Connect with us

Courts

Judge OKays Covington Catholic Kids’ $250 Million Lawsuit Against Wash. Post Reversing Lower Court

Published

on

A federal judge is now allowing a defamation lawsuit filed by the the Covington Catholic teens against the Washington Post to proceed, reversing a lower court’s ruling.

U.S. District Court Judge William Bertelsman agreed to allow discovery to continue for the suit alleging 33 libelous statements the Washington Post supposedly made during its coverage of the January 18 confrontation between fraud Indian activist Nathan Phillips and Covington Catholic student Nicholas Sandmann.

The paper’s initial reporting claimed that Sandmann was a racist who called the faux Indian activist names and taunted him and his friends. But only a day later, full video of the incident showed exactly the opposite was true, that it was Phillips that was the aggressor and none of the Catholic kids delivered any taunts or yelled any epithets.

The students have identified statements by the paper that claims Sandmann and the other students blocked Phillips and impeded his cohorts from moving freely.

Trending: First Day of ‘Impeachment Hearings’ Immediately Prove Farcical

But the judge has narrowed the lawsuit to particular statements that he feels are problematic.

“The Court will adhere to its previous rulings as they pertain to these statements except Statements 10, 11, and 33, to the extent that these three statements state that plaintiff ‘blocked’ Nathan Phillips and ‘would not allow him to retreat,'” Judge Bertelsman said in his Monday order.

“Suffice to say that the Court has given this matter careful review and concludes that ‘justice requires’ that discovery be had regarding these statements and their context. The Court will then consider them anew on summary judgment,” the judge continued.

Sandmann’s attorney, Todd V. McMurtry, called the new order a “huge victory.”

“The Sandmann family and our legal team are grateful that Judge Bertelsman has allowed the case to proceed,” McMurtry told the Washington Times in an email. “The Court’s ruling preserves the heart of the Nicholas Sandmann’s claims. We can consider this a huge victory and look forward to initiating discovery against the Washington Post”

Sandmann’s legal team also filed suits against CNN and NBC for their fake news coverage of the incident.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Advertisement

Courts

Witness for Prosecution in Roger Stone Trial Makes Mockery of Court

A witness for the government testifying in Roger Stone’s case made a mockery of the court, Tuesday.

Published

on

A witness for the government testifying in Roger Stone’s case made a mockery of the court by repeatedly rambling and even trying to do funny impressions from the witness box.

District Judge Amy Berman Jackson reportedly even called a side bar with government prosecutors and demanded that they get their witness in line.

Jackson spoke to lead government attorney Aaron Zelinsky and Stone lawyer Robert Bushchel after the antics of witness Randy Credico lit up the courtroom on Tuesday.

Credico was what Jackson called a “difficult” witness, the Daily Caller reported.

According to a court transcript obtained by the Daily Caller, the judge repeatedly warned Credico to stop with his disruptive behavior which even included his attempts to do celebrity impressions from the stand.

After Bushchel apologized for Credico’s behavior, the lawyer told Judge Jackson, “I’m doing the best I can.”

“Believe me, I think everybody is doing the best under difficult circumstances,” the judge replied according to the transcript.

The exasperated judge even apologized for coming down so hard on prosecutors.

“I’m trying to facilitate what you’re doing, and focusing in ways that maybe are less threatening to him so that he can actually answer the question,” Jackson insisted.

The jury was not able to hear the exchange as it was carried out close to the bench. However, they did get to hear the “difficult” witness knock down some of the prosecution’s key accusations against Stone.

One of the government’s accusations is that Stone threatened Credico by saying he (Stone) would kidnap and maybe even harm Credico’s dog. But with his “difficult” testimony on Tuesday, Credico denied his earlier claims that Stone threatened him.

“I don’t think he was going to steal my dog. I think he was pretty riled up at that time,” Credico acknowledged during cross-examination from Bushchel, the Stone lawyer.

“I know he wouldn’t have ever touched that dog. It was hyperbole by him.”

“Does he love my dog? I think he loves all dogs. I don’t think he would steal a dog, no,” Credico added.

This testimony totally undercut the governments accusation that Stone threatened Credico’s dog and thereby threatened Credico.

No wonder the government felt Credico was “difficult.”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Courts

Is Gen. Michael Flynn’s Conviction About to be Thrown Out?

Big things may be on the verge of happening with Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn and it just might put the biggest black eye yet for Obama’s entire corrupt FBI.

Published

on

Big things may be on the verge of happening with the conviction of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn and it just might put the biggest black eye yet for Robert Mueller, James Comey, and Obama’s entire corrupt FBI.

A week ago, Gen. Flynn’s gangbusters new attorney Sidney Powell filed a shocking motion that asserted that fired FBI operative Lisa Page altered the general’s interview records so the Bureau could use the falsified records to destroy him.

Powell’s filing is based off information discovered about the explosive revelations laying out what Page allegedly did and the illegal actions taken by the FBI.

The filing, US v Flynn; DE 129-2 was posted by Techno Fog on Scribd.

Flynn’s legal team argues that the FBI hit Flynn with an “ambush-interview” in the White House. The interview was not intended to discover any evidence of criminal activity, but to fool Flynn into making false statements that the FBI could then use to destroy him and force him to do their bidding to destroy others in Trump’s orbit.

This was on top of evidence that the FBI also hid evidence and even destroyed evidence that would be exculpatory for Flynn that could have been used in the trial that resulted in his guilty plea.

The evidence that the government criminally altered records is contained in messages written by Page and other FBI agents.

“Overnight, the most important substantive changes were made to the Flynn 302,” Powell wrote. “Those changes added an unequivocal statement that ‘Flynn stated he did not”—in response to whether Mr. Flynn had asked Kislyak to vote in a certain manner or slow down the UN vote.”

As Powell points out, the original notes of the agents who interviewed Flynn showed, “Mr. Flynn was not even sure he had spoken to Russia/Kislyak on the issue.” But it looks like additional information was added to the official interview records that does not appear in the agent notes.

The evidence seems to show that Flynn pleaded guilty to statements that he didn’t even make because he was shown records months later that did not reflect what he actually said.

After Powell filed her motion, Judge Emmet Sullivan abruptly cancelled his next hearing — a sure sign that he found the filing alarming.

Some court-watchers have become convinced that the judge is considering ruling that the whole case is suspect.

For her part, Powell said she is at least expecting a postponement of the sentencing phase.

“I’m expecting Judge Sullivan to issue an order than at a minimum postpones any sentencing or cancels any sentencing and orders the government to produce additional information, and might even hold the prosecutors in contempt of court because they certainly are,” Powell said on Friday.

“I attached a number of exhibits including a comparison of the 302, the FBI interview form between February 10 and February 11 that shows dramatic changes, the long notes of the FBI agents… to show that there were things that were wrong in the notes. We also identified a small group in the upper echelon of the FBI, approximately ten people, met the day before Mr. Flynn’s interview to scheme and plan how to keep him unguarded and unaware of the true purpose of the interview,” Powell added.

Indeed, Judge Sullivan took the forceful step of informing the FBI and government prosecutors that they have three days to respond to Powell’s motion.

The question is, what exactly is Judge Sullivan thinking? Is he getting frustrated with Powell? Or, as some suspect, is he having the wool pulled from his eyes about the criminal actions committed by Obama’s FBI.

In any case, the countdown clock is ticking away.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Courts

Roger Stone Set to Fight Government Cancellation of His First Amendment Rights

Roger Stone is set to go before a judge next week, but for months he has suffered a loss of his First Amendment rights.

Published

on

One-time Trump strategist Roger Stone is finally set to go before a judge next week, but for months he has suffered a loss of his First Amendment rights after Judge Amy Berman Jackson summarily canceled his right to speak against his persecution.

Judge Jackson slammed down a gag order on Stone preventing him from defending himself in the press for much of this year ahead of his Nov. 5 trial. He has tried to fight the gag order, but a D.C. appeals court denied his petition.

Next week, Stone will face “charges of witness tampering, obstruction and false statements about his interactions related to the release of stolen Democratic Party emails by WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential campaign. The charges were originally brought by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who investigated Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The trial is scheduled to begin Nov. 5,” the Sun Sentinel noted.

The flamboyant political strategist — who got his start as far back as the Nixon administration — should have the same right of free speech as everyone else. But an out of control judge has denied him his rights and the deep state judiciary has aligned against him.

Judge Jackson ordered that Stone be barred from posting to social media or talk about his case until the trial begins.

The order reads in part:

[T]he defendant is prohibited from making statements to the media or in public settings about the Special Counsel’s investigation or this case or any of the participants in the investigation or the case. The prohibition includes, but is not limited to, statements made about the case through the following means: radio broadcasts; interviews on television, on the radio, with print reporters, or on internet based media; press releases or press conferences; blogs or letters to the editor; and posts on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or any other form of social media.

The judge has claimed that Stone’s well-known Twitter, Instagram, and other accounts are so well publicized that he could “prejudice the jury pool” against the government persecution.

But, in fact, it is special counsel Robert Mueller who has introduced prejudice into the case by engineering a false reason for picking Judge Jackson in the first place. Mueller claimed that the Stone case is somehow part of the case of Paul Manafort’s unreported lobbying. Clearly, they are not connected at all as Stone is being accused of different and unconnected violations.

Judge Jackson’s act of slapping a gag order on Stone itself will prejudice a jury because Jackson just made Stone look guilty by assuming that he will just launch a wave of lies on social media. How could that not color the jury’s perceptions of the case?

Worse, it appears that this arrogant judge feels it is her prerogative to jail Americans or take away their rights because they might say mean things about her.

This judge should be removed from this case.

Meanwhile, Stone’s entire life and freedom is under threat by this out of control judge.

The cost will be exorbitant, as well. Stone is still trying to raise as much money as he can to fund his defense. According to the Sun Sentinel, more than 45,000 Americans have donated to Stone’s defense fund and so far he has raised more than $2 million of the $3 million he hopes to raise.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.ne_

Continue Reading

Courts

Filing from Gen Michael Flynn’s Lawyer Asserts Fired FBI Agent Lisa Page Altered Interview Records

Gen. Michael Flynn’s lawyer has filed a motion asserting that the Department of Justice manipulated Flynn’s interview document to frame the general.

Published

on

Sidney Powell, the lawyer for former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, has filed a motion in which she asserts that the Department of Justice manipulated Flynn’s interview documents to frame the general and is withholding exculpatory evidence that would exonerate him.

Powell’s filing is based off information discovered about the explosive revelations laying out what Page allegedly did and the illegal actions taken by the FBI.

The filing, US v Flynn; DE 129-2 was posted by Techno Fog on Scribd.

Flynn’s legal team argues that the FBI hit Flynn with an “ambush-interview” in the White House. The interview was not intended to discover any evidence of criminal activity, but to fool Flynn into making false statements that the FBI could then use to destroy him, and force him to do their bidding to destroy others in Trump’s orbit.

Powell is demanding that federal prosecutors hand over a mountain of evidence that proves her case. But the feds are refusing to hand over any of this evidence claiming that documents Powell is requesting have no bearing on Flynn’s case.

But now we have this new evidence made public showing disgraced FBI operative Lisa Page seeming to admit that she and the FBI illegally altered Flynn’s records to make Flynn look guilty.

The documents posted by Techno Fog includes Page’s apparent admission that she had edited Flynn’s 302 forms — something that she allegedly told FBI investigators she did not recall.

The edits that Page apparently admitted to making in the forms were substantive: they included a claim that Flynn said he did not discuss any sanctions with the Russian ambassador. Flynn’s lawyers allege he merely told the FBI he did not recall, and that the claim he said otherwise was added only after a transcript of his discussion with the ambassador had been leaked to the media.

As Joel Pollak — who is Breitbart News’ legal counsel — explained:

In a footnote, the filing adds that former FBI general counsel James Baker “is believed to be the person who illegally leaked the transcript of Mr. Flynn’s calls to [Washington Post reporter David] Ignatius.” It also alleges that former National Intelligence Director James Clapper told Ignatius to “take the kill shot on Flynn.”

The filing emerged hours after reports that the Department of Justice had shifted its investigation of the origins of the Russia probe to become a criminal investigation under the supervision of prosecutor John H. Durham.

Flynn was subject to surveillance — allegedly in response to claims that he might have violated the Logan Act, an archaic and rarely-enforced law barring private citizens from diplomacy — during President-elect Donald Trump’s transition to office. Flynn’s name was then unmasked in the transcript of his telephone conversation with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, which was then leaked illegally.

Flynn’s subsequent prosecution for lying to the FBI was a major part of the so-called “Russia collusion” story that the FBI tried to push after the 2016 election. However, despite the wild claims of Trump’s criminal actions, Robert Mueller’s subsequent report found that no collusion occurred and the whole story is fake news.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @WTHuston.

Continue Reading

Courts

WATCH: 3-Year-Old James Younger Tells Dad that His Mom Says He is a Girl

A three-year-old boy at the heart of a court case in Texas is seen on video telling his father that his mother is trying to turn him into a little girl.

Published

on

A three-year-old boy at the heart of a court case in Texas is seen on video telling his father that his mother is trying to turn him into a little girl.

The boy is at the heart of a case where a state court has decided it must step in to rule whether or not the little child should be turned into a girl.

The case has already brought condemnation from Texas Senator Ted Cruz who spoke out against the court’s decision to allow the child’s mother to continue trying to turn the little boy into a girl.

“This is horrifying & tragic. For a parent to subject such a young child to life-altering hormone blockers to medically transition their sex is nothing less than child abuse,” Sen. Cruz Twitted. “A 7-year-old child doesn’t have the maturity to make profound decisions like this. The state of Texas should protect this child’s right to choose — as an informed, mature person — and not be used as a pawn in a left-wing political agenda. #ProtectJamesYounger.”

Texas Governor has also noted that the state is taking a look at the court’s actions.

Now, the father in the case, Jeff Younger, has posted video of his son explaining how his mother, Younger’s ex-wife Anne Georgulas, is trying to turn the little boy into a transgender girl.

The interaction between the father and his little boy are shocking.

“You’re a boy, right?” Younger asks the boy in the video.

“No. I’m a girl,” the boy replies.

“Who told you you’re a girl?” the father asks.

“Mommy,” the child answers.

Younger asks, “When did she tell you you were a girl?”

“Because, I love girls!” the three-year-old says.

“Oh, I see. So mommy told you you’re a girl?”

“Mhmm,” James answers in the affirmative.

The child tells Mr. Younger that his mother puts dresses on him, buys him headbands and hair clips, and paints his nails because he likes nail polish.

“So mommy puts you in a dress and puts nail polish on you?” Mr. Younger says.

“Mhmm,” James replies.

“And what does mommy tell you?”

“She tells me I’m a girl,” the child responds.

the court is taking criticism for allowing the boy’s mother to push puberty blockers on this three-year-old child and to begin forcing his “transition” to a girl.

Younger is distraught over the court’s decision to bar him from having any control over his own son’s life.

“Every. Single. Day. You have to see your son sexually abused, and you have to maintain your calm,” Younger said on an appearance on the The Luke Macias Show, “because the courts are not going to be fair to you. And the only way you can survive this and get your son through this alive is to calmly allow your son to be tortured right before your eyes and outlast the opposition. That’s what it’s like.”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @WTHuston.

Continue Reading

The Mitchell Report

Latest Articles

Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Pin It on Pinterest