Tag Archives: 2020

Roger Stone courtroom hearing on motion for new trial February 26, 2020, 11 members of jury back in court, Jackson: “take the matter under advisement.”

Roger Stone courtroom hearing on motion for new trial February 26, 2020, 11 members of jury back in court, Jackson: “take the matter under advisement.”

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

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

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

“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

 

From United States v Stone.

“Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Amy Berman Jackson: Motion Hearing as to ROGER J. STONE, JR. held on 2/25/2020 re: 332 Defendant’s SEALED MOTION to Open Hearing in Support of Amended Motion for New Trial. For the reasons stated on the record in open Court, the 332 SEALED MOTION to Open Hearing in Support of Amended Motion for New Trial is Granted in Part and Denied in Part. Bond Status of Defendant: Defendant Remains on Personal Recognizance Bond; Court Reporter: Sara Wick; Defense Attorneys: Robert C. Buschel, Bruce S. Rogow, Grant J. Smith, Seth Ginsberg “and Trar A. Campion; US Attorneys: John Crabb, Jr. and J.P. Cooney. (zjth)”

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/14515855/united-states-v-stone/?page=3

From KPBS.

“A federal judge in Washington on Tuesday heard arguments from Roger Stone’s lawyers and federal prosecutors on the longtime Republican operative’s bid for a new trial based on his allegations or juror misconduct.

The more than four-hour hearing before Judge Amy Berman Jackson came less than a week after Jackson sentenced Stone to more than three years in prison for obstruction, witness tampering and lying to Congress. Stone, a friend of Trump’s for more than three decades, was convicted in November by a jury on all seven counts brought against him by special counsel Robert Mueller as part of the Russia investigation.

Jackson did not rule Tuesday on Stone’s motion for a new trial, saying before she closed the day’s proceedings that she will “take the matter under advisement.””

“Jackson then ordered that courtroom cleared of spectators and journalists for the rest of the proceedings, which included the surprise that she had called 11 members of the jury back to the court for potential questioning.

Reporters and members of the public were able to listen in on what transpired in the courtroom via an audio feed. Lawyers were instructed not to refer to any jurors by their name or juror number.

As the drama unfolded inside the courtroom, Trump took aim at the jury foreperson, tweeting that the individual was “so tainted” for allegedly having “hatred” of Trump and Stone. Trump also accused Jackson of being “totally biased.”

The motion seeking a new trial was filed under seal since it concerned the identity of a juror in the case, but Jackson said it involved questions about a questionnaire prospective jurors had to fill out during the jury selection process.

The jury forewoman answered questions under oath in the Tuesday hearing about her activity on social media, including a postings about Stone’s arrest in which she wrote: “brought to you by the lock her up peanut gallery.”

The forewoman was also asked about a first-bump emoji the morning before the jury reached a unanimous guilty verdict. The forewoman said it was a message out of solidarity.

The forewoman said that at the time she answered the jury questionnaire she could not recall posting anything about investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election; she added her answers were based on what she remembered.

A woman who identified herself on social media as the forewoman in the Stone case once unsuccessfully ran as a Democrat for Congress. The juror told the judge during jury selection that her former bid for office would not inhibit her ability to serve on the panel as a fair and impartial juror.

During Tuesday’s hearing, the defense and the government were each allowed to select one unidentified juror to be brought in and questioned by Jackson.”

Read more:

https://www.kpbs.org/news/2020/feb/25/judge-weighs-roger-stones-bid-for-a-new-trial-as/

 

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more:

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

Judge Amy Berman Jackson should be impeached.

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

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Flynn response to prosecution opposition to motion to dismiss Feb 18, 2020, “government’s response admits astounding and widespread government misconduct”

Michael Flynn response to prosecution opposition to motion to dismiss Feb 18, 2020, “government’s response admits astounding and widespread government misconduct”

“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 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 Michael Flynn response to prosecution opposition to motion to dismiss February 18, 2020.

“The government’s February 12, 2020, response in opposition to Mr. Flynn’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 169, demonstrates only its adamant refusal to recognize its obligations to seek justice not convictions and to produce evidence favorable to the defense under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). It continues to disregard this Court’s Brady order, which required it to produce
information favorable to the defense since December 2017.

Now, more than two years after this Court’s order—and more than one year after the “extended plea colloquy” on which the government repeatedly harps—the defense learned from a stunning report of the Inspector General (“IG Report”) that one of the two FBI agents, who broke all protocols to interview Mr. Flynn in the White House on January 24, 2017, was a surreptitious participant in a presidential briefing on August 17, 2016. The FBI assigned him specifically to
collect information from and about Mr. Flynn to give the FBI further advantage and insights in the agents’ plan to interview Mr. Flynn in the White House if Trump won the election. The IG Report revealed conduct of this agent and in the highest tiers of the FBI that is indeed “so grossly shocking and so outrageous as to violate the universal sense of justice.” United States v. Restrepo, 930 F.2d
705, 712 (9th Cir. 1991).

If the government and this Court fail to acknowledge it, then surely a court will find that this is the very case that mandates the exercise of a court’s supervisory power if not the constitutionally required application of Brady to dismiss this prosecution because of the government’s appalling and unrepentant attitude. Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States, 487 U.S. 250, 263 (1988); see Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959) (conviction obtained on known false
evidence cannot stand).”

“The government’s response admits astounding and widespread government misconduct as detailed in the IG Report regarding the Crossfire Hurricane investigation and FISA applications, yet Mr. Van Grack refuses to admit any impact on Mr. Flynn’s case. For these reasons and those in Mr. Flynn’s Motion to Dismiss and other briefs, the government’s outrageous misconduct
mandates dismissal of this prosecution with prejudice. Its opposition proves no interest in justice, defies credulity, and demonstrates the government’s reprehensible and unrepentant attitude toward the most serious of all issues that affect due process and the administration of justice.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.170.0_6.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

 

Flynn prosecution response to Motion to Dismiss for Egregious Government Misconduct Feb 12, 2020, Why is Brandon Van Grack still assigned?

Flynn prosecution response to Motion to Dismiss for Egregious Government
Misconduct Feb 12, 2020, Why is Brandon Van Grack still assigned?

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

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

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

 

From the Flynn prosecution response to Motion to Dismiss for Egregious Government Misconduct Feb 12, 2020.

“The defendant does not identify government misconduct in this case, and certainly not conduct that is “outrageous” or “grossly shocking.” His allegations center on the OIG Report, see Mot. to Dismiss at 6-16, but the misconduct described in the Report does not pertain to the investigation of the defendant or his false statements to the FBI on January 24, 2017. And the information in the Report pertaining to SSA 1 does not constitute a Brady violation. Defendant’s
remaining allegations have either previously been rejected by this Court or are irrelevant to the charges to which defendant pleaded guilty.
a. The errors and/or misconduct described in the OIG Report do not pertain to defendant’s false statements to FBI on January 24, 2017.

The defendant was charged with and pleaded guilty to providing false statements to FBI agents during an interview on January 24, 2017. The OIG Report does not identify errors or misconduct pertaining to the investigation of the defendant.4
With respect to the investigation of the defendant, the OIG Report “concluded that the FBI had sufficient predication to open [a] full counterintelligence investigation [] of . . . Flynn . . . in August 2016.” OIG Report at 352. The
defendant’s motion focuses on SSA 1’s participation on August 17, 2016, in a strategic intelligence briefing given to then-candidate Trump and the defendant. As the OIG Report explained, the FBI selected SSA 1 to participate in that briefing “in part, because Flynn, who would be attending thebriefing with candidate Trump, was a subject of the ongoing investigations.” Id. at 407-08. The Report does not allege that SSA 1’s participation in the briefing amounted to misconduct. Rather, the Report concludes SSA 1’s participation was a “judgment call[] left to the discretion of FBI officials.” Id. at 408. And the decision for SSA 1 to participate was “reached by consensus” among “higher levels” at the FBI. Id. at 341-42, 408. 5

The OIG Report did identify instances where the FBI did not comply with existing policies and neglected to exercise appropriate diligence, which led to “significant errors or omissions” in the four FISA applications for surveillance targeting Carter Page. But those four FISAs did not target the defendant. To the contrary, the Report affirmed that the FBI “did not seek FISA
surveillance” of the defendant. Id. at 357 n.488. The government does not dispute the seriousness of the “significant errors and omissions” described in the Report. But the compliance and diligence failures and “significant errors” as they relate to the Page FISA applications do not warrant or necessitate the dismissal of the charge against the defendant. ”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.169.0_7.pdf

Why has Attorney General Barr allowed Brandon Van Grack to remain on this case or even remain employed by the USDOJ?

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

 

Seth Rich murder cover ups and misconduct by FBI, Ty Clevenger v. U.S. Department of Justice telehearing February 12, 2020, Caitlin Sinclair of One America News permission to listen

Seth Rich murder cover ups and misconduct by FBI, Ty Clevenger v. U.S. Department of Justice telehearing February 12, 2020, Caitlin Sinclair of One America News permission to listen

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

“Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.”…George Orwell

 

Filed by Attorney Ty Clevenger February 7, 2020.

“Re: Ty Clevenger v. U.S. Department of Justice, et al., Civil Action No. 18-
CV-01568 (WFK) (LB)
Judge Bloom:
Caitlin Sinclair, a reporter for One America News, told me she contacted your
chambers about listening to the telehearing scheduled for February 12, 2020 in the matter above, and she said she was informed by your clerk that one of the parties would need to request authorization on her behalf. I write to request such authorization.

The circumstances surrounding the murder of Seth Rich have been subject to
national media attention since late 2016, shortly after Mr. Rich was murdered. Likewise, misconduct and cover-ups within the FBI have been the subject of widespread media attention for at least two years. I believe the public and, by extension, the media have a legitimate interest in the February 12, 2020 hearing, therefore I request that Ms. Sinclair be permitted to listen to the telehearing.

I conferred with Asst. U.S. Attorney Kathleen Mahoney, counsel for the
Defendants, and she indicated that the Defendants take no position on this request. Thank you in advance for your consideration.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.414614/gov.uscourts.nyed.414614.54.0.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Joe Biden criminal complaint filed by Ukrainian prosecutor  Viktor Shokin January 28, 2020, “series of serious crimes committed by…managers of…Burisma Holding…board of directors…Hunter Biden”

Joe Biden criminal complaint filed by Ukrainian prosecutor  Viktor Shokin January 28, 2020, “series of serious crimes committed by…managers of…Burisma Holding…board of directors…Hunter Biden”

“Joe Biden “Outraged We Seized Burisma Assets”, Could No Longer Pay His Son…”…Former Ukraine Prosecutor Shokin

“One of the downstream consequences of Rudy Giuliani investigating the Ukraine corruption and money laundering operation to U.S. officials is that it ends up catching Senator Graham.”…Conservative Treehouse

“I discovered a pattern of corruption that the Washington press covered up for years! I’m also going to bring out a massive pay-for-play scheme under the Obama Administration that will devastate the Democrat Party. Do you honestly think I’m intimidated?”…Rudy Giuliani,

 

From Zero Hedge.

“Ukrainiain ‘Son Of A Bitch Who Got Fired’ Files Criminal Complaint Against Biden For Abuse Of Power

The Ukrainian prosecutor who Joe Biden bragged about getting fired, Viktor Shokin, has filed a criminal complaint in Kiev against the former Vice President for abusing his power, according to French news outlet Les Crises (confirmed by multiple sources according to PJ Media).

Shokin writes in his complaint:

During the period 2014-2016, the Prosecutor General’s Office of Ukraine was conducting a preliminary investigation into a series of serious crimes committed by the former Minister of Ecology of Ukraine Mykola Zlotchevsky and by the managers of the company “Burisma Holding Limited “(Cyprus), the board of directors of which included, among others, Hunter Biden, son of Joseph Biden, then vice-president of the United States of America.

The investigation into the above-mentioned crimes was carried out in strict accordance with Criminal Law and was under my personal control as the Prosecutor General of Ukraine.

Owing to my firm position on the above-mentioned cases regarding their prompt and objective investigation, which should have resulted in the arrest and the indictment of the guilty parties, Joseph Biden developed a firmly hostile attitude towards me which led him to express in private conversations with senior Ukrainian officials, as well as in his public speeches, a categorical request for my immediate dismissal from the post of Attorney General of Ukraine in exchange for the sum of US $ 1 billion in as a financial guarantee from the United States for the benefit of Ukraine.

* * *

Shokin says that due to “continued pressure from the Vice President of the United States Joseph Biden to oust me from the job by blackmailing the allocation of financial assistance, I, as the man who places the State interests above my personal interests, I agreed to abandon the post of Prosecutor General of Ukraine.“”

“In November, the State department released detailed accusations against the Bidens levied by Shokin and his successor, Yiury Lutsenko. In them, Shokin claims:”

“Shokin then details how in July 2015, “US Ambassador Geoffrey R. Pyatt told him that the investigation has to be handled with white gloves, which according to Mr. Shokin, that implied do nothing. On or about September 2015 Mr. Pyatt gave a speech in Odessa where he stated that the cases were not investigated correctly and that Mr. Shokin may be corrupt.”

“Mr. Shokin further stated that on February of 2016 warrants were placed on the accounts of multiple people in Ukraine. There were requests for information on Hunter Biden to which nothing was received.

“It is believed that Hunter Biden receives a salary, commission plus one million dollars.”

“President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko [who Joe Biden threatened to withhold $1 billion in US loan guarantees] told Mr. Shokin not to investigate Burisma as it was not in the interest of Joe and/or Hunter BidenMr. Shokin was called into Mr. Poroshenko’s office and told that the investigation into Burisma and the Managing Director where Hunter Biden is on the board, has caused Joe Biden to hold up one billion dollars in US aid to Ukraine.

“Mr. Shokin stated that on or around April of 2016 Mr. Petro Poroshenko called him and told him he had to be fired as the aid to the Ukraine was being withheld by Joe Biden. Mr. Biden told Mr. Poroshenko that he had evidence that Mr. Shokin was corrupt and needed to be fired. Mr. Shokin was dismissed in April of 2016 and the US aid was delivered within one and one half months.”

“On a different point Mr. Shokin believes the current Ambassador Marie L. Yovanovitch denied his visa to travel to the US. Mr. Shokin stated that she is close to Mr. Biden. Mr. Shokin also stated that there were leaks by a person named Reshenko of the Ukrainian State Secret Service about the Manafort Black Book. Mr. Shokin stated that there is possible deceit in the Manafort Black Book.””

Read more:

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/ukrainiain-son-bitch-who-got-fired-files-criminal-complaint-against-biden-abuse-power

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Flynn motion to dismiss for egregious government misconduct January 29, 2020, Remarkable new Brady evidence prosecution has long suppressed

Flynn motion to dismiss for egregious government misconduct January 29, 2020, Remarkable new Brady evidence prosecution has long suppressed

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 General Michael Flynn

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR EGREGIOUS GOVERNMENT
MISCONDUCT AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE

January 29, 2020.

“Michael T. Flynn (“Mr. Flynn”) hereby moves to dismiss the charges against him for outrageous government misconduct and in the interest of justice.1 This motion is based on exculpatory evidence (“Brady”) as well as egregious government misconduct that was discovered after Mr. Flynn’s Motion to Compel Brady Material (ECF No. 109) and related briefing.

Such exculpatory evidence and outrageous misconduct includes that on December 9, 2019, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) issued its 478-page report on the “Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation” (“IG Report”).2 The IG Report illustrates the misconduct by the government as further detailed below.

Further, on December 15, 2019, the government produced to Mr. Flynn’s defense team 637 pages of documents—including sixteen long-awaited FD-302s and 206 pages of corresponding FBI handwritten notes—all of interviews of Mr. Flynn. Additionally, in its Supplemental Sentencing Memorandum (which also breaches the plea agreement), the government included never-produced FD-302s of the government’s interviews with Mr. Flynn’s prior counsel at Covington & Burling (“Covington”), Robert Kelner and Brian Smith, from June 2018. ECF No. 150-4 through 150-6. The government also belatedly produced to Mr. Flynn FD-302s and related documents as recently as January 23, 2020. ECF No. 157.

These documents contain remarkable new Brady evidence that the prosecution has long suppressed. For instance, this evidence not only belies the bogus FARA “false statement” charges Mr. Van Grack leveraged against Covington and Mr. Flynn, but also demonstrates Mr. Van Grack knew these charges were bogus, yet sought to have Mr. Flynn make a false statement in his EDVA interview on June 25, 2019, and was encouraging subornation of perjury by Mr. Flynn. See ECF
No. 151. Additionally, the IG Report shows that the government long suppressed evidence of shocking malfeasance by the leadership of the FBI and Supervisory Special Agent 1 (“SSA 1”) that was favorable to Mr. Flynn’s defense. For these reasons, and those outlined in prior briefing, Mr. Flynn moves to dismiss this entire prosecution for outrageous government misconduct and in
the interest of justice.

This factually and legally baseless “investigation” and prosecution of Mr. Flynn has no precedent. From the FBI’s insertion of SSA 1 into the August 17, 2016 presidential briefing of candidate Trump and Mr. Flynn, to the former Director of the FBI bragging and laughing on national television about his own cleverness and violations of FBI/DOJ rules in dispatching agents to the White House to interview the new President’s National Security Advisor, to the still missing
original FBI FD-302 of the January 24, 2017 interview—everything about this prosecution has violated long-standing standards and policy for the FBI and the DOJ. In addition to the myriad of breaches and irregularities identified in our prior filings, the IG Report released on December 9, 2019, reveals even more evidence of the FBI’s deceitful and wrongful conduct that should have
been disclosed to Mr. Flynn’s defense.3

There were two FBI agents who interviewed Mr. Flynn in the White House on January 24, 2017—Agent Peter Strzok and SSA 1. The IG Report confirms both participated in government misconduct. As explained in further detail below, not only was Strzok so biased, calculated, and deceitful he had to be terminated from Mueller’s investigation and then the FBI/DOJ, but it has also now been revealed that SSA 1 was surreptitiously inserted in the mock presidential briefing
on August 17, 2016, to collect information and report on Mr. Trump and Mr. Flynn. Moreover, SSA 1 was involved in every aspect of the debacle that is Crossfire Hurricane and significant illegal surveillance resulting from it. Further, SSA 1 bore ultimate responsibility for four falsified applications to the FISA court and oversaw virtually every abuse inherent in Crossfire Hurricane—
including suppression of exculpatory evidence. See generally IG Report.

Only the dismissal of this prosecution in its entirety would begin to get the attention of the government, the FBI, and the DOJ needed to impress upon them the “reprehensible nature of its acts and omissions.” United States v. Kohring, 637 F.3d 895, 914 (9th Cir. 2011) (Fletcher, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).”

Read More:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.162.0_1.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/