1A Intelligence Desk

← Back to search results

Transcript Details

FRAUDITOR LOSES 2 LAWSUITS AND FACES FINANCIAL PENALTIES

Welcome back, everybody. In today's video, we have really good news regarding the lawsuit that Lana is involved in because she lost the lawsuit, and now on top of that, she might be facing some sanctions. She might have to pay the attorney fees of the defendant. But before we get into that, I just want to give you guys a quick update regarding the lawsuit with DMA and I. We have something really interesting that I want to talk to you guys about, but I don't know if I'm allowed to show it online yet. So, I want to talk to my lawyer this week. We're going to go over it, and if I'm able to show it to you guys, then trust me, I will make an update because I would really want you guys to see this. But, we'll see that in due time. Also, we have a video that was posted by Mark Manchin's ex-girlfriend, where she secretly recorded him, and he was uttering death threats, or at least that's what it appears to be. He said that he would slice her throat, that he would choke her out, some really, really crazy [ __ ] But first, let's talk about Lana. All right. So, this is Lana Patrick, aka Mark White, versus Mike Fassano. And the defendant Mike Fassano, as Pasco County Tax Collector's motion for sanctions and award of attorney fees. So, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, defendant Mike Fassano, as Pasco County Tax Collector, through counsel, hereby files this motion for sanctions and supporting memorandum of law arising out of plaintiff's unwarranted filing of the complaint for violation of civil rights. Non-prisoner complaint. Relief requested. Fassano requests the court to enter sanctions against plaintiff pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, including without limitations directing plaintiff to pay the reasonable attorney fees and other expenses directly resulting from plaintiff's unwarranted and frivolous filing of the complaint. And here's the thing that frauditors don't understand. There are consequences to filing these ridiculous lawsuits. For example, if you give permission to a content creator footage, and then afterwards you sue them, then you might face some legal consequences. Or in Lana's case, if you take a course from Rogue Nation Esquire, and he teaches you how to file a pro se lawsuit, and you fail miserably, there will be consequences. But let's keep reading. Memorandum of law. On June 6th, 2025, plaintiff Lana Patrick filed the complaint therein and attempted to allege the following claims. That Fassano has put into place a policy that violates plaintiff's rights of access to gather information under the First Amendment. That Fassano has denied citizen journalists the ability to enter the publicly accessible areas of its offices if we are audio-video recording. That many of us have been unlawfully trespassed, detained, and identified under the policy. That Fassano is under the mistaken assumption that gathering content is an expressive act and regulated by the forum doctrine. That Fassano misapplies the Sunshine Law obligations to items not included, including conversations and or observations. That Fassano mistakenly assumes he can declare an expectation of privacy in an area with 20 to 50 strangers elbow to elbow. And that defendant's concerns are nonsensical and unfounded, as well as being covered by other laws. Plaintiff requests as reliefs $100,000 in damages, and that Fassano's policy be removed as unconstitutional as prior restraint. Statement of facts. On June 6th, 2025, plaintiff commenced this action by filing the complaint against Fassano. The complaint was ultimately served on Fassano. Plaintiff, previous to filing this action, filed an action against Lisa McGuire, an employee of the Pasco County Tax Collector, and Sergeant Sherman and Captain Rowe, two Dade City police officers, which alleged all of the claims contained in the complaint except for the Sunshine Act claim and the privacy claim. See Patrick versus McGuire. In the first Patrick case, US District Judge Mary Scriven, on the merits, ruled against plaintiff on the same First Amendment claims made in this case, including without limitation the expressive act and forum doctrine claims. Hence, plaintiff is improperly seeking a second bite at the apple on these claims, claims which were addressed on the merits in the first Patrick case, and claims on which plaintiff was clearly and correctly ruled against by the court. Plaintiff brought this case knowing she had previously brought a case raising these identical claims, and that these claims were meritless and without factual or legal basis. Plaintiff has known these claims were meritless and without factual or legal basis at least since Judge Scriven issued her order in the first Patrick case on November 15th, 2024. The Sunshine Law claim against Fassano is not remotely warranted by existing law or any reasonable argument for extending, modifying, or reversing the law. Plaintiff has no factual or legal basis for filing a Sunshine Law claim against Fassano. Any privacy claims against Fassano are not remotely warranted by existing law or any reasonable argument for extending, modifying, or reversing the law. Plaintiff has no factual or legal basis for filing any privacy claims against Fassano. Aside from having no basis factually or legally, the First Amendment claims, including the expressive act and forum doctrine claims, must be dismissed pursuant to the doctrine of res judicata claim preclusion. To summarize, on the merits, none of the claims pled in the complaint state a cause of action and have no reasonable chance of success. You know what? There's something that's dawning on me. I'm starting to think that Rogue Nation is not an actual lawyer. You see, he did a course where he explained to frauditors how to file pro se lawsuits, and he himself has had very little success. He was awarded a single dollar last week when I made that video. You guys watched it. You guys had a good time with that one. And now, one of his protege, Lana Patrick, aka Mark White, has filed multiple lawsuits and failed. And now she's about to face real consequences. It's almost like taking legal advice from a non-lawyer could have really, really bad repercussions. At least that's the pattern that I'm seeing right here. All right. So, I'm not going to read the whole thing, but there are certain parts that are really interesting. Here's the legal standard motion for sanctions. Under Rule 11, an unrepresented party or parties who file a pleading, motion, or other filing in federal court certifies that to the best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, that it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation. The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a non-frivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law. The factual contention have evidentiary support, or if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery. And the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence, or if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or lack of information. All right. Next, for the reasons stated and grounds advanced in Fassano's motion to dismiss plaintiff complaint for violation of civil rights with prejudice, none of plaintiff's First Amendment claims, including the expressive acts and forum doctrine claims, state a cause of action. Additionally, these claims have no reasonable factual basis, are not based on legal theories that have a reasonable chance of success, and that cannot be advanced as a reasonable argument to change existing law, and have been filed in bad faith and for improper purpose. Plaintiff filed a patently groundless complaint containing claims that have no factual or legal basis if they are not in fact objectively frivolous, and plaintiff knew this or should have known this at the time of filing the complaint. Based on the ruling in the first Patrick case, as well as Fassano's motion to dismiss the complaint, plaintiffs were aware of the nature of the claims pled in the complaint, which lacked a factual and legal basis, were frivolous and abusive. Nevertheless, despite the foregoing, plaintiffs needlessly proceeded to litigate these claims enumerated in the complaint. Sanctions may be awarded pursuant to Rule 11 when one, a party files a pleading or motion that has no reasonable factual basis, or two, when the party files a pleading or motion that is based on a legal theory that has no reasonable chance of success, and that cannot be advanced as a reasonable argument to change existing law, or when the party files a pleading or motion in bad faith. For the foregoing reasons, Fassano requests the court to grant this motion against plaintiff Lana Patrick. Fassano requests attorney fees and costs incurred in responding to the complaint and bring this motion. Respectfully submitted, and that is Frederick Reeves, which is the attorney of Fassano. So, first of all, let me just say that this attorney did a really good job at explaining why Lana Patrick has to pay their attorney fees, and this hasn't been decided at this moment. see what happens. I'm sure that Lana Patrick will respond to this, but these frauditors need to be held accountable for clogging up the court system. That's exactly what's happening in my case. DMA gave me permission to use his content. We were super chill for a while, and then we had a falling out, and then out of nowhere he files these copyright strikes without ever revoking his consent. Now, in my opinion, that is bad faith litigation, and we will try our best to hold him accountable. Now, if you want to help us with that, I'll leave a link to the GoFundMe. You guys have been absolutely incredible. We have already 6% of the goal even though we just started the campaign, and we have years to go in this lawsuit. So, it's going really well. And let me just say, if you're not able to or you don't want to, that's perfectly fine. Our content is always going to be free, unlike Frauditor's videos who put most of their contents behind paywalls. My videos are always free to watch. There's no obligation to watch the content, so I just want to make that 100% clear. Now, another topic that I wanted to talk about is the Mark Manchin situation, because his ex-girlfriend posted a video recently where it's pretty much a secret recording. Obviously, she knew she was being recorded. I'm not sure if he did, but it is a recording, and during that recording he threatened her. So, we'll be reacting to that, and much like DMA's videos, I do have her permission to post this because she has previously asked me to post this on the channel. So, this is a very similar situation that would happen with DMA. By the way, I recommend turning on closed captioning for this one because there's a lot of background noise, and this is very, very important that you understand every word that's coming out of his mouth. That's like both of your [ __ ] drugs. I would do a life sentence to you. I won't. Let's do it. It's 19 years for scissors right here. I know they are. I know they are. Mhm. That'll be doing you a favor, though. I ain't doing you no favors. I won't. That's the funny part of smart little girl. Thinks funny, huh? You're saying you're saying you want to kill me? Yeah. That's how fast I can [ __ ] right. Yeah. Yeah, much like right now. Right now? Mhm. Sure. Sure. I'll throw you right to your [ __ ] face. Yeah. That's how fast I can fast to my mind. Yeah. The only reason I'm stopping is because of her. You're lucky I'm on parole. I'd be doing you a favor, though. I'm not doing you no favors, anyway. You've got no favors coming for you. People like you get killed for this [ __ ] you know? That's cool. Yeah. Good for them. Yeah. I'd rather sit in a [ __ ] cell right now, no regrets. I would neither. I'd put myself in that position. I could easily [ __ ] do it. You will soon enough. Oh, yeah? Mhm. Yeah? Really? Why is that? Cuz this thing over, ain't it? Huh? You have more to [ __ ] do. Right? I don't. You have plenty to do. I don't have anything to do with you. You done with me? Was that it? Hold on. So so then You're still running your mouth? Yeah. So, I got Mhm. And then it's more than festival, not at all. More. Yeah. Ain't phasing me. No? No. I know it won't. Just a little bit, though. Little bit, though. Just a little. You don't phase me, Mark. No, I know I don't. You're a [ __ ] I'm a [ __ ] huh? Really? Really? You're really pushing me now, huh? Huh? I'm a [ __ ] huh? You want me to prove myself? Is that what you're doing right now? Testing me? Huh? Do whatever you feel you need to do. >> word means to me? Do whatever you feel you need to do. I will [ __ ] strangle you dead right here, dude. Go ahead, test me. All right. So, his exact words are, "I will strangle you dead right here, dude. Test me." So, if that's not a death threat, I don't know what is. Like, honestly, this is the people they're looking up to. This is their hero that goes and is doing all this activism around the New England area. Come on, man. This is just a piece of [ __ ] He's just a total scumbag who treats his girlfriend even worse than he treats the secretaries he harasses. And I found it really funny when I was watching her video, and I saw comments from his viewers, and there's this one guy that said, "I don't believe any of this. Press NH Now sounds like a really nice guy." What are you talking about? Are we watching the same videos? He treats everybody he encounters like trash. What makes you think that he would treat his loved ones any different? Anyway, these people are really stupid if they're looking up to this guy. Test me. Call me a [ __ ] again. Go ahead. Yeah? Go ahead. Test me. It's not happening. You want me to get you? Are you snapping? >> You want me to get You want me to get You want me to get me there? Go ahead. I [ __ ] dare you. Go ahead. I'll do a life sentence right now, [ __ ] Go ahead. Go ahead. I'll kiss my daughter goodbye and call the police myself. Go ahead. You know where she ends up? Go ahead. You know where she's going to end up? [ __ ] it at that point. I know where you end up. And that's all that matters. Go ahead. So, he is willing to kill his girlfriend at the time. He is willing to leave his daughter without a mother, without a father, because she called him a [ __ ] Mark, should we call the feelings enforcer? Because right now it sure looks like your feelings have been terribly hurt, and even the largest tub of butt hurt cream will not fix it. I mean, holy [ __ ] this guy has the thinnest skin I have ever seen. You want to push me? This ain't the [ __ ] time. [ __ ] like you belong in the [ __ ] dirt. You sit there and call me a [ __ ] [ __ ] dude. Yeah. Real [ __ ] funny, dude. You think I give a [ __ ] if I get arrested for domestic right now? You think I give a [ __ ] if I get arrested for domestic right now? If not worse. You think I give a [ __ ] All right. So, I'm not going to show you the last section because he's there in his boxers, and he does a gesture that I do not really want to show on my YouTube channel. But what I will do is put the link to her video in the description, and to make it even more convenient, I'll put it as an end card. So, the link you see on the screen right now, it will take you straight to her video. I just really don't want to show that on my channel for policy reasons. It might be a little bit too heavy for YouTube, but I do need you to see this. This is very important for you to understand who Mark Manchin is. So, click on that link right now, and I'll see you guys on the next one.