Tag Archives: 2020

General Flynn case amicus brief filed by Trey Gowdy et al May 28, 2020, “court lacks discretion to deny a rule 48 motion to which the defendant consents”

General Flynn case amicus brief filed by Trey Gowdy et al May 28, 2020, “court lacks discretion to deny a rule 48 motion to which the defendant consents”

“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 the

BRIEF OF FEDERAL PRACTITIONERS AS AMICI CURIAE

filed by Trey Gowdy May 28, 2020.

“INTEREST OF AMICI CURIAE
Amici curiae are a bipartisan group of attorneys with extensive experience in
the federal court system, including many who practice criminal law in this and
other federal courts. Some were prosecutors, government attorneys, or judges.
They have an interest in: (1) the proper application of Fed.R.Crim.P 48 in light of
Separation of Powers principles, and (2) the potential triggering of a contempt
proceeding for perjury in cases where a client moves to withdraw a guilty plea or
in cases, civil or criminal, where a client provides testimony which a court may
consider to be false.

“ARGUMENT
I. THE COURT LACKS DISCRETION TO DENY A RULE 48 MOTION
TO WHICH THE DEFENDANT CONSENTS
The issue presented in this case is whether the court has discretion to deny a
motion to dismiss to which the defendant consents, as Gen. Flynn has done here.
The answer is no. Rule 48 must be construed in light of the Constitutional
separation of powers. The D.C. Circuit has done so and has concluded that “the
‘leave of court’ authority gives no power to a district court to deny a prosecutor’s
Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss charges based on a disagreement with the
prosecution’s exercise of charging authority.” U.S. v. Fokker Services B.V., 818
F.3d 733, 742 (D.C. Cir. 2016).

“Rule 48 provides that “[t]he government may, with leave of court, dismiss
an indictment, information, or complaint.” “The words ‘leave of court’ were
inserted in Rule 48(a) without explanation.” Rinaldi v. United States, 434 U.S. 22, 29 n. 15 (1977).3”

“A. The constitutional separation of powers precludes a court from
overriding a prosecutor’s decision to dismiss a prosecution.
Since its 1977 decision in Rinaldi, the Supreme Court has ruled that “an
agency’s decision not to prosecute or enforce, whether through civil or criminal
process, is a decision generally committed to an agency’s absolute discretion.”
Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 831 (1985). The Court has cautioned that “the
decision to prosecute is particularly ill-suited to judicial review. Such factors as the strength of the case, the prosecution’s general deterrence value, the Government’s enforcement priorities, and the case’s relationship to the Government’s overall enforcement plan are not readily susceptible to the kind of analysis the courts are competent to undertake.” Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598, 607 (1985).
These decisions effectively overrule Cowan and Ammidown.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.212.4_1.pdf

Exhibit A
List of Amici Curiae
1
Dan Backer Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Roy Barrera, Jr. Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Robert J. Bittman Federal trial and Appellate lawyer
Former Deputy Independent Counsel – Whitewater
John Stuart Bruce Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Former (The) United States Attorney, EDNC
Jackie Bennett Federal trial lawyer
Former Deputy Independent Counsel – Whitewater
Former DOJ Attorney (Public Integrity Section)
Former Assistant United States Attorney, SDIN
Margot Cleveland Retired career federal law clerk (7th Circuit)
Ronald D. Coleman Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Eric Evenson Former Assistant United States Attorney, EDNC
Former Chief – Organized Crime/Drug
Enforcement Tas Force, EDNC
Jack C. Frels Former Assistant United States Attorney, SDTX
Former Chief – Criminal Division, SDTX
Former Assistant United States Attorney, WDTX
Former Chief OCDETF/Narcotics Section, WDTX
Chris K. Gober Federal trial lawyer

Steven D. Gordon Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Former Assistant United States Attorney, DDC
Former Chief of Felony Trial, DDC
Trey Gowdy Former Assistant United States Attorney, DSC
Robert Harvey Federal trial and appellate attorney
Former Judge Advocate General, USN
Kenneth Julian Federal criminal trial attorney
Former Assistant United States Attorney, CDCA
Former Deputy Chief, CDCA
Joseph T. Knott, III Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Former Assistant United States Attorney, EDNC
Douglas McCullough Retired Judge, NC Court of Appeals
Former Assistant United States Attorney, EDNC
Former Acting United States Attorney, EDNC
Marina Medvin Career criminal defense attorney
John M. Reeves Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Former Missouri Assistant Attorney General
Wayne A. Rich, Jr. Former (The) United States Attorney, SDWV
Former Principal Deputy Director of the Executive
Office of the United States Attorneys
Former Military Judge, Col USMCR (ret.)

John P. Rowley, III Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Former Assistant United States Attorney, EDVA
Kevin H. Sharp Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Former United States District Judge, MDTN
William Shipley Federal criminal trial and appellate lawyer
Matthew H. Simmons Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Kenneth W. Starr Former Solicitor General of the United States
Former Independent Counsel – Whitewater
Carla Kerr Stearns Federal trial and appellate lawyer
William A. “Bill” Webb Mediator
Former United States Magistrate Judge, EDNC
Former (The) Public Defender, EDNC
Former Chief, OCDETF, EDNC
Former Assistant United States Attorney, EDNC
Former Assistant United States Attorney, WDPA
Solomon L. Wisenberg Federal trial and appellate lawyer
Former Deputy Independent Counsel – Whitewater
Former Assistant United States Attorney, WDTX
Former Chief -Financial Institution Fraud, WDTX
Former Assistant United States Attorney, EDNC

Ronald G. Woods Former (The) United States Attorney, SDTX
Former Assistant United States Attorney, SDTX
Former Special Agent, FBI

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.212.1_1.pdf

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Sidney Powell Writ of Mandamus US v Michael Flynn May 19, 2020, “seeks an order directing the district court to grant the Justice Department’s Motion to Dismiss its criminal case”

Sidney Powell Writ of Mandamus US v Michael Flynn May 19, 2020, “seeks an order directing the district court to grant the Justice Department’s Motion to Dismiss its criminal case”

“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 the Sidney Powell 

EMERGENCY PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

Filed May 19, 2020.

“This petition seeks an order directing the district court to grant the
Justice Department’s Motion to Dismiss its criminal case against former
National Security Advisor to President Trump, Lieutenant General Michael
T. Flynn (Ret.) (“Motion to Dismiss”). ECF No. 198. The Government moved
to dismiss the Information charging a violation of 18 U.S.C. §1001 after an
internal review by United States Attorney Jeffrey Jensen unearthed stunning
evidence of government misconduct and General Flynn’s innocence.

This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to the All Writs Act, which
authorizes federal courts to issue writs “in the aid of their respective
jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.” 28 U.S.C.
§1651(a). The district court’s failure to grant the Government’s Motion to
Dismiss defies this Court’s binding precedent in United States v. Fokker
Servs., B.V., 818 F.3d 733, 740 (D.C. Cir. 2016). The district court’s sua
sponte appointment of an amicus to oppose the Government’s motion and
its Minute Order to issue a schedule for additional amici are at loggerheads
with the unanimous Supreme Court opinion in United States v. SinenengSmith, No. 19–67 (U.S. May 7, 2020).

RELIEF SOUGHT
Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court order the district court
immediately to (1) grant the Justice Department’s Motion to Dismiss; (2)
vacate its order appointing amicus curiae; and (3) reassign the case to
another district judge as to any further proceedings.

ISSUE PRESENTED
Whether the district court exceeded its authority and egregiously
abused its discretion by failing to grant the Government’s Motion to Dismiss
the Criminal Information and, instead, appointing an amicus to oppose the
motion and to propose contempt and perjury charges against General Flynn,
while inviting additional amici.”

Read more:

https://sidneypowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Petition-filed.pdf

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

US v Michael Flynn update April 24, 2020, More delays by US attorneys and former counsel, 100 pages of text and more than 500 pages of partly redacted exhibits 

US v Michael Flynn update April 24, 2020, More delays by US attorneys and former counsel, 100 pages of text and more than 500 pages of partly redacted
exhibits

“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

 

***  Update See Below   ***

From Citizen Wells April 10, 2020.

“Covington & Burling LLP (“Covington”) submits this Supplemental Notice to provide information to the Court about the transfer of the case file to successor counsel.”

“In reviewing materials in response to the Court’s March 6, 2020 Order (Doc. 174) to respond to Mr. Flynn’s specific allegations in his Supplemental Motion to Withdraw Plea of Guilty (Doc. 160), however, we have found emails and two pages of handwritten notes that were not previously transferred to successor counsel. With respect to the emails, this appears to have resulted from errors in the process of collecting and searching electronic materials that were not contained in the working case file. The two pages of notes appear to have been inadvertently missed during the file transfer process. Today, we made a supplemental transfer to Mr. Flynn’s current counsel of the emails and notes identified to date as not having been transferred previously. We are in the process of working with our information technology personnel, as
expeditiously as possible, to determine what other materials were not captured by the prior electronic searches and to collect and transfer them promptly to Mr. Flynn’s current counsel. We will apprise the Court when this is completed and will provide any further information that the Court requires.”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2020/04/10/us-v-michael-flynn-update-april-10-2020-former-defense-counsel-covington-burling-provides-documents-not-previously-transferred-to-successor-counsel/

Today April 24, 2020 we learn.

The United States of America, by and through the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, files this status report. On February 27, 2020, the Court ordered the parties to file a joint proposed order setting forth the terms of the waiver of the attorney-client privilege and the authorization of disclosure of information with respect to Mr. Flynn’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims by no later than 12:00 PM on March 6, 2020. On March 6, the parties filed a Joint
Stipulation and submitted a joint proposed Order, consistent with the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.6, proposing that Covington and Burling, LLP (“Covington”) be ordered to take all actions reasonably necessary to respond to defendant Flynn’s specific allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel. The Court issued this Order on the afternoon of March 6, 2020. On April 3, 2020, the Court ordered the government to provide a status report
informing the Court of the status of the production from Covington & Burling LLP or, if feasible, proposing a briefing schedule, by no later than 12 p.m. on April 24, 2020.

As required by the Court’s Order of March 6, Covington has provided to the government five timely and substantial productions of documents “reasonably necessary” to respond to the “specific allegations” made by the defendant in his motions to withdraw his plea. On April 23, 2020, Covington provided the government with signed declarations from four Covington attorneys. The government promptly produced these declarations to defense counsel; in total, the declarations comprise more than 100 pages of text and more than 500 pages of partly-redacted exhibits.1

The declarations are detailed, and span numerous topics that arose during Covington’s 30-month representation of Mr. Flynn. The government needs additional time to review these declarations and to determine whether it needs to conduct any interviews of Covington personnel or to seek additional declarations or supporting documents. Should any issues arise that the government and Covington are unable to resolve, the government will file a motion with the Court,along with any relevant declarations and exhibits, for resolution.

In order to allow the government adequate time to review the declarations and exhibits that have been produced by Covington and to conduct any additional inquiries, the government respectfully asks this Court to allow the government two additional weeks to provide a further status update and, if feasible, a proposed briefing schedule.

Wherefore the government asks this Court to order it to provide a further status update and, if feasible, a proposed briefing schedule, no later than 12 p.m. on May 8, 2020.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.179.0_3.pdf

*** Update 6:00 PM  ***

Attorney Sidney Powell filed the following today April 24, 2020.

“SUPPLEMENT TO MR. FLYNN’S MOTION TO DISMISS
FOR EGREGIOUS GOVERNMENT MISCONDUCT

On January 29, 2020, Michael T. Flynn (“Mr. Flynn”) submitted his Motion to Dismiss for Egregious Government Misconduct and in the Interest of Justice. ECF No. 162. Mr. Flynn now files this brief Supplement to his Motion to Dismiss for Government Misconduct. This afternoon, the government produced to Mr. Flynn stunning Brady evidence that proves Mr. Flynn’s allegations of having been deliberately set up and framed by corrupt agents at the top of the FBI.
It also defeats any argument that the interview of Mr. Flynn on January 24, 2017 was material to any “investigation.” The government has deliberately suppressed this evidence from the inception of this prosecution—knowing there was no crime by Mr. Flynn.

In addition, Mr. Flynn’s counsel has found further evidence of misconduct by Mr. Van Grack specifically. Not only did he make baseless threats to indict Michael G. Flynn, he made a side deal not to prosecute Michael G. Flynn as a material term of the plea agreement, but he required that it be kept secret between himself and the Covington attorneys expressly to avoid the
requirement of Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972). Exs. 1, 2.

Since August 2016 at the latest, partisan FBI and DOJ leaders conspired to destroy Mr. Flynn. These documents show in their own handwriting and emails that they intended either to create an offense they could prosecute or at least get him fired. Then came the incredible malfeasance of Mr. Van Grack’s and the SCO’s prosecution despite their knowledge there was no crime by Mr. Flynn. All this new evidence, and the government has advised there is more to come,
proves that the crimes were committed by the FBI officials and then the prosecutors. The government’s misconduct in this case is beyond shocking and reprehensible. It mandates dismissal.

Furthermore, this Court should order the government immediately to provide the defense with unredacted copies of the documents in Exhibit 3, filed under seal. Those documents were
filed under seal solely in an abundance of caution because the government produced them under the protective order, and we request that they be unsealed. Consequently, Mr. Flynn is filing Exhibit 3 to this Supplement contemporaneously and asks that the Court promptly unseal the document.

This case is a shameful blight on the American justice system. “The first duties of the officers of the law are to prevent, not to punish crime. It is not their duty to incite to and create crime for the sole purpose of prosecuting and punishing it. . . [I]t is unconscionable, contrary to public policy, and to the established law of the land to punish a man for the commission of an offense of the like of which he had never been guilty, either in thought or in deed, and evidently never would have been guilty of if the officers of the law had not inspired, incited, persuaded, and
lured him to attempt to commit it.” Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435, 444-45 (1932) (quoting Butts v. United States, 273 F. 35, 38 (8th Cir. 1921)).

For the reasons above, and those previously briefed, this Court must dismiss this concocted prosecution of General Flynn in full recognition of the travesty of justice that it is.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.181.0.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

 

US v Michael Flynn update April 10, 2020, Former defense counsel Covington & Burling provides documents “not previously transferred to successor counsel”

US v Michael Flynn update April 10, 2020, Former defense counsel Covington & Burling provides documents “not previously transferred to successor counsel”

“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 OF AMERICA
v.
MICHAEL T. FLYNN

COVINGTON & BURLING LLP’S SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE
REGARDING TRANSFER OF CASE FILE TO SUCCESSOR COUNSEL:

“Covington & Burling LLP (“Covington”) submits this Supplemental Notice to provide information to the Court about the transfer of the case file to successor counsel. On July 25, 2019, Covington & Burling LLP filed a Notice Regarding Transfer of Case File to Defendant’s New Counsel (Doc. 99). That Notice informed the Court that Covington had transferred its working case file in this case to new counsel within days of the termination of its representation
of Mr. Flynn, and that we had then turned to identifying, collecting and transferring a large body of emails, text messages, handwritten notes, time records, voicemails, hard copy documents, and other records that were not maintained in that working case file during the ordinary course of
business. Having finished that process, we stated that “the firm’s transfer of its case file to General Flynn’s new counsel is now complete.”

In reviewing materials in response to the Court’s March 6, 2020 Order (Doc. 174) to respond to Mr. Flynn’s specific allegations in his Supplemental Motion to Withdraw Plea of Guilty (Doc. 160), however, we have found emails and two pages of handwritten notes that were not previously transferred to successor counsel. With respect to the emails, this appears to have resulted from errors in the process of collecting and searching electronic materials that were not contained in the working case file. The two pages of notes appear to have been inadvertently missed during the file transfer process. Today, we made a supplemental transfer to Mr. Flynn’s current counsel of the emails and notes identified to date as not having been transferred previously. We are in the process of working with our information technology personnel, as
expeditiously as possible, to determine what other materials were not captured by the prior electronic searches and to collect and transfer them promptly to Mr. Flynn’s current counsel. We will apprise the Court when this is completed and will provide any further information that the Court requires.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.177.0.pdf

From Sara Carter:

“Flynn’s new defense team is combing through the new trove of documents, suggesting that the appropriate action by the DOJ would be to dismiss Flynn’s case entirely based on egregious government misconduct.

“It’s an interesting new production of documents from the Flynn file. It will be even more interesting to see what the firm has to say about them. We are really looking forward to a hearing in court on all the issues that will exonerate General Flynn,” said Powell, who spoke to SaraACarter.com.

“Meanwhile, the government still refuses to produce the original 302 and the DOJ memo of January 30, 2017 that exonerated him of any Russia issue, and it still refuses to dismiss the case because of the egregious government misconduct from the inception of this persecution—including slipping an FBI Agent secretly into a presidential briefing in August 2016—before the election—to collect information on nominee Trump and General Flynn,” she added. “The country and Justice would be best served if the DOJ would take responsibility for these outrageous actions and the deliberate attempted destruction of an honorable man. The agents who interviewed him knew he was honest with them.  They later altered the 302 until it was approved by Andrew McCabe.”

Last week, a status report was filed by prosecutors to delay the anticipated April 3 status report hearing to April 24. Justice Department prosecutors contend that the documents provided by Flynn’s former legal counsel “are voluminous, span numerous topics that arose during Covington’s 30-month representation of Mr. Flynn , and include many pages of sometimes difficult-to-decipher handwritten notes.””

Read more:

https://saraacarter.com/former-flynn-defense-counsel-covington-and-burling-just-now-found-additional-docs-in-flynn-file/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

 

 

 

NC Governor Roy Cooper absurd edict April 9, 2020, Executive order, Remove Cooper from office, NC has extremely low Covid-19 deaths, Overreach of power

NC Governor Roy Cooper absurd edict April 9, 2020, Executive order, Remove Cooper from office, NC has extremely low Covid-19 deaths, Overreach of power

“Compare, for example, numbers from leading causes of death in US-published by the @CDCgov for 2017–not to mention hundreds of thousands of abortions. Meanwhile, #DomesticViolence is escalating. Job losses will trigger suicides from despair. People can’t meet basic needs.”...Attorney Sidney Powell

“How many Americans suffering from other illnesses cannot see a doctor now? How many Americans will lose their jobs, their life savings, their retirement prospects, and their incalculable feeling of self-worth? How many will succumb to depression, drug or alcohol abuse, and suicide? How many will lose their homes, divorce their spouses, or suffer abuse? How many will never recover in their careers? How many small businesses, including the vital ones of doctors, dentists, and veterinarians, will vanish from your community? How many young people will “fail to launch”?”…Mises Wire

“You can’t fix stupid.”…Ron White

 

NC has a population of approx 10.5 million and is the 9th most populous state.

NC has an extremely low death rate from Covid-19.

I agree with social distancing and common sense measures.

I do not agree with NC Governor Roy Cooper’s absurd edict today, April 9, 2020, in his executive Executive order.

This is not NY, NJ or idiot LA.

Governor Cooper has overstepped his authority, apparently lost his mind and should be removed from office.

From ABC 11 News:

“Governor Roy Cooper announced during a news conference that a new executive order will go into effect Monday that makes changes to guidelines for shopping and grocery and retail stores.

Starting Monday at 5 p.m., stores cannot exceed 20 percent of fire capacity or five people for every 1,000 square feet at any given time.

Stores must also have 6-foot markers at congregation areas like checkouts and must perform frequent cleaning and disinfection.

Additionally, the executive order will encourage that all stores have shopping hours for seniors and at-risk people as well as have hand sanitizer accessible for shoppers. The governor asks that stores use shields for employees at checkout and limit aisles to one-way traffic.”

https://abc11.com/health/watch-gov-cooper-gives-update-on-covid-19-in-nc/6088955/

“five people for every 1,000 square feet”

Cooper is obviously on drugs.

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deborah Sines Seth Rich investigation deposition released April 3, 2020, Consulted with FBI and DC police, Rich laptop examined, Transcript link

Deborah Sines Seth Rich investigation deposition released April 3, 2020, Consulted with FBI and DC police, Rich laptop examined, Transcript link

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

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

 

From The Gateway Pundit April 3, 2020.

“Former DOJ Assistant US Attorney Admits FBI Examined Seth Rich’s Computer and She Met with FBI and Mueller Gang But No 302 Has Been Provided to Date

More evidence confirms more FBI and Mueller gang lies and cover ups.  This time a Deep State Anti-Trump former Assistant US Attorney claimed under oath that the FBI did examine Seth Rich’s computer and that she met with an FBI Agent and prosecutor from the Mueller gang.  This indicates the meeting should have been recorded in a form 302 but the FBI continues to claim no records related to Seth Rich are available!

Previously we reported that after getting caught lying to the Courts and claiming there were no documents related to Seth Rich, emails between FBI Deep State lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were uncovered by Judicial Watch with the title “Seth Rich” .

Attorney Ty Clevenger uncovered that the former Assistant US Attorney related to the case admitted that Rich’s computer was inspected by the FBI and that there would be records related to this investigation.  She now has been deposed and her comments are shocking, indicating she met with both the FBI and the Mueller gang!

Earlier this week Clevenger filed his request again asking for all information related to the Seth Rich case. This was based on recent testimony from former Assistant US Attorney Deborah Sines:”

Read more:

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/04/breaking-exclusive-former-doj-assistant-us-attorney-admits-fbi-examined-seth-richs-computer-met-fbi-mueller-gang-no-302-provided-date/

From the transcript:

“Q. If you would turn to page 49 of that
5 Episode 6 transcript. On — on that page Mr. Isikoff
6 says: MPD or Metropolitan Police Department examined
7 and reexamined Seth’s laptop.
8 Is that something that you told Mr. Isikoff?
9 A. Yes, it is.
10 Q. And to your — to your knowledge, that is a
11 true statement?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Did the MPD have any assistance from other
14 agencies in examining the laptop?
15 A. I was not authorized to say what MPD did. I
16 should not have said that. That is the law enforcement
17 privilege. It’s an open case. I’m not allowed to
18 answer anything else other than did I say it and was it
19 true. I was not authorized to say that.
20 Q. Do you know whether Aaron Rich disclosed all
21 of his brother’s e-mail accounts during the
22 investigation?
23 A. I’m not allowed to answer that.
24 Q. On page 54 of the transcript, it quotes you
25 as saying that there was more than one person that was

1 involved, a gunman and someone who aided and abetted?
2 A. Let me just —
3 Q. Did you make that statement?
4 A. What — what page is that?
5 Q. Okay. 54.
6 A. I’m just looking to see where I’m talking.
7 Wait a minute. Can you give me a line, Counsel?
8 Q. Actually, I don’t have it in front of me.
9 Let me pull it up. Just a second.
10 A. I’ve got it. I see it.
11 Q. Okay. Was that —
12 A. Hold on.
13 Q. Is that —
14 A. Let — let me read it.
15 Q. Sure.
16 A. I said it. That’s the truth.
17 Q. Okay. Can you say why you believe it was
18 more than one person?
19 A. I wish I could. From my investigation. From
20 the evidence.
21 Q. Okay.
22 A. I really do wish I could answer your
23 question.
24 Q. I understand. You said in the interview that
25 you had to track down every lead. Did you or anyone

1 from your investigative team attempt to contact
2 WikiLeaks?
3 A. Oh, I’m not allowed to answer that.
4 Q. And I understand you may not be able to
5 answer these, but I — I have to get them on the record.
6 A. I understand. I understand.
7 Q. Did you or anyone from your team attempt to
8 interview or contact Julian Assange?
9 A. I’m not permitted to answer that either.
10 Q. What about Kim Dotcom?
11 A. I’m not allowed to answer that either.
12 Q. Did you issue subpoenas to obtain Aaron
13 Rich’s bank accounts?
14 A. I’m not allowed to answer that.
15 Q. Did you issue subpoenas to obtain Seth Rich’s
16 bank accounts?
17 A. I’m not allowed to answer that.
18 Q. Did you issue subpoenas to obtain Aaron or
19 Seth Rich’s PayPal or eBay accounts?
20 A. I’m not allowed to answer that. That’s all
21 grand jury.
22 Q. I understand.
23 A. I know.
24 Q. Again, I’m just putting this on the record.
25 A. I understand.”

https://www.scribd.com/document/454800604/Testimony-by-former-Assistant-US-Attorney-Deborah-Sines-in-Ed-Butowsky-vs-David-Fokenflik?campaign=VigLink&ad_group=xxc1xx&source=hp_affiliate&medium=affiliate

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/