Posted originally on the CTH on January 18, 2024 | Sundance
In a court filing two weeks ago [SEE pdf HERE], one of the co-defendants in the Fulton County election case against President Trump presented very specific details of an intimate relationship between District Attorney Fani Willis and Special Prosecutor Nathan Wade. Among the allegations are claims Ms. Willis and Mr. Wade had extravagant vacations together as a result of payments made for legal services.
Nathan Wade was a lawyer specializing in family matters prior to being appointed by Willis. Mr. Wade never prosecuted a single felony case in his legal career. Additionally, Mr. Wade is currently in divorce proceedings and making matters more complicated for DA Willis, Mr Wade’s wife is seeking to unseal the details of their current divorce battle and force a deposition from Ms Willis.
Judge Scott McAfee ordered District Attorney Fani Willis to file a written response by Feb. 2. He said he will hold a hearing on the allegations on Feb. 15.
Additionally, according to White House visitor logs, Mr Wade visited White House lawyers prior to indictment of President Trump. Also, DA Willis met with staff (Mary McCord) from the January 6 Committee prior to the indictment.
The Georgia prosecutor meeting with Biden lawyers prior to the indictment against Biden’s political opposition is a big issue that has yet to surface in front of Judge McAfee.
Things are getting very interesting.
This is actually a good segment for context of the issues:
Posted originally on Jan 16, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
The Irish government wants to pass a law that could see you or your loved ones jailed for the mere possession of memes, cartoons, or any content that could be deemed “hateful” unless you are a Neocon promoting hate speech to incite war with Russia. The Bill includes no definition of hate and is wide open to abuse by bad actors. This is a blueprint for hate speech laws the West wants to impose on everyone. You are only allowed to hate people they justify. They call Trump a liar, a dictator, a traitor, a Putin Puppet – none of this is hate speech as long as the government says it. The guys who created memes on Hillary were sent to prison for 7 months, calling it election interference. All the things they hurl at Trump in elections are not interference or hate speech – it’s amazing how many dimensions we have to law.
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 January 14, 2024 | Sundance
Two high level takeaways. First, please pay attention to the venue {GO DEEP}, as CTH has documented for 10+ years the AME church network is the epicenter of racially driven political influence. BLM are the activist foot soldiers; AME are the network organizers. BLM harvest the ballots; AME are the precinct workers who scan them as many times as needed. This is the “Atlanta way,” that duplicates in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore and Madison.
Second, Fani Willis must anticipate a major problem with her case and conduct if she is proactively going to the crew who will be tasked with circling the wagons on her defense. In this video soundbite Fani Willis plays the race card to her audience at Big Bethal AME church in Atlanta. WATCH:
Fani Willis’ full speech was 35 minutes long and filled with racially driven context.
The AME church network is the same political system used by Barack “if I had a son” Obama, Benjamin Crump, Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin in Miami-Dade/Orlando. The same network in Ferguson Missouri (Mike Brown), the same network in Baltimore, Maryland (Freddy Gray), and on it goes.
The AME network is a system built on the guise of religion, but fraught with politics, racial division, the retention of pretenses and massive fraud.
Posted originally on Jan 9, 2024 By Martin Armstrong
State laws should be viewed with a watchful eye as we move toward the next election. I often speak highly of Florida state laws, but make no mistake – Florida’s state government is still a GOVERNMENT but the lesser of multiple evils. Nearly every state quietly passed new legislation on January 1, and Florida’s new rules regarding pretrial release and detention are concerning.
SB 1534 regarding pretrial and detention now state that only a judge may set bail.
Section 1. Subsections (4), (5), and (6) are added to
48 section 903.011, Florida Statutes, to read:
49 903.011 Pretrial release “Bail” and “bond” defined; general
50 terms; statewide uniform bond schedule.—
51 (4) Except as authorized in subsection (5), only a judge
52 may set, reduce, or otherwise alter a defendant’s bail. Upon
53 motion by a defendant, or on the court’s own motion, a court may
54 reconsider the monetary component of a defendant’s bail if he or
55 she is unable to post a monetary bond.
56 (5)(a) Beginning January 1, 2024, and annually thereafter,
57 the Supreme Court must adopt a uniform statewide bond schedule
58 for criminal offenses not described in subsection (6) for which
59 a person may be released on bail before and in lieu of his or
60 her first appearance hearing or bail determination. The Supreme
61 Court must make the revised uniform statewide bond schedule
62 available to each judicial circuit.
Judges will have the ability to raise bail, but they may not lower it. If convicted, not charged, with the following crimes, you will be detained until a judge can hear your case:
(6) A person may not be released before his or her first
93 appearance hearing or bail determination and a judge must
94 determine the appropriate bail, if any, based on an
95 individualized consideration of the criteria in s. 903.046(2),
96 if the person meets any of the following criteria:
97 (a) The person was, at the time of arrest for any felony,
98 on pretrial release, probation, or community control in this
99 state or any other state;
100 (b) The person was, at the time of arrest, designated as a
101 sexual offender or sexual predator in this state or any other
102 state;
103 (c) The person was arrested for violating a protective
104 injunction;
105 (d) The person was, at the time of arrest, on release from
106 supervision under s. 947.1405, s. 947.146, s. 947.149, or s.
107 944.4731;
108 (e) The person has, at any time before the current arrest,
109 been sentenced pursuant to s. 775.082(9) or s. 775.084 as a
110 prison releasee reoffender, habitual violent felony offender,
111 three-time violent felony offender, or violent career criminal;
112 (f) The person has been arrested three or more times in the
113 12 months immediately preceding his or her arrest for the
114 current offense; or
115 (g) The person’s current offense of arrest is for one or
116 more of the following crimes:
117 1. A capital felony, life felony, felony of the first
118 degree, or felony of the second degree;
119 2. A homicide under chapter 782; or any attempt,
120 solicitation, or conspiracy to commit a homicide;
121 3. Assault in furtherance of a riot or an aggravated riot;
122 felony battery; domestic battery by strangulation; domestic
123 violence, as defined in s. 741.28; stalking; mob intimidation;
124 assault or battery on a law enforcement officer; assault or
125 battery on juvenile probation officer, or other staff of a
126 detention center or commitment facility, or a staff member of a
127 commitment facility, or health services personnel; assault or
128 battery on a person 65 years of age or older; robbery; burglary;
129 carjacking; or resisting an officer with violence;
130 4. Kidnapping, false imprisonment, human trafficking, or
131 human smuggling;
132 5. Possession of a firearm or ammunition by a felon,
133 violent career criminal, or person subject to an injunction
134 against committing acts of domestic violence, stalking, or
135 cyberstalking;
136 6. Sexual battery; indecent, lewd, or lascivious touching;
137 exposure of sexual organs; incest; luring or enticing a child;
138 or child pornography;
139 7. Abuse, neglect, or exploitation of an elderly person or
140 disabled adult;
141 8. Child abuse or aggravated child abuse;
142 9. Arson; riot, aggravated riot, inciting a riot, or
143 aggravated inciting a riot; or a burglary or theft during a
144 riot;
145 10. Escape; tampering or retaliating against a witness,
146 victim, or informant; destruction of evidence; or tampering with
147 a jury;
148 11. Any offense committed for the purpose of benefitting,
149 promoting, or furthering the interests of a criminal gang;
150 12. Trafficking in a controlled substance, including
151 conspiracy to engage in trafficking in a controlled substance;
152 13. Racketeering; or
153 14. Failure to appear at required court proceedings while
154 on bail.
Now, you may read through this list, nodding your head in agreement that anyone who commits a violent crime is a danger to our society and should be locked away. However, the legal system was designed so everyone is viewed as INNOCENT until proven guilty. This method enables the law to detain people who have not been charged with a crime and may be innocent.
Read the list a bit closer, and you will notice there are non-violent offenses that could land you in jail without bail. Inciting or participating in a riot means you are guilty until proven innocent. There WILL be riots after the election regardless of who wins, and everyone who participates may be held. You are unwise if you believe this will only benefit your political party. All the new arrivals to Florida could flip it blue, and “riots” like the Black Lives Matter wave will be considered OK, as the blue states deemed them, while conservative rallies will lead to domestic terrorism charges.
Conspiracy is also on the list if you read it carefully. So, if they simply THINK you may have committed a drug-related crime, you will be locked away until a judge can hear your case. We know that three-letter agencies have planted drugs on innocent people in the past to get that conviction. They do not even need evidence, as this is opening Pandora’s box to permit the government to detain citizens before trial.
Look at what happened over COVID. The courts closed due to the pandemic, and people living in states that did not offer bail were stuck behind bars for months until a judge could take their case. In New Jersey, for example, people awaiting trial were not even permitted to go outside for months on end, and the time they spent awaiting trial was not reduced from their sentence if found guilty. The judge is not required to take your case immediately, and they could potentially delay it for as long as possible, as they did during COVID.
Posted originally on the CTH on January 9, 2024 | Sundance
If you understand how the Dept of Homeland Security and FBI access and ultimately control the content of social media platforms, specifically the public opinion square of Twitter, then you can start to understand a much bigger aspect to this hidden court case.
KEY CONTEXT – During the Twitter File releases, existing DHS/FBI guidance controlled what the Twitter legal team was allowed to share with researchers. The Twitter File group gave Twitter search terms, and the Twitter team entered the search words/phrases and generated results. However, the Twitter legal team then had to filter that information against the instructions of DHS/FBI to determine what the research group was allowed to know; ultimately, what was allowed to become public information.
This reality stimulates the question: where/when did that prior guidance from DHS/FBI originate? The answer to that question is discovered in a little-known lawsuit by Twitter against the U.S. government. Please do not overlook the dates here.
Back in 2014, Twitter sued the government, “seeking to make public the number of times the FBI requested user information from the company in connection with national security investigations.” {link} Why? Because during the Obama administration, Twitter “was blocked from publishing the quantity of requests in its biannual online “Transparency Report,” claiming the government unlawfully restrained its speech.” {link}
In essence, DHS/FBI were weaponizing Twitter data and demanding information on specific users, specific inquiry about issues of greatest concern to the Obama administration. The Obama administration then told Twitter they were not permitted to talk about their demands due to “national security” issues. Twitter was barred from telling the public what was happening.
The Twitter lawsuit against the government wound its way through the lower courts and various levels of appeal. Each lower court ruled against the release of the information, forbidding Twitter from releasing the information. Why? Because the executive branch, in this example Obama DHS/FBI, have unilateral authority to determine what constitutes a “national security” issue. If DHS/FBI says the issue is a “national security” threat, the judicial branch is not prepared to challenge that definition.
Ultimately the lawsuit ended up at the doors of the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court refused to engage the question thereby supporting the rulings of the lower court. You can read about THAT PART HERE. However, there’s another layer to this story that needs to be accurately understood, because this deference by the judicial branch to the executive branch is part of how the system is weaponized.
These rulings are essentially correct, as following the process within a constitutional republic. However, here’s the rub. The weaponized Deep State are using this deference, as a tool in their Lawfare arsenal.
If the Deep State can unilaterally determine what constitutes “national security,” and if the judicial branch is not going to review or challenge those determinations, then the executive branch can target people, target institutions, and/or conduct domestic surveillance while hiding their conduct behind the shield of national security.
That’s exactly what the weaponized institutions (DHS, DOJ, FBI) have been doing.
That’s exactly the process that Barack Obama and Eric Holder created.
That’s exactly the motive for Eric Holder creating the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD).
Now, can you see the bigger issue, as presented by the Twitter case against government, that was just highlighted by the Supreme Court decision not to get involved.
The DOJ-NSD is the targeting mechanism for corrupt interests in our government to target us. The Dept of Homeland Security and the FBI unite in the process and provide the results to the DOJ-NSD for action against the targets. The collaboration then uses “national security” as the technique to stop those being abused by the targeting system from ever finding out, and the judicial branch cannot provide oversight.
Hopefully, this helps people put the scale of the ‘weaponization of government’ issue into a context.
That’s how they are carrying out Lawfare. That’s why there’s no process to impede them within the ordinary structures of constitutional protection.
Their ability to use “national security” as the justification for all of the corrupt targeting and surveillance is ultimately the source of power for the Fourth Branch of Government.
Posted originally on the CTH on January 4, 2024 | Sundance
I have long been saying the Jack Smith special counsel team is the reassembly of the Robert Mueller team. Today, inside an article {SEE HERE} outlining other ancillary matters about the 2020 election challenges, Politico inadvertently confirmed my suspicions.
First, the non-pretending BIG PICTURE. The Clinton exoneration FBI Team became the Trump investigation FBI Team (Crossfire Hurricane) -which then became the Robert Mueller FBI Team (exact same people, plus some additions) – which then became the J6 Investigation FBI Team (exact same people, plus some additions) – which then became the Jack Smith FBI Team (same exact people). Not only is it one long continuum, but it’s also the EXACT SAME PEOPLE.
So, the Politico Article, discussing the FBI Agents and the DOJ officials who signed the subpoena that stemmed from Jack Smith, is not really surprising other than the confirmation of the same DC-based FBI agents and DC-based Lawfare operatives.
POLITICO – […] During a tense confrontation with FBI agents who were trying to serve a subpoena, Harrison Floyd — a 2020 Trump campaign aide — considered grabbing one of the agents’ guns, Floyd told local police officers who arrived at his door shortly afterward.
[…] The subpoena and its accompanying letter were signed by assistant special counsel Jonathan Haray, a veteran federal prosecutor who once worked closely with Washington, D.C.’s U.S. attorney, Matthew Graves, who now leads the massive Justice Department probe of the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
The presence on Smith’s staff of Haray, who once served as the deputy chief of the fraud and public corruption section at the U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, has not been previously reported. Haray joined law firm DLA Piper in 2014 after a job at the Securities and Exchange Commission. He appears to have returned to government service about a year ago, around the time Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Smith to the special counsel post in November 2022.
[…] While the federal court filings don’t name the FBI agents, a police report released to POLITICO this week with the video under the Maryland Public Information Act identifies them as Walter Giardina and Christopher Meyer. Meyer’s name is also visible in the paperwork accompanying the subpoena seen in the bodycam video.
Giardina, who is assigned to the FBI’s Washington Field Office and like Floyd is a former Marine and an Iraq War veteran, has had roles in a number of high-profile, politically charged cases in recent years. He worked with special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe, including on aspects of the investigation of potential foreign influence on Trump 2016 campaign adviser Michael Flynn, who briefly served as national security adviser in the first weeks of Trump’s administration.
Giardina also took part in the arrest of another former Trump aide, Peter Navarro, in a Reagan National Airport jetway in 2022 on charges of defying subpoenas from the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 riot and Trump’s broader efforts to overturn the 2020 election. (read more)
This article comes on the heels of another confirmation that is even more critical in context.
I have been sounding the alarm about Mary McCord for a long time. A few days ago, Andrew Weissmann, who together with Norm Eisen created the Lawfare arguments that Jack Smith is using {GO DEEP}, confirmed that he is working with Mary McCord.
Veteran prosecutors Andrew Weissmann and Mary McCord discuss and dissect the cases against former President Donald Trump, including the historic indictments from the Manhattan D.A., Special Counsel Jack Smith and Fulton County D.A. Fani Willis. {SOURCE}
Last month I said, “[…] Remember the stories of the J6 investigative staff all going to work for Jack Smith on the investigation of Donald Trump? Well, Mary McCord was a member of that team [citation]; all indications are that her background efforts continue today as a quiet member of the Special Counsel team that is still attacking Donald Trump. READ MORE HERE
This is one long continuum of the same Lawfare activity by the same core group of people.
This effort to prevent Trump from running for President is presenting a major CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS. We have the extremely LEFTIST Supreme Court of Colorado ruling unconstitutionally that Trump should be barred from being on the ballot. Then we have the Michigan Supreme Court ruling against Colorado. Now, the State of Maine, another LEFTIST government, is also seeking to follow Colorado.
These Leftist Governments are planning to really destroy the Constitution in any way they possibly can. Not a single person on January 6th was criminally charged with the Insurrection Statute. Yet, these LEFTIST states are trying to use the 14th Amendment to block Trump from running when it has NEVER been used even once in history against any Southerner.
These states are fulfilling the warnings of Nikita Khrushchev (1894-1971). They are so anti-Constitution and are allowing this country to be flooded with people from South America who have traditionally been Marxists, which is why they have destroyed their own economies and are flooding into the United States for free food, clothing, healthcare, and to be taken care of for life as long as they vote for the Marxists here determined to destroy the US economy.
Our model warns of a recession from May 7th, 2024, into 2028. As Chairman Powell of the Federal Reserve warned, this spending by Biden is “unsustainable,” and there may not even be an election by 2028. Democracy is all about letting the people decide. States are rigging the ballots so that no challenger in the Democratic primary may appear on any ballot, leaving no choice for Democrats but Biden. Then, they are trying to prevent Trump from running at all. This is not Democracy – it is totalitarianism.
I fear we have reached the end of the rule of law. If the Supreme Court strikes down these Marxist States, they will only claim it was a Republican Decision. The very idea of a “UNITED” formation of states can no longer be justified. The nation has become so deeply divided; as Abraham Lincoln once said, a house divided cannot stand. This is what we face as we move into 2032. The Supreme Court instigated the Civil War with the Dread Scott decision when they tried to defuse the potential for the Civil War.
Emerson was Scott’s owner, and he allowed Scott to get married and left Scott and his wife in Wisconsin when Emerson traveled to Louisiana. Emerson died in 1843, and Scott attempted to purchase his freedom from Emerson’s widow, but she refused. Dread Scott argued that since he became a permanent resident in the federal territory of Wisconsin, which prohibited slavery, he became a freeman. The district court applied the laws of Missouri to find Scott was still a slave, and the Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. It then went to the Supreme Court, in a hotly watched issue, then much as removing Trump from the ballots today. In a highly contentious opinion written by Chief Justice Taney, he held that persons of African descent were not citizens of the United States. The Court reasoned that, at the time of the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, persons of African descent were brought to the U.S. as property and, whether later freed or not, could not become U.S. citizens. With that decision, the Civil War became the solution. Abraham Lincoln was never on the ballots in 10 states: South Carolina, North Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Texas, Georgia, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Virginia. He did not receive any votes from the states that would later form the Confederacy besides Virginia, where Republicans secured 1% of the votes. History is repeating once again. Today, the Marxist-following states that do not believe in Equal Protection of the Law seek to remove Trump from their ballots as well to prevent him from becoming president, precisely as was done to Abraham Lincoln.
Regardless of how the Supreme Court rules, as in Dread Scott, one side will never support the outcome. It is questionable if the United States will ever be able to stand as one nation once again.
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 