National security attorney Bradley Moss and former assistant attorney general John Yoo appear on Fox News to discuss the issues around a constructed Russian conspiracy; a politically corrupt special counsel; the pending IG report on possible FISA abuse; and the ongoing predicate review by U.S. Attorney John Durham.
Former congressman Trey Gowdy warns everyone to tamp down expectations from the IG report on FISA abuse. One point of focus from Horowitz’s letter today is that he *only* looked at the singular FISA issues surrounding Carter Page, nothing more.
…”Relating to a certain U.S. person.”
Therefore if Carter Page was not a victim; meaning if Carter Page was an active participant (mole) in the FBI operation – willing to be the vehicle by which the Steele Dossier could be injected into the investigation; then there will likely be no criminal conduct outlined by Horowitz. The head of the tick-tock club was not happy with this possibility.
The DOJ Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz has notified congress that his investigation is complete. In a letter to congressional committee members with oversight authority, IG Horowitz states the draft report on his FISA abuse investigation is currently undergoing an internal classification review:
PROCESS: The completion of the draft report indicates: (1) the investigation has concluded; (2) the IG referencer checks are now complete; and (3) the draft is submitted to the DOJ (AG Bill Barr) and FBI (Christopher Wray) for a review.
Depending on the size, scale and content of the report a classification review could take several weeks. This is where President Trump previously granting AG Bill Barr authority to make declassification decisions will come into play. Ultimately the decision on what can be released is now in the hands of U.S. Attorney General William Barr.
AG Bill Barr’s May 23rd, 2019, declassification authority covers investigative material from the DOJ, FBI, Central Intelligence Agency, State Department, Treasury Department, Department of Energy, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security and the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).
How much AG Bill Barr will declassify is an unknown; and this part will most likely be the source of a great deal of debate and political positioning.
After the classification review, and possible declassification determinations by AG Bill Barr, the draft report will be returned to the Office of Inspector General for a Final Draft assembly. Any information remaining classified will be placed into a separate “Classified Appendix” that will not be public.
The Final Draft could, likely will, be shared with key stakeholders who are outlined within the report during the Principal Review Phase (generally two/three weeks). Here the IG may accept feedback on the investigative findings. If the IG accepts feedback for placement in the report; the referencer will generally provide additional material specific to the allowed response from the principal(s), with further comment from the IG.
Interesting note from the IG letter:
From this point, a good guess based on processes and procedures would be to anticipate a final public report in approximately six to eight weeks. Though it could be delivered faster depending on the scale/scope/complexity of the classification review.
As you listen to Jeffrey Toobin defend former FBI Director Andrew McCabe, play a little mental juxtaposition game and replace McCabe with General Mike Flynn. Then contemplate just how hypocritical, sanctimonious, biased and politically obtuse this CNN crew of narrative engineers really are. WATCH:
Here’s a juxtaposed transcript using Toobins exact words:
…”This is an extremely unusual prosecution. Michael Flynn had the right to speak to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, that is beyond dispute. As incoming National Security Advisor he had the fight to speak to ambassadors. He also had an impeccable record as one of the most honored and successful DNI heads of his generation.”
…”It’s complicated. It is really difficult to understand even what the lie is here; the alleged lie. The alleged lie is while Flynn had the right to speak to Ambassador Kislyak, and he spoke to Ambassador Kislyak… well, months later, describe what was in the conversation that you had every right to have; at a time when Flynn’s being interviewed about a different subject. Being prosecuted for lying in these very esoteric circumstances, where it’s about this conversation – then that conversation, well, it’s very rare. You know”…
Several news outlets are now reporting that U.S. Attorney for DC, Jessie Liu, will likely indict former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe for lying to FBI investigators.
The reporting is based on leaked email communications from the lawyers representing Andrew McCabe, where McCabe’s legal appeals to Main Justice and current DOJ Deputy Attorney General James Rosen were rejected.
WASHINGTON DC – […] A source close to McCabe’s legal team said they received an email from the Department of Justice which said, “The Department rejected your appeal of the United States Attorney’s Office’s decision in this matter. Any further inquiries should be directed to the United States Attorney’s Office.” (more)
While an indictment of McCabe is a positive step toward accountability for the corrupt ‘small group’ within the DOJ/FBI, the fact that McCabe is afforded a back-and-forth debate on the issues only highlights the ridiculous prism of tiered justice and politics.
The OIG investigation of McCabe, and the subsequent criminal referral, was finalized over 18 months ago. No ordinary citizen, other than well-connected ‘beach friends‘, would be granted such considerations.
If McCabe is indicted it will be interesting to read the Lawfare (Benjamin Wittes) perspective on having one of their team finally encountering legal accountability.
Previously Michael Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell, had to file specific requests within their ‘motion to show cause for Brady discovery material‘ under seal. After a DOJ review, and redaction of some names, the discovery motion is now unsealed by the court and available for review.
There are 40 bullet points outlining material sought by Michael Flynn. The request is extensive and connects to multiple aspects of the overall DOJ, FBI and intelligence community operations throughout 2016 and into 2017. The government response to the Flynn motion is due to Judge Sullivan by September 24th at noon.
This prosecution and the circumstances surrounding it are unprecedented. The only way to achieve justice in this case is to provide transparency and the full disclosure of all information relevant to the defense of Mr. Flynn. Now, more than ever, the government must be held to the highest standards, as classically set out in Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 86 (1935) (“The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win the case, but that justice shall be done.”); United States v. Harvey, 791 F.2d 294, 300 (4th Cir. 1986) (noting “both constitutional and supervisory concerns require holding the Government to a greater degree of responsibility”).
Today Michael Flynn and his attorney Sidney Powell returned to federal court for a status hearing before Judge Emmet Sullivan. Generally status hearings are uneventful; however, this hearing falls on the heels of an explosive filing by Flynn’s defense outlining allegations of serious prosecutorial misconduct; and claims the DOJ is withholding Brady material.
Before getting into the heart of the proceedings, here is Ms. Sidney Powell appearing on Fox News to discuss the events today. In this interview Ms. Powell confirms something we have previously presented; Rod Rosenstein authorized Robert Mueller to target Michael Flynn Jr. in order to provide leverage for a Flynn guilty plea.
Hat Tip Techno-Fog: The DOJ prosecutor, Brandon Van Grack, has not filed a response to the Flynn defense motion. However, both sides argued some of the specifics today in court.
For scheduling: a date of Sept. 24th, 2019, was set by Judge Sullivan for the written DOJ response to Flynn’s accusations of Brady violations. Thereafter the defense rebuttal to the DOJ response is due by October 15th; and then a hearing date of October 31st is scheduled for Sullivan to question both teams centered around the filings. A tentative sentencing date was scheduled for December 18th, 2019, as a matter of formal proceeding.
Tone – Judge Sullivan appeared to be open to the defense presentations and established during his statements that the plea agreement was between Flynn and the DOJ, and did not bind his court. Therefore Sullivan’s prior order on Brady discovery supersedes any agreement between the defense and prosecution:
Thus the court establishes, despite the plea agreement, the DOJ is still responsible for delivering exculpatory Brady evidence that is relevant to the purpose of court proceedings; including material that should be considered for sentencing.
After hearing from Ms. Powell discussing Brady material showing Michael Flynn did not commit any FARA (lobbying) violation, Judge Sullivan gave an example of how the court considered Brady value around evidence of the FARA violation, or lack thereof.
In prior proceedings (December 2018) the DOJ implied benefit within the plea deal because Mr. Flynn was not charged with lobbying (FARA) violations.
The absence of legal responsibility would be considered a benefit to the defendant by the court. However, if the actual evidence does not support the existence of a FARA violation then the court would be mistakenly considering a benefit within the plea. Ms. Powell confirmed the example.
The bottom line is Judge Sullivan is open to reviewing all the exculpatory evidence that is required by his standing Brady order. This is helpful to Flynn’s defense because it puts the DOJ on notice they must provide a fulsome picture of the Flynn case to both the defendant and the court.
Ms. Powell then highlighted some of the particular concerns surrounding missing Brady evidence. Example: the DOJ sat on Page/Strzok texts for months in violation of the Court’s discovery order:
Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack then countered Ms. Powell by saying the DOJ “notified the defendant – that such communications existed”
But notice the DOJ doesn’t say they made the texts available to Flynn prior to his plea agreement November 30th 2017, only that they informed him “communications existed”.
Then after Flynn signed the plea agreement; and after the Page/Strzok texts were public; at the second Flynn sentencing hearing (Dec 2018); there were “texts provided that were not available to the public.”
That’s a rather stunning admission, because the DOJ is admitting the special counsel hid text messages from within the batches that were released to the public. The special counsel later showed those ‘exculpatory‘ text messages to Flynn’s defense knowing they held a Brady value, and knowing the defense would be unable to make them public.
Considering these hidden text messages pertain to evidence of Flynn’s innocence, we can only imagine what those text messages are.
Additionally Ms. Powell highlighted two more documents the DOJ-NSD (Jessie Liu again) refuses to produce:
1) This is new…. A “Russian agent” exoneration memo dated 1/30/17 that apparently originated from inside the DOJ.
2) A DOJ memo clearing Flynn of Logan Act on 2/8/17. (Remember, the “Logan Act” was said by Sally Yates to be a big part of the reason for the FBI to interview Flynn.)
Then Ms. Powell went on to discuss the issues surrounding the missing notes from FBI Agent Joseph Pientka, and the original FD-302 written by Pientka. The DOJ says they don’t have it.
Judge Sullivan asked Ms. Powell if she was going to withdraw the guilty plea based on the direction she was going. Ms. Powell said no, and pointed to the possibility of dismissal based on wrongful prosecution; and a case that would never have been brought if all the evidence was visible.
The official DOJ response will is due in two weeks, 9/24/19 by high-noon.
It’s worth noting according to Mark Meadows the Office of Inspector General Michael Horowitz has interviewed FBI Agent Joe Pientka extensively; prior attempts by congress to gain testimony from Pientka were blocked by the FBI and Rod Rosenstein.
FBI Agent Joseph Pientka was never interviewed by the joint House judiciary and oversight committees (Goodlatte and Gowdy). The reason, as explained by Meadows, was simple; Pientka was on Weissmann and Mueller’s special counsel team. Congress was not allowed to interfere in the Mueller probe. In hindsight this looks like Weissmann, Mueller & Rosenstein strategically using the investigation as a shield from sunlight.
The Flynn interview took place on January 24, 2017. The Pientka report was written Jan 24th, 2017. The wording was then deliberated by the small group, approved by FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and entered into the record on February 15th, 2017.
Here’s the report:
The original authorization for the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller was May 17th, 2017. However, the released Mueller and Weissmann report showed there were two additional scope memos authorizing specific targeting of the Mueller probe. The first scope memo was August 2nd, 2017, OUTLINED HERE, and is an important part of the puzzle that helps explain the corrupt original purpose of the special counsel.
The second scope memo was issued by Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller on October 20th, 2017. The transparent intent of the second scope memo was to provide Weissmann and Mueller with ammunition and authority to investigate specific targets, for specific purposes. One of those targets was General Michael Flynn’s son, Michael Flynn Jr.
As you review the highlighted portion below, found on pages 12 and 13 of the Weissmann report, read slowly and fully absorb the intent; the corruption is blood-boiling:
This second scope memo allowed Weissmann and Mueller to target tangentially related persons and entities bringing in Michael Cohen, Richard Gates, Roger Stone and Michael Flynn Jr. Additionally and strategically (you’ll see why), this memo established the authority to pursue “jointly undertaken activity“.
The four identified targets within the original July 2016 investigation, “Operation Crossfire Hurricane”, were George Papadopoulos, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort and Carter Page. (See HPSCI report):
General Flynn was under investigation from the outset in mid-2016. The fraudulent FBI counterintelligence operation, established by CIA Director John Brennan, had Flynn as one of the early targets when Brennan handed the originating electronic communication “EC” to FBI Director James Comey.
The investigation of General Flynn never stopped throughout 2016 and led to the second investigative issue of his phone call with Russian Ambassador Kislyak in December 2016:
Back to the Page #12 October 20th Scope Memo:
The first redaction listed under “personal privacy” has not been revealed. However, The second related redaction is a specific person, Michael Flynn Jr.
In combination with the October timing, the addition of Flynn Jr to the target list relates to the ongoing 2016/2017 investigation of his father, General Michael Flynn, for: (1) possible conspiracy with a foreign government; (2) unregistered lobbying; (3) materially false statements and omissions on 2017 FARA documents; and (4) lying to the FBI.
This October 20th, 2017, request from Weissmann and Mueller aligns with the time-frame were special counsel team lawyers Brandon L. Van Grack and Zainab N. Ahmad were prosecuting Michael Flynn and attempting to force him into a guilty plea.
Getting Rosenstein to authorize adding Mike Flynn Jr. to the target list (scope memo) meant the special counsel could threaten General Flynn with the indictment of his son as a co-conspirator tied to the Turkish lobbying issue (which they did) if he doesn’t agree to a plea. Remember: “jointly undertaken activity“.
The October 20th, 2017, expanded scope memo authorized Mueller to start demanding records, phones, electronic devices and other evidence from Mike Flynn Jr, and provided the leverage Weissmann wanted. After all, Mike Flynn Jr. had a four month old baby.
The amount of twisted pressure from this corrupt team of prosecutors is sickening. A month later, General Flynn was signing a plea agreement:
Michael Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell, responds to the threats and harassment from HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff and his retained political Lawfare subcontractors:
Not enough people understand the role of the Lawfare group in the corruption and political weaponization of the DOJ, FBI and larger intelligence community.
What Media Matters is to corrupt left-wing media, the Lawfare group is to the corrupt DOJ and FBI.
All of the headline names around the seditious conspiracy against Donald Trump assemble within the network of the Lawfare group.
Three days after the October 21st, 2016, FISA warrant was obtained, Benjamin Wittes outlined the insurance policy approach.
FBI Director James Comey, FBI Legal Counsel James Baker, Comey memo recepient Daniel Richman, Deputy AG Sally Yates, Comey friend Benjamin Wittes, FBI lead agent Peter Strzok, FBI counsel Lisa Page, Mueller lead Andrew Weissmann and the Mueller team of lawyers, all of them -and more- are connected to the Lawfare group; and this network provides the sounding board for all of the weaponized approaches, including the various new legal theories as outlined within the Weissmann-Mueller Report.
The Lawfare continuum is very simple. The corrupt 2015 Clinton exoneration; which became the corrupt 2016 DOJ/FBI Trump investigation; which became the corrupt 2017 DOJ/FBI Mueller probe; is currently the 2019 “impeachment” plan. Weissmann and Mueller delivering their report evolved the plan from corrupt legal theory into corrupt political targeting. Every phase within the continuum holds the same goal.
The current “impeachment strategy” is planned-out within the Lawfare group.
After the 2018 mid-terms, and in preparation for the “impeachment” strategy, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler hired Lawfare Group members to become committee staff.
Chairman Schiff hired former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman (link), and Chairman Nadler hired Obama Administration lawyer Norm Eisen and criminal defense attorney Barry Berke (link), all are within the Lawfare network.
Remember, Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller didn’t come into this process as an ‘outsider’, and Mueller didn’t select his team. The corrupt Lawfare team inside government (FBI Counsel James Baker, DOJ Deputy Andrew Weissmann, FBI Deputy McCabe etc.) already knew Mueller. The team had established personal and professional connections to Mueller, and they brought him in to lead the team.
When you realize that Robert Mueller didn’t select the team; rather the preexisting team selected their figurehead, Robert Mueller; then results make sense. Robert Mueller can never be allowed to testify to congress without a handler, because when questioned about specifics he actually has very little understanding of what took place.
A disconcerting aspect to the Lawfare dynamic is how current U.S. Attorney General William Barr has knowledge of this. Barr knows and understands how the Lawfare network operates. Barr is from this professional neighborhood. Like Mueller, Barr also knows these people.
“As a matter of law. In other words, we didn’t agree with the legal analysis- a lot of the legal analysis in the report. It did not reflect the views of the department. It was the views of a particular lawyer or lawyers“…
Under Eric Holder, Sally Yates, Loretta Lynch, Tom Perez, Robert Mueller, James Comey and Andrew McCabe, the focus of the DOJ and FBI became prismatic toward politics and tribalism. All of the hired senior lawyers and officials had to be aligned with the political intents of the offices.
[CIA Director John Brennan brought the same political goals to an intelligence apparatus that held a preexisting disposition of alignment, see Mike Morell: “I ran the CIA now I’m endorsing Hillary Clinton”.]
Their agencies were used against their ideological enemies in large operations like Fast-n-Furious, IRS targeting, Gibson Guitar etc. And also smaller operations: Henry Louis Gates, George Zimmerman, Darren Wilson, Ferguson, Baltimore etc. All of these activist Lawfare examples were pushed and promoted by an allied media.
Many of the ‘weaponized’ approaches use radical legal theory (ex. disparate impact), and that ties into the purposes and methods of the Lawfare Group. The intent of Lawfare is described in the name: to use Law as a tool in Warfare. The ideology that binds the group is the ideological outlook and purpose: using the legal system to target political opposition.
The Lawfare group ensures you have the right to remain guilty until they verify your politics and determine your alignment with the tribe. If accepted, your disposition shifts to innocent and you receive a pass to avoid any legal jeopardy…
When special counsel Robert Mueller formally closed the Russia investigation on May 29th, he opened the door to wide-ranging speculation as to the intent behind his statement. In the eyes of Former Texas Prosecutor Sidney Powell, Mueller’s words stood the rule of law and the presumption of innocence on their heads.
The Democrats return from summer vacation intending to pick right-back-up where they failed in the spring… Yup, back to the ridiculous Muh Russia Collusion Conspiracy as advanced by the insufferable head weasel of the HPSCI, Chairman Adam Schiff.
Chairman Schiff sends a copy of a letter (full pdf below) to his collaborative narrative engineers in the media. The letter outlines committee efforts to force testimony from Michael Flynn, and the response from Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell dismissing the political grandstanding of Schiff and his ‘beat-a-dead-horse‘ Russian constituents.
According to the letter sanctimonious Schiff says Flynn’s new counsel, Sidney Powell, “exhibits a troubling degree of unprofessionalism” in conversations with committee staffers and Mr. Schiff’s legal aides borrowed from the Lawfare community of resistance operatives. Good for her.
Last week, Sidney Powell filed a brief with judge Emmet Sullivan outlining serious allegations of prosecutorial misconduct in the Flynn case. A hearing in Judge Sullivan’s court is scheduled for tomorrow, September 10th.
Here’s Schiff’s letter:
Here’s Powell’s Brief: