Posts

Declassified Susan Rice Email Confirms Michael Flynn Was Personally Targeted; Flynn’s Close Family Stuck by Him Despite Charges

/0 Comments/in , /by

By The Federalist. Michael Flynn was personally targeted during a crucial Jan. 5, 2017 Oval Office meeting arranged by then-President Barack Obama, a newly declassified document shows.

On Jan. 20, 2017, as President Donald Trump was being inaugurated, former White House National Security Adviser Susan Rice sent herself a bizarre email detailing the Jan. 5 meeting between her, Obama, then-Vice President Joe Biden, then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, and fired former Federal Bureau of Investigations Director James Comey. In the email, portions of which were not declassified until recently, Rice recorded that Flynn, who at the time was the incoming national security adviser for Trump, was personally discussed and targeted during the meeting with Obama. . .

The newly declassified portions of the Jan. 5 Rice email confirm that the targeting of Flynn was coordinated within the inner sanctum of the White House and that both Obama and Biden were deeply involved in the campaign to take down Flynn.

Documents previously released and declassified showed that the FBI never possessed any evidence that Flynn was a secret Russian agent or that he had broken any laws. An FBI electronic communication closing the agency’s counterintelligence investigation against him, which was dated Jan. 4, made clear that “no derogatory information” about Flynn had been obtained during the months-long investigation of Flynn. (Read more from “Declassified Susan Rice Email Confirms Michael Flynn Was Personally Targeted” HERE)

___________________________________________________________

Michael Flynn’s Close Family Stuck by Him Despite Charges

By New York Post. Even after the Justice Department filed papers earlier this month to withdraw its deeply compromised case against Gen. Michael Flynn for making false statements to the FBI, the fate of President Trump’s first national security adviser is still unresolved. Presiding Judge Emmitt Sullivan disagrees so strongly with the government’s decision that he appointed a former jurist to find avenues by which Flynn might still be prosecuted.

It’s the latest reversal for the 33-year combat veteran and former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Flynn joined the Trump campaign in 2016 and became one of the president’s closest advisers — which is why former Obama administration officials had their knives out. Forced out of the White House in February 2017, Flynn pleaded guilty after Robert Mueller’s special counsel prosecutors threatened to bring phony charges against his son.

All the time, Flynn’s large Irish Catholic family, which was raised in Newport, RI, had stood by him. . .

“All of the allegations about him ‘colluding’ with Russia were so preposterous that we knew it was corrupt,” says Joe Flynn, one of the retired general’s younger brothers. “He was being targeted and that galvanized us.”

The Flynns started a legal-defense fund for their brother. (Read more from “Michael Flynn’s Close Family Stuck by Him Despite Charges” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Flynn Defense Files Request for Appellate Court Intervention

/0 Comments/in , /by

Moments ago Michael Flynn defense counsel Sidney Powell filed an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, a Petition for Writ of Mandamus (pdf link here), asking for intervention to correct Judge Sullivan’s unauthorized action.

Within the request Flynn’s defense requests the DC Appeals Court to order district court judge Emett Sullivan to: (1) grant the Justice Department’s Motion to Dismiss; (2) vacate its order appointing amicus curiae; and (3) reassign the case to another district judge as to any further proceedings.

The request cites numerous legal precedents in favor of granting the writ; but it’s a DC panel of judges so politics will likely play a role in determining what the appeals court decides to do. Given the nature of this extraordinary situation it is difficult to predict success or failure for the request to intervene. The whole darn thing is bizarre.

Within the petition the defense team notes:

…”The district judge’s latest actions—failing to grant the Government’s Motion to Dismiss, appointing a biased and highly-political amicus who has expressed hostility and disdain towards the Justice Department’s decision to dismiss the prosecution, and the promise to set a briefing schedule for widespread amicus participation in further proceedings— bespeaks a judge who is not only biased against Petitioner, but also revels in the notoriety he has created by failing to take the simple step of granting a motion he has no authority to deny.

This is an umpire who has decided to steal public attention from the players and focus it on himself. He wants to pitch, bat, run bases, and play shortstop. In truth, he is way out in left field.”…

A case reassignment in the DC district is a sketchy proposition. Things could get even worse than they are now. Sidney Powell is doing everything within her legal power to advocate on behalf of her client, Michael Flynn; however, the politics in DC seem to be the guiding force – and not legal standards or judicial prudence. (For more from the author of “Flynn Defense Files Request for Appellate Court Intervention” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Acting DNI Declassifies Susan Rice Email on January 2017 WH Meeting; What Susan Rice’s Declassified Email Reveals About Trump’s ‘Obamagate’ Claims; Rice’s 2017 Comments Denying Knowledge of Trump Surveillance Resurface (VIDEO)

/0 Comments/in , , /by

By Breitbart. Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell has fully-declassified an email that former Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice emailed to herself hours before leaving the White House on January 20, 2017.

Grenell’s move was first reported Tuesday by the Wall Street Journal‘s Kimberley Strassel and confirmed by Breitbart News.

Rice sent herself an email memorializing a now-scrutinized meeting at the White House on January 5, 2017, where then-President Obama discussed with his top advisers calls between incoming Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn and a Russian ambassador that would illegally leak to the media and that FBI officials would later use for Flynn’s prosecution. . .

The newly-declassified portion of the email revealed that Comey said he was proceeding “by the book,” and that he had concerns Flynn was speaking to Kislyak too frequently, though he did not express any other concerns, including about what Flynn was saying to Kislyak. Rice wrote:

Director Comey affirmed that he is proceeding ‘by the book’ as it relates to law enforcement. From a national security perspective, Comey said he does have some concerns that incoming NSA Flynn is speaking frequently with Russian Ambassador Kislyak. Comey said that could be an issue as it relates to sharing sensitive information. President Obama asked if Comey was saying that the NSC should not pass sensitive information related to Russia to Flynn. Comey replied, ‘potentially.’ He added that he has no indication thus far that Flynn has passed classified information to Kislyak, but he noted that ‘the level of communication is unusual.’

(Read more from “Acting DNI Declassifies Susan Rice Email on January 2017 WH Meeting” HERE)

______________________________________________________

Susan Rice’s Resurfaced 2017 Comments Denying Knowledge of Trump Team Surveillance Raise Eyebrows

By Fox News. A three-year-old interview clip of former National Security Adviser Susan Rice resurfaced Tuesday after the declassified email she sent to herself on the final day of the Obama administration was released.

During an April 2017 appearance on PBS News Hour, Rice was asked about the then-breaking revelations about members of President Trump’s transition team having been surveilled before he took office.

“In the last few hours, we’ve been following a disclosure by the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Devin Nunes, that in essence, during the final days of the Obama administration, during the transition after President Trump had been elected, that he and the people around him may have been caught up in surveillance of foreign individuals and their identities may have been disclosed. Do you know anything about this?” PBS anchor Judy Woodruff asked.

“I know nothing about this,” Rice said at the time. “I was surprised to see reports from Chairman Nunes on that count today.”

Rice then pivoted to Trump’s accusation that then-President Barack Obama had “wiretapped” him during the 2016 election, insisting that “nothing of the sort occurred.” She later insisted that “no president, no White House can order the surveillance of another American citizen. That can only come from the Justice Department with the approval of a FISA court.”

(Read more from “Susan Rice’s Resurfaced 2017 Comments Denying Knowledge of Trump Team Surveillance Raise Eyebrows” HERE)

______________________________________________________

What Susan Rice’s Declassified Email Reveals About Trump’s ‘Obamagate’ Claims

By The Blaze. A recently declassified email, written by former National Security Adviser Susan Rice and sent herself on the day of President Donald Trump’s inauguration, reveals the players involved in the origins of the Trump-Russia probe and “unmasking” of then-incoming National Security Adviser, Gen. Michael Flynn.

(Read more from “What Susan Rice’s Declassified Email Reveals About Trump’s ‘Obamagate’ Claims” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Classified Leak Against Michael Flynn Didn’t Come From an ‘Unmasking’ Request, Analysis Suggests; Flynn Attorney Files Emergency Appeal to Shut Down Judge Sullivan’s Orders, Boot Him From Case

/0 Comments/in , /by

By Daily Caller. A leak of classified information to the media regarding Michael Flynn’s phone calls in late 2016 with a Russian diplomat was likely not derived from a so-called “unmasking” request, according to analysis from two former U.S. law enforcement officials, and a review of newly released government documents.

Republicans have for over three years suggested that requests that Obama administration officials made for information on Flynn during the presidential transition period were somehow tied to the leak provided to The Washington Post for a Jan. 12, 2017, story about Flynn’s phone calls with Sergey Kislyak, a Russian diplomat.

Post columnist David Ignatius reported that a “senior U.S. government official” said Flynn spoke by phone with Kislyak, the then-Russian ambassador, about U.S. sanctions against Russia.

The story touched off of a series of events that eventually led to charges against Flynn for making false statements to the FBI. The Justice Department filed a motion to toss out the case, citing evidence that the FBI withheld information from Flynn’s lawyers. Attorney General William Barr defended Flynn’s call with Kislyak in a May 8 interview as “laudable” and said the former national security adviser was the target of an FBI “perjury trap.”

Republicans upset at the leak of the Flynn story to the Post have pushed for the declassification of a list of Obama-era officials who submitted requests for intelligence reports regarding Flynn. One hope was that the list of “unmasking” requests might shed light on which Obama administration official was behind the leak to the Post, or at least narrow down a list of possible culprits. (Read more from “Classified Leak Against Michael Flynn Didn’t Come From an ‘Unmasking’ Request, Analysis Suggests” HERE)

______________________________________________________________

Flynn Attorney Files Emergency Appeal to Shut Down Judge Sullivan’s Orders, Boot Him From Case

By Fox News. Michael Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell on Tuesday filed an emergency writ of mandamus to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals seeking the immediate removal of Judge Emmet Sullivan from the case — and saying that under appellate precedent set by the “Fokker Services” case, Sullivan or his replacement must dismiss the prosecution, as the Justice Department has requested.

Writs of mandamus are extraordinary remedies, which are appropriate when there has been a “usurpation of judicial power” that is “clear and indisputable” — and, Powell argued, Sullivan’s behavior fits the bill. Powell pointed in particular to Sullivan’s bizarre suggestion in December 2018 that Flynn had “sold out his country” and could have been prosecuted for “treason,” as well as Sullivan’s misstatements on the facts of the case.

Powell also demanded the appellate court vacate Sullivan’s order appointing an “amicus curiae,” or “friend of the court,” to argue in favor of preserving Flynn’s guilty plea on one count of making false statements to the FBI during an unusual January 24, 2017 White House interview. Oral arguments are set for July 16.

The amicus appointed by Sullivan, retired federal judge John Gleeson, has openly criticized the Trump administration’s handling of Flynn’s case, raising concerns that he was selected to improperly bolster Sullivan’s efforts to keep the Flynn case alive even though both the government and defendant want it dismissed. (In 2013, Gleeson himself held that “the government has near-absolute power under [the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure] to extinguish a case that it has brought” — but he has since apparently changed his opinion.)

(Read more from “Flynn Attorney Files Emergency Appeal to Shut Down Judge Sullivan’s Orders, Boot Him From Case” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Here’s Why Judge Sullivan Can’t Legally Punish Michael Flynn For ‘Perjury’; Majority Say They Support Decision to Drop Case Against Flynn; Ron Johnson Demands Declassification of Susan Rice Email on Michael Flynn

/0 Comments/in , /by

By The Federalist. Stunning developments in the criminal case of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn exploded onto the national scene the past two weeks. First, the government moved to dismiss the case, a one-count plea for allegedly making false statements to the FBI.

Then the trial judge, Emmet Sullivan, issued an order permitting people and groups claiming to have an interest in the matter to file briefs about whether he should grant the government’s motion. Further, Sullivan appointed a retired federal judge, John Gleeson, to act as amicus curiae (friend of the court) to present opposing arguments to the government’s motion. . .

I can save Gleeson the trouble. The controlling legal authority from the Supreme Court holds that contempt power cannot be used to punish people for making statements, even under oath, that the judge deems false. . .

A court issues a show-cause order for contempt as a prelude to possibly punishing a person for alleged misconduct. It describes the misconduct and requires the person to defend against that allegation. It is similar to an indictment except the court, rather than a prosecutor, initiates it. The person receiving a show-cause order must appear and defend the accusation but has certain due process rights, such as the right to notice, the right to counsel, and the right to present a defense.

Sullivan has not yet issued a show-cause order to Flynn, but he has directed Gleeson to advise him as to whether he should do so. The answer is absolutely not, because Sullivan lacks the authority to sanction Flynn for perjury. (Read more from “Here’s Why Judge Sullivan Can’t Legally Punish Michael Flynn For ‘Perjury’” HERE)

__________________________________________________________

Majority Say They Support Decision to Drop Case Against Flynn

By The Hill. A narrow majority of voters say they support the Justice Department’s decision to drop the case against President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn, according to a new Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll survey released exclusively to The Hill.

Fifty-one percent of voters polled said they supported the move, while 49 percent said they opposed it.

The Justice Department moved earlier this month to drop its case against Flynn over charges of lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russia before Trump took office, saying in a court filing that it did not believe it could make a case against Flynn anymore.

The poll comes less than a week after a National Security Agency document made public on Wednesday showed 39 former Obama administration officials, including former Vice President Joe Biden, asked to “unmask” the identity of an American who had come up in intelligence briefings based on his conversations with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. . .

The same poll found that 53 percent of respondents said they supported the decision after being made aware of potential FBI process breaches, while another 47 percent said they still opposed the move. (Read more from “Majority Say They Support Decision to Drop Case Against Flynn” HERE)

__________________________________________________________

Ron Johnson Demands Declassification of Susan Rice Email on Michael Flynn

By Politico. A powerful Senate committee chairman has asked the Trump administration to fully declassify an unusual email a top Obama aide sent herself regarding Michael Flynn on the eve of her departure. In a letter reviewed by POLITICO, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) made the request of Attorney General Bill Barr. . .

“I understand your office is currently reviewing a January 20, 2017, email from former national security advisor Susan Rice,” Johnson wrote in the letter. “In that email, Ambassador Rice summarized an Oval Office meeting with President Obama and other administration officials that occurred on January 5, 2017. A majority of Ambassador Rice’s email was declassified but a portion of the email remains classified.

“The significance of that meeting is becoming increasingly apparent as more and more information is declassified,” Johnson wrote. “For these reasons, it is essential that Congress and the American people understand what occurred during that January 5, 2017, meeting and how it was later characterized by administration officials. The declassification of Ambassador Rice’s email, in whole, will assist these efforts.”

“On January 5, following a briefing by IC leadership on Russian hacking during the 2016 Presidential election, President Obama had a brief follow-on conversation with FBI Director Jim Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates in the Oval Office. Vice President Biden and I were also present,” Rice wrote in a portion of the email that was declassified. (Read more from “Ron Johnson Demands Declassification of Susan Rice Email on Michael Flynn” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

AG Barr Just Made Major News on ‘Obamagate’

/0 Comments/in , /by

That sound you hear is the deep groan of disappointment by people who had hoped that Attorney General Bill Barr would investigate former President Obama for his part in “Obamagate.”

In just the past few days it’s been publicly disclosed that both Obama and Vice President Biden were in an Oval Office meeting in which the investigation into Trump National Security Adviser General Mike Flynn was discussed. It was also revealed that Biden personally “unmasked” Flynn’s name to discover more information about Flynn. President Trump calls the spy program “Obamagate.” . . .

But Barr said Monday that the Department of Justice is unlikely to charge either former President Obama or Vice President Joe Biden in the “Obamagate” spying program on the Trump campaign, Law and Crime reports.

“This is especially true for the upcoming elections in November,” Barr said, adding that it is “critical” that we have a 2020 election in which the American people have a chance to vote based on “robust” policy debate — not criminal debate.

“Any effort to pursue an investigation of either candidate has to be approved by me,” Barr noted. In January, Barr said that the FBI, heading forward, would have to get approval from him before “opening of a counterintelligence investigation of a presidential campaign.”

(Read more from “AG Barr Just Made Major News on ‘Obamagate'” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

4 Big Unanswered Questions About the ‘Unmasking’ Scandal

/0 Comments/in , , /by

As the “unmasking” scandal unfolds, the Senate Judiciary Committee will delve into the conduct of the Obama administration and the intelligence community in secretly investigating the incoming Trump administration.

Two Senate Republicans released previously secret information Wednesday listing top Obama administration officials who made the same request in early 2017: that the intelligence community disclose to them that retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was the American whose phone conversation with the Russian ambassador had been intercepted by intelligence officials.

Flynn at the time had been chosen by President-elect Donald Trump as his first national security adviser. Flynn’s “unmasking” at the request of some of outgoing President Barack Obama’s closest advisers set in motion events that led to Flynn’s resignation after only 23 days in office during the new Trump administration.

Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, both Republicans, released the names of the Obama officials requesting Flynn’s identity as part of information declassified by Richard Grenell, acting director of national intelligence.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., announced Thursday that his committee would hold hearings in June examining issues surrounding the Flynn case and related to the initial FBI investigation of possible ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

In a joint statement, Johnson, chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the Senate’s chief oversight panel, and Grassley, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said:

Our investigation of these matters has been ongoing for years, and as information finally comes to light, our focus on these issues is even more important now. The records are one step forward in an important effort to get to the bottom of what the Obama administration did during the Russia investigation and to Lt. General Flynn. We will continue to review this information and push for additional relevant disclosures until we are satisfied that the American people know the full truth.

Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney John Durham of Connecticut continues to look into the origins of the Russia investigation, and the Justice Department has said that the Flynn unmasking requests is one part of that probe.

Here are four big unanswered questions as the Senate and the Justice Department scrutinize actions taken by the Obama administration between Trump’s election on Nov. 8, 2016, and his inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017.

1. Can Obama Be Compelled to Testify?

It might well be must-see TV, but at this point it seems highly unlikely that Obama himself would be subpoenaed to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Trump made the demand in a tweet Thursday.

“If I were a Senator or Congressman, the first person I would call to testify about the biggest political crime and scandal in the history of the USA, by FAR, is former President Obama,” Trump said in the tweet. “He knew EVERYTHING. Do it @LindseyGrahamSC, just do it. No more Mr. Nice Guy. No more talk!”

The previously classified documents released this week show that in the waning days of the Obama administration, these six well-known officials each submitted an unmasking request that would reveal Flynn’s otherwise protected identity under U.S. law: FBI Director James Comey, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough, Vice President Joe Biden, United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power, CIA Director John Brennan, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

The Justice Department’s case against Flynn for lying to the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador largely fell apart after other documents recently surfaced. They included notes of a discussion among Comey and two other top FBI officials about whether the goal in questioning Flynn at the White House was to “get him to lie” so that he could be fired or prosecuted.

The Justice Department last week dropped the case against Flynn for misleading the FBI, but a federal judge this week called in outside authorities to dispute that action. Flynn has withdrawn his guilty plea.

Graham, in a statement Thursday, appeared to be reluctant about Trump’s call for Obama to testify.

“I am greatly concerned about the precedent that would be set by calling a former president for oversight,” Graham said. “No president is above the law. However, the presidency has executive privilege claims against other branches of government.”

Graham continued:

To say we are living in unusual times is an understatement.

We have the sitting president (Trump) accusing the former president (Obama) of being part of a treasonous conspiracy to undermine his presidency. We have the former president suggesting the current president is destroying the rule of law by dismissing the General Flynn case.

All of this is occurring during a major pandemic.

As to the Judiciary Committee, both presidents are welcome to come before the committee and share their concerns about each other. If nothing else it would make for great television. However, I have great doubts about whether it would be wise for the country.

Graham is striking the correct balance, said Charles Stimson, a senior legal fellow for national security at The Heritage Foundation.

“Chairman Graham should go after the facts, and see where that leads. He’s going to hold hearings,” Stimson told The Daily Signal on Thursday. “To take the president up on that suggestion [of calling Obama to testify] would risk looking political and could delegitimize the inquiry.”

2. What Are the Legal Issues?

Graham said the first part of his committee’s comprehensive inquiry would focus on the Flynn matter.

“Our first phase will deal with the government’s decision to dismiss the Flynn case as well as an in-depth analysis of the unmasking requests made by Obama Administration officials against General Flynn,” Graham said in his written statement. “We must determine if these requests were legitimate.”

If Obama administration officials engaged in improper conduct, it’s not clear whether a law was broken, or who violated the law if one was broken.

Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, U.S. intelligence agencies may intercept and listen to the telephone calls of foreign citizens, including foreign officials. That would include Flynn’s call with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak on Dec. 29, 2016, roughly three weeks before Trump’s inauguration.

If a foreign citizen is speaking to an American citizen on the intercepted call, the law requires the name of the American citizen to be blacked out, or masked, in documentation.

So unmasking is the process by which authorized federal officials request to see information regarding American citizens mentioned anonymously in classified transcripts of calls or other communications involving foreigners.

However, someone leaked Flynn’s communication with the Russian ambassador to the media shortly after the unmasking requests were made. Leaking classified information is a crime.

Brennan, Clapper, Comey and the others named in the documents released by Grenell were authorized to ask for the unmasking. The question is whether there was a legitimate reason to ask for the unmasking, Stimson said.

Another question, besides who leaked Flynn’s name, is whether the unmasking was an attempt by officials of the outgoing Obama administration to undermine the incoming Trump administration.

“I’m not there yet. I want to see more facts,” Stimson told The Daily Signal.

Stimson added that congressional hearings typically seem political, but could produce further lines of inquiry.

He said he is more focused on the probe by Durham, whose career has been as a “stand-up, just-the-facts-ma’am, Joe Friday type of guy.”

3. How Did FISA System Go ‘Off the Rails’?

Graham said the next phase of the Judiciary Committee’s inquiry will revisit the apparent abuse of the process for obtaining warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, highlighted in a scathing report late last year by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

Horowitz testified to the committee in December about his report’s findings. Among the most startling: The FBI relied almost entirely on the so-called Steele dossier, an opposition research document financed by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, as the basis for a FISA warrant to surveil Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

The inspector general’s report also determined that FBI overreach wasn’t limited to Page, but included other Trump campaign aides such as Flynn, then an adviser; George Papadopoulos, a campaign volunteer; and one-time campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

“Our next area of inquiry, later this summer, will be oversight building upon the Horowitz report about FISA abuses against Carter Page,” Graham said. “My goal is to find out why and how the system got so off the rails.”

4. What Was the Point of the Mueller Probe?

After an investigation lasting nearly two years and costing taxpayers $32 million, special counsel Robert Mueller, Comey’s predecessor as FBI director, determined that the Trump campaign did not conspire with the Russian government to influence the 2016 election.

The problem, critics of the Mueller probe say, is that prior to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s appointing him as special counsel, no evidence existed to suggest a Trump-Russia conspiracy.

Thus, the Judiciary Committee will look into the predicate of initiating a special counsel probe, Graham said.

“Finally, we will look at whether Robert Mueller should have ever been appointed as Special Counsel,” he said. “Was there legitimate reason to conclude the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russians?”

Mueller secured grand jury indictments against some two dozen Russian operatives—none of whom is expected ever to stand trial because they are in Russia.

The special counsel’s team also scored a conviction of Manafort for financial crimes unrelated to the presidential campaign. (For more from the author of “4 Big Unanswered Questions About the ‘Unmasking’ Scandal” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Constitution Requires Judge Sullivan’s Lawless Amicus Order Against Michael Flynn Be Overturned; Flynn Judge Ignores Shocking Record of False Guilty Pleas

/0 Comments/in , , /by

By The Federalist. On May 13, Judge Emmet Sullivan issued a blatantly biased and unconstitutional order in the long-lasting Michael Flynn criminal case. To preserve the rule of law and our constitutional separation of powers, the Department of Justice has no choice now but to seek a writ of mandamus from the D.C. Circuit Court ordering the criminal charge against Flynn dismissed and reassigning the case to another judge. . .

Soon after Judge Sullivan announced he would accept amicus briefs, a group of lawyers operating under the moniker Watergate Prosecutors filed a notice of its intent to file an amicus brief. That a group of left-leaning lawyers intended to relitigate Obamagate via the Flynn case wasn’t surprising. What was surprising—no, unbelievable—is what Judge Sullivan did on Wednesday: He entered an order “appoint[ing] The Honorable John Gleeson (Ret.) as amicus curiae to present arguments in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss.”

This order was jaw-dropping for two reasons. First, the U.S. Constitution makes clear that the judiciary has no business second-guessing prosecutorial decisions. In fact, the very case Judge Sullivan cited for the proposition that he had the inherent authority to appoint an amicus curiae—United States v. Fokker—made clear Sullivan’s order was lawless.

In that case, the government had criminally charged Fokker Services with violations of export control laws. The government and defendant entered a deferred prosecution agreement, under which the government would dismiss the charges in exchange for Fokker Services agreeing to several compliance provisions. But when the parties went before a federal district court judge to formalize the arrangement and a waiver of the Speedy Trial Act, the presiding judge refused to accept the waiver—which in essence doomed the agreement—because he believed the agreement was too lenient on the business owners.

The government filed a “writ of mandamus” with the D.C. Circuit Court. A writ of mandamus is a procedural machination that allows a party to seek to force a lower court to act as required by law. The Fokker court explained that while mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, it is appropriate where the petitioner: (i) has “no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires”; (ii) “show[s] that his right to the writ is ‘clear and indisputable’”; and then “(iii) the court ‘in the exercise of its discretion, must be satisfied that the writ is appropriate under the circumstances.’” (Read more from “The Constitution Requires Judge Sullivan’s Lawless Amicus Order Against Michael Flynn Be Overturned” HERE)

______________________________________________________

Flynn Judge Ignores Shocking Record of False Guilty Pleas

By The New York Sun. . .The fact is that it’s by no means rare for persons to plead guilty to crimes they didn’t commit. Some are scared. Others confused. Some lack the intestinal fortitude or financial wherewithal to stand up against the warnings or threats from the prosecutors. What’s so unusual in the Flynn case is that the Democrats and liberals are siding against the poor schlepper caught in the prosecutorial vice. . .

Some 95% of felony convictions in America, the Website notes, are obtained through guilty pleas. Among persons known to be exonerated, it reports, a staggering 18% pleaded guilty to crimes they didn’t commit. It is a humbling statistic for those of us who cover the courts. The filing of a guilty plea by an innocent party occurs at a pace that leaves GuiltyPleaProblem.com saying: “there’s no telling how many are behind bars as a result.”

So where are the liberals now? Where’s the logic of Judge Sullivan getting up on his high horse over the idea that someone in his court might move to withdraw a guilty plea? The idea that General Flynn was uncomfortable with his own plea deal can’t be a surprise to the judge. It was already in the air when the judge erupted at the general at a now-infamous hearing in open court back in December 2018.

That’s the hearing at which the judge declared, “I’m not hiding my disgust, my disdain, for this criminal offense.” With the judge listing the general’s misdeeds, the Washington Post reported at the time, “was not how Flynn’s supporters or Trump thought Tuesday’s sentencing hearing would unfold.” They’d hoped Judge Sullivan would be the one “who would reveal overreach by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and the FBI.” (Read more from “Flynn Judge Ignores Shocking Record of False Guilty Pleas” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Ex-Flynn Deputy Hits Obama Officials Over Conflicting Collusion Claims

/0 Comments/in , /by

By Fox News. Former Deputy National Security Adviser K.T. McFarland ripped Obama administration officials on “The Story” Thursday for making what she considered to be conflicting public statements about the existence of “collusion” between President Trump and the Russian government.

“The director of national intelligence [James Clapper], the CIA director [John Brennan], the FBI director [James Comey], and the deputy FBI director [Andrew McCabe] in the Obama administration were going into closed, classified healings on Capitol Hill, in the House Intelligence Committee and they were saying there was no collusion,” she said. . .

“And then others were basically accusing President Trump of treason,” added McFarland, who served under retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. “Which way is it, guys? You dragged the country through three years of being at each other’s throats over something you knew was a lie and a hoax.

“Why did you do it and who helped you do it?” (Read more from “Ex-Flynn Deputy Hits Obama Officials Over Conflicting Collusion Claims” HERE)

__________________________________________________

Former Intelligence Director James Clapper Responds to ‘Unmasking’ Allegations

By New York Post. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper defended his conduct after being named among top Obama administration officials as having been involved in the effort to “unmask” former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Speaking during an appearance on CNN Thursday, Clapper argued that it was “routine” to “unmask” US citizens who are inadvertently included in the surveillance of foreign adversaries.

“It’s a routine thing,” the former intelligence chief said. “It’s appropriate and legitimate when you have a valid foreign intelligence target engaging with a US person. Is it, for example, an insider, someone in the government engaging with a foreign adversary? So it’s important from the standpoint of potential jeopardy to national security that you understand what’s going on.”

Clapper told the network that he would request to “unmask” individuals as frequently as “once or twice a week” during his tenure as DNI. (Read more from “Former Intelligence Director James Clapper Responds to ‘Unmasking’ Allegations” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Federal Judge Out of Control: Trying to Sentence Gen. Flynn Even Though Prosecution Wants Charges Withdrawn; List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released

/0 Comments/in , , /by

By CNN. Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan on Wednesday asked whether President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn could be held in contempt of court for perjury.

Sullivan also appointed a retired judge to look into Flynn’s case and argue against the Department of Justice’s request to dismiss it. . .

Sullivan signaled on Tuesday he would open the door to third parties to weigh in on the case, but it wasn’t clear whom he would allow. Others have argued to him that the judge could sentence Flynn, essentially ignoring the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss his charge.

Sullivan appointed a retired judge, John Gleeson, [to present] arguments to the judge “in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss” and on “whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury,” the judge wrote.

Gleeson is a former Clinton appointee to the federal trial bench in the Eastern District of New York. (Read more from “Federal Judge Out of Control: Trying to Sentence Gen. Flynn Even Though Prosecution Wants Charges Withdrawn” HERE)

__________________________________________________________

Hannity Warns Biden ‘Might Want to Start Thinking About Getting His Story Straight’ on Flynn Unmasking

By Fox News. Sean Hannity opened his show Wednesday by reacting to the newly released list of Obama administration officials who requested to “unmask” the identity of former national security adviser Michael Flynn in intelligence reports during the Trump transition.

“Why in the hell did the Obama administration’s unmasking requests jump threefold from 9,500 in 2013 to 30,355 in 2016?” Hannity asked.

“Now, we know one part of the massive increase was targeted at Donald Trump campaign adviser, an incoming national security adviser, a man who has served this country honorably for 33 years in combat zones, and that’s General Michael Flynn,” the host added. “We now know he was unmasked a whopping 48 times by roughly two dozen Obama officials between Election Day, November 8, 2016 and the president’s inauguration, January 20, 2017.”

The host explained that the term ‘unmasking’ refers largely to the process of identifying an American citizen whose communications have been picked up by U.S. intelligence officials during surveillance on a foreign government, person or other entity.

In Flynn’s case, he was unmasked over his calls with then-Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak, which were picked up on wiretaps. That information was then leaked to The Washington Post in early 2017. (Read more from “Hannity Warns Biden ‘Might Want to Start Thinking About Getting His Story Straight’ on Flynn Unmasking” HERE)

__________________________________________________________

List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released: Biden, Comey, Obama Chief of Staff Among Them

By Fox News. Top Obama administration officials purportedly requested to “unmask” the identity of former national security adviser Michael Flynn during the presidential transition period, according to a list of names from that controversial process made public on Wednesday.

The list was declassified in recent days by Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell and then sent to GOP Sens. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, who made the documents public. The roster features top-ranking figures including then-Vice President Joe Biden — a detail already being raised by the Trump campaign in the bare-knuckle 2020 presidential race where Biden is now the Democrats’ presumptive nominee.

The list also includes then-FBI Director James Comey, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and Obama’s then-chief of staff Denis McDonough. (Read more from “List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released: Biden, Comey, Obama Chief of Staff Among Them” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE