Posted originally on the CTH on May 28, 2024 | Sundance
Judge Aileen Cannon has rejected the request by Special Prosecutor Jack Smith to ban President Trump from talking about the DOJ/FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, and/or the circumstances that led to the Biden administration approving the use of deadly force.
FLORIDA – […] U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon turned down the gag order request Tuesday as she delivered another sharp warning to prosecutors that they need to make more concerted efforts at dialogue with Trump’s counsel before bringing disputes to the court.
“The Court finds the Special Counsel’s pro forma ‘conferral’ [with the defense] to be wholly lacking in substance and professional courtesy,” wrote Cannon, a Trump appointee. “It should go without saying that meaningful conferral is not a perfunctory exercise.”
Cannon didn’t rule out granting the request in the future, but she said prosecutors would need to to further engage with Trump’s side over the issue before she will take it up again. She also questioned Smith’s claim of urgency to file the gag order request, noting that prosecutors filed it on a “non-emergency” basis. It was submitted on the Friday evening before the Memorial Day weekend, leading Trump lawyers to complain that they were being rushed into responding.
In addition, Cannon appeared to fault Smith’s attorneys for skewing how they described the stance that Trump’s lawyers had taken on the proposed gag order. The judge suggested prosecutors had relegated Trump’s response to “editorialized footnotes,” rather than just reciting it neutrally to the court. She directed both sides to provide her with more details in the future on their attempts to work out such disputes and to do so “in objective terms.” (read more)
Posted originally on Feb 8, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
There is rising speculation over whether prosecutors in Donald Trump’s classified documents case, Jack Smith, will attempt to have presiding Judge Aileen Cannon recused (removed) from the trial after she granted the defense access to certain unredacted classified papers. Smith wants to deny Trump any knowledge of who will testify against him. This is typical of an unethical prosecutor who manipulates judges and courts to ensure they always win and keep the highest conviction rate in the world, along with the 500% greater chance you will go to prison in the USA rather than China.
In my case, after Republic National Bank pled guilty with a deal to return all the money they stole and make all my clients whole with the promise nobody in the bank would ever go to prison, as always in New York, I filed a motion before Judge McKenna which was to compel the government to explain what were the charges since in a reverse proffer session they finally admitted I stole no money. I represented myself because they had taken my lawyers away with another parallel civil court. I filed this motion to compel the government to explain just the theory of the case. They argued this was a pro se brief, and the court could not expect them to answer because I did not know the law to defend myself. I then moved to dismiss the case since if I did not know the law to defend myself; then I could not have knowingly violated the law. Judge McKenna smiled and asked the government if they would not answer my motion now.
Since they had no answer, they went to the Chief Judge, had my case removed from Judge McKenna, and reassigned it to Judge Keenan, who instantly denied that motion. This is how these prosecutors act. The Constitution, law, due process, nothing matters to them. They MUST retain their perfect conviction rate. Jack Smith is now widely expected to pull the same maneuver. We will see if the Florida Federal Court is as corrupt as New York. Just for the record, they should have made a motion to recuse before Judge McKenna, to which I should have had the due process right to object. That was denied by the back-room deal with the Chief Judge, and then, as you can see, they sealed the records, so I cannot even see how they removed the judge.
Judge Keenan, a former prosecutor, should also have had a hearing to allow me to object to this back-room deal – he did not. The bankers told the government I had to be shut down because they were losing money in their manipulations. I had forecast that Russia would collapse in June 1998 within about 30 days. That was the collapse of the Long-Term Capital Management.
Even Edmond Safra, the owner of Republic National Bank, lost over $1 billion, so I believe he stole the funds from me and told the government he had no idea where the money was. All you had to do was go down the list of all the big players who lost billions, for they assumed if they ganged up together, they could manipulate the world. Just look at who had all loses on the same trade, and that is the evidence that they are “the club,” as I call it; they do not compete against each other but join together. If they were manufacturing cars, they would be charged under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act statutes and broken up like AT&T, etc.
When I asked a NY Lawyer why bankers are never charged? He said: “You don’t shit where you eat.“The prosecutors were so bought that no rational person would ever believe $1 billion left a bank, and they had no idea where it was. There would be a wire transfer, a check written – something! There was nothing. They could not be that stupid. This was all about shutting down my First Amendment rights and stopping the forecasting.
It became obvious when Judge Keenan dared to publicly claim I stole the idea for the ECM from the 1998 Movie Pi. They could care less about even facts when they alleged I was dealing in Japan back in 1992. I suppose I used a time machine as well. It was the forecasting they were desperately trying to discredit at all costs to support the bankers manipulating the markets and blowing up the world economy every time.
The Southern District of NY court is beyond all hope – it’s too corrupt. Judges commit felonies all the time, and they alter the transcripts, changing the very words spoken in court. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals dared to claim they lacked the power to order judges to obey the law – see US v ZICHETTELLO id/97. I argued since time means nothing and they can change the words spoken in court, they might as well say I confessed to killing JFK while they were at it and just order the death penalty since trials are a nuisance anyway. Stalin executed Kondratieff because he said there was a cycle and communism would collapse as well. He was taken from court when they ran out of reasons to imprison him and just shot him in the parking lot.
Trump does not stand a chance of winning in New York City. I have never seen the courts there EVER provide a fair trial to anyone! There is a higher probability that it will snow in Hell before Trump ever gets a fair trial in New York City. We are NOW about to see if the Florida courts are as corrupt as New York. Jack Smith will try a backroom deal and say the President needs this. Tuesday, Judge Cannon ruled in favor of Trump, stating the filing from Jack Smith:
“fails to identify the information at issue, provide any explanation about the nature of the investigation, or explain how disclosure of the code name would prejudice or jeopardize the integrity of the separate investigation (assuming it remains ongoing).“
With each passing day, this corruption is becoming so bad that the only solution becomes separation of the United States, particularly in light of the Biden Administration seeking a total dictatorship over Texas, tearing up the constitution and nullifying all State’s rights, which the Founding Fathers swore that day would NEVER come – see Federalist #46.
Without the Rule of Law – Civilization Cannot Exist.
The worst kid you ever knew in high school becomes a prosecutor.
Posted originally on the CTH on January 16, 2024 | Sundance
In a 14-page opinion and ruling today [SEE pdf HERE] four judges from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals deconstruct the previous ruling from their own court as well as the DC judge beneath them that gave Special Counsel Jack Smith access to President Trump Twitter account data and then enforced a non-disclosure order.
There are multiple layers to this story, but the substantive part is the scheme and the construct of how the Lawfare took place. There’s no way this was coincidental; I’ll explain why.
First, there are only 7 members on the full DC Circuit Court of Appeals. When the Twitter case to gain access to President Trump communication came to the appellate level, somehow all three of the most left-wing judges were assigned to hear the appeal.
An “en banc” review would have included the full 7 members. However, that review was made moot by the release of the information (a result of the appellate decision). The release itself was done with the use of a non-disclosure order, hiding the ruling in secrecy and keeping President Trump from knowing about it. Once the other four members of the DC CCA eventually found out about the case and the ramifications for ‘executive privilege’ their opinion lambasting their own court is released.
As noted from the panel, “the court here permitted a special prosecutor to avoid even the assertion of executive privilege by allowing a warrant for presidential communications from a third party and then imposing a nondisclosure order.”
The Circuit Court justices note that Jack Smith could have gone to the National Archives for the information as they held the same set of documents and information. However, Smith didn’t want to go that route because the National Archives would inform President Trump as customary and provide him the ability to assert executive privilege over any of the 32 Direct Messages requested.
Jack Smith didn’t want President Trump to know the prosecution was looking through his Twitter metadata and personal communication, so they went to district court under seal to file their search warrants in secrecy; then banning Twitter (the third party) from telling President Trump about it. The four justices from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals are furious the other three members of the court went along with this precedent setting usurpation of authority.
President Trump could not appeal any part of this process because he was unaware it was taking place. In essence, a star-chamber of secrecy was established and the majority on DC Circuit Court of Appeals is not happy about it.
Jack Smith gained access after Twitter lost the 3-judge Circuit Court appeal decision. So, an en banc full 7-member ruling is essentially moot. The information was released, and Smith had access without President Trump or the White House having any option to assert privilege.
…”While a Twitter account primarily consists of public tweets, it may also include some private material, such as direct messages between users, drafts, and personal metadata. In fact, the material produced by Twitter included several dozen direct messages written by a sitting President. The district court afforded no opportunity for the former President to invoke executive privilege before disclosure, and this court made no mention of the privilege concerns entangled in a third-party search of a President’s social media account. This approach directly contravenes the principles and procedures long used to adjudicate claims of executive privilege.” [pdf HERE]
The ruling provides no remedy other than public scrutiny and perhaps fuel for Florida Judge Aileen Cannon who already has Special Counsel Jack Smith on his heels after several rulings in the Mar-a-Lago documents case.
What the publicity does is highlight to the world just how politically motivated all of this aforementioned action really is. Lastly, what are the odds of the random 3-judge panel to approve it. Even the DC Circuit Court itself seems to imply this was a structured outcome, which is even more infuriating to the majority within the court.
Posted originally on the CTH on October 30, 2023 | Sundance
For the sake of this argument, if you wanted to align with Judge Chutkan on the need for a gag order, you would first need to clarify if Mark Meadows was a witness for the Jack Smith prosecution. Absent an actual witness list, the remarks by President Trump have to be stretched to encompass potential witnesses or foreseeable witnesses. That’s what Judge Chutkan decided. Anyone who might be a witness is protected by the gag order forbidding President Trump from talking about them.
Jack Smith baited President Trump by leaking a story to ABC News saying Mark Meadows warned President Trump that Biden’s 2020 election win was legitimate. It never happened, but the leak and story were bait to get President Trump to respond – thereby creating the dynamic that would lead to the gag order. The Lawfare worked.
I do not fault President Trump for responding to the ABC News article, he should have every right to speak about false assertions against him. In reality, Jack Smith knew Judge Chutkan wanted to reaffirm the gag order, so he just provided her the legal tool to do it. When dealing with corruption, that’s how Lawfare operates.
WASHINGTON DC – […] Chutkan reiterated that her decision to issue the original gag order earlier this month was rooted in evidence that Trump’s public attacks on witnesses, prosecutors and court personnel have routinely resulted in threats and harassment jeopardizing their safety and her duty to protect the “orderly administration of justice.” In such cases, she said, the Supreme Court and other legal precedents and rules have supported gag orders as a tool to protect the public’s interest in a fair trial.
[…] Chutkan noted that despite the clear problems with the Meadows statement, she would not act on it because the order had not been in effect. She noted that for any potential violations in the future, she would not reach any conclusions before giving both Trump and prosecutors a chance to “provide their positions on the statement’s meaning and permissibility.” (read more)
Posted originally on the CTH on August 8, 2023Sundance
Appearing with Sebastian Gorka, Kash Patel puts some excellent context on the issue of Dircuit Court Judge Chutkan presiding over the special counsel case against President Trump. {Direct Rumble Link Here}
I was unaware of the detail where Judge Chutkan originally presided over the case when Fusion GPS tried to block Devin Nunes and Kash Patel from revealing the source of the payments for the Chriss Steele dossier. This is a big datapoint. WATCH:
TRANSCRIPT – Kash Patel: “Judge Chutkan, for those who don’t know, represented Burisma, Hunter Biden’s fraudulent consulting firm, she was a lawyer at the same law firm with Hunter Biden. But Seb, let’s put that aside. What other matters are there for her recusal? In 2017 when Devin Nunes and I were running the Russiagate investigation, we figured out who paid for the Steele dossier. Fusion GPS, the DNC, and the Hillary Clinton campaign paid Christopher Steele millions of dollars and they laundered it through the FBI and the FISA court to unlawfully surveil Donald Trump. That’s big-time stuff.
On the eve of us winning that disclosure, before the world knew, Fusion GPS took us to federal court and that case landed in JUDGE CHUTKAN’S COURT ROOM. … After a month of heavy litigation where Judge Chutkan knew the ins and outs of Fusion GPS, our proceedings, all possible witnesses, etc., when she could not prevent us from prevailing, she recused -on her own- from that case. Why?”
“We found out her law firm, Boies Schiller, represented Fusion GPS. The very client that was in front of her in federal court was one of her former clients. That is rule #1 for disqualification.”
GORKA: “Boies Schiller Flexner is the same company where Chutkan and Hunter Biden worked!”
PATEL: “You gotta ask yourself, Seb, how come it took Chutkan a month [to recuse herself]? … She wanted to block the bank records.
Imagine if we never found out who paid for the dossier. … She set the precedent. She cannot neutrally and arbitrarily preside over Donald Trump’s criminal trial when she recused herself from the very representation of the Democratic entrenchment: the DNC, the Hillary Clinton campaign, Fusion GPS, because she was so biased because of her prior representation from Boies Schiller.
How could she possibly be allowed to stay on this case? And it wasn’t us, Seb. We got her off because of her own history. That precedent is what Donald Trump’s lawyers must apply this week.”
Perhaps this recusal issue is why four other district court judges including Boasberg sat in the back of the courtroom for President Trump’s appearance last week. Perhaps the judges were proactively contemplating who would meet the DC recusal threshold.
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