And we're back to Whitmer trial after break so both sides can prepare for FBI entrapment defense.
Judge tells jury he hoped to put off entrapment issues until after DOJ rested but it's not possible to "segment" the argument. Defense, prosecutor will present new opening arguments
Whooo boy. Croft atty not holding back. "The FBI is supposed to protect us and protect our rights. They are not supposed punish people who say mean things about them. We expect the FBI to use responsible tactics."
Croft was criticizing FBI on Facebook in 2017, made him a target
Blanchard, Croft atty, now blasting CHS Steve as a longtime criminal who committed crimes in 9 states.
CHS Steve was "plying guys with drugs" at every event. "Out of their minds stoned." Violates FBI rules.
FBI ignored CHS Steve behavior. Also selectively record defendants.
FBI ignored CHS Steve "breaking the rules." (Defense asked last week for all records related to FBI admonishments to CHSs. Judge denied for now.)
Blanchard explains that FBI agents immediately decided this would be a "TEI" case, terrorism enterprise investigation. One agent told his boss (D'Antuono?) that he'd work it that way with or without his approval.
CHSs purchased hotel rooms for defendants before recon trip.
Gets in truck driven by CHS Dan and filled with other CHSs, FBI UCE
"At every step, FBI had good reason to close the case."
FBI should have closed CHS Steve as source when he smoked pot with targets.
"This was stoned crazy talk, not a plan."
Blanchard going thru Croft's outlandish remarks including talk of "barking" outside Whitmer's cottage.
Lol, they talked about flying her on a kite over the lake. "That's not how kites work."
I wish I could see the faces of the jurors.
"You can't prosecute someone for talking."
"We expect better from our government. You can tell the FBI it's not ok to prosecute people they are angry with or who run their mouth."
Gibbons (Fox atty) up again: "Adam Fox would protest" when CHS Dan came to vacuum shop to entice Fox into kidnapping plot.
CHS Dan paid $64k!
sometimes receiving "envelopes of cash" by the FBI.
Gibbons now detailing CHS Dan's involvement including comms with FBI handlers. (Those agents also will not testify for government nor will FBI special agent in charge. He was fired after assaulting his wife last summer.)
"It's the government moving all of it."
Atty Julia Kelly up, reiterating CHS Dan's contact with her client, Daniel Harris. CHS Dan calls handler in May 2020, says there is "no plan" btw defendants. But CHS Dan kept pushing Adam Fox to other defendants.
DOJ up.
AUSA explains entrapment is a legal standard not based on "feeling or ideas."
Calls first witness: FBI special agent Todd Ronick (sp)
He's worked on domestic terror cases since 2014 specifically militia movement.
AUSA asks how FBI decides to open cases. Mostly "tips," he says.
He says someone walked into FBI office with a tip about Wolverine Watchmen. Showing exhibits to identify defendants.
Now explaining CHSs: Could be someone who provides info to us, someone we recruit in an organization.
Someone could be in trouble and offer to help?
Yes.
Could someone do it for money?
Yes.
Now discussing "admonishments" given to CHSs.
I'll post this blistering 2019 report by IG Horowitz on FBIs lousy record of vetting, tracking informants:
CHSs "sometimes they have to pretend to be criminals."
UCE is an employee of the FBI, usually a special agent.
"They have to look different" if they're going to infiltrate a group. Sounds like they're prepping jury to see unconventional FBI UCEs "Mark" and "Red."
Confirms CHS Dan had access to group's encrypted chats--gave FBI access to those accounts.
Confirms FBI can get search warrants for info on social media accounts. (This happens repeatedly in J6 cases)
Now presenting evidence to jury off defendants' accounts. (Can't see it)
Now playing profane videos by Fox on Facebook, talking about boogaloo movement. "Get ready."
FBI says boogaloo wants to start second civil war. They wear Hawaiian shirts (!) apparently.
Now says their references to 1776 is somehow indicative of second civil war
Plays video of Fox saying 435 members of Congress don't "give a f*ck about us."
Where's the lie? Wonder how the jury will take that.
Shows photo of Fox wearing Hawaiian shirt at lockdown rally, someone screaming "F the government."
Lots of posts, chat related to lockdown anger
Ok back and forth between Fox and Croft with hot talk about taking down governors and tyrants bc of lockdowns.
Now talking about June 2020 meeting in Ohio organized by CHS Steve.
FBI agent says meeting was about "uniting the militias," says Fox then started recruiting members
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here’s the nondisclosure order signed by Jeb Boasberg in May 2023 prohibiting Verizon from notifying several US senators and one House member that Jack Smith had subpoenaed their phone records. Verizon complied with the subpoenas and NDOs with the exception of Ted Cruz.
Important to note what Boasberg claims here. In order to authorize an NDO in a tech related subpoena, a judge must determine one of five factors according to Stored Communications Act.
What Boasberg alleged is that sitting Republican lawmakers might break the law if notified of the subpoenas.
He is a lunatic and must be removed from the bench. This is the CHIEF JUDGE of the DC district court.
Dreeben played a key role not just on Team Mueller but he also is directly tied to Comey's involvement in developing the obstruction case against the president--recall Comey admitted the reason he leaked the content of his secret Flynn memo was to prompt the appointment of a special counsel, which happened the day after the NYT leak... x.com/JohnWHuber/sta…
In 2023, Dreeben bragged about his lead role in the Mueller witch hunt; the "speed" at which the investigation proceeded; and how he was responsible for overseeing the production of Vol II of Mueller report, which addressed potential obstruction charges against the president.
If I were the DOJ, this guy would be toward the top of a government witness list. So how can he represent Comey when he likely will be questioned as part of the obstruction/false statements case against him?
So in 48 hours, Judge Karin Immergut (Trump) determined the president acted unconstitutionally in federalizing and deploying Natl Guard troops to protest Portland ICE facility; claimed the move violated Oregon's 10th Amend rights; and concluded there was no "rebellion" taking place to justify the president's order.
If you read carefully how Immergut described illegal immigrants, you might pick up a slight bias...as well as her claims of "mostly peaceful" protests:
The way federal judges so casually downplay examples of criminal behavior represents another part of the escalating crisis in the judicial branch. Even if you take the word of local law enforcement--Immergut's pooh-poohing of sustained violence to any degree is stunning:
Immergut--relying heavily on determinations made by Judge Charles Breyer in a similar lawsuit in California--decides on her own that no "rebellion" is underway.
I mean, surely Immergut is aware of attacks on ICE agents and facilities in other cities including Los Angeles and Chicago...right?
Her arrogance here reminds me of the words of Judge Andrew Oldham of the 5th Circuit in his dissent in an Alien Enemies Act opinion. Oldham repeatedly warned of judicial overreach in matters exclusive to the executive branch:
Oldham: "It transmogrifies the least-dangerous branch into robed crusaders who get to playact as multitudinous Commanders in Chief."
It's hard to know where to start--or end-- in covering the batsh*t meltdown last week by DC Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui. (I made the full transcript available to my paid subscribers on Substack)
Faruqui was presiding over a hearing in the case of Edward Dana, a career criminal with 9 prior convictions and 23 arrests who was on probation and arrested by DC police for vandalizing property in a drunken rage on August 17.
During his arrest, Dana said he wanted to kill the president (among other crazy statements.) DC US attorney Jeanine Pirro sought to indict Dana on a federal felony of making threats to the president.
But once again--in a rarity now commonplace in DC--a grand jury made up of DC voters (93% for Kamala in 2024) refused to indict him. So prosecutors had to drop the charge.
This enraged Faruqui, who not only misrepresented Dana's case (making him a victim rather than the longtime perp he is) and he berated the prosecutor for about 20 minutes or so.
But Faruqui's tirade had less to do with Dana and more to do with President Trump. Time and again, Faruqui--who was appointed in 2020 but not confirmed by the Senate--blasted the president's policies related to using federal law enforcement agencies and the National Guard in DC and warnings to do the same in other cities to combat crime.
Faruqui:
"How do we reestablish faith in people in DC that they're not going to be wrongly arrested, when the hobby, or whatever, the interest of the moment, if we move to Chicago or whatever city, Baltimore, or whatever next thing it is that catches the administration's interest, what are we, the people left here in Washington, DC, who have actually lived here, had to suffer through whatever is happening, how am I supposed to reestablish confidence in every defense lawyer and defendant that they are being treated fairly and rightly?"
Have to "suffer," the judge says.
As I have noted repeatedly, Faruqui signed hundreds of arrest warrants for J6ers including the unlawful 1512c2 felony. In one case, Faruqui found a woman in criminal contempt after she refused to answer his questions and willingly submit to conditions of release on her nonviolent misdemeanors charges.
He raised no such objections (to my knowledge) about the treatment of J6ers or berated Biden's DOJ for bringing near-daily cases to the DC courthouse.
Faruqui:
"I'm absolutely just beyond words as to what is happening and that we are just acting like this is normal. This is not only abnormal, it is now we are at past the question of constitutional crisis and academic thinking.
This is not hypothetical. What is being done? It is implausible, illegal, immoral for one person in our country to be treated like this, and now we are getting into double digits. What is being done?"
Faruqui misrepresents why these cases are being dismissed--he refuses to aknowledge the partisan bias at work by DC grand juries who are protesting the Trump administration by refusing to bring criminal indictments sought by Trump's DOJ. (I believe there are six such known cases as of now.)
Faruqui: "There seems to be just a complete disregard for the impact this is having on the people who are getting arrested and then released or dismissed. They are our fellow citizens.
This is not how we treat criminals, we don't treat them that way. We certainly do not treat presumed innocent people this way, let alone people who are our fellow Americans."
Keep in mind--Dana has a rap sheet a mile long:
Faruqui: "There seems to be a complete disregard for the traumatic effect that's having not just on the city, its citizens, the court, the AUSAs who are working all night and day to satisfy some sort of, you know, whatever this fantasy is or idea that there's going to be some great showing.
There are consequences. And right now, Mr. Dana is suffering those consequences."
Faruqui lauds the idea of a "deep state" of career prosecutors internally protesting the president's approach and the authority of AG Pam Bondi.
This is truly WILD:
"So if the United States Attorney [Pirro] wants to take this as a new tactic to just arrest people and detain them, she will find the court will hold a line." (Dana was not held by the feds but by local DC police. The prosecutor tried to raise that important fact with Faruqui but he did not care.)
"And I know that the U.S. Attorney's Office is full of U.S. attorneys who are continuing to hold the line and fight to hold the line. And I give great credit to the courage of the AUSAs who stay there, because the court can't do it on its own. We need dedicated -- what other people call the deep state, I would call that principled AUSAs, principled Department of Justice employees, the ones who didn't get fired for no reason apparently. (No reason--another lie.)
The ones who stay there, I am deeply grateful that you had the courage to come here today, stand in front of me and listen to me be appalled by what is happening in your office. That takes true courage."
Here are some of the declarations filed by the National Immigration Law Center who is suing the Trump adm to prevent sending back home hundreds of unaccompanied minors here illegally from Guatemala:
A 16 year old who was either pregnant or became pregnant on her trek here:
A 10-year-old here under unknown circumstances.
I want to know who brought her to the US and why.
(And to answer someone's question on 1st post, all were written by Spanish interpreters--as is the case in all of these deportation/removal lawsuits.)
Hearing underway now before Judge Jia Cobb in DC related to Lisa Cook's lawsuit against the president and Fed chief Jerome Powell over her firing as a member of the Federal Reserve Board.
Cook, appointed by Biden in 2022 and confirmed by the Senate with a tie-breaking vote cast by Kamala Harris, is being credibly accused of mortgage fraud related to three separate mortgages (!) she took out in 2021.
She is fighting her firing claiming the loan applications were filed prior to her appointment to the Fed board and that the president didn't follow the law in removing her. She wants Judge Cobb to enter a temp restraining order to keep her on the board.
Cobb starts hearing by asking Cook atty whether they intend to file a motion for a preliminary injunction (usually the next step after request for a temp restraining order). Attorney--I believe Abbe Lowell is speaking but hard to tell--says yes. Cobb says she is prepared to set an "expedited" briefing schedule to determine the merits of the case.
He keeps referring to Cook as "governor" 🙄
DOJ says they don't object to converting TRO motion to motion for prelim injunction.
Here is Cook's proposed TRO order for Judge Cobb to consider:
Cook atty attempting to dismiss allegations of mortgage fraud and those allegations do not represent "cause" needed to justify removal.
Cook atty raises Humphrey's Executor case--one that keep coming up in nearly all the lawsuits against the president related to firings/dismissals--that "cause" needs to be specific.
Judge Cobb asks for citation to back up Cook's claims any malfeasance prior to appointment cannot represent "cause" for firing. Cook atty doesn't have one and doesn't really rule it out but ponders whether the allegations were known at time of confirmation.
Cobb: "Where do I get the authority for that?" She's asking for case law to support his position that past behavior does not represent "cause."