Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness: Fraud Against The Court - Sally Yates, Michael Flynn & FISA

They still do not get it, which makes it all that much sweeter when they final do.

#maytheheavensfall

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: November 8th, 2019 DNC PR Team Says They Were Only Joking About Bombing Trump

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

JIMMY DORE: Democrats Deep Ties To Russia & Ukraine Corruption!

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

We Have Everything - Clinton & Her Rogue Ass Crew Emails - We Do Not Need The Servers - We Have The Content

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: Attorney General Barr Speaks At Cyber Security Conference

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

What I Would Ask Robert Mueller If I Was A Member Of Judiciary

Well, there seems to be a new game going around the cyberverse called "What I would ask Robert Mueller."

Since members are only allotted five minutes, I decided to respect the economy of time.

Here are my 5 questions:

1. How much longer before you #sayhisname?
2. When are you coming to Detroit?
3. When is the Celestial Goddess of the Woodshed to be released?
4. Did you ever learn to dig clams?
5. Which member will be the first to have a meltdown?

I reserve the balance of my time for the other members.

The public must understand it takes a few extra moments to compose oneself to frame the questions properly when experiencing a spiritual implosion.

What I Would Ask Robert Mueller

By James Comey

If I were a member of Congress with five minutes to question Robert Mueller, I would ask short questions drawn from the report’s executive summaries.

Volume One: Russia

Did you find that there were a series of contacts between the Trump campaign and individuals with ties to the Russian government? (p. 5)

In particular, did you find that a Trump foreign policy adviser learned that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails? (pp. 5-6)

Did you find that the Trump foreign policy adviser said the Trump campaign had received indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to candidate Clinton? (p. 6)

Did you find that senior members of the Trump campaign met with Russian representatives at Trump Tower after being told in an email that the meeting was part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump? (p. 6)

Did you find that, despite the fact that candidate Trump said he had "nothing to do with Russia," his organization had been pursuing a major Moscow project into the middle of the election year and that candidate Trump was regularly updated on developments? (vol 1, p. 5: vol 2, p. 19)

Did the Trump campaign report any of its Russian contacts to the FBI?

Not even the indications from the Russian government that it could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to candidate Clinton?

Volume Two: Obstruction

Did you reach a judgment as to whether the president had committed obstruction of justice crimes?

Did you find substantial evidence that the president had committed obstruction of justice crimes?

For example, did you find that the president directed the White House counsel to call the acting attorney general and tell him the special counsel must be removed? (p. 4)

Did you find that the White House counsel decided he would rather resign than carry out that order? (p. 4)

Did you find that the president later directed the White House counsel to say he had not been ordered to have the special counsel removed? (p. 6)

Did you find that the president wanted the White House counsel to write a false memo saying he had not been ordered to have the special counsel removed? (p. 6)

Did you find that the White House counsel refused to do that because it was not true? (p. 6)

Did you find that the president repeatedly asked a private citizen—his former campaign manager—to deliver a message to the attorney general to restrict the special counsel to investigating only future campaign interference? (p. 5)

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Cocktails & Popcorn: Introducing Uranium 1, 2, 3 - Pickup Up Where Uranium One Left Off

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Day 10.2 When Brennan Goes Low, You Can't Let Browder And Deripaska Hide

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

White House: President Trump Unveils America’s First Cybersecurity Strategy in 15 Years

How to build a cyberwall.

America’s networks are threatened daily by criminals, terrorists, and foreign adversaries. In the face of growing threats, the Federal Government has the responsibility to do its part to ensure America has the best cybersecurity in the world. Failures to prioritize cybersecurity by both government and industry have left our Nation less secure.

President Donald J. Trump is committed to protecting the cybersecurity of our Nation, and has made it clear that this Administration will do what it takes to make America cyber secure.

Since the beginning of President Trump’s Administration, he has taken action to protect the American people in cyber space. Building on these strong efforts, today, the President signed the National Cyber Strategy—the first fully articulated cyber strategy for the United States since 2003.

The National Cyber Strategy identifies decisive priority actions to protect the American people. This strategy makes clear that the Federal Government will never stop defending our interests, and that we will bring every element of American power to bear to protect our people in the digital domain.

This Administration will not treat cyberspace as a separate arena. Instead, we are integrating cyber into all elements of national power. Structuring the National Cyber Strategy around the four pillars of the National Security Strategy reflects and advances and this approach. These are the key tenets on which we build this National Cyber Strategy:

Protect the American People, the Homeland, and the American Way of Life. We will manage cybersecurity risks to increase the security and resilience of the Nation’s information and information systems. We will do this by taking specific steps to secure Federal networks and information, secure critical infrastructure, combat cybercrime, and improve incident reporting.

Promote American Prosperity. We will preserve America’s influence in the technological ecosystem and pursue development of cyberspace as an open engine of economic growth, innovation, and efficiency. To do this, we will support a vibrant and resilient digital economy, foster and protect American ingenuity, and develop a superior cybersecurity workforce.

Preserve Peace through Strength. We will identify, counter, disrupt, degrade, and deter behavior in cyberspace that is destabilizing and contrary to our national interests, while preserving America’s overmatch in and through cyberspace. To achieve this, we will do our part to enhance cyber stability through norms of responsible state behavior, attribution of unacceptable behavior in cyberspace, and the imposition of costs on malicious cyber actors.

Advance American Influence. We will preserve the long-term openness, interoperability, security, and reliability of the Internet, which supports and is reinforced by America’s interests. We will take specific global efforts to promote these objectives, while supporting market growth for infrastructure and emerging technologies and building cyber capacity internationally.

The American people expect our Nation to be a world leader on every front, including cyberspace. The prosperity and security of our people, and the preservation of our way of life, depend on our successful execution of this strategy. We have a lot of work to do, and there is no time to waste.

We will Make America Cyber Secure.

National Cyber Strategy by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: Pictures Contain More Than 1K Words - Email Espionage

Turbine technology is used in nuclear projects.

What are they doing with all that research?

Emails, they are not for just for gif attachments with encrypted data, anymore.

You can text pics, too, you know.

Just saying.

New York Man Charged With Theft of Trade Secrets

Xiaoqing Zheng, 55, of Niskayuna, New York, was arrested today in connection with a criminal complaint charging him with stealing trade secrets belonging to General Electric (GE).

The announcement was made by Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers, U.S. Attorney Grant C. Jaquith for the Northern District of New York, and, Acting Special Agent in Charge Charles Margiotta of the FBI’s Albany Division.

The criminal complaint alleges that on or about July 5, Zheng, an engineer employed by General Electric, used an elaborate and sophisticated means to remove electronic files containing GE’s trade secrets involving its turbine technologies. Specifically, Zheng is alleged to have used steganography to hide data files belonging to GE into an innocuous looking digital picture of a sunset, and then to have e-mailed the digital picture, which contained the stolen GE data files, to Zheng’s e-mail account. 

The defendant appeared today in federal court in Albany, New York, before U.S. Magistrate Judge Christian F. Hummel and was ordered detained without bail pending a hearing scheduled for August 2, at 1:30 p.m.   

The charge filed against Zheng carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, a fine of up to $250,000, and a term of supervised release of up to three years.  The maximum statutory sentence is prescribed by Congress and is provided here for informational purposes.  If convicted of any offense, the sentencing of the defendant will be determined by the court based on the advisory Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.  The charge in the complaint is merely an accusation. The defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

This case is being investigated by the FBI, and is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Rick Belliss of the Northern District of New York, and Trial Attorneys Jason McCullough and Matt Chang of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DEFANGO: Wikileaks Vs Q? Deep Dive + Netflix Antifa Pizza Party - s03e12

Defango analyzes the current situations with Wikileaks, Q, Julian Assange, and Antifa in what I call a propaganda challenge to evidentary standards,

In essence, if one can plant a seed through manipulation of the public record, where, in this instance, mysterious, anonymous groups have generated a narrative, to question the credibility of Wikileaks, then the substance of the emails in the Clinton Foundation investigation can be thrown out,

The only problem with this scenario is that the data were preserved years ago and the issue was addressed in House Judiciary, in 2014.

Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. on H.R. 699, “The Email Privacy Act”

The only problem with this plan, which sounds like the work of "Legal Geniuses" (trademark pending) is that the investigation is about child welfare, of which Wikileaks has not released, to the public that is, the emails and cables on the trafficking of tiny humans.

Wikileaks Exposes Drugging Kids as Lab Rats

Wikileaks: Children under care of Irish government ended up in brothels

Another issue is this: if the question of a campaign, or perhaps elected and appointed officials, possess knowledge of leaking, or of an operation to interfere in ongoing investigations, such as the email investigation, which started under David Patreaus and has previously been addressed by House Judiciary, then why is this anonymous disinformation campaign not being addressed by FBI?

Would it not be fair to even question if "Q" is a Russian operative, considering this is the direction of its accusations against the credibility through a cyberattack of Wikileaks?

Why is "Qanon" leading anti-establishment Trump voters to embrace regime change and neo-conservatism? https://t.co/iCtWPmnSmO

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) June 26, 2018

Is not "Q" a leaker, if, in fact, it does possess access to confidential, national intelligence, and, if not, why is it, then, allowed to redirect the narrative away from anything dealing with the trafficking of tiny humans, which includes entitites named in Wikileaks material that has and, more than likely, also named in traunches that have yet to be released.

Propaganda campaigns have always started in child welfare, because no one cares.

Enjoy Defango's Deep Dive...."A D3 Production".

The following is an article speaking upon cyberattacks through psychological operations through social media, a much more complex topic when looking through a lens of intellectual property and judicial redress of grievance. 

Qanon: The Path To Dictatorship

Virtually everyone following politics has heard of the #Qanon story. Religiously followed by a growing mass of disciples and vehemently assaulted by a variety of left wing propagandists ranging from Vice to Newsweek, the validity of its claims have sparked a uniquely passionate debate on both sides.  The ones championing its teaching as unquestionable truth range from imageboard dwelling millennials to a considerable number of boomers.  Be it truly the broadcast of insider intel or merely the flagship conspiracy of our time, it’s certainly an exciting read that provides quality entertainment for the end times.

But those faithfully trusting in Q to lead the overthrow of the evil “deep state cabal” and restore American democracy to the people may be missing a much darker purpose for the Qanon posts.  

Used as a highly efficient propaganda tool, Q’s drops may actually be aiding an attempt to dismantle the judiciary altogether.  Should it succeed in pushing this distrust across the public through the oft-cited “Great Awakening, this narrative may actually serve to weaponize Americans into removing the only barrier left to toppling democracy and clearing the way for an Emperor to ascend to the throne. That is, of course, assuming that a coup d’etat has not already taken place.

The basic theme to the Qanon 8chan posts are that Trump and Sessions are frantically working behind the scenes to bring down what we all now know to be a very real and very corrupt deep state shadow government.  The antagonists — corrupt intelligence agency officials, congressmen, and news media plants — did not expect Trump to win and therefore are in “panic mode” over a number of crimes committed over the last eight to twenty years.  These crimes allegedly range from what we’ve seen already (election rigging, dark money, bribes take by elected officials and intelligence agencies) to the far-fetched (mass sex trafficking and pedophilia among elected officials). Some predictions have failed (Hillary Clinton being arrested in October 2017) while others have been eerily prophetic (the pope’s bizarre suggestion of changing the Lord’s prayer).

Perhaps the most compelling narrative is Q’s assertion that high level crime and corruption has been committed within Obama’s Department of Justice and heads of the intelligence agencies, going up to his Chief of Staff Loretta Lynch.  Q compares the systematic dismantling of these “bad actors” to defusing a bomb: the right wires must be cut to disable the mechanism without detonating the entire thing. In this case, the “explosion” of an inadvertent detonation would be the complete collapse of the entire Judicial Branch of America. Q warns that if such an event could occur, all court rulings throughout this period of time could be rendered null and void, and ultimately be challenged according to our current legal channels.

But what if this is the actual plan?

Thanks to the perfect storm of recent disasters ranging from James Clapper’s NSA spying (and perjury upon questioned of it) to former FBI director James  Comey’s destructive letter to Congress about reopening the Clinton email case, Deputy director Andrew McCabe’s contradicting testimony, all of the horrors of the recent IG report, and DOJ’s complete lack of prosecution of any of these crimes, the entire foundation of our intelligence agencies and judicial department is weak and may easily be toppled. The public has lost faith in our judicial department, and has lost faith in all of our intelligence agencies.

Correction: almost all of our intelligence agencies.

There is one agency that remains free of scandal, unearthed corruption, and public distrust: Military Intelligence.  Coincidentally, this is the one place that Trump seems to be comfortably nestled within, protected by its rank and file like the walls of an impenetrable fortress.  Some even speculate that the Qanon postings are an MI counter op that was planned since before Trump took the Oval Office:

According to veteran investigative reporter and best selling author, Dr. Jerome Corsi, he was approached three years ago by a group of generals and told that Donald Trump had been recruited by U.S. military intelligence to run in the 2016 Presidential elections, and subsequently help remove corrupt Deep State officials from positions of power. Corsi claims that QAnon represents the same group of senior military intelligence officials who are exposing the Deep State corruption and officials involved in a history of treasonous actions against the U.S. Republic.

Trump has, from the start of his presidency, surrounded himself by generals and high ranking military personnel.  He has given in to their demands even when in strict opposition to his voter base’s opinion. His spending budget was riddled with Democrat concessions in favor of remarkable military spending. In nearly all of his speeches he’s praised his soldiers and even suggested an American military parade.   This is likely why Q believes Trump is completely untouchable by Mueller’s highly biased quest to ignite a Trump impeachment, as indicated in many of his posts.

It is without question that America’s deep state will go full throttle to attempt to sabotage the Trump presidency before their crimes are unearthed and prosecuted.  We now know that Obama had spies inside Trump’s campaign, had FBI agents offering his colleagues damaging information on Hillary on behalf of Russia, and had baited a “Russian Collusion” setup in the strange event that he would win.  Whether or not Trump actually committed any crimes during his campaign is insignificant: Mueller is going to attempt to set the stage for an impeachment vote, and the media will throw everything they have at the public to get them to consider.  If this fails, they will use all of the media weapons at their disposal to grow a public uprising to try to force Trump out of power while rogue intelligence agents (now removed) will try to sabotage any investigations that may deter this.

But through this gamble, they have inadvertently cleared the path for Trump to garner the public support he needs to overthrow the constitution and seize full authoritarian control of America.  He has already successfully (and thankfully) dismantled the public’s trust of the mainstream media by proving their complete corruption.  This is step two of overthrowing any democracy, with step one being garnering control of the military (which Trump appears to already have done).  To complete the transition, he needs to either attain control of or dismantle the judicial branch.  With the unprecedented Democrat stonewalling on all of his judicial appointees, the former may not be possible. But with the massive failures of all intelligence agencies and the years of DOJ failures to prosecute criminal swamp creatures, there is a growing consensus that our judicial system is broken beyond repair.  Should evidence arrive that the DOJ was compromised; the stage will be set for Trump to conquer.

Qanon’s world is built upon a presumed “great awakening” within public consciousness.  But this awakening might actually be a conditioning: a conditioning of the masses to rally behind Trump’s military order at any cost. And its likelihood of success is very considerable: it is without a doubt that any attempt to remove Trump, no matter what the grounds or the crime, will be met with the full wrath of most of our country.  With at least half of the population firmly behind Trump (unironically the half who is likely to own a firearm), and the power of a strengthened military at his disposal, Trump should be able to seize the throne without much resistance.

It’s possible that Q is just a conspiracy theory, and it’s also possible that it’s real.  But to assume either may underestimate its purpose and its potential.  Q may instead be a sign of the empire to come, and a powerful weapon in crafting its long-overdue reign.  If this is a case, we can look forward to an end of many of the liberal woes we’ve seen over the last 50 years.

Again, the moral of the story is, "Do not be mean to my Sweetie. Period."

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

JUDICIARY: Ranking Member Nadler Statement for the Hearing with Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein & FBI Director Wray

Washington, D.C. – Today, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, delivered the following opening remarks during a Judiciary Committee hearing with the Department of Justice (DOJ) Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Christopher Wray on “oversight of FBI and DOJ actions surrounding the 2016 election.”

“Mr. Chairman, the events that have led up to this hearing are totally unacceptable. 

“On Monday of this week, you notified us of this hearing without the seven-day notice required by the rules.

“On Tuesday, you started our Committee markup more than an hour late, without notice to the Minority.  Then you allowed Mr. Jordan to offer an amendment to a resolution of inquiry that was patently non-germane—and then you stood out of view of the cameras, in the hallway just off the hearing room, while the Majority voted to overturn the ruling of their own Chair that the amendment was not germane.

“On Wednesday, you dropped all Committee business to interview Peter Strzok, who had already volunteered to come in for an interview before you threatened him with a subpoena.

“Today, we meet so that the Majority can criticize the Deputy Attorney General to his face, largely about documents that you know he cannot produce.  We will take a break so that we can go to the floor and vote on a so-called “resolution of insistence” based on the Jordan amendment from earlier this week—a measure that is without precedent, without the force of law, and clearly a pretext for a move against Mr. Rosenstein that the Majority already has planned. 

“And what is the great emergency that justifies this last-minute hearing?  Why has the Majority abandoned the rules and traditions that govern civility in the House?  The tired story of Hillary Clinton’s emails, of course, plus a few conspiracy theories about the Special Counsel. 

“When President Trump and his Administration were actively separating families at the border—ripping children out of the arms of their parents, and causing untold suffering to thousands of families—that did not merit an emergency hearing.

“And now that thousands of children are still separated from their parents, with no clear plan from this Administration for reuniting these families, where is the emergency hearing on that issue?

“We know that Russia, after successfully interfering with the 2016 elections, is actively working to disrupt the upcoming elections as well.  The former National Security Advisor testified that our intelligence agencies have received no instructions from the White House to protect the integrity of our election system.  Have we scheduled an emergency hearing on that issue?

“For that matter, have we conducted any oversight at all on election security; on the family separation crisis; on the Administration’s failure to protect Dreamers; on the Justice Department’s radical decision not to defend the Affordable Care Act; on the Supreme Court’s recent decisions to undermine voting rights and workers’ rights; on the President’s ongoing conflicts of interest and violations of the Emoluments Clause; or on the myriad other pressing issues within our Committee’s jurisdiction?  No, as with so many issues, this Committee has stayed silent.

“But on Hillary Clinton’s emails?  Sound the alarms.

“Despite an Inspector General’s report that, in more than 500 exhaustive pages, demonstrates conclusively that the outcome of the Clinton investigation was not affected by any improper bias, political or otherwise, we are wasting precious Committee time to chase Hillary Clinton.

“The Republicans seems desperate to prove that there was some sort of pro-Clinton and anti-Trump conspiracy within the FBI when, in fact, the overwhelming evidence shows exactly the opposite.  Virtually every action criticized in the Inspector General’s report—Director Comey’s July announcement, his disparate treatment of the Clinton and Trump investigations, and his October decision to announce the discovery of additional emails—ultimately harmed the candidacy of Secretary Clinton, and inured to the benefit of Donald Trump.

“But I guess we shouldn’t let facts stand in the way of a good manufactured emergency.

“According to the Republican memo for today’s hearing, today is also an opportunity for Members to consider “the Justice Department’s compliance with the committee’s March 22 subpoena,” a subpoena that was not issued in compliance with House Rules and, therefore, cannot be enforced.

“Even if it were a properly issued subpoena, the fight over document production seems to have boiled down to certain documents that the Republicans know the Department of Justice cannot turn over—much of it evidence related to an ongoing criminal investigation, the scoping documents outlining specific lines of inquiry in an ongoing criminal investigation, and the identities of confidential human sources still working undercover in the field.

“And that, of course, is the whole point.  As part of their coordinated and determined effort to undermine the Special Counsel’s investigation, Republicans are requesting documents they know they cannot have. 

“If they somehow find themselves in possession of sensitive documents that go to the core of the Special Counsel’s investigation, and if past practice holds, those documents will end up in the possession of the subject of the investigation—namely, President Trump.

“And if the Majority is rightly denied, they will do their best to undermine the credibility of the Department of Justice, the credibility of the Deputy Attorney General—and, by extension, the credibility of the Special Counsel. 

“They will likely try to hold Mr. Rosenstein in contempt.  Some have even threatened him with impeachment.  They may argue that he must be removed his oversight role over the Special Counsel’s investigation.

“This is an investigation, I might remind my Republican colleagues, that has already yielded five guilty pleas, and that has led to the indictment of 20 people so far.  The President and some of his closest advisors are under investigation for having participated in a criminal conspiracy with a foreign power against the United States.

“That is an emergency.

“The President practically confessed to Lester Holt on television that he obstructed the investigation into that conspiracy when he said that he fired former FBI Director Comey because of “this Russia stuff, with Trump and Russia.”

“That is an emergency.

“But is that the subject of today’s emergency hearing?  No.  Or of any emergency hearing?  No it is not.

“I know that this has been a hard week for the Majority.  I know that it must be tempting to change the subject and rally the base with cries of “lock her up!” 

“But we do not have the luxury of hiding or voting present at this critical juncture in our democracy. 

“We cannot hide from our responsibilities. We cannot hide from our obligation to conduct oversight of a corrupt Administration.  We cannot hide from our constitutional duty to protect our elections from foreign interference, or to stand up for the rules, and for our democratic institutions, and for the rule of law.

“I ask my colleagues to consider this question as we proceed:  when the Special Counsel’s work is complete, when the enormity of what he finds has been laid bare, how will the American people judge your actions today? 

“I yield back the balance of my time.”

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

SCOTUS Rules On Preservation Of Evidence In Private Data

The issue with warrants and data have been previously addressed in Congress, but long forgotten, well, that is unless you do a metatag keyword search of data on my blog.

Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. on H.R. 699, “The Email Privacy Act”

Learn more: BEVERLY TRAN: Statement of the Honorable John Conyers, Jr. on H.R. 699, “The Email Privacy Act” http://beverlytran.blogspot.com/2015/12/statement-of-honorable-john-conyers-jr.html#ixzz5JAgDGCil
Stop Medicaid Fraud in Child Welfare 

If SCOTUS rules law enforcement needs warrant to search private cellphone data, then, I shall assume, it applies to emails, and the emails & cellphone data of private corporations, because, after all, "corporations are people, too".

See, if law enforcement does not follow proper procedure in securing evidence in a criminal proceeding, then all that evidence can be thrown out which is why the Hillary Clinton email investigation is going through meticulous scrutiny in DOJ and FBI internal policies and operations.

One just might want to get this one right because this looks like we now have a backdoor into some regulation of those Public Private Partnerships and anything else dealing with privatization when it comes to national security, be it domestic or foreign.

What is interesting to keep in mind, in child welfare proceedings, there is an exception called "exigent circumstances" dealing with children where Child Protective Services will obtain personal information without need of warrant.

Supreme Court rules law enforcement needs warrant to search cellphone data

The Supreme Court ruled Friday that law enforcement in most cases has to obtain a warrant in order to search and seize long-term cell phone records that would show a person's location.

In a 5-4 ruling, the court held that the Fourth Amendment's protections against an unreasonable search protects people from having the government acquire their cell-site records from wireless providers in run-of-the-mill criminal investigations.

Chief Justice John Roberts sided with the court's four liberal justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, to make up the majority.

Justice Anthony Kennedy dissented along with conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch.

The case before the court centered on Timothy Carpenter, who argued the government violated his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable search and seizure when it obtained records from his wireless provider revealing his location over 127 days.

Authorities used the data as evidence at his trial to convict him of a string of robberies at Radio Shack and T-Mobile stores in Michigan and Ohio from December 2010 to March 2011.

The government claimed it was well within its right under the Stored Communications Act of 1986 to obtain the records through a court order, which requires police to show reasonable grounds to believe the information is relevant to their criminal investigation.

For a warrant, police have to show probable cause that the crime occurred. <===right there is the purpose of OIG investigations.

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Carpenter, upholding the district court ruling, sentencing Carpenter to 1,395 months in prison.

The court held that no search occurred under the Fourth Amendment because Carpenter had no reasonable expectation of privacy in cell phone location records held by his service provider.

In reversing the lower court ruling, Roberts disagreed. He said Carpenter did have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

“As with GPS information, the time-stamped data provides an intimate window into a person’s life revealing not only his particular movements, but through them his familial, political, professional, religious and sexual associations,” he said. “These location records hold for many Americans the ‘privacies of life.’”

Roberts noted that location data has become so precise that it gives the government a near perfect surveillance. Unlike with GPS tracking, he said police don’t even need to know in advance who they want to follow or when.

“Whoever the suspect turns out to be, he has effectively been tailed every moment of every day for five years, and the police may — in the government’s view — call upon the results of that surveillance without regard to the constraints of the Fourth Amendment,” he said.

"Only a few without cell phones could escape this tireless and absolute surveillance.”

In a dissenting opinion, Kennedy said the court's ruling puts needed, reasonable, accepted, lawful and congressionally authorized criminal investigations at risk in serious cases.

"And it places undue restrictions on the lawful and necessary enforcement powers exercised not only by the federal government, but also by law enforcement in every state and locality throughout the nation."

But Roberts said law enforcement can obtain an exemption from the warrant requirement in urgent situations.

“Lower courts for instance, have approved warrantless searches related to bomb threats, active shootings and child abductions,” he said. “Our decision today does not call into doubt warrantless access to CSLI [cell-site location information] in such circumstances.”

SCOTUS CARPENTER v. UNITED STATES Email Search Warrant by Beverly Tran on Scribd

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

Richard Cebull Has Popped Back Up From The 9th Circuit

Well, look what popped up from Salt Lake, Utah.

Conyers and Cohen Request Hearing On Judge Cebull's Violations of Office 

John Huber is from Utah.

Judge Richard Cebull is from U.S. Circuit Court 9th Circuit.

Even Trump has voiced issues about the 9th Circuit.

Heck, I even heard rumors about the 9th Circuit and its False Claims Act decisions but I must give respect where the media has failed to do to Judge Stephen Trott.

Right to Lie in Child Welfare Cases - Opinion 15-55563, 1-3-2017 by Beverly Tran on Scribd

I believe someone found some more stuff in those emails of the 9th Circuit.

I wonder if it had anything to do with real estate fraud, or sex trafficking of tiny humans, or drugs, or bribery, or blackmail?

Oh, the possibilities to throw a case.

Federal judge who sealed Cebull file retires amid sexual misconduct allegations

The federal judge who ordered that the results of a lengthy misconduct investigation into a former Montana chief judge be sealed resigned Monday amid allegations of sexual misconduct.

According the 

Alex Kozinski, the powerful judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit who was facing a judicial investigation over allegations that he subjected 15 women to inappropriate sexual behavior, announced Monday that he would retire effective immediately.

Kozinski is the U.S. 9th Circuit chief judge who in 2013 declared that the results of an official investigation into former Montana Chief District Judge Richard Cebull’s racist, homophobic, and sexist emails was “moot” because Cebull resigned from the bench.

Kozinki’s decision to abandon the order revealing the findings of the investigation was overruled by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court Judicial Council. The ethics panel, after nine-month review,  revealed that over a four-year period, Cebull sent “hundreds” of emails “related to race, politics, religion, gender, sexual orientation, and politically sensitive issues.” However, the panel determined there was no bias in the Cebull’s judicial conduct.

The panel sealed the investigative file and it has never been made public.

---

Kozinski first came under fire in 2008 when the Los Angeles Times revealed that he maintained a publicly accessible website featuring sexually explicit photos and videos. After the allegations surfaced, Kozinski called for an investigation into his own conduct. As the Los Angeles Times reported, Kozinski was presiding over a closely watched obscenity trial when news about the website broke. An investigation found Kozinski and his son exercised carelessness in allowing the information on their private server to be publicly available, but he was not sanctioned.

The cascade of recent sexual misconduct allegations against Kozinski, which the Washington Post

 first reported on Dec. 8, involve accusations that Kozinski repeatedly showed pornography to female staffers in his courthouse chambers. An account the Post published Friday involved an unnamed recent University of Montana law student who says Kozinski inappropriately touched her.

From the One recent law student at the University of Montana said that Kozinski, at a 2016 reception, pressed his finger into the side of her breast, which was covered by her clothes, and moved it with some “deliberateness” to the center, purporting to be pushing aside her lapel to fully see her name tag.

---

U.S. Chief District Judge Richard Cebull, of Montana, retired in 2013 amid misconduct allegations after Cebull sent a racist email from his courthouse computer.

In 2015 this reporter, along with former Montana journalist Shane Castle, filed a First Amendment lawsuit against the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals demanding release of the investigative files so the public could review the emails and determine whether Cebull had demonstrated judicial bias during his time on the federal bench. The complaint argued that federal judges and court officers should not be exempt from federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) disclosure requirements.

“Plaintiffs seek disclosure of these discriminatory emails because this is a matter of public concern, and because various parties who appeared before Judge Cebull likely had their due process rights violated by his rulings,” the complaint stated. “Without access to the requested emails, the potential harm to numerous people is incalculable.”

After more than a year of litigation, the plaintiffs dropped the lawsuit in 20016 after it became apparent that suing the federal court in federal court was not the best mechanism for obtaining the records.

In light of the recent allegations surrounding Kozinski, Castle said efforts to bring sunshine to the federal judiciary is more important than ever.

“I always thought a compelling reason for getting the emails was to see who else in the judiciary sent or received the offensive emails, or perhaps responded to them,” Castle said. “This latest news is just further proof we need a FOIA equivalent for the judiciary and legislative branches, so civil servants wielding huge amounts of power over other people’s lives can’t hide in these black boxes.”

---

The Great Falls Tribune first broke the Cebull scandal in 2012 after Cebull admitted to sending a racially charged email about President Barack Obama from his courthouse chambers.

Cebull, of Billings, was nominated by former President George W. Bush and received his commission in 2001 and he served as chief judge for the District of Montana from 2008 until his retirement in 2013.

This reporter received a copy of the offensive email. The source who sent it said they had received it from a family member, who received it from one of the recipients on the email thread. The subject line of the email, which Cebull sent from his official courthouse email address on Feb. 20 at 3:42 p.m., read: “A MOM’S MEMORY.”

A photo that accompanied Cebull’s racist email.

The forwarded text read as follow:

“Normally I don’t send or forward a lot of these, but even by my standards, it was a bit touching. I want all of my friends to feel what I felt when I read this. Hope it touches your heart like it did mine.

“A little boy said to his mother; ‘Mommy, how come I’m black and you’re white? His mother replied, ‘Don’t even go there Barack! From what I can remember about that party, you’re lucky you don’t bark!'”

On March 1, 2012, a day after the story broke, Cebull wrote a letter to Kozinski requesting an inquiry into his actions to determine whether sending the email constituted “misconduct.” Cebull waived his confidentiality as to making the request and the existence of any proceedings. The Montana Human Rights Network was among an unknown number of groups and individuals who filed official judicial misconduct complaints with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

The scandal touched off a national firestorm and calls for Cebull’s immediate resignation, including from within the halls of Congress, rained down.

A timeline of the Cebull investigation is as follows:

Feb. 10, 2012: Judge Richard F. Cebull receives an email titled “A Mom’s Memory” on his courthouse email account.

· Feb. 20, 2012: Judge Cebull forwards that email  to six friends and his personal email address.

· Feb. 29, 2012: As a reporter for the Great Falls Tribune, I receive a copy of the email sent from Cebull’s email account and call him to ask him about it. He admits to sending the email and says he did so because he does not like President Obama.

· March 1, 2012: Judge Cebull writes an apology to President Barack Obama.

· March 1, 2012: Judge Cebull writes to 9th Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski requesting an inquiry into his actions to determine whether his actions constitute “misconduct.” Cebull waives his confidentiality as to making the request and the existence of any proceedings that ensue.

· March 1, 2012: Cathy A. Catterson, executive of the 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals issues a statement in which she proclaims the Judicial Council of the 9th Circuit  “is expected to act expeditiously in investigating and resolving this matter.”

· March 1, 2012: Groups begin circulating petitions calling for Cebull’s resignation.

· March 5, 2012: The Montana Human Rights Network files an official judicial misconduct complaint with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and calls on Cebull to resign.

· March 6, 2012: The ranking Democrat on the House judiciary, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., calls for the House Judiciary Committee to hold hearings on Cebull’s conduct.

· March 12, 2012: The Montana Human Rights Network sends a letter to Cebull along with a petition signed by more than 2,800 people calling on Cebull to resign.

· March 23, 2012:  9th Circuit Court of Appeals Chief Judge Alex Kozinski appoints a five-judge judicial committee to investigate Cebull’s actions. Judge M. Margaret McKeown is assigned to preside over the case.

· October, 2012: Cebull announces he’ll take senior status effective March, 15, 2013

· December, 2012: The Special Committee submits its report to the Judicial Council in December 2012.

· March 15, 2013: The Judicial Council issues an order and memorandum, though the order is not to be released until after the 63-day appeal period.

· April 2, 2013: The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of appeals in a statement on its website makes the preceding two facts known to the public and announces Cebull submitted a retirement letter stating his last day would be May 3, 2013. The council states it will have no further comment until the conclusion of the appeal period.

· May 3, 2013: Cebull retires. According to federal law, as an Article III federal district judge he is entitled to continue to collect his $174,000 annual salary until his death.

· May 13, 2013: Four days before the order and memorandum are to become public, Kozinksi issues a statement saying the order stemming from the investigation is “moot” because Cebull retired from active duty. Kozinski says the Judicial Council “now finds it necessary to review the procedural status and will consider the matter” at its June 28 meeting.

· June 28, 2013: The Judicial Council meets to consider the Cebull misconduct complaint.

· July 2, 2013: Kozinski releases another statement indicating that the Judicial Council reviewed misconduct complaints 12-90026 and 12-90032 against Cebull. Judicial Council issues a  “final order,” which is to be made public on Sept. 4 “if no petition for review is filed before that date.” Only Cebull and the complainant associated with docket No. 12-90032 have the right to view the final order and consider it for appeal.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©

DOJ: Horowitz Report Is Out For "Their Eyes Only"

What a lovely day to memorialize in the annals of history.

Happy Birthday, Sweetie.

Report on DOJ’s Handling of Clinton Email Probe Nears Release

Multiple subjects of a report on the Justice Department’s handling of a 2016 investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email use have been notified that they can privately review the report by week’s end, signaling t he long-awaited document is nearing release.

The report is likely to reignite the volatile debate over the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s handling of the Clinton probe, and it will put Michael Horowitz, the Justice Department’s inspector general, in a familiar place—taking aim at members of the law enforcement community.

Those invited to review the report were told they would have to sign nondisclosure agreements in order to read it, people familiar with the matter said. They are expected to have a few days to craft a response to any criticism in the report, which will then be incorporated in the final version to be released in coming weeks.

Mr. Horowitz told lawmakers last month he expected to issue the report in May, but Tuesday’s notification is the first indication that Mr. Horowitz has largely completed his inquiry. Congressional committees are expected to review the report in coming weeks.

Mr. Horowitz’s office issued a related report last month, which laid the groundwork for the firing of former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, finding that he misled investigators probing his role in providing information to a reporter for The Wall Street Journal. Mr. McCabe disputed the allegations, which have been referred to the Washington U.S. attorney’s office to determine whether he should be charged with a crime.

The inspector general’s yearlong review is expected to yield sharp criticism of actions by several top officials, including former FBI Director James Comey’s announcement in July 2016 that Mrs. Clinton had been reckless with the nation’s secrets but he was recommending against prosecuting her.

The report is also expected to scrutinize whether Mr. McCabe should have recused himself from the Clinton investigation, since his wife’s campaign for the Virginia legislature was aided by then- Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Clinton ally. And it is likely to criticize the numerous texts exchanged by two FBI employees critical of President Donald Trump and others.

Beyond that, the document’s release will shine an unusual spotlight on Mr. Horowitz, the Justice Department’s in-house watchdog since 2011.

Inspectors general, appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, don’t automatically change with administrations, a way of maintaining their independence. Their probes often involve interviews with dozens of witnesses and can produce reports months or even years after a problem comes to light.

In January 2017, Mr. Horowitz announced a review of Mr. Comey’s public statements on the Clinton investigation and related matters. Since then, officials have been bracing for his report, which has occasionally been in the news, such as when he released the related report on Mr. McCabe last month.

The McCabe report drew the ire of one of Mr. Horowitz’s predecessors, Michael Bromwich, an attorney who now represents Mr. McCabe and who said he had evidence that contradicted the initial report’s findings.

No stranger to antagonizing his colleagues, Mr. Horowitz spent several years as chief of the public-corruption unit in the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office in the 1990s. In that role he helped prosecute more than a dozen police officers from New York’s 30th Precinct who were accused of stealing money and drugs from criminal suspects and reselling the drugs.

He authorized the arrest of the officers just as a colleague was planning to use them as witnesses in a major drug case.

“It not only involved proceeding against law enforcement, which is your day-to-day partner in fighting crime...it also had negative impacts on other cases in the office, and needed to be handled with skill, sensitivity and all those things Michael has,” said Mary Jo White, who was U.S. attorney and Mr. Horowitz’s boss at the time.

Mr. Horowitz also served as an official at Justice Department headquarters in Washington and spent a decade in private practice before being nominated by then-President Barack Obama to the inspector general post.

At his confirmation hearing, Mr. Horowitz cited the police corruption case and another prosecution involving the Teamsters that also disrupted colleagues’ work, saying they showed he could maintain his independence from people he had worked with for many years.

“I wasn’t interested in winning popularity contests as the head of the corruption unit,” he said. “I was instructed by the U.S. attorney to doggedly pursue corruption, to be independent of the other units in the office, and that’s precisely what I did.”

At that hearing, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R., Iowa) pressed Mr. Horowitz on whether he could be impartial toward the then-head of the Justice Department’s criminal division, Lanny Breuer, whom Mr. Horowitz had publicly supported. Mr. Horowitz said he would pursue “every avenue in that case, no matter who’s involved.”

Several months later, Mr. Horowitz’s office released a report on the botched “Fast and Furious” gun-trafficking operation, in which officials lost track of guns sold to suspected smugglers. The report faulted Mr. Breuer for not promptly informing superiors about a similar operation he had learned of in 2010.

Some Obama Justice Department officials criticized that report as applying simplistic hindsight to complex episodes during which the proper course of action wasn’t always clear.

Officials generally say they expect Mr. Horowitz to reach good faith conclusions in the coming report. “Horowitz is open-minded and fair,” said Matthew Miller, who ran the Justice Department’s public affairs office when the “Fast and Furious” operation first became public.

Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©