Missouri Governor Eric Greitens

Missouri Governor Eric Greitens is under attack from a host of unsavory characters, from a prosecutor whose campaign was largely funded by George Soros to a member of the media who hand-delivered at least $50,000 to benefit one of the chief witnesses in claims against Greitens. The all-out assault on Greitens has placed him on the brink of potential impeachment. Greitens refuses to back down, however, and a group of citizens supportive of the Governor have recently created a petition opposing efforts to impeach Greitens.

On November 8, 2016 the people of Missouri elected Greitens to be their governor. Greitens won a bruising primary against three opponents and decisively defeated Democrat Chris Koster to become governor.

Since taking office Greitens has worked to deliver on his promise to end politics as usual. That promise included eliminating the state’s bipartisan wasteful low income housing tax credit system that for years made developers, lawyers, bankers and other special interests very wealthy.

Those that had benefited from the status quo have attacked Greitens in every way possible. Ultimately, they are attempting to remove Greitens from office in hopes that Lt. Governor Mike Parson, who would replace Greitens, will reinstate the tax credit program. Indeed, Parson has indicated that he would do just that.

TRENDING: BREAKING: 'At Least 10 Shots' Reportedly Fired at Police By Louisville Black Lives Matter Rioters — UPDATE... At Least Two Officers Shot (VIDEOS)

Their main attack on Greitens centers on an affair he has admitted to that occurred years ago, before ever running for office. Special interests have sought to exploit his affair and turn it into something much worse. It began with an allegation that he took a nonconsensual nude photo of his former lover and threatened to blackmail her with it. St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner, whose recent election was fueled largely by campaign contributions from a group associated with George Soros, dutifully indicted him for felony invasion of privacy. One can be forgiven for believing that there was credible evidence of criminal conduct, because what prosecutor would indict a case otherwise. Unfortunately you would be mistaken in that belief. After investigating for a month, obtaining an indictment, and continuing her desperate search for evidence for an additional three months right into jury selection, there was still no evidence of a crime.

The alleged photo was never found.

There was a forensic search of the alleged phone used to take the alleged photo that failed to discover the alleged photo or evidence that any photo was taken on the date in question. There was also no evidence found that any photo taken on the date in question was deleted.

There was a search of iCloud and Google accounts where the alleged photo was alleged to have been uploaded. Those searches too failed to find the alleged photo or evidence that any photo was taken on the date in question. There was also no evidence found that any photo taken on the date in question was deleted.

The prosecution had no witness who could testify to seeing the alleged photo or what the alleged photo depicted.

The prosecution produced no evidence that any alleged photo was subsequently transmitted.

Indeed, it appears the former lover’s statement that the whole thing may have been based on a “dream” is correct. Adding to the many reasons to be skeptical about this prosecution’s legitimacy is the revelation that the woman’s ex-husband’s lawyer received over $100,000 in cash payments from an anonymous wealthy Republican. Worse yet, the ex-husband has stated that this money may ultimately be placed in trust for his children, some of whom, of course, are also the children of the so-called “victim.” To cap it off, one of the cash payments was actually hand-delivered by a (now former) member of the state capital press corps.

As their case fell apart, prosecutors moved on to allegations of physical violence and sexual coercion by Greitens. Of course, the only evidence of violence or sexual coercion is the testimony of the former lover who “dreamed” up the alleged photo. In fact, the affair continued for months after the alleged sexual coercion and the former lover did not allege coercion, until after the House committee investigating the matter literally put the word “coercion” into her mouth, and even then it was only “maybe.” Indeed, just before putting the word into her mouth she testified that there was “consent.” Likewise, there is no evidence of any physical violence. Notably the woman’s ex-husband, who now claims to have known about the violence and coercion, never mentioned it in his online rantings where he repeatedly labeled Greitens a “homewrecker.”

Not only was Gardner unable to produce any evidence against Greitens, but she also committed some of the most egregious prosecutorial misconduct ever witnessed. Gardner met with Greitens’ former lover alone in a motel room and failed to take proper notes. Ordinarily prosecutors do not meet alone with victims or witnesses because the prosecutor risks becoming a witness. Gardner circumvented the St. Louis Police Department in favor of a private investigator, William Tisaby, who had a history of making false statements under oath. Mr. Tisaby then proceeded to perjure himself dozens of times in his deposition. Gardner also concealed additional meetings with the alleged victim from Greitens’ attorneys.

When it became apparent that baseless allegations of nonconsensual photos, blackmail, physical violence, and sexual coercion would not drive Greitens from office, Ms. Gardner then alleged probable cause that Greitens committed felony computer tampering. The basis of the computer tampering charge is essentially that Greitens stole from the charity he founded, The Mission Continues. Of course, TMC was never deprived of any property or benefit; it lost nothing. In actuality, Greitens simply called friends and colleagues who had previously donated to TMC to solicit campaign contributions. Incidentally, TMC publishes its list of donor names on its website.

The Missouri Attorney General decided to refer to Cole County Prosecutor, Mark Richardson what he claimed was probable cause Greitens filed a false document with the Missouri Ethics Commission. That claim arose from the settlement of a complaint relating to TMC donor’s list that he had failed to properly report an in-kind contribution of a donor list. The MEC and Greitens stipulated that the list was received on an “uncertain” date in early 2015 and for purposes of the amended report the date was listed as March 1, 2015. Hawley claimed the donor list was received in January 2015. Richardson, unsurprisingly, found no probable cause.

We must defend the right of the people to choose their own leaders. Make no mistake about it, the effort to impeach Governor Greitens is a direct attack on the right to vote and government of the people.

Do your part NOW to defend Greitens from attacks by special interests and the representatives they are bought by: