drcrinum said:

---

https://www.scribd.com/document/462033805/Flynn-State-AGs-Amicus

Amicus brief filed by the States' Attorney Generals in the Flynn case. Rather strongly worded...

---

Quote:

---

To be sure, the media reporting will portray Barr's latest comments as indicative of a rift between the AG and President Trump, whose latest "Obamagate" rhetoric frames Obama-era investigative abuses as "crime." Barr's remarks will also be applauded as an "exoneration" of Obama officials consistent with the media approach that portrays Democrats as innocent victims of right-wing smears if they manage to evade indictment, while a "guilty until proved innocent beyond any doubt" standard is applied to Republicans. Barr's comments will feature in the "nothing to see here" storyline, the press's counter to stunning revelations about the baselessness of the Russia collusion narrative willfully peddled by Democrats, and the exploitation of counterintelligence powers powers that are supposed to protect us from jihadists and hostile regimes for partisan political purposes.

To the contrary, my sense is that the AG believes there is plenty to see and be outraged about.
...
Barr reiterated that the Justice Department is conducting a serious criminal investigation, led by Connecticut U.S. attorney John Durham, a highly experienced, scrupulous career prosecutor. It seems clear to me that, had there been nothing worth investigating, Durham would have closed shop a long time ago. Enough shocking irregularities have been disclosed that I'd be surprised if no criminal charges were filed. Nevertheless, if you are waiting for the sprawling RICO, treason, or "conspiracy against the United States" indictment of "Obamagate" culprits, you are waiting in vain.

Attorney General Barr is right in his commitment to purge the Justice Department and the FBI of their recent political proclivities. I do not see how vital counterterrorism and counterintelligence authorities can be preserved unless this is done. What worries me is not that this means wayward officials will not be held accountable. It is that Barr cannot prevent a potential Biden administration from putting such officials right back in business

---

Quote:

---

Don't lose hope.

But know, if @realDonaldTrump does not get re-elected, Barr is gone, Durham is gone, Jensen is gone and all the corruption will be tossed away. Nothing will change.

---

VaultingChemist said:

---

Quote:

---

Don't lose hope.

But know, if @realDonaldTrump does not get re-elected, Barr is gone, Durham is gone, Jensen is gone and all the corruption will be tossed away. Nothing will change.

---

That is a very sobering thought.

---

JamesE4 said:

---

I have been following this thread for over two years, as best as I can (I am not an attorney).

The part that makes me maddest is the way Flynn has been treated i this whole ordeal. I decided I want to do a Facebook post summarizing my thoughts, and put together this:

--------------------------------------
There has been a lot of discussion since Trump tweeted "Obamagate" on Mother's Day. The MSM has been working overtime kicking out articles saying it is about nothing, etc.

I believe that what the Obama administration did, with the knowledge and leadership of Obama himself, is the largest and worst publicly known political scandal in our country's history. This is actually much worse than the "Watergate" scandal that took down Nixon. Their actions, combined with the Mueller investigation, was a "soft coup" attempt to topple an elected president, or at least hamper his administration for years, to try to keep them from focusing on doing good for the country.

I believe the now publicly available documents clearly show:

The Obama Administration, with active participation by leadership in the FBI and intelligence agencies, started a program to spy on Trump and those thought to be close to him, in 2016 before the election. Among others, this included spying on Michael Flynn.

They justified this spying program by getting FISA court approvals, based primarily on the "Steele Dossier". The "Steele Dossier" was a collection of rumors and lies claiming that Trump and his associates were colluding with Russia, against the best interests of the United States. It was funded by the DNC and the Hillary Campaign. The FBI agents that submitted this "proof" to the FISA court knew that the information it contained was not only "unverified", but many of its statements had actually been verified false, and many of them were likely Russian "dis-information", intentional falsehoods provided to Steele by Russia. Yet the FBI told the FISA court that the information was verified by the FBI. This is counter to FISA court rules, so the original spying program was approved based on lies. This is the only known time in documented U.S. history that a Presidential Administration has "spied" on its political opponents, both before and after the election.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, the spying program did not actually turn up any evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia, or any other wrong-doing.

The CIA also had attempted to analyze who the Russians favor in the 2016 election, and what actions they might be taking to influence the results of the election. They found indicators that Russia favored both candidates, in fact finding stronger evidence that they favored Hillary, and wrote up a report stating that. The head of the CIA, James Clapper, altered the final report, removing the parts that said they favor Hillary, and only reporting on the items that implied they favor Trump. This report was issued on Jan 6, 2017.

When Trump won the election, the Obama conspirators realized that the man Trump had appointed as National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, was likely to uncover the improper spying, and they set out to create a reason to get him discredited or fired.

Obama announce "sanctions" on Russia for allegedly meddling in the 2106 election (it appears that Russia has been "meddling" in U.S. presidential elections for decades, so it looks like they bought some Facebook ads and other low level attempts to increase discord in the U.S., but no evidence has come out that their actions had any impact on the election results).

Michael Flynn had a few phone calls with the Russian Ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak, in late December 2016. Flynn had been announced as the incoming National Security Advisor. Flynn and Kislyak already had a relationship before the call. The Obama administration was monitoring Kislyak's calls, and were apparently independently monitoring Flynn's calls. It is not at all unusual for an incoming NSA to talk to Ambassadors from other countries. Apparently the insiders in the Obama Administration and FBI floated that the call was a violation of the "Logan Act", which forbids "non official Americans" from engaging in foreign policy. No one has ever been prosecuted for violations of this act, and it is routinely "violated" by lots of people of all political spectrums on a routine basis.

In early January, the Obama administration leaked to the friendly press that Michael Flynn had talked to Sergey Kislyak, and implied it was more evidence of "Trump-Russia Collusion". Whoever leaked the information to the Press did actually commit a crime. Likely to avoid fingering the "Leaker", the Obama administration made clear that dozens of their team had access to the transcripts, so that it could not easily be found who broke the law by leaking classified information. Note that the fact that the call was spied on itself is considered confidential the U.S. government doesn't want everyone to know when and how they spy on officials from other countries.

On January 24, 2017, the FBI sent two agents to the White House to interview Michael Flynn about the call with Kislyak. When asked to sit down with the FBI, Flynn asked if he should have a lawyer present, and McCabe (part of the FBI conspiracy team) said, no, you don't need a lawyer.

It seems clear that the purpose of the interview was to set a "perjury" trap. The agents did not inform the White House counsel before the interview so as to catch Flynn by surprise; they did not share the transcripts with Flynn during the interview (which would have allowed him to refresh his memory); they did not warn him that making false statements would be a crime all of which are standard procedure. Even so, both of the agents who questioned him came away with the impression that "Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying." The FBI does not record these interviews a very questionable practice because they then rely on their notes and memory to claim what the interviewee stated, who in this case was alone in the room.

The transcript of the Flynn-Kislyak call has not been released, and apparently has never been made available to Flynn or his legal team (How his lawyers could recommend that he plead guilty to "lying" without Flynn or they actually reading the FBI transcript of the call is yet another amazing part of this story). Recently released notes indicate that in the interview, Flynn said he did not recall discussing Russian sanctions with Kislyak. Flynn reportedly told the FBI agents, "why are you asking me? I am sure you have the transcript". Therefore, he knew that the FBI already had the transcript of the call, and had no reason to ask him, other than to set a perjury trap. Knowing that, there is no way he would have intentionally lied to the FBI about the call.

The FBI agents prepared their notes "called form 302" and issued them to the FBI bosses. McCabe did not like that the notes said they did not think Flynn lied, so they "lost" the original notes, and McCabe edited the notes which were then issued as the "official FBI notes". These notes claimed that Flynn lied in his meeting with the FBI agents.

The FBI then leaked to the Press that Flynn had lied about his conversation with Kislyak. The furor from the Press lead to Flynn agreeing to resign as NSA.

So the Obama Team won, right? They succeeding in getting rid of Flynn. Time to celebrate and let it die, right? Wrong. They succeeded in getting Jeff Sessions, appointed U.S. Attorney General, to "recuse himself". In a fevered attempt to further discredit Trump, the crooked Justice Department told Flynn they were filing charges against him for "lying to the FBI" based on what he told the FBI. They also threw in "FARA" charges, claiming that Flynn had not represented his relationship with Turkey properly in documents he had filed in 2016. They also got the "acting" Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein, to appoint Robert Mueller to lead a partisan team, paid for by U.S. taxpayers, to further investigate "Trump-Russia Collusion", and any other possible crimes they could try to lay on Trump.

Subsequent discovery, which is at the heart of the Justice Department's filing on May 7, 2020 to dismiss the Flynn charges, were based on the information that the FBI had already finished their investigation of Flynn prior to his meeting with the FBI agents, so there was no legitimate reason to even conduct an interview, and any statements he made were therefore not "material" to an investigation.

In response to the Justice Department telling Flynn they were filing charges against him, Flynn hired a law firm, Covington and Burling, to represent him in this matter. This was the biggest mistake Flynn made in the whole ordeal. The same law firm had represented him while filling out paperwork for the FARA paperwork, and therefore had a conflict of interest in representing him on charges that the paperwork was improper. This is also the Law Firm that Eric Holder, Obama's Attorney General/"wing man" worked for.

The Justice Department told Flynn that they would go after his son for "FARA" violations. They then made a secret deal that they would not go after his son, or pursue jail time, if Flynn pled guilty to all charges, and testified against others. Secret deals between prosecutors and defendants are also against the law, but that didn't stop the Justice Department from pursuing it. Broke, beaten down, and in an attempt to protect his son, Flynn agreed to plead guilty, backed by his cheering Covington attorneys.

After Flynn's "guilty" plead was announced, the case moved on to court for sentencing. There, the Justice Department backed off on their agreement to no jail time, and pushed for maximum sentencing. Realizing he had been lied to and set up, both by the "Justice" Department and his attorneys, Flynn fired Covington and Burling, and hired Sidney Powell as his attorney. In contrast, that was the smartest thing he did.

After two years, in March 2019, the Mueller Investigation issued a long report with no proof of any Trump-Russia collusion, or any other real crime by Trump. They claimed that there may have been "obstruction", because Trump tweeted that he did not collude with Russia. In what situation is someone "guilty" of a crime, simply by stating that they are "not guilty" of a crime? Maximum absurdity, but that didn't stop the press from jumping on it for weeks.

Bill Barr, who was appointed U.S. Attorney General in February, 2019, assigned John Durham to investigate the actions of the Obama administration, Justice Department and FBI officials in their conduct of the spying, FISA approvals, and investigations of Trump and his administration. No official reports or indictments have been issued at this time, but the investigation is still underway.

There is a lot more this is just a high level summary of the Obama Administration and Justice Department officials un-ethical and probably illegal actions regarding Mike Flynn.
---------------------------------------
I know - TLDR, and doesn't address the drama now with the "motion to withdraw" and the judge looking for a way to reject the motion. But I wanted to just discuss the action up to a few weeks ago. If someone knows of a better summary, or any facts I have wrong or are legitimately disputed, I would be happy for any feedback and comments.

---

nortex97 said:

---

The DoJ has to file for a writ of mandamus, to get the circuit to cut into Sullivans circus.

Does anyone think they will? Not really, until he blathers on the next time about how terrible the motion to dismiss such a hardcore traitor is.

BTW, there's ample evidence Flynn was in fact until around Nov. 30, a DIA confidential source. His TS clearance was renewed in April 2016, and he reported before and after his trip to Moscow about intelligence gained to the DIA. He was exonerated of being a Russian agent nearly a year before his guilty plea as they threatened to indict his son the next day.

---

VaultingChemist said:

---

How did I miss the scoop on the Treasury Department whistleblower?

---

nortex97 said:

---

I think we agree on the underlying matters/improprieties completely, but I think (a) Barr sees taking politics out of the DoJ as his over-arching mission, and (b) the writ would have a lot more impact/chances of success if it comes from the DoJ vs. defense counsel, particularly if it is delivered prior to his eventual (June??) ruling on the dismissal.

I've never seen or even read of a federal judicial harassment of a defendant as here. So the board knows, lot's of federal judges are sort of God complex types on the bench (lifetime appointment etc. will do that), but it's almost always directed at attorneys before them, not litigants, let alone an individual defendant in a criminal case.

---

Quote:

---

Those on the right decrying Judge Sullivan's judicial overreach anticipated the prosecuting U.S. attorney to promptly petition the D.C. Circuit Court for a writ directing Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case. Instead, conservatives caught a glimpse of the circus Judge Sullivan has invited into his courtroom.

For more than two years, Flynn's case lingered on Sullivan's docket, with the former President Trump national security advisor first awaiting sentencing for making false statements to the FBI, and then, after replacing his Covington and Burling lawyers with Sidney Powell, waiting for Sullivan to rule on a motion to compel the production of exculpatory evidence. Judge Sullivan denied that motion but has yet to rule on Flynn's pending motion to dismiss the charge against him for prosecutorial misconduct and two separate motions to withdraw his guilty plea.

Earlier this month, Flynn's claim of prosecutorial misconduct received a boost when an outside U.S. attorney, Jeff Jensen, assigned by Attorney General William Barr to review the Flynn investigation, provided Powell previously withheld evidence that confirmed many of Flynn's claims. That evidence included text messages and handwritten notes establishing that when the FBI interviewed Flynn on January 24, 2017, they had no legitimate investigatory purpose for questioning him. Instead, the questioning of Flynn served as a perjury trap. As such, any statements Flynn made during the intervieweven if falsewere not material and thus not a crime.

---

nortex97 said:

---

I think we agree on the underlying matters/improprieties completely, but I think (a) Barr sees taking politics out of the DoJ as his over-arching mission, and (b) the writ would have a lot more impact/chances of success if it comes from the DoJ vs. defense counsel, particularly if it is delivered prior to his eventual (June??) ruling on the dismissal.

I've never seen or even read of a federal judicial harassment of a defendant as here. So the board knows, lot's of federal judges are sort of God complex types on the bench (lifetime appointment etc. will do that), but it's almost always directed at attorneys before them, not litigants, let alone an individual defendant in a criminal case.

---

Zemira said:

---

This is so frustrating as a non-lawyer so it must be incredibly worse for you.

Is there any other way to get the higher courts to intervene in the case??? Can Sydney do anything? This is a complete farce and abomination of our legal/justice system. The longer it plays out the more pissed I get that they are stringing this along till the election for only political reasons.

---

drcrinum said:

---

VaultingChemist said:

---

How did I miss the scoop on the Treasury Department whistleblower?

---

Back on our Page 1116:

https://theohiostar.com/2020/05/18/exclusive-the-treasury-department-spied-on-flynn-manafort-and-the-trump-family-says-whistleblower/

---

Quote:

---

• The FBI relied heavily on media reporting, often based on leaks, to justify taking additional steps in Crossfire Hurricane, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation analysis of public records.
• FBI officials relied on the so-called news hooks to conduct interviews with Michael Flynn.
• A series of news hooks also led to the publication of the now-debunked Steele dossier. The FBI relied on the publication of the dossier itself to provide cover to conduct interviews for Crossfire Hurricane.
• And James Comey himself crafted his own news hook to spur the appointment of a special counsel to take over Crossfire Hurricane after he was fired.

---

Quote:

---

James Comey, Andrew McCabe and Peter Strzok all took advantage of media reports to push the investigation forward. And in one case, Comey orchestrated a leak of his own to spur the appointment of a special counsel.

Prominent media outlets played a key role in advancing the now-debunked theory that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government. Much of that media manipulation centered around the infamous Steele dossier, which the Clinton campaign and DNC funded.

Christopher Steele, a former British spy, briefed numerous reporters, the FBI, Department of Justice (DOJ), State Department and think tank officials on his dossier. The FBI's possession of the dossier itself would eventually serve as a news hook that allowed Steele's unverified allegations to make their way into public view.

---

Quote:

---

Comey has justified briefing Trump on the blackmail portion of the dossier claiming that he did so because the media had the dossier and was poised to publish it.

"I said I wasn't saying this was true, only that I wanted him to know both that it had been reported and that the reports were in many hands," Comey wrote in a memo following his briefing.



<snip>

While Comey has publicly claimed that his purpose for the Trump briefing was to warn the incoming president of rumors floating around about him, he also appears to have used the meeting to advance the Crossfire Hurricane probe.

FBI officials told the DOJ's office of the inspector general (OIG) that they and Comey discussed using the briefing to collect information for Crossfire Hurricane.

"Witnesses interviewed by the OIG also said that they discussed Trump's potential responses to being told about the 'salacious' information, including that Trump might make statements about, or provide information of value to, the pending Russian interference investigation," reads an August 2019 report regarding Comey's memos.

Comey told the OIG that he treated the memo he wrote following the Jan. 6, 2017, briefing as if it were obtained through surveillance, suggesting that he viewed it as material derived through an investigation rather than a simple defensive briefing.

According to the OIG report, Comey said his post-briefing memo "ought to be treated [like] FISA derived information or information in a [counterintelligence] investigation," a reference to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

---

Quote:

---

Strzok, the FBI deputy chief of counterintelligence at the time, immediately seized on the publication in order to advance the probe.

"Sitting with Bill watching CNN. A TON more out," Strzok texted FBI lawyer Lisa Page on Jan. 10, 2017, just after publication of the dossier.

Strzok was seemingly referring to Bill Priestap, his boss at the FBI.

"Hey let me know when you can talk. We're discussing whether, now that this is out, we use it as a pretext to go interview some people," Strzok added.

---

Quote:

---

According to an inspector general's report on the Crossfire Hurricane probe, Strzok said that he recalled that the text messages referred to the possibility of interviewing former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Steele accused both of taking part in the Trump-Kremlin conspiracy.

Strzok told the OIG investigators that the Steele dossier could be used as cover to conduct the interviews without compromising the Crossfire Hurricane probe.

"Strzok said the media release of the reports would be a logical reason for the FBI to interview Cohen and Manafort without alerting them to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation," the OIG report stated.

---

BQ78 said:

---

On what basis is Gleason allowed to prosecute, I thought he was just going to file and brief and leave. Are you saying they are at square one again and we still might have a trial?

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Woo hoo!! Sydney filed the writ!!

Mandamus time.

---