Trump U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan files public response to James Comey's motion to dismiss his indictment for vindictive prosecution.
Exhibit 13 includes bombshell, damning evidence of then-FBI Director Comey's handwritten note--on FBI director letterhead--evidencing Comey's knowledge of--and even participation in--the Russian collusion criminal conspiracy against Trump.
Exhibit 5 gets worse.
James Comey, from his burner gmail with his alias Reinhold Niebuhr, states:
to me
No need. At this point it would shouting into the wind. Some day they will figure it out. And as Jack and Ben point out, my decision will be one a president elect Clinton will be very grateful for (though that wasn't why I did it).
In Exhibit 7, in response to planting a New York Times election-eve hit piece against Trump, then-FBI Director James Comey tells FBI special government employee Daniel Richman:
"Well done my friend. Who knew this would. E so uh fun."
Exhibit 10 shows FBI special government employee Daniel Richman (aka "Michael Garcia") is leaking--as an anonymous source--to New York Times reporter Michael Schmidt on behalf of then-FBI Director James Comey.
Comey testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee he never did this.
The FBI doesn't have the evidence many thought it did.
There are not tapes with powerful men raping kids.
There is not a list.
(Eipstein's rolodex is already public.)
And the file is largely unreleasable, for many reasons including:
1. Grand-jury materials
2. Court records under seal
3. Child pornography
4. Protection of victims
5. Unsubstantiated, even double- or triple-hearsay, bogus claims (like we saw during the Kavanaugh proceedings), which would permanently destroy the reputation of innocent people if released
Does anyone really believe Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, or Dan Bongino would cover up for the likes of Bill Clinton or Bill Gates--if they had that evidence?
The Trump Justice Department wanted to be fully transparent. But it can't, for the reasons above. This is a case of no good deed goes unpunished.
This is no doubt unsatisfying to many. But that's the hard truth.
Again, to those complaining about Pam:
"The Trump Justice Department wanted to be fully transparent. But it can't, for the reasons above. This is a case of no good deed goes unpunished."
The President of the United States correctly designated Tren de Aragua (TdA), a vicious Venezuelan gang, as a foreign-terrorist organization.
The President correctly put these terrorists on planes to get them the hell out of our country.
Yet DC Obama Judge James Boasberg thinks he has the power to order the President to turn around the planes in mid-air and bring back these terrorists into America.
This is the most dangerous constitutional crisis imaginable.
I do not say this lightly:
The President has a constitutional duty, as the chief executive officer and commander-in-chief, to ignore Judge Boasberg's lawless and dangerous order.
The Supreme Court must use the emergency docket to immediately stay Judge Boasberg's order.
An activist Obama DC judge thinks he has the power to order the President to turn around planes deporting vicious Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang members?
When will the Chief Justice and Justice Barrett end this extremely dangerous judicial sabotage of the presidency?
Tina Peters, the then-Mesa County, Colorado clerk and recorder, investigated voter fraud after the 2021 Grand Junction municipal election.
So hyper-partisan Democrat Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold and Attorney General Phil Weiser, along with a weak Republican local District Attorney Dan Rubenstein, brought trumped-up felony charges against Tina Peters and (falsely) accused her of unauthorized access to voting machines.
During this same time, Jena Griswold--a partisan slob--allowed voting-machine passwords to remain publicly posted online for 4 months.
Then Democrat Judge Matthew Barrett, poorly rated by his community, was dumb enough to state on the record he sentenced 69-year-old Tina Peters to 9 years in prison because of her First Amendment-protected views on election integrity.
Tina Peters is now suffering greatly in prison, because of these sadistic partisans.
Fortunately, the Trump 47 Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, along with Colorado Acting U.S. Attorney Bishop Grewell, took the first step today to bring justice to Tina Peters.
They filed a statement of interest in her federal habeas lawsuit, drafted by attorney Patrick McSweeney, raising these serious civil-rights problems.
Next, the Trump 47 Justice Department must open a federal civil-rights probe, under 18 U.S.C. § 241, for this apparent criminal conspiracy to violate the constitutional rights of Tina Peters.
This includes investigating Jena Griswold, Phil Weiser, Dan Rubenstein, Judge Matthew Barrett, and all other potential co-conspirators.
It is outrageous they've put this 69-year-old woman in prison for 9 years for simply questioning elections.
Nobody is above the law.
ICYMI, my piece on this:
Judge Throws The Book At 69-Year-Old Tina Peters For Minor Infraction Because She Believes The 2020 Election Was Stolen
At @Article3Project, we're drafting legislation to "reform" the DC U.S. District Court--the worst of the worst.
Maybe we get rid of the (unconstitutional) DC Superior Court, make current DC U.S. District Court judges handle DC street crimes, cut their budgets, and randomly draw U.S. judges from across America to sit by designation for all other DC cases?
Seems like the ideal time to get rid of the (unconstitutional) DC Superior Court: