The DOJ is Dropping the Case Against Mike Flynn

[AGBF]

While people are concentrating on matters of life and death with the pandemic, Trump pulled a fast one. (Remember how he tried to shut down the coronavirus task force earlier this week to shut up Dr. Fauci then, because he got so much negative feedback, had to reinstate it claiming he had no idea it was so popular.) He had the DOJ drop the case against Michael Flynn, who had already pleaded guilty to charges. Trump acts at his most corrupt while other people are too absorbed with struggling to live and hopes to go undetected. This is unprecedented.

Remember, Mike Flynn acted as an agent for Russia, without registering, while Barack Obama was still President. He tried to reassure the Russians that they could ignore President Obama's sanctions because Trump would soon be in office.Then he lied to the FBI about it and pleaded guilty to this in court.These are serious charges.

"Following the Justice Department’s decision to drop the charges against President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn, who pleaded guilty of lying to the FBI, Attorney General William Barr defended the reversal in an interview with CBS News on Thursday. '[The FBI] did not have a basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage,' Barr told CBS News, adding that a 'crime cannot be established here.' Asked whether it was still true that Flynn lied during an interview with the FBI in 2016, Barr deflected: 'Well, people sometimes plead to things that turn out not to be crimes.'

Trump had previously hinted that he was considering a pardon for Flynn. After denying he was doing Trump’s bidding, Barr was asked how history would remember this move. 'History is written by the winners, so it largely depends on who is writing the history,' he said with a sly smile".

Bill Barr on Flynn: ‘History Is Written by the Winners’

“[The FBI] did not have a basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage,” Barr told CBS News, adding that a “crime cannot be established here.”

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[redwood66]

Thank goodness.

The Corruption Behind The Michael Flynn Case - The Federalist

Federalist Senior Contributor Margot Cleveland joins Ben Domenech to discuss the corruption that led to the case against Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

thefederalist.com

Obama, Biden Oval Office Meeting On January 5 Was Key To Entire Anti-Trump Operation

In light of the newly declassified documents, it is clear that understanding what happened in that January 5 Oval Office meeting is essential to understanding the corrupt operation against the Trump administration.

thefederalist.com

 

[Demon]

I wonder what the judge will do.

 

[the_mother_thing]

It is beyond comprehension the miscarriage of justice perpetuated against Flynn & his family. I hope he sues every single person with a hand in this for their last breath of life.

 

[Karl_K]

It is beyond comprehension the miscarriage of justice perpetuated against Flynn & his family. I hope he sues every single person with a hand in this for their last breath of life.

yep

 

[redwood66]

It is beyond comprehension the miscarriage of justice perpetuated against Flynn & his family. I hope he sues every single person with a hand in this for their last breath of life.

EVERY DAMN ONE OF THEM.

ETA - Comey first since he bragged on video about not following practice and "interview" without notifying the WHC.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I LOVE that this was Gen. Flynn’s first tweet following the DOJ announcement; very classy & his grandson is too adorable!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1258495318490054661

 

[rocks]

It is beyond comprehension the miscarriage of justice perpetuated against Flynn & his family. I hope he sues every single person with a hand in this for their last breath of life.

Don’t the elected official have immunity from prosecution?

 

[the_mother_thing]

Don’t the elected official have immunity from prosecution?

Not sure the specifics on it, but Comey, Mueller, and all the crooked FBI & DOJ folks aren’t elected ... nor are any WH advisors & appointees.

 

[Queenie60]

It is beyond comprehension the miscarriage of justice perpetuated against Flynn & his family. I hope he sues every single person with a hand in this for their last breath of life.

You bet - and they should be prosecuted

 

[the_mother_thing]

Sounds like the pressure is getting to those who initiated this farce in the first place; someone’s getting nervous if they recorded & leaked this Obama convo.

Exclusive: Obama says in private call that 'rule of law is at risk' in Michael Flynn case

Former President Barack Obama, talking privately to former members of his administration, said Friday that the “rule of law is at risk” in the wake of what he called an unprecedented move by the Justice Department to drop charges against former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.

news.yahoo.com

This link to audio is less chopped by ads:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1258971961914527744

 

[Dancing Fire]

EVERY DAMN ONE OF THEM.

ETA - Comey first since he bragged on video about not following practice and "interview" without notifying the WHC.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1258556332090802177

 

[AGBF]

This article, written by two Georgetown law professors, has a view of the move to drop the case against Flynn which is extremely different from that of the posters above. In fact, they think that that the move injures the institutions of the United States and they spell out why they think that in detail. Note that they feel a pardon by the president would be less harmful.

"Criminal law specialists and members of the law enforcement community are tough to really shock. But the Justice Department’s announcement that it would drop criminal charges against Michael Flynn, President Trump’s former national security adviser, has provoked, in addition to outrage, a sense of utter demoralization among them. They’ve never seen such a thing before. After all, Mr. Flynn twice pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I.

But it’s important to understand why all Americans should be not just shocked but outraged. It’s not just because Mr. Flynn won’t go to jail or offer any service toward justice.

It’s because this move embeds into official U.S. policy an extremist view of law enforcement as the enemy of the American people. It’s a deception that Americans must see through — and that the federal judge overseeing Mr. Flynn’s case, Emmet Sullivan, can reject by examining the Justice Department’s rationale in open court and by allowing a future Justice Department to reconsider charges.

In 2017, when he pleaded guilty, Mr. Flynn apologized to the judge for lying to investigators, saying, '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.'

Sure, sometimes people plead guilty to crimes they never committed, but those people usually lack resources or exposure to the legal system. That is not the case with Mr. Flynn, a retired general and former national security adviser to the president.

So it seems crazy for the Justice Department to abandon criminal charges when the conviction based on them was all but signed, sealed and delivered. Justice is blind — except, it seems, when it comes to friends of President Trump like Mr. Flynn and Roger Stone.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/...tion=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article
But it requires zooming out to see the real outrage. The Justice Department’s shift reflects a deeply mistaken view of American law enforcement. In this view, federal investigators and prosecutors are a deep threat to the American people. That’s the narrative about the handling of the Flynn case that began on far-right websites, then migrated to Fox News and has now — appallingly — been embraced by President Trump and his attorney general, Bill Barr. They’re all peddling the idea that Mr. Flynn was 'set up' by the F.B.I. and the Justice Department.

The capstone to this narrative was the Justice Department’s voluntary release last week of additional materials to Mr. Flynn’s lawyers. This was itself an unusual event: Judge Sullivan had already heard arguments from the prosecution and the defense about these issues and rejected Mr. Flynn’s claims. But suddenly, Mr. Barr’s Justice Department decided to hand over more. Even in those additional materials, there was, as they say, no there there: no smoking gun, no withheld exoneration.

That didn’t stop Mr. Flynn’s lawyers, pro-Trump media and Mr. Trump himself from expressing outrage at the documents’ contents — especially a few pages of F.B.I. notes written down before Mr. Flynn’s interview. Mr. Trump said his former adviser was 'tormented' by 'dirty, filthy cops at the top of the F.B.I.'

But what the documents actually spoke to was the care taken by F.B.I. investigators in making sure they adopted an approach that even a Trump White House couldn’t see as 'playing games' when they interviewed Mr. Flynn. The documents certainly didn’t offer exoneration: They didn’t change the fact that he’d lied or that he’d later admitted he’d lied. Yet, it gave Mr. Trump and his allies something they could claim was … enough.

Enough to do what? Not just exonerate Mr. Flynn, but also — here’s the crucial part — condemn institutions: the F.B.I. and the Justice Department. And that’s just what they’ve done. Mr. Trump, Mr. Barr and those echoing them have used the Flynn case to make condemnation of federal law enforcement official U.S. government policy.

Never mind that the arguments made in the Justice Department’s court filing on Thursday don’t pass the laugh test. Never mind that even Mr. Barr’s Justice Department surely doesn’t intend to apply the same principles to every other case or possibly any other case. Never mind any of that: The point, really, isn’t just to spring Mr. Flynn. It’s to impugn federal law enforcement.

Here’s the tell. The Justice Department’s new position isn’t that Mr. Flynn didn’t lie — that couldn’t be its position, because he did lie, and he admitted in federal court that he lied. Instead, the new filing argues that it was wrong for the F.B.I. to interview him in the first place. Look carefully at who the villain becomes in that narrative: not Mr. Flynn for lying, but the F.B.I. for asking the questions to which he lied in response.

And there’s a second tell. If the goal was just to shield Mr. Flynn, Mr. Trump could simply have pardoned him. That would have been a regrettable abuse of the pardon power — but at least it would have left Mr. Trump owning the decision and would have spared the Justice Department of the patent, destructive corruption that its new filing represents. But that didn’t happen — because institutional destruction isn’t collateral damage for Mr. Trump. It’s the very goal.

Fortunately, in our system, a prosecutor’s say-so is not enough to drop a prosecution; it requires the approval of the court. And while judges rarely interfere with such decisions, this is that rare case. Judge Sullivan, who still presides over Mr. Flynn’s case, has three important lines of inquiry available to him. First, he can examine why the highly regarded former prosecutor of Mr. Flynn withdrew from the case moments before the Justice Department’s astonishing filing. Last year, after the Supreme Court essentially held that the Trump administration had lied about the census and several Justice Department attorneys attempted to withdraw from the case, the presiding federal judge refused and began an inquiry into the attorneys’ withdrawal. A similar inquiry is appropriate here.

Second, the judge can examine the department’s reasoning and inquire into whether it is legally sound, including through on-the-record hearings. And finally, the judge can reject the Justice Department’s request to drop the charges 'with prejudice' Granting the request would mean that no future Justice Department could rethink the matter and revive the charges. There’s no reason for the judge to grant that. If he doesn’t see any wrongdoing by earlier investigators and prosecutors — and he hasn’t so far — then he can allow the charges to be dropped without prejudice. That way, it’s possible that a future Justice Department could take another look.

Presidents are not kings, and federal courts have a vital role to play in protecting our democracy. By carrying out these three lines of inquiry, the judge will be uncovering the truth and withholding his imprimatur from Mr. Trump’s and Mr. Barr’s appalling assault on American law enforcement."

Neal K. Katyal (@neal_katyal), a former acting solicitor general of the United States and the author of “Impeach: The Case Against Donald Trump,” and Joshua A. Geltzer (@jgeltzer), a former deputy legal adviser and senior director for counterterrorism at the National Security Council, are law professors at Georgetown.

A version of this article appears in print on May 9, 2020, Section A, Page 27 of the New York edition with the headline: Flynn Was Not ‘Set Up’.

Opinion | The Appalling Damage of Dropping the Michael Flynn Case (Published 2020)

It embeds into official U.S. policy a shockingly extremist view of law enforcement as the enemy of the American people.

www.nytimes.com

 

[redwood66]

Why was he told he did not need a lawyer and why was WHC not notified in advance? If you are investigating someone why on earth would you do that? That certainly is not the actions of any kind of LE agency I care to support.

The ones who did this are the enemy of fair justice, not an entire agency as suggested by partisan lawyers.

 

[the_mother_thing]

In fact, they think that that the move injures the institutions of the United States and they spell out why they think that in detail.
...
It’s because this move embeds into official U.S. policy an extremist view of law enforcement as the enemy of the American people.

“The move” doesn’t injure the institutions or create “an extremist view“; the actions of the investigators and officials who started all of this are what “injure” those institutions and damage the trust in our justice system. After reading some of the documents finally released related to the Flynn ‘investigation’, I really don’t care what the NY Times or those two professors think; that IS an ”opinion” piece, not news/facts and one is clearly biased against Trump.

ETA: BOTH of those professors have biased viewpoints.

 

[Tekate]

Me too! then we could have senate investigations, panels, grand juries called and then, like what happened to Mrs Clinton, the words will be:

Two senior House Republicans on Friday said they are closing their investigation into the FBI's handling of its probes into both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign, issuing few new revelations but urging the continuation of their work when Democrats take the majority in January.

House Republicans close their investigation into 2016 candidates' probes

Bob Goodlatte and Trey Gowdy reiterated their calls for an additional special counsel, but released little new information.

www.politico.com

The State Department prepared a report of its own internal investigation of the attack.[75] The report itself found no wrongdoing of Hillary Clinton[76] in itself.

United States House Select Committee on Benghazi - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

We just go round and round.. where it stops will probably happen when millenials reach their 50s.

It is beyond comprehension the miscarriage of justice perpetuated against Flynn & his family. I hope he sues every single person with a hand in this for their last breath of life.

 

[AGBF]

And the purge continues. Purging while others are preoccupied with the coronavirus is a good tactic for a sleazy politician. Now Trump wants to get rid of FBI Director Christopher Wray. Well, he already got rid of all the Inspectors General...who else that is honest is left in the government?

"According to a report from Axios, Donald Trump is reportedly angry with FBI Director Christopher Wray for staying silent on the recent revelations in the Michael Flynn case and would like to dump him.

The report, from Jonathan Swan, notes the president is being restrained from another firing by close aides and Attorney General Bill Barr.

'Trump’s dissatisfaction with Wray — whom he nominated for the post in 2017 after firing Jim Comey — is nothing new' Swan wrote. 'A source who has discussed the FBI director repeatedly with the president said Trump "has never felt like Wray was his guy" and does not trust him to "change the culture" of the FBI.'

The report goes on to note,'Trump was especially angered by what he views as Wray’s reluctance to publicly criticize actions taken by Comey and by Wray’s relatively muted reaction to the FBI’s misconduct in seeking the surveillance of Trump campaign associate Carter Page.'

According to the report, close aides to Trump have started a whisper campaign against the now-embattled FBI director, hinting to the president that Wray has no interest in rooting out what they perceive to be 'corruption' within the agency.

For the moment, the report notes, Wray’s job is safe because some White House officials don’t want another controversy so close to the election which is not looking good for the president based on recent polls. Additionally, '….there isn’t an obvious replacement who’d both pass muster on Capitol Hill and be the sort of loyalist Trump wants to run the FBI,' Swan wrote."

Trump angry with FBI's Christopher Wray and wants to replace him: report

According to a report from Axios, Donald Trump is reportedly angry with FBI Director Christopher Wray for staying silent on the recent revelations in the Michael Flynn case and would like to dump him.The report, from Jonathan Swan, notes the president is being restrained from another firing by...

www.rawstory.com

 

[AGBF]

"Nearly 2,000 former Justice Department and FBI officials on Monday signed an open letter strongly critical of Attorney General William Barr's decision to abandon the prosecution of Michael Flynn, calling the action 'extraordinarily rare, if not unprecedented.'

If anyone else who is not a friend of the president 'were to lie to federal investigators in the course of a properly predicated counterintelligence investigation, and admit we did so under oath, we could be prosecuted,'" the letter said.

The letter calls on Barr to resign and encourages Congress to formally censure Barr over 'his repeated assaults on the rule of law in doing the President’s personal bidding rather than acting in the public interest.'

Barr directed federal prosecutors to abandon their prosecution of Michael Flynn, who served briefly as national security adviser in the early days of the Trump administration. Flynn admitted that he had lied to the FBI about his conversations during the transition with Russia's ambassador to the U.S."

2,000 former DOJ, FBI officials call on Barr to resign over Michael Flynn case

Barr is using the Justice Department to further Trump's personal and political interests, the letter said.

news.yahoo.com

 

[the_mother_thing]

@AGBF Why shouldn’t this information be released now; do you think Americans are incapable of digesting anything other than COVID-19 news?

In case you forgot in the midst of pandemic-mania, there is an election in less than 6 months; and, one candidate has repeatedly touted his critical “right-hand” role & involvement in the previous administration which was cited as being “scandal-free” and “without ethical shadiness”; however, the facts being ‘purged’ suggest otherwise.

If there is/was no wrong-doing, why are you concerned? Why wouldn’t you advocate for transparency of information for voters? How exactly is releasing now-declassified findings and informing Americans about how their government has operated (with their tax dollars) “sleazy”?

Was this also “sleazy”: President Obama criticized former President George W. Bush for trying to "hide" behind executive privilege in 2007 after the Bush administration refused to turn over subpoenaed documents related to the controversial firings of nine U.S. attorneys.

 

[AGBF]

@AGBF Why shouldn’t this information be released now; do you think Americans are incapable of digesting anything other than COVID-19 news?

In case you forgot in the midst of pandemic-mania, there is an election in less than 6 months; and, one candidate has repeatedly touted his critical “right-hand” role & involvement in the previous administration which was cited as being “scandal-free” and “without ethical shadiness”; however, the facts being ‘purged’ suggest otherwise.

If there is/was no wrong-doing, why are you concerned? Why wouldn’t you advocate for transparency of information for voters? How exactly is releasing now-declassified findings and informing Americans about how their government has operated (with their tax dollars) “sleazy”?

Was this also “sleazy”: President Obama criticized former President George W. Bush for trying to "hide" behind executive privilege in 2007 after the Bush administration refused to turn over subpoenaed documents related to the controversial firings of nine U.S. attorneys.

I don't know to which information you are referring. I have been posting that the DOJ should not have dropped the charges against Michael Flynn.

 

[the_mother_thing]

I don't know to which information you are referring. I have been posting that the DOJ should not have dropped the charges against Michael Flynn.

Why shouldn’t an entrapped & falsely-accused person be freed?

 

[AGBF]

Why shouldn’t an entrapped & falsely-accused person be freed?

An entrapped and falsely accused person should be set free (not that he would be just because he deserved to be). But what does that have to do with Michael Flynn who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI? The DOJ should not have dropped his case. But you know that.

 

[redwood66]

An entrapped and falsely accused person should be set free (not that he would be just because he deserved to be). But what does that have to do with Michael Flynn who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI? The DOJ should not have dropped his case. But you know that.

So pleading guilty is your metric for delivered justice? In that case the Central Park Five, and many cases like theirs, should still be in jail. Plenty of people think Flynn was entrapped and should never have been interviewed in the first place. I am awaiting Durham's report with interest.

 

[AGBF]

So pleading guilty is your metric for delivered justice? In that case the Central Park Five, and many cases like theirs, should still be in jail. Plenty of people think Flynn was entrapped and should never have been interviewed in the first place. I am awaiting Durham's report with interest.

Durham was always Barr's stooge and Barr was always Trump's stooge. The thing to wait for is Judge Sullivan's questioning, which will show what a sham Barr has put on. He (the Judge) will have to dismiss the case because precedent demands it, but the facts will come out during questioning.

 

[redwood66]

Durham was always Barr's stooge and Barr was always Trump's stooge. The thing to wait for is Judge Sullivan's questioning, which will show what a sham Barr has put on. He (the Judge) will have to dismiss the case because precedent demands it, but the facts will come out during questioning.

Your opinion of course. We'll see what happens.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

I am going to give my simplistic opinion on this action. First, it is my understanding Mike Flynn was a foreign agent representing Turkey- not Russia. Flynn lied about meetings with Russians. The FBI was looking to develop a case against Trump for colluding with the Russians and they hoped Flynn would give them information. Since the Justice Dept never established any criminal action against Trump and Ass., why should Flynn go to jail. Obviously there was nothing material in his testimony to help develop the case.

I think he should go free.


Annette

 

[redwood66]

Why dismiss the Flynn case? Because the FBI can’t prove it

The FBI agents went out of their way to deceive Flynn about the purpose of their interview, hoping to trip him up.

thehill.com

 

[the_mother_thing]

An entrapped and falsely accused person should be set free (not that he would be just because he deserved to be). But what does that have to do with Michael Flynn who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI? The DOJ should not have dropped his case. But you know that.

People plead guilty to things quite often when they are not guilty. In this case, as has been established by the now-released ”investigation” documentation and Flynn’s attorneys, he was clearly coerced into pleading guilty (despite his then-belief in his innocence) due to lack of proper disclosure by the DOJ/FBI leading the case/investigation as well as threats to his family and insurmountable legal defense fees resulting in him having to sell his home in DC.

Justice, fairness and due process are not reserved solely for those with a “D” by their name, contrary to what some might think.

 

[Demon]

Sullivan doesn't seem inclined to dismiss it so readily.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1260329588170862594

 

[AGBF]

Sullivan doesn't seem inclined to dismiss it so readily.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1260329588170862594

You may be right, but I have become convinced that in the end he will have to give in. What you are noticing is what I have been hearing: that he will not go gentle into that good night! There will be a lot of raging before the dying of the light on the DOJ if Judge Sullivan has a part in it (which he does).