John Eastman, FBI -search and seizure warrant. See Case No 1:22-mc-00023 -updated Cassidy Hutchinson info

This is by far one of the weakest motions and we are talking about Seditious Conspiracy, overt attempts to obstruct an official proceeding and aiding and abetting but Eastman’s Motion is HILARIOUS

Editorial Note: this article has been updated to include the previously published April 2022 article concerning several witnesses and deposition excerpts in the April 2022 Filing in Meadows v Pelosi. (As in we’ve had a preview of Cassidy Hutchinson since April 2022) provided that you actually read the Court filing. The update to this article us locates at the bottom of this article and a belated hattip to my reader ❤️El Caballero ❤️-who brought the witnesses to my attention. You can’t argue with me, I do in fact have the best readers and I very much value their input…

---

I was really and I mean really planning on taking a few more days off from Substack. So when news broke this evening that the FBI seized Eastman’s cell phone, it was enough to bring me out of the self imposed cone of silence.

Basic Facts of a search warrant…

To those who are unaware —below are the basic and I mean basic facts as it relates to a Federal Search Warrant —keep in mind when the “target” is a high profile attorney (cough remember Michael Cohen’s search warrant) typically the DOJ requires the Attorney General, Assistant Attorney General(s) and the actual US Attorney to be fully briefed.

• An affidavit is submitted with a search and seizure warrant

• The warrant itself aggregates the alleged (federal) crime,

  • Additionally sometimes the warrant includes the use of biometrics to allow FBI agents to unlock the targets phone

  • The target device will have fruits of said crime

• An Article III Judge, independently affirms there’s “probable cause” and then authorizes the search (and seizure) warrant

• Search Warrants are required to be particularized —in general SCOTUS has long held that search and seizure warrants can not be over generalized. Meaning it requires a specific federal crime and that the warrant for electronic devices will likely have fruits of said crime.

• Because the Attorney Client privilege and Constitutional rights (afforded to all of us) Eastman fails to articulate that the search warrant is strictly for the various electronics, but a separate warrant will be issued for the contents of his devices.

• Filter Team, Conflicts, Taint Team -essentially bifurcates the investigators from impermissibly reading the contents of said electronics. Thus giving Eastman plenty of Opportunity to argue due process, fifth amendment, eight amendment rights -writ large-

Nearly 99.999% of the time the search warrants are under seal, for obvious reasons. But what you should know about seizing an mobile phone, this opens the Dante’s Inferno gates to forensic data hell. And that hell mainly for the target. Off the top of my head, below is a general list of what kind of data on a seized cell phone:

• Time, Date think Geolocation

• Apps used -think WhatsApp, Signal and other encrypted messaging apps

• SMS, Text Messages, iMessage, voicemail messages etc

• Emails, Drafts, sent/received

• Contact list, calls/sent received in contact list

• Phone calls made/received, length of call, cell tower used, etc

As previously mentioned a vast majority of the time search and seized warrants remain sealed. But the Court typically unseals based on an oral or written motion by the Government. Earlier today John Eastman filed a motion in Federal New Mexico District Court.

See Case No - 1:22-mc-00023 via ECF

• Motion via ECF or via Scribd

• Exhibit via ECF or via Scribd

…Court to order the return of property seized during the execution of a warrant on movant’s person…LLOLs

Oh you think I’m over exaggerating Eastman’s June 27, 2022 filing? I can assure you that NOPE - I mean I suppose we should thank John Eastman for filing this nonsense motion. Right off the bat and I know that some will overlook this but this is kind of important —do you see what I’ve bolded and redlined and highlighted? Well this tells me that the DOJ/FBI has not only eyes on Eastman but they were likely tracking his travel.

…evening of June 22, 2022, federal agents served a search warrant (Exhibit 1) on movant while movant was exiting a restaurant. Movant asked to see the warrant, but the executing officer refused. Movant was frisked. Movant’s phone—an iPhone Pro 12—was seized. (emphasis added)

…Oh Department of Justice-Office of Inspector General..

If anyone tells you “they saw this coming” I can tell you that said person is full of malarkey because even I did not have the DOJ-OIG on my John Eastman Bingo card…

The federal agents identified themselves as FBI agents, but they appeared to be executing a warrant issued at the behest of the Department of Justice’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG). See Ex. 1 (noting that after seizure, the phone is to be transported “to Washington, D.C., or to the DOJ-OIG forensic laboratory in Northern Virginia”).

..The warrant’s authorization to seize “all information in such devices”…

To be clear production of an affidavit when executing a court authorized search and seizure warrant isn’t actually a requirement and Eastman’s argument stating the opposite is just sad and freaking hilariously bad…additionally Eastman’s arguments that he’s never worked for the DOJ-OIG ←not at all persuasive and I think if you genuinely believe I’m off the mark about Jeffrey Clark —I regret to inform you that I’m not

…without the particularity described in the affidavit or other information relied upon by the magistrate judge, the warrant improperly limits movant’s ability to demonstrate his aggrieved position as to the unlawful search and seizure of his property. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(d). By failing to provide the affidavit or other information, it shows an intent by the Government to prevent movant from developing his challenges to the warrant as an aggrieved party. Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g). This omission prejudices movant’s ability to demonstrate the irreparable harm, particularly where there is no pending matter to formally file a challenge to the search warrant.

I mean I can’t stop laughing because I’m fairly confident a freaking first year law student could make far more compelling arguments that John Eastman is attempting to make. But ProTip if you are arguing in XYZ Federal District Court you typically do not use cases from ABC Federal District Court —the only general exemption is if there isn’t an previous case law —but the fact that Eastman is citing cases on DDC, NDCA, EDVA and 9thCCOAs and 11th CCOAs that actually tells me: 1) he either can’t afford WestLaw, 2) there isn’t any such case in the NMDC, 3) that cherry picking from previously SCOTUS rulings but failing to cite superseding rulings ←that’s just sad and deliciously hilarious.

The warrant does not even mention, much less describe with specificity, any particular crime for which evidence sought by the warrant might be relevant, or include any information linking movant’s devices or the information contained therein to any such crime, or even that said devices were likely to exist or be on movant’s person.

I mean on page 9 -Eastman does a quasi decent job arguing his fifth amendment rights but that does nor ameliorate the infirmities of his total argument. To be clear what Eastman is doing here is he’s playing semantics, for example:

• copy versus “actual warrant and affidavit”

• “In the context of biometrics, compelled use of facial recognition is testimonial because it reveals (a) that the subject has unlocked the phone previously and (b) that the subject exercises some degree of control over the phone” now that’s just adorable because even in Eastman’s filing he concedes that the search warrant actually authorized the use of biometrics to unlock his cell phone

• Cough filter team John, filter team because you can’t cloak yourself in the ubiquitous “attorney client privilege and work product doctrine” because my retort is: crime fraud exemption and sedition has consequences

As previously mentioned I guess we should all say: THANK YOU JOHN because he was kind enough to attach the search warrant as Exhibit-1 (see ECF or Scribd) also to the uniformed Blue QANON who have relentlessly attacked and criticized the FBI and more broadly the DOJ y’all need a big gulp of STFU Juice.

Also take note of the date on the warrant, it was approved by the Magistrate Judge on June 17, 2022 at 11:33AM… because that can help better contextualize what might have been in the affidavit —conversely the HSCJ6 hearings might not have at all factored in… but then again remind me why the June 15th hearing was postponed… but meh whadda I know… (inset migraine inducing eyeroll)

Again you don’t have to agree with me —typically the execution of a search and seizure warrant by the FBI isn’t filmed. But I do find it odd that Eastman turned to the QANON-Mothership aka Fox “News” to which Tucker has the FBI video running on loop…but in Eastman’s Declaration he gives us a few previously unknown facts. For Example: 6 FBI Agents, “leaving a restaurant with my wife and friend” ←I guess we know who filmed the execution of the search warrant in New Mexico, but item # 7 is pretty intriguing to me. Not Eastman’s argue per say but “the attorney client privilege and work product doctrine” —WHY? Well a Federal Judge literally stated:

The Court first analyzes whether President Trump and Dr. Eastman likely committed any of the crimes alleged by the Select Committee, and then whether the eleven remaining documents relate to and further those crimes.

So it is a rather curious statement by Eastman (see ECF or via Scribd)

Reminder of June 15th & June 16th…

And now you might be wondering why I’m specifically pointing out the date and time of the search warrant ( not the date it was executed) but the date the Court approved it. Because what happened on June 16, 2022? See HSCJ6 YouTube hearing also see my previous article concerning Judge Luttig -I’m still pretty angry at the Blue QANON-sense disrespectful and disgusting criticism of Judge Luttig —again at the time I noted that the June 15th hearing postponement didn’t actually make sense —given the phenomenal job the HSCJ6 support staff has done with the multimedia presentation. I specifically said to my readers, this doesn’t add up so keep an eye on Jeffrey Clark and John Eastman. When I tell you that I gamed this out on a murder board that’s because I’ve run the plays at least 11 times and to me the only logical explanation was the DOJ picked up the phone and called the HSCJ6 hence why the June 15th hearing was unceremoniously postponed.

Again if I tell you that some of us truly know how DC, specifically Congress and the Judicial system works (not the bullshit fictionalization Hollywood scripts) but how things really do work. That’s me telling you that the “excuse” didn’t pass the sniff test but I also didn’t want to potentially report misinformation so I waited and if it requires me to produce various text messages to prove: I said what I said —then I’m happy to do that too but I think my track record is pretty long and strong (at least that’s not something I will ever take for granted)…

The fraudulent canonization of Mike Pence et al & Senior Trump/Pence staffers…UPDATED with June 16th DOJ Court Filing

…and if you’re paying attention to the “dots” then I’d like to remind you that the Eastman seizure warrant (not to be confused with a search and seizure warrant) occurred near the same day the FBI executed a lawful search and seizure warrant, the fact that Jeffrey Clark was standing outside his Lorton VA home in his PJs. Whispers there was an Easter Egg hidden in the June 23, 2022 article too

Again you can pull down Eastman’s recent Court filing via my Scribd account or you can spend the $2.70 via NMED-ECF and now that I believe you are fully caught up to speed —I bid you goodbye for a few days…

And lastly your daily saltwater therapy —but as I said I’m taking a few days off because I’m not in a good head space and my workload intensified this week because I think my employer really wants me to terminate my contract (whispers there’s an evergreen clause in that contract that they’ve triggered for 13+ years) because apparently they think I’m a cyborg and that I can simultaneously do the work of several people. I’m not a cyborg but as I mentioned last week —I really need to take a few days off from writing on Substack. Also the burn specialist prescribed me silicone strips (I made my spouse refill my empty La Mer) and I can’t believe how quickly these strips healed the second degree burns… like unicorn magic less than 24 hours of using these silicone sheets the blisters are now all but gone. Woot!

file411_dc

A post shared by File411 (@file411_dc)

PS the chances of Eastman prevailing on his Motion —not at all high or likely. Also if you don’t know by now the HSCJ6 announced a NEW hearing (for tomorrow) the fact that there are security concerns for tomorrow’s witness is slightly unnerving but then again nearly every member of the HSCJ6 have received numerous death threats. I can not think of anything more antithetical to the real American values like threatening the lives of law makers and their families. IT. IS. UNAMERICAN and criminal AF.

January 6th Committee @January6thCmte

The Select Committee will convene a hearing tomorrow, June 28 at 1:00pm to present recently obtained evidence and receive witness testimony.

january6th.house.gov06/28/2022 Select Committee Hearing

Updated June 27, 2022 at 11:26PM-DC Local time

---

If the recent public reporting is correct that Tomorrow’s HSCJ6’s witness will be Cassidy Hutchinson (big hat tip to El Caballero who posted a comment and provided the tweet) —say what you want about me, but I’ve never engaged in plagiarism nor forgotten to properly attribute. Because the actual professionals in my industry, drill those two points over and over. Ethics and Appreciation are not always mutually exclusive…

HSCJ6 June 27, 2022 Hearing & Witnesses

GOOD NEWS —in April of 2022 I actually wrote about Cassidy Hutchinson’s Depo excepts…specifically the HSCJ6 filing specifically cited numerous excerpts from her deposition… I would recommend that you reread that April 2022 article -specifically pages 40 thru 59 of the HSCJ6 filing which explicit cite several excerpts of depos… or not, I’m not the boss of you (yet)..

...Cassidy Hutchinson is an American Patriot…

Based in part of the Deposition of Cassidy Hutchinson —who specifically told the HSCJ6 had personally informed Mark Meadows about the “threat of violence” on Jan6th —importantly here the testimony also indicated she had no way to know what Meadows did with that intelligence or did he just ignore it…notwithstanding Hutchinson did testify to the following facts…

also Click here to view the Select Committee’s April 22, 2022 filing…

Speaker Pelosi’s 248 pages of surgically precise unbridled upbraiding of Meadows et al…Sedition has consequences Mark & Phil

Incidentally let’s say that Alex Holder “might” (operative word) also be a witness for the HSCJ6 June 28, 2022 Hearing —it is really interesting that the HSCJ6 published the Meeting Notice at 1PM today (see House Doc Repository link) As you’ll note there is no disclosure of who the witnesses will be. However I can not think of anything more unAmerican that making “death threats:” to a Committee Member, to Witnesses (and their families) —to those who are engaging in that disgusting behavior. Those engaging this kind of criminal behavior should be thought of as “domestic terrorist” and/or aiding and abetting a seditious conspiracy. ←yes that’s me saying that Donald J Trump’s fully indoctrinated MAGA Cult members were fully radicalized by Trump. And they should be viewed as domestic terrorist. I can’t think of any other way to describe Trump’s radicalization of his followers, can you?

And if you think I’m being hyperbolic with just how unAmerican Donald J Trump’s MAGA-Domestic Terrorist are, documentarian Alex Holder now has a security detail assigned to him. More broadly the recent UK Based The Independent article quotes Holder his interview with @EricTrump, who incidentally deleted this January 6, 2021 Tweet:

“Eric Trump felt that violence would be justified….When I asked Eric about the potential danger of sort of rhetoric and the sort of the belligerence, he felt that it was… fair game in that it… was sort of the equivalent on the other side of the political discourse,” Holder said, “or he felt that it was the right thing to do… because the election was stolen.”

Understand that if you commit a crime, then you should be charged with: Witness Intimidation (18 U.S.C. §1512), Obstructing of an Official Proceeding (18 U.S.C. §1505), using Interstate Commerce to transmit said threat (18 U.S.C.§ 875, and §876. Also see 18 U.S.C. §115 -Influencing, impeding, or retaliating against a Federal official by threatening or injuring a family member.

Aren’t you glad I updated this article? Snort -me mainly laughing at my spicy self