Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan held a sealed ex parte hearing with Michael Flynn’s defense counsel, Sidney Powell, today.  An “ex parte hearing” is a judicial review of an emergency request, in which the other party may or may not be present. [ie. a discussion between Flynn’s counsel and the court. The content was ‘sealed‘.]

(Hat Tip Techno-Fog)

As an outcome of today’s discussion, the court (Judge Sullivan) stated he will first reconcile issues surrounding allegations of Brady violations (unethical concealment of evidence favorable to the defendant), before proceeding to issues around the DOJ’s refusal to grant defense counsel with security clearances.

The ex parte hearing was prompted by a filing from Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell, (reposted below).  From the court’s response today it would appear Judge Sullivan will address the Brady concerns first, during the hearing scheduled for September 10th.

In the 19-page filing (full pdf below), Ms. Powell walks through the history of the DOJ, FBI and intelligence apparatus weaponization against Mr. Flynn and lays out the background behind everything known to have happened in 2016, 2017 through today.

From the corrupt DOJ lawyers who were working with Fusion-GPS and Chris Steele, including Mr. Weissmann, Mr. Van Grack and Ms. Zainab Ahmad; to the 2015/2016 FISA database search abuses; to the CIA and FBI operation against Flynn including Nellie Ohr; to the schemes behind the use of DOJ official Bruce Ohr; to the corrupt construct of the special counsels office selections; to the specifics within the malicious conspiracy outlined by hiding FBI interview notes of Mike Flynn,… all of it….

The conversation today with Judge Sullivan is an outcome of this stunning filing that many CTH readers are well prepared to understand.

.

Judge Sullivan will address the allegations of Brady violations first, and then proceed to the issues of security clearances (if needed).   The hearing is Tuesday, September 10th:

House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes appears on Fox News with the Tick-Tock club to discuss a lawsuit he has filed (full pdf below) against Fusion GPS.

The Nunes lawsuit alleges Fusion GPS participated in racketeering and conspiracy smear campaign Nunes and the House Intelligence Committee; in an attempt to impede the committee investigation of coordination between the Clinton campaign, Fusion GPS and the FBI.  [Cloud Link to lawsuit – Scribd Link to lawsuit]

.

According to the Tick-Tock club everyone must work together with Senator Lindsey Graham because the “Deep State” will attempt to obfuscate, hide information, block oversight and impede any effort to highlight damaging institutional information.

In essence what they are saying is that U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr is incapable of releasing the information.  CTH does not agree. AG Barr is capable, he’s just not delivering; quit defending his inaction. Stop the nonsense.  Here’s the lawsuit:

.

The Tick Tock cometh…. “soon”

Greg Craig was accused by special counsel Robert Mueller and lead litigator Andrew Weissman of  FARA (Foreign Agent Registration Act) lobbying violations; and later charges he lied when questioned about them.

The Greg Craig FARA pursuit was similar to special counsel accusations made against Paul Manafort and Michael Flynn, and special counsel threats toward the same objective against George Papadopoulos.

The sketchy use of potential FARA violations to capture targets was a specific technique deployed by Weissmann.  However, the difference between Manafort and Flynn was Greg Craig decided to fight (including fighting claims he lied about the lobbying construct) instead of taking a high-pressure DOJ plea deal.  Today a jury rejected the accusations.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Prominent Washington lawyer Greg Craig was found not guilty Wednesday of lying to the Justice Department about work he did for the government of Ukraine in a case that arose from the special counsel’s Russia investigation and that centered on the lucrative world of foreign lobbying.

The jury deliberated for less than a day before clearing Craig, a White House counsel in the Obama administration, of a single count of making false statements to federal investigators.

The swift verdict was a setback to the Justice Department’s crackdown on lobbyists who do unregistered work for foreign governments and came as prosecutors have been ramping up enforcement of a decades-old law meant to police foreign influence and promote transparency. U.S. officials hoped a conviction would demonstrate an aggressive approach to lobbyists who fail to register their foreign work or who give false information to the Justice Department to avoid identifying themselves as a foreign agent, as Craig was alleged to have done.

[…]  One juror, Michael Meyer, 60, said he was agitated that prosecutors, including Mueller, had devoted resources and attention to the case given the more serious allegations that he said were illuminated by the special counsel’s work.

“I just could not understand why so many resources of the government were put into this when, in fact, actually the republic itself is at risk,” Meyer said. “I was deeply offended personally … that this particular case was brought against this particular man.” (read more)

Remember when former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe said he was “not politically motivated”?   Well, the Pennsylvania Democrat Party has announced McCabe as the keynote speaker for their fundraiser on September 21st:

(Source Link)

(IG Report on Andrew McCabe)

Tonight Lou Dobbs, admitting his own frustration, asked former Acting AG Matthew Whitaker “where are the scope memos”? And a conversation began; and within that conversation, Dobbs mentions the number of the scope memos… To wit, Whitaker had a very curious and deflective response. WATCH:

Focusing only on the ‘scope memo’ aspect, why do you think Matthew Whitaker deferred from responding about them?… wouldn’t even put a number to them?

It’s a straightforward, curiously overlooked (until Dobbs) and seemingly inconsequential part of the overall issue.  The Mueller investigation is long-since over; so why haven’t we been permitted to see the memos, which Rod Rosenstein created, that authorized the targeting within the investigation by Robert Mueller?

The implication from the non-answer, and then the subsequent conversation, would seem to indicate Whitaker knows the Scope Memos name specific targets -outlined/approved by Rosenstein- that were not charged by Mueller for anything (ex. Flynn Jr.) and therefore that’s the justification for not releasing them.

Perhaps a valid point. However, the deflection by Whitaker has piqued Suspicious Cat’s suspicions because the scope memos could be released with non-indicted targets redacted.

Who exactly is being protected?  The “targets” or Rod Rosenstein?

.