Category Archives: Lawyers

Attorney John Gleeson for Judge Sullivan Devils Advocate for which devils?, Michael Flynn case, Judge Sullivan cannot charge Flynn with perjury, Deep state desperate

Attorney John Gleeson for Judge Sullivan Devils Advocate for which devils?, Michael Flynn case, Judge Sullivan cannot charge Flynn with perjury, Deep state desperate

“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

 

The Deep State is getting desperate.

They have been exposed in the General Michael Flynn persecution and are about to be indicted by the Justice Dept.

Attorney John Gleeson is representing Judge Emmet Sullivan (and God only knows what other devils of the deep state).

From his Amicus brief filed June 10, 2020.

“B. This Court Should Punish the Defendant’s Perjury by Factoring It into the
Sentence for the False Statements Offense to Which He Has Pleaded Guilty

As set forth above, there is more than sufficient evidence in the record to support theissuance of an Order to Show Cause why Flynn’s false statements do not constitute criminal contempt. That the Court possesses such authority, however, does not mean that the interests of justice require the Court to wield it. Given the case’s posture, with the defendant having entered a guilty plea and awaiting sentencing, the better course is the course typically taken: to decline to
issue an Order to Show Cause and consider the contemptuous conduct in sentencing on the offense of conviction.

This Court has appropriately indicated that it wishes to treat this defendant and this case like any other. See e.g., ECF No. 94 at 7. In cases like these, involving plea-related perjury, courts typically vindicate the interests of the judicial branch by factoring a defendant’s contemptuous conduct into the sentence imposed on the offense of conviction,70 not by holding the defendant in criminal contempt for perjury.71 There is much to be gained—for the judicial system and for our country—by treating the defendant like any other defendant, and this case
like any other case, to the greatest extent possible.

The Department of Justice has a solemn responsibility to prosecute this case—like every other case—without fear or favor and, to quote the Department’s motto, solely “on behalf of justice.” It has abdicated that responsibility through a gross abuse of prosecutorial power, attempting to provide special treatment to a favored friend and political ally of the President of the United States. It has treated the case like no other, and in doing so has undermined the
public’s confidence in the rule of law. I respectfully suggest that the best response to Flynn’s perjury is not to respond in kind. Ordering a defendant to show cause why he should not be held in contempt based on a perjurious effort to withdraw a guilty plea is not what judges typically do. To help restore confidence in the integrity of the judicial process, the Court should return
regularity to that process. And the Court can best do that by denying the government’s Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss, adjudicating any pending motions, proceeding to sentencing, and factoring the defendant’s contemptuous conduct into the appropriate punishment.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.225.0.pdf

General Flynn was never charged with perjury.

His entire prosecution persecution was based on lies and executed illegally.

From Attorney Leslie McAdoo Gordon.

“Sullivan Lacks Authority to Charge Flynn with Perjury

A court issues a show-cause order for contempt as a prelude to possibly punishing a person for alleged misconduct. It describes the misconduct and requires the person to defend against that allegation. It is similar to an indictment except the court, rather than a prosecutor, initiates it. The person receiving a show-cause order must appear and defend the accusation but has certain due process rights, such as the right to notice, the right to counsel, and the right to present a defense.

Sullivan has not yet issued a show-cause order to Flynn, but he has directed Gleeson to advise him as to whether he should do so. The answer is absolutely not, because Sullivan lacks the authority to sanction Flynn for perjury.

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.”

“Leslie McAdoo Gordon is the principal of McAdoo Gordon & Associates, P.C., founded in 2003. She graduated cum laude from the Georgetown University Law Center in 1996, and is licensed to practice law in Maryland, Virginia, the District of Columbia, and numerous federal trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Prior to entering the field of law, Leslie McAdoo Gordon served as a Special Agent for the Department of Defense, Defense Investigative Service (now the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency).”

Read more:

https://thefederalist.com/2020/05/18/heres-why-judge-sullivan-cant-legally-punish-michael-flynn-for-perjury/

John Gleeson was appointed as a district judge by Bill Clinton in 1994.

What other “devils'” interests does he represent?

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Seth Rich conclusive proof of Wikileaks contact imminent, Attorney Ty Clevenger letter to ODNI Director Richard Grenell, Clevenger v USDOJ

Seth Rich conclusive proof of Wikileaks contact imminent, Attorney Ty Clevenger letter to ODNI Director Richard Grenell, Clevenger v USDOJ

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

“Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the FBI’s claims that (1) it did not investigate matters pertaining to Mr. Rich; (2) it did not examine his computer; and (3) it conducted a “reasonable” search but could not locate any records or communications about Mr. Rich. Specifically, Ms. Sines’s testimony flatly contradicts the affidavit testimony of FBI Section Chief David M. Hardy.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger March 29, 2020

“Where is Ellen Ratner, key witness in the Seth Rich Wikileaks controversy?”...Citizen Wells

 

From the Attorney Ty Clevenger letter to ODNI Director Richard Grenell dated May 7, 2020.

“I represent Ed Butowsky in the cases identified above, each of which
concerns an overlapping question of fact, namely whether former Democratic
National Committee employee Seth Rich played a role in leaking emails from the
DNC to Wikileaks in 2016. I respectfully request your assistance in de-classifying
National Security Agency records that would settle this question once and for all.

As you are probably aware, Mr. Rich was murdered in Washington, D.C.
shortly after the emails were released, and Julian Assange strongly inferred that
Mr. Rich – rather than Russian hackers – was responsible for sending the emails to Wikileaks. Conversely, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the FBI, and the
intelligence establishment all have insisted that Mr. Rich played no role in
transferring the emails.

I am reliably informed that the NSA or its partners intercepted at least some
of the communications between Mr. Rich and Wikileaks. Before elaborating on
that, however, I should first note the extent to which the “deep state” has already
tried to cover up information about Mr. Rich. In an October 9, 2018 affidavit
submitted in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, FBI section chief David M.
Hardy testified that (1) the FBI did not investigate any matters pertaining to Mr.
Rich, and (2) the FBI was unable to locate any records about Mr. Rich. Both
claims were unequivocally false.”

“On March 20, 2020, I deposed former Asst. U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines,
the prosecutor assigned to the Seth Rich murder case. She testified that (1) the FBI investigated a possible intrusion into Mr. Rich’s electronic accounts; (2) the FBI examined Mr. Rich’s computer; and (3) the FBI did have records pertaining to Mr. Rich. Ms. Sines further testified that she met with a prosecutor and an FBI agent from Mr. Mueller’s team (ergo there should be an FD-302 form from that
interview). Again, this flatly contradicts the FBI’s official narrative that (1) Mr.
Rich was never the subject.”

Now, back to the NSA. Former NSA officials Bill Binney, Ed Loomis, and
Kirk Wiebe are prepared to testify that the DNC emails published by Wikileaks
could not have been obtained via hacking. Markings on the published emails –
including the speeds at which the email files were transmitted – exclude the
possibility of hacking. Instead, someone must have downloaded the files onto a
thumb drive or something similar. Furthermore, the NSA or its Five Eyes partners in London would have intercepted any communications between Mr. Rich and Wikileaks.

I have enclosed an October 4, 2018 letter wherein the NSA refused to
produce 32 pages of records about Seth Rich insofar as those records were
classified. I have also enclosed a November 22, 2019 letter wherein the NSA
declined to produce records in response to a subpoena duces tecum. One of my
consulting experts, Larry C. Johnson, was informed that the NSA possesses
additional communications between Mr. Rich and Wikileaks. Mr. Johnson is
retired from the CIA, and he has spoken with an intelligence official who said
there were additional communications.

Section 1.7 of Executive Order 13526 prohibits the use of classification for
purposes of concealing wrongdoing, and I believe the NSA is trying to conceal
wrongdoing that occurred during the Obama Administration. I respectfully request that you de-classify the NSA’s records about Seth Rich, further directing the NSA to release the records. Releasing the records would certainly help my client, but it would do a lot more than that. Disclosure would go a long way toward exposing the depravity of the “deep state,” and that is long overdue.”

Read more:

https://www.scribd.com/document/460698548/Letter-from-Attorney-Ty-Clevenger-to-Acting-DNI-Richard-Grenell#from_embed

From Clevenger v US Department of Justice filed May 1, 2020 by Attorney Ty Clevenger.

“In his March 29, 2020 Notice (Doc. No. 57), the Plaintiff informed the Court about the March 20, 2020 deposition of former Asst. U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines, and he further told the Court that he would provide a copy of Ms. Sines’s testimony after it became available. The Order was released on April 3, 2020, before the Plaintiff filed the transcript, but he has attached as Exhibit 1 to this motion a true and correct transcript of Ms. Sines’s testimony (hereinafter
“Transcript”).1 The Plaintiff respectfully moves the Court to reconsider the Order, particularly pages 15-19, in light of Ms. Sines’s testimony. Even without her testimony, however, the Plaintiff can establish that the government was not entitled to summary judgment.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.414614/gov.uscourts.nyed.414614.60.0.pdf

An order was filed yesterday May 13, 2020.

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/


Covington and Burling partner Eric Holder impeached for for high crimes and misdemeanors including delay of releasing Fast and Furious documents, Ex Flynn attorneys withheld docs

Covington and Burling partner Eric Holder impeached for for high crimes and misdemeanors including delay of releasing Fast and Furious documents, Ex Flynn attorneys withheld docs

“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

 

Eric Holder, Obama buddy, was impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors including delay of releasing Fast and Furious documents and other crimes and before he could be removed from office, resigned and returned as a partner to Covington and Burling, the law firm that withheld numerous important documents from General Michael Flynn’s new counsel led by Attorney Sidney Powell.

From the impeachment of Eric Holder:

“Introduced in House (11/14/2013)

113th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. RES. 411

Impeaching Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.


IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
November 14, 2013

Mr. Olson (for himself, Mr. Westmoreland, Mr. Bucshon, Mr. Williams, Mr. Yoho, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. Farenthold, Mr. Flores, Mrs. Bachmann, Mr. Gohmert, Mr. Hunter, Mr. Amodei, Mr. Duncan of South Carolina, Mr. Bridenstine, Mr. DesJarlais, Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas, Mr. Stockman, Mr. Conaway, Mr. Roe of Tennessee, and Mr. Massie) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary


RESOLUTION

Impeaching Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Resolved, That Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and all of the people of the United States of America, against Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.

ARTICLE I

ARTICLE II

ARTICLE III

ARTICLE IV

https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-resolution/411/text

From the Covington and Burling website:

“Eric Holder advises clients on complex investigations and litigation matters, including those that are international in scope and involve significant regulatory enforcement issues and substantial reputational concerns. Mr. Holder, who was a partner at Covington from 2001 to 2009, rejoined the firm after serving for six years as the 82nd Attorney General of the United States.

Before his service as Attorney General, Mr. Holder maintained a wide-ranging investigations and litigation practice at Covington.”

https://www.cov.com/en/professionals/h/eric-holder

In a court filing dated April 28, 2020, General Flynn former attorneys Covington & Burling blame miscommunication with their IT staff for the delayed release of 6,800 documents.

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2020/04/28/general-flynn-former-attorneys-covington-burling-file-court-doc-april-28-2020-revealing-6800-more-documents-and-emails-found-miscommunication-with-it-staff/

And that’s not all.

From the GateWay Pundit.

“General Flynn’s First Law Firm Hired Deep State FBI Attorney At Same Time They Were Repping Flynn – Did They Share with Flynn this Conflict of Interest?”
“The DOJ’s Trisha Anderson went to work for Flynn’s attorney law firm while they were repping for General Flynn. Did Covington tell General Flynn about hiring one of the individuals at the DOJ involved in the Russia collusion sham?”

“Anderson was deep in the Deep State at the FBI that worked on the coup attempt of President Trump.  Epoch Times reported this on Anderson’s testimony in front of Congress only a month before she left for Covington:”

Read more:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/01/breaking-exclusive-general-flynns-first-law-firm-hired-deep-state-fbi-attorney-at-same-time-they-were-repping-flynn-did-they-share-with-flynn-this-conflict-of-interest/

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

 

FBI caught in Seth Rich records lie, Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019 court filing, FBI records subpoenaed again, US Attorney Deborah Sines: “the FBI was looking into that”

FBI caught in Seth Rich records lie, Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019 court filing, FBI records subpoenaed again, US Attorney Deborah Sines: “the FBI was looking into that”

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

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

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

 

From the

MOTION TO COMPEL FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION TO
COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM

Filed by Attorney Ty Clevenger on October 11, 2019.

“On July 3, 2019, the Plaintiff served a subpoena duces tecum on the FBI that
commanded production of information related to Seth Rich and Aaron Rich:
1. Produce all data downloaded from all electronic devices that belonged to Seth
Conrad Rich (born on or about January 3, 1989) as well as all data, documents,
records or communications indicating how the devices were obtained and who was responsible for downloading the information.
2. Produce all data, documents, communications, records or other evidence indicating whether Seth Conrad Rich (hereinafter “Seth Rich”), his brother Aaron Rich, or any other person or persons were involved in transferring data from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks, either directly or through intermediaries.
3. Produce all documents, communications, records or other evidence reflecting
orders or directions (whether formal or informal) for the handling of any evidence pertaining to Seth Rich’s or Aaron Rich’s involvement in transferring data from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.

4. Produce all documents, records, or communications exchanged with any other
government agencies (or representatives of such agencies) since July 10, 2016
regarding (1) Seth Rich’s murder or (2) Seth Rich’s or Aaron Rich’s involvement in transferring data from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.
5. Produce all recordings, transcripts, or notes (e.g., FD-302 forms) reflecting any interviews of Aaron Rich or any other witness regarding (1) the death of Seth Rich or (2) the transfer of data from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.
6. In an August 13, 2018 letter from Assistant U.S. Attorney Kathleen Mahoney
(EDNY) to Ty Clevenger pertaining to Ty Clevenger v. U.S. Department of
Justice, et al., Case No. 18-CV-01568 (EDNY), Ms. Mahoney wrote that she had
conferred with the FBI (her client) regarding whether it assisted the Seth Rich
investigation:
I subsequently ascertained from the FBI that as part of the search that it
conducted in response to your FOIA request, the Washington, D.C. Field
Office was contacted. They responded that they did not open a case or
assist in the investigation and have no records.
In an August 22, 2018 letter from Assistant U.S. Attorney Kathleen Mahoney
(EDNY) to Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom in the same case, Ms. Mahoney wrote as
follows:
Plaintiff then inquired by email on August 16, whether the FBI had
searched for records with the Computer Analysis and Response Team
(“CART”). On August 20, the undersigned responded by email that the FBI
had advised that it did not reach out to CART because the FBI had not
assisted in the investigation (the D.C. police declined the FBI’s assistance)
but that the searches that the FBI did conduct would have located any
CART records.
Produce all records, documents, data, or communications (e.g., text messages or
telephone records) identifying the person or persons who offered FBI assistance
and the person or persons who declined it on behalf of the D.C. police. Also
produce the full contents of any such communications wherein the offer of
assistance was made or rejected.
7. Produce all data, documents, records or communications obtained by the FBI’s Computer Analysis and Response Team (“CART”) regarding Seth Rich and/or Aaron Rich.
8. Produce all data, documents or records (including texts or emails) that reflect any meetings or communications from July 10, 2016 until July 10, 2017 between
former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and any and all of the following: (1)
Seymour Myron “Sy” Hersh (born on or about April 8, 1937); (2) Washington,
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser; and/or (3) former Democratic National Committee Interim Chairwoman Donna Brazile.”

“1. The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those records in bad faith.”

“In August of 2019, Michael Isikoff of Yahoo!News published the fifth episode of
“Conspiracyland,” a podcast series about the murder of Seth Rich, and in that episode he interviewed former Asst. U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia had assigned Ms. Hines to investigate the murder of Mr. Rich, and a full copy of the interview can be found at https://tunein.com/podcasts/News–
Politics-Podcasts/Conspiracyland-p1231856/?topicId=132591823. In Episode 5, Mr. Isikoff discussed a Fox News report that the FBI had copies of communications between Seth Rich and Wikileaks:
Isikoff: “As soon as she heard the [Fox News] story, Sines reached out to the FBI.”

Sines: “Of course I did. Of course I did.”

Isikoff: “And what did they tell you?”

Sines: “No.”

Isikoff: “No.”

Sines: “No. No connection between Seth and Wikileaks. And there was no
evidence on his work computer of him downloading and disseminating things
from the DNC.”

Isikoff: “As it turned out, there was one sliver of truth in the Fox story. The FBI
had been examining Seth’s computer, not for any ties to the DNC emails or
Wikileaks, but because they saw unusual activity by a foreign hacker after his
death.”

Sines: “There were allegations that someone, maybe more than one person, was
trying to invade Seth’s Gmail account and set up a separate account after Seth was murdered, and the FBI was looking into that. I presumed they were trying to
create a fake Gmail account or get into Seth’s Gmail account so they could dump
false information in there.”

Isikoff: “So just to be clear, the FBI had only investigated an attempt to hack into
Seth Rich’s email when they saw activity after he died. When we contacted the
Bureau’s Washington Field Office, a spokesperson said it had never opened an
investigation into the DNC staffer’s death, pointing out that the FBI had no
jurisdiction over local crimes. Andrew McCabe, the Bureau’s acting director at
the time, told us something else. He had personally reached out to his agents
when he heard the Seth Rich conspiracy stories and was informed there was
nothing to them. There was no ‘there’ there, McCabe said he was told.” (emphasis added).
Transcript of Excerpt, Conspiracyland, Episode 5 (emphasis added).2

In other words, Mr. Hardy’s claim that the FBI had no records about Seth Rich was false. And the fact that the FBI refused to search in CART, the place where responsive records most likely would be found, is strong evidence of bad faith.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.183024/gov.uscourts.txed.183024.75.0.pdf

 

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/

Butowsky v. NPR Folkenflik et al Agreed Motion to Modify Scheduling Order August 19, 2019, Additional time is necessary for completion of discovery

Butowsky v. NPR Folkenflik et al Agreed Motion to Modify Scheduling Order August 19, 2019, Additional time is necessary for completion of discovery

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

 

From the Ed Butowsky v. NPR Folkenflik et al Agreed Motion to Modify Scheduling Order dated August 19, 2019.

1. On March 21, 2019, this Court entered a Scheduling Order (Dkt. # 57), which set forth various deadlines up to an including a Final Pretrial Conference on January 31, 2020. Pending before the Court at that time were Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, filed on October 16, 2018 (Dkt. # 25) and Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint, filed on March 15, 2019 (Dkt. 53). On April 17, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a
Report and Recommendation, recommending that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss be denied (Dkt. # 58), and on August 7, 2019, the Court adopted that Report and Recommendation and denied the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, and additionally granted the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend his Complaint (Dkt. # 65).

2. The parties have exchanged written discovery, but have mutually agreed that in light of the number of witnesses who must be deposed, several of whom are non-parties outside the control of any party, additional time is necessary for completion of discovery, the deadline to file dispositive motions, and trial. In addition, Plaintiff wishes to further amend his pleadings, based on events which occurred after the current Scheduling Order’s deadline to amend pleadings. Accordingly, the parties jointly request that portions of the March 21, 2019
Scheduling Order be modified, as set forth below.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.183024/gov.uscourts.txed.183024.68.0.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Epstein prosecution continues, Civil suits continue against estate, Co conspirators will be prosecuted and sued, Bill Clinton accused and prosecuted?

Epstein prosecution continues, Civil suits continue against estate, Co conspirators will be prosecuted and sued, Bill Clinton accused and prosecuted?

“Former President Bill Clinton was a much more frequent flyer on a registered sex offender’s infamous jet than previously reported, with flight logs showing the former president taking at least 26 trips aboard the “Lolita Express” — even apparently ditching his Secret Service detail for at least five of the flights, according to records obtained by FoxNews.com.”…Fox News May 13, 2016

“If This Story Gets Out, We Are Screwed”…Wikileaks: Doug Band to John Podesta

“Willing to help. Fantastic lawyer. Kept me out of jail.”…John Podesta, Wikileaks email

 

From the Jeffrey Epstein indictment.

“4. In creating and maintaining this network of minor victims in multiple states to sexually abuse and exploit, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, the defendant, worked and conspired with others, including employees and associates who facilitated his conduct by, among other things, contacting victims and scheduling their sexual encounters with EPSTEIN at the New York Residence and at the Palm Beach Residence.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.518649/gov.uscourts.nysd.518649.2.0_1.pdf

From the Manhattan U.S. Attorney.

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Saturday, August 10, 2019

Statement Of Manhattan U.S. Attorney On The Death Of Defendant Jeffrey Epstein

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman said:  “Earlier this morning, the Manhattan Correctional Center confirmed that Jeffrey Epstein, who faced charges brought by this Office of engaging in the sex trafficking of minors, had been found unresponsive in his cell and was pronounced dead shortly thereafter of an apparent suicide.  Today’s events are disturbing, and we are deeply aware of their potential to present yet another hurdle to giving Epstein’s many victims their day in Court. To those brave young women who have already come forward and to the many others who have yet to do so, let me reiterate that we remain committed to standing for you, and our investigation of the conduct charged in the Indictment – which included a conspiracy count – remains ongoing.

 

We continue to urge anyone who feels they may be a victim or have information related to the conduct in this case to please contact 1-800- CALL FBI.”

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/statement-manhattan-us-attorney-death-defendant-jeffrey-epstein

From NBC News.

“Accused child sex predator Jeffrey Epstein wired a total of $350,000 to a pair of possible co-conspirators just days after the publication of a newspaper story alleging he sexually abused dozens of underage girls, federal prosecutors said Friday.

The prosecutors said the payments, which were made last November after the bombshell Miami Herald story came out, demonstrate Epstein’s willingness to tamper with witnesses.

“This course of action, and in particular its timing, suggests the defendant was attempting to further influence co-conspirators who might provide information against him in light of the recently re-emerging allegations,” the prosecutors wrote in court papers arguing that Epstein should remain behind bars until his trial.

Epstein wired $100,000 to one of his associates two days after the story was published, the court papers say. Three days later, he sent $250,000 to someone identified as one of his employees, prosecutors said. Neither of the two were named, but both were said to be possible co-conspirators in the alleged sex crimes that were the subject of the Miami Herald article.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/jeffrey-epstein-tampered-witnesses-sent-350k-2-people-prosecutors-n1029381

From CBS News.

“An attorney who has represented more than a dozen women accusing Epstein of sexual abuse called the apparent suicide “unfortunate and predictable.”

“We will continue to represent his victims and will not stop in their pursuit of finality and justice,” Edwards said. In a statement on Twitter, Lisa Bloom, who represents three accusers, said civil cases would continue.

Epstein’s alleged victims said through their attorneys they are angry they won’t get a chance for justice since the criminal case will end with his death.

“I don’t blame them for being very angry,” said CBS News legal analyst Rikki Klieman. “They have lived with shame – either privately or publicly – they deserve their day in court to show that they are survivors. They deserve their day in court to show that they are survivors. ”

Klieman said the spotlight could now turn to Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstien’s one-time girlfriend who has been accused of procuring girls for him.

Civil cases against him can proceed against his estate, Klieman said.”

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

FBI FOIA response to Attorney Ty Clevenger suggests Obama White House pressured intelligence agencies to blame Russia, Rybicki transcript, FBI still balking on Seth Rich records

FBI FOIA response to Attorney Ty Clevenger suggests Obama White House pressured intelligence agencies to blame Russia, Rybicki transcript, FBI still balking on Seth Rich records

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

“Unfounded links between Clinton and the Rich killing predate the July 13, 2016, “bulletin” and coverage of it by a sketchy site called WhatDoesItMean.com. What’s more, the “hit team” story, which Sines says was repeated several weeks later, wasn’t the primary Rich-related conspiracy that gained traction.”…Washington Post July 9, 2019

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

 

Just in from Attorney Ty Clevenger  and LawFlog.

“Transcript suggests Obama White House pressured intelligence agencies to blame Russia

Newly released documents from the FBI suggest that the Obama White House pushed intelligence agencies to publicly blame the Russians for email leaks from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.

This afternoon I received an undated (and heavily redacted) transcript of an interview of James Rybicki, former chief of staff to former FBI Director James Comey, that includes this excerpt: “So we understand that at some point in October of 2016, there was, I guess, a desire by the White House to make some kind of statement about Russia’s…” and then the next page is omitted.

The comment is made by an unidentified prosecutor from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel or “OSC,” not to be confused with the office of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller (the OSC is a permanent office that investigates Hatch Act violations, and Mr. Comey was under investigation for trying to influence the 2016 Presidential election).

The context of the statement makes it all the more interesting, because the OSC prosecutors were noting that the FBI publicized its reactivation of the Clinton email investigation shortly before the 2016 election, and they were wondering why the FBI did not counterbalance that by publicizing the “Russian collusion” investigation into Donald Trump. In that setting, one of the prosecutors then commented that the White House wanted some kind of statement made about Russia.”

“In other words, it looks like the Obama White House put its thumb on the scale, pressuring intelligence agencies to adopt the Democratic National Committee’s talking points, i.e., to blame the stolen emails on Russian hackers rather than an internal source (like Seth Rich). Thanks to Roger Stone, we now know that neither the FBI nor anyone else from the U.S. government actually examined the DNC servers that supposedly were hacked. Instead, the FBI, et al. relied exclusively on a redacted report from CrowdStrike, a private security company with strong Democratic affiliations that was hired by Perkins Coie, the same firm that hired Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS.

As I noted in my July 23, 2019 post, CrowdStrike and the DNC are both fighting subpoenas that I issued (on behalf of Ed Butowsky) for information about the servers and the purported Russian hacking.

The Rybicki transcript was part of 55 additional pages that the FBI belatedly produced in response to my Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, Ty Clevenger v. U.S. Department of Justice, et al., Case No. 18-CV-01568 (E.D.N.Y.). (The FBI is still refusing to search its Computer Analysis and Research Team (“CART”) files for records related to Seth Rich, and that’s were any relevant records most likely would be found. I’ll be battling the FBI in federal court next month to make it search for records in CART).”

Read more:

Transcript suggests Obama White House pressured intelligence agencies to blame Russia

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Joel and Mary Rich v. Fox News appeal, Seth Rich murder investigations and reporting, Appeal of Rich’s failed lawsuit almost unreported

Joel and Mary Rich v. Fox News appeal, Seth Rich murder investigations and reporting, Appeal of Rich’s failed lawsuit almost unreported

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

“Unfounded links between Clinton and the Rich killing predate the July 13, 2016, “bulletin” and coverage of it by a sketchy site called WhatDoesItMean.com. What’s more, the “hit team” story, which Sines says was repeated several weeks later, wasn’t the primary Rich-related conspiracy that gained traction.”…Washington Post July 9, 2019

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

 

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.”

“Daniels also dismissed a second and separate lawsuit brought forth by Rod Wheeler, a private detective who was also a Fox News contributor and hired by the Rich family to investigate their son’s death. In it, Wheeler accused Fox News and Zimmerman of misrepresenting his analysis of Rich’s death in their story, and Butowsky of defaming him on Twitter after the story was published, according to reports by The New York Times.

“My investigation up to this point shows there was some degree of email exchange between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,” Wheeler was quoted in the Fox News article.”

Read more:

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/fox-news-wins-seth-rich-lawsuit-judge-dismisses

The appeal.

From Jennifer Taub, law professor and author.

“NEW: I just attended oral argument for the appeal brought by Seth Rich’s parents against Fox News

1/

The Riches sued Fox for intentional inflection of emotional distress. This case is related to a conspiracy theory broadcast by Fox News that in 2016 Seth, a DNC staffer, had leaked DNC emails to WikiLeaks prior to being shot and killed”

“4/

At oral argument today, Judge Calabresi told Rich’s counsel Arun Subramanian “You have to convince us that this is outrageous to the parents. .not to the son. The defamation case died with the son.” Also that the propensity for parents’ vulnerability and defendants’ awareness

5/

Judge Calabresi suggested that the outrageous conduct here involved interfering with the parents’ investigation including by planting a person from Fox News (Wheeler) to pretend he was working solely for them “

“11/

Judge Calabresi interrupted and said that if Seth Rich were in a coma, then couldn’t a defamation suit brought by Seth proceed regardless of first amendment claims. And then also, couldn’t this separate cause of action be brought by parents?

12/

Judge Calabresi added that the only question then would be whether New York recognizes this separate cause of action — whether there was “outrageous conduct” by Fox with respect to the parents

13/

Attorney Terry says New York Court of Appeals has rejected claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress with more outrageous facts (Note that NY CT App is the highest court in the state of New York and though this case is in federal court, New York law applies)”

“18/

Attorney Terry returned to the main argument he is making on behalf of Fox News “a defamation claim cannot be restyle as an intentional infliction of emotional distress case.” He also said, that the conduct should not be recognized as outrageous as a matter of law

19/

Terry said that NY courts have dismissed intentional infliction of emotional distress cases e.g where reporters told rape victims their names would not be published then publishing them. He said that wasn’t treated as outrageous conduct, so this should not

20/

Terry added that Seth’s parent must also prove that Fox’s conduct was INTENDED to cause them harm

21/

Judge Calabresi said that in order to prove intent, “wrecklessness” would suffice. He also suggested that perhaps given this “odd situation” the 2nd circuit could certify to the NY Court of Appeals this question of whether these facts amounted to “outrageous conduct.””

Read more:

https://threader.app/thread/1092478914998484994

It would be nice to have the appeal outcome stated explicitly.

If anyone has this reference, please supply as a comment.

By inference and the fact that it has not been shouted from the rooftops by the fake news media, it could be assumed that the outcome did not favor the Rich Family.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

Bauman v. Butowsky et al, Dismissed, Circumstances surrounding Seth Rich’s death remain unresolved, Bauman “Democrat crisis management person”

Bauman v. Butowsky et al, Dismissed, Circumstances surrounding Seth Rich’s death remain unresolved, Bauman “Democrat crisis management person”

“On March 1, 2017, Wheeler told Butowsky that he (Wheeler) had independently acquired some “dynamic information” from one of his sources, the “lead detective” on the Seth Rich murder case. Wheeler also claimed that he had learned and knew who was “blocking the [murder] investigation”…Butowsky Vs Folkenflik, NPR, et al

“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″

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

 

The ruling by judge Richard J. Leon was filed on March 29, 2019 dismissing the case against Ed Butowsky.

Heard much about this from the fake news media?

Heard much in the fake news media about the lawsuits Ed Butowsky has filed against those making false allegations against him?

Perhaps they are too busy trying to keep the false Russian Narrative alive and trying to obfuscate the Seth Rich murder story and possible link to the DNC leaks to Wikileaks.

From the ruling by judge Richard J. Leon on Bauman v. Butowsky, et al.

“While there is, of course, no real comparison to be made between the public debate over the Kennedy assassination and Seth Rich’s murder, this case does share much with Lane. Like the Kennedy assassination, the circumstances surrounding Seth Rich’s death remain unresolved. Compl. at ¶¶ 2, 29. Perhaps this would be a different case if the murderer had been caught, tried, and convicted and the motive made public; the present state of play, however, effectively precludes a factual determination as to the falsity of Butowsky’s statement. See Campbell vCitizens for an Honest Gov’tInc., 255 F.3d 560, 577(8th Cir. 2001) (“[w]hile we are not aficionados of conspiracy theories, we suppose that if [defendant’s] assertions are true, there would be inherent difficulties in verifying or refuting such a claim”). To be sure, my decision in this case in no way condones Butowsky’s conduct. But our Circuit Court has said that “where the question of truth or falsity is a close one, a court should err on the side of non-actionability.” Moldea II22 F.3d at 317. I will heed that admonition.

The remaining statements—that Bauman is a “Democrat crisis management person” “assigned” by the DNC to act as the Rich Family spokesperson, Compl. at ¶ 53—are not defamatory. To be defamatory, a statement must not only be capable of injuring the plaintiff “in his trade, profession or community standing” but also goes beyond mere offensiveness to “make the plaintiff appear odious, infamous, or ridiculous.” Competitive Enterprise150 A.3d at 1241 (internal quotation marks omitted). As with falsity, whether a statement is capable of defamatory meaning is a threshold question of law for the Court. Jankovic vInt’l Crisis Grp., 494 F.3d 1080, 1091 (D.C. Cir. 2007). The pleadings in this case make clear that Bauman is a public relations specialist, see Compl. at ¶¶ 14, 22, 51, and Bauman does not appear to dispute that his work often relates to Democratic Party causes, see Def. Butowsky’s Mot. to Dismiss at 5-6 [Dkt. # 12]; Mem. in Supp. of Def. Heavin’s Mot. to Dismiss at 1 [Dkt. # 14-1]; see generally Pl.’s Opp’n to Def. Heavin’s Mot. to Dismiss; Pl.’s Opp’n to Def. Butowsky’s Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt. # 23]. Thus, an accusation of being a “Democrat crisis management person” would hardly harm Bauman professionally. Indeed, it could be easily viewed by many as a badge of honor. Nor would the assertion that Bauman had been tasked by the DNC to handle communications on a matter of public interest that had quickly become politicized make him appear odious.

Of course, defamatory meaning need not be express. White vFraternal Order of Police909 F.2d 512, 518 (D.C. Cir. 1990). A statement may be defamatory by implication  if “a reasonable person could draw a defamatory inference” from the statement. Parnigoni vStColumba’s Nursery School681 F.Supp.2d 1, 15 (D.D.C. 2010). “In other words, defamation by implication evolves from what a statement reasonably implies.” Id. Here, the overarching defamatory inference that Bauman presents is that Butowsky’s statements form part of a larger narrative accusing him of working alongside the DNC to conceal criminality “at the highest echelons,” to cover up Seth Rich’s murder, and to impede law enforcement’s investigation into the murder. Compl. at ¶¶ 4, 59, 75, 129. But defamation by implication requires “an especially rigorous showing,” as the publication “must not only be reasonably read to impart the false innuendo, but it must also affirmatively suggest that the author intends or endorses the inference.” Guilford Transportation IndustriesInc., 760 A.2d at 596 (quoting Chapin vKnight-Ridder993 F.2d 1087, 1092-93 (4th Cir. 1993)). In the article on which Bauman relies, Butowsky certainly states his opinion that the DNC is engaged in nefarious activities, and he suggests that Bauman appeared at the DNC’s behest and that his role is deserving of suspicion. SeeCompl. at ¶ 53. But the facts alleged are insufficient to show that Butowsky intended, or affirmatively endorsed, the implication that Bauman’s job was, as the complaint puts it, to “execute the DNC’s plan to cover up Seth Rich’s murder.” Id. at ¶ 4; see also id. at ¶ 129(b) (“assigned and paid by the DNC to serve as the Rich family spokesperson so that he could obstruct the  investigation into Seth Rich’s murder”). Accordingly, Butowsky’s statements, although clearly hyperbolic, are not actionable in defamation.

 As Bauman has not met the first element of a defamation claim, I need not address Butowsky’s argument that Bauman is a limited purpose public figure under the First Amendment. ——–

b. Remaining Causes of Action

Bauman also brings claims for defamation per se and false light against Butowsky. For the reasons stated above, Bauman has not stated a claim for defamation per se, which occurs when a defendant falsely accuses the plaintiff of committing a crime or other unlawful act. Seee.g., Guilford TranspIndus., Inc., 760 A.2d at 600. Additionally, “[w]hen a false light claim is based upon the same factual allegations as a defamation claim, the two are analyzed identically.” Parisi vSinclair845 F.Supp.2d 215, 218 n.1 (D.D.C. 2012) (citing Blodgett vUnivClub930 A.2d 210, 223 (D.C. 2007)). Bauman therefore also has failed to state a false light claim.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Heavin’s Rule 12(b)(2) motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and Butowsky’s 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim are hereby GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED as to those defendants. A separate order consistent with this decision accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.196850/gov.uscourts.dcd.196850.35.0_1.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/