« Sword tonight | Main | "Biden Dodged $500K In Taxes..." Zerohedge »

28 September 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Babak makkinejad

Robert Willmann

I take it that this is an example of how Law can be abused to miscarry Justice.

And to this example, one could also add numerous cases of the so-called National Security Federal Courts whose judges more often as not, as the grapevine goes, rule for the goverment.

Are such cases artifacts of the Cold War (one must become more and more like the monster one wishes to destroy) or, are they manifestations of latent potentialities of the American Legal System, now allowed to fester in an age of decline?

If one sets the date 1880 as the date at which the United States became a country of Respect for the Rule of Law, has the United States entered again into a period of disrespect for the Rule of Law?

The potentates of yore in the Middle East used to strip people of their property and wealth on a whim, is this the American way of accomplishing that? Through a never-ending Federal Judicial Proceedings, all the while mentally torturing a poor bloke by dragging things for years?

The potentates of yore were more merciful, in my opinion.

exiled off mainstreet

The new material reveals what a travesty of justice this case has become. Trump made the mistake of not backing up his best national security advisor who knew where all the bodies were buried and bowing to "conventional wisdom" in this case. This has seriously weakened his presidency and, if he loses, will perhaps be the major reason for his defeat, since the dismissal of Flynn created the opening for the whole fiasco and seriously limited Trump's ability to craft a more reasonable foreign policy independent of the "deep state."


This evening almost three hours ago a few more documents were filed by Flynn's lawyer, on the docket.

One document indicates that on Feb. 2, 2017, two days after acting AG Sally Yates was fired, but while Flynn was still the N.S. Advisor, Stzrok began authorizing National Security Letters [7 in total], targeting Flynn.

These NSLetters claim that they are to obtain information because of events from May 2016.

Deja Vue all over again.

In other words, to create the illusion of an investigation of Flynn, as this had already been investigated and there was zip zero and nada on Flynn. [To claim he is an agent of a foreign government; that is: FARA + Logan Act "2 Things" a separate hand-written note from those investigating Flynn in 2017, a document also filed tonight on docket states]

Below is from the redacted FBI "Summary of National Security Letters Issued in CROSSFIRE RAZOR" on Flynn, from Feb. 2017, filed tonight on court docket:

[[“The FBI is predicating the investigation on predetermined criteria set forth by the CROSSFIRE HURRICANE investigative team based on an assessment of reliable lead information received during the course of the investigation. Specifically, a senior foreign policy adviser for the Donald J. Trump campaign circa May 2016, made statements indicating he is knowledgeable that the Russians made a suggestion to the "Trump team" that they could assist the Trump campaign with an anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama.” ]]

It includes this: [[The memoranda authorizing the issuance of these NSLs, the language of which are nearly identical with respect to justification, were titled “CROSSFIRE RAZOR, FOREIGN AGENTS REGISTRATION ACT – RUSSIA.” The memoranda further state: “A Full Foreign Counterintelligence investigation of the subject, a U.S. Person, was authorized in accordance with the Attorney General Guidelines. The FBI opened a Full Investigation based on an articulable factual basis that reasonably indicates an individual may wittingly or unwittingly be involved in activity on behalf of the Russian Federation which may constitute a federal crime or threat to national security.”]]

And this: [[ The memoranda sought electronic transactions records for accounts associated with Michael T. Flynn, because Flynn was a “Foreign Policy Advisor to the Trump Campaign and has previous travel to Russia and may have been in a position to receive a suggestion from the Russians that they could assist the Trump campaign.” ]]

In addition, Stzrok's lawyer filed what amounts to a grievance against Flynn's attorney; also tonight on docket. In the form of a letter to Sullivan.

Stzrok's attorney said Flynn's attorney is violating Sullivan's order against Powell -- by filing this.

Stzrok's attorney is saying Powell was not supposed to file anything else per Sullivan -- that is, not until all Brady material has been filed; and Stzrok's lawyer claims that dates appended in hand writing to some of the Stzrok hand written documents are forgeries because those dates have been appended to them.

Stzrok's lawyer in this is Aitan B. Goelman.

Goelman is also complaining about Stzrok text messages now part of the docket, alleging those texts, apparently filed on docket by Powell: "have nothing to do with Flynn's case, or more broadly, with the Department of Justice."

And thus the morality play masquerading as a judicial proceeding wanders hither and yon to a great many places.


Chuck Light

And yet, Lt. Gen. Flynn, with full knowledge of his own actions, pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. Not once, but at least three times. Before a Magistrate Judge, and at least twice, once verbally and once in writing (his plea agreement) before Judge Sullivan.

And yet, given the opportunity to be sentenced in December, 2018, he took the invitation of Judge Sullivan to continue to cooperate fully with the Special Counsel in order to (apparently) improve his chances of receiving a lesser sentence.

Query: Was Lt. Gen. Flynn stupid when he first pleaded guilty, or did he just become stupid at a later point?

Keith Harbaugh

We must be aware that the Jensen investigation itself has come under attack:
There Marcy Wheeler puts forward what she asserts are devastating inconsistencies in the documents from the Jensen investigation.
If her points are not competently rebutted, they will severely damage public confidence in the Jensen investigation.
And surely Sullivan is aware of her points, and Gleeson will use them in the hearing on 9/29, either explicitly or implicitly.
And Wall will probably lack time to adequately rebut them.
I lack the time, patience, and expertise to adequately rebut them myself.



It gets better all the time. Strzock's lawyer is upset since it is becoming clear there was zero probable cause of opening a counterintellegence investigation against Flynn and it is probably a crime to boot. Note the timing on when that "insurance policy" got opened, then did nothing, then well, as you see from all of Judge Sullivan's redactions here:

Quick, Trump's taxes! Has that 46% Biden supporting group caught on to the press's 3 card monty process yet?


What legitimacy is left? Those who hate us Americans the most do not live in Moscow, Beijing, or Tehran. They live in New York City, Washington DC, and Hollywood.


Slack Jaw

[[given the opportunity to be sentenced in December, 2018, he took the invitation of Judge Sullivan to continue to cooperate fully with the Special Counsel]]

This is the Slack Jaw version of what went on that day.

Anyone that actually reads this transcript of this hearing would discover the above is at best a poor and at worst a nonexistent summary of that.

The judge accused the general of being a traitor to his country, being a foreign agent, and Sullivan threatened Flynn with 15 years in jail, -- all that based on nothing.

Query: Was Sullivan stupid when he said that or did he just become stupid at a later point?

IT is fine to believe based on nothing that Flynn is "guilty" based on nothing.

It is not fine for government to make something up based on nothing.

And ruin peoples' lives based on nothing.

On this basis and others USA constitution was created and written.

Our constitution, a legal document at heart of our civilization, designed to STOP government from among other things: framing innocent men and women from the likes of which Flynn is being persecuted.

Query: Was Loretta Lynch, Barry, Yates, Mueller, Rosenstein, Weissmann Stupid when they [and Biden] all said Logan Act on Flynn --- and then did not ask a Grand Jury to indict him for this?

If they believed Logan Act applied, their only option was to charge him with crimes, in court.

And show their evidence, and let a jury decided, period. All done in public, as law demands.

So: Why a “A Full Foreign Counterintelligence investigation of the subject" Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn? instead?

To ask the question is to answer it.


Chuck Light

Jim: As I recall, Lt. Gen. Flynn, on Election Day in 2016, wrote an Op Ed criticizing a Turkish Cleric living in the United States, and received at least a half million dollars ($500,000) for the work he performed. He claimed at the time that he wrote the Op Ed on his own initiative, when in fact he was working for and was paid by a Dutch company with direct links to the Turkish Government.

According to an article in The Hill, Lt. Gen. Flynn did not disclose his relationship with the Nation of Turkey until March, 2017, when his firm belatedly filed a FARA disclosure regarding that representation. And he later admitted he lied in the FARA disclosure:

In March 2017, Flynn and his consulting firm retroactively registered as foreign agents working on behalf Turkey.

In a Dec. 2017 legal filing, though, Flynn admitted lying in the March filings to the Justice Department, including by falsely stating that the Flynn Intel Group did not know to what extent the Turkish government was involved in the project and that the op-ed was written on his own initiative.


Please correct me if I have gotten any of these facts wrong.

You make much of Judge Sullivan's comment that Flynn sold out his country, but to me, at least, and to many others, that is exactly what he did. While working for the incoming administration, he took a bunch of shekels from a dictator to try and get a Turkish Cleric deported, did not disclose his relationship to the foreign government dropping coin in his pocket, and then when confronted admitted he lied on a document he completed "under penalty of perjury."

In my view, and I believe in they eyes of many others, Lt. Gen. Flynn got it easy, when they only charged him for lying to the FBI. He swore an oath to the Constitution, and sold it all for a few hundred thousand dollars.


Chuck Light

As a retired officer (as opposed to a former officer) he was still bound by his oath, as am I.

Keith Harbaugh

Chuck Light: You wrote:
"Judge Sullivan's comment that Flynn sold out his country, but to me, at least, and to many others, that is exactly what he did "

Let me remind you of a basic fact: many people in Washington have made a very handsome income by whitewashing, to the American public, some very unsavory individuals and regimes.
Many have blatantly floughted the FARA, without real penalty.
Do you really think Flynn is the first Washingtotonian who has made money in this fashion?
I think not.
But he is surely the first to be threatened with such severe punishment for doing so.

The allegation is that Flynn did this.
Perhaps so.
Or perhaps he was uncertain as to exactly what it required of him.

In either case, Mr. Light, precisely how does this constitute "selling out ones county"?
Explain please.


What is the illegal act here: not having made a FARA disclosure?

If so, what bearing that has on his oath, I must be missing something here.

Abrams and Pointdexter also lied to US Congress - did that imply that they broke their oaths as well?

And so did Reagan.

[Nixon was only obstructing Justice.]

Chuck Light

Babak Makkinejad: You make a very good point and one that I have been wrestling with all afternoon. Does the crime of making false statements to the FBI, or perjuring oneself on a FARA application, constitute a violation of the Officers' Oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States"?

I do not know, and for that I am sorry. My feeble recollection was that the oath required a maker to "support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States," and certainly if that was the oath Flynn's plea of guilty to a violation of 18 USC 1001 would constitute a violation of the laws of the United States.

If my limited efforts to research this question have yielded anything, however, it would appear that Flynn violated a provision of the UCMJ relating to false statements, Possibly Article 107. And it would appear (again if I read it correctly) that as a retired General officer, Flynn is still subject to the UCMJ.

Again I apologize if I am wrong about Flynn's violations of 18 USC 1001 and FARA being a violation of his oath as an officer.

Regarding Abrams and Poindexter. Abrams got a pardon. Poindexter's convictions were overturned on appeal, a right which still applies to Flynn in the event he is sentenced for the crime to which he has already pleaded guilty. And unless The Hill made a false report regarding Flynn's violation of FARA, not only did he fail to properly file, but later admitted that when he did belatedly file, he lied again. On a document which is signed under penalty of perjury. Small crimes, I guess.

Mr. Harbaugh:

The answer to your question about FARA is contained in this statement by the US DoJ:


Two wrongs, or a thousand wrongs, do not make a right, Mr. Harbaugh. Just because others have flouted the laws of the United States doesn't make it right. And just because others have lied to the FBI, or under oath on official documents, doesn't make it right.

Do you really believe that Flynn was so naive as to not know what was required of him as a paid representative of the Nation of Turkey?

Flynn was a paid representative of a foreign nation while he was acting as the United States National Security Advisor. Would you at least admit that he had a small conflict of interest? In my view he sold out his country. Feel free to disagree.


chuck light

Retired military people of all ranks, not just generals, are still oath bound and subject to UCMJ. The only question is whether DoD chooses to press charges rather than let the Article 3 courts do so. A commissioned officer cannot be imprisoned and a sentence of imprisonment would require that Flynn be dismissed (expelled) from the Army. None of this is true of Former military people.

Keith Harbaugh

"Would you at least admit that he had a small conflict of interest?
In my view he sold out his country."

I don't know the exact relevant dates, but for the sake of argument
I'll admit the possibility of the conflict-of-interest charge.

But that, to my mind, does not constitute "selling out one's country."
That would require tangible, specific, harm done to his country in exchange for personal gain of one sort or another.
Sadly, there have been all to many cases of such by those entrusted with the nation's secrets.

But did writing an op-ed favoring one faction in Turkey over the other cause clear, specific harm to America?
I certainly don't think so.
For that reason I think the "he sold his country" charge is way, way over the top. And, in the case of General Flynn, probably reflects an underlying political bias.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad