For more serious coverage of the Gretchen Whitmer Kidnapping Entrapment Scheme, I’d suggest starting here on National-Justice. The long and short of it is that the accused didn’t even know what the plot they were supposedly a part of was, and to the extent they did know, they were not down for it.

Yahoo News:

Federal prosecutors on Friday said that they would not call on a key FBI agent to testify at the upcoming trial of five men accused of conspiring to kidnap Michigan’s governor. He is the third agent from the case conspicuously missing from government witness lists.

Henrik Impola was one of two special agents handling a confidential informant who made hundreds of hours of secret recordings during the probe. Last summer, defense attorneys noted in court that Impola had been accused of perjury in a prior case and asserted he “has had trouble telling the truth under oath.”

I’m starting to think I may have missed my career as a lawyer. Imagine getting to write “he has trouble telling the truth under oath,” about some pervert FBI agent.

Although prosecutors said the allegations were “unfounded” and that a separate court “made no finding of misconduct,” they said in a new filing that the government did not intend to use Impola’s testimony at the trial beginning March 8. The Justice Department had previously announced that the other agent who handled that informant, Jayson Chambers, would not be testifying either. That news came just five days after BuzzFeed News revealed that while working for the FBI, Chambers had incorporated a private security firm linked to an internet troll.

Ty Garbin, the one who agreed to testify against the others.

The allegations are ridiculous. Utterly absurd. But also, for absolutely no reason, the FBI doesn’t want to use Impola’s testimony for fear of him getting absolutely shredded upon cross-examination.

A third agent, Richard Trask, who had served as the case’s public face, will also not be coming to the stand because he was fired in the wake of an alleged assault on his wife after a swingers’ party.

It’s actually way worse than that. FBI creep Trask beat his wife because she refused to have sex with another man at a Swinger’s party.

It takes a special kind of person to be an FBI agent doesn’t it?

Prosecutors, however, dismissed the suggestions from defendants that these incidents had undermined the case, calling them “irrelevant collateral issues.”

Richard Trask, the wife beating cuckold.

The difference between apolitical trials and political trials is important to understand. It might be true that the FBI agent who set up the entire scheme beating his wife doesn’t matter legally, but it sure does matter politically. The FBI is a political police force. The harder you hammer home what vicious clowns they are, the more likely you are to win your case.

The government claims that the five men facing federal trial — Barry Croft, Kaleb Franks, Daniel Harris, Adam Fox, and Brandon Caserta — plotted during the spring, summer, and early fall of 2020 to “snatch” Gov. Gretchen Whitmer from her lakeside Michigan vacation home and potentially spirit her out of the state. The defendants argue that they were entrapped and that Chambers and Impola, through the use of multiple informants and undercover agents, directed much of the action in the plot and badgered the alleged conspirators into doing things that appeared incriminating.

Eight other men face trial in Michigan state court on related charges. A hearing is scheduled for Monday in Jackson County court to hear entrapment claims from three of them.

Also on Friday, Assistant US Attorney Nils Kessler wrote in a filing that such evidence should not be allowed in court. “Admitting these statements would permit the defendants to effectively testify without being subject to cross-examination,” the lead prosecutor in the case wrote.

In another filing, the government argued that it should be allowed to admit evidence of the defendants’ prior criminal record in unrelated cases, claiming that it would help “show they were predisposed to commit” the offenses alleged in the case.

In case you didn’t get that. The FBI doesn’t want to allow these defendants the right to introduce their own texts as evidence, because then they don’t have to testify and be cross-examined by the FBI. However, they also want to put in the defendants prior criminal record, just to bias the jury against them.

I hope everyone can see this behaviour, and understand why, legally important or not, bringing up that the most important FBI agent in this case is a literal wife beating cuckold is very important.

The prosecutor also took time to discuss allegations that special agent Chambers might have been trying to use the Whitmer investigation to promote his private security business, Exeintel. “The defendants have produced no evidence,” Kessler wrote, “showing SA Chambers had a financial stake in the outcome of this case.” He added that Chambers left Exeintel “without ever making a deal with a client or deriving any financial benefit.”

He also blasted the defense attorneys for trying to introduce information about the agents, calling it a ploy to “shift the focus away” from the defendant’s wrongdoing and “persuade the jury to punish the FBI for perceived personal or policy infractions, or political opinions, instead.”

“The information is of marginal relevance at best and invites the jury to decide the case on improper grounds,” Kessler continued. “Specifically, the defendants hope to capitalize on disinformation painting the FBI as a corrupt ‘deep state’ institution.”

The FBI’s position here is that them introducing utterly irrelevant criminal history for one of the members, a minor burglary and gun possession charges from the 90’s, is good and great. However, these fucking uppity peasants daring point out the FBI agent Richard Trask was beating his wife at swinger parties during this same time interval is awful and completely uncalled for.

Good, them being angry means you did something right. Do it more.

Unlike the incredibly boring Mossad Maxwell trial, where all the interesting bits were ruled “too sensational,” to be allowed at trial, this case is far more interesting, for a myriad of reasons. We will be covering this case closely as it unfolds.

You may also like

1 Comment

  1. […] interpretations of laws to convict people. We saw that with the Proud Boys in the Gretchen Whitmer case, and a similar story with the Rise Above Movement guys years before the existence of this site. […]

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in Activism