Flynndication

The Justice Department is dropping the criminal case against Lt General Michael Flynn.
The presiding judge (Judge Sullivan) has agreed.

We have Sidney Powell (Flynn’s most recent attorney), the FISC (the FISA court), and Jeff Jensen (U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri) to credit for this. (edit: and Judicial Watch of course)

Following revelations of widespread abuse of the FISA (foreign intelligence surveillance act) process by the Obama adminstration and Obama-holdovers in the Trump administration to spy on the Trump campaign/transition/administration, the FISC ordered (court order) the DOJ to review the relevant cases. This led to US Attorney Jeff Jensen to be appointed to review the Flynn case, and he managed to pry some documents from the DOJ/FBI that Sidney Powell had been asking for for a long long time (and had been told by the prosecutors did not exist).

I have mixed feelings about the case being dropped.
General Flynn has reportedly spent over $6M in legal fees, and needs to get on with his life.
On the other hand, there’s still a lot of DOJ/FBI wrongdoing hidden behind the curtain which now will likely never be exposed.
Comey sent agents to interview General Flynn, despite not having a legitimate reason to so do. When the FBI interviews someone, they complete a form (“302”). In Flynn’s case, the 302 was completed by FBI agent Joe Plientka and re-written long after the event by a different FBI agent Peter Strzok. We have yet to see the original 302, which reportedly said the agents did not think General Flynn lied to them. The rewritten 302 said that the agents did think that General Flynn lied.
If the case had continued, Sidney Powell might have finally been able to pry that original 302 from the FBI/DOJ. Not to mention the prospect of many of the bad actors (Comey, Plientka, Strozk, McCabe, Eric Holder, and maybe even Obama) being shredded on the witness stand by Ms Powell.

If the name Sidney Powell sounds familiar, she was the attorney wbo vindicated Arthur Anderson in the Supreme Court. (Arthur Anderson had been the world’s largest accounting firm and was convicted of wrongdoing in the Enron collapse. Arthur Anderson went bankrupt as a result putting 200k Americans out of work). The Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that Arthur Anderson had not in fact committed a crime. Ms Powell wrote a best-selling book (“Licensed to Lie”) about the Enron case, and many of the bad actors in that case (eg Andrew Weissman) went on to join the Mueller special counsel team

A lot of people in the DOJ/FBI did a lot of very bad things in the Flynn case, for example lying to the court, and I hope AG Barr will clean house.

And I sincerely hope that President Trump can find a place for General Flynn in his administration. We had two disastrous National Security Advisors following General Flynn’s resignation, the deep-state plant McMaster and the warmonger Bolton.

Some background: during the Transition, as part of his job, General Flynn made a series of phone calls to various ambassadors including then-Russian ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak. Why a series? playing phone tag and trying to get hold of the people involved.
At the time, the US had sanctions (put in place by Congress) against Russia as a result of the annexation of the Crimea, and lesser punitive measures that had just been put in place by Obama as a result of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 US election. During the phone call between Flynn and the Russian ambassador (which was spied on by the Obama adminsitration and illegally leaked to the media by James Baker at the office of net assessment in the DoD), the conversation touched on the more recent punitive measures but not the Crimean sanctions.

Malicious prosecution. I hope the relevant parties get sued (they won’t because Flynn just wants to move on)

1 Like

as an aside, I stole the thread title from this tweet by Benjamin Wittes who is a friend of Comey and part of the Lawfare gang (Lawfare is a portmanteau of Law and Warfare, meaning exactly what it sounds like, weaponizing the law to destroy your political opponents, just like they did to General Flynn)

I guess pleading guilty doesn’t matter anymore.

I guess the fact that someone they charged hadn’t broken a law doesn’t matter to the FBI/DOJ anymore.
Actually, it hasn’t mattered for a while. See the Arthur Anderson case (overturned 9-0 by SCOTUS) and the NJ bridgegate case (also overturned 9-0 by SCOTUS), both overturned because what the defendants had been charged with and convicted of wasn’t actually a crime.

the FBI agent who interviewed General Flynn (Joe Plientka) did not think that General Flynn lied, but whether General Flynn did or did not is immaterial as the FBI had no basis to interview him.

the citizen’s safety lies in the prosecutor who … seeks truth and not victims,
who serves the law and not factional purposes, and who approaches [the] task with humility.
(snip)
The Government therefore moves to dismiss the criminal information against Mr. Flynn

They dropped the case on Trump’s orders? How is that an exoneration?

Yep, it’s right there in the motion to dismiss:

“Moreover, we not believe that the Government can prove either the relevant false statements ortheir materiality beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Stupid Russian to English translators…

The transcript reads like the a court reading. It’s just all backward.

This is some banana republic type stuff, the Supreme Court should pick the AG to drop the partisanship.

a) the original “302” which is still AWOL supposedly said that the FBI didn’t think there were any false statements
b) we learned this week that it was supposedly a “Logan Act” interview, yet any alleged false statements were allegedly about “Russian collusion,” a different topic therefore not material

the person whose head should be on the block for lying is the prosecutor van Grack who lied to the court repeatedly

And I’ve already explained that this week’s events were at the behest of FISC (the FISA court).
The FISC issued a court order ordering the DOJ/FBI to review the Flynn case (and other cases also)

Following revelations of widespread abuse of the FISA (foreign intelligence surveillance act) process
by the Obama adminstration and Obama-holdovers in the Trump administration to spy
on the Trump campaign/transition/administration, the FISC ordered (court order)
the DOJ to review the relevant cases. This led to US Attorney Jeff Jensen to be appointed
to review the Flynn case, and he managed to pry some documents from the DOJ/FBI that
Sidney Powell had been asking for for a long long time
(and had been told by the prosecutors did not exist).

US Attorney Jeffrey Jensen has worked for the FBI and DOJ for over 22 years,

Obama’s “wingman,” former AG Eric Holder has been in the Flynn news for two reasons.

(i) Holder is a partner in General Flynn’s orginal lawfirm (Covington) which is alleged to have done bad things

(ii) (from Jonathon Turley), During the Obama administration, Senator Ted Stevens (R, AK) was convicted of corruption before the same judge (Sullivan) who heard the Flynn case. After the conviction, but before sentencing, an FBI whistleblower came forward to reveal egregious prosecutorial conduct during the case (including hiding a witness and hiding Brady material), and it culminated in Holder’s DOJ submitting a “Motion of The United States To Set Aside The Verdict And Dismiss The Indictment With Prejudice.” Judge Sullivan agreed, and since this occurred prior to sentencing it had the effect of vacating Stevens’s conviction

#obamagate

1 Like

What is the executive summary of this?
256 characters or less

Flynn didn’t commit a crime. The DOJ/FBI (and the Mueller gang) knew that and charged him anyway.
The DOJ/FBI had no legitimate reason to interview Flynn. At the interview, they tried and failed to set a perjury trap. Flynn didn’t lie but they charged him anyway.
The material which exonerated Flynn was hidden by the DOJ/FBI and released as a result of a review ordered by the FISA court in the wake of the FISA abuse scandal. The FBI/DOJ had previously told Flynn’s (second) attorney Sidney Powell that the material did not exist,
To those who say that it’s unprecedented for the DOJ to drop a case, Obama’s AG Holder dropped a case against Sen. Ted Stevens after the verdict but before sentencing because of DOJ misconduct, which involving hiding evidence which exonerated Sen. Stevens

Flynn’s first law firm (Covington, where former Obama AG Holder is a partner) is suspected of having worked with the DOJ/FBI to railroad their then-client

Most of what you wrote is inaccurate and basically copypasta from Fox News.

It is unprecedented to drop a case when somebody has plead guilty. OFC it is not unprecedented to drop a case over the course of DOJ history.

Obama warned Trump about Flynn way back when.

lol.
Got it, you’re mad as hell (foaming at the mouth mad) that an an innocent man hasn’t been sent to prison for a crime he did not commit. And so is Obama,
And that’s the bottom line: Flynn did not commit a crime.
It would be nice if some of the Dems acknowledged that an innocent man was being railroaded.

Jonathon Turley, whom I referenced ("(ii) (from Jonathon Turley)") works for CBS News, not FoxNews, and he was referencing a report that Obama said, “There is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free,”
Setting aside the issue that Obama misstated the crime with which General Flynn had been charged,
Senator Stevens was found guilty of making false statements, the exact same crime with which Flynn was charged. Like General Flynn, Sen. Stevens did not commit the offense with which he was charged. And the DOJ/FBI knew that when they charged Flynn and they knew that when they charged Stevens.
You appear to be calling Obama a liar. That’s between you and him.

The statement from Obama was strange:
“There is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free,”
I would hope that EVERYONE who is charged with a crime which they did not commit would get off scot-free

As to Obama warning Trump about Flynn, we get it. Obama hated Flynn. Flynn blew the whistle on Obama’s flagship Iran “deal” and on Obama arming Al Qaeda terrorists in Syria, to continue Obama’s other flagship policy of replacing brutal mid-East secular dictators with brutal islamists.

THE COURT: Do you wish to challenge the circumstances on
which you were interviewed by the FBI?
THE DEFENDANT: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you understand that by maintaining your
guilty plea and continuing with sentencing, you will give up your
right forever to challenge the circumstances under which you were
interviewed?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you have any concerns that you entered your
guilty plea before you or your attorneys were able to review
information that could have been helpful to your defense?
THE DEFENDANT: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: At the time of your January 24th, 2017
interview with the FBI, were you not aware that lying to FBI
investigators was a federal crime?
THE DEFENDANT: I was not – I was aware.
THE COURT: You were aware?
THE DEFENDANT: Yeah.
THE COURT: Your sentencing memorandum also states that
you pled guilty before certain, quote, revelations that certain
FBI officials involved in the January the 24th interview were
themselves being investigated for misconduct, end quote. Do you
seek an opportunity to withdraw your plea in light of those
revelations?
THE DEFENDANT: I do not, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Now, again, at any time – I
should have said this before I started asking questions, but
knowing what I was going to do, to have this colloquy with you,
I’ve made arrangements for a private room for you and your
attorneys to talk about any of these questions and your answers.
So, even though I’ve taken a number of answers from you, if you
want – if you want that opportunity to speak privately with your
attorneys, then I’ll certainly afford you that opportunity as
well. Would you like to do that?
THE DEFENDANT: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Are you satisfied with the
services provided by your attorneys?
THE DEFENDANT: I am.
THE COURT: In certain special circumstances, I have over
the years appointed an independent attorney to speak with a
defendant, review the defendant’s file, and conduct necessary
research to render a second opinion for a defendant. Do you want the Court to consider appointing an independent attorney for you in this case to give you a second opinion?
THE DEFENDANT: I do not, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you feel that you were competent and
capable of entering into a guilty plea when you pled guilty on
December 1st, 2017?
THE DEFENDANT: I do, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you understand the nature of the charges
against you and the consequences of pleading guilty?
THE DEFENDANT: I do understand, Your Honor.
THE COURT: And that was covered extensively by Judge
Contreras. I’ve read the transcript.
Are you continuing to accept responsibility for your false
statements?
THE DEFENDANT: I am, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Do you still want to plead guilty, or do you
want me to postpone this matter, give you a chance to speak with
your attorneys further, either in the courtroom or privately at
their office or elsewhere, and pick another day for a status
conference? And I’m happy to do that.
THE DEFENDANT: I appreciate that, but no, Your Honor.

Any yet, Barr and DOJ ignore the guilty plea.

Didn’t Trump or Pence fire him for this?

“I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI. He has pled guilty to those lies. It is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful. There was nothing to hide!”

  • Trump Twitter, 12/2/2017

Flynn pled guilty to committing a crime.

He probably knows better than you do whether he committed a crime or not.

the judge agreed that Gen. Flynn didn’t commit a crime. The probably knows better than you do whether Gen. Flynn committed a crime or not.

The big story here is that an innocent man was nearly sent to prison for a crime he did not commit.
.