Over a week ago, I wrote a column calling for the Justice Department to drop its case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. I have long been a critic of the case but the new evidence undermined not just the legitimacy of the prosecution but of the Justice Department itself. The Justice Department just moved to dismiss the case, a belated but commendable decision. The Flynn case represents one of the most ignoble chapters of the Special Counsel investigation. Notably, the motion itself could lay the foundation for suing on the basis of malicious prosecution.
While Judge Emmet Sullivan could dismiss the charges on the papers (an unopposed motion), I would expect a hearing to be called. There is a great irony here. Sullivan’s last hearing on sentencing led to controversial statements from the bench and a delay in sentencing that resulted in an easier path to dismissal.
James Comey tweeted that “DOJ has lost its way.” Given what this motion and the new evidence says about Comey’s own conduct, I would hope so if Comey is referring to his way of running the DOJ. Comey is implicated in this ignoble effort to bag a Trump official at any cost.
In the motion below, the Justice Department stresses that “the citizen’s safety lies in the prosecutor who … seeks truth and not victims, who serves the law and not factional purposes, and who approaches [the] task with humility.” It also establishes that there was never a satisfaction of the materiality element to the criminal allegation:
“In the case of Mr. Flynn, the evidence shows his statements were not “material” to any viable counterintelligence investigation—or any investigation for that matter—initiated by the FBI. Indeed, the FBI itself had recognized that it lacked sufficient basis to sustain its initial counterintelligence investigation by seeking to close that very investigation without even an interview of Mr. Flynn. See Ex. 1 at 4. Having repeatedly found “no derogatory information” on Mr. Flynn, id. at 2, the FBI’s draft “Closing Communication” made clear that the FBI had found no basis to “predicate further investigative efforts” into whether Mr. Flynn was being directed and controlled by a foreign power (Russia) in a manner that threatened U.S. national security or violated FARA or its related statutes, id. at 3.”
It further notes that key figures like Andrew McCabe “cut off” objections to the overly aggressive pursuit of Flynn. It describes an effort of former Director James Comey, McCabe, and others to skip common protocols to bag Flynn at any cost on any grounds.
While malicious prosecution cases are notoriously difficult to prove (particularly in a case with a voluntary plea), the motion reinforces the view of many of us that the Justice Department was engaged in a campaign to incriminate Flynn — a campaign that now appears entirely detached from both the evidence and legal standards supporting a criminal charge. Such a lawsuit could allow Flynn to pursue discovery into the motivations and actions of figures like McCabe.
The motion relieves President Donald Trump of the necessity of a pardon for Flynn. However, it hardly ends the matter. Congress has expressed an interest in investigating new and troubling evidence. It has every reason to do so. The new evidence obviously does not comport with the standard narrative of the media from the outset of the Russian investigation. Many will defend this case and its underlying abuses as “standard” practices. I have certainly seen abuses in my career as a criminal defense attorney, but I have never seen a record as troubling as this one in prosecutors seeking the creation rather than the investigation of criminal conduct. Even if such abuse is deemed standard by apologists for Mueller, it is neither an excuse nor a license for such misconduct.
Between this, the Horrowitz reports conclusion that Crossfire hurican should have been closed in mid Jan 2017, and the recent publication of Rosensteins justification memo for apointing Mueller,
The open question is why are ANY of Mueller’s prosecutions legitimate ?
The DOJ position on Flynn applies equally to the entire set of Mueller prosecutions.
Mueller was inarguably aware that by the time he was appointed, the allegations he was appointed to investigate had already been disproven.
So why did it take him about 2 years to redo an investigation that had already been proven fruitless ?
If FBI had no basis interviewing Flynn, what basis did they have interviewing papdopilis or Stone ? Or calling Stone before Congress ?
Ordinarily I would say “falsus in unum, falsus in omnibus”.
But this is narrower. Nearly the same evidence used to justify interviewing Flynn, was used as the foundation for the SC investigation.
Every subpeona, every warrant, Relies on the same material used either in the Page FISA warrant or against Flynn.
the entire Mueller investigation was premised on not just lies – but KNOWN lies.
It should be self evident now, why DOJ, and FBI fought so long and hard to prevent this information from going public.
Flynn Lied On Several Points, But We’re Supposed Sympathize. ..Huh..??
FBI agents interviewed Flynn on Jan. 24, 2017. It was days after Trump’s inauguration, and the FBI was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election and Russian contacts with Trump’s campaign.
Flynn told the FBI that he did not ask Kislyak to refrain from escalating the situation, which was false. Flynn also said he did not recall Kislyak calling back two days later to tell him that Russia had abided by Flynn’s request.
Flynn also made false statements to the FBI about his lobbying work for Turkey and about another contact with the Russian ambassador over Dec. 22 and Dec. 23, 2016, pertaining to a U.N. Security Council Resolution on Israeli settlements, according to his guilty plea.
Flynn agreed to cooperate with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation, and Mueller later recommended no jail time for Flynn due to his “substantial” assistance. Flynn sat for at least 19 interviews and gave evidence of Trump’s potential obstruction of justice and about WikiLeaks. He pleaded guilty to a single count of false statements, though prosecutors indicated that they could have charged him with more crimes.
In pleading guilty, Flynn said: “I recognize that the actions I acknowledged in court today were wrong, and, through my faith in God, I am working to set things right. My guilty plea and agreement to cooperate with the Special Counsel’s Office reflect a decision I made in the best interests of my family and of our country. I accept full responsibility for my actions.”
Prosecutors said FBI agents gave Flynn multiple opportunities to correct his false statements during the interview. Flynn testified in 2018 that he knew it was a crime when he lied to the FBI.
In seeking to void his guilty plea, Flynn now argues that he was entrapped by the FBI and given ineffective counsel by his former attorneys at the firm Covington & Burling.
Edited from: “Understanding The Twists And Turns In The Michael Flynn Case”
Today’s Washington Post
Seth:
You lose. Let it die.
Mespo– You know he won’t let it die. Seems like there is something wrong in there.
Mespo– Seth doesn’t understand that if we wanted to read papers as notoriously unreliable as WaPo and NYT we would subcribe to them. I wouldn’t unless they came on little rolls and were soft and absorbent.
When you have a pro-Trump Republican defendant; having the Barr Justice Department is like having a second set of defense attorneys. Really, Flynn pleaded guilty and the Judge just needs to move to sentencing with a new special counsel.
The FBI’s Comey, McCabe, the Ohrs, Rosenstein, Strozk, Page, Baker and etc. plus the likes of Brennan, Clapper and others in the Obama administration must be wondering if “the walls are closing in.”
Wonder if Covington & Burling (Flynn’s former law firm who negotiated the now infamous plea deal and “lost” some — but not all — of the exculpatory records) will post this result to their “Representative Cases” page?
LOL!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeeky:
You know ever since law school, the legal authorities have preached to me to “keep a professional distance from the client” and “don’t take cases personally.” That said, in every big result I ever got in court, I took the case very personally — I worked harder, thought more and prepped lots more thoroughly. I think Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell, Esq., is a terrific lawyer and I bet she took the case damn personally.
Mespo — I think she took it personally too. I am glad she did. No lawyer who didn’t take this case personally deserved to touch it. Sometimes one needs a sense of outrage to continue.
That said I think she did something as important– set out to learn more about the case than anyone else.
Magnificent lawyer.
It’s off to the history books for Sidney Powell, Esq.
Stand up, Atticus, Ms. Powell is passing.
mespo – did Sullivan dismiss the case?
Paul:
Not yet but Sullivan almost has to. The government says they can’t prove its case and that the investigation was unwarranted ’cause the statements weren’t material and the information sought was already known. If Sullivan forces the issue, he’s the bad guy and no judge wants that. He’s already a lightweight judicially speaking; adding persecutor of a war hero to his resume won’t help.
mespo – Sydney Powell is still waiting for emails from Eric Holder and another senior partner.
Paul– I was wondering about that as well. And I wondered if fear of having those emails exposed cleared brush from the path to dismissal. Beginning with the inept judge a lot of people probably want to see this buried as soon as possible and as deep as possible.
Could be the emails are now moot in this proceeding.
Young – I think Flynn is right on the edge of recovery for the criminal case. It is close, but he just might be under the amount needed to sue for damages.
One has to wonder why Covington, with its reputation and immense resources, did such a terrible job for Flynn. Did they dump it off on some inexperienced associate as a pro bono case that they weren’t interested in, or did they deliberately sandbag him? Then along comes Sidney Powell, whom I believe is a sole practitioner, and she turns the whole ship around. Definitely a David vs. Goliath victory on her part.
TIN- I have seen a few times when a big, heavy firm did a crappy job, almost if they expected to win with their letterhead rather than work.
I have seen it a lot. Biglaw charges tall fees, and sometimes they aren’t even half as good as a solo.
it’s part of why I’m not in the company of scoundrels called BigLaw
Today Sidney Powell is a hero. This is a great woman:
https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/674b8ee/2147483647/resize/1160x/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F9b%2F48%2F55c5848b4d68a1f856f9d7212f17%2Fkloor-powell-leadimage.jpg
See big firms have real operators in them, somewhere, doing the hard work amidst the drones and bureaucratic dead weight. But chances are you won’t get them and even if you do the legal fees may just destroy a person. Folks, if you’re really smart, you find a lawyer like Sidney Powell and don’t even consider a fat, bloated, Biglaw dinosaur.
everything one can dislike about any bureaucracy is suffused ten times the potency in “BIGLAW”
Anyone know why Flynn was fired from the Obama administration? Curious.
He was about to spill the beans on Clapper and Brennan.
Anyone know why you’re so dumb? Curious.
Flynn wasn’t fired from the Obama administration.
Why was he fired from the Trump administration? Lying, wasn’t it?
Trump just spoke not about the misconduct of the agencies so much as the OBAMA administration. Sending it home.
Why am I not surprised that Natacha, and Congressman Nadler, and other Democrats will pretend to NOT understand this, from the Motion above:
——————
[]the Government has concluded that the interview of Mr. Flynn was untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn—a no longer justifiably predicated investigation that the FBI had, in the Bureau’s own words, prepared to close because it had yielded an “absence of any derogatory information.” Ex. 1 at 4, FBI FD-1057 “Closing Communication” Jan. 4, 2017 (emphases added). The Government is not persuaded that the January 24, 2017 interview was conducted with a legitimate investigative basis and therefore does not believe Mr. Flynn’s statements were material even if untrue. Moreover, we not believe that the Government can prove either the relevant false statements or their materiality beyond a reasonable doubt.
——————
It was a hit job, done by the FBI on a political basis. Period.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
It’s not just about punishment. What happens all too often is that people make unfounded and perjurious accusations, or violate the rights of others and once this is defeated, we move on. There must be severe consequences including financial ruin, civil judgements, and jail for the perpetrators or this will not stop.
This will mean something only to Flynn if there are not people behind bars in the aftermath. This situation has shredded our rule of law if no one goes to jail and that is a far bigger crime than that perpetrated against Flynn, this was a crime against our nation as a whole.
If the perpetrators get away this will probably happen again. In any event the agencies involved will never be trusted again.
They will be viewed with the same horror and contempt as the KGB and Gestapo.
Good luck with future jurors you pack of slimy liars.
More fluff and stuff. None of this changes the fact that Flynn LIED to the FBI, and that he PLEADED GUILTY to doing so.
Take note: Trump’s personal fixer got to decide this one. That was probably calculated so that Trumpy Bear wouldn’t have to pardon him–election year, don’t you know.
Even the FBI admitted in the documents that they fought not to release that Flynn did not lie.
But you seem to have no moral compunctions about lying. That’s why I never read anything of yours that goes beyond two short, lying paragraphs.
Young, you’re nothing but a reservoir of sputtering, sanctimonious outrage.
Come to think of it, I am. Thank you.
But, Anonymous, I think it fair to wonder why you are not outraged at how the DOJ has been illegally weaponized for political goals.
No sense of right or wrong?
if he lied, then Flynn LIED about a LAWFUL CONVERSATION
hence the entrapment team was thus wrongfully trying to turn a LAWFUL CONVERSATION —
into a CRIME
if you don’t get this then you dont get much
the bigger issue as always is that some low level FBI agent was obstructing the diplomatic conversations of an incoming lawfully elected President of the United States
low level FBI agents using perjury traps had better confine them to actual criminals and not public servants in exercise of their duties
that’s the lesson here which the other schemers inside the FBI or anywhere else– like Vindman– had best learn. Stay in your lane!
Flynn was concerned that the interviewing agents did not have the necessary security clearances for some of the subjects that came up.
Natacha doesn’t want to know much. That does not appear to be her goal. She wants to repeat spin.
There are over 2000 people on the exonerate list. This is people convicted of murder, and sentenced to death. All of whom were subsequently PROVEN innocent. Almost every single on “confessed” at some point.
You seem to equate a guilty plea with proof of actual guilt.
People confess constantly to crimes they did not commit,
they plead guilty of crimes they did not commit.
We SOMETIMES excuse this because we have coerced people who are criminals.
In the specific case of Flynn – the DOJ motion is not saying Flynn is inherently innocent of Lying to the FBI. It is saying the FBI interview of Flynn was a violation of his rights – it was WRONG, Because the FBI already knew – not only the contents of Flynn’s call to Kisylak, but that there was no crime in that call, and that the FBI had already determined that in all the other things they were investigating – there were no crimes.
Put simply the investigation was over, they knew Flynn was innocent, but they went doggedly on with the explicit purpose of creating a crime.
No one – not even the innocent can hold out against a coercive government forever. We do not torture people, we do no prosecute them until they are bankrupt, we do not threaten to prosecute their families.
The people who do those thing are criminals. When those in government act that way we can not expect the innocent to hold out forever.
Who did the FBI lie to?
The entire country, including you (assuming your a citizen, albeit a misguided one)
The FBI and the Mueller SC office lied – not just to the public – but to the courts. That is a crime.
What is it that Flynn lied about ?
Your shallow mind can’t possibly comprehend the malfeasance carried out by the Obama JD & FBI to imprison an innocent man that was about to expose their so-called Russian Collusion claims!
What I want to see, is those who made Flynn go through fire and hell, without evidence at all, should be made to pay both criminally and monetarily.
My understanding is that Sullivan can still go ahead since Flynn pled guilty.
Sullivan probably wouldn’t dare go ahead despite the motion to dismiss.. He already looks very bad for his previous, outrageous remarks. I was wondering how he was going to swallow the ashes of that error and do the right thing on this case. The DOJ did him a favor by taking it out of his soiled hands.
It is probably technically inside his power. But this whole thing is very messy legally.
Flynn has plead guilty but not been sentenced, he has moved to withdraw his guilty plea. Generally you are free to do so, until sentence has been imposed. At an earlier Sentencing hearing Sullivan offered to let Flynn withdraw his plea. Flynn did not at the time, but has since. No milestone has past since Sullivan’s offer, so Sullivan has already accpeted that Flynn can withdraw his plea.
The only means for Sullivan to proceed is to reject a motion that both defense and prosecution agreed to an sentence Flynn. That would certainly be appealed, and DOJ would not defend the appeal. Flynn would near certainly win.
Sullivan can accept the motion and this is over.
Sullivan can accept the Flynn’s withdraw of his guilty plea – and this is over.
Sullivan can sentence Flynn, Flynn will appeal, win and this is over.
Only a bitter, Trump hating lefty would think(or suggest) that’s what’s going to happen.
I posted this on the Bridgegate thread before this one was started:
———
Meanwhile, the shills here like bytheDNCscript and Seth Warner/Peter Shill and Bad Anonymous are busy getting their talking points from the DNC.
I predict you will be hearing, “But Flynn pled guilty and why would he do that if he wasn’t guilty?” a whole lot from them. They will rely on most people not working in the legal field and knowing that people plead guilty all the time to save money, and to get a good deal. And like with Flynn, to protect their family.
But this is a major defeat for them, and it reveals a lot about the Obama administration and the crooks at DOJ and FBI.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
I’m eating this up with a spoon.
Van Grack will land on his feet, of course. Jeff Zucker has a seat waiting for him as a ‘legal affairs commentator’.
With covid he can work for CNN and broadcast from his prison cell.
TIA:
They always fall up. It’s a guaranteed government perk when you unmentionable is caught in a ringer.
Great.
Now time to punish those responsible for this travesty.
All FBI, DOJ & etc. should be held fully ACCOUNTABLE, if they work for the Gov’t they should be FIRED. Former FBI/DOJ Officials should be held fully ACCOUNTABLE. Flynn has a great law suit against ALL. SUE the BUMS for everything they have. Also, Flynn former Lawyers should be sued for malpractice.
Hallelujah! Bout durn time!
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter