Dear Mo Brooks - June 6 NOT June 7th. About the recent Minute Order & your motion to certify…

Are you sure that Ali Alexander didn’t covertly record any of the conversations? Are you sure he deleted the encrypted chats and messages? Discovery specifically Interrogatories will be super fun…

Apologies I overlooked this case;

I could have sworn I published an article concerning Swalwell’s

• March 2021 Complaint ¹ But as luck would have it, I overlooked this Complaint ² —What likely happened —when I saw Swalwell’s Notice of Related Case

  • Rep Thompson v Trump et al and Two USCP Officers in a decision based on what I thought would be more efficient, to focus on the Thompson and the Two USCP Officers Complaint

Insofar as my rationale—I’m mindful that doesn’t exactly ameliorate my folly. At the time I assumed that my readers/followers would have known that all three cases are “related” —accordingly that meant that all 3 cases were running on an almost parallel track. The only (one step) standard deviation is Rep Swalwell’s Complaint the inclusion of Rep Mo Brooks. And the insanity surrounding serving Defendant Brooks.

Also fair warning this is a very long and very detailed article with over 18+ cases and court filings. When it comes to Jan6th - there is no room for half-ass reporting—either you report fully and with actual documents or you do not. I tend to prefer the prior versus latter.

• 🌶also fun fact sidebar 🌶I really do read nearly every document that I write about —in Rep Swalwell’s complaint here are a few important data-points that some might (inaccurately) think I’m lost in the minutiae ocean. I’m not. Like I said if sans an Oxford Comma can result in a $10M then maybe there’s a reason I tend to zero in on tiny details.
  For Example;

  • The complaint repeatedly states Mo Brooks “in his individuality capacity” (see page the actual cover sheet and pages 78 thru 85)

  • @MoBrooks deleted a tweet and a bunch of retweets

  • @RepMoBrooks - ProPublica tracks deleted Tweets

Let’s also not forget Brooks’ recent and very public meltdown. After all he did successfully evade service for almost 90 days. Keep in mind the Tweet he deleted - which inadvertently displayed his password and PIN - the now deleted June 6th tweet (which was archived by an eagle eye at the DailyDot) actually confirms he was served on the on the 6th not the 7th. I’m not directly alleging that Defendant Brooks willfully mislead the Court. Mainly because that’s why above my pay grade —I’m merely pointing out facts in the public domain

Mo Brooks - Endorsed By President Trump 🇺🇸 @MoBrooks

.@ericswalwell Well, Swalwell FINALLY did his job, served complaint (on my WIFE). HORRIBLE Swalwell’s team committed a CRIME by unlawfully sneaking INTO MY HOUSE & accosting my wife! Alabama Code 13A-7-2: 1st degree criminal trespass. Year in jail. $6000 fine. More to come!

Mo Brook’s MOTION to Certify Defendant Mo Brooks was Acting Within the Scope of his Office or Employment by MO BROOKS. "Let this be filed" Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 7/2/2021

June 6th or June 7th -check the affidavit

There’s an interesting technically (it’s unlikely to reverse the recent minute order) but this inconvenient fact actually backs up my position which also adds to the veracity of the Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment - see page two of the June 2021 Affidavit Service Occurred on June 6th NOT June 7th

Page 2 Affidavit of Service - June 6th NOT JUNE 7th

…see page 1 of Mo Brook’s July 2, 2021 MOTION to Certify - this matters because if a $10M judgement can be made on the placement of an “Oxford comma” then I could see the Plaintiff arguing Brook’s Motion was untimely because the Affidavit of Service shows June 6th NOT June 7th. Because of the “on or about” and then citing three different summonses -Brooks is playing semantics with his wording. Because it’s just vague enough but then he admits he was served on the 6th and that’s later affirmed by Brooks’ own tweets. Again why reference the “three additional summonses” - why use “on or about” when you know damn well you were served on the 6th —Yes I know it’s the tiny detail but I seriously get paid well to notice tiny details in briefs.

Assuming arguendo that the Court and Plaintiffs decided to ignore the 21-day response rule - Brook’s other arguments actually fair no better. The subtext here is Rep Mo Brooks evaded service for nearly 3 months. He then threw an entire pot of uncooked spaghetti at the wall —praying something sticks/

Always know your local rules

No really that’s a lesson I learned the hard way some 17.5 years ago - always and I mean always know your local rules. The DDC local rules of procedure for civil and criminal, see June 2021 updated local rules.

• The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - specifically Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(2)(B) allows for service “at [his] dwelling or usual place of abode with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there.”

• Second issue was Brook’s failure to respond within the 21 days as predicated by (DDC local Rule) Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i) - which was argued under Plaintiff Swalwell’s Motion (Document No 19)

Here Defendant Brooks makes what’s known as a conclusory argument, he prematurely assumes that either the House Administration Committee or the GC for the House of Representatives “agrees” with Brooks that his incendiary Jan 6th Comments - he was acting in his official capacity as a U S House of Representative member.

Oh is Rep Brooks saying Inciting Violence is just part of his job as a member of Congress because it sure reads that’s the predicate he’s establishing and then he tosses in that he’s required to wear a mask while on the floor of the house debating and/or casting a vote…

Wait a minute I thought @mobrooks @RepMoBrooks said “the November 2020 Presidential Election was stole” —so pray tell Mo - why are you including the State of Alabama SoS Election Results

Brooks then stands his ground that all the tweets are from his government issued Twitter account, see page 10 of his motion to certify

I mean even after your “today is the day we start kicking ass…” but your brief citing the two sentences before you decided to “incite violence” it’s kind of odd that you didn’t actually use the entire quote where you unequivocally incited violence - try harder Mo because your filing is limp-low-energy insurrectionist propaganda. Because in Brooks’ motion he fails to provide the full text and content of his speech. I took the liberty of ensuring this never gets forgotten.

Mo Brooks Overt Acts…

In Brook’s Motion to Certify - he is strenuously arguing at that “he was acting at all relevant times” in his Official capacity as a Member of Congress. Brooks then rattles off pretty weak counter arguments. Brooks went as far as to say:

• government issued twitter account,

• his House office space,

• the government issued electronics

• White House pressured him into the know infamous Ellipse speech

• On January 5, 2021 the White House called Brooks…He was given direction and instructions on what his speech would include — note “an agreement was made”

The full transcript to Brook’s Jan 6th speech is incredibly problematic. For Example; he repeatedly uses footnotes to “edit and re-edit” what he actually said. The conjunctive/linkage words emphasized how “all in” Brooks was/is with Trump’s Big Lie. What’s telling —Brooks is arguing with semantics. Meaning on one hand he does ever explicitly state/use/invoke “fight”

Mo - pity the Office of Congressional Ethics opted to not investigate you & Gosar

But your footnotes in your Motion - super unavailing. Because the full transcript of your Jan6th speech —the depths of deep stupid reached a new level of incitement. Irrespective of how you’re aggressively trying to rewrite your own betrayal of the Oath you took. Mo take a moment and then go fix that badly damaged and insecure soul of yours. One can only conclude that you cleaving yourself to the disgrace former president (nope I’m never going to capitalize the “p” when it comes to Trump’s presidency) is your golden ticket to the senate. It’s not and it’s disgraceful.

Come on Mo - you and your attorney can do far better than this drivel - because your filing took great pains to contort the words in your speech —yet you failed to calculate the after effects of making such provocative and dangerous prognostications in your Jan6th speech. On one hand your footnotes state “today is really tomorrow and tomorrow is tomorrow” but you actually closed you rancid festering word salad with this…

And Mo your copious non sequiturs - shall henceforth be known as “your honor what I actually meant isn’t what I said” Your desperation is delightful. Your ignorance of the law, is like a chef’s kiss. Yet your flagrant violation of your oath of office to our constitution - is vulgar and an a-front to our Democracy

Taking Names & Kicking Ass y’all better “Get 'er Done”

Apparently Brooks’ way of providing inspiration to the downtrodden and beleaguered MAGA QANON. “today is the day American Patriots start taking down names and kicking ass” I am certain that yes feeding red meat to the MAGA-QANON crew after you, Trump, Giuliani and a handful of conspiracy theory nut jobs,

In what God’s green earth do real Patriotic Americans think, ransacking the Capitol, injuring 140+ Law Enforcement Officers, chanting “hang Mike Pence” or defecating in the Speaker’s chamber or taking a piss in the house Minority leader office - some how patriotic. Spoiler it’s not. It’s barbaric and incredibly distasteful and dare I say simple minded.

In some respects naturally everyone is entitled to their opinion, judgement and feelings. What’s nit up for negotiations is the Trump Big Lie. But the mendacity of a current seated member of Congress once again going to the mat to defend Trump’s deadly big lie. I genuinely wonder if Kevin “QAnon” McCarthy has a conscious or has he

Seriously Mo - when you took the oath of Office you swore to “protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic” -you copious tweets were slapped by Twitter as False or Misleading Information
November 27, 2020 Tweet Archived

January 6, 2021 Tweet Archived

And Mo - facts are facts

perhaps you think your motion to certify is the gateway to unlock your next step in your litigation strategy -that being the protections afforded to members of Congress by way of the “speech and debate clause”

Alabamians Charged and/or Indicted;

Interestingly enough there’s a rather curious Statement/Disclosure made by Brooks in his Motion to Certify - I now refer to page 24. Mo are you sure about this statement? No really I want you to think hard about your statement and then I want you to close your eyes and imagine what discovery will be like for you

• Dillon Colby Herrington, 29, of Madison, Alabama was charged (on June 3, 2021) with federal offenses that include forcibly assaulting, resisting, opposing or interfering with law enforcement; disorderly conduct on restricted grounds; and engaging in physical violence on grounds of the Capitol building. Herrington made his initial court appearance in the Northern District of Alabama this afternoon.
  Herrington Complaint & Affidavit

• Oath Keepers Joshua James - Remember that time someone was like “oh you planned to float supplies down the Potomac River” which is why when the SR1 was handed down I decided to do a deep dive of various “camp grounds in close proximity of the Potomac River.

• Lonnie Coffman - indicted on 17 charges following the seizure of nearly a dozen Molotov cocktail explosive devices from his pickup truck, as well as multiple guns, ammo and handwritten notes that included a “kill list” Coffman - Affidavit in Support, Coffman - Criminal Complaint andCoffman - Indictment

• Joshua Matthew Black aka “LetsUsTalk” pity that YouTube took down your two marginally insane videos. Arrested in Northern Alabama on 1/14/2021.nDetention, preliminary, and identity hearings on 1/20/21 at 2:30pm. Indicted 2/17/21 and arraigned 3/19/21 where he pleaded not guilty to counts 1-8. Status Conference is set for 6/18/2021 at 10:00 AM. Black - Complaint, Black - Affidavit in Support and Black Indictment

• Phillip Andrew Bromley - provided a nearly two minute long video, “4:26 p.m. Near Capitol” -he recounted what he saw, said and did. In the video interview Bromley stated he was standing about eight feet behind Ashli Babbitt as she was shot by US Capitol Police. Bromley - Complaint & Affidavit and Bromley - Information

• Russell Alford. He was very upset that I managed to capture his Facebook post before he had a chance to delete what certainly appeared to be an escalation and overt calls for violence. He was very mad at me. And let me know how mad he was both on the substack article and the YouTube video. Alford Complaint, Alford Information and Alford Statement of Facts

• William Wright Watson -who was pictured standing with the self identify QANON-Shaman (Jacob Chansley is currently undergoing a mental health evaluation to see if he’s competent to stand trial) - in July 2020 Lee County AL Court records indicated that Watson was arrested on several drug charges, specifically drug trafficking charges for LSD & pot. After his Jan6th Criminal Complaint - Lee County Prosectors moved to have Watson’s $103,000 bond in a drug trafficking case, revoked. He remains in custody. See DOJ - page 5 of affidavit specifically paragraph 11 Watson - Complaint & Affidavit

• Kari Dawn Kelley - Arrested 2/26 and initial appearance held the same day, Charged via criminal information 3/10. Arraigned 3/18 and pleaded not guilty to all counts. Status conference scheduled for 7/29 at 3 pm. Defendant remains on personal recognizance. Kelly - Complaint, Kelly - Affadavit and Martin Quick Quick Kelly - Information

I didn’t incite violence

Come on Mo - the “kicking ass” I’ll give you half a star for your clever argument concerning the semantics of this colloquial indium -but let’s look at how various dictionaries define your “kicking ass” idiom

Exhibit A - verb, rude slang “To physically attack one; to beat one up. In this usage, a possessive noun or pronoun is usedbetween "kick" and "ass."

Exhibit B -adjective Slang. “…strikingly or overwhelmingly tough, aggressive, powerful, or effective..” (technically in the context of your speech this was an adverb)

Exhibit C - as an adjective (but again you used it as an adverb) “people or things that they think are tough or aggressive.“

So while yes you could argue you didn’t use the word “fighting” but the fact is yes you did - in the full transcript of your speech (of which you included in your motion to certify- you used the word “fight” and iteration of that word some 16+ times. That’s according to the word search I ran on your transcript.

Mo Brooks Mo’problems -how’s your fund raising going Mo?

Past Articles concerning Mo “start kicking Ass” Brooks can be found here, here and most recently (admittedly my favorite article because I went there) found here.

Also if one of my reader would be ever so kind to Tweet at Mo Brooks - careful Mo - Discovery could be bad, very bad and forget about deleting your WhatsApp & Signal Chats with Ali Alexander and Amy Kramer (obtained a permit by the park service)

M Brooks Motion to Dismiss or be dismissed from Swalwell v Trump:

MINUTE ORDER. The United States and Plaintiffs shall respond by July 27, 2021, to 20 Defendant Mo Brooks' Petition to Certify He Was Acting Within the Scope of his Office or Employment. Defendant Brooks may file a reply by AugustM10, 2021. The clerk of court shall serve a copy of this Minute Order and a copy of Defendant's Motion on the head of the Civil Division for the U.S. Attorney'sOffice for the District of Columbia.

DDC - Docket Report July 5, 2021

MINUTE ORDER denying 19 Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment Against Defendant Mo Brooks. By virtue of filing his Petition to Certify, Defendant Brooks cannot be considered "an essentially unresponsive party," and strong policy reasons favor resolution of disputes on their merit…

Other relevant Court filings:

MOTION to Certify Defendant Mo Brooks was Acting Within the Scope of his Office or Employment by MO BROOKS. "Let this be filed" Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 7/2/2021 - https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04508625001

July 1, 2021 - MOTION for Default Judgment as to Defendant MO BROOKS by ERIC SWALWELL - DDC-ECF https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04508622719 or via my public drive

Defendant Brooks was served with the summons and complaint on June 6, 2021 “at [his] dwelling or usual place of abode with someone of suitable age and discretion who resides there.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(2)(B).

Page 2 of July 1, 2021 Motion for Default Judgment re Rep Mo Brooks

The affidavit of service was filed on June 8. ECF Dk. No. 18. Under the federal rules, Brooks was required to serve his response within 21 days of service of the complaint, in this case no later than June 27, 2021. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i). To date, Brooks has not done so.

And with that I think you’re sufficiently debriefed on this case. Isn’t this how normal people spend their lunch time? (Full disclosure I wrote the body of this article on July 3rd & 4th, respectively - today I merely tightened up the language and citations) - Filey

ps on Page 23 of Mo Brooks’ Motion to Certify he actually proffered an audacious narrative - frankly Brooks’ arguments strain credulity and are incredibly difficult to take at face value

Let’s roll the tape of Trump & Violence…

pps - I created a public folder entitled Swalwell v Trump and I dumped a bunch of court filings in that folder or you can pay for each filing via DDC-ECF

What to look for next? July 27th the Court Ordered the Government to respond to Brooks’ Motion to Certify (Document No 20)

and because I don’t traffic in disinformation or misinformation 👇🏻

1. Rep Eric Swalwell v Trump et al (including Rep Mo Brooks) - https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/doc1/04508369431

2. Rep Thompson & NAACP Complaint utilizing the Klu Klux Klan Act -https://file411.substack.com/p/trump-mr-giuliani-proud-boys-international