Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

Connect with us

Opinion

Politico Purports That POTUS Has Been Subpoenaed!

Has Mueller’s metaphorical “stealth mode” helped him secure his most daring maneuver so far?

Published

on

Robert Mueller

Thanks to the timing of the midterm elections, Special Counsel Robert Mueller has been even more shadow-y than usual in recent weeks, but that all could be turned on its head at a moment’s notice.

This spacious silence was no accident either, as the Justice Department tends to have a longstanding agreement to maintain the appearance of political neutrality when it comes to our electoral maneuvers.   This alleged impartiality may only exist in the realm of etiquette, however, as Mueller himself has been seemingly swamped with work during his time away from the spotlight.

Now, a series of events has led at least one Politico reporter to believe that Mueller has even gone so far as to subpoena the Commander in Chief himself.

Trending: WATCH: Ocasio-Cortez Speaks At Town Hall, Gets Heckled In Her Own District (Video)

The evidence lies in obscure docket entries at the clerk’s office for the D.C. Circuit. Thanks to Politico’s Josh Gerstein and Darren Samuelsohn, we know that on August 16th (the day after Giuliani said he was almost finished with his memorandum, remember), a sealed grand jury case was initiated in the D.C. federal district court before Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell. We know that on September 19, Chief Judge Howell issued a ruling and 5 days later one of the parties appealed to the D.C. Circuit. And thanks to Politico’s reporting, we know that the special counsel’s office is involved (because the reporter overheard a conversation in the clerk’s office). We can further deduce that the special counsel prevailed in the district court below, and that the presumptive grand jury witness has frantically appealed that order and sought special treatment from the judges of the D.C. Circuit—often referred to as the “second-most important court in the land.”

take our poll - story continues below

Do you think Democrats will push out Representative Ilhan Omar over her anti-Semitism?

  • Do you think Democrats will push out Representative Ilhan Omar over her anti-Semitism?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Nothing about the docket sheets, however, discloses the identity of the witness. Politico asked many of the known attorneys for Mueller witnesses—including Jay Sekulow, another Trump lawyer—and every one denied knowledge of the identity of the witness. (What, of course, would we expect a lawyer to say when asked about a proceeding the court has ordered sealed?)

Now for the juicy stuff:

The docket sheets give one final—but compelling—clue. When the witness lost the first time in the circuit court (before the quick round-trip to the district court), he unusually petitioned for rehearing en banc—meaning he thought his case was so important that it merited the very unusual action of convening all 10 of the D.C. Circuit judges to review the order. That is itself telling (this witness believes his case demands very special handling), but the order disposing of the petition is even more telling: President Trump’s sole appointee to that court, Gregory Katsas, recused himself.

Is Mueller springing a trap for the President for an upcoming moment, not far removed from the sacred midterms themselves?  Only time will tell.

 

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

News

BOMBSHELL: Report Claims Ukraine Colluded With Hillary Campaign to Defeat Trump

How about them apples?

John Salvatore

Published

on

All we hear about from the left is Russia, Russia, Russia. And yet, years later, there is still zero proof the Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin to defeat Hillary Clinton in 2016. However, the evidence against the Hillary Clinton campaign continues to mount. Now, this… From The Hill: Ukraine’s top prosecutor divulged in an interview aired Wednesday on Hill.TV that he has opened an investigation into whether his country’s law enforcement apparatus intentionally leaked financial records during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign about then-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort in an effort to sway the election in favor of Hillary Clinton. The leak of the so-called “black ledger” files to U.S. media prompted Manafort’s resignation from the Trump campaign and gave rise to one of the key allegations in the Russia collusion probe that has dogged Trump for the last two and a half years. Ukraine Prosecutor General Yurii Lutsenko’s probe was prompted by a Ukrainian parliamentarian’s release of a tape recording purporting to quote a top law enforcement official as saying his agency leaked the Manafort financial records to help Clinton’s campaign. Well, that seems like kind of a problem, huh? Will the mainstream media care to report?? The Hillary Clinton campaign has seemingly been routinely caught working with outside sources to gain insight on Trump. Why is there no media coverage on that angle? Why such hypocrisy? Why such a double standard? Those were rhetorical. Now, it seems as though a foreign government official once offered the Hillary campaign information on then-candidate Donald Trump. From American Mirror: A high-ranking member in the Verkohvna Rada of Ukraine is accusing the head of the country’s anti-corruption bureau of leaking information about associates of Donald Trump to the Hillary Clinton campaign in 2016, according to the television station 112 UA. MP…

Continue Reading

News

New Zealand Prime Minister Just Banned ‘Semi-Automatic’ Guns After Mosque Shooting

Liberals will have a field day…

John Salvatore

Published

on

50 people were killed after a man opened fire at a mosque in New Zealand. It was a terrible tragedy that the far-left mainstream media has decided to link to President Trump, because, of course. Now, the prime minister of the country has decided to ban “military-style semi-automatic” weapons. From Fox News: New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern on Thursday announced the country was immediately banning “military-style semi-automatic weapons” after last week’s attack that killed 50 people at two mosques. Ardern noted, “As I’ve said, what we’ve done here is taken out the guns out of circulation that are most critical to be addressed urgently and that’s what we’ve announced, with essentially almost immediate effect.” Ardern added: “There is more to be done and tranche two will look at issues around licensing, issues around registration, issues around storage. There are a range of other amendments that we believe do need to be made and that will be the second tranche of reforms yet to come.” This is clearly an impulsive move from the New Zealand government. Liberals will be elated. Democrats love them some “sanctuary cities” for people who aren’t supposed to be in the country. Now, some proud American sheriffs are set to make their counties sanctuaries for gun owners in order to preserve their citizens’ Second Amendment rights. Here are the details… From Reuters: A rapidly growing number of counties in at least four states are declaring themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries, refusing to enforce gun-control laws that they consider to be infringements on the U.S. constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Organizers of the pro-gun sanctuaries admit they took the idea from liberals who have created immigration sanctuaries across the United States where local officials defy the Trump administration’s efforts to enforce tougher immigration laws. Now local…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week

Send this to a friend