Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-17?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:40 pm

SIDNEY POWELL ACCUSES MIKE FLYNN OF LYING TO THE FBI ON JANUARY 24, 2017

October 28, 2019/26 Comments/in 2016 Presidential Election, Mueller Probe /by emptywheel
I’m starting my deep dive into the case Sidney Powell tries to make to convince Emmet Sullivan to throw out the guilty pleas Mike Flynn pled to twice (in this post, I laid out how she used a “reply” brief demanding Brady material to make an opening argument in a bid to get the case thrown out).

But in starting my deep dive, I didn’t get two lines into her exhibits before I realized that Sidney Powell, in documents submitted to the court, accused her client of lying to the FBI on January 24, 2017, precisely the crime she says he shouldn’t be held accountable for. At issue is the timeline she created to suggest every single event that happened at FBI between 2016 and 2018 was part of a plot to get her client. The second entry, which describes how Trump accepted the GOP nomination around the same time Lisa Page and Peter Strzok said bad two things about Trump (but not about Flynn), says that Flynn joined the campaign in 2015, though she claims not to know the date.

Image

By setting the date when Flynn joined the campaign to sometime vaguely in 2015, it suggests the government’s interest in his actions leading up to and during the RT Gala in Moscow in December 2015 were part of general animus direct at Trump, and not a legitimate counterintelligence concern about a former General being paid by a foreign propaganda outlet to eat dinner with Vladimir Putin.

Except that detail — that he was already part of the campaign in 2015 — conflicts with something he told the FBI on January 24, 2017: that he wasn’t really part of the Trump campaign yet when, after his former counterpart at GRU, Igor Sergun, died unexpectedly on January 3, 2016, he called Sergey Kislyak to offer condolences.

Image

Back in January 2017, Flynn would have had good reason to distance this call from Trump, because if it happened while he was part of the campaign, it would suggest he and Russia were in discussions even before Russia started stealing emails from Hillary Clinton and the Democrats.

Of particular note, the two other calls he claimed, in his interview with the FBI, were condolence calls actually weren’t, at least not primarily. On those, he was instead discussing policy issues.

But now Sidney Powell, Flynn’s own lawyer, says that’s not true, that he was already part of the campaign when he made this call.

It remains to be seen whether this Powell gambit will work. But accusing her client of lying to the FBI seems like an odd way to prove that only people who have an animus against Flynn would accuse him of lying to the FBI.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2019/10/28/s ... y-24-2017/
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Oct 29, 2019 12:58 pm

Kyle Cheney

JUST IN: Prosecutors say Joseph Mifsud's phones are "not favorable" to FLYNN or relevant to his case.

"Mifsud has no connection to the defendant’s communications with the Russian Ambassador in
December 2016, or to the defendant’s work on behalf of the Republic of Turkey"
Image
Image
MORE FLYNN NEWS: In another filing, prosecutors say every charge leveled by Flynn's attorneys in a recent brief are "unsupported by fact or law." And they go further to say the filing itself is flawed because you're not allowed to raise novel issues in a reply brief.
Image

Prosecutors also note that the recent filing is the first claim by Flynn that he's innocent, despite pleading guilty before two judges.

"In an extraordinary reversal, the defendant now claims that he is innocent of the criminal charge in this case."
Image
And lastly, prosecutors say they were prepared to file a detailed rebuttal of Flynn's new claims before Sulilvan decided he has all the info he needs to rule. They want to make sure he plans to dismiss the new allegations, or offer prosecutors a chance to respond before he rules.

Flynn's bizarre strategy of allowing his lawyers file wild right wing conspiracy theories that he personally knows to be untrue and that have no chance of legal success in court is increasing the likelihood Judge Sullivan sentences him to prison

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/ ... 4361330688
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby alloneword » Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:09 pm

Judge cancels Flynn hearing to review evidence - Published on 30 Oct 2019



The Michael Flynn smoking gun: FBI headquarters altered interview summary
by James Gagliano | November 05, 2019 12:23 PM

As a self-proclaimed adherent to Hanlon’s Razor, I once cynically viewed the frenzied focus on FBI actions during the 2016 Russian election-meddling investigation as partisan and overwrought. Hanlon’s Razor suggests that we never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity or incompetence. Having proudly served in the FBI for 25 years, I bristled at insulting accusations of an onerous deep state conspiracy. Some obvious mistakes made during the investigation of the Trump campaign were quite possibly the result of two ham-handedly overzealous FBI headquarters denizens, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, clumsily seeking to impress each other with ever-increasing levels of loathing for then-candidate Donald Trump.

FBI employees are entitled to their own political views. But senior-level decision-makers who express them on government devices, while overseeing a supremely consequential investigation into a political campaign, simply do not possess the requisite judgment and temperament for the job.

Their stunning text message exchanges and talk of an onerous “insurance policy” in the event Trump were to win prove how ill-suited they were for their positions in James Comey’s cabinet. What other steps might they have taken that have yet to be discovered? The inspector general is soon set to release a report into FBI actions in the effort to surveil the Trump campaign. Attorney General Bill Barr’s Justice Department is conducting its own review, and U.S. Attorney John Durham recently expanded his investigation into the case as well, by converting the review into a full-blown criminal investigation. Barr has faced backlash from critics of his investigation, who ironically have referred to it as a witch hunt.

But as we anxiously await the expected reports, there recently appeared some fairly explosive allegations into potential investigator misconduct that have not received the attention they deserve. With her filing of a blistering Motion to Compel against federal prosecutors in the Michael Flynn case just made public, Sidney Powell has upended my adherence to Hanlon’s Razor. Powell is the attorney for former national security adviser and retired Army Lt. Gen. Flynn, who pled guilty to one count of lying to FBI agents during the special counsel investigation. Powell’s motion seeks to unravel a case many feel was biased from its inception.

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.

Here’s me, acknowledging my mistake. I was dead wrong. It now seems there was a concerted effort, though isolated, within the upper-echelons of the FBI to influence the outcome of the Flynn investigation. By “dirtying up” Flynn, Comey’s FBI headquarters team of callow sycophants shortcut the investigative process. Arm-twisting Flynn through the “tweaked” version of his interview afforded him criminal exposure. The cocksure Comey team felt supremely confident that would inspire him “flipping” and give them the desperately sought-after evidence of Trump-Russia collusion that the wholly unverified Steele dossier was never remotely capable of providing.

I am physically nauseous as I type these words. I have long maintained that innocent mistakes were made and that the investigators at the center of this maelstrom were entitled to the benefit of the doubt.

No more.

They have tarnished the badge and forever stained an agency that deserved so much better from them. I am ashamed. The irreparable damage Comey’s team has done to the FBI will take a generation to reverse.

I ashamedly join Hanlon’s Razor in getting this one wrong.

James A. Gagliano (@JamesAGagliano) worked in the FBI for 25 years. He is a law enforcement analyst for CNN and an adjunct assistant professor in homeland security and criminal justice at St. John's University.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... ew-summary
User avatar
alloneword
 
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:19 am
Location: UK
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Nov 07, 2019 7:12 pm

One America News Network, also referred to as One America News, is an American right-wing to radical right wing pay television news channel launched on July 4, 2013, owned by Herring Networks, Inc. The network is headquartered in San Diego, California, and operates a news bureau in Washington, D.C


The Hell of Working at Trump’s New Favorite Network
Conspiracy theories, racist outbursts, and a whole lot of Putin love. Working for the far-right One America News Network was a deeply weird experience, former employees say.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-hell- ... ws-network



“Flynn is playing to Trump,”


POLITICS
Michael Flynn tries to get his guilty plea thrown out in Russia investigation

Michael Flynn
Michael Flynn, then President Trump’s national security advisor, speaks at the White House in early 2017. He lasted less than a month in the job. (Carolyn Kaster / Associated Press)
By DEL QUENTIN WILBERSTAFF WRITER
NOV. 7, 2019 10:22 AM
WASHINGTON — Michael Flynn, President Trump’s first national security advisor, is seeking to have his guilty plea thrown out for lying to the FBI during the Russia investigation — a risky legal strategy that could irritate the federal judge who will sentence him next month.
In seeking to dismiss the case, Flynn’s lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan to hold prosecutors in contempt of court for withholding evidence. They also have embraced what appear to be unrelated conspiracy theories pushed by Trump and his allies to discredit federal investigators.

Legal experts said it is clear from court filings that the real audience for Flynn’s moves is not Sullivan, a no-nonsense judge who has little patience for defendants seeking to duck responsibility for their crimes. It is the president who named Flynn national security advisor after the 2016 election — and then sacked him after less than a month on the job.

“Flynn is playing to Trump,” said James Cohen, a law professor at Fordham University in New York. “You don’t evaluate these arguments based on them making sense. You evaluate them on the basis of whom they are making happy. That would be Trump. Flynn wants a pardon.”

Flynn’s scheduled sentencing on Dec. 18 represents a legal denouement of sorts in former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s sprawling investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 campaign. He pleaded guilty in December 2017.

Flynn was the only member of the Trump White House charged in the probe, though his case did not involve allegations that he colluded with Russia to help Trump get elected.

Mueller successfully prosecuted Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, and deputy campaign chairman, Rick Gates, among others, on charges ranging from tax fraud to lying to investigators. He also charged 25 Russian military intelligence operatives and others with stealing Democratic Party emails and sowing disinformation on social media.

Mueller ultimately concluded that the Trump campaign welcomed Russian help in the 2016 campaign but did not engage in a criminal conspiracy with the Kremlin

#EveryonesChild | We are in this together. SPONSORED CONTENT
#EveryonesChild | We are in this together.
By Players Coalition
Flynn pleaded guilty to lying about his conversations with Sergey Kislyak, Russia’s ambassador to the U.S., in the weeks before Trump’s inauguration in January 2017. He falsely denied to FBI agents that he told Kislyak that Russia should not retaliate after the outgoing Obama administration enacted sanctions to punish Moscow for meddling in the election.

When Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that Moscow would not hit back with sanctions, Kislyak called Flynn to tell him that was in response to his request, according to court documents.

On Feb. 13, 2017, Flynn resigned after the White House learned he had lied to Vice President Pence about those conversations. He became the first in a string of high-profile departures from the Trump administration as the Mueller probe and other scandals have swirled around the White House.

It was a staggering downfall for a former Army lieutenant general who helped lead efforts to strengthen military intelligence operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and later led the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency.

After pleading guilty, Flynn cooperated extensively with Mueller’s team, court papers show.

Citing that assistance, prosecutors urged Sullivan last year to spare Flynn prison time. Under federal sentencing guidelines, which judges use to help mete out appropriate punishment, he faces no more than six months in jail.

In June, two months after Mueller had issued his final report, Flynn abruptly changed tactics.

He fired his lawyers who had negotiated the guilty plea and replaced them with a team led by Sidney Powell, a pro-Trump attorney who frequently appears on conservative television and radio shows.

In seeking to toss the case and obtain more evidence, Powell and her colleagues in recent months have accused the FBI of plotting to trap Flynn. Agents orchestrated an “ambush-interview,” Powell wrote, and tricked her client “into making statements they could allege as false.”

Flynn’s new lawyers have also savaged the credibility of a former FBI agent, Peter Strzok, who had helped question Flynn. Strzok was fired in August 2018 after Justice Department officials uncovered private anti-Trump texts he had exchanged with an FBI employee with whom he was having an affair.

Arguing that prosecutors withheld helpful evidence, the defense lawyers have sought to link Flynn’s plight to a number of conspiracies involving the Russia investigation, though none appear to directly involve Flynn’s lies to the FBI or Pence.

Most recently, Flynn’s new team has sought access to cellphones purportedly belonging to Joseph Mifsud, a Maltese academic who told a Trump campaign advisor that Russia had “dirt” on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails.” That tip ultimately led to the FBI investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 race.

In his report, Mueller wrote that Mifsud had “connections to Russia” and former FBI officials have described him as a Russian agent.

In court papers, prosecutors denied withholding evidence and scoffed at the conspiracy theories promoted by Powell and her team.

“Since the beginning of their involvement, the defendant’s new counsel have sought to get the charges dropped, professed their client’s actual innocence, and perpetuated conspiracy theories, all while stating that the defendant does not intend to withdraw his guilty plea,” federal prosecutors wrote.

Flynn’s efforts to get more evidence, prosecutors argued, is “a fishing expedition in hopes of advancing conspiracy theories related to the U.S. government’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.”

A Justice Department spokeswoman and Powell declined to comment. Sullivan has not indicated when he might rule on the defense team’s motions.

If the judge sides with prosecutors, Flynn could be in trouble, legal experts said.

“If the judge disagrees with Flynn’s arguments and concludes that Flynn is not fully accepting responsibility for his misconduct, then I would expect Judge Sullivan to say as much at sentencing and give a sentence that takes that lack of acceptance into account,” said Steven Levin, a former federal prosecutor.

Levin and other legal experts say that by not withdrawing his guilty plea, Flynn has kept prosecutors from charging him with more serious crimes.

As part of his plea, for example, Flynn admitted he made false statements about consulting work he did for Turkey. If he were charged with more serious offenses and lost at trial, he could face extended prison time.

Prosecutors also do not appear eager for the plea to evaporate, the experts said. A trial would take time and they have problematic witnesses, including the FBI agents who had an affair and sent anti-Trump text messages.

The judge has already indicated that he takes a dim view of Flynn’s crimes.

During a tumultuous sentencing hearing last Dec. 18, Sullivan chastised Flynn in harsh terms, saying he had lied to FBI agents “on the premises of the White House, in the White House in the West Wing by a high-ranking security officer who, up to that point, had an unblemished career of service to his country.”

“I am not hiding my disgust, my disdain for your criminal offense,” Sullivan said, though he later backtracked on some of his harsher comments.

Sullivan subsequently expressed concern that the former Trump advisor was not accepting responsibility after his then-attorneys suggested in court filings that he had been set up by the FBI. “This sounds like backpedaling,” the judge said.
https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/ ... thrown-out



Sarah Kendzior

In addition to this, Flynn tried to kidnap a cleric, make illegal nuke deals, worked illegally as an agent for Russia and Turkey, etc. The judge in his case was appalled and wanted him locked up for public safety.

Mueller insisted Flynn not go to prison, to the judge's horror

https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/statu ... 9686340609



'I can’t hide my disgust, my disdain’: judge lambasts Michael Flynn
In an unexpected moment, Judge Emmet Sullivan subjected Trump’s former national security adviser to a stinging rebuke
Stephanie Kirchgaessner in Washington

Tue 18 Dec 2018 17.26 EST Last modified on Wed 19 Dec 2018 00.11 EST

Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, leaves after the delay in his sentencing hearing at US District Court in Washington DC on Tuesday.
Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, leaves after the delay in his sentencing hearing at US district court in Washington on Tuesday. Photograph: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images
When a stone-faced Michael Flynn entered courtroom 24 in the US district court in Washington DC on Tuesday, it looked like a cozy deal arranged with prosecutors – no jail time in exchange for a guilty plea and full cooperation – was already sealed.

But no one was counting on Judge Emmet Sullivan.


While Mueller’s prosecutors had argued Flynn’s decades of military service warranted a lenient sentence for the three-star general even after he had admitted lying to the FBI, it was Sullivan who, gesturing to the American flag beside him, accused Flynn of selling his country out. Minutes later, he ponderously asked the government’s lawyers whether they had ever considered charging Flynn with treason. (No, they later answered.)

“Arguably,” Sullivan said, describing how Flynn had secretly been working for the Turkish government before he joined the White House, “that undermines everything this flag over here stands for.”

It was an unexpected moment that seemed to capture – perhaps for the first time – the depth of the betrayals at the heart of special counsel Robert Mueller’s criminal investigation. So far, the cast of characters that have been ensnared by the inquiry, from Trump adviser George Papadopoulos to Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort, have seemed relatively minor players on the world stage. But not Flynn, who had been entrusted with keeping the country’s most classified secrets and protecting its security.

“I am going to be frank with you, this crime is very serious,” the judge said. “I can’t hide my disgust, my disdain, at this criminal offence.”

Even the scene of the crime – the West Wing of the White House – seemed to gnaw at Sullivan, who repeated it several times, all the while emphasizing how unusual it was that the government and Flynn were asking him to bless a plea agreement even though Flynn had not completed his cooperation with the government.

Sullivan also quickly clamped down on any suggestion that Flynn’s admitted crime – lying to federal investigators – had occurred in part because the retired general had been lulled into thinking his interview with the FBI was simply a chat, and not part of a criminal investigation.

Never in his decades on the bench, Sullivan said, had he accepted a guilty plea from a defendant who was not really guilty. “I don’t intend to start today,” Sullivan said, and then had Flynn sworn in. “Any false answers will get you in more trouble,” he added.

Months after Flynn led chants of “lock her up” at the Republican national convention, in reference to Hillary Clinton, it was the three-star general who was then forced – without hesitation or excuses – to admit to his crimes.

Even then, Sullivan told Flynn he ought to consider a delay in his sentencing because there were no guarantees, the judge said, that he would not be incarcerated. After a brief recess, Flynn, looking subdued and a little stunned, returned with his answer: he would take the delay and thereby possibly avoid a harsher sentence.

Then came more bad news for Flynn on what Sullivan had in mind. He was clearly keen to convince Flynn that jail time was still on the table.

“I didn’t say ‘wink, wink, nod, nod’,” Sullivan declared. “I’m not promising anything.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... sentencing
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Will Flynn bring back Yellowcake to WH Menu after 1-21-1

Postby BenDhyan » Wed Nov 25, 2020 11:20 pm

The End..or.is there more?

Image
Ben D
User avatar
BenDhyan
 
Posts: 880
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests