Category Archives: Civil Complaint

Nunes v WP Company dba Washington Post, Defamation and common law conspiracy, Bezos’ WaPo heavily promoted the Russian “collusion” hoax 

Nunes v WP Company dba Washington Post, Defamation and common law conspiracy, Bezos’ WaPo heavily promoted the Russian “collusion” hoax

“Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they call ‘The Resistance’ and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the executive branch.” …Attorney General Barr

“The function of the press is very high. It is almost Holy.
It ought to serve as a forum for the people, through which
the people may know freely what is going on. To misstate or
suppress the news is a breach of trust.”…. Louis D. Brandeis

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

From DEVIN G. NUNES )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) Case No.
)
) TRIAL BY JURY
WP COMPANY, LLC ) IS DEMANDED
d/b/a The Washington Post

“Plaintiff seeks (a) compensatory damages and punitive damages in the amount of $250,350,000.00, plus, (b) prejudgment interest on the principal sum awarded by the Jury from February 20, 2020 to the date of Judgment at the rate of six percent (6%) per year pursuant to § 8.01-382 of the Virginia Code (1950), as amended (the “Code”), and (c) court costs pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. § 1920 – arising out of the Defendants’ defamation and common law conspiracy.”

“1. Billionaire, Jeff Bezos (“Bezos”), purchased WaPo in 2013 for the
purpose of using WaPo’s mighty pen to influence Federal elections. Bezos failed to defeat the GOP in 2016, in spite of WaPo’s notoriously libelous reporting. Bezos’ WaPo heavily promoted the Russian “collusion” hoax between 2017 and 2019, in spite of the fact that there was no evidence that any member of the Trump campaign colluded with any “Russian” to influence the 2016 Presidential Election. This is 2020. As this case illustrates, Bezos and his printing press remain desperate to defame the President of the United States and his allies in Congress. This defamation must end.”

“WAPO
(Intentional
Misrepresentations)

Devin Nunes told
President Trump that
Shelby Pierson had given
the assessment (that
“Russia wants to see
President Trump
reelected, viewing his
administration as more
favorable to the Kremlin’s
interests”) “exclusively to
Rep. Adam B. Schiff (DCalif.), the chairman of
the House Intelligence
Committee” and “the lead
impeachment manager, or
prosecutor, during
Trump’s Senate trial on
charges of abuse of power
and obstruction of
Congress”

THE TRUTH

Devin Nunes never told the President or anyone else that
Shelby Pierson had given an exclusive briefing to Schiff
Devin Nunes did not meet or speak with the President on
February 13, 2020 – the day of the “classified hearing” –
or on February 14, 2020, and never conveyed to him any
indication that Schiff was given an exclusive assessment
of Russian actions
In fact, WaPo and Harris knew that Devin Nunes was in
Tulsa, Oklahoma, on February 14, 2020 for a breakfast
hosted by the Republican Party of Tulsa County”

“6. The WaPo Hit Piece imputes to Plaintiff criminal conduct in violation of
Title 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a), dishonesty, deceit, sharp and unethical practices, and
independently actionable tortious acts, all of which severely impugns Plaintiff’s integrity and prejudices him in the performance of his duties as a United States Congressman.”

Read more:

https://www.scribd.com/document/449816497/Nunes-WaPo-Lawsuit#from_embed

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

 

Michael Bloomberg to pregnant employee “kill it”, Garrison v Bloomberg 1998, Lawsuit settled financially, Employee witness David Zielenziger,: “Mike came out and…. said, ‘Are you going to kill it?’ “

Michael Bloomberg to pregnant employee “kill it”, Garrison v Bloomberg 1998, Lawsuit settled financially, Employee witness David Zielenziger,: “Mike came out and…. said, ‘Are you going to kill it?’ ”

“and other female employees were subjected, on virtually a daily basis, by Bloomberg and his male executives, to repeated and unwelcome sexual comments, repeated and unwelcome sexual overtures, and repeated and unwelcome overt sexual gestures, including, upon information and belief, unauthorized touching and inappropriate acts.”…Garrison v Bloomberg

It is understandable why Michael Bloomberg could consider Hillary Clinton as a running mate. Birds of a feather flock together.”…Citizen Wells

 

From The Blaze February 15, 2020.

“Report: Woman who worked for Bloomberg claims he told her to ‘kill it’ after learning she was pregnant

She also accused Bloomberg’s company of having a racist work culture”

“The most explosive revelation, however, stems from a high-profile 1990s case where a former saleswoman sued Bloomberg and his company alleging she was discriminated against on the basis of her sex. According to the woman, Bloomberg told her to “kill it,” referring to her unborn baby, when he learned that she was pregnant.

The Post also interviewed a former Bloomberg employee, David Zielenziger, who said he witnessed the exchange between the business mogul and the woman and describes the candidate’s behavior toward the woman as “outrageous.”

“I remember she had been telling some of her girlfriends that she was pregnant,” Zielenziger said. “And Mike came out and I remember he said, ‘Are you going to kill it?’ And that stopped everything. And I couldn’t believe it.”

According to court documents, the plaintiff, whose name is Sekiko Sakai Garrison, claimed that Bloomberg was upset that several of his female employees were pregnant:

On April 11, 1995 at approximately 11:20 a.m., Bloomberg was having a photograph taken with two female Company salespeople and a group of N.Y.U. Business School students, in the company snack area. When Bloomberg noticed Garrison standing nearby, he asked, “Why didn’t they ask you to be in the picture? I guess they saw your face.” Continuing his penchant for ridiculing recently married women in his employ, Bloomberg asked plaintiff, “How’s married life? You married?” Plaintiff responded that her marriage was great and was going to get better in a few months: that she was pregnant, and the baby was due the following September. He responded to her “Kill it!” Plaintiff asked Bloomberg to repeat himself, and again he said, “Kill it!” and muttered, “Great! Number 16!” suggesting to plaintiff his unhappiness that sixteen women in the Company had maternity-related status. Then he walked away.

Garrison also alleged that Bloomberg berated other expecting mothers.

“What the hell did you do a thing like that for?” he is accused of saying to a pregnant employee.”

Read more:

https://www.theblaze.com/news/mike_bloomberg_kill_it_employee?utm_source=theblaze-dailyAM&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily-Newsletter__AM%202020-02-16&utm_term=TheBlaze%20Daily%20AM%20-%20last%20270%20days

Sekiko Sakai Garrison v Michael Bloomberg.

https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/147d68ac-ec77-493d-9de9-92b47e214f05/note/fd46d6a6-8734-4671-8dbc-edd5f5b93a35.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

 

 

 

Flynn supplemental sentencing memorandum January 22, 2020, “Mr. Flynn told the government the truth about every question it asked him”

Flynn supplemental sentencing memorandum January 22, 2020, “Mr. Flynn told the government the truth about every question it asked him”

“John Adams was right: “facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” The government tried to manufacture facts in the Rafiekian case and they thought they could strongarm Mr. Flynn into helping them through perjury. But they underestimated the will and courage
of Michael T. Flynn, a man that bravely and selflessly spent his life protecting his fellowAmericans. In considering the whole story of this man and his sacrifices, the Court should impose no more than a sentence of probation.”...Attorney Sidney Powell motion January 22, 2020

“And I’ve now found a witness who says the original 302 did in fact say that Flynn was honest with the agents.”...Attorney Sidney Powell

“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October 23, 2019

 

From the General Michael Flynn supplemental sentencing memorandum January 22, 2020.

“This Court should swiftly reject the government’s brazen attempt to punish Mr. Flynn for refusing to compose rather than sing. 1 The reversal of its sentencing position is not only unjust, itis unlawful. If left unchecked, it will send a dangerous message to cooperators – give testimony consistent with the government’s theory of the case, regardless of veracity, or pay the price with
your freedom.

The government also continues its campaign to hold Mr. Flynn responsible for false statements in a FARA filing. It ignores the facts in its possession as well as the decision of another court. Any misstatements in the March 2017 FARA filing at issue were not the fault of Mr. Flynn. He gave his lawyers complete and accurate documents and information. Moreover, he did his part
to make sure any FARA filing was accurate. The FARA statements listed in the Statement of Offense (ECF No. 4) are either not false or not attributable to Mr. Flynn.2

Mr. Flynn dedicated his life to serving his country. While the defendants in other cases cited by the government were working to benefit themselves, Mr. Flynn wrote a blank check on his life and put himself in harm’s way for more than five years in foreign deployments and thirtythree years of service to protect all Americans. He has touched the lives of countless people in the
process, many of whom wrote letters to the Court on his behalf. For the reasons set forth in this supplemental memorandum and Mr. Flynn’s initial sentencing brief (ECF No. 50), Mr. Flynn should receive a sentence, if any, 3 of probation and community service.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.156.0_1.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Sharyl Attkisson US Dept. of Justice lawsuit experience echoes Attorneys Sidney Powell and Ty Clevenger discovery attempts, Corrupt USDOJ and judges, Judge Wynn dissenting opinion

Sharyl Attkisson US Dept. of Justice lawsuit experience echoes Attorneys Sidney Powell and Ty Clevenger discovery attempts, Corrupt USDOJ and judges, Judge Wynn dissenting opinion

“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October 23, 2019

“Why John Brennan, Peter Strzok and DOJ Needed Julian Assange Arrested”…The Conservative Treehouse November 3, 2019

“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019

 

From the Sharyl Attkisson appeal decision of March 21, 2019.

Judge Wynn dissenting opinion.

“In this case, the government—not unlike Dean Smith’s Tar Heels—put up the “fours” when Plaintiff-Appellant Sharyl Attkisson,3 a journalist formerly employed by CBS News, filed suit against unnamed employees and agents of the federal government (the “Doe Defendants”). Attkisson alleged that the Doe Defendants conspired to violate her constitutional and statutory rights by accessing and commandeering her home and work internet-connected devices for surveillance purposes. But Attkisson never got a meaningful opportunity to pursue her claims because the government did everything in its power to run out the clock on Attkisson’s action—it filed motions challenging venue and jurisdiction, motions challenging the sufficiency of service, motions for extension of time, motions to dismiss, and motions for protective orders.

And just as the Tar Heels had great success running the Four Corners, the government’s strategy worked. Although Attkisson diligently sought to identify the Doe Defendants for nearly four years—including by repeatedly serving discovery on the government and third-parties directed at identifying the Doe Defendants—the district court dismissed her case with prejudice against the Doe Defendants for failing to comply with a court order to identify the names of the Doe Defendants by a date certain. The district court did so even though the government’s delaying tactics deprived Attkisson of any meaningful opportunity to engage in the discovery necessary to identify the Doe Defendants.

The majority opinion affirms the district court’s dismissal of Attkisson’s claims against the Doe Defendants on grounds that the dismissal constituted a permissible exercise of the court’s discretion to oversee discovery and sanction a party for failing to comply with a court order. But this Court long has held that plaintiffs—like Attkisson—who state a plausible claim that unnamed defendants violated their constitutional or statutory rights are entitled to a meaningful opportunity to engage in discovery aimed at identifying the “true identity of an unnamed party.” Schiff v. Kennedy, 691 F.2d 196, 197–98 (4th Cir. 1982). And this Court has held that dismissal of an action for failure to comply with a court order is a “drastic” sanction, Hillig v. C.I.R., 916 F.2d 171, 174 (4th Cir. 1990), that courts should impose only in “extreme circumstances,” Reizakis v. Loy, 490 F.2d 1132, 1135 (4th Cir. 1974).

Because the government deprived Attkisson of a meaningful opportunity to identify the Doe Defendants and the district court never determined that the requisite “extreme circumstances” were present to warrant dismissal for failure to comply with a court order, I disagree with the majority opinion’s determination that the district court permissibly exercised its discretion in dismissing Attkisson’s claims against the Doe Defendants. Not only should we disapprove of the tactics the government used to run out the clock on Attkisson’s claims, but we should also reject the troubling “game plan” it provided for the government and private parties to prevent disclosure of—and, therefore, responsibility for—their potentially unconstitutional or illegal electronic surveillance activities. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent as to the dismissal of Attkisson’s claims against the Doe Defendants.”

Read more:

https://cases.justia.com/federal/appellate-courts/ca4/18-1677/18-1677-2019-03-21.pdf?ts=1553194819

Just as in the General Michael Flynn case, represented by Attorney Sidney Powell and the Seth Rich controversies involving Ed Butowsky, represented by Attorney Ty Clevenger, we have the US Justice Dept. not cooperating in discovery and withholding crucial information as well as corrupt/incompetent judges not upholding the US Constitution.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Strzok v Barr DOJ documents released, Peter Strzok lawsuit, Attorney General Barr motion to dismiss, “grave risks to the Bureau’s institutional interests and basic integrity.”

Strzok v Barr DOJ documents released, Peter Strzok lawsuit, Attorney General Barr motion to dismiss, “grave risks to the Bureau’s institutional interests and basic integrity.”

“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019

“Why John Brennan, Peter Strzok and DOJ Needed Julian Assange Arrested”…The Conservative Treehouse November 3, 2019

“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October 23, 2019

 

From Peter Strzok v. William Barr Attorney General.

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO COUNT ONE AND COUNT TWO, AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO COUNT THREE

Filed November 18, 2019.

“Yet, as the FBI was placing enormous trust in Plaintiff and giving him substantial authority over some of the most important investigations in recent memory, he committed a series of serious and sustained lapses in judgment. In particular, a Department of Justice (“Department”) Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) investigation found that Plaintiff had exchanged over 40,000 text messages with an FBI attorney (“Government Attorney” or “GA”) on their government-issued phones, among them texts written in 2016 in which Plaintiff called the President—at that time, still a candidate for President—a “disaster” and suggested that “[w]e’ll stop” him from taking office. And in a text he wrote in 2017—after the President had taken office and during Plaintiff’s tenure as a lead investigator for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team—Plaintiff described his
own “sense of unfinished business.” As he wrote to the Government Attorney in that text: “I unleashed it with [the Clinton email investigation]. Now I need to fix it and finish it. . . . Who gives a f*ck, one more A[ssistant] D[irector] . . . [versus] [a]n investigation leading to impeachment?”

“The statements made in those and similar text exchanges involved matters of public concern. But when made by an FBI Special Agent—especially a member of the Bureau’s senior leadership—in the context of active investigations over which that Special Agent had official responsibility, these messages posed grave risks to the Bureau’s institutional interests and basic integrity. The lapses in judgment embodied in those messages and others like them risked undermining public confidence in two of the Bureau’s highest-profile investigations. And even
more broadly, those lapses in judgment risked damaging the public trust in the FBI as a nonpartisan, even-handed, and effective law enforcement institution—trust that is essential to the FBI’s ability to vigorously enforce the nation’s laws without fear or favor.”

““As I considered the facts associated with the adjudication of your case, I could not recall another incident like yours that brought such discredit on the organization. In my 23 years in the FBI, I have not seen a more impactful series of missteps that has called into question the entire organization and more thoroughly damaged the FBI’s reputation. In our role as FBI employees
we sometimes make unpopular decisions, but the public should be able to examine our work without having to question our motives.” ”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16020887/strzok-v-barr/

Read the released documents if you can stomach it.

This is some of the most disgusting, biased and yes evil wording I have witnessed.

https://www.scribd.com/document/435752237/Strzok-v-Barr-DOJ-DE-30-5

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Matt Couch new attorney Eden Quainton, Rich v Butowsky Matthew Couch, et al, Couch discoverable information list very interesting, Tide turning?

Matt Couch new attorney Eden Quainton, Rich v Butowsky Matthew Couch, et al, Couch discoverable information list very interesting, Tide turning?

“I would say explosive and I would say, for people at the highest levels of the FBI and at the highest levels of the Justice Department–more important at the Justice Department–it’s going to be devastating. It’s going to ruin careers, it’s going to make people have bar problems”…Joe diGenova on OIG FISA report

“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October 23, 2019

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”…Edmund Burke

 

In AARON RICH

v.

EDWARD BUTOWSKY,
MATTHEW COUCH
AMERICA FIRST MEDIA:

New filing this AM.

Eden P. Quainton of Quainton Law is the new attorney for Matthew Couch.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794.90.0.pdf

The Matt Couch disclosure list filed October 31, 2019 is very interesting.

DEFENDANT MATTHEW COUCH’S RULE 26(a) INITIAL DISCLOSURES.

1. Edward Butowsky
c/o Counsel
Mr. Butowsky has knowledge of certain facts and circumstances alleged in the
complaint.
2. Cassandra Fairbanks
Address unknown
Ms. Fairbanks has knowledge about statements made by Julian Assange
relevant to the leaking of DNC, Clinton campaign and/or John Podesta-related
emails and attachments (collectively, “DNC emails”).
3. Michael Isikoff
Address unknown
Mr. Isikoff has knowledge about the podcasts he has produced relating to,
among other things, Aaron Rich, Matt Couch, the alleged DNC hacking and
investigations and news reports relating to the foregoing.
4. Malia Zimmerman
c/o Dechert LLP
Ms. Zimmerman has knowledge about her investigation of and the article she
wrote about the leaking of the DNC emails to Wikileaks and the FBI’s report
relating to the leaked DNC emails.
5. Joel Rich
c/o Massey & Gail
Mr. Rich has knowledge of his communications with Mr. Butowsky, Mr.
Wheeler and Aaron Rich.
6. Mary Rich
c/o Massey & Gail

Ms. Rich has knowledge of her communications with Mr. Butowsky, Mr.
Wheeler and Aaron Rich.
7. Rod Wheeler
14006 Silver Teal Way
Upper Marlboro, MD 20744
Mr. Wheeler has knowledge relating to his communications with Aaron Rich,
Mr. Butowsky, Mary Rich, Joel Rich and other persons with knowledge of
matters alleged in the Complaint.
8. Kelsey Mulka
Address unknown
Ms. Mulka has knowledge about her communications with Aaron Rich relating
to Seth Rich.
9. Dr. Tore Linderman
Address unknown
Dr. Landsman has knowledge about communications between Aaron Rich and
Kelsey Mulka relating to Seth Rich.
10. Donna Brazile
Address unknown
Ms. Brazile has knowledge about her interactions and communications with
Aaron Rich and circumstances surrounding the murder of Seth Rich.
11. Seymour Hersch
Address unknown
Mr. Rich has knowledge of the leaking of the DNC emails to Wikileaks and the
FBI’s report relating to the leaked DNC emails.
12. Ellen Ratner
Address unknown

Ms. Ratner has knowledge of her communications with Julian Assange relating
to the leak of DNC emails to Wikileaks by one or more DNC insiders or
affiliated persons.
13. Christopher Steele
Address unknown
Mr. Steele has knowledge relating to the role of internal DNC operatives in the
alleged hacking of the DNC and the communication of the DNC emails to
Wikileaks.
14. Aaron Rich
c/o Boies Schiller Flexner LLP
Mr. Rich has knowledge of the facts alleged in the complaint.
15. Julian Assange
Belmarsh Prison, UK
Mr. Assange knows the identity of the individual or individuals who leaked the
DNC emails to him. Mr. Assange knows the identity of the individual or
individuals to whom payment was made for the DNC emails.
16. Joseph DellaCamera
Metropolitan Police Department of Washington D.C.
300 Indiana Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001
Mr. DellaCamera has knowledge about the murder of Seth Rich.
17. Kevin Doherty
Nottoway Correctional Center
Schutt Road Burkeville, VA. 23922
Mr. Doherty has knowledge of the murder of Seth Rich.
18. Pratt Wiley
Address unknown

Mr. Wiley has relevant information relating to Seth Rich and Aaron Rich
derived from conversation with both prior to Seth Rich’s murder.
19. District of Columbia Chief Medical Examiner
OCME
Dr. Roger A. Mitchell
401 E. St. SW
Washington D.C. 20004
Mr. Mitchel has knowledge about the autopsy performed on Seth Rich and the
cause of death.
20. Dimitri Alperowitch
Chief Technology Officer
Crowdstrike Holdings, Inc.
150 Mathilda Place, Suite 300
Sunnyvale, California 9408
Mr. Alperowitch has knowledge of certain matters alleged in the Complaint.
21. Shawn Henry
President of CrowdStrike Services and Chief Security Officer
Crowdstrike Holdings, Inc.
150 Mathilda Place, Suite 300
Sunnyvale, California 9408
Mr. Henry has knowledge of certain matters alleged in the Complaint.
22. Kim Dotcom
Address unknown in New Zealand
kim@kim.com
Mr. Dotcom has information on the leaking of the DNC emails to Wikileaks.
23. Craig Murray
Address unknown in the United Kingdom
Mr. Murray has information on the leaking of the DNC emails to Wikileaks.

24. Andrew McCabe
Address unknown
Mr. McCabe has information about the alleged hacking of Seth Rich’s gmail
account by foreign operatives and the FBI’s investigation of Seth Rich’s
computer.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794/gov.uscourts.dcd.194794.89.18.pdf

It is apparent that due to the revelations from Attorney Sidney Powell in the Flynn case, intensified investigations by Attorney General Barr and John Durham as well as other revelations, that the tide is turning.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

Butowsky v. NPR Folkenflik et al Amended Scheduling Order means no revelations from this case before 2020 election, Seth Rich fake news media narrative

Butowsky v. NPR Folkenflik et al Amended Scheduling Order means no revelations from this case before 2020 election, Seth Rich fake news media narrative

Mueller, as a matter of determined policy, omitted key steps which any honest investigator would undertake. He did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview Bill Binney. He did not interview Julian Assange. His failure to do any of those obvious things renders his report worthless.”…Craig Murray

“Fox News news analyst Ellen Ratner relayed information from Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to Texas businessman Ed Butowsky regarding Seth Rich’s role in transferring emails to Wikileaks, according to an amended lawsuit that I filed this morning on behalf of Mr. Butowsky.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger

“Who murdered Seth Rich and why?”…Citizen Wells

 

Ed Butowsky v. NPR Folkenflik, et al will be settled out of court, in mediation or at trial at such a late date that the major revelations from witness testimony will not be revealed before the 2020 election.

At least in this case, the fake news narrative perpetuated by NPR and the rest of the fake news media will prevail regarding Seth Rich and his alleged involvement in leaks to the DNC, until after the election.

From the Butowsky v. NPR Folkenflik et al Amended Scheduling Order filed August 21, 2019.

“April 30, 2020 All discovery shall be commenced in time to be completed by
this date.
June 1, 2020 Deadline for motions to dismiss, motions for summary
judgment, or other dispositive motions.
July 27, 2020 Date by which the parties shall notify the Court of the name,
address, and telephone number of the agreed-upon mediator,
or request that the Court select a mediator, if they are unable
to agree on one.

August 10, 2020 Notice of intent to offer certified records.
August 10, 2020 Counsel and unrepresented parties are each responsible for
contacting opposing counsel and unrepresented parties to
determine how they will prepare the Joint Final Pretrial Order
(See http://www.txed.uscourts.gov) and Joint Proposed Jury
Instructions and Verdict Form (or Proposed Findings of Fact
and Conclusions of Law in non-jury cases).
August 10, 2020 Video Deposition Designation due. Each party who proposes
to offer a deposition by video shall serve on all other parties a
disclosure identifying the line and page numbers to be offered.
All other parties will have seven calendar days to serve a
response with any objections and requesting crossexamination line and page numbers to be included. Counsel
must consult on any objections and only those which cannot
be resolved shall be presented to the court. The party who filed
the initial Video Deposition Designation is responsible for
preparation of the final edited video in accordance with all
parties’ designations and the Court’s rulings on objections.
August 31, 2020 Mediation must occur by this date.
August 31, 2020 Motions in limine due.
File Joint Final Pretrial Order. (See http://www.txed.uscourts.gov).
September 18, 2020 Response to motions in limine due.3

September 18, 2020 File objections to witnesses, deposition extracts, and exhibits,
listed in pre-trial order.4 (This does not extend deadline to
object to expert witnesses) (Provide the exhibit objected to in
the motion or response). If numerous objections are filed the
court may set a hearing prior to docket call.
File Proposed Jury Instructions/Form of Verdict (or Proposed
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law).
Date will be set by court. If numerous objections are filed the court may set a hearing
Usually within 10 days prior to to consider all pending motions and objections.
the Final Pretrial Conference.
October 2, 2020 Final Pretrial Conference at 9:00 a.m. at the Paul Brown
United States Courthouse located at 101 East Pecan Street in
Sherman, Texas. Date parties should be prepared to try case.
All cases on the Court’s Final Pretrial Conference docket for
this day have been set at 9:00 a.m. However, prior to the Final
Pretrial Conference date, the Court will set a specific time
between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. for each case, depending on
which cases remain on the Court’s docket.

To be determined 10:00 a.m. Jury selection and trial at the Paul Brown United
States Courthouse located at 101 East Pecan Street in
Sherman, Texas. A specific trial date will be selected at the
Final Pretrial Conference.5”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.183024/gov.uscourts.txed.183024.70.0.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/