« Finally: a study on the SARS-CoV-2 virus in a specific county whether people had symptoms or not | Main | "Donald Trump warns of consequences if China was knowingly responsible for coronavirus" The Telegraph »

18 April 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Could one venture that the post-Watergate incarceration of the Nixon team key and secondary players, that no one attempted the same degree of crimes and coverups that emanated from that White House?

As well as VP Sprio Agnew also getting caught red-handed taking bribes during his time sitting within the executive offices.

So call me naive too, but doing time for doing the crime does appear to work as deterance. Or did the same activity, just go further underground.

Lesson from Watergate for me: truth will out. Oh, what tangled webs we weave, when we first choose to deceive. Once one lies, cheats or steals they have turn their lives over to someone else. Not worth it.


The apparent crimes committed by what looks like a busload of zealots against Carter Page are straightforward, and uncomplicated to prosecute.

Why haven’t all of those involved with the apparent violations of CP’s first amendment rights not yet been criminally charged with violating his civil rights?

What happened to him is not a mystery anymore.

This is such a black and white case; the DOJ does these cases all the time. It’s their bread and butter.

The indictment list may run into dozens of DOJ/FBI/CIA officials, but so what.

This is the one crime I’ve waited years to be prosecuted. It is so pernicious, and this was an attack on anyone wanting to get involved in politics.

I'm also more and more curious about something I don't think I'll ever get to know for sure.

Are there in existence "sealed indictments" sitting in someone's DOJ drawer -- against CP -- that is: FARA indictments against CP – was that also part of this tom foolery by FBI/DOJ/CIA/Barry?

Are there one or more “sealed” indictments on Gen. Flynn?

I would like a definitive answers on these Qs.

Cleaning up this ugly mess demands, among many things: a definitive Yes or No from AG Barr on whether there are any "sealed" indictments against anyone who volunteered to serve on the Trump 2016 presidential campaign.

Current practice prohibits disclosure of such; however, there is nothing to prohibit Barr or any of his deputies from clearly stating whether there are any unsealed indictments, stemming from the Barry Regime, against Trump campaign volunteers.

Of course, there is nothing preventing Sally Yates or Loretta Lynch from disclosing this too.



Jim, could you please explain the significance of finding any 'sealed indictments". Are like they are ready made "insurance policies" waiting to be cashed in? Thanks.



Why is Wray still running the FBI?


Short and simple answer is: I never thought of sealed criminal indictment as insurance policy. They are supposed to be a tool to fight crime. As a practical matter, many criminal indictments are sealed just for a few days, or hours -- between when an indictment is filed in a court, and when the alleged criminal is arrested and brought to court. When an alleged criminal is formally charged, there is no longer a practical reason to keep one sealed, as the suspect is in custody. Unsealing -- before then -- give suspect opportunity to flee.

Thinking of it this way, as an analogy, sealed indictment equals insurance policy -- cries against all our justice system stands for -- in cases when there may be no real evidence of a crime, rather, just to frame someone.

But your observation makes sense in a way, as it applies to Gen. Flynn and Carter Page.

I like the question Deap, simply because, this entire fiasco, including the so-called 'insurance policy' Strzok communicated to Lisa Page is serious but so slap stick.

A well known recent example is Julian Assange; there was at least one sealed indictment against him, that we know about, that was sealed for many months.

It was unsealed by US DOJ, when he was forcibly removed from Ecuador embassy in London.

An advocacy group [Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press], prior to when this was unsealed, filed a lawsuit to make it unsealed.

They failed.

The federal judge rejected this plea, which happened four months before the government unsealed it, when Assange was arrested in London, where he is in jail.

"What makes this case unique is that the Government [DOJ] has not acknowledged whether formal charges have been filed against Assange, and the Committee has not cited any authority supporting the notion that the public has a right to require the Government to confirm or deny that it has charged someone,” the federal judge in his opinion denying the petition to unseal an actually existing, albeit sealed, indictment.

Even the DOJ does not have automatic access to a sealed indictment. [Keep in mind grand jury proceedings are also sealed.]

This is what a federal court said, about even DOJ not having automatic access to a sealed indictment [this is a separate matter from the above judge's ruling]:

[[Even if you represent the party who filed the sealed document, you must have a court order to obtain a copy from the Clerk’s Office. For example, if the U.S. Attorney’s Office wants a certified copy of a sealed indictment, either the order sealing the indictment or a separate order must give the Clerk’s Office permission to provide the U.S. Attorney's Office with a copy.]] [this is on the government's website at: https://www.mdd.uscourts.gov/content/sealed-criminal-document-procedures ]

While I would "like to think" there are no sealed indictments, that is, there was none filed against Carter Page and General Flynn when Obama was president, given all we know about this spectacle, I can't in good conscience be sure of it.

So, if any were filed, one might infer they were quasi "insurance policies."

The judge in the Flynn case, in December 2018, basically accused him of treason, a traitor to his country, etc.

The judge in the Roger Stone case, she is off her rocker, biased and malicious.

As Larry pointed out, and others, including the CTH: the 2018 DOJ letter [I've read it myself] -- it is astounding what they were still trying to claim.

All I'm saying is that the treatment of Flynn and Stone, by two different federal judges goes way beyond odd, way beyond anything reasonable and rational.

Thus, I wonder if sealed indictments were filed by DOJ against Flynn [and against Page]. . . since trying to ascertain any plausible explanation for the queer behavior of these two lifetime judges. . .to try and come up with an explanation as to why these two judges, in particular, took the liberty to act like fools, buffoons.

Were there sealed indictments, I'd imagine the two judges could have had access to them. But I don't know this either.

But the judges it is fair to say did gulp the cool aid, that is the most charitable explanation for their actions.

For my own taste, I would not say -- if there was sealed indictments -- that this was purely analogous to insurance policy.

The goal all along has been to create the illusion of crimes.

To the extent that: half the country apparently still believes many of these illusions.

Which includes politicians, judges, some of our neighbors.

This has been especially evident in what we saw play out in all the false "bombshells" that never exploded since Trump has been in office. The bombshells were all make-believe, based on fantasies.

Thus it is not unreasonable to wonder if make-believe indictments were also created, and remain sealed, never to see the light of day. [We all know the DOJ has power to indict the proverbial ham sandwich]

Former AG [acting] Sally Yates was among the most dishonest purveyor of patently false, and totally fabricated character assassinations on Flynn. And he is still in the dock, years later. Press outlets slandered Page based on anonymous sources based on the Sally Yates model: character assassination.

I have other thoughts about significance of getting a straight answer on whether there are, or are not, any sealed indictments. I sure hope there are none. If there are, well, can the corruption get any more fantastic? If there are, then, yes, it would become more outrageous. Which is why it's in the public interest for us to know, one way or the other, if this is true or not.

And not to beat a dead horse on this: the DOJ 2018 letter Larry referenced is exactly why we should get an up or down yes or no on this. This letter will live in infamy.

I hope this helps answer the question.

FBI Dir. Chris Wray was then-NJ Gov Chris Christie's lawyer during "BridgeGate" back in Sept. 2013 [The Fort Lee lane closure scandal, also known as the George Washington Bridge lane closure scandal or Bridgegate]

$2.1 million paid to King & Spalding, who employed Christie’s former personal attorney Chris Wray

Christie did not want Trump to appoint Flynn as the NSA.

“Suffice to say, I had serious misgivings, which I think have been confirmed by the fact that he pled guilty to a felony in federal court,” Christie said.


Patrick Armstrong

Yeah, OK, another leak that tells us what we've all known for months and years.

So, when do we get to the fecal-ventilator interface with arrests, handcuffs and orange jumpsuits?

Never, I'm starting to think.

Which is what my cynical wife told me three years ago when I got excited about the latest Great Big Revelation and Sundance's analysis.
Fugetaboutit! said she: neva gonna happen.
Nothing has proved her wrong yet.


Jim, that was a very helpful explanation about the role of "sealed indictments". Struggling to keep all the names, code names, dates and redactions in place.

Assuming this is the referenced and damning 2018 DOJ Letter - legitimizing in no uncertain terms Steele as a trusted source, and legitimizing the predication for the FISA requests: https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/04/17/declassified-doj-letter-to-fisa-court-highlights-severe-institutional-corruption-doj-blames-fbi-for-spygate/?shared=email&msg=fail

Forget my $1200 check, Mr Trump. I want the entire $23 million wasted on the Mueller. With punitive damages.

blue peacock


Your cynical wife has the number down. The institutional DNA is to protect their own. This was a particularly egregious case with Brennan and Comey outright calling a duly elected president a traitor. As we saw with Roger Stone when they want to they move with guns drawn SWAT style they can move pretty fast. But in this instance everyone of those involved in the abuse of FISA and other statutes have been rewarded with lucrative GoFundMe and book deals and other types of sinecures. On the other hand all those in Trump's orbit have been financially ruined and harassed to no end.

What culpability does Trump himself have in this inaction? It is after all his administration. Wray, Rosenstein and Barr are his nominees. Why hasn't he pardoned Gen. Flynn?


Fleshing our Lisa Page cryptic email: "potus wants to know everything" allegedly required inclusion of the Steele dossier in the Obama-directed Russian election interference investigation. https://www.redstate.com/nick-arama/2020/04/22/ex-fbi-officials-confirm-in-new-report-they-included-dossier-in-russian-interference-because-of-obama-order/

However, the dossier inclusion did not include any known qualifications at the time this dossier was (1) unvetted, (2) produced by the Clinton campaign or (3) was a known product of Russian disinformation.

Comey additionally handed it -unqualified- to President Elect Trump - while surreptitously observing and reporting PEOTUS Trump's reactions to this unqualified dossier- clearly a set-up sting operation.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad