In April President Trump requested the Clinton-appointed judge overseeing his Russiagate case against Hillary Clinton and others be removed from the case due to obvious conflicts of interest.
President Trump earlier had sued a number of individuals and former officials for their actions related to the Russiagate hoax and attempted coup of his administration.
Somehow this case was assigned to Clinton-appointed Judge Donald Middlebrooks and Judge Ryon McCabe.
Judge Donald Middlebrooks was appointed by Bill Clinton to the Southern District of Florida in May 1997.
President Trump urged the courts to replace the Clinton judge with someone who is not biased in the case.
Judge Ryon McCabe later recused himself from the case.
But Judge Donald Middlebrooks will not recuse himself from the case.
Judge Donald Middlebrooks then announced he will deny President Trump’s motion to remove Judge Middlebrooks from the case.
— kagbro88 (@kagbro88) April 7, 2022
This is how our judicial system works today. If you’re a Republican you get screwed.
Here is Judge Middlebrooks’ statement.
On Friday, Judge Donald Middlebrooks DISMISSED President Trump’s lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and several FBI-DOJ crooks who manufactured the Russia Collusion hoax to influence the 2016 election and then to bring down his presidency in a government coup.
Judge Middlebrooks also threatened Trump’s attorneys with “consequences” for daring to file the case against Hillary Clinton.
In dismissing former President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against his 2016 presidential opponent Hillary Clinton, a Florida judge said on Friday that Trump’s lawyers could face consequences for the claims and legal contentions they made in the suit.
On Friday, Florida District Court Judge Donald Middlebrooks dismissed Trump’s lawsuit against Clinton, which was filed in March alleging that Clinton accused him of colluding with Russia prior to the 2016 presidential election.
The ruling dismissing the suit said that Trump’s complaint “is neither short nor plain, and it certainly does not establish that [Trump] is entitled to any relief.”
“The amended complaint alleges that the defendants ‘engaged in a calculated scheme to defraud the news media, law enforcement, and counterintelligence officials for the purpose of proliferating a false narrative of collusion between Trump and Russia,'” Middlebrooks said in the ruling.
In the ruling, Middlebrooks said he felt the claims brought by Trump and his lawyers were not “warranted under the law.”
“In presenting a pleading, an attorney certifies that it is not being presented for any improper purpose; that the claims are warranted under the law; and that the factual contentions have evidentiary support…By filing the amended complaint, plaintiff’s lawyers certified to the court that, to the best of their knowledge, ‘the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law,” and that “the factual contentions have evidentiary support.'”
“I have serious doubts about whether that standard is met here,” Middlebrooks added.