Tag Archives: Weaponized IRS

Jan 17 2024

Four Judges of DC Circuit Court of Appeals Excoriate Prior Executive Privilege Ruling, and The Admitted Scheme of Special Counsel Jack Smith


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.

Jan 15 2024

Atlanta DA Fani Willis Plays the Race Card Giving Proactive Speech at Big Bethal AME Church


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.

.

Jan 14 2024

1.3.24: INFO Flood incoming! CEOS departing in droves, Flight logs, Lawfare, Cali Ballots, Celine, Be ready, Pray!


Posted originally on Rumble By And We Know on: Jan 3, 2024 at 12:45 pm EST

Jan 12 2024

Migrant Crisis Motive Revealed


Posted originally on Jan 12, 2024 By Martin Armstrong |  

Democratic Rep. Yvette Clarke is running for re-election this year in New York’s 9th District to FINISH THE JOB of utterly destroying New York. To achieve her goal of ruining a once great city, Clarke is demanding MORE illegal migrants. Clarke actually admitted that the Democrats need more migrants to overrun their cities and states for “redistricting purposes.”

“I’m from Brooklyn, New York. We have a diaspora that can absorb a significant number of these migrants,” said Clarke, who has served on the House Committee on Homeland Security. “When I hear colleagues talk about, you know, the doors of the inn being closed — ah, no room at the inn — I’m saying I need more people in my district just for redistricting purposes.”

Now, redrawing districts is a common tactic used by the right and left. However, dismantling the Constitution to allow non-citizens to enter the country and vote is not.

Watch how the federal government blames the state government in the video above. No one will take responsibility for the state of our nation.

Did Clarke actually admit that the invasion of America under Joe Biden was a deliberate ploy for votes?

Republican New York City councilwoman explained the situation in further detail. “Congressional seats are allocated by population. Higher population states get more congressional seats, and therefore more political power in Washington. “Blue states have been LOSING seats as people flee progressive policies,” continued Paladino. “We’re set to possibly lose THREE seats by 2030 in NY. These allocations are determined by census-calculated raw population, including illegals. See how it works?”

Clarke is from Brooklyn, where children were just expelled from school to make room for illegal migrants. Clarke was responsible for passing the Dream and Promise Act (H.R. 6) legislation that provided 2.5 million illegal migrants, or dreamers, temporary residence in America and an easy path to citizenship.

The ploy to infiltrate America with illegal migrants began years ago. At first, they said those wishing to come here were simply “dreamers” looking for a better life, similar to most of our ancestors. However, they were not following the typical protocol to enter the country. Then left politicians told migrants that they were WELCOME in their cities and could declare sanctuary there. Naturally, countless people fled their socialistic hell holes for America, where the government then decided they were not going to issue work permits but force them to become dependent on government aid. Soon, they will be provided with the right to vote, and certainly, they will vote for the people who are enabling their new lives.

Jan 12 2024

We Will Prevail No Matter What – Governments Better Learn from History


Posted originally on Jan 11, 2024 By Martin Armstrong 

Stasr War Vader

COMMENT: Hi Martin,

We can now see insanity developing to the full.  As you or \ and Socrates predicted. The curtain has been pulled somewhat but we have not yet seen the wizard completely. We can clearly see  some of its agents. Anyway. Not all seems to be  lost in the process. I notice a growing resistance and luckily some the brightest are amongst them. I understand this is a cyclical thing in humanity. I do wonder how bad it will be this time around. We need more involvement of women. Their strength has not yet been awakened enough.  All these jokes of women that are now in power can be restrained by the real  feminine spirit. When I was a girl me and my sisters watched the series ‘Ivanhoe’, which inspired us to take out the  copper rods of the stair case and mimic a sword fight. No we were not misgendered. Girls also like a fight. They just have different methods certainly when they grow up.

Happy new year to you and fasten up your seat belt.

Cheerio,

L.

Martin Armstrong Margaret Thatcher

REPLY: I have met many women in governments around the world. I must say, since 2000, there has been a trend where those who rise to power are not the strong, independent type, male or female. Those who rise are those who conform. The days of Margaret Thatcher are long gone. Maggie understood the shenanigans behind the Euro. It was the men who staged a coup against her because they were the conformists. They were perfectly willing to surrender the sovereignty of Britain to Brussels, all on the theory that a one-European government would end the war and a single currency would promote European central control.

AtlasShrugged

People are waking up. That is part of the cycle into 2032. As they awake, those in power will scream and fight, for this is all about them retaining power – not what is good for the country and certainly not the people. This is why we must go through their treacherous times. In the end, we will win because they are actually nothing without the people. When Ayn Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged, the left hated it. It was raining on their Marxist idea of utopia.

Many ask me: How can Socrates forecast civil unrest and outcomes with such accuracy?  What I have tried to explain is that history is a map of the future. People wrongly assume that we are technologically advanced, so history is just about a lot of people chucking spears and running around in sheets. They are focused on the technology rather than the events and the people. The one thing that ensures history will ALWAYS repeat is that human nature never changes.

For example, if you knew your history, you would instantly spot that Star Wars was simply a modern revision of the Roman Revolution. Instead of swords, they are now light sabers. They are fighting for the Republic against the evil Emperor.

Roman Rebellion of the Plebs Lanatus

Second Roman Revolution in 495/494BC.

Agrippa Menenius Lanatus

This is what we will see as more and more people open their eyes. As in Rome, the Revolution of the Plebs during the 5th century BC was when the common people revolted and just walked out. A series of clashes erupted in the Second Roman Revolution in 495/494BC. The plebs were even talking about assassinating the consuls. Instead, the plebeians vacated the city and marched to the Sacred Mount (Mons Sacer) outside the city. The Senate suddenly realized that without the plebs, there was no economy. The ancient version of Atlas Shrugged. They dispatched Agrippa Menenius Lanatus, who had been a consul that the plebs well respected. He explained that they were the belly and the limbs of society and that they also would starve. He explained that both needed each other.

Tax Robbery

The plebeians agreed to negotiate for their return to the city but insisted they would have special tribunes to represent them. That was the birth of the Tribune of the Plebs. However, no member of the senatorial class would be eligible for this office, and the tribunes should be above everyone else. Nobody could touch them, not even the Consuls. The senate agreed to their terms, and the people returned to the city. Thus, this was a bloodless revolution.

These people look at us with such disdain. We are to be exploited for their unbridled power. There is no economy without the people. That is why this Great Taking is so wrong. To retain power, they need the military. If those in the military refuse to fire on the people, as was the case in Russia when Yeltsin stood on the tank, then the Russian coup collapsed.

There are limits to their power. They are ignorant of that fact, for when they are on top, they cannot see how they will fall – but they always do. This is what 2032 is all about. They WILL FAIL, and the PEOPLE will ultimately prevail. We will get to redesign government, and this time, let us learn from the past – just for once!

Jan 10 2024

Pretrial and Detention in Florida – Guilty Until Proven Innocent


Posted originally on Jan 9, 2024 By Martin Armstrong 

Rule of Law Justice

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.
Judge

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.

Jan 10 2024

Very Revealing – Supreme Court Refuses to Permit Twitter to Outline Scope of FBI/DHS Unlawful Domestic Surveillance


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.

Keep in mind, the lawsuit by Twitter against the Obama administration (DHS/FBI) was in 2014, so the demands from government were ‘prior to’.   Now, does my prior outlining of “Jack’s Magic Coffee Shop” start to make more sense?  [Keep in mind, I received a ridiculous subpoena for writing about this.]

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.

You might remember this 11th circuit court of appeals ruling against Trump; it essentially encapsulates the issue:

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.

Jan 10 2024

Hopelessly Corrupt – Judge James Boasberg Gives Ray Epps the James Wolfe and Kevin Clinesmith Treatment, Probation for Ray Epps


Posted originally on the CTH on January 9, 2024 | Sundance

James Wolfe was the Senate Intelligence Committee Security Director who leaked the top-secret Title-1 search warrant FISA application to journalist Ali Watkins on March 17, 2017.  When Wolfe was busted by the FBI his lawyers threatened to introduce evidence in court that he was instructed to do so by SSCI Vice-Chairman Senator Mark Warner. The DOJ dropped the classified document leak charge, and instead charged him only with lying to investigators.  Wolfe received probation.

In March, 2023, when I wrote the outline about Judge Boasberg being the corrupt DC judge who broke the constitutional restrictions on executive privilege, which technically forced Mike Pence to turn over his notes and testify to James Smith and the DC grand jury, I said at the time, “The entire judicial system is corrupt, soup to nuts, all of it.”  I was not using hyperbole.  {Go Deep – Go Deeper}

This is the same Judge Boasberg who sat as presiding judge on the FISA court.  The same Judge Boasberg who gave FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith a slap on the wrist for manufacturing evidence used in the Carter Page FISA application that defrauded the court.  The same Judge Boasberg who appointed former DOJ-NSD head Mary McCord as amicus curiae advisor to the court, after she knowingly and fraudulently submitted the FISA application to the court.

Today, Judge Boasberg gave J6 FBI agent provocateur Ray Epps a sentence of probation. [Read Courtroom Here]

[READ THIS]

Judge James Boasberg is not just openly and visibly aligned with the most corrupt activity within Washington DC, this is a federal judge who is laughing at the inability of anyone within the system to do a damned thing about it.

We need a reckoning, a serious and massive foundational reset, the likes of which we have never seen in our nation’s history.

Pray thankfulness.

Pray for wisdom.

Pray for resolve.

Pray for strength.

…. Then prepare!

Jan 9 2024

Georgia Court Filing Alleges DA Fani Willis Appointed and Paid Her Lover, Nathan Wade, $654,000 to Prosecute Donald Trump


Posted originally on the CTH on January 8, 2024 | Sundance 

Well, well, well… isn’t this interesting.  In a court filing today [SEE pdf HERE], one of the co-defendants in the Fulton County election case against President Trump is presenting very specific details of an intimate relationship between District Attorney Fani Willis and the Special Prosecutor she hired, Nathan Wade.

At first review, if the allegations are true, DA Willis had a financial motivation to initiate the case against Trump, as her boyfriend was the primary financial beneficiary.  The filing documents how Fani Willis and Nathan Wade took several extravagant vacations and indulged in an exclusive lifestyle as the result of payments Willis’s office made to Wade.

If investigated as accurate, this could be very legally problematic for the Fulton County District Attorney and her case against President Trump.  The conflict of interest is very bright under this spotlight.  [Also, lolol ]

ATLANTA – District Attorney Fani Willis improperly hired an alleged romantic partner to prosecute Donald Trump and financially benefited from their relationship, according to a court motion filed Monday which argued the criminal charges in the case were unconstitutional.

The bombshell public filing alleged that special prosecutor Nathan Wade, a private attorney, paid for lavish vacations he took with Willis using the Fulton County funds his law firm received. County records show that Wade, who has played a prominent role in the election interference case, has been paid nearly $654,000 in legal fees since January 2022. The DA authorizes his compensation.

The motion, filed on behalf of defendant Michael Roman, a former Trump campaign official, seeks to have the charges against Roman dismissed and for Willis, Wade and the entire DA’s office to be disqualified from further prosecution of the case.

Pallavi Bailey, a Willis spokeswoman, said the DA’s office will respond to Roman’s allegations “through appropriate court filings.” Wade did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It is unclear if the explosive issues raised in the filing undermine the validity of the indictment against Trump and the remaining 14 co-defendants or simply muddy the waters by questioning Willis’ professional ethics.

One ethics expert said that the the allegations, if true, raised serious questions.

Stephen Gillers, a professor emeritus at New York University Law School who has written extensively about legal and judicial ethics, said a closer look at Willis’ decision-making is be needed before it can be determined whether the indictment should be dismissed.

If the allegations are true, Gillers said, “Willis was conflicted in the investigation and prosecution of this case” and wasn’t able to bring the sort of “independent professional judgment” her position requires.” (read more)

[Source pdf]

Jan 8 2024

LIVE! The “January 6” Debate | Hosted by Zerohedge


Posted originally on Rumble By Glen Greenwald on: Jan 6, 7:00 pm EST