Category Archives: Judges

Judge Amy Coney Barrett opening statement Supreme Court nomination hearings October 12, 2020, Released Sunday

Judge Amy Coney Barrett opening statement Supreme Court nomination hearings October 12, 2020, Released Sunday

“I made it absolutely clear that I would go forward with a confirmation process as [Senate Judiciary] chairman, even a few months before a presidential election, if the nominee were chosen with the advice, and not merely the consent, of the Senate, just as the Constitution requires,” ..Joe Biden, Georgetown Law School 2016

“When there is a vacancy on the SCOTUS, the President is to nominate someone, the Senate is to consider that nomination … There’s no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off-years. That’s not in the Constitution text.”...Barack Obama 2016

“Even if President Trump wants to put forward a name now, the Senate should not act until after the American people select their next president, their next Congress, their next Senate,”...Joe Biden 2020 

 

“Chairman [Lindsey] Graham, Ranking Member [Dianne] Feinstein, and Members of the Committee: I am honored and humbled to appear before you as a nominee for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.

I thank the President for entrusting me with this profound responsibility, as well as for the graciousness that he and the First Lady have shown my family throughout this process.

I thank the Members of this Committee—and your other colleagues in the Senate—who have taken the time to meet with me since my nomination. It has been a privilege to meet you.

As I said when I was nominated to serve as a Justice, I am used to being in a group of nine—my family. Nothing is more important to me, and I am so proud to have them behind me.

My husband Jesse and I have been married for 21 years. He has been a selfless and wonderful partner at every step along the way. I once asked my sister, “Why do people say marriage is hard? I think it’s easy.” She said, “Maybe you should ask Jesse if he agrees.” I decided not to take her advice. I know that I am far luckier in love than I deserve.

Jesse and I are parents to seven wonderful children. Emma is a sophomore in college who just might follow her parents into a career in the law. Vivian came to us from Haiti. When she arrived, she was so weak that we were told she might never walk or talk normally. She now deadlifts as much as the male athletes at our gym, and I assure you that she has no trouble talking. Tess is 16, and while she shares her parents’ love for the liberal arts, she also has a math gene that seems to have skipped her parents’ generation. John Peter joined us shortly after the devastating earthquake in Haiti, and Jesse, who brought him home, still describes the shock on JP’s face when he got off the plane in wintertime Chicago. Once that shock wore off, JP assumed the happy-go-lucky attitude that is still his signature trait. Liam is smart, strong, and kind, and to our delight, he still loves watching movies with Mom and Dad. Ten-year-old Juliet is already pursuing her goal of becoming an author by writing multiple essays and short stories, including one she recently submitted for publication. And our youngest—Benjamin, who has Down Syndrome—is the unanimous favorite of the family.

My own siblings are here, some in the hearing room and some nearby. Carrie, Megan, Eileen, Amanda, Vivian, and Michael are my oldest and dearest friends. We’ve seen each other through both the happy and hard parts of life, and I am so grateful that they are with me now.

My parents, Mike and Linda Coney, are watching from their New Orleans home. My father was a lawyer and my mother was a teacher, which explains how I ended up as a law professor. More important, my parents modeled for me and my six siblings a life of service, principle, faith, and love. I remember preparing for a grade-school spelling bee against a boy in my class. To boost my confidence, Dad sang, “Anything boys can do, girls can do better.” At least as I remember it, I spelled my way to victory.

I received similar encouragement from the devoted teachers at St. Mary’s Dominican, my all-girls high school in New Orleans. When I went to college, it never occurred to me that anyone would consider girls to be less capable than boys. My freshman year, I took a literature class filled with upperclassmen English majors. When I did my first presentation—on Breakfast at Tiffany’s—I feared I had failed. But my professor filled me with confidence, became a mentor, and—when I graduated with a degree in English—gave me Truman Capote’s collected works.

Although I considered graduate studies in English, I decided my passion for words was better suited to deciphering statutes than novels. I was fortunate to have wonderful legal mentors—in particular, the judges for whom I clerked. The legendary Judge Laurence Silberman of the D.C. Circuit gave me my first job in the law and continues to teach me today. He was by my side during my Seventh Circuit hearing and investiture, and he is cheering me on from his living room now.

I also clerked for Justice Scalia, and like many law students, I felt like I knew the justice before I ever met him, because I had read so many of his colorful, accessible opinions. More than the style of his writing, though, it was the content of Justice Scalia’s reasoning that shaped me. His judicial philosophy was straightforward: A judge must apply the law as written, not as the judge wishes it were. Sometimes that approach meant reaching results that he did not like. But as he put it in one of his best known opinions, that is what it means to say we have a government of laws, not of men.

Justice Scalia taught me more than just law. He was devoted to his family, resolute in his beliefs, and fearless of criticism. And as I embarked on my own legal career, I resolved to maintain that same perspective. There is a tendency in our profession to treat the practice of law as all-consuming, while losing sight of everything else. But that makes for a shallow and unfulfilling life. I worked hard as a lawyer and a professor; I owed that to my clients, my students, and myself. But I never let the law define my identity or crowd out the rest of my life.

A similar principle applies to the role of courts. Courts have a vital responsibility to enforce the rule of law, which is critical to a free society. But courts are not designed to solve every problem or right every wrong in our public life. The policy decisions and value judgments of government must be made by the political branches elected by and accountable to the People. The public should not expect courts to do so, and courts should not try.

That is the approach I have strived to follow as a judge on the Seventh Circuit. In every case, I have carefully considered the arguments presented by the parties, discussed the issues with my colleagues on the court, and done my utmost to reach the result required by the law, whatever my own preferences might be. I try to remain mindful that, while my court decides thousands of cases a year, each case is the most important one to the parties involved. After all, cases are not like statutes, which are often named for their authors. Cases are named for the parties who stand to gain or lose in the real world, often through their liberty or livelihood.

When I write an opinion resolving a case, I read every word from the perspective of the losing party. I ask myself how would I view the decision if one of my children was the party I was ruling against: Even though I would not like the result, would I understand that the decision was fairly reasoned and grounded in the law? That is the standard I set for myself in every case, and it is the standard I will follow as long as I am a judge on any court.

When the President offered this nomination, I was deeply honored. But it was not a position I had sought out, and I thought carefully before accepting. The confirmation process—and the work of serving on the Court if I am confirmed— requires sacrifices, particularly from my family. I chose to accept the nomination because I believe deeply in the rule of law and the place of the Supreme Court in our Nation. I believe Americans of all backgrounds deserve an independent Supreme Court that interprets our Constitution and laws as they are written. And I believe I can serve my country by playing that role.

I come before this Committee with humility about the responsibility I have been asked to undertake, and with appreciation for those who came before me. I was nine years old when Sandra Day O’Connor became the first woman to sit in this seat. She was a model of grace and dignity throughout her distinguished tenure on the Court. When I was 21 years old and just beginning my career, Ruth Bader Ginsburg sat in this seat. She told the Committee, “What has become of me could only happen in America.” I have been nominated to fill Justice Ginsburg’s seat, but no one will ever take her place. I will be forever grateful for the path she marked and the life she led.

If confirmed, it would be the honor of a lifetime to serve alongside the Chief Justice and seven Associate Justices. I admire them all and would consider each a valued colleague. And I might bring a few new perspectives to the bench. As the President noted when he announced my nomination, I would be the first mother of school-age children to serve on the Court. I would be the first Justice to join the Court from the Seventh Circuit in 45 years. And I would be the only sitting Justice who didn’t attend law school at Harvard or Yale. I am confident that Notre Dame will hold its own, and maybe I could even teach them a thing or two about football.

As a final note, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the many Americans from all walks of life who have reached out with messages of support over the course of my nomination. I believe in the power of prayer, and it has been uplifting to hear that so many people are praying for me. I look forward to answering the Committee’s questions over the coming days. And if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, I pledge to faithfully and impartially discharge my duties to the American people as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Thank you.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/11/amy-coney-barrett-opening-statement-supreme-court-428635

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Seth Rich coverup Part 4, Seth Rich murdered July 10, 2016, Julian Assange murder considered December 2017?, Assange extradition hearing testimony

Seth Rich coverup Part 4, Seth Rich murdered July 10, 2016, Julian Assange murder considered December 2017?, Assange extradition hearing testimony

“Replying to this last point, the prosecution pointed out that a Grand Jury against Assange had been established by Obama and there was no indication the investigation had been closed. Feldstein agreed, the “Obama administration was very eager to file charges against Assange and they conducted a very aggressive investigation.” All of which speaks for the point that Assange is being sought for political reasons—motivations which are common to the whole American ruling class. It was current Democratic Party presidential candidate Joe Biden who branded the WikiLeaks publisher and journalist a “high-tech terrorist.””…Laura Tiernan and Thomas Scripps, Sept 9, 2020

“In the media, Hannity has been one of the loudest voices to warn of the dangers of a “deep state”. On Thursday, he called for Mr Trump to “purge” the executive branch of Obama-era bureaucrats and appointees.”…The Telegraph March 11, 2017

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

 

Fact: Seth Rich was murdered July 10, 2016.

Fact: There is a mountain of evidence that indicates Rich was involved in the DNC leak.

Fact: Julian Assange is the one man still alive who can confirm Seth Rich’s involvement in the leak.

Fact: Witness testimony in the Julian Assange extradition hearing just indicated that the CIA considered killing him in December 2017.

Fact: US prosecution of Assange was spearheaded by Obama holdovers.

From Consortium News September 30, 2020.

“FINAL REPORT: ASSANGE HEARING DAY SEVENTEEN—US Intel Spying on Assange Detailed in Court, Including Plans to Kidnap or Poison Him”

“United States intelligence discussed plans to kidnap or poison Julian Assange, the court was told on Wednesday.

After the prosecution said it was unable to do checks on the two anonymous witnesses from the UC Global case in Spain, defense attorney Mark Summers read out the testimony in court a day earlier than had been expected.”

“The witness said the Americans were “very nervous” about the visit of then California Congressman Dana Rohrabacher to Assange. “Morales asked me to control everything to do with that visit,” the witness said. ”

“In December 2017, the witness testified that “the U.S. was desperate” to get Assange out of the embassy, and that “more extreme measures should be used.”

“Leaving the embassy door open to allow Mr. Assange to be kidnapped and even poisoning was under consideration,” the witness testified Morales told him.  Summers for the defense then explained to the court how both witnesses approached an attorney who contact a court in Madrid that ordered an arrest warrant and search of Morales’ home, and issued charges against him.”

Read more:

https://consortiumnews.com/2020/09/30/live-updates-assange-hearing-day-seventeen-us-intel-spying-on-assange-detailed-in-court-including-plan-to-kidnap-or-poison-him/

From Citizen Wells September 18, 2020.

“The left, the Democrats, the Deep State. Obama holdovers employing high powered law firms and corrupt judges have done their best to hide and obfuscate the truth surrounding the DNC leaks and possible involvement by Seth Rich.

Many of those asking questions early on such as Fox News and the Washington Times were threatened and subsequently sued or threatened to be.

At least 4 lawsuits are still active involving the Rich Family, Fox News, Ed Butowsky and others.

Many of us question how the Rich Family could afford such expensive law firms.

On March 1, 2018 the Washington Times posted an Analysis/Opinion by Admiral James A. Lyons. It was scrubbed by the Times after a lawsuit was threatened by Aaron Rich. It is presented in entirety from the Wayback Machine.

“With the clearly unethical and most likely criminal behavior of the upper management levels of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) exposed by Chairman Devin Nunes of the House Intelligence Committee, there are two complementary areas that have been conveniently swept under the rug.

The first deals with the murder of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) staffer Seth Rich, and the second deals with the alleged hacking of the DNC server by Russia. Both should be of prime interest to special counsel Robert Mueller, but do not hold your breath.”

“With regard to the alleged Russian hacking of the DNC server, Mr. Assange also offered information to the Trump administration to prove Russia didn’t hack the DNC server, as the DNC claimed. Mr. Assange also met with Orange Country Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, California Republican, and gave him information to present to the Trump administration to prove no one hacked the DNC server.

However, with the Obama holdovers in key positions, it is not surprising that no one from the Trump administration would meet with the congressman or Mr. Assange. New Zealand tech expert Kim DotCom said he has proof that both he and Seth Rich were involved in passing the emails to Wikileaks, but he has been ignored as well.”

https://citizenwells.com/2020/09/18/assange-seth-rich-dnc-leaks-truth-all-forces-of-left-evil-harnessed-to-suppress-revelations-high-powered-attorneys-intimidate-obama-holdovers-still-control/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

General Flynn hearing instructions for listening Sept 29, 2020, Peter Strozk Attorney files letter alleging note changes

General Flynn hearing instructions for listening Sept 29, 2020, Peter Strozk Attorney files letter alleging note changes

“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

“her client was “totally set up” because he threatened to expose wrongdoing by top intelligence officials in the Obama administration.

“He was going to audit the intel agencies because he knew about the billions Brennan and company were running off the books,” Powell said, referring to former CIA Director John Brennan.”…Sidney Powell, Vickie McKenna Show

On Judge Sullivan: “if there was any doubt up to this point whether his conduct gives the appearance of partiality, that doubt is gone.”...Judge Rao dissenting opinion

 

The General Michael Flynn hearing begins at 11:00 today September 29, 2020.

Public audio access to Flynn hearing today:

Prior to the start time of the hearing, dial the public access teleconference number for the presiding Judge and enter the access code when prompted, followed by the pound (#) sign. Due to technical limits on the number of dial-in listeners who may be accommodated, you may wish to establish your connection at least 10 minutes early to ensure access.

Wait for the hearing to begin. You will be automatically muted and will not be heard by the Judge or participants in the hearing.

The motion hearing scheduled for September 29, 2020 at 11:00 AM shall now take place via VIDEO TELECONFERENCE (VTC). The Courtroom Deputy Clerk shall contact the parties to provide the dial-in information. The public and media may listen to the hearing by dialing in to one of the following teleconference numbers and entering the access code when prompted: 877-336-1839 (access code 5524636); 888-363-4734 (access code 6114909); 877-336-1839 (access code 1429888); 877-402-9753 (access code 2090166); 888-557-8511 (access code 4140864); 888-273-3658 (access code 1773796). Persons joining via teleconference will be automatically muted and will not be heard by the Court or participants in the hearing. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 9/25/2020. (lcegs3)

Peter Strozk’s Attorney, Aitan Goelman has just filed a letter alleging note changes.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.258.0_3.pdf

More on the hearing here:

https://citizenwells.com/2020/09/27/michael-flynn-motion-hearing-sept-29-2020-video-teleconference-judge-emmett-sullivan-oral-argument-from-government-flynn-and-amicus-curiae/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

Joel and Mary Rich v Fox News et al, “Fox defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims for conspiracy and aiding and abetting IIED…is granted”

Joel and Mary Rich v Fox News et al, “Fox defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims for conspiracy and aiding and abetting IIED…is granted”

“The left, the Democrats, the Deep State. Obama holdovers employing high powered law firms and corrupt judges have done their best to hide and obfuscate the truth surrounding the DNC leaks and possible involvement by Seth Rich.”…Citizen Wells

“With the clearly unethical and most likely criminal behavior of the upper management levels of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) exposed by Chairman Devin Nunes of the House Intelligence Committee, there are two complementary areas that have been conveniently swept under the rug. The first deals with the murder of the  Democratic National Convention (DNC) staffer Seth Rich, and the second deals with the alleged hacking of the DNC server by Russia.”...Admiral James Lyons

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

 

From Joel Rich and Mary Rich

v

Fox News Network, Malia Zimmerman and Ed Butowsky

September 25, 2020.

“Fox defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims for conspiracy and aiding and abetting IIED , (ECF No. 102), is granted”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.490098/gov.uscourts.nysd.490098.208.0.pdf

This case had been returned to this lower court on appeal.

From Citizen Wells July 14, 2019.

“This is possibly the most unreported important news story I have ever encountered.

Joel and Mary Rich lost their lawsuit against Fox News in 2018 and on September 27, 2018 filed an appeal.

First, their lawsuit results.

From the Federalist Papers.

“Fox News Wins Seth Rich Lawsuit; Judge Dismisses

A New York City judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by the parents of murdered Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich on Thursday that asserted Fox News Channel colluded with the White House to propel a false, politically-biased narrative about Rich’s death.”

“It is understandable that plaintiffs might feel that their grief and personal loss were taken advantage of, and that the tragic death of their son was exploited for political purposes,” but Fox evidently did not intend to inflict emotional distress, Judge George Daniels wrote in his decision.””

https://citizenwells.com/2019/07/14/joel-and-mary-rich-v-fox-news-appeal-seth-rich-murder-investigations-and-reporting-appeal-of-richs-failed-lawsuit-almost-unreported/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Michael Flynn motion hearing Sept 29, 2020 video teleconference, Judge Emmett Sullivan, oral argument from  government, Flynn, and amicus curiae

Michael Flynn motion hearing Sept 29, 2020 video teleconference, Judge Emmett Sullivan, oral argument from  government, Flynn, and amicus curiae

“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

“her client was “totally set up” because he threatened to expose wrongdoing by top intelligence officials in the Obama administration.

“He was going to audit the intel agencies because he knew about the billions Brennan and company were running off the books,” Powell said, referring to former CIA Director John Brennan.”…Sidney Powell, Vickie McKenna Show

On Judge Sullivan: “if there was any doubt up to this point whether his conduct gives the appearance of partiality, that doubt is gone.”...Judge Rao dissenting opinion

***  Update 5:18 from the court  ***

“Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Emmet G. Sullivan:Motion Hearing Via VTC as to MICHAEL T. FLYNN held on 9/29/2020 re 198 MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by USA. The Court Heard Oral Arguments From Government Counsel, Defense Counsel And Amicus. The Court Will Issue A Minute Order. The Court Will Take This Matter Under Advisement. Bond Status of Defendant: WAS NOT PRESENT; REMAINS ON PERSONAL RECOGNIZANCE; Court Reporter: LISA BANKINS; Defense Attorney: SIDNEY POWELL; JESSE BINNALL; US Attorney: KENNETH KOHL/ HASHIM MOOPPAN; Amicus: John Gleeson (mac)”

*********************************

Public audio access to Flynn hearing:

Prior to the start time of the hearing, dial the public access teleconference number for the presiding Judge and enter the access code when prompted, followed by the pound (#) sign. Due to technical limits on the number of dial-in listeners who may be accommodated, you may wish to establish your connection at least 10 minutes early to ensure access.

Wait for the hearing to begin. You will be automatically muted and will not be heard by the Judge or participants in the hearing.

The motion hearing scheduled for September 29, 2020 at 11:00 AM shall now take place via VIDEO TELECONFERENCE (VTC). The Courtroom Deputy Clerk shall contact the parties to provide the dial-in information. The public and media may listen to the hearing by dialing in to one of the following teleconference numbers and entering the access code when prompted: 877-336-1839 (access code 5524636); 888-363-4734 (access code 6114909); 877-336-1839 (access code 1429888); 877-402-9753 (access code 2090166); 888-557-8511 (access code 4140864); 888-273-3658 (access code 1773796). Persons joining via teleconference will be automatically muted and will not be heard by the Court or participants in the hearing. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 9/25/2020. (lcegs3)

 

From US v Michael Flynn.

“MINUTE ORDER as to MICHAEL T. FLYNN. In view of the motion hearing on September 29, 2020, the Court shall hear oral argument from the government, Mr. Flynn, and the Court-appointed amicus curiae. See L. Civ. R. 7(o)(6) (“An amicus curiae may participate in oral argument only with the court’s permission.”); see also United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V., 818 F.3d 733, 737 (D.C. Cir. 2016). Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 9/23/2020. (lcegs3)”

“MINUTE ORDER as to MICHAEL T. FLYNN. The motion hearing scheduled for September 29, 2020 at 11:00 AM shall now take place via VIDEO TELECONFERENCE (VTC). The Courtroom Deputy Clerk shall contact the parties to provide the dial-in information. The public and media may listen to the hearing by dialing in to one of the following teleconference numbers and entering the access code when prompted: 877-336-1839 (access code 5524636); 888-363-4734 (access code 6114909); 877-336-1839 (access code 1429888); 877-402-9753 (access code 2090166); 888-557-8511 (access code 4140864); 888-273-3658 (access code 1773796). Persons joining via teleconference will be automatically muted and will not be heard by the Court or participants in the hearing. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 9/25/2020. (lcegs3)”

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6234142/united-states-v-flynn/?page=3

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Amy Coney Barrett President Trump pick for SCOTUS, Judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia

Amy Coney Barrett President Trump pick for SCOTUS, Judge U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia

“I made it absolutely clear that I would go forward with a confirmation process as [Senate Judiciary] chairman, even a few months before a presidential election, if the nominee were chosen with the advice, and not merely the consent, of the Senate, just as the Constitution requires,” ..Joe Biden, Georgetown Law School 2016

“When there is a vacancy on the SCOTUS, the President is to nominate someone, the Senate is to consider that nomination … There’s no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off-years. That’s not in the Constitution text.”...Barack Obama 2016

“Even if President Trump wants to put forward a name now, the Senate should not act until after the American people select their next president, their next Congress, their next Senate,”...Joe Biden 2020 

 

The NY Times is calling it:

“President Trump has selected Judge Amy Coney Barrett, the favorite candidate of conservatives, to succeed Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and will try to force Senate confirmation before Election Day in a move that would significantly alter the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court for years.

Mr. Trump plans to announce on Saturday that she is his choice, according to six people close to the process who asked not to be identified disclosing the decision in advance. As they often do, aides cautioned that Mr. Trump sometimes upends his own plans.

But he is not known to have interviewed any other candidates and came away from two days of meetings with Judge Barrett this week impressed with a jurist he was told would be a female Antonin Scalia, referring to the justice she once clerked for. On Friday night, Judge Barrett was photographed getting out of her car outside her home in South Bend, Ind.

“I haven’t said it was her, but she is outstanding,” Mr. Trump told reporters who asked about Judge Barrett’s imminent nomination at Joint Base Andrews outside Washington after CNN and other news outlets reported on his choice.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/25/us/politics/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court.html

From The University of Notre Dame Law School.

“The Honorable Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in October 2017. She is a Notre Dame Law School alumna and has taught as a member of the Law School’s faculty since 2002.

Judge Barrett teaches and researches in the areas of federal courts, constitutional law, and statutory interpretation. Her scholarship in these fields has been published in leading journals, including the Columbia, Virginia, and Texas Law Reviews. From 2010-2016, she served by appointment of the Chief Justice on the Advisory Committee for the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. She has been selected as “Distinguished Professor of the Year” by three of the Law School’s graduating classes.

Judge Barrett earned her B.A. in English literature, magna cum laude, from Rhodes College, where she was elected to Phi Beta Kappa and, among other honors, was chosen by the faculty as the most outstanding graduate in the college’s English department. She earned her J.D., summa cum laude, from Notre Dame, where she was a Kiley Fellow, earned the Hoynes Prize, the Law School’s highest honor, and served as executive editor of the Notre Dame Law Review.

Before joining the Notre Dame faculty, Judge Barrett clerked for Judge Laurence H. Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and for Associate Justice Antonin Scalia of the U.S. Supreme Court. As an associate at Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin in Washington, D.C., she litigated constitutional, criminal, and commercial cases in both trial and appellate courts. Judge Barrett has served as a visiting associate professor and John M. Olin Fellow in Law at the George Washington University Law School,  as a visiting associate professor of law at the University of Virginia and is a member of the American Law Institute (ALI).”

Read more:

https://law.nd.edu/directory/amy-barrett/

Lawyer and law clerk endorsement letter:

https://law.nd.edu/assets/253073/amybarrettscotus.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

 

Attorney General Barr on passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg September 18, 2020, “Her legal ability, personal integrity, and determination were beyond doubt”

Attorney General Barr on passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg September 18, 2020, “Her legal ability, personal integrity, and determination were beyond doubt”

“In a 2015 dissent, Justice Ginsburg, citing a New York Times article examining arbitration agreements, wrote that the 2011 decision and later ones “have predictably resulted in the deprivation of consumers’ rights to seek redress for losses, and, turning the coin, they have insulated powerful economic interests from liability for violations of consumer protection laws.””...NY Times May 21, 2018

“Having experienced the abuse of mandated arbitration first hand, I agree with Justice Ginsburg. It may be the only time it happens, but injustice is injustice.”...Citizen Wells

 

From Attorney General William P. Barr September 18, 2020.

“On behalf of the Department of Justice, I extend my deepest sympathy on the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.  Justice Ginsburg led one of the great lives in the history of American law.  She was a brilliant and successful litigator, an admired court of appeals judge, and a profoundly influential Supreme Court Justice.  For all her achievements in those roles, she will perhaps be remembered most for inspiring women in the legal profession and beyond.  She and I did not agree on every issue, but her legal ability, personal integrity, and determination were beyond doubt.  She leaves a towering legacy, and all who seek justice mourn her loss.”

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/statement-attorney-general-william-p-barr-passing-justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

General Flynn opposition to amicus brief of Attorney Gleeson, Attorney Powell filed June 17, 2020, “Flynn…singled out for a baseless, politically motivated investigation and prosecution”

General Flynn opposition to amicus brief of Attorney Gleeson, Attorney Powell filed June 17, 2020, “Flynn…singled out for a baseless, politically
motivated investigation and prosecution”

“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

“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

“Under the separation of powers established by the Constitution, criminal charges are brought by the executive branch and adjudicated by the judiciary. Thus, any actual prosecution of Flynn under federal statutes for perjury would have to be brought by the Department of Justice.”…Attorney Leslie McAdoo Gordon

 

From the

GENERAL FLYNN’S BRIEF
IN OPPOSITION TO AMICUS

Filed June 17, 2020 by Attorney Sidney Powell.

“Counsel for General Michael Flynn files this brief to comply with this court’s
order of May 19, 2020. However, we hereby preserve all objections briefed in our
Petition for Writ of Mandamus and all prior filings in this court.1 This court exceeded its authority under the Constitution to solicit amici and to appoint an amicus. That chosen amicus has now engaged in a flagrant personal and partisan assault on General Flynn, Attorney General Barr, and the President of the United States.

This court’s friend simply ignores the indisputable, newly-produced evidence
proving that it is General Flynn who was singled out for a baseless, politically
motivated investigation and prosecution. ECF No. 198. In a rarely-mentioned text message the Government has never produced to General Flynn,2 FBI Agent Strzok reveals that [Bill] Priestap “doesn’t want Clapper giving CR cuts [transcripts on Crossfire Razor, the codename for the Flynn operation] to [the Obama] WH. All political, just shows our hand and potentially makes enemies.” (emphasis added). After Lisa Page’s reminder about including it already in the “doc on fri,” Strzok revealed the ultimate problem: “should we[?], particularly to the entirety of the lame duck usic [United States intelligence community] with partisan axes to grind.” (emphasis added).

The irony and sheer duplicity of Amicus’s accusations against the Justice
Department now—which is finally exposing the truth—is stunning. Amicus’s filing is a “wrap-up smear.” It is an affront to the Rule of Law and a raging insult to the citizens of this country who see the abject corruption in this assassination by political prosecution of General Flynn. This court exuviated any appearance of neutrality when it unlawfully appointed Amicus as its own adversary to make these scurrilous arguments.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.228.0_1.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Emmet Sullivan Flynn judge should be removed from bench, Michael Cernovich  filing ethics complaint, “acting as a politician, not a judge.”

Emmet Sullivan Flynn judge should be removed from bench, Michael Cernovich  filing ethics complaint, “acting as a politician, not a judge.”

“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

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 United States v Michael Flynn May 12, 2020.

“MINUTE ORDER as to MICHAEL T. FLYNN. Given the current posture of this case, the Court anticipates that individuals and organizations will seek leave of the Court to file amicus curiae briefs pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(o).”

“Accordingly, at the appropriate time, the Court will enter a Scheduling Order governing the submission of any amicus curiae briefs. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 5/12/2020. (lcegs3)”

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6234142/united-states-v-flynn/?page=2

From Fox News.

“Flynn judge to allow ‘amicus’ submissions, delaying immediate resolution and drawing planned ethics complaint

D.C. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order Tuesday indicating he’ll soon accept “amicus curiae,” or “friend of the court” submissions, in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn — drawing immediate scrutiny and a planned ethics complaint against Sullivan, who had previously refused to hear amicus briefs in the case.

Sullivan’s order indicated that an upcoming scheduling order would clarify the parameters of who specifically could submit the amicus briefs, which are submissions by non-parties that claim an interest in the case. Sullivan specifically said he anticipated that “individuals and organizations” will file briefs “for the benefit of the court,” as he prepares to rule on the government’s motion to dismiss the case.

“Judge Sullivan, who denied leave to file amicus briefs when he knew third parties would have spoken favorably of Flynn, now solicits briefs critical of Flynn,” independent journalist Michael Cernovich wrote on Twitter Tuesday evening. “This is a violation of the judicial oath and applicable ethical rules. We will be filing a complaint against Sullivan. … [He] is acting as a politician, not a judge.””

“The Federalist’s Sean Davis responded: “This is who Emmet G. Sullivan, the judge in Flynn’s case, is allowing to hijack a case which both the defense and the government prosecution wish to dismiss because the case was tainted by corruption from the beginning. Pathetic.”

Davis added that Sullivan was letting “left-wing lawyers write his final order against Flynn for him.”

Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell, echoed those arguments. “The proposed amicus brief has no place in this Court,” Powell wrote. “No further delay should be tolerated or any further expense caused to him and his defense.””

Read more:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-in-flynn-case-to-open-up-case-for-amicus-submissions

Enough is enough!

Judge Sullivan should be removed from the bench.

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Judge Amy Berman Jackson: Defendant Roger Stone Motion for Judicial Disqualification Feb 21, 2020, Jackson should be impeached

Judge Amy Berman Jackson: Defendant Roger Stone Motion for Judicial Disqualification Feb 21, 2020, Jackson should be impeached

“the Democratic Party overlooked the ethical red flags and made a pact with Mr. Clinton that was the equivalent of a pact with the devil. And he delivered. With Mr. Clinton at the controls, the party won the White House twice. But in the process it lost its bearings and maybe even its soul.”…Bob Herbert, NY Times February 26, 2001

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”...Ephesians 6:12

“Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointed corrupt treasonous liberal judge with an angry disposition toward Americans who think differently than Obama, continues to put her own distorted interpretation of US law ahead of the US Constitution.

Her actions with Paul Manafort alone were ample cause for her to be removed, impeached or jailed.”...Patriot or Traitor May 15, 2019

 

From the Defendant Roger Motion for Judicial Disqualification filed February 21, 2020.

“The issue at hand arises from the Defendant’s pending Motion for a New Trial (Dkt. # 309-2) and statements made by Judge Berman-Jackson during the Defendant’s Sentencing Hearing on February 20, 2020. Stone’s argument for a new trial rests on newly discovered information indicating that there was juror misconduct during Mr. Stone’s trial, thereby depriving him of his constitutional right to be tried by an impartial jury. Defendant’s Motion has not been ruled on, and in fact, the Defendant’s Reply to the Government’s Opposition is not yet
due, nor has a hearing been set. The Court must still consider whether any juror interviews are appropriate in light of the allegations. However, given the statements made by Judge BermanJackson during the Sentencing Hearing, recusal under 28 U.S.C § 455(a) is warranted in order to protect the integrity and impartiality of the judicial system.”

“Stone’s Motion for New Trial is directly related to the integrity of a juror. It is alleged that a juror misled the Court regarding her ability to be unbiased and fair and the juror attempted to cover up evidence that would directly contradict her false claims of impartiality.

Nevertheless, at Mr. Stone’s sentencing, the Court emphatically stated its views regarding both of the defendant and the jurors in his trial:

Everyone depends on our elected representatives to protect our
elections from foreign interference based on the facts. No one
knows where the threat is going to come from next time or whose
side they’re going to be on, and for that reason the dismay and
disgust at the defendant’s belligerence should transcend party. The
dismay and the disgust at the attempts by others to defend his
actions as just business as usual in our polarized climate should
transcend party. The dismay and the disgust with any attempts to
interfere with the efforts of prosecutors and members of the
judiciary to fulfil their duty should transcend party. Sure, the
defense is free to say: So what? Who cares? T. 87.
But, I’ll say this: Congress cared. The United States Department of
Justice and the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of
Columbia that prosecuted the case and is still prosecuting the case
cared. The jurors who served with integrity under difficult
circumstances cared. The American people cared. And I care.

Recusal is required based on the entirety of the above and this statement in particular: “The jurors who served with integrity under difficult circumstances cared.” 2/20/20 Tr. 88:7-8 (emphasis added). Whether the subject juror (and perhaps others) served with “integrity” is one of the paramount questions presented in the pending Motion. The Court’s ardent conclusion of
“integrity” indicates an inability to reserve judgment on an issue which has yet been heard. Moreover, the categorical finding of integrity made before hearing the facts is likely to “lead a reasonably informed observer to question the District Judge’s impartiality. Public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary is seriously jeopardized when judges…share their thoughts about the merits of pending…cases.” Microsoft Corp., 253 F.3d at 114-115 (D.C. Cir.
2001). The premature statement blessing the “integrity of the jury” undermines the appearance of impartiality and presents a strong bias for recusal.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.203583/gov.uscourts.dcd.203583.331.0.pdf

Judge Amy Berman Jackson should be impeached.

However, since she was appointed by Obama and he was not eligible for the POTUS, perhaps she should simply be escorted from the courtroom.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net