and starts making some threats that would suggest their ability to even potentially foreclose on us if we don't do what they say. And again, it's another moment to where my jaw drops, to where I'm thinking what world are we living in here? And you know, this entire time I've always thought like, you know, when are the cops going to come in and just bust this thing up? And so I start researching. I didn't know really anything about the Farm Credit Act and I say that as an agricultural attorney and it kind of goes back to what I talked about earlier. Farm Credit flies well below the radar on everything. Speaker 0: And I just like you because you kind of said it like under your breath a little bit. Like they tried to foreclose on you. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: And you had never missed a payment. Speaker 1: Never missed a payment. And again, this is another one of those moments to where they're going to be people that's watching this. And every time I tell the story on next, you'll have somebody that'll fly in there and comment. And listen, I probably would be the same way, but they'll say, oh, there's there's no way. There's no way. He he's missed a payment somewhere. He's not telling the full truth. Well, the the federal government ended up having to admit years later that it was true, that I had never missed a payment. I'd never been late on a payment, had nothing to do with my payments. They were trying they were not just trying, they were extorting me. They were trying to coerce something that they didn't deserve, they didn't have a right to, which was a legal release of claims in exchange for for them doing nothing. I mean they were they were using leverage and saying we're gonna foreclose on you when they had no legal right to foreclose on me. And it's the it's the very definition of extortion. Speaker 0: Which in plain English, that's what I'm here for in case you guys haven't noticed. I'm here to translate, and he tells his story. They wanted you to drop your clients Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: In exchange to not foreclose on you. Speaker 1: It was it was multiple layers of what they were requesting. They wanted a release of claims so that I could never sue them. They also though wanted confidentiality where I could never talk about the claims. And that brings up an interesting point in that there are ethical limitations with an attorney signing confidentiality when they represent other people on similar matters. Because if I'm not able to talk about something, I can't effectively represent my clients. Yeah. And like I mentioned, you had over a thousand borrowers in that farm credit system that, you know, that were poultry farmers that quite frankly probably didn't know another attorney outside of me to help them. And the but the last piece of that puzzle that they ended up coming back and I found out years later was that they did not want me to ever be able to represent a farm credit borrower. And the way and this might make the extortion side of it kind of even out as far as making sense, I try to keep everything simplified. I documented this case so well that there are literally thousands of pages of writings on this to the point that Chris Glenos was saying, please quit sending your emails because I would send something daily saying what was going on. And at some point I let them know in writing you want me to release my legal claims. I value my legal claims at $10,000,000. And I said that because then all of a sudden they're not just extorting me for some legal claim that they could say, Well it wasn't really a legal claim. We didn't really have any kind of thing. Their own knowledge at that point that what they are really extorting me out of is the potential to get $10,000,000. So I put a dollar figure on it so there would be no question And I did that and I did so many things during this and documenting it thinking now they'll back off. Now that they'll stop this nonsense. But as August rolled down, I could not communicate with my bank. I couldn't call in to so much as make a payment or anything. They had me mailing my payments. Our only communication could be with the Bradley ARANT law firm. I then realize, hey, we've got a board of directors at Alabama Farm Credit and I'm gonna call these guys and they're gonna be the people that ride in here and say, hey, now wait a second. These guys are stockholders. We represent them as the board of directors, and this nonsense needs to stop. Speaker 0: Yeah. Because we gotta remember that this isn't just a normal bank. Like the farmers own the bank. Speaker 1: Farmers own it. Speaker 0: So they get to decide who the board members are. Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: Go ahead. Speaker 1: If you want to know who was paying Chris Guinness' salary to extort me? Me, in part, along with every other borrower there. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And so I start reaching out to the board of directors, tried to reach out to the chairman, a gentleman named Matthew Christjon, who is a veterinarian in Alabama in the Randolph County area and got him on the phone and started explaining to him, Hey, we've not missed a payment. We don't have something is going on here and they've hijacked our account. And he said, I can't talk to you about that. And I said, You're the chairman of the board of directors. Who can? And he said, I can't talk to you anymore. He said, I'm represented by Chris Galenos. And what I have later found out through the grapevine, the board of directors was forced to sign confidentiality and an agreement not to communicate with me. And so you look at the different layers to it and you've got some people on it that were ignorant and probably didn't understand that their role as a director would require them to represent the stockholders. And you've got some that and I believe that Doctor. Christian is one of these you've got some that they know the score. They know what's going on, but there was something else that they were hiding and it was more important for them to risk extorting a lawyer than it was for them to allow things to move forward. And so on 08/24/2021, I filed a complaint with the United States Farm Credit Administration, which is the regulator of the farm credit system. Speaker 0: So why did you go to them? Why did you not just sue in court? Because you are a lawyer. Speaker 1: Great question. So every loan in the Farm Credit System is governed by the Farm Credit Act. And the Farm Credit Act through the years has been revised numerous times. In the 1980s, there was a farm credit crisis where you had farms being foreclosed on left and right. And they realized finally that these farm credit lenders were going in and just robbing these farmers blind. And they were doing it to try to preserve a system that was on the verge of collapse and ultimately did collapse and had to be bailed out. Speaker 0: That the same kind of story where they were getting their farms taken away even if they paid? Speaker 1: That's right. Wow. You had farms, you know, and you can read some accounts about this that were covered by newspapers at the time. You had people that only owed a fraction of what their farms were worth getting foreclosed on by the banks. And and one of the aspects to that was they were taking mineral rights from those farmers and some in the Midwest out there were very valuable mineral rights. And what ultimately prompted the Farm Credit Act to be rewritten was and this has resurfaced as a significant issue today is there were so many farmer suicides. And if you look up farm credit crisis and go to like Wikipedia because I looked this up a while back, it has a listing of some of the most notable farmers that committed suicide, many of them in their barns hanging from their lofts. And you know, I look back at that and you know, nobody wants to glorify suicide, but there was a sacrifice in that that allowed the ultimate story of that fraud to be told. And probably the most impassioned plea related to that was made by a young senator from, I believe, South Dakota, Tom Dashell. And, you know, Dashell gets up on the Senate floor and talks about those suicides and read some of the articles and basically said something has got to be done. And when they when they evaluated the Farm Credit Act, what they realized was these farmers that own the system, they had no rights. There was nothing they could do to stop these foreclosures. So they come up with a list of borrower rights to where the farmers were treated more equitably. One of those borrower rights was if you've made all your payments, we can't foreclose on you in the farm credit system. I mean, the farm credit system was established because private banks were foreclosing on too many farms, and we were desperately concerned that we might lose the family farm. We're talking about 1916. So in 1933 when the Farm Credit Administration was created, we had six and a half million farms. Today, under their great stewardship, we're down to about one and a half million farms. So they've only lost 5,000,000 farms on their for a system that was created to save the family farm. Yeah. So they come up with all these borrower rights. You can pull up the committee notes. I don't know that anybody had ever looked at the committee notes until we have over the last couple of years in filing litigation related to this. But in the committee notes, it makes clear they contemplated those farmers being able to sue under federal law under the Farm Credit Act in a court of law. What ends up happening is three years later the Farm Credit Administration takes cases to court. The Farm Credit Administration, which again all these people are being paid by the farmers, It's not a traditional federal agency that receives standard appropriations. Farmers are are given an assessment through the individual lenders that pays all these people's salaries. Speaker 0: So you have a government agency. The FCA is a government agency Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: Independent. Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: And they are supposed to regulate the farm credit banks. Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: And they get their funding from the farm credit banks. Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: Can you imagine? I was trying to think of an example on how to put this in plain English or what it's like. I mean, the the best thing I come up with is, like, let's say, you pay for your local police. Just you. You are the only one that pays for your local police. Mhmm. You fund all of their salaries. Do you think they're ever gonna pull you over and give you a ticket? Speaker 1: Exactly. Speaker 0: They're never going to do it. That's where the that's all their funding comes from you. They're not gonna piss you off. Speaker 1: That's exactly right. And and the lenders hold the power of the purse, so to speak, but the money ain't coming from these executives. The money is coming from the farmers themselves. And and the Farm Credit Administration, which was supposed to have regulatory authority, so these farmers in the eighties, they finally have got the right they can go to court and get somebody that's neutral to look into this on these wrongful foreclosures. And Farm Credit Administration went to court and said that law doesn't specifically state that they could go to court and sue us. And it just says that they have those rights. And at the Farm Credit Administration, we can enforce those rights. And as we've seen, you know, a lot of times the difference between right and wrong is just what a judge says at the end of the day. And these judges, I don't care if they're on the federal level with a lifetime appointment, they they can still be subject to influence. And they got a court around 1990, just three years after the farmers had finally fought and got their rights. They got a court to say, no. A farmer can't go to court and sue these people. The farmer has to rely on the Farm Credit Administration to come in and regulate the lender's conduct. Speaker 0: Which this goes against our entire constitution. Speaker 1: Absolutely. Speaker 0: This is like, people wanna talk about an attack on the constitution or a threat to democracy, whatever you wanna say. This is the threat because our founding fathers created the an imperfect perfect system. The three branches of government, executive branch, which is the president and everything under him, which would include the FCA, the legislative branch, congress, and the judicial branch. That is our publicly funded courts. That's where we're supposed to fight to the death with each other. I I always say, courts are for where adults go when they disagree. And you're telling me, you can't sue farm credit in normal courts like you would any other any other thing or person, whatever. Speaker 1: Not under the Farm Credit Act, which governs every if if the Farm Credit Administration says the lender did things right under the Farm Credit Act, they did things right under the Farm Credit Act. If they just ignore you on a complaint and, you know, push you into a position to do something, that's the same thing. But there's no case where you can ever go and sue under the Farm Credit Act. That does two things. You know, quite obviously you're not getting due process when you're having to go to the people these lenders are paying to say, Hey, I need you to come in here and bring the paddle and spank these people. They're not doing anything there to where you can get any kind of third party independent neutral review. They've taken that away. Also though what they've taken away is the ability to make it public. You know you file a federal complaint against a farm credit lender under the farm and say hey they violated the very law that this loan was written under. And you're gonna get some press related to that. Where you're not gonna get press is when you make a complaint to the Farm Credit Administration, which I had to do, saying I can't so much as call my local branch. They hang the phone up on me and I need you to step in because they violated the Farm Credit Act seven ways from Sunday. And I need somebody to come in here. And at that point, you know, we're in 08/24/2021. Again, at every step of this, just like when I reached out to the board of directors, I'm sitting back with a little bit of a smirk on my face thinking that, you y'all had it now. Farm Credit Administration is going to go in and they're not going to put up with this kind of conduct. And I sent that to them and they not only did they put up with it, but they kept it quiet. And when the Farm Credit Administration releases findings, if a lender does something wrong, they make those findings confidential. They do not release them to the public. You know, you see the FTC, you see the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, they do press releases all the time. DOJ, hey, this company did this. They had to pay a fine X amount. Yep. And it's a public release. You can search for any kind of release on the Farm Credit Administration. If it involves a borrower dispute with a lender, it is completely confidential. In fact, they tried to take the position that the findings they issued to me were confidential. I just ignored that ultimately because the truth needed to come out. And this was a federal agency that I had in part financed and those findings should absolutely be public. Probably the most important reason is to let all those other stockholders know what is going on in this farm credit system. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And to know what their rights are. And if all of these were made public through the years, the way going back to the 1980s, they wouldn't have been able to get away with this. They've been able to get away with it. Corruption hides in dark places and that couldn't be more true than the way they've handled business here. Speaker 0: So Farm Credit tries to foreclose your farm through your mom, right, and that whole mess, which would be, you know, signing a contract under duress, which, you know, is illegal. And you can't sue in court. You have to go to the FCA Mhmm. And file a complaint. Mhmm. So what happened exactly after you filed a complaint with the FCA? What was the complaint about exactly? Speaker 1: Yeah, so the complaint listed exactly what was going on and literally uses the words they are attempting to extort me right now. I can't communicate with my bank. I had a I want to say it was an hour and a half long interview with an investigator named Russell Middleton who was assigned to my file. First letter I got in August said and their book protocol requires them to conduct that investigation in sixty days. And that's what the initial letter said. You know, we have a phone call. He had a female on the line with him as well, who I I don't recall their name, but they were actively involved in the conversation. When I explained things like they have told me I can't so much as have a credit transaction process unless I sign this release, They immediately said, well, that that's illegal. That's that's not right. And when I got off that phone, I was I felt pretty confident that they know this is wrong. There was no question about it. You know, when and I sent him an email at some point and I said, could you just get on a three way call with me with my bank and let them know that they can talk to me? That it and they said, no, we can't do that. So sixty days goes by and I'm trying to do everything I can. You know, we're supposed to be launching our business that fall. I had 14 people working for me. We had construction crews here renovating the properties. And I'm feeling like at some point we're gonna this is gonna get resolved and we're gonna be back to business as usual because this is ridiculous what's going on. This is, you know, I felt like that whole time, this is somebody they've made a mistake. They're trying to cover it up, but eventually it's going to get to the right person and they're going to come in and say, hey, now wait just a second. Get get off this guy's back. Give him his money that he's that he's due on it. And, you know, let's let's go on with everything. And but sixty days passed and I got a letter and it said, due to the complexity of your case, we're going to need more time. Now, ultimately, I'd get that same letter for over six hundred days, almost two years. Speaker 0: Almost two years. Speaker 1: Every letter, every sixty days was exactly the same. It always said due to the complexity of your case, we need more time. Speaker 0: And you're and you have like foreclosure over your head. You don't have time. Speaker 1: That's right. That's right. And like, you know, a lot of people probably say, you know, he should have been shouting from the rooftops. And I was, you know, I'll tell you how desperate I got is when when they had sent and put our loan in distress and like, you know, I'm the potential that if I don't sign this and I don't go away as a whistleblower on all this, that they're going to take my form. I went to try to talk to the governor of Tennessee, went to the governor's office, ended up meeting with the chief of the chief of staff for the governor, contacted the attorney general, contacted the consumer financial protection bureau. I contacted the USDA's crime enforcement division. I contacted the state of Tennessee's ag crimes division. I contacted the Alabama State Bar. I contacted the Tennessee State Bar. I contacted every single authority that I felt like might possibly have jurisdiction to shut this down. And I couldn't do it. I even emailed other attorneys that worked for Bradley A. Rant that worked in, white collar crime, so to speak, fraud cases that knew better. There's an attorney in particular named Robert Maddox. He was a professor at Sanford School of Law where I was. He was not my professor, but I felt like, Hey, I've got this connection. Here's a guy that works as a law school professor. He works in these criminal fraud type issues involving extortion. And I sent him an email and told him what was going on and nothing. I contacted Bradley Arantz, their chairman of the board, who was based in Nashville, Tennessee, and let him know what was going on. Nothing. Nobody would step in here and act. And we get to early November and one of the smartest things that we did, Tennessee is a one party state, so only one side needs to know that you're recording a telephone conversation. We started recording. Speaker 0: Those are the best states. I'm in one too. I love it. Absolutely. Speaker 1: It's a, you know, our law firm used to record every call that comes in and now have certain apps that we use. But there was a period of time that we started recording those calls with Glenos because he got more and more aggressive. And there was a point to where we had documented so much. And again, if we were living in a sane world, criminal acts. But he was getting more and more aggressive. So we started recording those calls. And in early November, he's he starts saying, we're gonna put your loan in distress, which is the first step to foreclosure in the Farm Credit System. And, you know, I I think we've looked back and I sent had sent like 31 emails or something like that to the foreign credit administration, like begging, trying to get them to intervene. Like, mean, I'm a proud person and, you know, and but I begged those people to help me. I mean, I literally said, Please, I can't. Y'all, somebody has got to do something. And I finally because I could sense that, Glenos' desperation and I thought, you know what, if I if I could outline all this in one recorded call where he knows I've never missed a payment and and I got him to say, you know, start to finish on all this, that might be enough. Then somebody might be forced to step in or Glenos might back off for fear that he might go to prison for extortion. And, so on November, I woke up that morning and I sent myself an email. And it said I have zero I said I have zero intention of ever signing this release. I will not agree to confidentiality. I will not go away on this because it is not right. Speaker 0: And doesn't this just make you feel like you obviously have something over them with the the poultry farmers? Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 0: I mean, obviously, there's something you have that you could take this whole system down. That's all this is. So they want and you're the only lawyer that will is probably willing to work for the small farm. Speaker 1: That's right. And we had a case about a decade ago involving the USDA that made the USDA look very bad. So we'd had a case about a decade before that with the USDA and it made the USDA look really bad and that there are a lot of ties, even though there should not be, between USDA and foreign credit. And I, you know, I have to feel like that factored in. I'd had a case with Bradley Arant just a few years before where they had been made to look pretty bad and got fired right before trial in that case and they, you know, but it was they were so aggressive I knew there was something I had to be missing on all of this. But I got up that morning, I sent myself an email and I said I'm going to ask him to send that release. And I did that because I felt like people in hindsight might go back and say, Well Dustin had a weak moment. There they finally wore him down. But I sent an email to Chris Glenos and I said, Chris, I couldn't sleep last night and I can't do this anymore. Can you please just send me whatever it is you want me to sign? And then I sat there and I just stared at that computer screen waiting to see what the response would be. And his response back was, Absolutely. I'll have your draft sent before the end of the day. And I knew then this is not a mistake on their part. They know exactly what they are doing. So the end of the day comes and by the end of the day I get a call from Glenn Ose and he's frantic and says, Hey, my clients are on a plane. They're getting they were actually going to a farm credit fly in, which is this deal where all the lenders and execs go up and schmooze these politicians. And so just incredible timing in that regard. He said I need them to sign off on everything and review this and it looks like it'll be Monday before I can send it to you. And I Speaker 0: said I'd be like nope you have to do it right now. Speaker 1: I know and here I am I'm trying to play it cool. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: But that weekend goes by and, you know, I don't even know if I slept over that weekend, but, you know, part of it was I can't take his temperature on Saturday and Sunday to gauge what's going on. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And then I'm thinking Monday comes around, I thought, you know what, I can't wait anymore. So that morning I called and I said, I left him a message, he called me right back and I said, I just want you to kind of detail for me what it is you're wanting me to sign. And then in an eleven minute phone conversation I go through and get him to admit that he knew I'd made every payment. He actually says, Well, you don't have to miss a payment with us. You might miss a payment with somebody else and be in some kind of financial distress. I said, Chris, I don't owe anybody anything. Speaker 0: And Speaker 1: he comes back, Okay, okay, well and he says, well, we might not have to put that loan in distress right yet or something along those lines. And then you can, you know, and I've posted that that recorded call on X, but on that day Chris Glenos was a desperate broken man. In the other calls, he's practically mocking us about what are you gonna do? But here we are. I've made it a hundred days and I've held them off and I still haven't signed it. And so by the end of that call, he had admitted to everything. And when I asked him why this all was happening to me, he said, it's because you've got claims of fraud. And at the time, here I am. I am a whistleblower in the United States Farm Credit System with an active case pending with the Farm Credit Administration. So that call ends. I immediately send it to the Alabama State Bar. I send it to the Tennessee State Bar. I send it to the chairman of the board of Bradley Arahan. Actually, don't think I sent the recording. I sent the knowledge that your attorney just in a recorded call has admitted to those things And I sent the recording to the Farm Credit Administration investigator Russell Middleton and basically said here's all the proof you need as to what's going on. Speaker 0: Wow. Speaker 1: And I need somebody to step in. That night, I got a letter from Chris Glynos in my email. There's not even a subject on it. And it is on Alabama Farm Credit letterhead and it says, your loans have been placed in distress. First step to foreclosure in The United States Farm Credit System. And it gave, I want to say, maybe forty five days. They also sent one to my mother and said, During that time, you have the ability to propose a restructure of the loan to us, which is what the Farm Credit Act would require them to do. But if we don't agree that that restructure is appropriate, we will foreclose on you. And in the meantime, we want your bank records. We want your tax records. We want everything. I looked up to see how many restructures has Alabama Farm Credit approved over the last few years. And the answer was zero. Speaker 0: Really? Speaker 1: So I knew then, you know, what they ultimately would do is they would play it out. They would foreclose on me and then they've got my farm and then all of a sudden I've got to sign something if I want the farm back. And I think it was twenty one days that it took me, but on December I paid off our farm credit loans. Speaker 0: Wow. Speaker 1: And it was not easy. We sold a hundred acres of land over that time period and some of it was some things we had to sell afterwards to make up short term loans we had to get the meantime. But we sold a hundred acres of land. We sold over a hundred head of cattle of our registered cattle and ultimately sold my home up here my private home that my family had just moved into within the last year. I had a 12 year old daughter who'd never moved before in her life and I you know I she's not like me as far as being tremendously outgoing. She's more introverted and shy and you know I had to put a hell of a sale on a kid to understand why we needed to move to Tennessee. And part of that sale was you know, hey we'll have this our dream home. This is where you'll spend the rest of your life We had a little chicken coop in the back and she'd finally talked me into you know I talked about my opposition to getting chickens but she was she'd kind of talked me into we'll get some chickens put in that coop. I had a concrete pad in the back that we're going build a little barn on and we were just ten minutes down the road from the main farm here. And we had to sell that to be able to come up with the money that it took to pay those loans back because the Farm Credit Administration refused to do anything. They responded back and said we still need more time to investigate your complaint. And you know I'm screaming at them that I I don't have more time. I I I need something to be done. And, Speaker 0: And I just like I don't mean to interrupt, but if this can happen to you Right. A lawyer, a very successful one, Speaker 1: who had every advantage you could have in this situation. We were well funded so I could hold, you know, I could hold them out. I don't have to hire a lawyer. I am a lawyer. I can go and file anything that I need to file and for whatever reason, although I listen, won't find anybody that hates lawyers more than I do. The biggest compliment I get is when somebody's been around me for a while and then I've not mentioned anything about being a lawyer and they say, well, that's the last thing I would have thought is that you're a lawyer. I mean, that's that's great. That's as good as it gets for me. But in this instance and I'd never filed a lawsuit in my life. I've never been sued in my life up to this point. Filed a whole lot Speaker 0: On yourself? Speaker 1: Right. Myself. I had represented a whole lot of other people, but when it comes to me, I've never had any kind of legal issue. And you know here I was and and the one thing that I that is that if you've got a law degree that people tend to take you seriously. You know, I got in with the chief of staff for the governor of the state of Tennessee and got to talk to him. And if if I was a row crop farmer, I'll be honest, I don't know that they would let somebody in there. Speaker 0: And that's just what I keep thinking about them. Like, if all this happened to you, what's happening to the farmer that's not a lawyer? Speaker 1: They would have no chance whatsoever. There is I'll go a step further. There is no way that because I mean here we are and I've, you know, it's been a steady fight, know, it's kind of like a boxing match to where, you know, I'm always looking for the knockout punch, but I'm just jabbing and I'm constantly winning. They've they've had to go through five law firms. I'm talking about five of the biggest law firms, most expensive law firms, thousand dollar an hour lawyers to stop us. They had to hire a PR crisis firm to come in and do Speaker 0: damage And who actually paid for them? Speaker 1: The farmers paid for all of it. And at the time they were extorting me, I'm one of them. I'm one of the stockholders, and they're going after me for exposing corruption. And to go, you know, not to put too fine a point on it, but one of the things I let Chris Glynis know is you've committed malpractice for your client. You are violating the law and that malpractice claim belongs to the shareholders, to the stockholders, who have a derivative claim against your law firm for violating the law. And what would end up happening is that I would find out later and actually through I don't know who mailed it to me. I don't know whether somebody at Bradley ARANT mailed it to me or whether somebody at the state bar mailed it to me, but I got a package one day and it was all the documents Bradley A. Rant had sent to the Alabama State Bar after I reported them. And in there is a letter from 11/08/2021. Keep in mind I called him that morning and got him on that recorded call. That night he put my loans in foreclosure. In the middle they had an attorney and I think her name is Meade Hartfield for Bradley A. R. And if you look up she's now in their farm credit practice group. She wrote a letter saying it's two page letter and I'm paraphrasing but essentially says Dustin Kittles made allegations that we violated the law with respect to him and there could be some truth to that. Wow. And for us to continue representing Alabama Farm Credit in this action against Mr. Kittle. And it talks about how this would be a second action. As I've went back and kind of put the pieces together, the second part of the action was that's when they were gonna formally put me my loan in distress. But she said we need the CEO or we need somebody to sign a conflict waiver because there is a conflict of interest. Now to be honest with you, when you get caught in a recorded call like that and you violated the law and somebody's made a derivative claim against you as an attorney, that's not even a waivable conflict. But what is certainly not waivable is the CEO who they represented individually as well in this signing that. There is case law precedent that is clear as day and you can't tell me that Roman Shaw, who's the general counsel of the Alabama State Bar, is dumb enough to not know this precedent. But the precedent says that if you're the CEO and the law firm is representing you too, you can't sign a waiver, a conflict waiver on behalf of that company. And it makes sense because that CEO is trying to protect himself. They don't necessarily want another law firm to come in and look at what has been going on. They wanted Bradley ARANT to take this to the finish line because their only chance at that point as far as escaping at the least public accountability for me is to get me to sign something saying I won't talk about what has actually been going on. Speaker 0: But now at this point, you've paid off your loan. So do they have anything on you? Are they still trying to contact you? Like what's going on now? Speaker 1: So December 1 comes around. I paid off the loans. I mentioned this to you yesterday that like I went through a period of time where I wasn't sleeping, I wasn't eating. A week later and I've never been in the hospital for anything, I don't even think I've ever broken a bone, but a week later I thought I was having a heart attack and I thought, Well, it makes sense. I've been under this stress and you know I say this I've never been an anxious person. You know, I've had people I've had attorneys that worked for me that came in and said, Dustin, my gosh, I've blown the statute of limitations. What in the world are we gonna do on this? And you know, I pat them on the back and say, Hey, we're gonna figure this out. And and but there were nights during all of that, during that twenty one days where I'm up at 03:00 in the morning, I'm pacing the floor trembling. And and just like, what am I I mean, just sitting there like, what am I gonna do? What am I gonna how to how Speaker 0: am gonna mean, because everything you've known so far is not available to you. Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: You you can't just sue farm credit like you normally would. That's what you know. Speaker 1: How do you beat the ultimate authority in the government? Is Speaker 0: And that and that's what I was gonna say. Okay. So that was my other question. So now you have an issue not just with farm credit, but you also have an issue with the farm credit administration. Speaker 1: That's Speaker 0: right. Because they're dragging their feet on this. Speaker 1: That's right. And you know even then I chalked that up to maybe government inefficiency. Yeah. You know, we deal with the EOC, for example, unemployment cases and have for years and, you know, they not like a lot of the people with the EOC, but I mean, they're not going to just, you know, come busting out and get a bunch of work done. There's gonna be delays that happen and that's just that's the government, you know, that kind of deal. And at first I thought it was just complete incompetence. And you know I think I said as much in some of the emails like how in how stupid are y'all? And it really didn't, you know, people probably look at some of the things that that I post now and say, my goodness, this got some kind of conspiracy theorist on this as far as like the government and before all of this, I didn't the the last thing I thought was that the Farm Credit Administration was in on all this with the lenders. And I'm talking about all the way up to the point I paid my loans off, and I held on to my house for a few more months after I had taken some short term loans out there. And the reason I did is because I kept thinking this is just inefficiency. It ultimately will get to the right person at the Farm Credit Administration. They'll come in and fix this. I'd keep my employees going as long even though we were supposed to have that $1,300,000 to finalize the construction on everything here and to launch a business that would include agritourism and an event venue and things of that nature. And, you know, I'm I'm continuing to think even going into early twenty twenty two anytime now. They're they're gonna get this straight. Speaker 0: And they didn't. Speaker 1: They did not. Speaker 0: So here's another big question. Because if you have a complaint with farm credit, you have to go through the FCA. What do you do if you have a complaint about the FCA? Speaker 1: So if you have a complaint about the FCA, you go to the inspector general of the FCA. Speaker 0: And I know Trump recently just fired a whole bunch. Speaker 1: He did. And, they have an organization that's over them, that's called SIGI and I think it's like Council for Inspector General's own Integrity and Efficiency or something along those And they don't have much integrity and they don't have very much efficiency based on my experience with them. But we made a complaint to the inspector general of the Farm Credit Administration, and that's really supposed to be your real watchdog. They are supposed to have total independence from the rest of the administration and, you know, they're that extra layer of protection to be sure that they don't go off the rails as far as federal law is concerned. And that complaint got ignored. And so the only thing that was happening during that period of time, let's just say the entire 02/2022, I'm sitting here trying to continue floating my farm and this dream. Like in, you know, if you talk about like what would have been best for me if I'd have sold everything and just went to the beach way back then. But it involved more than me. It involved people that worked for me. It involved my mother who had been put in that position. It involved the other borrowers at Alabama Farm Credit that needed to know what was going on and in particular the poultry farmers. And so for 2022, every 60, I just got that boilerplate letter. And like I say, we met an inspector general complaint, got no response, followed up on it. And it wasn't until 06/12/2023 that I finally received the findings from the US Farm Credit Administration. Speaker 0: After this is like, what, a year, year and a half or so? Like, after you've paid off your loan? Speaker 1: Right. So on 06/12/2023, we finally get those findings. And I wasn't expecting them. It they came out of the blue. Got them in an email from Russell Middleton, and it's five pages. And when you go through it, it's everything that we said was true. The, you know, the primary ruling there was we had made all of our loan payments, so we couldn't be foreclosed on. And so the Farm Credit Administration said that letter, the distress letter, was sent to us in error. Now we're six fifty seven days later. A hell of a lot of good it did me then. Speaker 0: And because the damage is done. Speaker 1: The damage is Speaker 0: You've already sold your land, your cattle, your home. Speaker 1: The damage is done, and the damage has been exacerbated over that time. And it also said that they had withheld appraisals from us. And it also said that they had violated the law in saying that I couldn't do business with them unless I signed a legal release of claims with confidentiality. So there are, I'm gonna say, seven violations of federal law, primarily the Farm Credit Act, but also the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which gives us a potential angle. Although they have some defenses on those claims as well as far as immunity is concerned, due to some manipulation of the the regulations. But, once I got those findings, I sent those to Alabama Farm Credit's new attorneys because by that time Bradley Arant had to hire their own lawyers. And, so I sent it to them and and basically said, that law firm along with the executives of Alabama Farm Credit violated federal law. The reason I had to send it to them is because the Farm Credit Administration at the end of the findings said, yeah, they they violated the law. We agree with you, but you paid your loans off and are no longer a Farm Credit borrower so there's nothing we can do for you. Thank you for reporting your concerns. And, you know, to my knowledge, you've got they didn't remove anybody from that board of directors. The CEO, Mel Kohler, wasn't removed. The vice president, Jody Campbell, wasn't removed. And the law firm in Bradley Arant and the lawyer, Chris Glynos, that you literally have said in those findings violated federal law, they're still representing Alabama Farm Bureau. Speaker 0: Imagine just dream with me for a second. Imagine you actually sued, in regular courts. What do you think you would have got for for all of this? Speaker 1: I I'll tell you this. There's no amount that would have been worth it. Yeah. Speaker 0: But you would have got something. Speaker 1: Absolutely. It you know, I our agricultural business had been we had a business evaluation under $10,000,000 we started and that was as an upstart pre revenue. And that business never launched and the reason it never launched is my- sold my house, I had to move into the venue which still isn't finished. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And you know, we had a credit line with them at two point eight five percent or something along those lines interest right around the 3% mark because interest was at historic lows. Yeah, that was a huge part of why I took the loans out to begin with is we've got an interest at historic lows, put it on a twenty five, thirty year term and you know there's no better time than there would be. I mean with interest rates that low and you know you're that's free money essentially as long as you've got a you know an eventual plan for it. And that was one of kind of just the circumstantial tragedies of it is they locked my account for a hundred days. And during that I'm literally telling them, hey, interest rates are going up because they're trying to force me out of the foreign credit system. It's obvious. You know, our mortgage interest rate now in the loans that we've had to take since, are at 8%. And like when you're talking about that amount of money Speaker 0: Oh yeah. There's a huge difference. Yeah. People don't realize most of your mortgage is interest. That's right. Speaker 1: And there's no way I would have ever taken out a loan and and but again it was a you know twenty five-thirty year loan that we were taking out. So my expectation was this is the last this will do me till probably the rest of my life right here. And I'm locked in at this rate and everything's good to go. If we would have been in 2020 when it was time for me to move and the interest rates would have been at 8%, I wouldn't have bought anything. That you know that it wouldn't have penciled out quite frankly. And so that's a huge part of the harm to it is on the financial side you had a business that was when it was time for them to launch, we were being extorted and our loan account was frozen and they had $1,300,000 of my money. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And then by December I have to write them a check for 2 and a half million dollars to pay the loans off just to get out of the extortion. But it was it was the only way. Speaker 0: So to recap, farm credit, you take out a seemingly harmless loan through farm credit. They say, you need to drop all of your clients against us even though you've made all your payments. And you try to go to the only regulating body of farm credit, the FCA, they drag their feet where you have to either foreclose on everything or pay off the house, some land, your cattle to at least have something left over. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: They take six hundred and days to respond. And there's there's no way for you to go after the FCA, really. Right. But there was one thing. There's literally one thing that the FCA could do wrong or I guess the president could do wrong. And the president did that one thing that he could do wrong to give you grounds to sue. What was that one thing? Speaker 1: So the entirety of our complaint process start to finish was during the Biden administration. And you know I don't even know that I looked at this initially, but at some point I looked and saw that there were two Farm Credit board members and in the Farm Credit Act it specifies that there should be three Farm Credit board members and they are the very top of the pyramid outside of Inspector General, who would have even oversight over the Farm Credit Board members. But these three positions are appointed by the president and subject to Senate confirmation, but we only had two people serving on that board. And one of those individuals was a guy named Jeff Hall. He's a former Farm Bureau executive and a legislative staffer for Mitch McConnell. Speaker 0: And we just love Mitch McConnell. Speaker 1: Love Mitch McConnell. Speaker 0: The Sarcasm, I Speaker 1: mean, when you think about this farm credit fiasco, you think about this is the kind of stuff Mitch McConnell's usually got his hands in. And and I would indicate that he probably does. And the fact that Jeff Hall, even today Jeff Hall, President Trump has recently appointed him to be the acting Farm Credit Chairman. There are term limits. You can only serve one six year term in the Farm Credit Administration on that board. Jeff Hall's term expired in October of twenty eighteen. Wow. He is the longest serving Farm Credit Board member in history. Speaker 0: Because it's illegal. Speaker 1: Because it's illegal. And he has now served two consecutive terms and is starting his third term. He was a Barack Obama appointee and the other individual is a guy named Glenn Smith. Now, and Glenn Smith is also serving in an expired term. The reason there were only two people on that board is because the third member died. And the third member was a guy named Dallas Tonsager from South Dakota. And just to give you without going through the full array of improprieties that his fingerprints are on and I don't mind saying that. I'm sure his family doesn't like to hear that but it's absolutely true. He got involved in some biofuel ventures before he got into the government and capitalized on a lot of these fraudulent carbon activities that are going on today. But he was an appointee originally by George W. Bush At the very end of his term and the way that the Farm Credit Act specifies it as far as that term limit, if you serve over three years, you've served your full term. That's it. So at the very end of his term, Barack Obama, when he come into office, actually removed him from the farm credit position and moved him to undersecretary for the USDA. And he inserted a gentleman named Kenneth Spearman onto the farm credit board. Well then you fast forward to the end of Barack Obama's eight years. And so we're looking in that twenty fifteen-twenty sixteen range. He then moves Dallas Tonsager back from USDA back into that position on the farm credit board. And something else that he did, and this is just a very clear signal that there was a lot of fraud that was going on within this agency and it was known by at least everyone within the USDA higher ups, and I would include in that Secretary Tom Vilsack. But after Donald Trump had upset Hillary Clinton in the election and and won it. In that period between the election and when Trump was sworn sworn in for his first term, Barack Obama made the selection of Dallas Tomsegger to be the chairman of the Farm Credit Board. And typically, anytime there had been a selection of moving someone in as chairman, they would have to go back before the Senate. That wasn't done. And so, Ton Sager comes in and then you move forward a few years and Ton Sager took his executive assistant who was a legal advisor to him and moved her her name was Wendy LaGuardia into the position of Inspector General. So basically his underling is then over him and the entire farm credit system. Speaker 0: It just sounds like a free for all. Speaker 1: It absolutely was. Wendy LaGuarda comes in and starts firing people that were in the inspector general's office. And if you look back now, we've been able to see through FOIA requests, there were some active investigations going on. People in the inspector general office and I include Elizabeth Neen and Kathy Gallo in that had made complaints clear clear complaints that there was fraud going on. Well, Wendy LaGuardia replaced Elizabeth Dean and it appears to be a forced retirement potentially and then she fired Kathy Gallo which was she was essentially the Assistant Inspector General And Kathy Gallo, as far as the reason she was terminated, it's listed as a reduction in force. So a reduction in force is typically you got a big company, hey we got to get rid of 400 people. Kind of like what's going on with Elion right now in paring down some of these agencies. In looking at these records, this was a reduction in force of one against someone that is trying to expose fraud. Wow. And so, you know, what ends up happening with that Farm Credit Board is Dallas Tonsager passes away, and then there's just two people on the board. Donald Trump nominates a gentleman named Rodney k Brown to replace Jeff Hall's position, which had expired as of 02/2018. Speaker 0: And I just wanted to take a quick note. Why that's so important is because if your board is three people, you need to have a quorum. That's right. A quorum for people who don't, aren't too involved in government. You need a majority people on the board to be able to make decisions. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: So if you have someone who is illegally on the board, that means the board is only one person, and they cannot conduct a business at Speaker 1: all. Right. Speaker 0: They can't enforce rules. They like, that board is useless. So you're saying since 2017, that board has been useless? Speaker 1: That that is exactly what I'm saying. There has even looking at it as we sit here right now, there's one member serving in their legitimate term, And Trump tried to correct it to his credit during his first term in nominating Rodney K. Brown. And these Senate confirmation hearings for the Farm Credit Administration, it's open and shut. I mean they let Glenn Smith on the board and never even talked about the fact he'd been censored by his state for some activities that had went on as far as real estate was concerned. And things that you would scrutinize a Bobby Kennedy over or a Pam Bondi over. Farm Credit Administration, who cares? You know, if they're gonna screw over anybody, least it's just the farmers. And so their Farm Credit Administration hearings is typically just a pat on the back. Except for with Rodney K. Brown, when he was informed that he would be the nominee, he was told nobody else is going to know this and you keep your mouth shut on this. We're not going to let this get out until it's official. We'll do a release on it. You know I think Rodney's even talked about that he even asked him, Well can I tell my wife? And I think they're all, I don't know about that. Well before Rodney could even get back home, well he did ask, he says, Are anybody else gonna know? And they said and at the time Mr. Tonsager was still alive. They said, Well yeah, the FCA chairman Mr. Tonsager will know. He's not you know, it's like the bushes baked beans. He's not telling anybody. And so Rodney, before he even gets home, starts getting calls that people were calling the White House opposing his nomination. And it appears to be Farm Bureau leading that charge, but also Farm Credit has its own trade association. Speaker 0: And what's Farm Bureau? Speaker 1: Farm Bureau is a car insurance company who likes to dress up and pretend that they're a farmer. And they're nothing more and nothing less. They're trying to make money for their car and farm and property insurance business. And if you look at their history of lobbying, at least in recent years, it goes directly against the interest of the actual farmers. They are a big ag shiel and they are a corporation that's trying to make money and they spend a ton of money lobbying these representatives and senators. You can just about bet if you've got a representative or a senator that's anywhere close to sniffing that ag committee, Farm Bureau's kicking them a little bit of money as far as their campaign is concerned. And you know you go back to this whole deal about Jeff Hall. So that's who Mr. Brown's supposed to be coming in replacing. Jeff, we appreciate your service. Your term limit's up. On head on back to the farm and get a real job. And, instead, the Senate Ag Committee had denied a confirmation hearing for a full year for Mr. Brown. And so during that period of time, Ton Sager dies. So you've got at that point in time, again, one legitimate member serving in their term. That was Glenn Smith. Ton Sager's died. Hall's term's over. But Brown were just waiting on his confirmation hearing, which could happen on the next Tuesday. And they calling me out and ask questions and that's Should be a, you know, a and you know, if ultimately there was something that that gentleman had done wrong, which there wasn't, the reason they opposed Rodney Brown is he was a real banker. There's not a person that's been on that board, I would say in the last couple of decades, that's ever written a loan. Rodney Brown had managed some major private banks. He wanted to be involved with Farm Credit because his dad had worked for farm credit, and Rodney's an older gentleman. Speaker 0: So not like a corrupt banker, you're saying someone who knows the system and who can identify fraud and waste. Speaker 1: Exactly. And and that had essentially been his calling card Is he could come in and he could look at it and you know, I make the statement a lot of times what's wrong with this country's bankers and lawyers and I believe that sincerely, But within that, you have good bankers and you have good lawyers. And I've looked at Rodney Brown up and down to try to find anything that that gentleman's ever done wrong, and I cannot find it. Speaker 0: And you said Trump appointed him? Speaker 1: Trump nominated. Nominated. So the Senate Ag Committee for that whole year doesn't hold a confirmation hearing. If you can stall a confirmation, you may remember from Merrick, like the situation with Merrick Garland back a few years ago with the Supreme Court nomination, then at the end of the term, at the end of the legislative term, so it'd be in January, then they can return that nomination to the president. And they can say you can re nominate this person, you can re nominate or you can nominate someone else. And from my understanding, they returned that nomination and the Trump administration at that time said, we're re nominating Rodney. Give him his confirmation hearing. And I mean at the end of the day, again, if there is some objection that there is to this gentleman in serving in this role that is legitimate, let's get it before the American people, let's, you know, let's put it for the Senate Committee. This is what this confirmation process is for. Instead, they let another year go by. And as I recall, it's dated January third of twenty twenty one. So you're like three days before J6 blows up. But they again return Rodney Brown's nomination to President Trump. And so for two years, they left that board vacant without giving a nominee a confirmation hearing. And you know, I guess maybe that's happened before in history. I can't find a record of it because what would typically happen is they send that nomination back and maybe there's something wrong with that individual and so the president would nominate somebody else. Speaker 0: In Speaker 1: this case, there was nothing wrong with Mr. Brown. So he returned the nomination and we had a guy, a nominee to a Farm Credit Board position with an open seat sitting there to where this board could not conduct legitimate business to sort out fraud within this system because the Senate Committee would not act. And if you look at who was on that senate committee at the top for the democrats, you're talking about Debbie Stabenow or however you pronounce her name. Speaker 0: I don't want to claim her, but she was my senator. Speaker 1: I thought so. I didn't want to point the blame at you, but, not that we've got much better in in these polls. Speaker 0: But And the new person is Alisa Slotkin. I don't wanna claim her either. And she lives in my town too. Speaker 1: And she was very articulate last night, I felt like. Speaker 0: Yeah. So so she's replaced Debbie, and she took over her senate ag seat as well. So we hopefully can get through to her. Speaker 1: We couldn't get through to Debbie, there was a pretty good reason for that. Yeah. After Dallas, Tonsager passed away. And like, again, are things I find out later. It's not like I had time to sit here and run out the family tree. I'm Debbie Sabanow, but she brought in Josh Tonsager to serve as an advisor to the Senate Ag Committee after his dad passed away. Well do you think Josh is gonna say, Yeah, let's get Rodney Brown in here. He can go in and look at some of dad's fraud. Yeah. I mean it just makes no sense whatsoever, but you know as we're kind of finding out on some of this, I think this is a pretty extreme example. But in a lot of ways, it's the way business is done in Washington, DC. Speaker 0: So to summarize, your lawsuit is, we have to say, alleging that the Biden administration or Biden himself did not appoint a board and how the is it the constitution says he shall appoint Right. When there's vacancies? So, he did not appoint. Now Trump comes in. Now did you change your lawsuit to include Trump at all because has he appointed anyone? Speaker 1: So he has not appointed anyone. And Biden appointed one person, and that was a gentleman named Vincent Logan. Speaker 0: Okay. Speaker 1: He was in opening press release and really throughout his tenure, he became the FCA chairman. Now he wasn't appointed until October of twenty twenty two. So we had a three year period with just a two member board, including during the entire situation I was in, in 2021. We've got two people serving on the board. Yeah. And so Vincent Logan comes in in October of twenty twenty two. He becomes the chairman. I don't see that he had any agricultural background, but his calling card per the Biden administration was he was the first openly gay chairman to ever serve the Farm Credit Board. And he came in with an initiative that we are going to bring in DEI policies. And they actually created entire departments and here's what you got to think about: they're an independent agency. Now there were some agencies and I'd even include USDA in that that might have been subject to executive order as far as DEI. There are articles written where Logan talks about the fact we didn't have to do this. We're an independent agency, but we think it's the right thing to do. Then you go back to the fact of who funded it. The farmers. The farmer stockholders funded a DEI program when this administration can't even keep people from being foreclosed on who've never missed a payment. All of a sudden we're going to fix the world's problems as far as diversity. His other program that he wanted to bring in and they did they gave loans left and right was what they called climate smart agriculture, which is a good way of saying that's just bullshit fraud. The climate programs as far as the carbon pipeline studies have been done showing that will have a negative impact on the environment. But you've Speaker 0: got Recently, Michigan wanted to cut down acres and acres of forest to put solar panels. And I'm like, guys, if you actually care about reducing carbon Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: What do you think reduces carbon? The solar panels or the forest? Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: The forest will every single day of the week. Okay? Like, that's science. The our forest is the best thing you can do if you, like, think carbon is out of control. Absolutely. And you wanna cut it down and put solar panels. Speaker 1: And it's all it is is you've got a group of people that have got together, they figured out a way that they can get that funding. Yeah. And and and it's nothing more, nothing less. They couldn't justify it, in any way, by common sense. But, those were Logan's initiatives, and I have begged for a meeting with Logan. I begged for a meeting Speaker 0: with that So is he still there today? Speaker 1: He is still there today. Now he is now just a board member because when Trump come in, Trump put Hall in the position of FCA chairman. Speaker 0: Okay. Speaker 1: And here's another interesting dynamic to the appointment clause: they can all be from the same political party. Oh wow. Speaker 0: And Speaker 1: so if you look, and people might be saying, well Jeff Hawley worked for Mitch McConnell, I'd assume he was Republican, but he was appointed by Obama. Obama was in the position of having to appoint a Republican because there were two Democrats on the board. And so Logan is listed as a Democrat. Hall and Smith are listed as Republicans and Logan's still serving in his legitimate term. Smith's terms now expired. Hall's term has now expired. In our recent amended complaint that we filed, we left the claim in against Biden but modified it and what we're seeking is declaratory relief. We just want a straightforward, declaration from the court that indicates he violated federal law in failing to make the appointment. He made one appointment. He should have made three. Speaker 0: And correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't he make that appointment after you sued? Speaker 1: So that the one that he made after I sued was he ended up nominating a gentleman from the USDA named Marcus Graham who did not get senate confirmation either in those last few months. So he has the Biden has the argument. I appointed two, but he does not have the argument he appointed three. And with neither of those did he have them replace Jeff Hall. When he nominated Marcus Graham and this is a telltale thing Smith, Glenn Smith's term did not expire until 2021 or 2022. Hall's been expired since 2018. So when he nominated Marcus Graham, that should have obviously been for Hall. You'd go with the person that's been expired the longest. No, it was for Smith. So he never made a single nomination to replace Hall. And the way this all was structured was that each of these people's terms expires every two years. And the reason for that is you want independence. You want renewal with the board. You don't want me, for example, having to convince the board that violated the law that they should do something to punish themselves. And, you know, that kind of explains why they want to to hold on on all this. So we're seeking that declaration from the court to say that he did not make his appointments, but yes, you are right that we forced one nomination of the of the two he was supposed to make, and he made that nomination on the day he was served they were served with my complaint. That's when it was passed over to the Senate Ag Committee, and I want to say that was like April sixth of last year. Speaker 0: And if they had a full board, whether they were corrupt or not, you would never have been able to sue. Speaker 1: Could not sue them. Speaker 0: So this one mistake by Biden well, we all know it wasn't actually Biden, but, this one mistake by the Biden administration literally blew the top this thing for you. And now you get to tell your story, and now it's all in court record. And, I just want people to know too. I read your complaint. Mhmm. I I looked at all the evidence. Like I've said, we've been in talk for months, and I don't play around. So I'm not gonna I'm I'm not gonna cover a story if I think you're just, you know, bullshitting me. Right. So I I've seen it all. You have everything very well documented. Of course, while it's going through court, we have to say allegedly. Right. But Well, you do. I do. Speaker 1: I mean I clearly say he didn't make the appointments. Now that judge might end up saying well I don't want to enter a declaratory judgment against the former president saying that they violated the law but he violated the law. The law says the man had to make those appointments and he did not make them. In the case when I filed it, of course Biden's still in office, their motions to dismiss focused on the fact that I couldn't force him to make him before his term ended. That the law was written in such a way that those other board members could serve until the next president come in and appointed the new people, but you can't make that argument when the term ends and there's still there's still a vacancy. Speaker 0: So real quick, because you've listed a lot of names and everything. Okay. So right now, today, are there three board members appointed? Like, what do we have exactly right now today? Speaker 1: We have one board member in Vincent Logan serving in his legitimate six year term. Speaker 0: Okay. Speaker 1: There's there's, you know, and and this is the thing is you can't make qualms over who a president appoints. You can only challenge if they don't make an appointment. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: The other two members, which are on the board right now, are Smith and Hall, both of whom are serving in expired terms, terms that expired multiple years Speaker 0: So again, even under Trump today, we are technically in a situation where that board is completely ineffective. That's right. So that means the only independent agency, the only agency, the only plan, of recourse for our farmers if they have an issue with farm credit is completely Gone. Yeah. You can't do anything with them. And it's Speaker 1: And like I mentioned, you've got an inspector general that should be over them, I talked about those conflicts. And people within the Farm Credit Administration blew the whistle on her long before Dustin Kittle came along, and we've been able to find those records now. And, you know, I listed her publicly on X the day that we found out that she was one of those individuals who was sabotaging the farm credit system in a post that got over a million views and I still get people that reach out to me today. But once we named her as a defendant in that suit, she was removed from her position as the Inspector General of Farm Credit. And we left her as a defendant in this action. And then we have asserted some creative claims against the Farm Credit Administration under the Administrative Procedure Act. And then we kind of have a global constitutional claim on denial of due process. And we've added Jeff Hall to the complaint in noting that he's in violation of federal law because he has now served in undisputed facts in two consecutive terms, and the law specifically says you can't serve a second term. Speaker 0: So, hold on. I have a question here. I I did take notes, but I never look at them. But first time I'm looking at them. You submitted a public records request. And if people don't know me, I'm the queen of FOIA request, I say, because I love doing them. So the FCA is still a government agency, still subject to public records request. You put one in to to get any record that they have forced compliance with farm credit. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: What did you get back? Speaker 1: They they literally had to admit there are no documents to where they have enforced compliance on behalf of a borrower. And you think about that, I mean even in the worst of the federal agencies, they're doing something. I mean you look at Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that's got a lot of heat for not doing much. Hey, they've got at least some records to where they have enforced and found violations of law in favor of private citizens. Farm Credit has none. And, you know, the Speaker 0: And it's obviously because farm credit is doing so well. Right? They never broke the law. They you know, like, there's nothing to complain about. Right? They're just stealing farmer's land. And and that's okay. Speaker 1: And, you know, when you wait six hundred and fifty seven days before you tell, before you come out and say, yeah, they broke the law, what do they think is gonna happen? I held those lawyers off who were going for my throat for a hundred days and it was, you know, again, I pride myself on I'll take on anybody anytime, anywhere as far as law firms or as far as companies. I mean, we've won cases against Ford Motor Company, Verizon Wireless, the state of Alabama, you know. But during that, there was nothing there, you know, there was absolutely nothing that could be done because your only recourse is with the Farm Credit Administration. Speaker 0: Which I think is completely unconstitutional in my opinion, you know. Speaker 1: Oh, it's it's clearly unconstitutional. And and there's nobody there that has even a halfway understanding of the law that that doesn't know that. It's a situation now to where, you know, it's they are running from the, you know, they're like a, you know, an escaped convict. They are running and they're gonna run until they get caught. And when you look at who are the few authorities that could rein them in, we're talking about a limited set. We're talking about the Department of Justice or the president of The United States. But outside of that, you know, there's not a whole lot that can that can be done to them. And Speaker 0: And let me ask this because this ties in. Like, is there anything the USDA can do? The United States Department of Agriculture? Speaker 1: No. There's not. And, you know, that's kind of a misnomer. A lot of people look at that and think, well, they're they're probably tied in. They actually by law can't be tied in. Trent Luce, who is a fantastic agricultural reporter, I was on his show right after filing the complaint against Biden, and he ended up going to a press conference with secretary Vilsack, the USDA secretary of ag. And he asked secretary Vilsack, I mean, we're talking about it was fresh then maybe seven days after filing the complaint. He said, do you know about the Dustin Kittle complaint? He says, yes, I I do. We've briefed the White House on it. And like at the time, I, you know, I'll I'll tell you at the time, I thought, well, that's cool. You know, they they they after all this, at least I've got them talking about me on what they're gonna do. And, but, you know, I thinking about it now, what in the hell business was it of his? The USDA couldn't be involved in that discussion whatsoever. Then you look at who Biden nominates. He nominates a USDA employee in Marcus Graham and that's kind of what we've known all along. You know, I talked about I had a tussle with USDA back years ago where we proved fraud through the rural utility services program, which that's come back. And you know that case ultimately ended up bankrupt in a fortune 500 company in Windstream related to the Connect America program that Vilsack was in charge of. And you have him saying he's influencing the outcome of who is going to be nominated to the Farm Credit Board based on my lawsuit. That's an admission right there that there is not independence between those programs. Speaker 0: Wow. So I what can we do about this? Because this is I I never just wanna, like, complain Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: Just to complain. Like, there has to be something we can do because we can't go to the courts. Even though you are in the court, you you're suing over the one thing you could possibly sue on, which, again, I would say that we could even just sue that the FCA in general, and this would actually tie in, like, the Federal Reserve and everything because you have these independent government agencies, but everything is supposed to be under the executive branch and under the supervision of the president. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: And these agencies really aren't. The only thing the president can do is appoint that board. Like, he doesn't have any control over the rest of it. So that that seems clearly unconstitutional to me. I mean, there was even a judge that just said that Trump can fire anyone he wants in the executive branch because it's his executive branch. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: And so how how would he not be able to hire and fire from the FCA? You know? So but getting back to it, like, what can we do? What can we advocate for? What are our avenues here? Speaker 1: It it you know, part of that when we talk about like filing the complaint with Biden, it was trying to elevate this to get to somebody's attention who could do something about it. Now at the time I filed it, you've got the Biden administration in charge. Now that kind of echoes a little bit differently when you have a new administration that would surely be happy to shovel a little bit of dirt on some of the fraud and corruption that went in with the Biden administration. But I ultimately had to file that complaint in part because after I got those findings, as I mentioned, they don't make those public. Alabama Farm Credit started telling their stockholders that this was all a lie. This was a story that was concocted by me. There was no investigation. There was no there were no findings. And I listened to that lie for a a few weeks. And in in September of twenty twenty three, my mother was having health issues and she was diagnosed with cancer, with breast cancer. And that you know the hell they had put her through on this in trying to take a farm. You know my dad died under difficult circumstances He was shot and killed in 2014. I'm driving to work one day and my mom calls me and says, Your dad's been shot and you need to get here immediately. My life changed just in the blink of an eye and my mother's life changed, But one of the things she was most proud of is we ran my dad's steel business for a few years after that and sold it. And when we sold that business she was able to pay off that farm for the first time since, you know, I talked about us moving there when I was two years old. And you know the heartache that this has caused her and when she got that cancer diagnosis I just said I can't I will not go another day without people knowing what happened on this. And and quite frankly, I probably I had been threatened somewhat and if I said something publicly before those findings come out, they could just close the investigation. And so I tried to do everything right on it, everything ethically. If this went awry, it wouldn't be on because of me. But I posted on Facebook the next day and let everybody know what had happened. And part of that, it took some time for me to reconcile with the fact I've not you know I've never been in any kind of trouble or anything like that. I practiced law all these years I've never had any kind of issues and it's embarrassing to tell people even though it that I'd made every payment and I did everything right and it's embarrassing to tell people that I got a letter saying they're gonna foreclose on my farm because and I understand like from people's perspective and looking at it and thinking like how could that even be the case? And there's got to be more to it. And if there's more to it, I'd love for them to bring it forward, but you know I finally had to kind of get past that and just trust that this story would resonate. And when I posted on Facebook, I started hearing from farm credit borrowers all across the country and I really did not understand the magnitude of all of this until then. And I did it because I, you know, my mother now thankfully is in remission from cancer Good. And she's had a tough last few years health wise, but I wanted my mom to see that justice was done before something happened to her. And so I posted on social media and on Facebook and and I had Alabama Farm Credit borrowers call and say, you know, just these horror stories of what was going on with them. A lot of them are poultry farmer clients. And ultimately at that time I started putting together the pieces as far as what actually had happened. And this is what I believe happened. I think this is why I was targeted. As I mentioned, I was the Alabama Poultry Growers Association's attorney. There are over a thousand poultry farmer borrowers, over a third of their loan portfolio, more per capita borrowers than in any other lending institution in the country as far as poultry farmers. A farm credit bank, because they have tax exempt status, they're a government agency, they can't take a deposit. They are just a lending service. But in the 1990s they had come up with a way to take something called a voluntary advance conditional payment. And that would be an example of, I've got a mortgage payment with you and I want to just give you this money in advance. And let's say you might be somebody that's at the end of the year and for tax purposes they say, Hey, I got it. I'm a few months ahead here. Can y'all hold this in my account and then just apply for my payment going forward? Maybe there's some tax benefit. Speaker 0: Yeah. Like my like my home mortgage, I have an escrow. So, I have it's the home insurance and property taxes Right. Go in there. And they do the math and figure out how much every month needs to be added to the mortgage. And at the end of the year, they tell us if we were over or under their estimates and they factor that in to the next year. So you're saying it's similar to that? Speaker 1: It's similar to that. And and what they found out is there was a segment of agricultural borrowers that had steady income. You know, that was the whole reason in creating the farm credit system a farmer doesn't know when that crop's gonna come in and you know when they're gonna sell cattle, they're not getting a steady paycheck except for poultry farmers who were independent contractors who were contracted with these major poultry integrators like Cook Foods and like Pilgrim's. And so let's say every six weeks they're getting a check from those poultry companies. And so in a typical mortgage like with mine, the collateral that I'm putting up is the property. Yeah. They're appraising that property and I and let's say it's a 75% loan to value and it's a million dollar farm, they'll lend $750,000 on it and they leave themselves a little extra there because in case they had to foreclose, they're still covered. With poultry farmers, they took the they had the farm collateral. So there should have been no other collateral that would be needed. Plus you had a guy and a poultry farmer that's getting a check every six weeks that's pretty steady and guaranteed. Much less of a risk than a cattle farmer, for example, which I am. But if the cattle market's up and down, I certainly don't have a company that's guaranteeing that they're going to pay me every six weeks. So they were covered by the land and collateral, but then they went and found out that the USD would guarantee some of these loans too. So they had that covered. So they had a guaranteed loan essentially, but where they got greedy is they got the farmers and they there was nothing voluntary about it. You ask these poultry farmers that dealt with Alabama Farm Credit and they will say they told me if I didn't agree to this assignment I couldn't get a loan with them. But what they did was you've got a check that's going to be coming every six weeks from Tyson. They would calculate and almost always high what percentage of that would be pro rata share of what your payment would be to Farm Credit. And with a farm credit loan for most of these they're either biannual or annual. So technically, I mean that's one of the benefits of it is it let's say you're on an annual payment. Well you got a year to get everything done and you know who knows you might hit the lottery the day before that payment's due. Who knows where that money could come from? But nobody's beating down your door saying, hey you got to pay us a little bit at a time. That's another benefit of the farm credit system. With these poultry farmers, they would take as much as 65% of their checks. Wow. They were putting it in these accounts that they called that voluntary advanced conditional payments, much like a deposit. In fact, it'd be hard to tell the difference between that and a deposit. And the assurance was if we get too far out ahead because it's all guesswork. If we get too far out ahead and we have more than what your payment is, well, you can just take that money back. And that's the way that it was supposed to work out. And you know a lot of those farmers would then use that money that was the overage. Now it really wasn't right that they were taking it before it was due more than what the payment was, but at least the farmers could dip back into that to pay for emergency expenses and things. And we believe that Alabama Farm Credit around that period of time in 2021 was probably holding $60,000,000 in voluntary advanced conditional payments. Now the bin you might be saying, well what's the benefit for the bank there? Well the benefit for the bank is like any bank. If you've got deposits with them, it ain't like all that money sitting up there. They're reinvesting it. That's how they make their money and it's why if there's a run on a bank they can go under in a hurry. Well the Farm Credit Administration knew that was the case with these funds held accounts and actually sent a memo out in 1996 coaching those lenders on some things they could do to keep a bank run from happening. And like one of the examples and this was something Alabama Farm Credit did just to be they you know are going to come in and ask for that money back at the same time, you had to tell them what you were planning to use that money for that you were going to get out. And they knew that there would be a certain segment that would say like, well I was planning to use that to take the kids to Myrtle Beach, but I'm not going to tell them that and because they won't give it to me maybe they'll just go away and they don't they don't take it out. Speaker 0: That's just crazy. Mean like it's my money and I need it Exactly. Speaker 1: That is the exact concept. You're holding my money. It's much like my situation. And you've got my money. Yeah. And you're trying to dictate on this what I can do with it or when I can have it. And and so the poultry farmers finally got wise and they figured out that, well, there's not much they can do if we tell them we're just making improvements to the chicken house. And a lot of times they were. Or buying their sawdust or shavings before a flock of chickens come in. And that had always went fine. Now you know in talking with those poultry farmers, it did put them in a bind because if they overfigured those numbers, even slightly, that's the difference in maybe buying groceries. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And you know those poultry farmers aren't getting rich. They, like a lot of people, a lot of us, is that they're living paycheck to paycheck. And so this is my opinion on what happened, but in looking at it Alabama Farm Credit could only borrow from the Farm Credit Bank of Texas. That's in the regulations. They had a billion dollar line of credit with them. They were right up against it on a billion dollar line of credit and we're talking about like in the 900 millions. As I recall in September of twenty twenty one that line of credit was coming up for renewal. They had that $60,000,000 or so let's just say and that's an estimate based on our clients and figuring averages and the numbers. They had that held in those accounts, but they had to maintain a certain amount to ensure liquidity. And I feel like they needed to access those funds or else they stood to potentially go under as a farm credit institution. And so in September, and you think about I made my complaint to farm credit in August. They froze my account in July August. They start extorting me in August. In September they send a letter out to the poultry farmers and say, We've got good news for you. We're not going to have a funds held account anymore. What we're going to do is apply what's in that funds held account to your loan and it's gonna save you interest. In reality, what they did is they pocketed that money. Speaker 0: Wow. Speaker 1: The farmers continued to have their assignments taken out. Some of those people at that period in time were over two years paid ahead on their loans. Speaker 0: Wow. Speaker 1: You think about how much would it cripple any of us to be paid that far ahead on your mortgage. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: We finally forced Alabama Farm Credit's attorney and I'm talking about forced them to admit that the plan is they've taken that money and like for one of our clients named Dwight Brooks who I've publicly mentioned before and is a poultry farmer, at the time they froze that. And when we asked for it, he had $60,000 in that account. So he was paid ahead for the next couple of years. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: So there is a significant amount of that money that was his. There are other borrowers that had over $150,000 in those accounts. Speaker 0: Did they try to get like ask for it back? Speaker 1: So they had had a staff meeting at Alabama Farm Credit as I understand it where they told them we're about to lock these accounts. Don't say anything to the poultry growers. But naturally you had people that worked at Alabama Farm Credit who were friends and if not family with some poultry growers. So then all of a sudden calls start going out and saying, Hey, you need to try to take some of your money out. And it was starting to create a bank run. There come all those farmers. Hey, we've heard y'all may lock this account. The next day, they locked those accounts and the farmers have never been able to access that money again. Speaker 0: And you represent them. Speaker 1: And we represent a significant portion of those farmers. So they're only so, you know, you imagine Dwight Brooks and I and I'll tell you how it plays in with him. He'd been a truck driver his whole life and he had grandkids and he wanted them to learn to work on a farm and things like that and he had an opportunity to start growing chickens, and so he took out a loan so he could come off the road as a truck driver and be with his grandkids and let them grow up on the farm. And when they locked those funds and him having $60,000 and that's no guess, that's what their attorneys had to ultimately admit to me, that they were holding of his money, he was having to go back out on the road and drive a truck because they had financially strapped him to the point he's having to drive a truck and run a chicken farm. They got $60,000. You think that money wouldn't go a long way for a family? Speaker 0: That's crazy. And, I mean, I hear this all the time that farmers, many farmers, if not most, have to have other jobs. Right. Like farming isn't a full time job as it is. It's probably three full time jobs. Speaker 1: That's right. And you think to it, well how did they get these chicken companies to play along in something like this? Well I'll tell you how they got the chicken companies to play along with it. They've given the chicken companies billion dollar loans. They have taken the money that's generated from the farmers on these little small what they'd call piddly loans and the entire portfolio at Alabama Farm Credit for all 3,000 stockholders is less than a billion dollars. They have loaned I think it's Pilgrim's Pride and it's filed in Circuit Court of DeKalb County. There's a lien that Farm Credit's involved in that's 1 and a half billion dollars to them. And so who do you think is calling the shots here? And who do you think really controls the Farm Credit System? It's Big Ag. It's the Tysons. It's the, you know, and it's all of these companies that you hear about that are influencing policies in ag, the factory farms that we're seeing, they have taken over a system that was created in 1916 to save the family farm and now and they have as if you let something go on long enough, have corrupted it to the point that the system is completely on its head. And so, you know, kind of circling back to all that, when I start telling my story and I start talking about this poultry funds deal to where they've taken again what we believe will ultimately be 60 to a hundred million dollars and they're taking more of it every day. And if you don't think they're they're doing something wrong on it, anytime somebody goes to them and says now what about this assignment deal? I heard that you're maybe not supposed to be taking those funds and those belong back to me. They will start trying to bargain with them to take away their assignment if they'll keep their mouth shut on it. Speaker 0: And that's ultimately why we really haven't heard a lot of this because they keep putting people under non disclosures or NDAs saying you can't Exactly right. Speaker 1: If you're doing business the right way, you don't have to have people sign confidentiality statements. And when we're talking about a government sponsored enterprise here, I think it's arguable whether it's legal at all for people to be signing confidentiality. Speaker 0: That's a great point. It would go against the First Amendment. Speaker 1: It absolutely goes against First Amendment and it goes against it creates a chilling effect as far as reporting fraud to the Department of Justice or the Farm Credit Administration. And that is where they have allowed these law firms. They have put them in and weaponized these law firms. And, you know, look at it and you think, well, who in the world could afford to pay lawyers like that? If these, I mean, we're talking about it's an all star team of lawyers. Well, they're not paying it. The farmers are paying it. They are funding their own demise. And ultimately what happened in late twenty twenty three, so those findings come out and I start talking about them and Alabama Farm Credit's nervous. Nervous to the point they assigned a full an attorney full time from Bradley A. Rent to monitor my social media and reported me constantly for anything and everything, copyright violations when I'm posting the annual stockholder reports and things like that. But we start having people call and say, What can we do about this? And I look up in their bylaws and we could call a stockholder meeting and fire everybody up there for this fraud. And it's exactly what we attempted to do. I got the signatures from these individuals or got the written confirmation that they sought for me to petition on their behalf to the chairman of the board to call a special meeting to bring all this to a head. We have the sufficient number of people. Again, Speaker 0: the farmers own farm credit. Speaker 1: Farmers own farm credit and own Alabama. Those farmers, those 3,000 farmers in Alabama own Alabama farm credit. If they all stand up at one time tomorrow, they could tell Mel Kohler and Jody Campbell to get their shit and get out of there. And it's what is gonna have to happen. And the reason that it hasn't to this point, they see what those people have done to me. They see what those people have done to others and they are vindictive and they are retaliating and they have the protection all the way up to the federal government behind them to make sure that nothing happens to any of them. And reason being, I'll just say this real quickly, reason being if Alabama Farm Credit goes under, all these other 60 lenders are jointly and severally liable. And so if Alabama Farm Credit goes under, all these other lenders have to make it right with those stockholders. And then let's say you've got three or four more that were on the fringe. We'll pay in that, let's say, you know, several hundred million dollars that might put them out of business and more and more until you have collapsed the entire system. And that's where a $100,000,000 fraud could have the potential to collapse a half a trillion dollar business. Yeah. And after we had everything ready to go on the last day of 2023, we had called a stockholders meeting in Cullman Alabama at the headquarters of Alabama Farm Credit. And even though we were told there would be armed guards at the door to keep the actual people that own that building from going in it, we were not deterred. They ended up hiring three law firms to file an action against me. Speaker 0: I mean you must be flattered though. Speaker 1: I am. I mean honestly, I take a lot of pride in the fact that we have beefed them at every turn. Speaker 0: But Speaker 1: for the fact of people not doing what they're supposed to do, this would be long over with. And, you know I've got emails and this probably works to my disadvantage, but when you're being extorted by people out of your home I've got emails just taunting those people like letting them know I will not. I will be a thorn in your side the rest of your life and I will. But they end up suing me and seeking an injunction from the court to stop this stockholder meeting from taking place and everything about that stockholder meeting was appropriate. But they got that judge to hold off until the day the stockholder meeting was called to issue the order. At least that's when we got our copy of the order and by then there was no way to go forward with the meeting because we had to give notice. Now that notice was supposed to come from the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors refused to send the stockholders notice. And because they and they had put in the complaint against me that there was no investigation. There were no findings. There was no wrongdoing. All of this was made up and then I was just trying to hijack a legitimate institution here which couldn't have been further from the truth. Once they got the judge to issue the ruling which the ruling was in my favor, but it just was it was just that it was too late for that meeting to be called. Under the bylaws, you had to go through a process. It took about forty five days to get a meeting and giving all the proper notices. And I had dotted every I and crossed every t. And so after that they immediately dismissed the complaint against me. Now they filed a complaint in federal court against me in a jurisdiction I had been licensed to practice in for over fifteen years in a public filing that anybody that ever goes against me in a case could pull up and they call me a liar and they say nothing I have said in any of this is true. And so I let them know very clearly I'm gonna pursue sanctions against everybody involved in this. And they start saying, No, let's wait. Let's look at the opportunity for mediation. So in January of twenty twenty four we go to mediation. And at that mediation I honestly thought, I thought again and you know I'm a perpetual optimist. I wake up every day thinking today could be the day the right person hears this who can do something about this and they'll step up and help us. And going into that mediation, I thought maybe we could get something done. And what happened at that mediation is they offered me $1,200,000 which my damages were significantly more than that. That doesn't pay the interest that I've had to pay over the last few years to be frank with you. They wanted me to take $1,200,000 but it was accompanied with I had to agree to confidentiality, had to agree that if it ever got out anything was said that about what I knew about the fraud, they could come back and take that money back and that's why the money would be paid out over a five year period to ensure that I would keep confidentiality. But it also included that I had to take a legal consulting position with Farm Credit. And this isn't speculation anything. It's in their emails back and forth. Now originally when they had the mediator put that offer out to me and she even called and she said I've never had this before but they don't want me to write this down. They want me to give this to you orally. Speaker 0: Oh yeah, because it's a full on bribe. Speaker 1: But again, by that point, I realized the score here. I know what's going on. And so I email her right back and say, I'm confirming that the offer that's on the table and I go check check check check and she she agrees. And the reason they wanted me to take a legal consulting position was not because they highly value my legal skills, but it would create a conflict to where I can never represent somebody against farm credit again. Speaker 0: So you really what you are working with on with these poultry farmers is that valuable to ruin your life, to go after your family, and they tried everything. Even after you paid off your loan, like, they just want you so badly Yeah. To drop them. So whatever you're working on is obviously gold, and you obviously are about to just blow the top off this thing. Speaker 1: Unless they blow my top off because I've got multiple death threats from and and death threats that I would call credible. And and Speaker 0: And this is cool. I and I've seen it. I I don't want people to think that, like, sometimes when people tell their own story, they can exaggerate and stuff like that. I have seen all of this. I read it myself. Someone sent you a satellite image of your farm Speaker 1: That's right. Speaker 0: Saying, where do you wanna meet me? Speaker 1: That's right. And and in the message, it said there are four farm credit banks and an institution that has it literally says has too much to lose and you need to do what's right by you and by your family in stopping this and just going away. And, you know, honestly, that that is my family doesn't deserve to have to go through this. Speaker 0: And you could and and you could have done it. You you could have signed it. You could have took your 1,200,000.0, and you could have just been done. You could have dropped your clients and said my life is worth more than 1,200,000.0. Speaker 1: That's Speaker 0: right. Or like all of this corruption. Speaker 1: I would have I would have committed, an ethics violation because you can't bargain with your clients to get money. And that's another side to it is I have questioned whether that was proposed to me to try to force me into an ethics violation because they they have tried to take my law license through the state. I continued trying to reach out to Amanda Simpson to be a witness to the Farm Credit Administration of this fraud. No one knew it better and they reported that to the Alabama State Bar as me contacting their client. Speaker 0: Wow. Speaker 1: And, you know, are just kind of the different things on it. But ultimately, once that meeting didn't go forward and they ended up having an annual meeting a few months later, and what they said at that annual meeting was, we will take up no new business. So there could be nothing that was brought forth at Alabama Farm Credit's meeting of the stockholders. There could be nothing brought forth that could allow them to even discuss this fraud. And again, as you know, because you're involved in Open Meetings Act and Sunshine Laws and all this, it's a blatant violation. Yes. But after some period of time I realized because I'd went to congress people from Alabama, I'd sent it to the Alabama Attorney General and nobody would look into this. And again, I'm telling these people, I'm pitching this as the fact that we have farmers here that they may have as much as a hundred million dollars of their money. I know they've got tens of millions of dollars and it ain't even the question about it. And I can't get anybody to look at it and I felt like I had to elevate it and that's when I came up with the theory that and you know when I first I kind of do market research as far as you know I've got a lot of people I trust that's in my inner circle including Ashley that works for me and and and I pitched this idea for a long time before because it sounds crazy that you're gonna sue the president. I've never sued anybody before and and you're gonna sue the president of The United States and the immediate reaction is laugh. But I had found a case involving Richard Nixon and the case involved Minnesota Chippewa tribe and what that case said is there is a unique circumstance where a private citizen could sue the president of The United States to where they would have no immunity. And that would be the situation where that citizen has been harmed because the president failed to make an appointment. Wow. You can't have any kind of issues. If he appoints the wrong guy and that guy happens to be corrupt, that ain't on the You Speaker 0: literally have the golden ticket. Speaker 1: Yes. And and I told everybody, you know, I I sent it out to some other attorneys, and I said, find the the hole in this theory. And, you know, everybody had come back initially. So, well, yeah, give me about thirty minutes, and I'll able to figure out how the president can wiggle out of this. Biden could not get out of that. And Speaker 0: And I just wanna because we've talked about this yesterday a little bit, but you could be suing president Trump right now. Speaker 1: That's exactly right. And and it's more of a tactical issue. You know, one of the arguments that Biden, of course, made was is that he has an op he has to have an opportunity to do due diligence. Well, now, you know, when I sued him, he's three years into the term. That's that's plenty of time really to do due diligence. With Trump, Trump, of course, is we're sixty days in, forty five days in, whatever it is right now, and I can sympathize with the fact that they still need to do due diligence. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And and I will have that claim and and could bring it at any time. But my hope is and and, you know, my hope is that they won't just sweep this corruption under the rug, because it impacted them. Speaker 0: And and this is what's key too is the DOJ is is defending Biden on your case to this day. So That's right. The Trump administration is defending the Biden administration right this second in your case. Speaker 1: And and quite honestly, don't even realize it. Speaker 0: So, really, really, you're handing Trump a win here. Speaker 1: Absolutely. Speaker 0: He could easily direct his DOJ to just be done with this and say, look, guys. The courts found that Biden didn't appoint these people and allowed all of this corruption. This could give Trump a huge win right now. Speaker 1: If Trump does this he likes to say a lot of times, no president's ever been I I'll throw him a parade in Santa Fe, Tennessee and put him Speaker 0: up Speaker 1: on the big Clydesdale horse over there if that's what it takes because it would be monumental and you know I'm not asking for any kind of special treatment. My claim needs to be resolved regardless. It does. I was harmed by actions trying to cover up fraud within a corrupt administration, and I was a whistleblower to fraud. And when you talk about the things that I've blown the whistle on, one of those things that was that we have foreign agents coming in and buying farmland. You know, know you covered a lot when Bobby Kennedy was going through his campaign and I was on his podcast and that was the key issue is we had brought out long before Trump and Doctor. Phil are sitting there looking on that map and seeing that this surrounds those. And the way that we found that out went all the way back to 2021, and there wasn't anybody talking about this back then, but I had got a copy I found in the Farm Credit Act that you could, if you were a stockholder, you could request a list of your fellow stockholders. And the reason you could was because there might be a time that you need to communicate with them because there is fraud at the executive level. Yeah. You know you talk about how did I get those 200 people to sign off on a petition? I knew who they were and I knew who they were because I had a stockholder list. Yeah. But what that stockholder list also told me is there were a whole lot more people from China and from other foreign areas that I think that most would consider adversarial to agricultural interest Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: Who run that stockholder Speaker 0: list. And I got this question yesterday. You know, they're not just doing it to you. They're looking at foreclosing on a lot of farmers' land That's right. If they just look at them the wrong way. So what are they doing with this land once they wrongfully take it from a farmer? Speaker 1: So and and that's a multipart answer in the fact that with poultry farmers, they use these poultry farms as it's almost like their commodity. The farmer's interchangeable. They can force, you know, we just went through that period of historic interest rate lows, so they might have had a farmer that was on a thirty year note at a 3% interest. If they put enough pressure on them and I sent you a copy of a mortgage agreement with them and one of the areas of default is if they have any reason to believe that you just wouldn't have the financial ability to repay your loan. And ultimately that's what they said to me. That was the ground. Speaker 0: Not that you didn't pay it. Speaker 1: Not that I didn't pay that they had reason to believe. Now in that call, in that recorded call, I'm sitting there and I'm telling him I don't know anybody anything. And like the reality of it is by God, I own the whole place a year before that. I took that to them deed in hand. And now all of a sudden I made every payment over the last year and you're trying to tell me that I didn't have the money to make it. And quite honestly, farm's still sitting over there. You went over and saw the lambs yesterday and I've had the financial ability to hold on to it all over this period of time, even with an 8% interest rate. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: So that was complete manufacturer BS to put pressure, but they do that to all of these borrowers that they want to try to push out. You know, I've made the statement that Mel Kohler, the CEO, and Jody Campbell, the CRO, probably were really good at that game Boggle, where you had all those parts you pop that thing down they just reshuffled everything. Well they had all these people in two or 3% interest rate loans and all of a sudden they hired Bradley A. Rent to start calling these people up. Bradley A. Rent the law firm to call these farmers just like my mom and dad had no college education talking about a muskrat trapper and a woman that worked at a gas station who took a chance and got a farm and had no idea about what the law said. And to have an aggressive litigator like Chris Glenos call and say, We're gonna put your loan in distress. If we have to go all the way through this foreclosure process, you could have to pay attorney's fees, could have to pay cost, embarrassment of it. If you'll turn your farm over to us and give us a deed in lieu of foreclosure, we'll just let you pack up and get off that land. And one of the ways this clicked for me is I had a guy that called me and he said, Hey, there was a foreclosed farm over there and I offered them cash price on what they on what they were asking for. And they told me no. They would only sell it to me if I financed it with them. Speaker 0: Oh my gosh. Speaker 1: So then you go back and you realize this is their cash cow. They've got that person moved out. We elevate it to an 8% interest loan. The new guy comes in with an assignment agreement. That money comes back in on an assignment agreement and that's their little kitty that they're using to play ball with. Mean Speaker 0: Real quick. My husband's in the room but you won't hear him. I'll repeat it. You're a realtor. If someone wanted to buy property and or a seller, so they're selling their land. Right? Could they ethically say, I don't want you I don't want your cash offer. I only will accept your offer if you finance through me. Would that even be allowed? What about if there was a realtor representing them? So the seller could dictate whatever they want with their land if they only wanna accept a certain way. What happens if there was a realtor representing them? Would the realtor have an ethics complaint against them? Yes. For yeah. That that's what I thought. So what he just said, because I know no one could hear it, but so he said that a seller can do that. Mhmm. If there's a realtor involved, the realtor cannot say, you should take this offer over another one. Their job, they have to present all the offers to the seller. Speaker 1: And here's one kind of superseding or intervening event in that is the fact that in this case, the seller has to answer to the stockholders. So technically they have an obligation to do what is in the best interest of the stockholders. And so then you play it through and you say, well, I've just had a foreclosure. I had somebody that got foreclosed down. We need to, you know, we need to hedge our bets on here and make sure we don't lose anything. You've got somebody that comes forward and says, well, I'll just pay you cash on what you're asking. And instead, what they want to be able to do is to get those assignments. Yeah. They don't want to lose that property because in Dwight Brooks case, that's $60,000 that they don't have in their teal that they can play with to go invest in other ways. And it ultimately leads to those executives ending up with exorbitant salaries. I mean you've got these farmers that can barely put food on the table and you look at the Farm Credit Bank of Texas, their CEO makes over a million dollar salary and receives over a million dollar bonus. Speaker 0: Crazy. So I do wanna start wrapping up here. So we kind of talked about a couple of options to fix this. First of all, the farmers could have a revolution and say, we want all of the upper management at Farm Credit to be just wiped out, put all new people in. The problem with that is they don't wanna be retaliated against. Mhmm. The next thing, the president could appoint or nominate three FCA members that are not corrupt and actually want to drive out corruption with farm credit. The other thing, congress could get involved, right, because they wrote the Farm Credit Act, and they could rewrite it. Mhmm. Really, I mean I I mean, obviously, you're I would like to hear your opinion, but it just seems like the FCA and farm credit just need to go away. I mean Speaker 1: It's and I've given a lot of thought because you asked me yesterday what what could be done on this. And I actually have in in just like talking through all this over the last hour plus on it, I've got a different answer than probably what I would have had before now, but really all of this falls under the exact things that Elon Musk is looking into. And it really would take someone at that level that has a common sense approach that is trying to ensure that citizens aren't harmed by fraud and corruption. And he's talked a lot too about how we need our farmers. I think he knows farmers are under attack and we need some way to where it's elevated up to President Trump's level and I know that's you know that's a tall order but I feel like that this falls right in the Department of Government efficiency. Yes, this is an independent agency but there is government oversight with them. They are a government sponsored enterprise. The Farm Credit Administration also regulates Farmer Mac, where we certainly believe there is a lot of corruption. And here's the danger: in the 80s the farm credit system did go belly up and had to be bailed out. And we could be headed for that again. All of these people that have got rich on this is getting their money and they're getting out, these executives, and they're going to be long gone. And if this system is collapsed, which you know at least in theory I think in 2021 could have happened had they not did what they did to extort me and if they had to give that money back to those poultry farmers, The domino effect that it could create, but we're talking about a system that's holding $450,000,000,000 in debt. And we're talking about a system right now that's been turned on its head that has issued more $25,000,000 end up loans than under 25,000,000. They've loaned money to Verizon. They've owned they've loaned money to Tyson. They've loaned money to all of the big ag players on this. And the system has been captured. And we need someone like Elon Musk. It's as simple as this could be fixed in my opinion, if President Trump put Rodney Brown, I would re nominate Rodney Brown and I would shame that senate ag committee. Speaker 0: Yeah. It just he has so much power. Speaker 1: He does. Speaker 0: He has so much influence. It's just you name whoever's in charge of it Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: Of this ag committee and say, call this confirmation today Speaker 1: Today. Speaker 0: Or we're gonna primary you. And Watch how fast it happens. Speaker 1: Probably power he didn't have in the first term in in being fair to him. But do you think that if it was a secretary of state appointment, they would have let it go on for two years? Of course not. No. It's only because it's Farm Credit Administration, and it's impacting 1% of the populace. Speaker 0: And, unfortunately, like, farmers just don't have enough representation. Speaker 1: You know? That's that's exactly right. It's the you know, I didn't grow up wanting to be a lawyer. There's nobody in my family who's ever been a lawyer. The first time I ever was in a courtroom in my life, I was a licensed attorney. But I went into this field because I watched my parents get taken advantage of and not having a way to do anything about it. And big ag was that way in the 80s. There were lawsuits- there was lawsuit after lawsuit against Gold Kiss back then for fraud and these poultry companies engaging in fraud and you know I get a lot of personal self gratification and the fact that farmers who maybe have a situation that seems hopeless to them, they can come to me and you know it's I always describe it as like you know these companies that manipulate and bully these farmers. I mean, that's exactly what they are. They are bullies. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And then, you know, when an attorney shows up and can hit them back in the nose to even up the score, you know, that's worth more than any money I'll ever see is being able to fill that role. That's a part of, I feel like, my purpose in life, but one person can only do so much and I couldn't tell you another attorney in this country that's doing the same kind of things. I'll credit Robert Barnes who represented Amos Miller and did a fantastic job in that and win in that case, but we need more attorneys representing people in agriculture. Speaker 0: Would say RFK Jr, but you Speaker 1: know he's Speaker 0: a little busy. Speaker 1: He's busy, but I credit him too. You look at the work that he did on the corporate capture in agriculture and I'm talking about going two decades ago, he was ahead of the curve. And you talk about someone that really understands what I'm talking about on all of this as far as these agencies. There's nobody better than than Bobby Kennedy. Speaker 0: Yeah. So, yeah, we we just we need Trump. We need Elon. I would throw in Nicole Shanahan. I really think that she she needs to sit down with you. She she could get this escalated to the others. I yeah. Speaker 1: And she's and she's been my biggest political surprise I can ever remember. I didn't know who Nicole Shanahan was when Kennedy nominated her, and and she is a breath of fresh air. Speaker 0: I gotta say, I gotta brag about it because even before she was officially announced and it was just being floated around, I looked into her a little bit, and I just had such a good feeling about her. I I was so excited. I mean, she is a self made woman. Right. And I I'm just so excited about her and her bright, bright future. I mean, she can only go up from here. And any hate she gets, I just don't think I just don't think people real I truly do not think RFK junior would be secretary of HHS if it wasn't for Nicole. Speaker 1: No. She was and particularly on the agriculture side, she is someone that, you know and and I'm not gonna say I agree with Elon on everything, but there are very few people in this country who will stand up to anybody. But Nicole's one of those people. She her motives are pure. And I can remember when Bobby nominated her, hearing him say, You'll fall in love with this person. And, know, I look at her, you know, things would be different right now in the USDA if Nicole Shanahan would have had more of a say. I believe Thomas Massey would be the secretary of agriculture right now if the MAHA movement's recommendations were put in place. Speaker 0: Well, and I just real quick because, I'm kinda transitioning, so I wanted to do some quick hitters with you because it's not every day I can sit in front of a farmer and a an established farmer too. So that was one of the things I was going to ask you is what do you think about Trump's pick of Brooke Rollins as secretary of USDA? Without, Speaker 1: know, probably the politically correct answer when I'm I'm hoping that Trump's gonna help us in our situation. Well, the Biden administration would be that it was a good pick, but, you know, I'd be lying if I I said I wasn't skeptical over it. And Brooke Rollins is probably a fantastic person. I don't know of anything personal related to her. I have no issues with her. You know, when I see somebody like Thomas Massey as a contrast there, Thomas Massey is another person that I would put in that kind of same mold as Nicole Shanahan who money don't mean anything. Speaker 0: And he's looking more like a founding father every day. Speaker 1: It's, you know, I find myself checking if I'm on the fence on something, I want to see what he says about it. He is you could say a lot of things about Thomas Mass, but he is not a sellout. You know, you you he is not beholden to anyone but what he truly believes. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And the rarity of that up there is, you know, he's probably a one of one when it comes to that. But, you know, with with Brooke, my concern with her and my concern with her is the same as it would be with a Sonny Perdue or a Tom Vilsack is to the extent she has relationships it's with entities that are not that do not have the family farms interest at heart. Speaker 0: And that is what concerns me that Sonny Perdue is Trump's first in his first term, the secretary of USDA. And I did a lot of research on him. I actually was doing a huge thread one day, and I wanted to go through his first cabinet to prove that he filled his cabinet with the swamp. And that was the first person on the list. And I looked into Sonny Perdue, and he accepted bribes and all like, you could possibly do wrong. Just everything. Okay? And then I see Sonny Perdue and Brooke Rollins are messaging. Like, they're sharing each other stuff Speaker 1: Yeah. Speaker 0: On x saying, I'm so excited for my friend Brooke Rollins. Oh, thank you, my friend Sonny Perdue. You're friends with him? That's not good. That's a bad sign. Speaker 1: And right after she was nominated, Zippy Duvall, who's the CEO of the farm of Farm Bureau, who, you know, you look at the kind of things that if you look at their State Farm Bureau, they literally lobbied against a bill that would have prevented foreign agents from being able to buy American farmland. And so you look at that and you say, well, how could Farm Bureau be for the family farm? And agriculture is vast, you know, it's does Rook Rollins have some relationships with some of the entities that are at the top of the heap as far as agriculture? Certainly. But the problem is the ones that are at the top are smothering out the family farms at the bottom. I mean, we're losing a family farm every fifteen minutes. When you look at the fact farm credit holds 46% of the debt and you have all these other policies and regulations that the USDA has implemented that puts the family farmer at a disadvantage, it's no wonder. I did the calculation on it and I think we're about seventeen years away from the last family farm being here. We'll hang the last foreclosure sign in about seventeen years if we keep going at this same pace. And, you know, that's why I was hoping and I know so many were, including Nicole Shanahan, that we would have someone like Thomas Massey. You know, I've never mentioned this on my page, but Speaker 0: So it's an exclusive for me. Speaker 1: This is an Speaker 0: exclusive for you. Speaker 1: But I was asked to be a part of that team and Joel Salton was asked to be a part of that team. And a lot of the what I would say are the most innovative minds and agriculture, particularly USDA, has gotten the position to where status quo won't get it. You have to come in and have radical transparency if nothing else. And we have to have new solutions. You know, people talk about subsidies that go into agriculture, but if you really look at it at the family farm level, particularly for livestock farmers, there is little in the way of subsidies. Those are going to ethanol plants and those are even going to, broadband Internet providers. Speaker 0: I was actually gonna ask you that was another quick hitter I wanted to ask you about is your thoughts on subsidies. I get a lot of comments from a lot of small farms saying, I don't want anything from the government. Right. Leave me alone. Speaker 1: And and that's where we need a nuanced approach. But we need we need a plan is I sympathize with the corn farmer, the row cropper, the guy that grows corn and soybeans, and he's invested in all this equipment. He's invested under this assurance that the government's going to keep this renewable fuel mandate and it's going to elevate the price of corn to the point that due to supply and demand he's able to make a living or she's able to make a living. Because you know what they'll tell you is they don't pencil out, but we still got to grow corn. But those policies can't continue forever because it's part of what are what is derailing us. Bobby Kennedy talks a lot of times about in agriculture we need an off ramp and we do. We need to find a way and it can absolutely be done. We just have to look at different ways to do it to where those farmers they might for a period of time get a contemporaneous consistent subsidy that they would be getting to produce biofuels. But instead of producing biofuels, that farmer could just as well be producing food. Yeah. And we've got to get that evened up to where we're in the food production business in agriculture because that's never going to go out of style. Yeah. Know biofuels and things like that will come and go when at the end of the day we've got to get to a place where we can let the free market work. And a lot of this is USDA's picking winners and losers. When they're paying the corn farmer more and it elevates the price, the cattle farmer might be paying more in feed. And so, you know, you might be pushing some of those out of business. And at the end of the day, we've got to encourage creativity in farming. We've got to find a way to stop the vertical integration to where like these poultry farmers are nothing but an employee answering to big ag. And when you think about it, these corn farmers corn and soybean farmers that rely on the subsidies and understandably so how is that any different? They're vertically integrated it's just with the government. Told what they have to plant and when they, you know, and so all of that is dictated and we need creative solutions and you know again nothing against Brooke Rollins from a personal standpoint. I just have not heard anything from her that is creative and she's close with Farm Bureau, close with Sunny Purdue, and I feel like agriculture in this administration may have been a bit of a sacrificial lamb. We had a lot of wins in other departments just like getting Bobby appointed and through confirmation. And you know I do worry about with USDA Brooke Rollins was the former boss of John Thune's son-in-law And John Thune's son-in-law has already been appointed to a position, so I feel like his hand was in that. But we've got to have change, and we've got to start now. Speaker 0: I just don't understand. It would have actually helped Trump if he appointed or nominated Thomas Massey as secretary of agriculture because, honestly, Massey's kind of a pain in his ass in the house. Right. So he actually would have been helping the house because they would have just put another republican that just is a yes man in his spot. And, you know, the then the house would have another reliable yes vote because they're in very slim margins right now. So, you think it would have actually helped because, like I said, you would get him out of the house, and he would be a rock star for farmers. Right. And then, you know, that's another thing that Trump could take credit for that he saved the farm. You know? Speaker 1: Any any if anybody could do it, Thomas Massie could. Like, I I truly believe that. You'll have these hardcore farmers that, you know, that they might look down on a situation where they say, well, Thomas Massie's not a real farmer. He's out there doing regenerative, you know, whether we like it or not, those concepts, we've got to get to something that's sustainable. Yeah. And the way that we're doing business is not we've got to I'm not saying that we need a, you know, a bunch of Liberty Gardens and that that's going to feed the world because it's not. But we've got to start thinking creatively. We've got to bring in new ideas and you know that's where I think the panel that that would have been surrounding someone like Massey and who knows whether, you know, who knows how long it would have taken to implement this, but we would at least be moving in the right direction. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And that's what's got to be done. Right now we're stagnant and nobody wants to make a change. Speaker 0: Now I do, another quick hitter I wanted to ask you about, especially because you represent poultry farmers. What are your thoughts, briefly on the bird flu and the response so far to it? So, Speaker 1: you know, when you look at the response, you go back to the Biden administration and and, you know, I brought something up on this. It's probably been a couple of months ago to where and and many other people have as well sounding the alarm we're killing 150,000,000 chickens or whatever it is. And obviously that has an impact on supply and demand. But when you look at it more closely and you look at what the USDA did, the USDA was compensating for these chickens that would be, cold as a result of bird flu, but they were culling chickens that were sick along with chickens that had nothing wrong with them at all. Now you'll hear people say the bird flu is so bad that if you have a farm that has it before long they may all die. But they probably won't all die and that is genetics 101 in that we have destroyed the chickens and with government money to do it. We have destroyed the chickens that could have got us out of that mess in creating breeding lines that would be resistant to the bird flu. And instead of that, we've had no plan whatsoever other than to just continue culling those chickens. And if you look at the amount of money that has been spent and again you're talking about money that's going to these same poultry integrators And I would be real surprised if you did the math if it wasn't profitable for them to pull those chickens rather than raise them. Speaker 0: Yeah. I mean, because really what's going on right now is you could have one sick chicken out of 30,000, and they will tell you that you need to destroy all of your chickens, kill them all. Right. Even if one had it, got over it, was resilient to it, even if that chicken was, that one chicken had a wrong test. Yeah. Even if that test was faulty. They'll make you kill your whole flock, but don't worry. The government will come in and pay you for the chickens, but only the healthy ones. Speaker 1: Yeah. And that's where you don't even need just one chicken. You need one guy that's willing to sign a paper that says you've got one chicken. Speaker 0: So then, really, I mean, unethical farmers, now they don't have to deal with raising the chickens, paying for feed. They don't have to worry about butchering them. Nothing. They can just get a check. Right. Mean, who wouldn't want that? I mean, it sounds amazing. Right? Just sit around and sign a piece of paper like you're saying and get a big fancy check from the government. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: And, you know, it happened primarily under the Biden administration, but there's no word if that's changed yet. Speaker 1: No. And there's a lot of concern right now over vaccines and and whether they're gonna use a vaccine in the poultry. And and, you know, I would say this, if nothing else, just from the standpoint of history, we need to be really certain that because we're talking about something that's going right into the food chain here. And, you know, it's kind of like I hear a lot of people say these conspiracy theorists, they're just about batting a thousand right now when it comes to things like that. And so when I hear Rollins the USDA's position on this, I'm not seeing any kind of creative ideas outside of, you know, the mission of vaccines. To the extent that that is a solution, we certainly need more transparency to everything than just trust us. And again, I would say that the more logical solution is from the genetic side. We need to change the incentives. Imagine if you went back and you said, okay, we've got some funding here that could go towards the bird flu, but what we want to do is to create some kind of bird flu line, breeding line that's resistant to it. That's the natural genetic remedy to doing that. And is that worth taxpayer money? Probably so. Yeah, because what we don't want to have happen is for 150,000,000 chickens to get cold because then the price of eggs goes up. And so nobody's thinking creatively and it's because they're all beholden to the poultry integrators, companies like Farm Bureau and our politicians have been asleep at the wheel. I mean, where where was someone banging this drum a couple of years ago? Because they didn't just kill a 50,000,000 chickens on Biden's last day in office. Yeah. Who was watching the store when it comes to these, congressional representatives to allow the USDA to just run haywire, on all Speaker 0: of Speaker 1: this. Speaker 0: And I really started to panic. I think it was, like, a week ago thinking about all of this because my dog is allergic to every meat but chicken. Right. So if we get in a crisis where we don't have enough chicken because they're just killing off millions of chickens, I don't know what I'm gonna do. Like, that's all she can eat. We have tried everything. She's allergic to it all. Yeah. So, I mean, this this is really bad. Speaker 1: And and and then you see these solutions that are proffered about, you know, here's this product, but it's eggs, but it's not made with real eggs. You know, again, looking back at it, a lot of people have been skeptical on that and there does seem to be an agenda there. Oh gosh. Speaker 0: Yeah, because you have like Bill Gates making fake meat right now. Exactly. Oh my gosh. Speaker 1: Exactly. And and you look at how our cattle supply, you know, to transition over to that. Beef's high right now. Our national cattle herd is at the lowest it's been in seventy years. Speaker 0: Just have my mind. Like, now I'm thinking, like, Bill Gates, you know, he's gonna come in and save the day with his fake chicken. Speaker 1: Exactly. And meet the demand. Speaker 0: And he's going to supply vaccines That to treat the bird flu. This is this is, like, such a moneymaker. Speaker 1: I mean, I wish Bill Gates would just tell us how much money do you want, Bill? We'll just give it to you. If you'll just go away. I mean, if you'll just leave us alone and not kill us, we'll write you that check because it would be well worth it. Speaker 0: He is the definition of a mad scientist. Speaker 1: He is. He is insane. You know, you look at agriculture as a whole on the beef side, and it's just one other just tangential issue here but you got, an organization that represents all the cattle farmers called NCBA that that lobbies against a lot of wolves in sheep's clothing here they lobby against something called, country of origin labeling on beef. And so we're bringing in beef from outside. Well you look at eggs, we're talking about importing eggs I think from Turkey, and the question would be will there be country of origin would there be country of origin labeling there? Yeah. Will I know what I'm getting? Speaker 0: And, unfortunately, Republicans would see that as red tape and not want that. But I would argue that we have a right as buyers and consumers to know what we're eating. Right. So Because then what Speaker 1: do our USDA standards even mean? Speaker 0: Exactly. Speaker 1: We're bringing this in from outside. I at least should be told whether this has come from Brazil or whether it's come from one of our farmers. And if we before recently and the cattle prices now are high because we've got a significant demand issue just like with with eggs, but the last time prices were this high was in 2014. We had mandatory country of origin labeling for beef. And when the American beef could differentiate their product, all of a sudden it made American cattle prices go up. And so it's a win win. It's a that's an easy win for the farmers. Yeah, that's another thing that President Trump could do that would be so impactful. Thomas Massie's been out in support of it. I think he's maybe one of the signatories on the bill. There's an organization called RCAF that has really pushed for that, but we need, especially in this day and time coming post pandemic, we need to know where food is coming from. We need to know it's safe. Speaker 0: So the last thing I wanna talk about is glyphosate because, you know, the constitution allows I always forget what amendment it is. But the constitution allows us to sue anyone over anything over $20. But as we've seen with vaccine manufacturers, they have immunity from being sued, which is a lot of, like, what we're talking about with you and the the farm credit. Exactly. They they have immunity from this, and I just don't understand how because the constitution clearly says that you can sue people. So now, glyphosate companies, like Roundup and stuff like Bayer makes Roundup, they are going around lobbying, trying to push bills and state by state to get immunity from lawsuits. So we know RFK Jr. Was the top lawyer, or at least his firm, on the cases against Roundup. A lot of people that don't know RFK Jr. Don't know that, but he's the one that won billions of dollars on behalf of the small farmers because Roundup was causing cancer. They knew that it was causing cancer. So they sued because the company knew they caused injuries, and they got billions of dollars, and those lawsuits are still going on today. So instead of pulling your product off the market that causes cancer, they are gonna go and lobby and bribe our politicians to make it that no one can sue them anymore. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: So I actually asked Zen Honeycutt. She is, I believe, the leader of moms across America. She's incredible. She's welcome on my show anytime, by the way. But I asked her right before this for a statement because she's been all over this, and I really haven't had that much time to cover it. So she gave me a statement that I can read, so I wanna read that. She says, Moms Across America urges our state elected officials to say no to the make America sick again pesticide immunity bill immunity bills that have been introduced in 11 states. It is outrageous that foreign German and Chinese companies think they can manipulate our local officials into making them immune from lawsuits and protecting their executives' ability to buy a third beach home. We think that rather than spending millions of dollars on lobbyists and lawyers, they should be spending that money on reformulating their products for safety to avoid lawsuits forever. It can be done. There are nontoxic weed killers available now. People who want to help can go to MomsAcrossAmerica.org/blog for the phone numbers and emails of the state officials to contact. So very important. Absolutely. Is there anything you wanna add to that conversation? Speaker 1: Yeah. You know, when I first started practicing law, I I did defense work. I haven't always been on the right side of this. And it didn't take me long to figure out. I did environmental law and I represented some of the top chemical companies in the country. I'm not gonna name who they are, but companies that I was advising, everybody is very familiar with those companies. And I found out very quickly that those companies were doing an economic evaluation. You know, again just like I talked about with Farm Bureau, their only obligation would be to like the stockholders. And there is a calculation to where it's more profitable for them to put that product out there even knowing that it could cause cancer, even knowing that they've got studies that show that and then they'll just deal with the backlash on the other side. Know, we look at why have we had such a higher incidence rate of cancer. I think about when I was a kid, my dad had a friend he come home and he said he's got cancer. I thought cancer? We know anybody that had cancer then. Now there's none of us that isn't hasn't been impacted by somebody that has cancer. And I firmly believe and this is my opinion as an environmental attorney that's been on both sides of it that the chemical companies and it's been proven in court time and time again that the chemical companies are responsible at least in part for the higher rate of cancer. When you look at immunities from legal immunities from the standpoint of a farm credit or a pharmaceutical company, you know, what kind of behavior, what kind of incentive do you think that does create there to where you are telling them that they are above the law? And so Speaker 0: And a void of the free market. Speaker 1: Absolutely. You have and think of the audacity of a company to even ask for legal immunity. I mean just think about that. We want to even if we hurt somebody, even if we kill somebody, we don't want to be responsible for it. Why? Because it ultimately could put us out of business. Well when you think about what we've talked about where the scales in the courts are already tipped against the farmers as it is and against the American public as it is. If you don't think that a big corporation has more influence than you do in a courtroom, then you're sadly mistaken. In every case I've ever went up against the other side on these corporations, you have to knock them out. Yeah. Because if you leave any doubt, you will lose against these big corporations. So let's say that 10% of these cases get through and actually there's liability found to where somebody could recover. They already have the courts captured and they want to take away the most obvious situations to where they're going to have liability. And again, if you are a chemical company and you can convince a court or a jury in this day and age when you've got when that chemical company can go out and hire any law firm in America to go in and represent them. If you are losing in that case and you are causing people to die because of your product, you deserve to go out of business. Exactly. That's the exact that's the exact reason that you that the one whip we have as private citizens is maybe we could sue and maybe we got a chance that we look up and draw a fair judge or a fair jury and I could win. Because most of the time even when you're right on these cases, if you're going up against the wrong party, you're still not going to win. You've got to have everything aligned and you know the one kind of overarching point there is I haven't sued Alabama Farm Credit yet, for example, and a lot of that has to do with the immunities, but I also didn't want to entrust my future because my future hinges on my case being resolved because of the position that they've put us in and the hell they've put us in. And I didn't want to leave it in the hands of one judge and quite frankly it scares me to leave it in the hands of 12 people I don't know. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: But what I knew was if I could put my point out to the world and the jury of my peers I can find on the X platform when I put my story out and other people can hear it and you're not going to get that in court. Farm Credit tried to put a gag order on me so that I couldn't post anymore on social media. And I am thankful that the judge did not order that. But when it comes to these chemical companies and the immunity, we've got to be very vocal there. And you know, we need that public pressure on these politicians. Anybody that has introduced a bill to give one of these chemical companies immunity, call them out because because you know what they are? They're murderers. Yeah. They are allowing a company to go in and say they're not going to be accountable to you even if they kill you. And this is what that what's going to make that you think that chemical company is not going to push the envelope even further. You know, the one thing we've got on them now is maybe there won't be just the most obvious cases because they could lose in court. Imagine just like in the pharmaceutical industry where there's no recourse whatsoever or with farm credit. They'll foreclose on you when you don't haven't missed a payment. Speaker 0: You know, some people, I I think I said this in my last episode, some people blame capitalism that it's just people that are being greedy that will do whatever they can to save a dollar. This system we have today is not capitalism. This is not a free market. When you have laws that protect you from our judicial system, that is not capitalism. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: That's what RFK junior says. It's crony capitalism. We need like, the theme every time I find corruption, the theme is that they're hiding from the free market. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: The free market is you get injured by a company, by someone. You sue them in court. You get a jury of your peers. You hopefully get a fair judge, and they decide, yes, you got injured or you didn't. Here's your remedy for that. Like, you got injured by having to sell your property when you shouldn't have had to. Your you should get your property back. You should at least get the the money that would be worth or store your loan, anything. Okay? But you can't because they're hiding from the free market. Speaker 1: Right. Speaker 0: You don't have to like, you can't go to court. Right. You like I said, you got the golden ticket, you were able to sue on something, but you're not suing farm credit. You're suing the president of The United States. Right. I talked to my friend Tiffany last week about arbitration court. That should be illegal because it goes against the three branches of government. It hides from the free market. Speaker 1: That's Speaker 0: true. Same thing with these glyphosate companies. They are trying to hide from the free market. The free market would say, okay. You poisoned me. You gave me cancer. You need to pay for that. Right. And they would be sued into oblivion that would make them either change their product and make it safe, or they would go out of business. Yeah. And they're trying to hide from that, and that's not okay. So we need to restore democracy, republic, our republic. You know? We have a our constitution was the greatest gift from our founding fathers, and we need to implement it. We need to protect it, and we can't protect what we don't know. So if you haven't read the constitution, please do that. And we need to learn it, we need to study it, we need to protect it, and we need to not let this happen. Anyone that votes against like you said, if someone introduces a bill that goes against the three branches of government, we need to get them voted out. Call them out. Get them voted out. Don't let anyone else come back in their spot if they don't understand, you know, how a republic works. But, Speaker 1: yeah I do have one idea that I think could help bring transparency is we talk about all this money that's going for certain things to benefit the taxpayers. We should be live streaming every time there's court in session Speaker 0: Yeah. Anywhere. Absolutely. Speaker 1: You know, it's we've got the ability to do that very economically right now. But I'm going to tell you, there are a lot of judges that, know, people picture, people watch movies and things like that. And they think, well, there's a courtroom full of people there. No, there's not. You'll lose your house or you'll divorce your spouse in an empty room and nobody will be watching it and we've got to keep these judges in check. We've got to keep attorneys in check. We need there's a lot of smart people across the country that that could watch and I think just that transparency you would see a major difference in our legal system is just the potential that if that judge did something that was a violation of ethics, for example, somebody somewhere has the potential to see that and to call them out on And so I think that's something that that should be done. It's something that, you know, I've talked about for the last couple of years is we have- this is all public. As you know, in my Alabama case where they sued me sanctions and explained that everything they said was false, the judge sealed that. And quite honestly, if people knew like, you know, there's information in there that affects people's livelihoods. People have been foreclosed on who are farm credit borrowers at Alabama Farm Credit because that judge sealed that information and they didn't know that there were lawyers hired, the same lawyers going against me that's going against their interest. Those are the kind of things that if there was more transparency, it would at least create a deterrence to it. And so, that's just kind of a creative idea that maybe somebody Speaker 0: Yeah. For sure. Speaker 1: Could put together. Speaker 0: Well, I can't thank you enough for trusting me with your story. Like I said, we've been planning this for a while, and I I never get nervous, but I got nervous, before this because I I just hope I help do your story justice. Speaker 1: And I I mean, I can't tell you how much I appreciate it. Speaker 0: I'm gonna cry because this is Speaker 1: No. I mean, like, you know, like, when I lost my Facebook account, for example, you don't know how bad it is, like, when you lose your voice to be able to say something. And I had to go on X and and, you know, I think I had, like, three cousins and a dog walker following me on there at that time. And then now all of a sudden a year later, I've got 23,000 people that that follow. And I watched your work with reporting during the election and, you know, I say this word a lot, but like I can tell when somebody's motives are pure. And, you know, I could tell that your motives were pure in this and, you know, you've got a huge following. You've got a following that I feel like are fighters. There's this critical mass that's that's been created of people from the right and the left and in the middle that just is tired of the corruption. Speaker 0: Yeah. Speaker 1: And you know, I think both of our followings that is the the common denominator between it. But you recently had, you know, I think even Elon retweeted, you know, some of your work and and I just appreciate anybody that's willing to stand up and tell the truth no matter the consequences. And and so I can't thank you enough for taking the time. I mean, you come all the way down here to Tennessee, and, it's just so greatly appreciated. And, you know, before all of this, I probably took for granted having a, you know, not ever being faced with a situation like this. But it's there's been a lot of people that I thought would have helped me in this that that didn't. And it makes you really appreciate the people that like see it and and take the initiative to try to be sure that this story is told. Because like I said earlier, this could air and the next day I might get that phone call that I've been waiting on for four years to end this. And you know, it's not just for me. Speaker 0: It's It's not. Speaker 1: It's there's a lot of poultry farmers that during this have lost their farms. Yeah. And don't think that I don't have some guilt over that I've been able to beat everybody in every case I've ever been in. And on this, how do you beat the government? How you know, even when you prove that they violated the law and like I took it all the way up and sued the president and the president couldn't even get out of it. But still, it's still going on. And so, you know, I hope that somebody watches this and, you know, there's people that's contacted me within the Farm Credit Administration that were willing to risk everything and telling me I was right on this and validating me. Yeah. And that has kept me going. But, you know, I just hope that someone sees it that can do something about it and we can get this fixed because it needs to be fixed. It's went on for far too long and the farmers deserve better and there's a reason we're losing our family farms. We need to quit just talking about the fact we're losing our family farms and let's look at why we're losing them. We're losing them because we have 46 of the agricultural debt in the country controlled controlled by a rogue criminal enterprise Yep. In farm credit. Speaker 0: Yep. Speaker 1: And we need somebody to come in and put a boot up their ass. Mhmm. And I hope president Trump can do that. Speaker 0: President Trump, Elon, Pam Bondi, anyone, please come save us. Please. Come save the farmers. I can't thank you enough for telling your story and not signing that $1,200,000 deal to stay quiet. I I really, you are helping so many people, and I really hope it's worth it one day. Speaker 1: And would say this for anybody that wants to look into it. I'll open up our records and show you everything we've got. We've got the receipts on this. Yeah. We just need somebody to take the initiative to get it done. Speaker 0: Well, again, thank you so much. Thank you. And, please reach out. If you're listening to this, reach out to your congresspeople. Tag Elon. Tag Trump. Just try to make noise. We have to get this story out. We just have to to save the farmers. But, thank you so much, and it was such a pleasure interviewing you today. Speaker 1: Thank you.
Saved - March 14, 2025 at 8:24 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I blew the whistle on fraud in the U.S. Farm Credit System, and now, 100 days into a federal investigation, I'm facing extortion from Farm Credit Lawyer Chris Glenos. Despite having evidence, the DOJ continues to defend Farm Credit. They even offered a seven-figure settlement, but it came with unacceptable conditions. Additionally, the Alabama State Bar and General Counsel Roman Shaul are complicit in covering up this corruption involving Glenos, a partner at a major law firm in Alabama. It's frustrating and disheartening.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

I was a whistleblower to fraud in the U.S. Farm Credit System. This call is 100 days into the federal investigation, with Farm Credit Lawyer Chris Glenos (@bradleylegal) extorting me and my family. And @PamBondi; your DOJ is still defending Farm Credit. https://t.co/nCFYd5Psjk

Video Transcript AI Summary
AFC wants a release of threatened claims. Speaker 1 states they have never missed a payment and have over $2,000,000 in equity in the properties. Speaker 1 received a notice stating their loan was in distress, but Speaker 1 claims they are not in distress and have met every obligation. Speaker 0 clarifies that financial distress doesn't necessarily require missing a payment to the association. Speaker 1 asks why they have to sign a release if they've made every payment and if the release will include non-disclosure and confidentiality clauses. Speaker 1 also claims they can't get their balance from their bank without going through Speaker 0 and feels deprived of the ability to talk with their local branch manager.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Well, I mean, obviously, AFC would like a release of the threatened claims. What what is did you make your payments this month? I don't know. I haven't talked to association today. Speaker 1: I've I've never missed a payment, Chris. Speaker 0: Okay. So the the payments that are that that you've the obligations that you guys can't meet, those are to other creditors? Speaker 1: Oh, I've I've met every single obligation that there is out there. I mean, we've got over $2,000,000 in equity in these properties, and we've never missed a a payment. And you sent me an email saying I was on notice that our loan was in distress. I understand why all this is happening. Speaker 0: On the distressed loan issue, as a borrower of the association, if you go into default or if you enter if you become financially distressed, you have a right and you you'll get this notice, and this is what I was talking about, to propose a restructuring. Speaker 1: I'm not in the I'm not in distress, Chris. I've not missed a payment. Speaker 0: Okay. Well, it doesn't necessarily require missing a payment with us. You could make your payments to the association presumably, but not be able to pay other obligations. Speaker 1: I've paid every obligation. I don't owe anybody anything. Why have I I've done everything right, I feel like, as a borrower. I mean, I've made every payment. I think we both know that's not right. I mean, is the release am I gonna have to release you and Bradley Arendt? Speaker 0: Look. I I don't wanna get into mean, that's a pretty straightforward question. Is at risk of being mischaracterized or spun into something or twisted something Speaker 1: that What do you think I've mischaracterized, Chris? Speaker 0: Look, Dustin, I'm happy to talk about where we are now. It is it is we have, I think, demonstrated that it doesn't it's not productive to talk about the past. Speaker 1: But what have I done wrong? If I've made every payment as a borrower, what have I done wrong? Why am I having to sign a release? Is the release gonna have to have non disclosure and confidentiality where I can never say anything about any of this? I can't get my balance, Chris, from my bank without going through you. And I don't know, I'm an attorney too, I don't know of anything that says that you could deprive my ability to talk with I mean, like I can't even talk with my local branch manager. I've known since we were four years old.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🧵 You might be asking yourself — Why would Farm Credit not just resolve this matter with Dustin Kittle, given the fact he has recorded calls and documents showing he was extorted as a whistleblower after he reported fraud in the U.S. Farm Credit System? Well, they tried; in fact, they offered a seven figure settlement — but it was to be conditioned on the following … 🧵 1 of 6

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

And the @AlabamaStateBar and its General Counsel Roman Shaul have had a hand in covering up this corruption; engaged in by an Alabama licensed attorney in Chris Glenos, who just happens to be a Partner at Bradley Arant, the biggest law firm in the State of Alabama. Nasty work.

Saved - July 19, 2024 at 5:10 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I've faced significant challenges since my Facebook account was hacked and disabled last year, coinciding with an investigation into the U.S. Farm Credit System. After creating a new account that was also banned, I moved my efforts to X. Recently, my law partner experienced similar hacks. We need to reach @elonmusk and @RepThomasMassie to expose the corruption and threats we've encountered, including extortion attempts and foreign influence within the Farm Credit System. I'm determined to share our story and seek justice, regardless of the risks involved.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🚨 URGENT REQUEST: As many of you know, last year, weeks before the U.S. Farm Credit Administration released its Findings in the investigation into our matter, my FB account (which I’d had since 2008) was hacked and disabled — the Farm Credit System was aware I had been contacted by internal witnesses through FB messaging; as those messages were turned over to them under duress by current employees they had questioned. I created a new FB account that was later banned and disabled in early 2024, with our learning through legal filings that the largest law firm in Alabama, Bradley Arant, had an attorney assigned to my social media 24/7; with their reporting 20+ complaints against my account over a period of several weeks for “copyright violations” and other “terms violations”. That is when I moved this effort over to X. During that exact same time, we had an Apple ID compromised we were using to communicate with our Farm Credit clients. In the last 24 hours, my law partner and lead counsel on the case pending against President Biden, @AshleyPosey22, had both her FB account and Apple ID hacked; with FB also disabling her access. While we both agree that X is certainly the better place to tell this story, so many of our clients only utilized FB and followed our efforts there — and keep in mind that my FB account was banned earlier this year after I refused to accept a $1.2 million bribe to take a job within the U.S. Farm Credit System as a paid legal consultant; that would have required me to fire my clients and would have disqualified me from opposing Farm Credit in any legal actions. There are two people we need your help to be sure this information reaches, as we are down to our last means of communication: 1) @elonmusk — To ensure that the United States Government nor its lawyers are able to shut off our last lines of communication here on X; as we have done nothing but expose corruption within the U.S. Farm Credit System and their blatant extortion in attempting to force us to swear and affirm to confidentiality since 2021 (that would have prevented us from speaking out on the Farm Credit System’s engagement in transferring American farmland over to foreign agents, including from China); and 2) @RepThomasMassie — To hear us out on this pursuant to his position on the Congressional Committee related to the Weaponization of the Federal Government. We have everything from recorded calls in which the Farm Credit System’s extortion against us was detailed in 2021 — to death threats made against us just days after we rejected Farm Credit’s bribe months ago. I can show Congressman Massie evidence that will send people to prison. I can show Congressman Massie evidence that our Farm Credit System has been sabotaged and is compromised by foreign influence. I’ll walk to Washington DC for 30 minutes of his time, as that is all it will take to blow his mind on this — but there is no other Representative or Senator who I trust. I have been told if I keep fighting this they will render me “unconscious” — and that is an exact quote in their most recent threat. I don’t care if they kill me at this point; it would be a welcome relief after the past three years of Hell they’ve put us through; but there are more people counting on us to make this right than anyone can fathom. I’m not scared. I’m not intimidated. And they will not bribe me or break me. But something has to give before the best chance to fix the corruption within the U.S. Farm Credit System is taken out; as they know they cannot stop us any other way. We need this story heard while we still have this voice — I haven’t sacrificed to this point to be silenced from telling the truth. And @finkd, you’ll have more blood on your hands in your putrid platform’s denial of Free Speech to so many Americans who have sought to do nothing but tell the truth. Wake up while we still can — Dustin Kittle | Rancher + Ag Attorney 🇺🇸 #SaveOurFarms #FreeSpeech

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

This man has known about the ethics violations of the Bradley Arant Law Firm and their extortion against us since 2021 as well as the death threats against us and has refused to so much as conduct an investigation into same — get his corrupt ass fired before he gets us killed. https://t.co/EEcfuewEEu

Saved - June 17, 2024 at 7:49 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
A scandal involving Farm Credit and the Summit Carbon Pipeline has been exposed. The connection between government officials, including USDA and Farm Credit officials, and the energy industry raises conflicts of interest. South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem is implicated due to her ownership interests and familial connections to companies involved in the project. Landowners and farmers are left fighting for their rights while Noem remains silent. The crickets symbolize her lack of action and accountability.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🚨 THE FARM CREDIT SCANDAL Chapter Four || Crickets 🦗 🧵 1 - of - 2 — SaveOurFarms 🇺🇸🌾 ———————— For at least 15 years now, a plan has unfolded to reshape the way we view agriculture and its role within our environment. And over that time, three groups have emerged in that narrative: 1.Those who found a way to vilify farms for the sake of personal profit; 2.Those who put trust in those people in an effort to be a steward of the environment; and, 3.Those of us who know better. And the third group grows with each passing day; as it becomes more and more apparent that those who have peddled this nonsense that our cows are destroying the environment, et al. are being exposed for the CON-MEN and CON-WOMEN they are. Three months ago, I was down, after having the Page we had built a movement behind disabled by Meta — and in my pivot to X, a story broke on Kristi Noem and her book; with Noem justifying the shooting of a hunting dog and a goat as business as usual on the American family farm. The timing could not have been worse for me; as the last thing I needed was to alienate anyone. But I also had to be true to myself and what I believe — so I wrote a scathing rebuke of her words in a post that hit 2 million views. You can read that post here: https://x.com/dustinkittle/status/1784997897211142156?s=42… But I lost followers, had a major influencer on the right say I must be lying about the Farm Credit matter because I challenged them on Noem, and was called a leftist Biden plant more times than I can count (although it was fun asking back why they haven’t sued him yet like I have lol) — But I stand by my position: Anyone who would cause harm to an innocent animal would cause harm to me or you; if just given half-a-chance. Ground Zero to this agricultural fraud involving our government is shared by South Dakota and Iowa; although Arkansas is not too far behind. What we have revealed in recent days is that the Summit Carbon Pipeline has been a sham of epic proportions. An appointed USDA / Farm Credit Official was business partners with the CEO of the Energy Company that initiated this carbon capture movement within the ethanol fuel industry. And even as environmentalists, those in that debate for the right reasons, said the carbon pipeline would do more harm than good; every warning light and stop sign was blown through, by either encouragement or silence. Right now, Brad Little is failing the farmers and ranchers of Idaho by failing to come to their aid — and I would argue that, through acquiescence and silence, Kristi Noem of South Dakota has failed the farmers, and the landowners in general, of her State by failing to tell them the complete truth. Governor Kristi Noem should have been upfront and owned the fact that she has an ownership interest in a company involved in the project; but perhaps even more damning, Kristi Noem has a familial connection with someone who is a paid advocate for a company connected to the project. ————— 🧵 1 - of - 2 #SaveOurFarms 🇺🇸🌾

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

THE REAL KRISTI NOEM STORY AND WHY THIS RANCHER CALLS BULLSHIT: I was born on a cattle and poultry farm — I have spent the majority of my life living on the farm — and I currently have a ranch in Tennessee with cattle, horses, and sheep — and what I am here to tell you is that…

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🚨 THE FARM CREDIT SCANDAL Chapter Four || Crickets 🦗 🧵 2 - of - 2 — SaveOurFarms 🇺🇸🌾 ———————— So allow me to take you from South Dakota to Washington DC and then back home again; just to show the lawyers of conflicts at play here: Farm Credit Board Member Dallas Tonsager, of South Dakota, formed business ventures with Energy mogul Tom Hitchcock, also of South Dakota, in 2002; with Tonsager appointed to the Farm Credit Board by 2004. In 2007, Hitchcock joined Redfield Energy; where he would ultimately become CEO. By 2009, President Obama transferred Farm Credit Board Member Tonsager to the position of USDA Undersecretary. By 2011, Redfield Energy would enter into a joint venture with an Englewood, Colorado-based energy company known as Gevo. By 2015, President Obama reassigned Tonsager back to the Farm Credit Board; naming him as Chairman of the Farm Credit System just two weeks after Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in the November 2016 Election. From 2015 until 2018, Redfield Energy becomes the “pioneer” of carbon capture within the ethanol business. As an off-shoot to those efforts, our government, through the USDA and the Department of Energy, began doling out massive tax credits and guaranteed government loans within the industry to advance carbon capture — — with the most significant of those projects being the “Boondoggle” of the Summit Carbon Pipeline; spanning multiple states, to include South Dakota; whose farmers and rural residents have been fighting for their property rights in 160+ eminent domain lawsuits filed by Summit Carbon. Meanwhile, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem, who has the authority to put a stop to this entire nonsense, by doing little more than making her positions on the subject very plain and clear, has, for the most part, stood back and watched that raging fire burn. While Noem’s team might suggest she has been a part of implementing certain half-hearted measures in response; there has not been a time Noem has went all in for landowners. And that is likely because she is conflicted; by facts she did not lead with as she should have — until forced to do so once they were discovered. See the list of business partners of Summit Carbon Solutions here: https://summitcarbonsolutions.com/ethanol-plant-partners/ Based upon financial disclosures, Kristi Noem is or has been a part of the ownership group in Granite Falls Energy, a Summit business partner with an ethanol plant located in Minnesota; Based upon financial disclosures, Kristi Noem is or has been a part of the ownership group in Glacial Lakes Energy, a Summit business partner with ethanol plants located in South Dakota; Summit Carbon Solutions was one of the five (5) Platinum Sponsors for Kristi Noem’s inauguration; And Noem’s son-in-law Kyle Peters serves as a LOBBYIST for Gevo, a business partner of Summit Carbon which has direct ties to Redfield / Hitchcock (with ties to the USDA). More concerning, Gevo touts that the Federal Government has promised them a $950 million dollar guaranteed loan through the Department of Energy; so long as that Summit Carbon Capture Pipeline Project moves forward. If the Pipeline Project does not materialize, Gevo says they may not can continue operating at all. And I say all that to say this: By the publicly available information alone, South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem’s son-in-law stands to lose his job if that $8 Billion Magic Pipeline does not span the South Dakota prairie. So now you should know why we hear crickets when awaiting Noem to speak up for South Dakota landowners — — and Crickets always seem to find a way to come back and haunt her. ———— Dustin Kittle | Rancher + Ag Attorney #SaveOurFarms 🌾 Come alongside us and fight 🇺🇸 givesendgo.com/SaveOurFarms American Farmers, et al. v. Biden Complaint: linktr.ee/dustinkittle

Ethanol Plant Partners - Summit Carbon Solutions Summit Carbon Solutions has partnered with dozens of ethanol plants to capture carbon that would otherwise be emitted into the atmosphere. summitcarbonsolutions.com
Saved - June 14, 2024 at 12:13 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Poultry growers at Alabama Farm Credit have lost $60 million due to executives' spending, leaving the institution on the verge of collapse. The U.S. Farm Credit Administration and Congress have not taken any action. @TTuberville has ignored farmers' requests for meetings while meeting with the executives involved. The corrupt nature of politicians is evident, with a $1500 campaign contribution required for a 15-minute meeting with a Washington DC representative.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

Sleep on this — the poultry growers with loans at Alabama Farm Credit have had approximately $60 million removed from their accounts that the Executives have apparently spent and now cannot repay; without collapsing the institution — The U.S. Farm Credit Administration and Congress has done nothing for them. @TTuberville has ignored requests for meetings to discuss the matter with the farmers themselves — while taking multiple meetings with the Farm Credit executives who absconded the funds. And if you want to know the full story on these politicians, I was told recently I could get a 15-minute meeting with one of the Washington DC reps for a $1500 campaign contribution — it’s corrupt to the core.

Saved - June 13, 2024 at 11:22 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
Barack Obama found an ally in Dallas Tonsager, a South Dakotan Democrat, who served on the U.S. Farm Credit Board. Tonsager later supported Obama's campaign and founded RURAL AMERICANS FOR OBAMA. Tonsager's appointment to the U.S. Department of Agriculture under Obama led to a significant impact on American agriculture. However, Tonsager's actions raised concerns about the hijacking of the U.S. Farm Credit System. Tonsager's tenure as Farm Credit Chairman resulted in a lack of relief for farmers in need. Tonsager's passing in 2019 offers a chance to save farms.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🚨 THE NEXT CHAPTER: “DALLAS PACKED HIS SUITCASE” — Barack Obama, then a junior United States Senator from Illinois, announced his candidacy for President in February 2007. Barack Obama never lacked for charisma, polish, or charm — but his Achilles’ heel, so it seemed, on the national stage, was how he related to those outside of the Cities. But in the native South Dakotan Dallas Tonsager, Barack Obama found his ally. 🧵 1 of 4 || #SaveOurFarms 🇺🇸🌾

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

Tonsager had grown up on a dairy farm in rural South Dakota but was a bit of an anomaly, as he was, steadfastly, a die-hard Democrat. He had emerged on the national political scene in 1993, named as USDA Director for Rural Development for his home-state of South Dakota by President Bill Clinton. But it was a Republican President, George W. Bush, who brought Mr. Tonsager to Washington; as an appointee to the U.S. Farm Credit Board in the year 2004. While that may sound odd, it is a part of the design of checks and balances within the U.S. Farm Credit System, that was put in place more than a century ago to STOP the wrongful taking of family farms that was occurring, at the time, within the private banking and lending industry. Farm Credit’s regulations state that the sitting U.S. President must appoint a three-member Farm Credit Board to manage and direct the Farm Credit System, with these specific protections: 1.The Board cannot be monopolized by the same political party (with Bush appointing Tonsager to create the requisite political balance on the Board); 2.The Board Members must serve in a fixed six-year term; 3.The Board Members may not succeed themselves, to effectively create one of the only true American Government systems with term limits; and 4.The President’s appointments must be confirmed by the United States Senate. —— 🧵 2 of 4 || #SaveOurFarms 🇺🇸🌾 Note: Graphic provided by the Congressional Research Service.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

So let’s go back to 2004 and walk through the timing as to it all; given that Tonsager had been appointed by President Bush to serve on the Farm Credit System Board Term until the year 2010. But I guess Dallas — and no doubt others — had decided that, if he just walked in the locker room at halftime and switched jersey — no one would even notice when he ran back out on the field for the third quarter and lined up for the other team. In 2007, while continuing to serve on the U.S. Farm Credit Board, Dallas Tonsager took off his overalls and slipped on his suit and tie; As there was money to be made on the backs of American farmers who were at the Government’s mercy. While the accessibility of information was not so readily available then, today you can check my work on this just fine; to know that a man who was a Presidentially appointed Officer of a U.S. Government Sponsored Enterprise hit the campaign trail in support of Barack Obama. But he wasn’t just knocking on doors folks, it was Dallas Tonsager who founded the organization, RURAL AMERICANS FOR OBAMA, which would become the backbone of the Democratic Party’s reframing of Barack Obama’s candidacy. Dallas Tonsager’s allegiance to party and politics, at the expense of his duty to serve American farmers, would be well rewarded though, to be sure. Tonsager would become chair of Obama’s first rural campaign committee; and upon Barack Obama’s election in November 2008, it was Dallas Tonsager who was poised in a prime position to now cash in. And cash in he did. By 2009, Dallas Tonsager’s time on the U.S. Farm Credit Board was, thankfully for those American farmers in his wake, coming to an unceremonious endpoint; but there would be no need to sell that Beltway condo quite yet, as Barack Obama needed a man like Tonsager; to serve in the U.S. Department of Agriculture. —— 🧵 3 of 4 || #SaveOurFarms 🇺🇸🌾

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

But, at least in the eyes of those in Washington, what would be the harm in pulling Tonsager from the Farm Credit Game, with just minutes left to play — could we possibly save that redshirt year to be used at a later date?? And the answer to that question is the answer to most of the questions in this story: You can do whatever you want to do in Washington DC — until somebody stands up and stops you. President Barack Obama removed a sitting Farm Credit Board Member in Tonsager in 2009, one year early; replacing him with the first African-American Member of the U.S. Farm Credit Board, Ken Spearman. As for Tonsager, he was moving on up to be the #2 man in the USDA, as the Undersecretary in charge of Rural Development for Obama’s Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack — who just happens to have been rehired by Joe Biden in an effort to get the band back together. But while the subject of tomorrow’s Chapter in this sordid Farm Credit tale will focus on what happened in those years that Tonsager would team with Vilsack, allow me, for today, to blow your mind as to the possibilities that can happen in Politics; when no good guys are left watching. An unholy trinity of Obama, Vilsack, and Tonsager would rewrite the future of American agriculture as we once knew it, all the way back then, in 2009; while the farmers tilled their fields in the dark. And though labeled as an “independent” System owned by the farmer borrowers themselves (who were forced to buy stock as a part of their loans), the USDA saw a chance to capture Farm Credit. And they did. The plan was unfolding well as we approached the 2016 election; with the presumed President-elect to be a familiar name to Tonsager in Hillary Rodham Clinton, the wife of Dallas’s old boss. But something funny happened as voters walked past entry and exit polls predicting Hillary Clinton’s victory at marks as high as 90%; and elected Donald Trump. Oh shit. That’s what I’d just about bet was said in the halls of the USDA on or about November 9, 2016, as the world woke up to realize that Trump would be coming and, at least by his campaign commitments, he was poised to drain that swamp. What in the hell are we going to do? You can count on that being a question that came next in those closed-door meetings as a decade of plans were about to go up in smoke. So on November 22, 2016, I turned 36 years old. But also on that date, Mr. Dallas Tonsager became the first U.S. Farm Credit Board Chairman to be appointed and/or selected AFTER an election had been held with a NEW U.S. President set to be sworn in; in less than 60 days. But that’s not all, President Obama moved more mountains than you might think, as Tonsager became the ONLY Farm Credit Board Member in the history of the United States to skirt all rules and regulations and to be appointed for a SECOND FULL TERM on the Farm Credit Board. Damn the torpedoes and the term limits — and with no additional confirmation as Chairman, to allow a Senate review of how Tonsager intended to direct the System as its highest officer, a man was put in control of U.S. Farm Credit in violation of every check and balance that was put in place. The United States Farm Credit System had officially been HIJACKED — — and from that point, as the next two Chapters will reveal, NOTHING at all has ever been the same. —— 🧵 4 of 4 || #SaveOurFarms 🇺🇸🌾 Note: Graphic provided by the Congressional Research Service. 🚨 CONCLUSION AND WRAP-UP TO THE CHAPTER IN THE NEXT REPLY — 👇🏼

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🚨 THE CONCLUSION AND WRAP TO CHAPTER ONE OF THIS FARM CREDIT SAGA: “Dallas Packed His Suitcase” — The facts are ultimately this in today’s Chapter: Dallas Tonsager was a human political blockade appointed to prevent Donald Trump from having an opportunity to appoint a Chairman to the U.S. Farm Credit System; as by the time Tonsager’s turn was done, there would be no time for Trump to nominate and appoint; not with all those political friends made on Senate Ag. But just like with Trump’s election, things always seemed to get in the way of their ultimate plans — and with my apologies to those who cared about the man as friend or family, it is my opinion that we still have a chance to save our farms today because Mr. Tonsager was unable to serve his full term as Chairman; passing away in 2019. For my part, his legacy as Farm Credit Chairman can be summarized best as this: Dallas Tonsager was able to hijack a farmer protection System so well that, since his appointment as Farm Credit Chairman, we can find no record of any farmer borrower in this country who has been afforded relief when pleading to the United States Farm Credit Administration for help. But what I can give are examples of farmers pleading for help to save their farms, and their homes, and their property (from what was a wrongful taking); as rather than help, the Farm Credit Administration had been completely redesigned, with its own set of policies implemented, to stand back away from that helpless farmer while a local farm credit lender burned them to the ground. I was one of them — Thank you for all of the support in this and I will give details of tomorrow’s Chapter later tonight; but be ready, as you might just find out it was a South Dakotan himself who helped dig that Summit Carbon trench. ✌🏻 Dustin Kittle | Rancher + Ag Attorney #saveourfarms 🌾 Come alongside us and fight 🇺🇸 givesendgo.com/SaveOurFarms Kittle v. Biden Filed Federal Complaint: linktr.ee/dustinkittle

Saved - June 12, 2024 at 11:43 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
The U.S. Farm Credit System has been compromised by foreign agents, leading to the acquisition of American farmland by foreign interests, including the Communist Government of China. This has resulted in a threat to national security and harm to the national food supply chain. Evidence suggests that the Farm Credit System was manipulated to influence policy and elections. A case is being built against the Obama and Biden administrations for sabotaging the system. Help is needed to fund a Constitutional challenge and blow the whistle on this wrongdoing. The #SaveOurFarms campaign aims to expose the fraud and protect American farms.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🚨🇺🇸 — AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM TENNESSEE RANCHER + AG ATTORNEY DUSTIN KITTLE ON IMMEDIATE THREATS TO OUR NATIONAL SECURITY WHICH HAVE BEEN HIDDEN FROM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC: The U.S. Farm Credit System has been hijacked, sabotaged, and, based upon our review of the documented evidence, appears to be under the direction, control, or influence of foreign agents. While most know me as the rancher who brought suit against President Biden due to a blatant failure to perform his Constitutional duties in appointing a U.S. Farm Credit Oversight Board, I have not made known until now that this effort is part of a broader case that first began in 2014. It was then I investigated, discovered, and exposed a corruption within the United States Department of Agriculture that would later be linked to a “Red Dawn” event that was allowed to occur on American soil from 2017 until 2022. What was that “Red Dawn” event? Over a five year period immediately following the Presidency of Barack Obama and transitioning into the Presidency of Joe Biden, there was an all-out assault launched to capture American farmland and reroute it to foreign interests; to include the Communist Government of China. What we now know is the farmland was not selected randomly and instead was acquired to border specific, strategic military sites that have now compromised our national security; and in the same process, irreparable harm was inflicted to our national food supply chain; with family farms converted to a consolidated scheme in favor of foreign-owned corporate agriculture. Since the election of President Obama in 2008, we have lost more farms to foreign interests than at any point in American history; further, the evidence will show that the U.S. Farm Credit Board was manipulated by both Barack Obama and Joe Biden (or his controlling agent) — to allow the influx of foreign “investors” to continue. But perhaps of greater importance, the evidence we have now obtained shows the Farm Credit System became a pawn in the scheme to not only influence policy; but also our ELECTIONS. This story cannot and should not be told in a single Post — and over the next 24 days, we will reveal every piece of evidence in this fraud. But lest they think I am bluffing, just follow this — In 2007, a Presidential appointed and Senate confirmed Board Member of the United States Farm Credit System broke rank (following his appointment by President George W. Bush) to form Rural Americans for Obama. That Official would ultimately play a key role, as he both was chair of Obama’s rural campaign committee and would become a member of the transition team. Although that Farm Credit Board Member was reassigned by President Barack Obama to the USDA in 2009, it would be two weeks after the election of Donald Trump as President in 2016 that Barack Obama would name the Official in question CHAIRMAN of the Farm Credit System. The selection occurred between the November election of Trump and his swearing in as the President; in an unprecedented move. Tomorrow, you will be introduced to that individual in the first of 24 articles between now and July 4th to outline every player in this fraudulent, treasonous scheme. But I leave you with this; what upset the apple cart to get us to here? That Official died, unexpectedly, in 2019; but not before he put his Executive Assistant and Legal Advisor in place as the “independent” Inspector General of the U.S. Farm Credit System — — who was able to make an election-interfering Hatch Act violation, within the United States Farm Credit System, disappear as to the election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Oh, and don’t bother calling the Chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, Debbie Stabenow (Michigan - Democrat), for help — the SON of that Official was hired by her to become the Special Legal Counsel to her and to the Senate Agriculture Committee. Debbie, you let me know when I have your attention. I am ready to testify.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

I wish it was not the case but we need your help as we take this fight to five law firms, with that including regional, national and even international law firms — as well as an international PR Crisis Firm which has been hired with the farmer borrowers’ money to protect those who committed and are continuing to commit wrongdoing within the USDA, the U.S. Farm Credit System, and we believe at this time, the Democratic Party (going into this election). We launched a #SaveOurFarms 🇺🇸🌾 campaign in recent weeks through our non-profit entity to assist in funding a Constitutional challenge to the U.S. Farm Credit Act, in its allowance, on its face and/or as applied, to violate due process and the First Amendment right to free speech. What we could not reveal then was this was a parallel effort to a Federal RICO case we have been building as to a conspiracy between the Obama Administration and the Biden Administration with respect to the sabotage of the Farm Credit System. After refusing to accept a $1.2 million bribe in January of this year, I received a death threat almost immediately; and since that time we have been targeted with the disabling of our Meta social media accounts and the disabling of iMessage services to our phones (which is more readily shielded from a subpoena’s reach). Our farm was also reported for investigation to PETA, who has refused to close that investigation. While we will assume nothing, that report was made contemporaneously to multiple animals on our farm developing neurological issues; with some succumbing to death and now under investigation through necropsy. The #1 thing you can do for us is to find whatever whistle you have, no matter its size or tone, and blow that whistle as loud as you can, until someone either steps in or we arrest the entire Senate Ag Committee for treason; and to include both parties. This should have never been allowed to happen and it should never have been allowed to continue — but this train is off the tracks and they are not touching their brake until we stop them or it crashes. And while times right now are incredibly difficult I know, I ask you to consider standing alongside us and fighting through the #SaveOurFarms campaign, which may just be a needed vessel in saving more than just our farms in exposing, with evidence and detail, just one of the many frauds that has been perpetuated against us all. This really is not about politics or parties. It comes down to what is right and wrong. Anyone with a conscience and common sense understands that a government sponsored enterprise like the U.S. Farm Credit System should have never been allowed to take our farmland and divert it to foreign interests — so don’t think the border crisis is the only “Red Dawn” event that is currently going ongoing — as these times are so dark you cannot see the light in this until someone does what we have done in risking and losing most all we have ever worked for in trying to stop them. I owe such a debt of gratitude to those who have helped spur us on this, particularly in recent months here on X. The removal of my FB account after the lawsuit was filed against President Biden was a turning point — I’ll forever be thankful to @elonmusk for providing this platform, which allowed us to reach so many more; including those on the “inside” who said enough is enough. The next article posts at 1 pm central tomorrow — thank you all, Dustin Kittle | Rancher + Ag Attorney #saveourfarms 🌾 Come alongside us and fight 🇺🇸 givesendgo.com/SaveOurFarms Kittle v. Biden Filed Federal Complaint: linktr.ee/dustinkittle

Saved - May 16, 2024 at 1:33 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
New evidence reveals a high-level employee within the U.S. Farm Credit Administration engaged in sabotage against farmer borrowers. The employee's identity will be revealed soon to protect the farmers. Save any documents related to complaints made since 2019. Farm Credit fraud cases continue to surface, including the plight of poultry farmers in the Midwest. A former Alabama Farm Credit employee reveals non-disclosure agreements during a federal investigation. Congress was warned in 2017 about the rogue behavior of the U.S. Farm Credit System. #SaveOurFarms

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

“THE CALL IS COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE … “ ——— 🚨BREAKING: NEW EVIDENCE FOUND IN U.S. FARM CREDIT INVESTIGATION: In recent days, we have obtained credible information pointing to a high-level employee within the U.S. Farm Credit Administration who has, over a period of at least the past five years, engaged in acts of sabotage against the farmer borrowers who have loans within the national Farm Credit System. This is not based on speculation or conjecture. The facts and evidence reveal that there is an employee who has worked and is working for the other side; with the other side being those with an interest in American farmland and/or those with an interest in undue profits gained from the farm credit cooperative. As of this morning, we have narrowed the field of internal employees down to just three; based on a process of review and an analysis of thousands of pages of farm credit records obtained from multiple sources dating back to 1987. The employee is currently, or has been previously, assigned to the McLean, Virginia Farm Credit Headquarters. We anticipate knowing the identity of the employee within the next week. We are confident in that position given information discovered in the last hour. We will be making our findings public in order to protect the farmer borrowers with loans in the Farm Credit System. #SaveOurFarms Media Inquiries: 2569965822 (text) / dm Pending Federal Complaint found here: https://linktr.ee/dustinkittle

DUSTIN KITTLE - Listen on Spotify - Linktree View dustinkittle’s Linktree. Listen to their music on Spotify here. linktr.ee

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

I will release a statement on this by 7 pm central tonight — quite frankly we are reviewing what remains of close to 4,000 pages of documents — this came completely out of the blue and I’m not sure if I am glad it did or not, because I could spit fire right now

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

If you have made a complaint to the U.S. Farm Credit Administration at any point since 2019, save any documents you received from them or that you may have sent to them — this is particularly true if you had a loan which was placed in distress — we will share more on this soon

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

More Farm Credit fraud surfaces — and this is despicable given what these poultry farmers are going through — article linked below

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🧵 More Farm Credit Fraud: If you aren’t following the plight of the poultry farmers in the Midwest, whose poultry-growing contracts were abruptly cancelled by corporate giant Tyson Foods, learn more here: https://missouriindependent.com/2024/05/10/chicken-farmers-stuck-with-uncertainty-massive-loans-in-wake-of-tyson-foods-closures/ Then stay for the rest of the story …

Chicken farmers stuck with uncertainty, massive loans in wake of Tyson Foods closures • Missouri Independent Tyson Foods says plant closures ‘drove out waste from the business.’ Contract chicken farmers are now stuck with uncertainty, massive loans. missouriindependent.com

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

If you don’t think people are paying attention to what is going on, read this that has come in related to the federal investigation into Alabama Farm Credit that prompted much of this — that investigation lasted 657-days and was not released publicly.

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

BREAKING: A former Alabama Farm Credit employee has contacted us to advise that, during the period a federal investigation was ongoing into their operations, the entire underwriting department for the lender was forced to sign full non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements. https://t.co/65sKKtnCb1

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

Congress ignored 2017 report that Farm Credit had went rogue —

@dustinkittle - Dustin Kittle

🚨🧵— CONGRESS WAS WARNED THAT THE U.S. FARM CREDIT SYSTEM HAD WENT ROGUE: In a 2017 letter to the House Ag Committee, the Independent Community Bankers of America sounded the alarm that the U.S. Farm Credit System had went rogue and was actively manipulating legal directives — 1 — of — 5

View Full Interactive Feed