>>127163

Durham Files Response to Sussmann’s Motion to Strike Paragraphs From Case

By Mimi Nguyen Ly

February 17, 2022 

Special counsel John Durham, who is probing the origins of the counterintelligence investigation against Donald Trump’s campaign, filed late Thursday a response to former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann’s motion to strike six paragraphs from Durham’s case against him.

Sussmann filed a motion (pdf) on Feb. 14 to strike six paragraphs that comprise the “Factual Background” section in Durham’s filing on Feb. 11.

Durham’s filing alleged that Trump’s residences and the White House were spied on by a tech executive aligned with the Democratic Party, who is identified in reports as Rodney Joffe.

Sussmann wrote in his Feb. 14 motion to strike, “Given the Special Counsel’s pattern of including unnecessary prejudicial material in public filings, there can be no doubt that the superfluous ‘Factual Background’ in the Special Counsel’s motion is intended to further politicize this case, inflame media coverage, and taint the jury pool.”

He said that “[a]pproximately half of this Factual Background provocatively—and misleadingly—describes for the first time Domain Name System (‘DNS’) traffic potentially associated with former President Donald Trump, including data at the Executive Office of the President (‘EOP’), that was allegedly presented to Agency-2 in February 2017.”

He continued: “These allegations were not included in the Indictment; these allegations post-date the single false statement that was charged in the Indictment; and these allegations were not necessary to identify any of the potential conflicts of interest with which the Motion is putatively concerned. Why then include them? The question answers itself.”

The indictment to which Sussmann referred is the filing from Durham in September 2021 (pdf). There, Durham alleged that Sussmann had told then-FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016 that he wasn’t working for any client when he met with Baker to provide information that purported to connect the Trump Organization to a Russian bank. The information has since been debunked.

Durham said in his filing on Thursday (pdf) that the court should deny Sussmann’s motion to strike the six paragraphs. He said it is “simply not true” that his office “intentionally sought to politicize this case, inflame media coverage, and taint the jury pool.”

Durham said that two paragraphs of “limited additional factual detail” had been included in the motion “for valid and straightforward reasons.”

“First, those paragraphs reflect conduct that is intertwined with, and part of, events that are central to proving the defendant’s alleged criminal conduct,” Durham wrote. “Second, the Government included these paragraphs to apprise the Court of the factual basis for one of the potential conflicts described in the Government’s Motion, namely, that a member of the defense team was working for the Executive Office of the President of the United States (‘EOP’) during relevant events that involved the EOP.”

Durham said that if media outlets or third parties had misinterpreted or misrepresented facts in his motion against Sussmann, “that does not in any way undermine the valid reasons for the Government’s inclusion of this information.”

As such, “there is no basis to strike any portion of the Government’s Motion,” Durham wrote, adding that the government intends to file motions “in which it will further discuss these and other pertinent facts to explain why they constitute relevant and admissible evidence at trial.”

Durham’s response comes slightly after Sussmann filed a separate motion on the same day to dismiss Durham’s case against him. Sussmann’s lawyers said the case is one of “extraordinary prosecutorial overreach."

https://m.theepochtimes.com/durham-files-response-to-sussmanns-motion-to-strike-paragraphs-from-case_4285965.html

Arizona State Representative Mark Finchem Talks About Resolution To Decertify AZ, Subpoena By Jan. 6 Committee: “This Is Classic Saul Alinsky.”

February 17, 2022

Last week, Arizona State Representative Mark Finchem introduced a resolution to decertify three compromised 2020 county elections in Arizona after multiple investigations statewide discovered elections law violations and hundreds of thousands of ballot discrepancies.

Immediately, Finchem faced pushback from Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers who will make the next decision on hearing this historic resolution.

Arizona citizens who want to fix 2020 must contact Arizona legislators and House Speaker Bowers to strongly encourage decertification.

Days after this major move to decertify Arizona, the January 6 committee issued subpoenas to Rep. Mark Finchem and AZGOP Chairwoman Kelli Ward. This is just another deep state intimidation tactic.

The Gateway Pundit correspondent Jordan Conradson spoke to Rep. Finchem earlier for an update.

Conradson: So, have you received any more support from legislators on your resolution to decertify Arizona’s fraudulent election?

Finchem: There are a few more senators and representatives who, I think they’ve seen the proof. They’ve seen the legal argument. They see the jurisprudence. They see that the Supreme Court itself has said, Oh, no, you can do this. I think that they’re beginning to get to that place where they may be a little bit more comfortable. It’s a big move. I mean, this is a historic thing.

Conradson: Last time we spoke, you challenged Speaker Bowers’ legal team to a little bit of a debate on the constitutionality of your resolution. Can you tell us about that?

Finchem: I guess it wasn’t a formal challenge. It was more of, you know, thinking out loud. Perhaps it would be great for the people because this is a passionate issue, not just here in Arizona but across the country. And if we were to have a pro-con debate between legal scholars, people who know what they’re talking about with the Constitution, and lawyers who agree with the legal theory that I presented or disagree with the legal theory I presented, I would like to see those two groups onstage participating in a debate. This is not a debate between Mark Finchem and the Speaker of the House. That’s not what I’m calling for at all. I wrote the legal analysis memo, presented that with the merits of the case along with evidence to the Speaker’s office. Now where it goes from there, he’s the Speaker of the House.

You catch somebody stealing something, you don’t let them keep what they stole. You take it back, and essentially that’s what we’re advocating for. Now, to your question about a debate. I’ve not seen anybody present a strong case that says the legislature doesn’t have this authority. So it might be a moot issue. But I would still like to give the people a glimpse of what the discussion is, and I think the best way to do that is to get both pro and con on stage in front of the people for a respectful debate, right?

Conradson: So and so you were subpoenaed by the January 6 committee. It was just days after you dropped this resolution. What what do you think they’re trying to do here?

Finchem: Well, they’re trying to intimidate the people. I mean, they’ve already seen my public statement. I’m sure that they’ve already pulled a FISA warrant on my phone. I’m sure that they’ve already looked at everything that’s there. I think what this is, is an exercise in public political hit jobs. And the fact that Liz Cheney and Nancy Pelosi both are coming after me, tells me I’m right over the target. When you start asking tough questions that they can’t answer, this is classic Saul Alinsky. You don’t like the message. So you’re gonna take out the messenger. I’m not going anywhere.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich has already received all evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 election, and The Gateway Pundit reported that the investigation could be wrapping up.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/02/exclusive-arizona-state-representative-mark-finchem-talks-resolution-decertify-az-subpoena-jan-6-committee-classic-saul-alinsky/

Biracial NC dad slams critical race theory as a ‘discrimination revolution’ in viral video

February 18, 2022

A biracial North Carolina father has gone viral for railing against critical race theory at a school board meeting earlier this week, arguing that the controversial teaching method was “a big fat lie.”

Brian Echevarria, a father of three who is running for the North Carolina General Assembly, slammed CRT a “discrimination revolution” when he addressed the Cabarrus County School Board hearing on Feb. 14.

“I’m biracial, I’m bilingual, I’m multicultural. The fact is, in America, in North Carolina, I can do anything I want and I teach that to my children,” Echevarria said.

“And the person who tells my pecan-color kids that they’re oppressed, based on the color of their skin, would be absolutely wrong and absolutely at war with me.”

Echevarria said parents had learned they can drive policy change in local school boards across the country in the wake of debates over mask mandates and CRT.

"The community, I think we recognize, now the political juice has been sucked out of the mask distraction, that we have to move forward,” he said.

“What the masks showed us is the parents, the most powerful group in the country, [are] taking back the wheel.”

The Cabarrus County School Board voted last week to make masks optional for students following backlash from parents. The board also approved a resolution last year to ensure nondiscrimination in the district amid the CRT controversy.

"CRT, all of that, the parents don’t want it. It’s a big fat lie,” Echevarria said.

“If you believe in CRT … it means you look at your black neighbor and say they’re oppressed and you look at your white neighbor and say they’re evil — regardless of the experience you’ve had with them.

“We know that’s not true because we believe the lives we live."

Race and the teaching of CRT in schools has increased tension in the US over the last year.

Much of the outrage is centered on concerns that children are being indoctrinated into believing that white people are inherently racist and that race plays a role in most or all social interaction.

https://nypost.com/2022/02/18/biracial-dad-slams-crt-as-a-discrimination-revolution-video/

Muh D5?

Britain, France strike deal to develop new missiles

February 18, 2022

Britain and France have signed a deal to jointly develop new cruise and anti-ship missiles, their defence procurement agencies and manufacturer MDBA said Friday, after months of cross-Channel defence tensions over a submarine deal with Australia.

Paris and London “have confirmed the launch of the preparation works for the Future Cruise / Anti-Ship Weapon,” European missile specialist MBDA said in a statement.

Both Britain’s Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) and France’s DGA procurement agency confirmed the three-year contract, which MBDA said aimed to develop weapons “to be fielded at the end of the decade”.

MBDA’s new weapons, a subsonic stealth variant and a “highly manoeuvrable” supersonic version, would replace existing missiles in use by the two countries’ navies and air forces.

The two countries had been at loggerheads on defence issues since last year, when Britain and the US struck a deal to produce nuclear-powered submarines for Australia as Canberra tore up an existing contract with France.

French Defence Minister Florence Parly had said in October that the missile project was “in difficulties, given the state of our relations with the UK”.

But joint British-French missiles have been on the cards since the neighbours signed the Lancaster House treaty in 2010, solidifying close defence ties.

Britain and France account for 60 percent of European defence spending and 80 percent of defence research and development outlays between them, far outstripping Germany and keeping London a key military partner for Paris even after its departure from the European Union.

>>127265

Whoops, thanks, wuz in a hurry

Finally got around to making this

Prison is a bitch for the prison bitches

Ghislaine Maxwell’s family ‘fears for her safety’ after Brunel found dead

February 19, 2022

The family of Ghislaine Maxwell say they fear for her safety after model agent Jean-Luc Brunel was found hanged in his Paris prison cell on Saturday.

Maxwell, who was convicted last year of sex trafficking, allegedly introduced Brunel to billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, who was found hanging in his Manhattan lockup in August 2019.

"It’s really shocking,” Ian Maxwell, one of Ghislaine’s siblings, told The Post. “Another death by hanging in a high-security prison. My reaction is one of total shock and bewilderment.”

In an interview from his home in London, Maxwell said the family “fears for her safety” at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn where she is being held.

Following her Dec. 29 conviction on sexual abuse charges, Maxwell was put into a room at the prison with a psychiatrist and two others, her brother said.

“She was deemed a suicide risk and they are now waking her up every 15 minutes. It’s a complete violation of prisoner rights and human rights,” Ian Maxwell said.

Maxwell insisted his younger sister is not suicidal, and said that it was “ironic” that Epstein and Brunel who died of apparent suicides were not on suicide watches in their respective prisons. Epstein had been taken off suicide watch shortly before his death in August, 2019.

Last month, Ghislaine Maxwell, 60, officially requested a retrial after a juror in the case told media that he used his own experience of being sexually abused in order to influence his peers on the jury to reach a guilty verdict.

Maxwell’s attorney Bobbi Sternheim refused comment Saturday.

Brunel, who ran Karin Models in Paris, and later formed MC2 Model Management with Epstein, was charged with securing girls and young women for Epstein.

He was awaiting trial when he was found hanged by his bedsheets in his cell around 1:30 a.m. local time at La Sante prison, the Paris prosecutor’s office told CNN.

French prison authorities told local media that “no breach” in security at the prison had occurred, and an investigation into the cause of death had been launched.

https://nypost.com/2022/02/19/ghislaine-maxwells-family-fears-for-safety-after-jean-luc-brunel-death/