Steven Calk -meets Superseding Indictment (what took so long)

It’s almost like a PITA account had said - just wait until the superseder drops. About 8 months longer than my murder board estimated nonetheless HERE. WE. ARE. MY. MITCHs. Here we are

Mar 07, 2021

I make zero apologies this is an extraordinarily document heavy article, so pour yourself a nice mug of highly caffeinated coffee, ready, set..let’s do this.

2017 -yes in 2017- a long -meticulously curated and detailed thread…

In retrospect my 2017 Manafort Thread represented hours of research and so did the subsequent 2018 through 2021 threads upon threads. You see unlike some, I trust my readers and I want them to have access to original documents and facts. While many thought that it was easy to research the financial endless bucket that was Paul Manafort’s finances and properties. I can assure you researching that took considerable time, which required pulling data from no less than four different databases. Not that it matters but that was strictly the property taxes and mortgages. In order to validate my research I had to cross reference with the ECF because there were several cases that encumbered aforementioned properties.

I recall tweeting a thread and explained what the catalyst of taking on that research project. It was corruption plain and simple pure unadulterated raw corruption. The added benefit is this the kind of research I get paid to do. In my office I’m known for “if it’s complicated, give it to [redacted] and let her take a crack at it” but be warned do not ever open my office door, especially if it’s shut. I’ll cut you.

For the record Washington D.C is not a place for the faint of heart or pretenders. We can sniff out a pretender within seconds. I think my best official clocked time was below eight seconds. In short in D.C. you have to come correct or don’t come at all. In my industry there are a few ground rules of engagement and the “fake it until you make it” is an absolute non sequitur. Below are a few rules of engagement that will get you black-balled for perpetuity;

plagiarism is a one-way ticket to no-man’s land, which makes Siberia feel warm. Either do the writing and research yourself but don’t you dare steal other people’s work.
misrepresentation of original/root documents - in short forging or manipulation of documents and even intentionally withholding exculpatory evidence is a very big no no. And that will also send you to black-balled purgatory. Again where Siberia feels warm-ish
refusal to show “methodology” and the underlying evidence of your finding of facts. This is a bit more nuanced so let me explain in non-legalese if you can’t (or in some cases you simply refuse) to show how you got from A to Z then consider a career at McDonalds or larping on social media and monetize your fraud-fakeness.

Once I managed to untangle that incredibly complex web of Manafort Financials - I believe in the early spring of 2017 I tweeted: Steven Calk is super forked and he will be indicted, it’s just a matter of time. I didn’t tweet that for clicks, likes or retweets. I tweeted it because I had done the research and it was the factual/logical conclusion supported by actual documents. I had spent a decent amount of time trap-tracing (yes that’s a thing) the Manafort mortgages and the Federal Savings Bank portfolio. Coupled with countless hours of reading reams of court filings concerning Chicago Bancorp and CitiMortgage, I had a sufficient amount of facts to tweet;

“Yo Calk you better get your affairs in Order because you’re going to be indicted and you’ll be found guilty - you duplicitous fake mortgage scamming charlatan”

I then tweeted copies of a deposition transcript, various video statement and a few congressional communiques. That earned me an insta-block and I was subsequently suspended from Twitter. That particular insta-block signaled I had hit the nail squarely on the head. Or a byproduct of spreading my Twitter glitter.

Congressional Background with documents:

For years. Not months but for years House Republicans repeatedly rebuffed Democrats request to investigate what was prima facie “something for something” colloquially known as “quid pro quo” - yet House Republicans repeatedly demurred. Below is a brief document tick tock surrounding Steve Calk, Paul Manafort and (then) president-elect Trump. As with my standard practice I will provide you with original documents, because after all sharing is caring;

February 20181 -Congress House Oversight Letter

“…requesting information about “extremely troubling” press reports suggesting that a banker named Stephen Calk may have made loans of up to $16 million to President Donald Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, in exchange for alleged promises to name him Secretary of the Army.”

March 2018 - When House Republicans controlled the Committees -they ran a lot of interference and appeared to be unwilling to investigate the potential quid-pro-quo - “something for something” - To wit the minority/ranking member requested (then) Chairman Gowdy the following letter requesting he authorize a subpoena

“…issue a subpoena to compel the Department of Defense (DOD) to produce documents it has been withholding from Congress relating to extremely troubling reports that a banker named Stephen Calk may have made loans of up to $16 million to President Donald Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort..”

April 2, 2018 - Department of Defense (DOD) responsive letter2 to (then) ranking member Rep Elijah Cummings - the DOD included a slide from the November 16, 2016 B.E.N.S. Luncheon in Chicago, see past events which I archived here

April 12, 2018 - House Oversight and Homeland Security Committee(s) letter to Steve Calk requesting documents surrounding the >$16M in various loans to Manafort.

“DOD’s response was also limited in that it apparently focused only on your communications with the Department of the Army rather than all DOD elements…‘the Army was not involved in any personnel decisions regarding Mr. Calk, and did not engage in any communications regarding Mr. Calk with Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, or other individuals affiliated with President Trump's campaign.’”

April 26, 2018 -Federal Savings Bank sent the following responsive letter to Congress. The reason this responsive document is particularly important- Federal Savings Bank, see what’s red lined.3

And let’s not forget the various exhibits included in the Paul Manafort trial -because the two exhibits4 that will pop up in Steve Calk’s 5case actually matter - a lot. This short video summarizes this article and the state of play concerning Steve Calk - I am genuinely surprised no one caught the February 2021 SEC-Form-D filing but then again I’m mindful that I can get lost in the weeds.

MARCH 4, 2021 henceforth known as

SUPERSEDING THURSDAY

Again I don’t need to regurgitate or opine over my lost research. On Twitter I think I earned the reputation of “you wanna know what’s going on with Manafort, Yohani and Calk” check my timeline or whatever iteration of my Twitter account. Candidly I’ve lost count, Twitter suspended me, a lot. Although there are some fragments of threads (here, here, here) It wasn’t until I went hunting did I think I’d some how ameliorate the injustice of seeing my previous research going tango down- until I realized apparently there was a hashtag (not judging but hashtags were never really my thing)

SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT FILED6 (ECF)7 as to Stephen M. Calk (1) count(s) 1s, 2s - for those who don’t understand “what” the “new” charge or charges are8. Simple - Count Two - charges Calk with “conspiring to commit” financial institution bribery. This count implicates the same individuals for substantially the same conduct. Also this seems like a good time to remind you, during the Manafort trial the Government granted immunity to two Federal Savings Bank employees. The basis of the conspiracy is based on the same series of events.

Count One of Calk’s Superseder -18 U.S.C. §231(2)(a)9 Receipt of commissions or gifts for procuring loans aka institutional bribery - what I’d like to draw your attention to is the punishment: “…shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or three times the value of the thing given, offered, promised, solicited, demanded, accepted, or agreed to be accepted, whichever is greater, or imprisoned not more than 30 years…”

The “bank” is Federal Savings Bank. The “holding Company” is National Bancorp Holdings - placeholder because I have a lot of files, mainly SEC files and the other 37% owner - well that is kind of easy it Steven’s brother.

SEC and (new) National Bancorp Holdings, Inc filings

The interesting February 2021 National Bancorp Holdings, Inc filing is, kind of interesting - I’m not one to withhold publicly available documents, you can run the same search I did by utilizing the SEC’s database;

https://www.sec.gov/search/search.htm or you can simply read the February 2021 SEC Form D, found here, because I don’t withhold documents and I know my way around a few databases. And my SOP is sharing is caring but to reiterate I am kind of shocked that no one actually caught this February 2021 SEC-FORM-D filing. Then again I tend to catch details that others casually overlook.

I think you are now sufficiently caught up. Also fun fact -Trump really should have pardoned Calk because he pardoned Manafort. In turn Manafort accepted Trump’s deleterious pardon (I could argue that pardon was the final act of Trump’s Obstruction of Justice) this also means Manafort no longer has the privilege of his 5th Amendment Right(s) -nor was he charged in the Calk-FSB Conspiracy. Also as for the Government’s witnesses I know at least three - two were granted “transactional/testimonial immunity” during the Manafort trial - the third witness imma gonna go out on a limb and say:

“Dear Paulie-Walnuts, lying to a Grand Jury probably one of the stupidest things you’ve done besides accepting the pardon…you big dolt”

Signing off -Filey

File411’s Newsletter

“Dear Paulie-Walnuts, lying to a Grand Jury probably one of the stupidest things you’ve done besides accepting the pardon…you big dolt”

Discussion about this post