Posted on 08/14/2021 5:33:32 PM PDT by White Lives Matter
Federal prosecutors are refusing to hand over text messages and laptops from FBI informants in the Whitmer kidnapping case.
In October 2020, the FBI announced during a press conference that it thwarted a plot by a so-called “right-wing militia” to kidnap and kill Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer and overthrow the state government.
The Whitmer kidnapping plot was in the media 24/7 and used to bludgeon Trump with just a few weeks to go until Election Day.
The FBI used at least 12 informants in the Michigan Whitmer kidnapping case.
There are 6 defendants and 12 FBI informants.
According to report BuzzFeed News published last month, the FBI was involved in every aspect of the Whitmer kidnapping case – starting with its inception!
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
None dare call it coup.
The bipartisan nature of the coup could not be more obvious. Any Trump voter who votes GOP in 2022 endorses these assaults on our American Heritage.
Of course it was entrapment. 12 informants and 6 defendants. The leaders of the “plot” were informants pushing the others to do the deed. This was an FBI plot with a few unknowing followers.
They’re too f*cking corrupt.
The only criminals that are caught are the dumb ones and the careless ones
That being said it’s hard for me to believe that defense attorneys across the country aren’t going after this agency. You gotta have money. But they’ve done some crazy stuff.
my bet is that this also exposes the same group as being the actual organizers of January 6th and other violent actions in the last year. becouse a great deal of those involved dont have the full picture and believe they are not doing anything wrong there will be a lot of back and fourth between those that organized it and have the big picture.
If you are involved in a militia, at least half the members are FBI informants.
The usual remedy from a judge is hand it all over and do it right now OR I dismiss the case against all defendants with prejudice.
Anybody who has ever read FRCP #26 knows there is no question. You have to hand over any evidence in your possession which might have probative value to the defense. This was hammered into my skull as a 1L.
People jailed without bond and held in solitary confinement, denied trials, discovery of evidence is denied to defense counsel, defense attorneys offices are searched and defense attorneys are interrogated about communication with their client. Trump derangement syndrome has upended the constitution and bill of rights. No one is safe; these abuses will trickledown to every court in the country, political crimes will preempt every prosecution. We entered the realm of the KGB and Gestapo.
Judge will throw the cases out, for non-cooperation in discovery.
That’s possible.
Vishinski, Stalin’s show crimes “prosecutor.”
ANYONE sitting on a federal jury needs to start voting not guilty on every federal trial. If the FBI/DOJ are involved you have sufficient grounds for reasonable doubt and a not guilty verdict. They have no credibility in anything at this point. If asked all you say is I had a reasonable doubt and you would be telling the truth.
Start destroying their show trials and watch them go pure Stasi on the citizens for daring to question their perceived ethics.
Bull excrement! Were they terrified (Comey) when they spied on President DJT? Were they terrified (Strock and Page) when they had a hand in fixing the 2020 election? How about when they (Wray) hid Hunter's laptop for a year? Continue here ad nauseum. The feds are terrified of nothing IMHO. That's because they 'are the cops'! They are the ones who they would call to report an incident that they thought needed to be investigated and they are the ones who would investigate themselves. Ain't justice grand?
Since when does the prosecution have the right to adjudicate the likelihood of defense claims rather than the court? Is not that the whole point of a trial?
Perhaps there was no actual plot in the first place. Perhaps it was a hoax just before the election to flip Michigan.
The DOJ / FBI / CIA / NSA have been a criminal enterprise since 1996. The courts have no control over them whatsoever. They are all politicalized mercenaries. The courts are terrified of them.
My tagline says all you need to know on this subject...
Yes. Twelve snitches and six suckers, but it wasn’t a frame job at all. /s
...
BTTT
Entrapment has a very high threshold.
https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-645-entrapment-elements
645. Entrapment—Elements
Entrapment is a complete defense to a criminal charge, on the theory that “Government agents may not originate a criminal design, implant in an innocent person’s mind the disposition to commit a criminal act, and then induce commission of the crime so that the Government may prosecute.” Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540, 548 (1992). A valid entrapment defense has two related elements: (1) government inducement of the crime, and (2) the defendant’s lack of predisposition to engage in the criminal conduct. Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58, 63 (1988). Of the two elements, predisposition is by far the more important.
Inducement is the threshold issue in the entrapment defense. Mere solicitation to commit a crime is not inducement. Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435, 451 (1932). Nor does the government’s use of artifice, stratagem, pretense, or deceit establish inducement. Id. at 441. Rather, inducement requires a showing of at least persuasion or mild coercion, United States v. Nations, 764 F.2d 1073, 1080 (5th Cir. 1985); pleas based on need, sympathy, or friendship, ibid.; or extraordinary promises of the sort “that would blind the ordinary person to his legal duties,” United States v. Evans, 924 F.2d 714, 717 (7th Cir. 1991). See also United States v. Kelly, 748 F.2d 691, 698 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (inducement shown only if government’s behavior was such that “a law-abiding citizen’s will to obey the law could have been overborne”); United States v. Johnson, 872 F.2d 612, 620 (5th Cir. 1989) (inducement shown if government created “a substantial risk that an offense would be committed by a person other than one ready to commit it”).
Even if inducement has been shown, a finding of predisposition is fatal to an entrapment defense. The predisposition inquiry focuses upon whether the defendant “was an unwary innocent or, instead, an unwary criminal who readily availed himself of the opportunity to perpetrate the crime.” Mathews, 485 U.S. at 63. Thus, predisposition should not be confused with intent or mens rea: a person may have the requisite intent to commit the crime, yet be entrapped. Also, predisposition may exist even in the absence of prior criminal involvement: “the ready commission of the criminal act,” such as where a defendant promptly accepts an undercover agent’s offer of an opportunity to buy or sell drugs, may itself establish predisposition. Jacobson, 503 U.S. at 550.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.