Tag Archives: 2019?

Sidney Powell surreply November 4, 2019, “Andrew McCabe as much as admitted the FBI’s intent to set up Mr. Flynn on a criminal false statement charge”

Sidney Powell surreply November 4, 2019, “Andrew McCabe as much as admitted the FBI’s intent to set up Mr. Flynn on a criminal false statement charge”

“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

“Former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe as much as admitted the FBI’s intent to set up Mr. Flynn on a criminal false statement charge from the get-go.”…Attorney Sidney Powell November 4, 2019

“Truth, due process, evidence, rights of the accused: All are swept aside in pursuit of the progressive agenda.
George Orwell’s 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four is no longer fiction. We are living it right now.”…National Review September 25, 2018

 

From United States v. Michael Flynn

Filed November 4, 2019 by Attorney Sidney Powell.

“MR. FLYNN’S SUR-SURREPLY IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION TO COMPEL
PRODUCTION OF BRADY MATERIAL AND FOR AN ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE”

“If accepted, the government’s approach would allow endless manipulation by prosecutors: target individuals, run search warrants, seize devices, interrogate for days, threaten family members, cajole, but never charge until the clock strikes midnight once a plea is extracted. Yet playing cat-and-mouse with the Due Process Clause is the opposite of what the Brady-BagleyGiglio line of cases is all about. Perhaps even more significantly, the government’s position
wholly ignores this Court’s Standing Order, which not only has no such timing requirements, but is issued for the precise purpose of eliminating the games the government played here.”

“The government has known since prior to January 24, 2017, that it intended to target Mr. Flynn for federal prosecution. That is why the entire “investigation” of him was created at least as early as summer 2016 and pursued despite the absence of a legitimate basis. That is why Peter Strzok texted Lisa Page on January 10, 2017: “Sitting with Bill watching CNN. A TON more out. .
. We’re discussing whether, now that this is out, we can use it as a pretext to go interview some people.” 3 The word “pretext” is key. Thinking he was communicating secretly only with his paramour before their illicit relationship and extreme bias were revealed to the world, Strzok let
the cat out of the bag as to what the FBI was up to. Try as he might, Mr. Van Grack cannot stuff that cat back into that bag.4

Former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe as much as admitted the FBI’s intent to set up Mr. Flynn on a criminal false statement charge from the get-go. On Dec. 19, 2017, McCabe told the House Intelligence Committee in sworn testimony: “[T]he conundrum that we faced on their return from the interview is that although [the agents] didn’t detect deception in the statements
that he made in the interview . . . the statements were inconsistent with our understanding of the conversation that he had actually had with the ambassador.” McCabe proceeded to admit to the Committee that “the two people who interviewed [Flynn] didn’t think he was lying, [which] was not [a] great beginning of a false statement case.” Ex. 1.”

“But here, to use Strzok’s own words, the investigation was “a pretext;” the object of the interview was to secure, rather than prevent, a 1001 violation. The “poor
start” further reveals Mr. McCabe’s determination to create a case despite the agents’ belief Mr. Flynn was telling the truth. Having such concrete evidence as to the prosecution’s thinking processes is rare; having it in text messages and sworn congressional testimony is priceless.”

“The Strzok-Page text messages confirm that Lisa Page had two opportunities to edit drafts of the crucial 302. Strzok returned to his FBI office the night of February 10, 2017, to input the edits she made on the draft she had earlier left in Bill [Priestap’s] office (about which they hatch a cover-story), then sent her another version over the weekend. The government thus implicitly
admits there was at least one version prior to the February 10 edition.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.135.0_1.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

 

 

General Flynn response to prosecutors, Attorney Sidney Powell filing Nov. 1, 2019, Strzok Page texts: “I made some joke about what F said. Something patriotic or military.”

General Flynn response to prosecutors, Attorney Sidney Powell filing Nov. 1, 2019, Strzok Page texts: “I made some joke about what F said. Something
patriotic or military.”

“I made some joke about what F said. Something patriotic or military.”…Strzok Page texts

“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

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

 

From the Attorney Sidney Powell response filing November 1, 2019 in United States v Michael Flynn:

“As new counsel has made clear from her first appearance, Mr. Flynn will ask this Court to dismiss the entire prosecution based on the outrageous and un-American conduct of law enforcement officials and the subsequent failure of the prosecution to disclose this evidence—which it had in its possession all along—either in a timely fashion or at all. Moreover, the defendant still needs and is still entitled to all the facts in the government’s possession—not just those Mr. Van Grack was forced to provide because they had already leaked into the public
domain. The government’s tactic of disclosing information because it had made its way into the news and the internet is tantamount to no Brady disclosure at all, while its self-serving minimized disclosures were outright deceptive.”

“Despite a polite reminder from this Court that its Brady order is paramount,1 the government’s response depends heavily on its assertion—forty-five times in twenty pages—that Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty, and thirteen assertions that he waived any right to further Brady material.2 As expected, the government touts its many Brady disclosures. What it elides, however, is that its “disclosures” were so limited, misleading, untimely, or deliberately trivialized as to
render them meaningless—and in some instances, outright deceitful. As the Supreme Court has recognized, and which happened in the extreme here, an incomplete response could “represent[] to the defense that the evidence does not exist” and cause it “to make pretrial and trial decisions on the basis of this assumption.” United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 682-83 (1985).”

“The real evidence the government had long suppressed caused a cavalcade of major events—many within mere days of Mr. Flynn’s plea—and all unknown to him before it. Lisa Page, Special Counsel to Deputy Director McCabe, resigned; she had edited Mr. Flynn’s 302 and was part of the small, high-level group that strategically planned his ambush. Lead Agent Peter Strzok was demoted from the Mueller investigation and ultimately fired. Strzok, who had met extensively with McCabe and the high-level, small group, was primarily responsible for creating the only basis for the charge alleged against Flynn. Ex. 1.

The day after Mr. Flynn’s plea, the press exploded with the news of Strzok and Page’s prolific text messages, their affair, and their malice toward President Trump.3 The Inspector General issued a rare statement that he was investigating the entire matter. MTC 23. Bruce Ohr, the fourth highest-ranking member of DOJ, was demoted. Judge Contreras, who accepted Mr. Flynn’s plea only days before, was suddenly and inexplicably recused—only for it to be disclosed
much later that he was a topic of conversation in the Strzok-Page texts because he was a friend of Agent Strzok.4 And, remarkably, DOJ’s Bruce Ohr was demoted a second time. Ex. 1. This is merely a snapshot of the aftershock from the earliest revelations into the public domain and to Mr. Flynn.”

“January 23, the day before the interview, the upper echelon of the FBI met to orchestrate it all. Deputy Director McCabe, General Counsel James Baker, , Lisa Page, Strzok, David Bowdich, Trish Anderson, and Jen Boone strategized to talk with Mr. Flynn in such a way as to keep from alerting him from understanding that he was being interviewed in a criminal investigation of which he was the target. Ex.12. Knowing they had no basis for an investigation,6
they deliberately decided not to notify DOJ for fear DOJ officials would follow protocol and notify White House Counsel. They decided not to tell Flynn their true purpose nor give him 1001 warnings, so as to keep him “relaxed.” They planned not to show him the transcript of his calls to refresh his recollection, nor confront him directly if he did not remember. In short, they planned
to deceive him about the entire scenario, and keep him “unguarded.” Exs. 5, 6; MTC 34.”

“They knew what they were doing was wrong. Lisa Page wrote: “I can feel my heart beating harder, I’m so stressed about all the ways THIS has the potential to go fully off the rails.””

“5. Reporting Back: Flynn’s “Demeanor Was Sure.”
He Was Telling the Truth or Believed He Was Telling the Truth.
The agents returned from interviewing Mr. Flynn, describing their excitement over it, and with a belief contrary to what they expected, that he had been honest with them. After the interview, they briefed it three times. Strzok texted Page: “Describe the feeling, nervousness, excitement knowing we had just heard him denying it all. Knowing we’d have to pivot into asking.
Puzzle round and round about it. Talk about the funny details. Remember what I said that made Andy laugh and ask if he really said that.”
Strzok urged: “Also have some faith in and my assessment. ……. I’m finding it hard to go out on a counterintuitive yet strongly felt ledge with so many competent voices expressing what I feel too: bullsh*t – that doesn’t make sense. [] I made some joke about what F said. Something patriotic or military.””

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.133.0.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

Sidney Powell for Michael Flynn request for Joseph Mifsud data and other Brady material, Government response October 29, 2019, “not…material to the defendant’s guilt”???

Sidney Powell for Michael Flynn request for Joseph Mifsud data and other Brady material, Government response October 29, 2019, “not…material to the defendant’s guilt”???

“Mr. McCabe pointed to Mr. Flynn’s “very public interactions with Vladimir Putin and other Russians.” These “interactions” seem to have arisen from the work of CIA/FBI operatives Stefan Halper and Joseph Mifsud”…Sidney Powell motion October 25, 2019

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

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

 

I guess the prosecutors in the US v Michael Flynn case are desperate (or just corrupt and covering each other’s asses).

A pre law or for that matter average middle school student could blow their latest argument out of the water.

Attorney Sidney Powell will.

And the judge, if not too corrupt, should see it as another prosecution ploy to subvert justice.

From the motions:

“The United States of America, by and through its undersigned counsel, respectfully files this response to defendant Michael Flynn’s Motion to Produce Newly Discovered Brady Evidence, United States v. Flynn, 17-cr-232 (Doc. 124) (D.D.C. Oct. 15, 2019). In the motion, the defendant requests information pertaining to two phones that allegedly “were used by Mr.Joseph Mifsud” and are allegedly in the possession of the government. Id. at 2. According to the
defendant, the phones contain information on individuals tasked against the defendant as early as 2014. Id. 1

The requested materials are not favorable and material to the defendant’s guilt or punishment, or even relevant to this criminal case.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.130.0_8.pdf

“In an extraordinary reversal, the defendant now claims that he is innocent of the criminal charge in this case. See, e.g., Reply at 2 (“When the Director of the FBI, and a group of his close associates, plot to set up an innocent man and create a crime . . . .”). For the first time, the defendant represents to this Court that he “was honest with the agents [on January 24, 2017] to the best of his recollection at the time.” Reply at 23. He makes this claim despite having admitted his guilt, under oath, before two federal judges (including this Court). The defendant also argues—based almost entirely on evidence previously provided in discovery—that the government engaged in “conduct so shocking to the conscience and so inimical to our system of justice that it requires the dismissal of the charges [sic] for outrageous government conduct.”
Reply at 2. The Reply then seeks a new category of relief, that “this Court . . . dismiss the entire prosecution for outrageous government misconduct.”1
Reply at 32.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.131.0_2.pdf

From Sidney Powell’s motion filed October 25, 2019.

The Mueller Report established that there was no conspiracy between anyone in the Trump campaign and Russia. It is also apparent now, or will be upon the release of the FISA report of the Inspector General, that the FBI and DOJ had no legal basis to obtain a FISA warrant against Carter Page or to investigate Mr. Flynn.13 Yet, the government wants us to accept its word that the defense has everything to which it is entitled. Fortunately Brady exists to protect the accused
“from the prosecutor’s private deliberations, as the chosen forum for ascertaining the truth about criminal accusations.” Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419, 440 (1995).

While Flynn was cooperating extensively on all issues the Special Counsel wanted to address, the government has trickled out productions over the last year that reveal many things. Ex. 15. Some of the most notable include : (i) the original notes of the agents differ materially from the 302s; (ii) there were material alterations to the 302s to set up the “false statements,” and (iii)
the government has extensive reports of Mr. Flynn’s briefings and debriefings on all his foreign contacts—including his Russia trip and his meeting with Turkish officials—giving lie yet again to the public pretext of the FBI “investigation” of Mr. Flynn. Further, what is still a heavily redacted 302 for former Agent Strzok, since January 2017, the government knew, but still has not disclosed the full statements and notes that show Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates said the interview of Mr. Flynn was “problematic,” and she was “unclear” why the FBI was investigating or interviewing Mr. Flynn at all.”

“12 Mr. McCabe pointed to Mr. Flynn’s “very public interactions with Vladimir Putin and other Russians.” These “interactions” seem to have arisen from the work of CIA/FBI operatives Stefan Halper and Joseph Mifsud, and bookings made by Mr. Flynn’s American speakers’ bureau,
Leading Authorities (which books engagements for countless former government officials and prominent people). Leading Authorities booked him for three events with “Russian connections”: one in Moscow for RT and two in Washington. All were well attended by prominent persons from
around the world because of the important issues discussed and the presence of other recognized experts on the programs. See Ex. 14; MTC 4, 16.

Mifsud was present at the RT dinner in Moscow, and it is his cell phones recently obtained by the government that are expected to confirm that he was working for “western intelligence.” Dkt. 124.

Stefan Halper is a known long-time operative for the CIA/FBI. He was paid exorbitant sums by the FBI/CIA/DOD through the Department of Defense Department’s Office of Net Assessment in 2016. His tasks seem to have included slandering Mr. Flynn with accusations of having an affair with a young professor (a British national of Russian descent) Flynn met at an official dinner
at Cambridge University when he was head of DIA in 2014. Flynn has requested the records of Col. James Baker because he was Halper’s “handler” in the Office of Net Assessment in the Pentagon, and ONA Director Baker regularly lunched with Washington Post Reporter David Ignatius. Baker is believed to be the person who illegally leaked the transcript of Mr. Flynn’s calls to Ignatius. The defense has requested the phone records of James Clapper to confirm his contacts with Washington Post reporter Ignatius—especially on January 10, 2017, when Clapper told Ignatius in words to the effect of “take the kill shot on Flynn.” It cannot escape mention that the press has long had transcripts of the Kislyak calls that the government has denied to the defense.
MTC 34, 35, 37.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.129.0_1.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Carter Page v. US Department of Justice filed October 21, 2019, “The DOJ, its employees and officers…acted intentionally or willfully in violation of Dr. Page’s privacy rights,”

Carter Page v. US Department of Justice filed October 21, 2019, “The DOJ, its employees and officers…acted intentionally or willfully in violation of Dr. Page’s privacy rights,”

“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

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

“McCabe had a role in crafting the “insurance policy” in the event Mr. Trump was elected.  Expect to find Comey a part of that also.”…Attorney Sydney Powell

 

From The Epoch Times.

“Carter Page Sues DOJ, Demands Review of IG Report Prior to Release

A former Trump campaign associate who was wiretapped by the FBI sued the Department of Justice (DOJ) on Oct. 21, demanding that the government provide him with the opportunity to review, before it is made public, the forthcoming inspector general’s report on potential surveillance abuses in his case.

In a lawsuit filed with the U.S. District Court in Washington, Carter Page accuses the DOJ of violating his privacy rights by failing to grant him the opportunity to review the report before the document is published.”

“Page additionally alleges that the DOJ violated his privacy rights by disclosing copies of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) application to the New York Times prior to giving him an opportunity to review the documents.

In addition to requesting damages and the prosecution of the officials involved, Page is asking the court to order the DOJ to hand over all of the documents he has long sought to review and amend.

“The DOJ, its employees and officers, including those in the affiliated agency of the FBI under their jurisdiction, acted intentionally or willfully in violation of Dr. Page’s privacy rights,” the lawsuit states.”

“The FBI obtained the warrant as part of its counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign. The application relies heavily on the dossier of political opposition research on then-candidate Donald Trump. Former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele compiled the dossier by paying second- and third-hand sources with ties to the Kremlin. The FISA warrant application fails to mention that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee paid for the dossier.”

Read more:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/carter-page-sues-doj-demands-ig-report-be-delayed-for-review_3128379.html

Read the lawsuit:

https://www.scribd.com/document/432130059/Carter-Page-v-DOJ

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Sidney Powell motion for Brady material and hold prosecutors in contempt meshes with Durham prosecution, October 24, 2019, Fake Russian collusion explained 101

Sidney Powell motion for Brady material and hold prosecutors in contempt meshes with Durham prosecution, October 24, 2019, Fake Russian collusion explained 101

“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

“Prosecutors Brandon Van Grack of the Justice Department’s national security division, who was formerly on Mr. Mueller’s team, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Curtis, of Washington, provided little explanation as to why they were not turning over the transcripts.”…Pittsburgh Post-Gazette June 1, 2019

“McCabe had a role in crafting the “insurance policy” in the event Mr. Trump was elected.  Expect to find Comey a part of that also.”…Attorney Sydney Powell

 

Attorney Sidney Powell, who knows the Justice Department inside and out, filed a motion yesterday, October 24, 2019, concurrently with the apparent start of prosecution by John Durham.

The contents of the motion could be considered an explanation into the fake Russian Collusion narrative, i.e. Justice Department corruption 101.

 

“FLYNN REPLY IN SUPPORT OF HIS MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF BRADY MATERIAL AND TO HOLD THE PROSECUTORS IN CONTEMPT”

“TABLE OF CONTENTS
ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES IN REPLY…………………………………………………………….. 3
A. The Government’s Suppression of the Actual Strzok-Page Texts Mandates a Finding of Contempt……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
1. “A Pretext to Interview Some People.” …………………………………………………………………. 6
2. “Many Meetings” to Strategize the Interview of Flynn………………………………………….. 7
3. “Off the Rails” ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8
4. The Plan Worked: Mr. Flynn was “Relaxed,” “Jocular,” and “Unguarded.”…………. 9
5. Reporting Back: Flynn’s “Demeanor Was Sure.”
He Was Telling the Truth or Believed He Was Telling the Truth…………………………….. 10
6. Agents Manipulate the Flynn 302……………………………………………………………………….. 10
7. February 14: “Launch f 302.”…………………………………………………………………………….. 11
8. The Media Leak Strategy with DOJ……………………………………………………………………. 12
9. The FBI Opens Obstruction Case on President Trump
and “Locks In” Case on “Flynn?”………………………………………………………………………….. 12
B. The FBI Knew Its Entire Investigation of Flynn Was A Pretext. ……………………………. 14
C. Brady Requires the Government to Produce Exculpatory Evidence in Time for the Defense to Use It. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 18
D. Full, Actual, Unredacted Documents, The Original 302, Drafts Prior to
February 10, 2019, and the 1A File and Subfiles Must be Produced Pursuant to Brady. 22
1. Agent Strzok’s notes do not appear to have been taken contemporaneously during the  Interview………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 24
2. The 302 statement that Mr. Flynn was told the “nature of the interview” is false. … 25
3. Mr. Van Grack’s Productions of Flynn 302s Were Incomplete and Misleading. …… 25
4. The Final 302 Falsely States that Mr. Flynn Remembered Making Four to Five Calls from the Dominican Republic When Both Sets of Notes State He Does Not Remember.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
5. The Notes Provide No Support for a Chunk of the 302 That Purports to Provide a “Factual Basis” for the Plea. ………………………………………………………………………………….. 27
6. Mr. Flynn’s Statements Were Not Material. ……………………………………………………….. 27
7. The Flynn 302 Is Discussed in the Page-Strzok Texts and Was Not Approved by McCabe Until the Day After Flynn Resigned from the White House……………………….. 28
E. Classified Information Will Prove that Any Investigation of Mr. Flynn Was
Pretextual. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 28
1. Yunis Mandates Disclosure of The Classified Information Requested as Brady…….. 28
2. The DIA Reports of Briefing and Debriefings Belie Any Basis to Investigate Mr. Flynn and Likely Further Undermine the Factual Basis for the Plea……………………….. 29
3. The Letter from Sir Mark Lyall Grant to the Incoming National Security Team
Invalidates Any Use of Information from Christopher Steele, Further Undermines Any “Russia” Connection, and is Being Suppressed. ……………………………………………………… 30
CONCLUSION ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 32
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE……………………………………………………………………………………… 33
Case 1:17-cr-00232-EGS Document 129”

“CONCLUSION
In its relentless pursuit of Mr. Flynn, the government became the architect of an injustice so egregious it is “repugnant to the American criminal system.” Russell, 411 U.S. at 428 (citations omitted). For these reasons and those in our original Motion and Brief in Support, this Court should compel the government to produce the evidence the defense requests in its full, unredacted
form. Given the clear and convincing evidence herein, this Court should issue an order to show cause why the prosecutors should not be held in contempt; and should dismiss the entire prosecution for outrageous government misconduct.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.129.0_1.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Sidney Powell brief sealed redacted released soon aims for dismissal of General Flynn case or more Brady material, October 22, 2019, Hannity interview

Sidney Powell brief sealed redacted released soon aims for dismissal of General Flynn case or more Brady material, October 22, 2019, Hannity interview

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

“Given the material defense counsel has requested, which remains outstanding, Mr. Van Grack’s denial that further Brady material exists is patently absurd. It demonstrates arrogance and utter contempt for the letter and the spirit of this Court’s explicit order, the rule of Brady v. Maryland, and the protections guaranteed to defendants by the U.S. Constitution.”…US v. Flynn motion to compel production of Brady Material 

“McCabe had a role in crafting the “insurance policy” in the event Mr. Trump was elected.  Expect to find Comey a part of that also.”…Attorney Sydney Powell

 

Sean Hannity interviewed General Michael Flynn attorney Sidney Powell on his October 22, 2019 show.

During the interview Powell stated:

“We have filed a brief just as of noon today that is quite revealing. It’s very powerful and I think it’s going to make a huge difference. Judge Sullivan can see exactly what’s been going on from this. I think he’ll have every grounds he needs to either go ahead and dismiss the case for egregious government misconduct right now or at the very least give us a significant amount of Brady information that the government has long been hiding. There’s even a valid basis to hold the prosecutors in contempt of court for ignoring his very clear Brady order. We’ve caught them in some significant outrageous violations. Right now the brief is under seal. We’ve forwarded it to the government for their agreement to redact certain things that are still subject to a protective order but we’re hoping to resolve that before the end of the day today because it is quite stunning.”

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Rich v. Fox News update October 18, 2019, Remanded for further proceedings, Fox and Zimmerman may file answer to complaint by November 20, 2019

Rich v. Fox News update October 18, 2019, Remanded for further proceedings, Fox and Zimmerman may file answer to complaint by November 20, 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

“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

 

Just in in the Rich v. Fox News lawsuit which was remanded back to the trial court for further proceedings.

“Hon. George B. Daniels
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007-1312

Re: Rich v. Fox News Network, LLC, Case No. 18-cv-2223

Dear Judge Daniels,
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has vacated this Court’s judgment granting the motion to dismiss and remanded this case for further proceedings. Plaintiffs Joel and Mary Rich have agreed that defendants Fox News Network, LLC and Malia Zimmerman may file their answer to the complaint by November 20, 2019. Fox and Zimmerman respectfully
request that the Court set this deadline for their answer.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.490098/gov.uscourts.nysd.490098.76.0.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/