dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

A Dispute Has Arisen Between DOJ and Strzok/McCabe Attorneys Over Their Handwritten Notes – Politico Ignorantly Misreports

Last week Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered the Department of Justice to “authenticate” the exhibits it had filed in support of its motion to dismiss the case against General Michael Flynn. He also ordered DOJ to authenticate records and documents that had been filed by Gen. Flynn’s attorney in her supplemental filings in support of DOJ’s motion to dismiss. DOJ has been providing additional discovery pursuant to Judge Sullivan’s still applicable “Standing Order” that DOJ provide all “Brady” evidence to a defendant in a criminal case without the Defendant having to make a request or motion. Included in the documents provided by Gen. Flynn’s counsel by DOJ since the filing of the Motion to Dismiss are handwritten notes which DOJ identified to Gen. Flynn’s attorney when making the production that they were notes of Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe from meetings at different points in time which contain information relevant to the case against Gen. FLynn. On Monday, Assistant United States Attorney Jocelyn Ballentine filed the government’s response to Judge Sullivan’s Order. A dispute has now raised with regard to her characterization of what did or did not happen between her and the attorneys for Strzok and McCabe with regard to her efforts to comply with Judge Sullivan’s Order. Here is what she wrote with regard to the task at had as she understood it: By that Minute Order, the Court directed the government to file… a declaration pursuant to penalty of perjury…that the 14 exhibits attached to its motion to dismiss (ECF 198) and supplement (ECF 249) (hereinafter “Government Exhibits”) are true and correct copies. The Court extended this order to documents produced by the government in discovery which were subsequently filed by the defendant as exhibits in support of the defendant’s supplementary filings (ECF Nos. 228, 231, 237, 248, 251, 257, and 264) (hereinafter “Discovery Documents”). With respect to both categories, the Court ordered the government to identify each “exhibit” and “discovery document” by “name, date and author.” Lastly, the Court ordered the government to “provide transcriptions of all handwritten notes contained in the Exhibits.”''

Here is the exact text of Judge Sullivan’s order on this very issue: Accordingly, the government is HEREBY ORDERED to file…a declaration pursuant to penalty of perjury…that the Exhibits attached to its motion and supplement are true and correct copies…. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the government shall provide transcriptions of all handwritten notes contained in the Exhibits. The government has also filed on the record in this case numerous notices of filing discovery correspondence and Mr. Flynn has generally filed the discovery produced on the record in this case as Exhibits to his supplementary filings…. the government is HEREBY ORDERED to file… a declaration pursuant to penalty of perjury… that the discovery documents provided to Mr. Flynn and filed on the record in this case are true and correct copies. This is NOT a requirement that the DOJ establish that the contents of the documents in question are “true” or “accurate” as a factual matter. This is the process of “authentication” — which is the basis for legally establishing that the document is what it is reputed to be. So, for example, you would “authenticate” a page of handwritten notes as being the notes of Peter Strzok for the purpose of establishing that they are not the notes of some other person. Normally you would do that by having Peter Strzok say “The are my handwritten notes.” That is not the same as saying that the contents of the notes are “true” or “accurate” as a factual matter — only that they are Strzok’s notes and not, for example, Lisa Page’s notes.

https://redstate.com/shipwreckedcrew/2020/10/27/dispute-between-doj-and-strzok-mccage-attorneys-over-their-handwritten-notes-media-ignorantly-misreports-n270719