Sidney Powell Discusses In-Depth Background of Michael Flynn Case….


Michael Flynn’s lead defense counsel Sidney Powell sits down for a lengthy discussion with Epoch Times’ host Jan Jekielek.

In the court case against Lt. General Michael Flynn, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit has ordered Judge Emmet Sullivan to grant the DOJ’s request to dismiss. But what will happen next?

In the eyes of General Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell, what are the implications of Judge Sullivan keeping the case open? Is there more exculpatory evidence to come in the Flynn case? And, what are some possible steps to take to strengthen the U.S. Department of Justice as an institution?

Advertisements

Attorney General Bill Barr Podcast Interview With Senator Ted Cruz – (Video)…


U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr sat down for an important discussion with Texas Senator Ted Cruz for the Verdict podcast.  AG Barr discusses the recent riots and the ongoing effort to prosecute those engaging in violence and destruction of property.

Additionally, AG Barr also discusses the Big Tech censorship issue in combination with ongoing anti-trust investigations that will reach his desk for decision this summer.

Another important note surrounds AG Barr putting the date for Peter Strzok’s notes as January 5, 2017, following FBI Director James Comey’s pull-aside meeting at the White House with President Obama, VP Biden, Susan Rice and Sally Yates.

Devin Nunes Discusses Peter Strzok Notes that Tie Obama and Biden to Flynn Targeting…


Devin Nunes appears for a short interview with Martha MacCallum to discuss the latest information in/around the background investigation of the Michael Flynn case.

Sidney Powell Discusses Peter Strzok CYA Notes – “There’s A Criminal Conspiracy in There”…


Michael Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell appears with Maria Bartiromo to provide insight into the DC Circuit Appellate court ordering the dismissal of the Flynn case. One of the key points Ms. Powell draws attention to is that her client was targeted.  Within that targeting there’s a criminal conspiracy.

In hindsight it is very clear the White House, DOJ and FBI knew they were treading on thin ice. Susan Rice’s memo to file is clearly a CYA memo for the White House. James Comey’s memos are clearly a CYA effort for his participation. Bill Priestap kept his own notes reflecting his CYA; and Peter Strzok’s notes appear to have the same motivation.

Additionally, when the special counsel was put into place, Andrew McCabe’s memos to self are clearly written from a CYA perspective. They knew what they were doing was wrong.

Think about everyone in this picture above (left to right):

      • FBI Agent Peter Strzok kept CYA notes.
      • FBI Director James Comey kept CYA memos.
      • NSA Susan Rice wrote CYA memo on behalf of President Obama.
      • Depute Director Andrew McCabe wrote CYA memos.
      • FBI Counterintelligence Head Bill Priestap kept CYA notes.

Sidney Powell is correct, “there’s a criminal conspiracy in there.”

Sidney Powell Discusses Latest Flynn Developments With Lou Dobbs…


Michael Flynn’s defense counsel, Sidney Powell, appears on Lou Dobbs tonight to discuss the defense victory in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals; and the next steps in the case.

Ms. Powell still has legal business in front of Judge Emmet Sullivan, so she obviously needs to be a little tempered at this inflection point.  That said, what an incredible job Ms. Powell has done on behalf of her client.  Remarkable legal counsel.  WATCH:

Agent Strzok CYA Memo? – Strzok Notes Indicate Obama White House Involvement in Targeting Michael Flynn…


In a court filing yesterday [pdf here] the DOJ provided -initially under seal- the Flynn defense team with more exculpatory evidence.  The filing includes hand-written notes taken by FBI agent Peter Strzok in/around key dates in early January 2017.

The filing was unsealed today, and the Peter Strzok notes are released.

One of the reasons CTH has been slow on discussing this release is specifically because I am trying to accurately determine the provenance of the notes (as below).  USAO Jeff Jensen is unsure of the exact date of the notes.  Either January 3rd, 4th, or 5th… and there’s a good reason for that confusing ambiguity; which I am attempting to filter.

The notes are written by Peter Strzok during a conversation with former FBI Director James Comey; that context is important.  What the notes contain are Peter Strzok writing down what Comey relays to him from conversations with White House officials.

Repeat: The notes are Strzok writing down what Comey relays to him from conversations with the White House.   Comey is communicating to Strzok the status of opinion from various officials; those officials may include President Obama and Vice-President Biden.

.

However,… it also seems likely from CTH research files that some of the instructions (as written by Strzok) are passing through former ODNI James Clapper; who was in frequent contact with Comey on the key dates within the discussion.

So let me try to make sense of this.

James Comey was not in the room with Obama and/or Biden until January 5, 2017, the date of the Susan Rice memo.  The best guess on the date these notes were written is January 4, 2017, specifically because that’s the date when Strzok is telling his FBI counterpart not to close the Flynn case; and he says “The 7th Floor is involved”, which means James Comey.

We know Comey and Clapper were in conversation on January 3rd and 4th; and Comey provided the “CR cuts” (Flynn is Crossfire Razor “CR”) to Clapper on one of those dates.

The cuts are the rough draft transcript from Flynn’s intercepted phone calls with Russian Ambassador Kislyak.  Clapper used copies of the CR cuts to brief President Obama.

Comey would have received the CR cuts from Peter Strzok; and then passed them along to Clapper for use in the White House briefing.  Clapper would then be relaying information back to Comey about the White House position on their Flynn concerns.

The most likely scenario is that Clapper informed Comey about the White House position; and then Comey shared that information with Peter Strzok who is taking notes:

Agent Strzoks handwriting is terrible, and there are big blocks of redacted information.

A plausible rough transcript? [Via Stephen McIntyre]

Again, the background of these notes appears to be Comey relaying information to Peter Strzok about what the White House position is following their reception of the CR cuts. I do not believe Obama and Biden have talked to Comey. Instead the most likely scenario is DNI James Clapper relaying to Comey… who then relays to Strzok.

If my researched position is accurate, the day after these notes, January 5, 2017, Comey then meets with Obama and Biden as scheduled to discuss the Intelligence Community Assessment report that was previously requested by the White House.

It is from that January 5th meeting when the pull-aside took place with Obama, Biden, Rice, Yates, Clapper and Comey.

Jeff Jensen’s cover filing leaves open the slight possibility that Strzok’s notes were taken after the January 5th meeting.  However, I do not see that as likely at all.  The Strzok notes are connected to his LYNC instant messaging on January 4th:

Those instant messages were most likely relayed *AFTER* the conversation with James Comey. ie after “7th floor involved”.  So I would put the date of those notes as early to mid-morning January 4th.

It would look like this:

♦ January 3rd –  Comey asks Strzok to give him the “tech cuts” or “CR cuts” from the intercepted communication between Flynn and Kislyak.  Comey then gives copies (plural) to Clapper upon his request.   Clapper then goes to brief the White House.

♦ January 4th – After briefing the White House Clapper calls back to James Comey (or meets in person) to relay the position of the White House.  This is the substantive information that James Comey then relays to Peter Strzok as Comey tells Strzok: (a) what the White House response was to the CR Cuts; and (b) where to go from that moment.

Strzok then quickly responds by stopping the FBI Washington Field Office from closing the Flynn case as noted in the instant messages above.

♦ January 5th – Comey goes to the White House.

However, I’m also comfortable going to go out on a limb here… ready?

My hunch is these notes are FBI Agent Peter Strzok’s CYA memo for the targeting of Lt. General Michael Flynn.

  • Comey’s memos were Comey’s CYA.
  • Susan Rice’s memo was the White House CYA.
  • I now believe Strzok’s notes are Peter Strzoks’ CYA.

Everyone involved knew the targeting of incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was sketchy at best, seriously political, and potentially unlawful at worst.

The issue was so tenuous, the entire basis for the pull-aside meeting on January 5th was President Obama creating plausible deniability after James Clapper infected the White House with a document trail in the form of the CR Cuts.

Once DNI James Clapper briefed Obama and Biden on the Flynn intercepts, the White House now lost plausible deniability for their knowledge of Flynn being investigated.  The January 5th instructions to James Comey was purposefully the Obama/Biden White House cleaning up that potentially explosive issue.  Everyone was covering their ass.

The outcome of DNI Clapper briefing President Obama, with what Deputy Director Andrew McCabe described as “a summary document” that wasn’t an official “intelligence product”, was the White House now being officially informed of an open FBI investigation against incoming NSA Michael Flynn.  The White House was now infected with knowledge of the investigation…. and that could be a potential problem later on.

The knowledge of an investigation into the incoming administration; and the document trail created by Clapper/Comey; created a need for President Obama to have the pull-aside meeting with FBI Director James Comey the next day, January 5, 2017.

The purpose of the meeting was to create distance from an explosive & political issue.  The outgoing administration needed distance from James Comey.  Everything written in Susan Rice’s memo about the meeting is specifically worded to create that distance.

Susan Rice writes: “The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective”, adding three times that President Obama instructed Comey to handle everything “by the book.”   In essence the way Susan Rice framed the conversation was to place James Comey as specifically responsible for anything that happens.

Now, FBI Director James Comey isn’t stupid, and he would have immediately picked up on how he was being positioned outside the protective wire and completely on his own.  Being a very political FBI Director, Comey would know exactly what the purpose of these specific words and instructions from the President implied.

Rice’s memo, written with the advice of White House counsel, is specifically worded to create distance.  You might say the White House was leaving Comey holding the proverbial bag; and setting him up to be the ‘fall guy‘ if things went sideways.

This is the point where we need to put ourselves in Comey’s very political shoes.  Comey knows the purpose of that meeting.  Comey also knows essentially Obama is saying he didn’t authorize an investigation of Flynn and Obama is not going to protect Comey.

So what exactly was Comey tasked to do on behalf of the White House?

The only thing (provable) the FBI was specifically tasked to do was find out the reason for Russia’s behavior or lack thereof.  That’s it.  Comey carried authority to produce the intercepted “tech cuts”; and as an outcome of the task share them with DNI Clapper. But that’s the end of the White House/DNI tasking authority to the FBI against Flynn.

Director Comey was not tasked, authorized or requested to produce a transcript of the intercepted phone call; and he was not tasked to do anything else with it.  From the perspective of Obama, Comey’s task was complete January 5th, anything more is on him.

The lack of investigative authority toward Flynn is a key point to consider as we look at the internal FBI debate.  Remember, the day before the Obama/Comey conversation the FBI investigators had already determined there was “no derogatory information” and they were going to close the investigation.  Additionally, there was nothing of issue within the Flynn-Kislyak call content itself.

Anything, including legal risk from an abuse of power, after that January 5th meeting was now completely on Director Comey and Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s shoulders.

With that in mind, the debate with FBI Director of Counterintelligence Bill Priestap, and the January 23/24, 2017, meetings where Priestap is taking notes of conversations with Comey and McCabe, take on a new and narrow focus.

As Priestap took notes about his original concerns: “what is our goal?”

.

Flynn Case Update – Appeals Court Orders Judge Sullivan to Dismiss Flynn Case…


The three judges on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals have approved a writ of mandamus ordering Judge Emmet Sullivan to dismiss the case against Michael Flynn. [pdf here]

The panel ruled 2-1, that U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan overstepped his authority in not accepting the unopposed motion and questioning prosecutors’ decision.  This is a big victory for the Flynn defense team.  Not sure what Sullivan will do now.

Judges Karen Henderson and Neomi Rao supported the writ, judge Robert Wilkins did not.  Henderson was the surprise vote.

Writing the majority opinion Judge Neomi Rao noted, “in this case, the district court’s actions will result in specific harms to the exercise of the Executive Branch’s exclusive prosecutorial power.”  “If evidence comes to light calling into question the integrity or purpose of an underlying criminal investigation, the Executive Branch must have the authority to decide that further prosecution is not in the interest of justice,” Rao added.

Here’s the ruling:

.

 

Mueller Target Walid Phares Discusses Foreign Policy Motive for Obama-Era Officials To Target Team Trump…


Walid Phares was the fifth [redacted] target of Robert Mueller’s expanded investigation as authorized by former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein on August 2nd, 2017.

As Mr. Phares notes, the Mueller investigation was used by Obama-era politicians and officials as a mechanism to block President Trump from executing a divergent foreign policy.  The primary policy to protect was the Iran deal.

There is increased speculation, based on a pattern in other international activities and U.S. participants, the Iranian deal included return payments to U.S. officials for the release of billions in funds and the loosening of sanctions.  It is possible the return payments to the Obama team held a timing mechanism and the payments were stopped after President Trump withdrew from the deal and re-instituted sanctions.  Thus the severity of opposition from western politicians who were scheduled to remain wealthy via Iran.

.

U.S. senators write foreign aid policy, rules and regulations thereby creating the financing mechanisms to transmit U.S. funds.  Those same senators then received a portion of the laundered funds back through their various “institutes” and business connections to the foreign government offices. Example Ukraine [Burisma to Biden]

The U.S. State Dept. serves as a distribution network for the authorization of the money laundering by granting DC conflict waivers, approvals for financing (think Clinton Global Initiative), and permission slips for the payment of foreign money.   The officials within the State Dept. take a cut of the overall payments through a system of “indulgence fees”, junkets, gifts and expense payments to those with political oversight.

If anyone gets too close to revealing the process, writ large, they become a target of the entire apparatus.  President Trump was considered an existential threat to this entire process.  In reality all of the U.S. Senators (both parties) on the Foreign Relations Committee [Members Here] are participating in a process for receiving taxpayer money and contributions from foreign governments.

A “Codel” is a congressional delegation that takes trips to work out the payments terms/conditions of any changes in graft financing.  This is why Senators spend $20 million on a campaign to earn a job paying $350k/year.  The “institutes” is where the real foreign money comes in; billions paid by governments like China, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Ukraine, etc. etc.  There are trillions at stake.

Majority Leader Mitch McConnell holds the power over these members (and the members of the Senate Intel Committee), because McConnell decides who sits on what committee.

As soon as a Senator starts taking the bribes lobbying funds, McConnell then has full control over that Senator.  This is how the system works.

The McCain Institute was/is one of the obvious examples of the financing network.  And that is the primary reason why Cindy McCain is such an outspoken critic of President Trump.  In essence President Trump is standing between her and her next diamond necklace; a dangerous place to be.

So when we watched the Senate Impeachment Trial; and we considered which senators were the focus of impeachment for President Trump, it was not just a matter of Democrats -vs- Republican.  We saw a game of leverage, and the stand-off between those bribed Senators who would prefer President Trump did not interfere in their ongoing process.

McConnell has been advising President Trump.  At the same time McConnell controls which senators get which indulgences.  This is how he retains power.

Senator Lisa Murkowski rakes in millions from the Oil and Gas industry; and she ain’t about to allow horrible Trump to lessen her bank account any more than Cindy McCain will give up her frequent shopper discounts at Tiffanys.

Lou Dobbs Interviews Devin Nunes – USAO John Durham Needs to Come Forth Soon With His Findings…


House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes appears on Lou Dobbs to discuss the latest developments in the ‘Spygate’ investigation, John Durham, AG Bill Barr and ultimately the SDNY moves involving Geoffrey Berman.

Lou Dobbs gets the big picture; if the political left is allowed to manipulate the 2020 election, and steal a presidential contest, the ramifications will be so serious the potential for the fabric of our nation to completely tear is quite possible.  On a positive note, AG Bill Barr has made similar points in his conversation.

Advertisements

Jerry Nadler Says: Impeaching Bill Barr Would Be a “Waste of Time”… “Instead Will Do What We Have to Do”…


House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler appears with for an interview by furrowed brow to discuss his upcoming use of former DOJ lawyers John W. Elias and Aaron S.J. Zelinsky  as designated “whistleblowers” to give testimony against AG Bill Barr this week.

Zelinsky and Elias are being brought in to testify about their recommendation(s) for a nine-year prison sentence for Roger Stone & AG Bill Barr reducing that recommendation.  The purpose of the Zelinsky/Elias move was specifically to get the AG to intervene.  It was all a set up from the start; purposeful Lawfare.  A resistance strategy, executed.

Within the interview Nadler outlines his hope that recently dismissed USAO Geoffrey Berman would join the crew of DOJ resistance members who would align against the current AG.  However, Nadler retreats from any position that would actually target Bill Barr for impeachment proceedings.  The reason is transparently obvious, Nadler recognizes any impeachment effort would serve as a mechanism for Barr to point out the gross level of corrupt political agendas within the former employees.  WATCH:

.

By using his committee to attack Bill Barr, chairman Nadler positions himself to impugn the Attorney General as a defensive strategy against any sunlight from the ongoing “outside” USAO investigations, which includes John Durham.   However, Nadler doesn’t want to provide a platform where Barr can use those attacks to trigger his releases.

AG Barr brought in five+ outside U.S. attorney’s to review all of the Mueller cases as an outcome of the FISA court order to conduct a sequestration review of any/all evidence that might have been used as an outcome of the fraudulently obtained Carter Page FISA warrant.

As CTH noted at the time…. “If you consider that several DOJ offices may be involved with the material under review, including the Southern District of New York; The Eastern District of New York; The Eastern District of Virginia; The Washington DC District, and even Main Justice itself; it makes sense that outside DOJ personnel would be needed for this review.”

There’s no direct evidence the recent DOJ moves are connected to the sequestration review, but with USAO John Durham looking deeply into the background of DOJ and FBI activity surrounding the effort to target candidate Trump, and later President Trump, there could be a possibility that several lanes are merging.

Obviously, AG Barr feels very confident to make the moves and subsequent recommendations to President Trump for replacements.

All of the exit moves and incoming replacements are coming to a head at the same time; early July. The current SDNY move is effective July 3rd, which is the same time that FBI chief legal counsel Dana Boente is leaving his position.  Both Boente (FBI) and Jeffrey Berman (DOJ-SDNY) appear to be resigning by Bill Barr’s request; essentially being told to leave.

Other activity last week that may hold deeper connection:

♦On Monday June 15th, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler announced that two former Special Counsel Robert Mueller attorneys, John W. Elias and Aaron S.J. Zelinsky  would be designated as “whistleblowers” to give testimony against AG Bill Barr. (LINK)

♦On Tuesday June 16th, the last remaining DOJ advisor to Jeff Sessions, Jody Hunt, announced his intent to leave the justice dept effective “early July”. (LINK) Mr. Hunt was Jeff Session’s chief-of-staff, and one of the key advisors responsible for the decision to recuse from the Mueller probe. (LINK)

♦On Wednesday June 17th, the DOJ announced that Solicitor General Noel Francisco will be  departing: “Solicitor General of the United States Noel Francisco announces his departure from the Department of Justice, effective as of July 3, 2020.” (LINK)

♦And on Friday June 19th, Geoffrey Berman is removed and replaced at the SDNY office; and his exit is also timed for July 3rd. (LINK)

In addition to an identical exit time, one thing all of these departures have in common, including FBI legal counsel Dana Boente’s exit, is their connection to former AG Jeff Sessions (appointments) and DAG Rod Rosenstein (oversight); and ultimately each of these individuals is connected to the larger Robert Mueller special counsel activity.

Their previous work in the DOJ and FBI during the soft-coup insurance phase; which specifically involved the use of the special counsel appointment; in conjunction with the ongoing –and expanded– internal investigation by John Durham; which now includes seven or eight outside U.S. attorneys offices; just seems too coincidental.

The media are framing the use of outside attorneys as Bill Barr working on behalf of President Trump to undermine current and former prosecutions. However, understanding the January FISC order requiring the sequestration effort, the use of outsiders is absolutely necessary.  This is a big shield that AG Barr is likely keeping in his back pocket until after Nadler launches his attack.

The same U.S. Attorneys, prosecutors and FBI agents who used evidence gathered from the fraudulent FISA warrants cannot be the same attorneys, agents and prosecutors making decisions about what parts of the warrants were used to gather evidence and how each part of any case was assembled by the use therein. It is a simple matter of a conflict of interest carried by any prosecutor that used corrupt evidence.

How is AG Bill Barr ever going to bring the background DOJ material to the forefront?

How does the AG present material to the public when he knows the resistance agenda is going to be to frame him as being politically motivated?

AG Barr knows the motive of Nadler is to diffuse the damning material from the DOJ investigation by shouting that Bill Barr is doing the bidding of President Trump.

Traditional approaches will not work in this highly partisan era. Even the most stunning evidence of prior DOJ/FBI politicization and misconduct will be obfuscated by media around the Nadler narrative. Taking the initiative to hold a press conference, to release investigative findings, will not work.

AG Barr needs a mechanism to bring the material to the public square.

AG Barr needs the initiative to originate within the opposition; that’s where Chairman Nadler’s attacks become purposeful.

The Robert Mueller team of FBI investigators and special counsel prosecutors certainly used the fraudulently obtained FISA warrants as part of their investigative evidence collection. Common sense would tell us this had to be the case or the FBI and Mueller team would not have requested July 2017 renewal of the FISA warrant two months after the special counsel team was assembled.

If the FBI & Special Counsel were not using the FISA warrant(s) to capture information, they would not have needed them renewed. Despite media spin to the contrary, the simple truth of the renewals holding investigative value is evident in the renewal itself (ie. common sense).

Under this rather extensive effort to find exactly which investigations -over the course of three years- were touched directly, or indirectly, by the four FISA warrants; and/or which investigative paths may have been influenced downstream or enhanced -by varying degrees of importance- by evidence stemming from the FISA warrants; a reasonable person could see how AG Bill Barr would need to put a team together to retrace the investigative steps and make the sequestration determinations.

Overlay USAO John Durham doing a deeper and more lengthy investigation that touches the edges of the underlying warrant, and, well, that’s quite a lot of review ongoing.

Obviously, for reasons of biased intent, corporate left-wing media would like to ignore why outside prosecutors are needed under this framework. The media ignore in part because honest reporting would require an admission the FISA warrants were fraudulently obtained; and in part because the left-wing media have never informed the public of the DOJ/FBI sequestration effort in the first place. Likely well more than half the country has no idea the DOJ and FBI have been told to go find the material.

There have been numerous articles, thousands of words, and endless hours of pundit protestations about Bill Barr using outside DC lawyers to review all of the previous DOJ attorney activities; yet not a single time have they ever acknowledged the originating order from the FISA court requiring the DOJ/FBI to conduct the review.

Imagine that?

(Washington Post Link) […] Shortly after the McCabe announcement on Friday, officials said that Barr had assigned Jeff Jensen, the U.S. attorney in St. Louis, to review and “assist” prosecutors currently handling the case of Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who is still awaiting sentencing after having pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI during its investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

The Jensen appointment marks the latest iteration of an unusual trend inside the Justice Department of tasking outside U.S. attorneys with reviewing, managing, or reinvestigating work that would otherwise not be in their portfolio. Much of the effort seems aimed at re-examining the work of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, whose probe of possible coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign infuriated the president, or at targeting the president’s foes.  (read more)

Like I said, the Washington Post (above) and the New York Times (LINK) have both written pearl-clutching articles about Barr using DOJ “outsiders”; yet never once have they noted the FISA Court order that preceded all of these outside USAO’s entering the picture and receiving instructions from Bill Barr.  In order for media ideologues to continue advancing their political narrative they have to pretend not to know things…

…But Truth Has No Agenda!