Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Mar 9, 2022 18 tweets 4 min read Read on X
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 erroneously says Dublin, OH outside of Cleveland. It's outside Columbus.

When high, CHS Steve got everyone "whipped up."
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:

oig.justice.gov/reports/2019/a…
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
 

Keep Current with Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @julie_kelly2

Sep 25
Jim Jordan opens Weaponization committee hearing today with DOJ IG Michael Horowitz by noting the FBI has not yet found the J6 pipe bomber.

The committee, Jordan notes, is investigating the "double standards" at the "Biden/Harris DOJ."
LOL major dbag Glenn Kirschner a witness in weaponization committee. Bragging about his prosecutorial record--he has been tip of the spear in attempted character assassination and harassment of Judge Aileen Cannon.

Kirschner now talking about Project 2025 and bringing up Jeff Clark being charged in Georgia. LOL Kirschner claims Project 2025 threatens the "independence and apolitical work" of the DOJ.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL
I hope someone on @Weaponization asks Kirschner about his coordinated targeting of Cannon.

It got so bad that the 11th Circuit stopped accepting complaints that Kirschner publicly helped organize

GeneralOrder2024-J.pdf ()uscourts.gov
Read 4 tweets
Sep 24
In the most sneering tone possible, Tanya Chutkan as predicted grants Jack Smith motion to file a gargantuan 180-page “brief” in Trump’s J6 case. Image
Chutkan HERSELF described Smith's proposed brief explaining why DOJ believes the new indictment is not covered by presidential immunity as "irregular" and outside the "ordinary course" of court procedure.

She again says the election is of no concern to her--which is bullshit Image
It is this type of glibness and quite frankly, laziness, that got Chutkan smacked down by SCOTUS. Chief Justice John Roberts repeatedly criticized Chutkan for her lack of fact finding and due diligence before hastily issuing her Dec 2023 denying all forms of presidential immunity for Trump in the J6 case.

Chutkan now is saying--ok SCOTUS you want a "careful" assessment of immunity in existing indictment? Fine--I will let Jack Smith do it first.Image
Read 4 tweets
Sep 19
And so it begins.

As I have reported, DC US Attorney Matt Graves is using a new charge in the J6 prosecution to work around SCOTUS decision in Fischer, which overturned how DOJ applied 1512(c)(2).

Yesterday, Graves filed a superseding indictment against a California woman on 18 USC 372, "conspiracy to impede officers."

To my knowledge, this charge has not been brought in the nearly 4-year criminal prosecution of J6ers. (If it has, it applied only to a handful.)

Graves is now referring to elected members of Congress as "officers."Image
Image
It's hard to overemphasize how cynical, defiant, and deceptive this is.

Graves indicted Christina Kelso on 1512(c)(2) on 5/15/24--ONE MONTH AFTER SCOTUS ORAL ARGUMENTS IN FISCHER.

Everyone knew SCOTUS would reverse DOJ but Graves didn't care. In a solid stick in the eye to the court, Graves continued to bring the obstruction felony.

So now Graves is (1) dismissing the count but asking for same prison sentence in existing cases or (2) filing superseding indictment to drop 1512c2 but add another felony in its place.Image
To put this in perspective--Graves brought the 372 charge in high profile cases such as Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.

He is now using it against a 46-year-old woman who never went inside the building, is not accused of assaulting police, or destroying property. Image
Read 5 tweets
Sep 17
Getting up to speed on this batshit crazy lawsuit @nataliegwinters posted earlier today.

A Michigan "welfare rights" organization, 3 black Michigan voters, and NAACP filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump and RNC in WASHINGTON DC in Nov 2020 claiming Trump/RNC violated the Voting Rights Act and Ku Klux Klan act by attempting to uncover election fraud.

Of course the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit in Trump-hating DC federal court. It was initially given to Judge Emmet Sullivan--he went on senior status so it was transferred to Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee, in Feb 2023.

Then MAGICALLY--at the same time she was handling Jack Smith's J6 indictment and addressing unprecedented questions of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution--the case was reassigned to Judge Tanya Chutkan.

The courts claimed Reyes had a "conflict" but it took Reyes 8 months to mention it?

Sounds legitImage
Sullivan refused to toss the case out of DC.

The lawsuit is rife with allegations that are now covered by presidential immunity per SCOTUS. But that isn't stopping the defendants or Judge Chutkan from advancing the case.

When the issue of presidential immunity was raised during a Nov 2023 hearing on the lawsuit, Chutkan said the immunity matter would be "at least resolved in the lower courts shortly."

She issued her order denying immunity one week later.

Of course she was overturned by SCOTUS on July 1; Chief Justice Roberts criticized Chutkan for her hasty handling of the unprecedented issue.

She knew at this point she planned to deny Trump's immunity claims from criminal prosecution thereby greenlighting (at least temporarily) the civil suit.Image
So after SCOTUS opinion on immunity, the Michigan plaintiffs came back to court asking Chutkan to allow them to file a THIRD amended complaint.

They essentially want Chutkan to approve any efforts by Trump campaign and/or RNC to LAWFULLY investigate voting fraud.

Chutkan has not ruled on a Jan 2023 motion by Trump to dismiss the case.Image
Read 4 tweets
Sep 15
John Roberts, no flamethrower, privately expressed to the other justices his disgust with DC lower courts rulings on presidential immunity.

He also criticized their decisions in his immunity order.

Judges Tanya Chutkan, Florence Pan, Michelle Childs, and Karen Henderson should be forced to resign for their sloppy work in an effort to rush DOJ’s J6 case against Trump before the election
Too bad Chief Justice Roberts wasn’t in Chutkan’s courtroom on Sept 5 so he could see that she DGAF what he said in the immunity opinion.

Total defiance and arrogance on display rather than any contrition

open.substack.com/pub/juliekelly…
Judge Flo Pan should be impeached. Not only did she come up with the absurd “Seal Team Six” hypothetical, she also authored 2 rulings upholding 1512c2 in Jan 6 prosecution also overturned by SCOTUS In Fischer

open.substack.com/pub/juliekelly…
Read 4 tweets
Sep 5
Hearing in Jack Smith's J6 indictment against Donald Trump just ended.

It is a travesty cameras are now allowed in federal courtrooms so the American people can see what an unprepared, intemperate, smug, and condescending judge Tanya Chutkan is. The public would be outraged at her highly partisan and aggressive handling of this unprecedented case.

Chutkan, reversed by the Supreme Court and criticized by the chief justice for rushing her immunity order, came out swinging this morning.
Not only is she clearly agitated by SCOTUS immunity ruling, it is unclear whether she even read it.

On a number of occasions, she argued with John Lauro, Trump's defense attorney, about the elements of the opinion. "That's not how I read it," she said when misinterpreting what the opinion said.

At one point, during a discussion about mandatory appeal based on any other immunity decision she makes, Chutkan opined that "there will be a reversal (on her future immunity order) no matter what I do."

That is a dangerous sign. What Chutkan suggested is she will recklessly handle pending immunity questions related to Trump's comms with VP Pence because she feels SCOTUS will overturn her once again.

At issue is SCOTUS determining those comms with Pence are "presumptively immune." Chutkan said she didn't read it that way. (That's what it said.)

A ruling that Trump-Pence comms are protected under immunity would torpedo the entire indictment. Smith already had to cut 9 pages of original indictment bc Trump's comms with DOJ were conclusively immune.

Further, those immunized conversations not only are barred from being cited in an indictment, the protected comms cannot be used in any stage of the investigation or prosecution.
Chutkan, as she has said consistently since this case landed on her docket, emotionally emphasized that the presidential election will not affect her scheduling order, which she will file later today.

"I understand there is an election" soon, Chutkan said.

"It is not relevant. This court is not concerned with the electoral schedule. It is nothing I will consider."

But her own words and actions contradict that assertion. She attempted to rush the proceedings as soon as the SCOTUS mandate returned to her court--so much so that even Jack Smith had to ask to delay her status report and hearing deadline.

Further, she is contemplating taking what even she describes as an "irregular" procedure which is allow Jack Smith to file an "opening brief" to outline why he believes the existing indictment is not covered by SCOTUS immunity ruling.

Lauro strenuously objected to taking such an unusual step. Such a brief, Lauro argued, would be "enormously prejudicial" and noted Smith already filed a superseding indictment and it is the defense's turn to respond.

Chutkan shot back that the defense would have plenty of time to respond to such a brief, which Smith's prosecutor Tom Windom said could be submitted in about 3 weeks.

This is PRECISELY the sort of shoddy, hasty work that landed Chutkan in trouble at SCOTUS.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(