header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: In like Flynn

 (Read 100 times)

ATexasVol

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2930
  • Liked:
In like Flynn
« on: November 07, 2019, 03:15:00 PM »
If you're not following the trial of General Michael Flynn, you are missing out on some drama that reads like a suspense novel.   This was nothing less than a concerted plot by the FBI to "get" General Flynn during the very early days of the Trump administration.   Flynn's attorney, Sidney Powell, has put together a timeline of events and laid out a case of egregious misbehavior by the government.   


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-michael-flynn-smoking-gun-fbi-headquarters-altered-interview-summary

One of the most damning charges contained within Powell’s 37-page court brief is that Page, the DOJ lawyer assigned to the office of then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, may have materially altered Flynn’s interview FD-302, which was drafted by Strzok. FBI agents transfer handwritten interview notes onto a formal testimonial document, FD-302, within five days of conducting an interview, while recollections are still fresh.

It is unheard of for someone not actually on the interview itself to materially alter an FD-302. As an FBI agent, no one in my chain of command ever directed me to alter consequential wording. And as a longtime FBI supervisor, I never ever directed an agent to recollect something different from what they discerned during an interview. Returning a 302 for errors in grammar, punctuation, or syntax is appropriate. This occurs before the document is ultimately uploaded to a particular file, conjoined with the original interview notes which are safely secured inside a 1-A envelope, and secured as part of evidence at trial.


With this in mind, this related text message exchange from Strzok to Page dated Feb. 10, 2017, nauseated me:

"I made your edits and sent them to Joe. I also emailed you an updated 302. I’m not asking you to edit it this weekend, I just wanted to send it to you."

Powell charges that Page directed Strzok to alter his Flynn interview 302. As in most instances in life, words matter. The change in wording was instrumental in moving Flynn from a target to a subject. One recalls how critical wording was in the FBI’s decision not to argue that DOJ charge Hillary Clinton with a crime in the private email server investigation. Comey elected not to use “gross negligence” to characterize Clinton's actions — which would have been the required language in the mishandling of classified information statute — and instead settled upon the more benign and non-indictable “extreme carelessness."

Later, it was determined that none other than Strzok was the impetus behind the recrafting of Comey’s words.

Powell’s motion requests that Flynn’s case be dismissed. Central to this appeal are details surrounding Flynn’s first interview by the FBI on Jan. 24, 2017. Recall also how Comey famously told NBC’s Nicolle Wallace, in front of an audience, that Flynn was visited by FBI agents at the White House in chaotic early days of Trump transition because, in Comey’s words, “I sent them.”

Comey received warm laughter for his quip from an appreciative audience, reveled in the adulation, and further elaborated, providing this shockingly partisan move:

"Something we've — I probably wouldn't have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized investigation — a more organized administration. In the George W. Bush administration, for example, or the Obama administration. The protocol, two men that all of us perhaps have increased appreciation for over the last two years. And in both those administrations there was process. And so, if the FBI wanted to send agents into the White House itself to interview a senior official, you would work through the White House Counsel and there'd be discussions and approvals and it would be there. And I thought, it's early enough, let's just send a couple of guys over. And so, we placed a call to Flynn, said, hey, we're sending a couple of guys over. Hope you'll talk to them. He said, sure. Nobody else was there. They interviewed him in a conference room in the Situation Room, and he lied to them. And that’s what he’s now pled guilty to."

So, did an accomplished 3-star general actually misrepresent the truth? Or, was his recollection of events later spun to be a mendacious accounting by overzealous investigators who followed their boss’s lead, while circumventing established protocol in an ambush-style interview? What apparently followed was a “tweaking” of the accounting to ensure Flynn be charged with Title 18 USC § 1001 – something I have long argued was never charged by any U.S. Attorney’s Office during my time serving in the FBI unless we wanted to threaten it and employ as leverage.

Setting aside valid arguments that the FBI acted inappropriately — treating the Trump White House differently than they would have treated Bush’s or Obama’s, as the hubristic Comey proudly admits — Powell’s charges of egregious government misconduct are certainly deserving of the court’s consideration. The withholding of clearly exculpatory material related to revelations that “important substantive changes were made to the Flynn 302” may well be central to the findings of Inspector General Michael Horowitz and Durham, as well.


ATexasVol

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2930
  • Liked:
Re: In like Flynn
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2019, 03:21:38 PM »
Here's a link to Sidney Powell's brief:  https://sidneypowell.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Doc.-129-Flynn-Consent-Motion-to-File-Redacted-Reply-Brief.pdf

Opening summary:

For eighty-seven years, the Supreme Court has held that “[t]he first duties of the officers
of the law are to prevent, not to punish crime. It is not their duty to incite to and create crime for
the sole purpose of prosecuting and punishing it. . . t is unconscionable, contrary to public policy,
and to the established law of the land to punish a man for the commission of an offense of the like
of which he had never been guilty, either in thought or in deed, and evidently never would have
been guilty of if the officers of the law had not inspired, incited, persuaded, and lured him to
attempt to commit it." Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435, 444-45 (1932) (quoting Butts v.
United States, 273 F. 35, 38 (8th Cir. 1921)). Application of the criminal law under such
circumstances “is foreign to its purpose . . . [and] so shocking to the sense of justice that it has
been urged that it is the duty of the court to stop the prosecution in the interest of the Government
itself, to protect it from the illegal conduct of its officers and to preserve the purity of its courts.”
Id. at 446.

In this case, high-ranking FBI officials orchestrated an ambush-interview of the new
president’s National Security Advisor, not for the purpose of discovering any evidence of criminal
activity—they already had tapes of all the relevant conversations about which they questioned Mr.
Flynn—but for the purpose of trapping him into making statements they could allege as false.

This is no paranoid “conspiracy” delusion, as the government implies. It is well
documented by the evidence already made public, which was long known to the government —
yet withheld from the defense—until after Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty and in clear violation of Brady
v. Maryland and its progeny. This includes a still undisclosed discussion by the lead agent to use
news of the “Steele dossier” as “a pretext to interview some people;” the FBI Director’s calculated
decision (contrary to FBI/DOJ protocol) not to notify the White House Counsel that the FBI
wanted to speak with a key member of the President’s staff; a strategically-planned personal call
from FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, designed to prevent Mr. Flynn from seeking the
advice of counsel or notifying the Department of Justice; planning and rehearsing tactics calculated
to keep Mr. Flynn “relaxed” and “unguarded” so as not to alert him to the significance of the
conversation; anxious text messages between Agent Strzok and his paramour, Lisa Page—
McCabe’s Special Counsel—disclosing the deep personal involvement of these officials and others
in an enterprise without a legitimate law enforcement objective.

The government works hard to persuade this Court that the scope of its discovery obligation
is limited to facts relating to punishment for the crime to which Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty.
However, the evidence already produced or in the public record reveals far larger issues are at
play: namely, the integrity of our criminal justice system and public confidence in what used to be
our premier law enforcement institution. When the Director of the FBI, and a group of his close
associates, plot to set up an innocent man and create a crime—while taking affirmative steps to
ensnare him by refusing to follow procedures designed to prevent such inadvertent missteps—this
amounts to conduct so shocking to the conscience and so inimical to our system of justice that it
requires the dismissal of the charges for outrageous government conduct.

“Regard for the requirements of the Due Process Clause ‘inescapably imposes upon this
Court an exercise of judgment upon the whole course of the proceedings [resulting in a conviction]
in order to ascertain whether they offend those canons of decency and fairness which express the
notions of justice of English-speaking peoples even toward those charged with the most heinous
offenses.’” Rochin v. California, 342 U.S. 165, 169 (1952) (Frankfurter, J.) (quoting
Malinski v. New York, 324 U.S. 401, 416-17 (1945)). When the government transgresses these
boundaries—as it has here—the Court must dismiss the case and free the defendant to reconstitute
his life.
Case 1:17-cr-00232-EGS Document 129-2 Filed 10/24/19 Page 6 of 37
3

As new counsel has made clear from her first appearance, Mr. Flynn will ask this Court to
dismiss the entire prosecution based on the outrageous and un-American conduct of law
enforcement officials and the subsequent failure of the prosecution to disclose this evidence—
which it had in its possession all along—either in a timely fashion or at all. Moreover, the
defendant still needs and is still entitled to all the facts in the government’s possession—not just
those Mr. Van Grack was forced to provide because they had already leaked into the public
domain. The government’s tactic of disclosing information because it had made its way into the
news and the internet is tantamount to no Brady disclosure at all, while its self-serving minimized
disclosures were outright deceptive.

BrownCounty

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 3537
  • Liked:
Re: In like Flynn
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2019, 03:43:57 PM »

Not just Flynn, but once this whole swamp thing is done - we are going to have one hell of a movie on our hands.  Probably a 3-hour job like "JFK".

Just have to find folks in Hollywood to accurately tell the story.

Cincydawg

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 14318
  • Liked:
Re: In like Flynn
« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2019, 03:55:27 PM »
I hope the judge in the Flynn case can sort all this out and come to an accurate conclusion.  We're seeing one side here, and it's possible there is another of course.

roadvol

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2543
  • Liked:
Re: In like Flynn
« Reply #4 on: November 07, 2019, 04:02:54 PM »
You really don't think Hollywood will be interested in that story do you? Not their narrative.

roadvol

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 2543
  • Liked:
Re: In like Flynn
« Reply #5 on: November 07, 2019, 04:04:55 PM »
I had previously posted that if I ever get in trouble with the government ...I'm hiring Sidney Powell.
She's had the government on defense since the trial started........
Tough lawyer!

BrownCounty

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 3537
  • Liked:
Re: In like Flynn
« Reply #6 on: November 07, 2019, 04:20:27 PM »
You really don't think Hollywood will be interested in that story do you? Not their narrative.

Someone will want to tell the story.

We are lucky to live during this time.  I can't explain this phenomena, but every curve ball the Left throws is a boomerang.  If I were on the Left I would say "eff this" and get out of the crossfire.  Nothing good is coming of any of this for the Left, and any damage they try to cause only ends up on their own front porch.

It's like there is a foregone outcome at play here, and it involves Trump's unmitigated and absolute success in exposing and overthrowing the corrupt government of a country that once decided to put "In God We Trust" on its currency.

ATexasVol

  • All Star
  • ******
  • Posts: 2930
  • Liked:
Re: In like Flynn
« Reply #7 on: November 07, 2019, 05:02:46 PM »
Someone will want to tell the story.

We are lucky to live during this time.  I can't explain this phenomena, but every curve ball the Left throws is a boomerang.  If I were on the Left I would say "eff this" and get out of the crossfire.  Nothing good is coming of any of this for the Left, and any damage they try to cause only ends up on their own front porch.

It's like there is a foregone outcome at play here, and it involves Trump's unmitigated and absolute success in exposing and overthrowing the corrupt government of a country that once decided to put "In God We Trust" on its currency.

One thing I've observed about the left is when they fail miserably at something, instead of regrouping and re-examining their outlook on things, they double down.   If tax-and-spend doesn't produced the panacea they envisioned, it must be because they didn't tax-and-spend enough.  They always seem to learn the wrong lessons from their failures.  So I predict they will continue tilting at windmills until they have a bloody forehead.   

HK_Vol

  • Legend
  • ****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 9265
  • Liked:
Re: In like Flynn
« Reply #8 on: November 07, 2019, 05:39:38 PM »
You really don't think Hollywood will be interested in that story do you? Not their narrative.

Only if Clint Eastwood stays alive and keeps working.....

 

Please Support Site: