Tag Archives: 2020

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/

IG Horowitz report March 30, 2020, FBI FISA applications: “fundamental and serious errors in the agents’ conduct”, Crossfire Hurricane investigation

IG Horowitz report March 30, 2020, FBI FISA applications: “fundamental and serious errors in the agents’ conduct”, Crossfire Hurricane investigation

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 Inspector General Michael Horowitz March 30, 2020.

“As you are aware, in December 2019 my office issued a report examining
four Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) applications—an initial
application and three renewal applications—targeting a U.S. Person and other
aspects of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) “Crossfire Hurricane”
investigation (“December 2019 FISA Report”).1 As detailed in our report,
among other things, we identified fundamental and serious errors in the
agents’ conduct of the FBI’s factual accuracy review procedures (“Woods
Procedures”) with regard to all four FISA applications. We found, for example,
numerous instances where the Woods File did not include supporting
documentation for factual assertions contained in the FISA applications, as
required by FBI policy. Additionally, we determined that the Woods File did not
contain, as also required by FBI policy, documentation from the Confidential
Human Source’s (CHS) handling agent stating that the handling agent had
reviewed the facts presented in the FISA application regarding the CHS’s
reliability and background, and that the facts presented were accurate. We
further found that the FBI had failed to follow its policies for re-verifying factual assertions made in the initial FISA application that were also included in the
three FISA renewal applications.

As a result of these findings, in December 2019, my office initiated an
audit to examine more broadly the FBI’s execution of, and compliance with, its
Woods Procedures relating to U.S. Persons covering the period from October 2014
to September 2019. As an initial step in our audit, over the past 2 months, we
visited 8 FBI field offices of varying sizes and reviewed a judgmentally selected
sample of 29 applications relating to U.S. Persons and involving both
counterintelligence and counterterrorism investigations. This sample was
selected from a dataset provided by the FBI that contained more than
700 applications relating to U.S. Persons submitted by those 8 field offices over
a 5-year period. The proportion of counterintelligence and counterterrorism
applications within our sample roughly models the ratio of the case types
within that total of FBI FISA applications. Our initial review of these
applications has consisted solely of determining whether the contents of the
FBI’s Woods File supported statements of fact in the associated FISA
application; our review did not seek to determine whether support existed
elsewhere for the factual assertion in the FISA application (such as in the case
file), or if relevant information had been omitted from the application. For all of
the FISA applications that we have reviewed to date, the period of courtauthorized surveillance had been completed and no such surveillance was
active at the time of our review.”

“As a result of our audit work to date and as described below, we do not
have confidence that the FBI has executed its Woods Procedures in compliance
with FBI policy. Specifically, the Woods Procedures mandate compiling
supporting documentation for each fact in the FISA application. Adherence to
the Woods Procedures should result in such documentation as a means toward
achievement of the FBI’s policy that FISA applications be “scrupulously
accurate.” Our lack of confidence that the Woods Procedures are working as
intended stems primarily from the fact that: (1) we could not review original
Woods Files for 4 of the 29 selected FISA applications because the FBI has not been able to locate them and, in 3 of these instances, did not know if they ever
existed; (2) our testing of FISA applications to the associated Woods Files
identified apparent errors or inadequately supported facts in all of the
25 applications we reviewed, and interviews to date with available agents or
supervisors in field offices generally have confirmed the issues we identified;
(3) existing FBI and NSD oversight mechanisms have also identified deficiencies
in documentary support and application accuracy that are similar to those that
we have observed to date; and (4) FBI and NSD officials we interviewed
indicated to us that there were no efforts by the FBI to use existing FBI and
NSD oversight mechanisms to perform comprehensive, strategic assessments
of the efficacy of the Woods Procedures or FISA accuracy, to include identifying
the need for enhancements to training and improvements in the process, or
increased accountability measures.”

Read more:

https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2020/a20047.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Robocalls Justice Dept. lawsuits injunctions March 27, 2020, Fraudulent calls to consumers often originating abroad, Impersonating government agencies

Robocalls Justice Dept. lawsuits injunctions March 27, 2020, Fraudulent calls to consumers often originating abroad, Impersonating government agencies

“The court’s decision sends a clear message to gateway carriers who knowingly do business with scammers targeting Americans from overseas,”… Gail S. Ennis, Inspector General for the Social Security Administration

“O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive!”...Walter Scott

 

From the US Justice Department.

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, March 27, 2020
District Court Orders Injunctions against Two Telecom Carriers Who Facilitated Hundreds of Millions of Fraudulent Robocalls to Consumers in the United States
First of Their Kind Injunctions Obtained by Justice Department

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York entered orders in two separate civil actions, barring eight individuals and entities from continuing to facilitate the transmission of massive volumes of fraudulent robocalls to consumers in the United States, the Department of Justice announced today.

In one of the matters, United States v. Nicholas Palumbo, et al., the District Court entered a preliminary injunction that bars two individuals and two entities from operating as intermediate voice-over-internet-protocol (VoIP) carriers during the pendency of the civil action.  In the other matter, United States v. John Kahen, et al., the District Court entered consent decrees that permanently bar an individual and three entities from operating as intermediate VoIP carriers conveying any telephone calls into the U.S. telephone system.

“These massive robocall fraud schemes target telephones of residents across our country, many of whom are elderly or are otherwise potentially vulnerable to such schemes,” said Assistant Attorney General Jody Hunt of the Department of Justice’s Civil Division.  “The department is committed to stopping this unlawful conduct and pursuing those who knowingly facilitate these schemes for their own financial gain.”

“This office will take all appropriate measures to stop fraudulent robocalling schemes responsible for causing catastrophic losses to victims, including seeking to permanently shut down the U.S.-based enablers of such schemes,” said United States Attorney Richad P. Donoghue for the Eastern District of New York.  “Protecting elderly and vulnerable individuals from being conned by foreign call center scammers remains a priority of this office and the Department of Justice.”

As alleged in the complaints, the defendants in both cases operated as VoIP carriers, receiving internet-based calls from other entities, often located abroad, and transmitting those calls first to other carriers within the United States and, ultimately, to the phones of individuals.  Numerous foreign-based call centers are alleged to have used the defendants’ VoIP carrier services to pass fraudulent government- and business-imposter robocalls to victims in the United States.  The defendants also sold U.S. phone numbers to foreign entities, which were used as victim call-back numbers as part of massive robocalling fraud schemes.

As also alleged, the defendants were warned numerous times that they were carrying fraudulent robocalls — including calls impersonating government agencies, such as the Social Security Administration, the IRS, and legitimate businesses, such as Microsoft — and yet continued to carry those calls and facilitate fraud schemes targeting individuals in the United States.  Many of the robocalls were made by foreign fraudsters impersonating government investigators and conveying alarming messages, such as: the recipient’s social security number or other personal information has been compromised or otherwise connected to criminal activity; the recipient faces imminent arrest; the recipient’s assets are being frozen; the recipient’s bank and credit accounts have suspect activity; the recipient’s benefits are being stopped; the recipient faces imminent deportation; or combinations of these threats.  Each of these claims was a lie, designed to scare the call recipient into paying large sums of money.  These calls led to massive financial losses to elderly and other vulnerable victims throughout the United States.

“The court’s decision sends a clear message to gateway carriers who knowingly do business with scammers targeting Americans from overseas,” said Gail S. Ennis, Inspector General for the Social Security Administration.  “We will continue to pursue those who facilitate these scam calls by allowing them into the U.S. telephone network.  I want to thank the Department of Justice for its support throughout this investigation and its commitment to protecting Americans from this insidious form of fraud and theft.””

Read more:

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/district-court-orders-injunctions-against-two-telecom-carriers-who-facilitated-hundreds

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net

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/