In November 2019 activist Federal District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson ruled former White House counsel Don McGahn must appear before Congress; however, she also ruled McGahn retained the ability to “invoke executive privilege where appropriate” during his appearance. The central issue is separation of power.
The White House appealed the ruling to the DC appellate court on constitutional grounds, and on February 28, 2020, a three judge panel from the DC circuit agreed with the White House position. The House of representatives could have appealed the decision; however, instead, the main lawfare activist, House counsel Doug Letter, took a different approach and sought to argue the case based around their right to enforce a subpoena.
Today a politically divided DC appeals court panel ruled the House can’t go to the judicial branch to enforce legislative subpoenas because there is no statute giving the legislative chamber the authority to force the executive branch to enforce an action against its own constitutional interests.
DC Via Politico – […] “The decision is likely to spark a renewed debate over the House’s power of “inherent contempt” — its long-dormant ability to fine or jail witnesses who refuse to comply with its oversight requests.
Though courts have acknowledged this power exists, it has been in disuse since World War II. The House has emphasized that resorting to such heavy-handed tactics would only worsen government dysfunction. Court proceedings are far more desirable — to the House and to society — House counsel Doug Letter has argued during the House’s legal battles.
The new ruling appears to leave in place one other option for enforcing House subpoenas: the threat of criminal prosecution for contempt of Congress. However that option does not seem viable in cases involving fights over demands for testimony or records from the executive branch, since the Justice Department has long taken the position that it will not prosecute in cases where an official or ex-official was complying with a presidential assertion of executive privilege. (more)
The permanent political coup, led by the primary Lawfare activists who have infected the DOJ and all bodies politic, continues… Everything is tenuous.
All of this judicial turmoil is a downstream result from electing Barack Obama to fundamentally transform America in 2008. Where we are today can be traced to the continuum that many warned about more than a decade ago.
I have a standing rule never to write about current events in a state of anger; forgive me for violating my own standard… this is infuriating (albeit not unexpected). The two-tiered judicial process to target a ‘transparently innocent’ man continues. [Links Below]
As anticipated, on the last day prior to DC Circuit Judge Griffith departure, the DC en banc panel has rejected the Flynn writ of mandamus and now sends the case back to Judge Emmet Sullivan for final disposition. One way of looking at this is the DC circuit attempting to save face for Judge Sullivan by granting him the ability to do the right thing.
Another way of looking at this is a judicial stall tactic allowing the case to drag on even further until after the election. [60-page ruling pdf here – also available here]
As expected the majority of the panel hung their argument on the fact that Judge Sullivan had not yet ruled prior to the request for the writ of mandamus; and as an outcome Sullivan should be allowed to reach final disposition. As noted: “we expect the District Court to proceed with appropriate dispatch“…
The unopposed motion to dismiss the case against Michael Flynn is now back in the court of presiding Judge Emmet Sullivan.
Flynn’s defense counsel Sidney Powell ‘could’ appeal the full panel ruling to Supreme Court Chief Justice John G. Roberts for an emergency stay (not likely) reinforcing the original ruling (mandamus enforcement); or Powell could wait and see whether Judge Sullivan returns to judicial norms and allows the dismissal of the case prior to seeking any higher intervention (more likely). The latter approach just extends the timeline further.
As CTH noted last week the timing of this was predictable with Judge Griffith exiting the court. Additionally: “the DC appeals court likely doesn’t want this decision being reviewed any further (SCOTUS). It would make sense for the DC panel to seek a face-saving exit for Sullivan that doesn’t put Flynn’s defense in a position to appeal to Supreme Court Justice Roberts for intervention.” This appears to be the path the DC Circuit has taken.
Another possible option, albeit rather stark -highly unlikely- and loaded with implications, would be for the DOJ to simply refuse further case engagement completely.
CTH noted several months ago if the DOJ just refused further participation in the case, it would put Judge Sullivan in a very odd position of holding hearings where no prosecution shows up. However, this case is so far outside the normal boundaries of judicial proceedings anything is possible.
Here’s the embed pdf of the ruling. Judge Griffith (extreme anti-Flynn activist) representing the opinion of the court. Judges Rao and Henderson (who originally agreed to the writ) writing the dissent.
No two cases highlight the two-tiered system of justice like the comparative behind National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and SSCI Security Director James Wolfe.
In the Wolfe case corrupt elements of the judicial system allowed a transparently guilty man to escape accountability because it would have exposed massive multi-branch government corruption on an institutional scale that is almost unfathomable. Wolfe leaked top-secret classified documents at the request of members within the Senate Intelligence Committee. The DOJ then hides the wrong-doing.
In the Flynn case a transparently innocent man is framed by corrupt elements within the same institution, the FBI, by defining what the word “sanctions” means. A corrupt DOJ then transfers the corrupt intent into the judicial branch using a clear political agenda.
ODNI John Ratcliffe made an interesting, frightening & stunningly open direct statement yesterday when he described intelligence evidence that China is putting on a full-court press against governors and local officials to retain their influence campaign in 2020.
Essentially what DNI Ratcliffe described boils down to Beijing threatening economic blackmail against U.S. officials who were comfortable being reliant on local Chinese investment and purchases of U.S. companies, assents and interests.
With that stark statement in mind; and keeping the full national security ramifications in the forefront; it is worth remembering a foreboding speech given by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in February.
This is specifically important now against the backdrop of how some U.S. politicians appear to be reacting to the COVID-19 challenges, perhaps even weaponizing the virus to achieve political objectives; and with a perspective toward the way media outlets, some businesses and many politicians appear to be influenced by China. The background context for this speech takes on an entirely new dimension.
Pompeo’s remarks were made to the National Governors Association (NGA) Feb 8, 2020; and there’s an interesting segment where Pompeo reveals his awareness of a list of U.S. governors compiled by China’s communist party; and their alignment with China’s interests. A transcript of the key excerpt from his speech is provided. WATCH:
.
[Transcript at 01:45] […] “Last year, I received an invitation to an event that promised to be, quote, “an occasion for exclusive deal-making.” It said, quote, “the opportunities for mutually beneficial economic development between China and our individual states [are] tremendous,” end of quote.”
“Deal-making sounds like it might have come from President Trump, but the invitation was actually from a former governor.
I was being invited to the U.S.-China Governors’ Collaboration Summit.
It was an event co-hosted by the National Governors Association and something called the Chinese People’s Association For Friendship and Foreign Countries. Sounds pretty harmless.
What the invitation did not say is that the group – the group I just mentioned – is the public face of the Chinese Communist Party’s official foreign influence agency, the United Front Work Department.
Now, I was lucky. I was familiar with that organization from my time as the director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
But it got me thinking.
How many of you made the link between that group and Chinese Communist Party officials?
What if you made a new friend while you were at that event?
What if your new friend asked you for introductions to other politically connected and powerful people?
What if your new friend offered to invest big money in your state, perhaps in your pension, in industries sensitive to our national security?
These aren’t hypotheticals. These scenarios are all too true, and they impact American foreign policy significantly.
Indeed, last year, a Chinese Government-backed think tank in Beijing produced a report that assessed all 50 of America’s governors on their attitudes towards China. They labeled each of you “friendly,” “hardline,” or “ambiguous.”
I’ll let you decide where you think you belong. Someone in China already has. Many of you, indeed, in that report are referenced by name.
So here’s the lesson: The lesson is that competition with China is not just a federal issue. It’s why I wanted to be here today, Governor Hogan. It’s happening in your states with consequences for our foreign policy, for the citizens that reside in your states, and indeed, for each of you.
And, in fact, whether you are viewed by the CCP as friendly or hardline, know that it’s working you, know that it’s working the team around you.
Competition with China is happening inside of your state, and it affects our capacity to perform America’s vital national security functions.” (Keep Reading)
At the time of the speech it certainly seemed like Secretary Pompeo and President Trump understood a list of China-friendly governors…. and this was at the very beginning of the COVID influence over the U.S. economy and 2020 election.
Remember, “There are trillions at stake”…
Axios had an article earlier this year which included the Chinese Communist Party Report [Cloud pdf Here] that Secretary Pompeo was describing in February.
When we originally shared the information CTH specifically noted the importance of watching how and when each of these governors responded to their economy when contrast against the COVID-19 narrative.
Specifically, and anticipating the value of COVID as a leftist weapon to achieve their political objectives, we asked: “will there be a correlation to how the states respond that is directly related to their CCP alignment?
It appears we have enough evidence to say yes, there is a connection. Review the list(s) yourself and make your own decision.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 