By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell book
BBC - Honduras - CIA Trial book - NY Mag
EDNY MEDIA ROOM, Oct 28 – Thomas Barrack and Matthew Grimes, indicted for illegal lobbying for the United Arab Emirates, were arraigned on July 26, 2021 before U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York Magistrate Judge Sanket Bulsara. Inner City Press live tweeted it here (and podcast here)
On October 28, after the charging conference, the US Attorney's Office filed a letter including the names to be added, and more: "Dear Judge Cogan: The government writes to provide the Court with the information requested at the charging conference that was held today. A. Names to Add to Indictment Language for Counts Six through Nine The government respectfully requests that the Court replace the anonymized identifiers in the quoted indictment language at pages 49 to 50 of the proposed charge, with the actual names of the individuals. The requested changes are as follows: Identifier to Replace True Name to Add Location in Charge Emirati Official 1 Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed bin Sultan Al-Nahyan (“MBZ”) Page 49, Lines 16, 31, 33 Page 50, Lines 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 18, 20, 21, and 23 Emirati Official 2 Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al-Nahyan Page 49, Lines 16, 32, 34 Page 50, Lines 2, 3-4, 6, 8, 9 Emirati Official 4 Khalifa Al Ghafli Page 49, Line 15 U.S. Person 2 Stephen Bannon Page 50, Lines 18, 19, 21, 22 ." Full letter on Patreon here.
Prevous full 14 page letter on Patreon here.
On October 21, the defense called as a witness Brady Cassis, an associate at Paul Hasting in DC. He was present and took laptop notes at the June 20, 2019 DOJ interview of Barrack. But the US immediately opposed admission of the notes that he took. Judge Brian M. Cogan sent the jurors to the jury room in order to hear argument.
At 3:10 pm, more of Cassis' notes were shown, about Bannon's relationship with MBZ and "Erik Prince / Blackwater;" and a flight to the Middle East including "the actor Rob Lowe." Watch this site.
Order on Patreon here.
US filing on Patreon here.
On FARA, full order on Patreon here.
Analysis: Because of the possibility of (success) appeal to any conviction under Section 951, on a claim that the jurors confused it with FARA, the attempt is made to keep FARA out of testimony as much as possible. But what about the jury instructions? Watch this site.
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.
Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
