The hired lawyer for Judge Emmet Sullivan has filed a response to the DC District Court order in the case against Michael Flynn. [pdf available here] The DC district court ordered Sullivan to explain why he would not allow DOJ to drop charges against Flynn; the response by Sullivan’s lawyers says the DOJ position is essentially a moot issue, and Flynn can defend himself against independent accusations by the court.

The premise of Judge Sullivan to act as both prosecutor, judge and jury is ridiculous.  Additionally, Sullivan now claims Flynn must defend himself against claims of unlawful lobbying for Turkey that were never a substantive part of the original DOJ filing before the court.

(more…)

Within an interesting interview conducted by Jan Jekielek of Epoch Times, former AAG Matt Whitaker confirms what CTH long suspected. The Mueller investigation was used by corrupt interests within the special counsel’s office to threaten any/all executive branch and congressional officials with “obstruction of justice” charges if they revealed any exculpatory or counter-narrative information during the Mueller probe.

Whitaker describes this as the “obstruction of justice trap.”

Essentially, this approach confirms the second-prong purpose of the Mueller investigation itself. First, use the special counsel in 2017, 2018 and into the beginning of 2019, as a shield (hide information); and secondly a weapon (threats) against any entity who would reveal the background intelligence that undercut the Trump-Russia collusion narrative.

We know President Trump was threatened by Rod Rosenstein not to declassify any information in September of 2018 or the Mueller investigation would use that act as evidence of obstruction. Whitaker confirms that same approach was applied toward any executive branch officer who would reveal or release information to congress during the tenure of the special counsel; even within the DOJ and including the attorney general.

This is how the Mueller probe was weaponized to mislead the American people.

(more…)

Yesterday we noted a rather important, yet less discussed, motive for the strength of the DC Circuit Court position against Judge Emmet Sullivan.  I’ll expand after the video.

In this interview Gregg Jarrett talks with Flynn’s defense lawyer Sidney Powell about the rather unusual behavior of Judge Emmet Sullivan.  WATCH:

.

A DC judge hiring a well connected DC lawyer to write his response to a DC circuit court appeals panel is the part that’s interesting.  There’s no guarantee the appeals court will accept such a response; but that’s also another issue.   Bottom line: Judge Sullivan is importing a lawyer to represent his interests.  Very unusual.

(more…)

It’s a question that has been asked several times: why is FBI Director Christopher Wray now starting an internal review of those within the FBI who were engaged with the events around Lt. General Michael Flynn.  Why did he wait so long?

In this interview Representative Andy Biggs discusses that question.  WATCH:

.

The most likely answer is simply sunlight.  The corrupt FBI activity was clearly evident within the organization in 2018 and 2019.  However, the recent change is the public awareness of it with documented evidence.

(more…)

Former Acting AG Matt Whitaker appears on Sunday Morning Futures to discuss the latest DOJ and FBI issues surfacing as a result of the Flynn case.  Additionally Matt Whitaker gives his perspective on Judge Emmet Sullivan’s latest efforts.

(more…)

The Washington Post headline reads (emphasis mine): “Federal judge hires high-powered D.C. attorney to defend his actions in Flynn case.” Which gives some insight into the framework and purpose of this event, and how it reached the WaPo narrative engineers.

The Washington Post is, as an institution, adverse to the interests of Michael Flynn.  So this story, specifically the events behind the story, are written in a posture to aid Judge Sullivan and oppose Flynn.  Keep that in mind (I’ll explain after).

Judge Sullivan has hired a high profile DC lawyer to assist him in responding to the inquires of the DC circuit:

WASHINGTON DC – […] In a rare step that adds to this criminal case’s already unusual path, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan has retained Beth Wilkinson to represent him in defending his decision to a federal appeals court in Washington, according to a person familiar with the hire who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

[…] Wilkinson, known for her top-notch legal skills and get-results style, is expected to file a notice with the court in the coming week about representing the judge. She declined to comment when reached Friday evening. Sullivan also declined to comment through his office.

(more…)

Former Acting AG Matt Whitaker appears with Liz MacDonald to discuss the latest revelations in the Flynn case; the ongoing declassification of documents by DNI Ric Grenell; and the announcement of a new internal FBI investigation.  WATCH:

(more…)

You may have recently noticed that Susan Rice has called for the release of the transcript of the conversation between Michael Flynn and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak:

(Source and Full Statement)

However, what many people do not realize is the motive for Susan Rice to call for the release of this transcript.  This aspect of the intercepted communication is very interesting.

First, there is nothing damaging in the content of the Flynn-Kislyak call.  We know there is nothing damaging in the transcript because the call was made on December 29, 2016; and the FBI investigators who intercepted the call reviewed the call content; and five days later on January 4, 2017, the same Washington DC field office of the FBI wanted to close the investigation of Michael Flynn having “found no derogatory information.”

If there had been something damaging within the call to either the incoming Trump administration, or Michael Flynn himself, the FBI would not be saying they have found nothing derogatory and they were closing the Flynn investigation five days after the call.

Additionally, we also know there was nothing damaging or inappropriate within the call because Robert Mueller’s investigators outlined the content:

(more…)

Yeah, sometimes headlines speak for themselves… Election Judge Domenick DeMuro was paid between $300 and $5,000 to assist in ballot stuffing for each election over multiple years.

PHILADELPHIA – U.S. Attorney William M. McSwain released a video on May 21, 2020, in which he discussed the charging and guilty plea of former Philadelphia Judge of Elections Domenick J. DeMuro.

[Transcript] – Good morning. I am here to announce that the U.S. Attorney’s Office has unsealed criminal charges against Domenick J. DeMuro, a former Judge of Elections for the 39th Ward, 36th Division in South Philadelphia.

DeMuro has been charged with two counts: first, for conspiring to deprive Philadelphia voters of their civil rights by fraudulently stuffing the ballot boxes for specific Democratic candidates in the 2014, 2015, and 2016 primary elections; and second, for a violation of the Travel Act, which forbids the use of any facility in interstate commerce (here, a cell phone) with the intent to promote certain illegal activity (here, bribery). DeMuro has pled guilty to both of these charges.

(more…)

A three panel DC Appeals Court Panel, Judge Henderson, Judge Wilkins and Judge Rao have ordered Michael Flynn’s Judge, Emett Sullivan, to respond to the defense petition for a writ of mandamus within ten days:

Quoting the U.S. vs Fokker ruling the panel is not responding directly to the Flynn petition with an immediate decision; instead they are requiring Judge Sullivan to explain his decision to engage with extra-party amicus actions despite the DOJ and Flynn defense agreement on the motion to dismiss.

The order can be viewed as a smart move by the appeals panel because Judge Sullivan has yet to rule on the original unopposed DOJ motion. In essence, Sullivan has never explained himself; and this approach will require Sullivan to put his proverbial cards on the table.  The DC panel has given Judge Sullivan ten days to respond.

(more…)