Court Unseals Flynn Brady Motion – 40 Items Requested by Flynn Defense…

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.

Cloud link to filing HereSCRIBD link to filing here with embed below:

.

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”).

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, Election 2016, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

499 Responses to Court Unseals Flynn Brady Motion – 40 Items Requested by Flynn Defense…

  1. everywhereguyy says:

    Sunlight, the best disinfectant.

    Liked by 24 people

  2. Luke says:

    is sidney powell asking the govt to confess to spygate?

    Liked by 28 people

  3. Michael Davis says:

    Sidney Powell is a nation treasure. Thank you Sidney for your fierce defense of our rights and exposing the corruption in our legal system.

    Liked by 46 people

  4. cboldt says:

    For the scribd averse
    https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.111.0.pdf
    40 numbered items, PLUS, “a” through “i”
    My personal favorites are “22” and “e”

    Liked by 14 people

    • ann says:

      Part IV

      YES✅

      Liked by 1 person

    • MaineCoon says:

      #24 is a fav, it would pull the plug on the entire “Muh Russia”.

      Also, #19.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Deplore Able says:

      I would like to see 35.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Genie says:

      Yowza! I just want to hear Madow and Lemon read 22 on the air.

      Liked by 3 people

    • MaineCoon says:

      Let’s pull up the rear with #19. We don’t want to leave her out.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Bird Watcher says:

      Thank you for posting that in an easy to read format. I am not an attorney, but I understood everything written because it was direct, factual, and missing distracting unnecessary legalese. What superb writing. Kudos to Sidney! This Treeper holds her in the highest regard.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Dutchman says:

        When I read her first filing, I was impressed with her plain language, and thought it was a strategy.i.e. so the Judge would know that WE who are,watching can follow.
        Reading this second SP document, I wonder if this is always her style.

        Not in her league, of coarse, but I always wrote my filings and pleadings,this way. Use legal terms like ‘exoneration’ when necesary, cite case law, of coarse but when appropriate and necesary.
        Read plenty of opposing council pleadings, filings, charges where you had to have a law dictionary to understand it.
        SOMETIMES they seem to be using legalese to obscure, but most often they seem like the kid, using big words to impress you with how smart they are.
        Whatever the reason, the Prosecution has been in a pickle of their own making, for over 2 years, and now its all coming home to roost.

        Liked by 4 people

        • Dutchman…Thank you for your insight.
          I had a feeling when reading some of the DOJ pleadings they were just too much “goo” to get to the center.

          I am not an attorney nor try to be one, I like to understand the writer’s justification for what they are writing about and the DOJ attorneys made their pleadings extremely long and if one wasn’t on top of their game…things would be missed. Ms. Powell is an attorney that doesn’t need the “goo” to carry her words.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Dutchman says:

            Yeah, if you truly are smart, as well as intelligent, you don’t need to use big words to communicate your intellect.
            On the DOJ filings,,I suspect they deliberately WERE,trying to obscure their meaning, which as I said SOMETIMES seems to be the reasoning.

            Goes along with “If you have the facts, argue the facts!
            If you have the law, argue the law!
            If you have neither, bang your fists on the table (appeal to emotion) ,…and make your filings,and pleadings so long and convoluted, nobody can figure them out!”
            LOL

            Liked by 2 people

        • JL says:

          My father was a fairly accomplished attorney having argued and won several cases at the Supreme Court. He once told me the same thing when he was giving me advice on writing papers in college.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Dutchman says:

            Huh, perhaps clogging up filings with excessive legal jargon, in addition to trying to conceal from the public (as in these weismann cases) its a sign of a mediocre attourney
            My Dad wasn’t a lawyer, but he definetly had a ‘legal mind’, and whether nurture or nature, I inherited it from him.

            Like

  5. Tango kilo says:

    God bless you Sidney!

    Liked by 13 people

  6. bertdilbert says:

    If Flynn was charged with lying but was not and the charge was intentionally malicious, was Flynn’s freedom of speech violated?

    Liked by 4 people

    • cboldt says:

      No freedom of speech issue here. All the alleged criminal conduct was in private, while being questioned by the FBI.

      Liked by 1 person

    • ezpz2 says:

      It would seem more like his Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated.
      They told him he did not need a lawyer. It was obviously a set up to entrap Lt Gen Flynn. Comey admitted as much.

      Liked by 9 people

      • cboldt says:

        I find the “he needed a lawyer” angle to be bunk. I’ve answered wuestions put to me by the FBI, and I didn’t need a lawyer for that. Flynn didn;t need one either, and if he’d been given the usual practice of follow-up for clarification, the first impression (he’s telling the truth) would have been confirmed.
        This was an animus-driven prosecution, all the way. Get him on a technicality, a flimsy one at that.
        I’d have to look up DOJ guide on when to apprise a person of “maybe you should get your lawyer” short of being arrested. I’m sure that not all interviews open with “you may wnat to arrange to have your lawyer present before we proceed.”

        Liked by 2 people

        • jbowen82 says:

          It is as obvious as it can be that the only reason the Special Counsel went after Flynn was that they expected him to turn on Trump like Cohen did. Same with Manafort, Papadopoulos, etc. Go after the little fish to get the big fish. The problem with the Special Counsel’s theory of the case and “little fish-big fish” prosecutorial strategy is that there was nothing there. So they’re left with prosecutions of Flynn, Manafort, Stone, etc., that are just vindictive.

          Liked by 2 people

          • There was never an intent for the investigation to “find something”
            … it was set up to get people to “manufacture a ton”.

            Liked by 4 people

            • TarsTarkas says:

              To get the canaries not just to sing but compose.
              And if the canaries would not compose write the composition for them.
              Fortunately without the NSA database access they had to use workarounds.
              Ham radio included.

              Liked by 3 people

          • Flynn was not a little fish. He knows where all the bodies are buried, who has skeletons in closets, etc. From his time under Obama.
            They, specifically McCabe, wanted to ruin him.
            It would be an amazing irony if Flynn was allowed unfettered access to the NSA search database to surveil the coup plotters whilst he was awaiting sentencing. #hopepornbutgoodhopeporn

            Liked by 1 person

        • Badabing says:

          In light of recent events, if the FBI wants to talk to you, say no comment and GTFO.

          Liked by 7 people

        • ezpz2 says:

          I see what you’re saying, and you’re right.
          At the time, he did not need a lawyer – at least he didn’t think he did – because he was told it was just a casual, routine type of meeting. Lt. Gen. Flynn had no idea that it would turn into the nightmare it did.

          It’s in RETROSPECT that we see he did need a lawyer because he was being set up, but of course Weissmann, Rosy, et al will not admit to that, even though Comey already did.

          The whole think is so convoluted, and yet so simple at the same time….

          Convoluted because of all the il/legal machinations,
          and simple in the fact that there are the DOJ/FBI/CIA evil corruptocrats who tried to use Michael Flynn (among others) to take down a constitutionally elected President.

          Perhaps simplistic is more like it – as in good guys/bad guys.

          Liked by 3 people

          • ezpz2 says:

            Thing, not ‘think’
            Can’t even blame this one on my phone, since I’m on old desktop.
            This was me and a typo.

            Liked by 1 person

          • cboldt says:

            For all Flynn knew, the FBI was gathering info on Kislyiak or others he interacted with. I highly doubt he thought of himself as a potential target (unlike Scooter Libby who knew darn well he was a suspect in THAT bogus investigation).
            And for talking purposes, even if Flynn was a suspect of some sort, there is no sixth amendment violation if the cop doesn’t tell you to get a lawyer before you answer questions. Technically, Miranda attaches when the suspect is taken into custody, not free to leave. Otherwise, Flynn is free to answer or not as he sees fit, so is anybody else.

            Liked by 2 people

            • ann says:

              Choldt,
              But he was already being surveiled. Plus he did no wrong in talking w the Ambassador. It’s NORMAL.
              How can they claim it’s ok to “drop by “, sat the start of the transition, and withhold they are interrogating him sub rosa? They treated him as a suspect.

              No way will I ever feel safe with guys like this running Nat Sec.

              They make no sense and never have.

              Liked by 2 people

        • Beau Geste says:

          Anyone, and everyone unfortunately needs a lawyer if the FBI wants to “talk” with you. Even their assurances of not being a “target” are completely unreliable, as proven by the fact that they will freely lie without consequence to even their boss, the President of the United States.

          Do not ever talk to the FBI, take the 5th, get a lawyer.

          Liked by 7 people

          • bertdilbert says:

            I was at the wrong end of questioning by LE once. Not only did the cop lie but he put an exclamation mark after every lie he told where he quoted me. Gee, I can’t believe he said that and neither could the cop so he put an exclamation mark he was so surprised! After this one experience, never again.

            You can never win when there is no witness to the questioning. The cop can claim whatever he wants and it is your word against his.

            Liked by 3 people

            • Rhoda R says:

              Which is why the FBI loves their written summaries rather than recording the questioning sessions.

              Liked by 5 people

              • JL says:

                If there is any result from this whole saga of corruption, I hope it includes a reform that requires recording of interviews. The specific language used by the subject of an FBI interview matters when you’re determining things like false statements. These particulars cannot be captured in written notes, and 302 summaries of notes taken that summarize an oral intervew.

                We’ve learned a lot about 302’s in this whole saga, and I think it defies belief for many that a 302 is given the evidentiary importance that is currently recognized by our criminal justice system.

                Like

        • willthesuevi says:

          Are you saying that investigators knowing you are a suspect to a crime, can question you as a suspect, not tell you that you are a suspect and not advise you of your right to have a lawyer present?

          I am not in the legal profession but that sounds screwed up. Educate me please.

          Liked by 1 person

          • cboldt says:

            That’s what the law is. Cops can not only do that, they can send a confidential informant against you without a warrant.
            Miranda attaches when they take you into custody. Ask if you are free to leave. That puts them on the spot.
            Also, generally speaking, you have no obligation to answer their questions. Ignore them, change the subject, answer a different question. You’ll know from context whether and what you want to share with them. If they ask me anything about what I was doing, where I was, etc., none of their business, but I’m not a prick about it.

            Liked by 1 person

            • willthesuevi says:

              OK Thanks. One thing all this crap does is make private citizens not talk to LE. It’s not only the folks in the hood justifiably clamming up nowadays.
              I have zero respect for any aspect of the justice system anymore. They have only themselves to blame. Screw cooperation, the only word they will ever hear from me is “lawyer”.

              Liked by 1 person

              • Boots says:

                Can’t understand why Flynn even spoke to the FBI, at all, period. Didn’t he smell a rat? Didn’t he know that LE NEVER comes around just to shoot the chit like they claimed they were doing. When LE says they just wanna talk is when you MUST say “I have nothing to say. Am I free to go?”

                LE *can* detain you for questioning for a short period of time. Court cases have defined what that time frame is but I can’t recall offhand. However, if they question you too long, or if they prevent you from walking around in your own house, using your own bathroom, they then have you effectively under arrest and they law requires them to Mirandize you. Most WON’T.

                Instead, they’ll make you sit on the couch, or in your office chair at work, etc; and keep questioning you. It that happens, ask once more “Am I free to go”. If they say ANYTHING EXCEPT “Yes”….then tell them “I have nothing to say except I want a lawyer”.

                This video titled “Don’t Talk To Poice” is 48 minutes long and features a practicing defense attorney and retired police detective who BOTH explain, in detail, why you should NEVER talk to the police. The detective says ‘Everyone has a story and everyone wants to tell it to me. In 30 years I met a lot of people who talked themselves into an arrest. But I never met one who talked themself out of one.” WATCH IT! You’ll be GLAD you did!

                Liked by 2 people

                • ann says:

                  Thanks boots.
                  I will. never trust or cooperate w federal LE again until they PROVE worthy by complying promptly w transparency
                  And started fresh w stalwart middle class people,
                  Get rid of the hooked up wealthy Beltway pond scum: Rosenstein & wife, Jacoby, etc.

                  as crooked as. three dollar bill & it’s really obvious they don’t give a R.. A.. what we think. 🐢.🐍🐊

                  The detectives, law enforcement I know are local, state. straight up. 👮🏼‍♂️ 👍🏼💪🏼 Although they may be fierce with unruly people. Probably have to., 🕵🏼‍♀️

                  Never had anything but total kindness from police, so haven’t been scared or suspicious.

                  What an ugly world this cabal chooses to prop up.

                  Psychiatric patients incarcerated for white collar crimes, bomb making, etc.
                  Let me tell you, this bunch would fit in just fine.

                  So gross to know they ran DSI, office of Legal counsel & nat sec.

                  Sick to my stomach just thinking about it. 🇺🇸

                  Like

          • Linda K. says:

            They can lie to you and tell you they have proof you are guilty too.

            Liked by 1 person

          • Mac says:

            If you are being questioned as a suspect, especially if you are undergoingf custodial interrogation. anything you say which can be construed as being self incriminating can be excluded. Also, any evidence derived from these incriminating statements may also be excluded. Unless, the suspect has been informed of his rights under the Miranda ruling. This is known as the Exclusionary Rule. What the FBI was doing with Flynn, was attempting get him to give them information which was at odds with the known facts. They then turned around and charged him with lying to the FBI, even though they had no real evidence that he was intentionally uttering a falsehood and though they wrote that they believed he was not intentionally lying.

            Liked by 1 person

            • JL says:

              The problem with this, is that Flynn was not undergoing custodial interrogation. He was voluntarily participating.

              That’s not to say there aren’t a bunch of other issues. It’s not clear that Flynn was aware that he was being questioned or interrogated. If not, I think that in itself brings up a host of issues.

              Like

        • Kintbury says:

          He should however have been advised he could have one present if he wished and not been tricked into thinking this was some kind of “how goes it”.

          Like

        • Dutchman says:

          Miranda and subsequent rulings; when LE are investigating to firstly detirmine if a crime was committed, and secondly the nature of the crime, and before getting to “who done it”, they ask witnesses, victims and even people ‘on background’ lots of questions.
          No problem. But, when they view someone as a SUSPECT, THATS when Miranda kicks in.
          They danced around the edge. They HAD the transcripts of his calls with the Russian ambassador.

          They had the V.P. on National T.V. saying no one on Trump transition team had had any contact with Russians.

          The contact itself wasn’t illegal, since he was a member of the transition team, and not a private citisen, so no Logan act violation.

          But, if he contradicted the V.P, it would be spun as “V.P. Pence stated on National T.V. that no Trump team members have had contact with Russians, …but NOW it turns out,…what,ELSE are they hiding,…

          Point is, they ANTICIPATED that Flynn would ‘lie’, out of ‘political necesity’ and ‘optics’, they entrapped him, and so you could say they expected him to ‘lie’, and yeah by their actions, he shoulda had a lawyer.
          That a mans life was turned upside down for this piddling b.s. is really unbelievable.

          Liked by 1 person

          • BitterC says:

            A minor point, but I keep seeing people say “V.P. Pence stated on National T.V. that no Trump team members have had contact with Russians”. That is not accurate.

            I happened to catch that interview of Pence on Face The Nation. John Dickerson asked Pence REPEATEDLY if Flynn had discussed sanctions with Kislyak. My radar went up because he kept pressing everytime Pence denied it. I knew right then that Dickerson knew something Pence didn’t

            I also continue to believe Pence lied. We know Flynn spoke to the transition team in Mar-a-Lago before and after that fateful phone call. No way in the world Flynn didn’t ask Pence for guidance on what to say about the sanctions or report what was said afterwards.

            That has made me suspicious of Pence ever since Flynn was fired for “lying to the VP”

            Like

            • Dutchman says:

              Yeah, thanks for the correction. Its like it bothers me every time someone repeats “the,Russians hacked the DNC computers”,…
              repeat a lie often enough,…..

              On your interpretation, I ‘m not sure. I did see the clip once, and Dickerson ‘spun him up’, and defietly had an agenda.

              If it was a set up that Pence was IN on, shouldn’t have had to repeat the question.
              And, we KNOW it would have been SOP for McCabe or one of his minions to get Dickerson to ask the question.
              I haven’t seen anything that clearly makes me not trust Pence. But, I remember Papa Bush, and I am leery. Just on a “fool me once” basis,….

              Like

        • BitterC says:

          You may be right about the warning about needing a lawyer, but they could (not sure if it’s “should”) have reminded him it’s a felony to lie to the FBI

          Like

      • donna kovacevic says:

        Comey that ompa lumpa “Peder” he deserves to hang and hang him high.

        Liked by 2 people

      • John says:

        It was the White House Counsel’s job to file a notice of representation with the FBI for all the senior executive branch personnel. If Don McGahn had done his job none of this General Flynn nonsense would have even happened. Even after it happened the FBI General Counsel seemed to be shocked that McGahn didn’t come down on them like a ton of bricks.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Dutchman says:

          There are few things that are,as much of a clusterf*ck as a new ‘transition’ at the W.H., especially when there is a transfer from one party to the other.
          There is no private sector comparison. Several thousand employees (in the West Wing) and many thousands more in various departments (political appointees), LEAVE, to be replaced by new people, most who have NEVER done the job they are now tasked with.
          They spend some considerable time, getting up to speed.
          McCabe/Comey KNEW this, and took advantage of it.
          Barstuds! Remember Obummer promising to aid the transition? Oh, thats right,….his lips WERE moving, so of COARSE he eas lieing. Crapweasel.

          Liked by 3 people

  7. Perot Conservative says:

    Yes!

    Liked by 2 people

  8. The Boss says:

    I absolutely love the last part of the request (introduction) wherein Flynn / Powell request the court to order the Special Counsel to preserve all documentation relevant to this case. That is a massive shot across the bow of that lawless group of scum.

    Liked by 16 people

  9. Erik Heter says:

    Wow, there are some doozies in there. Powell is going scorched Earth, and if she gets some of these, a lot more than just the prosecutors of Flynn are going to be in serious, serious trouble.

    Really curious about the redaction behind #31 …

    Liked by 5 people

  10. What Sidney Powell is asking for is going to answer a LOT of questions. She is asking for stuff I am sure certain folks would rather stay hidden….makes me wonder if they will comply.

    Liked by 3 people

    • daylight58 says:

      “asking for stuff I am sure certain folks would rather stay hidden”

      Why does that scene from the end of the movie “Patton”, where the German command staff are burning every record available as the Allies close in on Berlin, come to mind?

      Oh. That’s why.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Newhere says:

      They already didn’t comply. And Judge Sullivan re-affirmed yesterday that DOJ must either comply, or explain why it need not comply. Which means Sidney’s already tacitly won part of the battle: DOJ has been saying it fulfilled it’s Brady obligation; by saying “comply or explain why you don’t have to,” Judge Sullivan is effectively agreeing with the defense that DOJ has not exhausted its obligation.

      For all this time we’ve watched the DOJ simply rebuff lawful orders. Sidney and Judge Sullivan have taken it to a different level, because Sidney has expressly asked the judge for CONSEQUENCES (ruling of contempt) to be followed by a motion to dismiss charges. She’s on offense. DOJ now has to defend it self, or LOSE big time. I believe this is the FIRST time in all of this that the table has turned, in terms of consequences.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Redzone says:

        Newhere- thanks for the background. What are the odds the DOJ can demonstrate Flynn has no right to that info?

        Someone else on here, I believe an attorney, suggested the case referenced by the Judge in the footnotes of his recent order regarding a terrorism case could be stretched to take the position that it applies here, so no document production is necessary. Thoughts?

        Like

        • Newhere says:

          I believe the standard in the terrorism case is a higher standard than Sullivan has applied before — meaning it raises the bar for Sidney in showing the government was required to hand over material it didn’t hand over. It doesn’t necessarily mean no production necessary; it’s just a tougher standard for Sidney to show the gov was required to hand over material it didn’t.

          A subtle point — by asking to compel production and hold the DOJ in contempt, Sidney technically isn’t JUST asking for the material. She’s asking for a ruling that DOJ was obligated to produce stuff, but didn’t; that the material must now be delivered, and the prosecutors held in contempt. So, the end result here isn’t just production or no production; it’s contempt or no contempt for *already* failing to produce.

          Back to the tougher standard: I believe it’s a 3-part test, having to do with relevance or materiality … but the 3rd part is a balancing test — importance to defendant vs. national security. I didn’t go back to look it up, but I think that’s roughly the test. So, I don’t know; balancing tests are notoriously difficult to predict. However, with the list delivered by Sidney, it’s hard to imagine a fair-minded just wouldn’t find even the higher standard satisfied — unless, he’s NOT a fair-minded jude and instead wants to use the murky test to yet again let DOJ off the hook. Another lawyer pointed out a common judicial move: adopt a strict test when the intention is to find for the moving party (i.e. Sidney/Flynn), because showing that even a harder standard is satisfied makes for a stronger decision and less vulnerable on appeal.

          Finally, aside from the motion to compel/find DOJ in contempt for Brady violations — which gets at evidence tied to Flynn’s culpability or lack thereof — Sidney made a separate charge of prosecutorial misconduct, which is extremely shrewd. This is the charge that swings open the gates on evidence pertaining to all or most FBI/DOJ spygate activity, because it’s relevant to the question of misconduct concerning the Flynn set-up and prosecution. This is an extremely audacious move, with high risk for the defendant (Flynn). They are essentially going for broke. An experienced and razor-sharp lawyer like Powell isn’t going to charge prosecutorial misconduct without a virtual certainty as to what’s hiding under the rocks. Because the stakes are so high for her client, and she’s not going to play fast-and-lose with the fate of a U.S. general and American hero.

          So, we’ve heard it so many times, but it might finally apply: buckle up!

          Liked by 3 people

  11. Maga Truth Seeker says:

    Just read all 40 requests. Sidney Powell is going straight to the source and has an amazing understanding of this case, the set-up, and documents needed to prove General Flynn is innocent of all crimes.

    Three redactions in the requests. Why is Joe P continually being redacted?

    Liked by 7 people

    • Mr e-man says:

      Whistleblower?

      Liked by 3 people

    • ristvan says:

      P took the notes while Strzok asked the questions. He is the lynchpin. Shows how demented the SC is/was tomthink we don’t know he was the second interviewer. Haven’t they read the Strzok/Page texts? Or seen the Congressional testimony requests.

      He is being ‘hidden’ because he has two options. Testify truthfully and the whole thing blows up. Testify untruthfully, and you will eventually go to prison. Casts Wray in a very bad (protect the corrupt FBI at all costs) light.

      Liked by 11 people

      • In other words…Wray’s ASS is on the line along with AG BARR!!!

        Because Barr has to approve of the material to be given to Sidney because he is the HEAD OF DOJ WHICH INCLUDES THE FIB!!! OUCH!!!!

        Betcha’ those bagpipes went a tad higher on the pitch!!!

        And I just had a brain f@rt…would it is something that THIS IS THE WAY to get the EVIDENCE INTRODUCED about the whole shebangs and Gen Flynn gets exonerated and every one of these cretins gets locked up AT THE SAME TIME!!!

        Like

    • We the people know says:

      There are 6 redactions. It reads quite well if insert the following:
      1. Beelzebub
      2. The Prince of Darkness’
      3. Dark Lord
      4. Mephistopheles
      5. The Devil
      6. Satan

      Liked by 4 people

    • WRB says:

      Why is Joe P continually being redacted?

      He is probably not SES level, and therefore as “just a gov’t worker” his name is protected.

      Liked by 1 person

    • BitterC says:

      I just read somewhere that they redact the names of all non-SES personnel

      Like

  12. L4grasshopper says:

    The question arises:

    What the heck was Flynn’s previous counsel doing?

    And —

    Was Flynn aware of what his previous counsel was, or was not, doing?

    Liked by 3 people

    • Deanna says:

      I listened to George papaD season earl recently and he said the prosecutors froze out legal counsel which limited who was willing to take his defense case and so he had to go with what was available to him. I’m not sure how it was done but there could be tacit agreements between prosecutor and defense attorney? Not really sure what he was alluding to.

      Liked by 2 people

    • sometimes when I am laying awake at night, I wonder if Flynn hasn’t “allowed” all this to happen, knowing the whole time he was going to switch lawyers on them, and turn the tables on these scum. Flynn is a smart man and that always leaves that little bit of doubt in my mind that he always knew where this was going to lead.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. 4sure says:

    It would appear that Gen. Flynn wasted his time and money on the lawyers who were supposedly representing him prior to his retaining Sidney Powell. Gen. Flynn should sue them for malpractice and incompetence. Can’t wait to see what the crooked DOJ response to this filing will entail and what the judge will do when the crooked DOJ once again refuses to comply.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cboldt says:

      Yep. And there is what I call a practical side of this. It is often impossible to prove the government is lying. They say “we don’t have it.” That’s the end.
      On the legal side, I see mostly “irrelevant” as the answer. That said, thes motions are in the oficial record in the Mueller / Russia hoax mix.
      The case is being transmogrified from “did Flynn lie to the FBI” to “what did the government do to undermine the election.”

      Liked by 10 people

      • ezpz2 says:

        Great word: transmogrified
        Thank you!

        Had to look it up.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Beau Geste says:

        The major risk to both the “government” and Judge Sullivan is that the records will eventually be released by President Trump. (They can likely rely on AG Barr not releasing the records, but as always, PDJT is the unpredictable wild card)

        If the “government lawyers” represent to the Court that the records are irrelevant, and Judge Sullivan accepts their argument, followed by release of highly relevant records showing that General Flynn was attacked and maliciously prosecuted and his family threatened as part of an illegal, seditious “coup”, the walls will close in on the “government” perps (and Judge Sullivan).

        Do the perps try to force an appeal to stall past the election?
        Does Judge Sullivan try to stall, to protect the “government” coup perps?
        How long does PDJT let this fester and percolate to see who is part of, and enablers of the coup?

        Liked by 4 people

      • California Joe says:

        The most important investigation in FBI history being the President of the United States and members of his campaign are Russian operatives and….THE FBI LOSES 302 INTERVIEWS? Really incredible to believe isn’t it. We’re not talking about some two-bit telemarketing scam and some boiler room targets are we????? You know that they are lying beside the FBI numbers and serializes every document in it’s file plus it’s stored on a computer and saved.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Failure-to-Produce and Lost-our-Evidence are grounds to REPLACE the ENTIRE FBI.

          Liked by 4 people

          • amazed treetop downlooker says:

            VERY SIMPLE, transform their role, make ’em “role models”….LOCK ALL convicted FBI perps inside the recommissioned FIB prison compound, PERMANENTLY, put indestructible iron bars on all windows, etc, then turn these Furtive Betraying Imbrogliones into the Forever Barricaded Insurgents…and charge admission to all suitable screened patriot citizens & others, HONEST security-screened, who wish to tour, after all doorways have been converted into impenetrable transparent doublewide DEEPSTATE zoo windows, all in order to to raise money to offset their incalculable damage to the Republic of the USA.

            Betcha millions would visit the only prison so close to the DC mall !
            Betcha there’d be no shortage of “We The People” volunteer prison guards to supplement the official Federal white hat FIB prison guard corps….kinda like an updated version of stocks.

            OK, fantasy over…they actually deserve much more severe punishment, many have earned their right to execution, but just trying to offer something cheaper than razing the place, and having to expensively warehouse a bunch of traitors..AND,,,

            a fitting perpetual lesson to future Deep State wannabe overthrow knife artists…ya better NOT try to go there !!!
            What’s YOUR suggestion to address the coming HUGE prison space shortage for self-serving DC swampsters of the worst kind ?

            Liked by 1 person

            • Dutchman says:

              Couldn’t we just hang em all?
              I admit I DID have a fantasy;
              A dunk tank, you know where you throw the softball, and hit the target, in they go.

              Filled with raw,sewage. Hillary, Obama, Comey, Brennan.

              WHAT would you pay, just to be in the,audience. And how much MORE,would you pay, for a chance to throw the ball?
              They could tour the country, and pay their debt to our country that way.
              I see Comey dressed as a clown,….

              Liked by 1 person

        • MaineCoon says:

          Yes. FIB is flat out lying. They didn’t lose the 302s. Many FIBers PCs will have them. Check Comey’s home safe for the original hardcopies.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Dutchman says:

      His previous council may have been representing his best interests i.e. following his instructions.
      Assuming Flynns son was under threat, as long as Mueller investigation was ongoing, he may have instructed them not to fight it, don’t make waves.

      Only with the,wrapping up of Mueller, was Flynn free to take them on.
      Thats ONE possibility. Another is this ;
      Weismann practices a special kind of Law, he goes WAY beyond what most prosecutors do. It may be that most lawyers simply aren’t adept at dealing with this level of deception from prosecutors; Sidney has had experience.

      Or, could be the fix was in, with Flynns first council. Flynn knows, we can only guess.

      Liked by 2 people

  14. DeWalt says:

    As we have seen before. The court may order the government to release. But it’s yet to be seen if they comply. We may now see which side the judge is playing.

    Like

  15. Chris says:

    “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”). “

    Liked by 4 people

  16. Patience says:

    Gotta get into the weeds………to drain a swamp

    Liked by 5 people

  17. For Eyes says:

    The failure to finish Flynn off and wrap this up long ago has become the undoing of the DOJ.

    And a piece of this blowback lands on Barr

    Liked by 2 people

    • MaineCoon says:

      It’s knocking at his door, right now.

      Liked by 1 person

      • MaineCoon says:

        By “knocking” I mean he should internally demand of the prosecutors that they follow the rule of law. I don’t think he should idlely sit back and allow further injustice by allowing the prosecutors to continue in illegal behavior. That would make him complicit. Subsequently, he should take action against them, individually.

        Like

      • Toenail says:

        Knocking loudly. If he ignores it his place in history may be among the great traitors.

        Liked by 1 person

    • ann says:

      The failure of the justice Department is to presume they can stomp all over American citizens

      Liked by 3 people

    • ristvan says:

      Beg to differ on AG Barr. This is/was an SC collateral damage issue. Should not now be on the AG’s plate, unlike main Spygate (1) FISA abuse (Horowitz) and (2) EC predicate (Durham).

      It is in Judge Sullivan’s courtroom with the very capable Sidney Powell now for the defense. Barr’s smart move is to let it play out there, then act against lesser DoJ bad actors (DoJ prosecutor Van Grack) if and when necessary later. Intervention now would have Dems screaming ‘political interference’—‘Trump forced Barr to ‘free’ Flynn so obstruction!!!’, just what Nadler is looking for.

      Liked by 14 people

      • For Eyes says:

        But think outside the box. The choice of actions span well past a simple binary of a) do nothing, and b) dismiss charges.

        Powell appears to demonstrate the DOJ has not done its legal duty to provide the needed Brady material. Barr could step in and insist they do so. That would have been the right thing to do all along, but nope. So give Sidney what she wants and THEN let the chips fall where they may.

        But Barr shows no signs of doing that. And THAT is on him. Prior Brady troubles were not on his watch. But this now is.

        Liked by 3 people

        • ristvan says:

          For Eyes, you plainly did not understand either the legal or the political implications of my comment. Please read it again. It IS NOT on Barr at this point. No way, No how. Get real.

          Liked by 5 people

          • For Eyes says:

            I read it. And again. I beg to differ.

            And isn’t that the great thing about debate? We all can reach our own conclusions, and not one of us has a corner on the market of wisdom.

            Like

            • American Nationalist says:

              I agree strongly with Ristvan. This has always been against the Commander in Chief from day one and any appearance of the Attorney general would be portrayed as such even if inaccurate. We know this from when Pelosi laughably called Barr a liar over a private conversation with Mueller. Another example was that retarded Bergdahl ruling that I largely disagree with. They claimed that because the President preferred a certain ruling that meant they had to rule otherwise lest it appears that the executive branch was influencing the case. But by that definition there couldn’t be an attorney general (Who’s appointed by the President). Nor can one determine that the President’s tweets or comments had a material impact on the prosecutor. It’s asserting an injury that might not have even occurred(The same argument in Bergdahl is the argument used by the Special Counsel in it’s “hypothetical” obstruction case it failed to file.) If that argument reached a Judge, I’m confident that he/she would agree with me that the argument goes against the First Amendment). Sorry for that diatribe but the point is that that’s how these scumbags think and Ristvan and I concur that the best way to beat them is also “by the book”. Two can play at that game Weissman.

              Liked by 1 person

              • For Eyes says:

                None of which answers the essential element:

                Exactly why would it be wrong, legally … or in the political context you drag in … for Barr to instruct his employees to obey the Judge’s order, and provide the legally required Brady material?

                Because the reverse is clearly wrong … to order them to not provide the required material.

                So at best you are saying no oversight at all somehow the best course of action for an AG in the management of DOJ? You must have been a real fan of Sessions.

                Like

      • Great posts, Ristvan – as always.
        [Disregard my post below to go after Van Grack – you’ve nailed it above.]

        Like

      • willthesuevi says:

        I agree ristvan. If Powell is able to expose enough so that Judge Sullivan has to rule against the DOJ, then Barr has what he needs to cleanse a few of the swamp critters.

        In that case, if Barr does not act we have our answer.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Could it be AG Barr is letting Ms Powell and Judge Sullivan do “his dirty work” for him by exposing and cleansing the alphabet agencies of corruption and thus enabling AG Barr to claim he’s “restoring” integrity to the DOJ and FBI?

        Liked by 1 person

        • For Eyes says:

          Well put.

          Leading from behind. Hardly grounds for hero status.

          Like

          • Bryan Alexander says:

            You can’t separate politics from this. Any action taken by AG Barr in this that will result in helping the president will be used as ammunition for Obstruction of Justice charges by the Democrats in the House. In this case, it is supporting your boss by not interfering with a criminal proceeding.

            Like

      • MACAULAY says:

        Agree with this, or at least defer to your superior knowledge….but how long do the American people have to keep bending over (and supplying their own Vaseline) to avoid the OBSTRUCTION charge…in the face of massive obstruction of justice by the Obama-Clinton Crime cartel, a/k/a Deep State, ongoing now for three long years?

        Will Justice ever come?

        Like

  18. RM says:

    I’d like to know if a class action suit could be brought against the coup plotters on behalf of General Flynn’s legal defense fund donors. We could then forward the proceeds to our great patriot.

    Like

    • cboldt says:

      Donors have no claim recognized by the law, unless Flynn was defrauding putative donors.
      Flynn may have a civil claim agianst the government, but that is his personally.

      Liked by 1 person

    • ristvan says:

      Lurking Lawyer here.
      Short answer, no. Doctrine of prosecutorial immunity, codified by 42USC§1983.

      Otherwise, every convicted criminal would sue the convicting prosecutor under some BS civil rights theory like racial bias or LGBTQ bias or whatever. Sometimes, the logic for the law is obvious but the results arguably unjust. An old but wise legal aphorism:
      Hard cases make bad law.

      Liked by 2 people

  19. There have been many Treepers over the past 3 years suggest that Flynn’s guilty plea was part of a sting operation. After reviewing Ms. Powell’s discovery motion, those Treepers may be right!

    Liked by 5 people

    • frances says:

      I thought that when he chose HC’s law firm to represent him of all people. Then when he at the last minute switched to Sidney I wondered if she has been in on the case from the get go. In any case she is superb.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Brinton says:

      Flynn was a spy. He specialized in counter spy craft…. I don’t believe it is 4D chess. But i believe they knew allot of what was going on by our government, knew the depth of it, and knew they had been targeted, starting in 2015. Flynn was the center piece, for their fight against it….. One question to ask. Who uncovered Stefan Halper’s identity? “Adam Lovinger”. The DOJ tried to prosecute, but failed. Who hired that individual? “Flynn”…. They knew that they were being spied on, and went to counter move. It has been an ever evolving strategy. I hope the tides are truly turning, i believe they are. But I do not believe we will get to the lowest of tides, the world doesn’t work that way. But we can do damage that will hurt them for the next 50 plus years. Then another generation will have to fight again.

      Liked by 4 people

      • For Eyes says:

        The Dem party as a party isn’t at risk.

        Even it were so, things would just morph to a new name, and on they go.

        Half the country still supports them. Most of the government swamp still does. For change to happen there has to be some shame and remorse, and that is absolutely absent from any of this.

        The most that can be hoped for, it seems to me, is to see the coup plotters pay a serious personal price. Enough that no one will consider doing this again.

        And yet, even that lesser hope seems to be in vain. There is plenty of evidence against plenty of people and yet no real action has been taken.

        I log in daily to keep up with the news, but expectations are pretty low at this point.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Brinton says:

          There is no such thing as total victory, just territory taken. Complete destruction of the enemy will never happen. We need to keep things in perspective. (mine were unrealistic when this started) I’m happy with a yard gained here and there. As long as we keep gaining yards, and chipping away at there foundation. And we are doing that. Look how affraid of us they are. They are trying to remove our voice from the internet. If they were winning, they would not being doing that…… I am not happy at the progress or speed. But we are gaining yard after yard, slowly….

          So many people here believe that Trump is some Herculean figure, and that Trump will shatter everything for us is so dangerous. It takes an army to win. and Army marching one yard at a time.

          Liked by 6 people

  20. dreamguardian007 says:

    My favorite part is Judge Sullivan’s Order:

    “The Court has carefully considered Mr. Michael T. Flynn’s motion to show cause and to compel production of Brady material and it is hereby ORDERED that said motion is GRANTED.”

    Liked by 4 people

    • cthulhu says:

      I believe that is a “pro-forma” order drafted by Sidney Powell, not an actual order signed by the judge.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Deplore Able says:

      Note that the Order isn’t signed. This is the proposed Order that Sidney Powell wants the Judge to sign. When you file a motion like this, the Defendant’s attorney often prepares a proposed order hoping the Judge will sign it. You try to make life easy for the Judge.

      The Judge won’t make a decision prior to October 31, after Sidney Powell files her rebuttal to the governments brief.

      Liked by 2 people

  21. shirley49 says:

    Can’t Trump do anything to move this along? He is the Pres.

    Like

    • Right to reply says:

      He can declassify, and he should!

      Liked by 1 person

    • John55 says:

      He’ll be accused of “obstructing justice” if he tries to ‘interfere” in this.

      Don’t forget that his previous attempts to rescue Flynn from the Deep State’s persecution resulted in the Mueller Inquisition. Without support from the Congressional GOP there’s nothing Trump can do. And they’re not supporting him, in fact they’re trying to oust him.

      Liked by 8 people

      • Toenail says:

        Often the democrat party is framed as the enemy but actually the republican Rinos may be the most dangerous of the two. The democrats may be crazy and yelling about stabbing you in the heart but republicans are the ones stabbing you in the back. I advise no money to the senate or house coffers. Make your donations only to the well vetted ones you want to support. Drying up the pond is one method of reducing the scum.

        Liked by 4 people

  22. Right to reply says:

    I pray God keeps her safe

    Liked by 8 people

  23. Mr e-man says:

    Looks like she sees Flynn as the cornerstone of the entire coup attempt and is therefore entitled to ALL the information on the coup plotters in order to properly defend her client.

    They don’t want to give all that to her or anyone. They would be totally and completely exposed at that point.

    I would think they would drop the case on Flynn before they would ever shine the public spotlight on their probable illegal activities. Sidney seems to know that and expects they will drop the case. But they won’t drop it without a fight because Flynn is an integral part of their fake collusion story.

    So they can’t drop it but they have to. All they can do is delay until the inevitable dropping of charges. Easier to explain that than the criminal activity they engaged in.

    Liked by 4 people

  24. MaineCoon says:

    The Great Sidney Powell is still Great.

    Liked by 3 people

    • I would say the Great Sidney Powell is not only Great but probably the Best (and 0nly) attorney out there who could take on the entire Justice Dept., CIA, FBI, et al and make it look easy.

      Liked by 6 people

      • MaineCoon says:

        Absolutely agree. She’s been in “training” for this very moment with the prior case history with Weissman. No one has her on ponit experience nor her character, ethics, professionalism and sheer guts to take them on. She has truth on her side.

        Liked by 4 people

  25. Paul Gable says:

    Love Sidney Powell, apparently the last patriot lawyer with the stones to call out this cesspool of govt behavior for what it is. But here’s a concern: the govt continues to stonewall, figuring their worst case is dismissal for prosecutorial misconduct. So what if Flynn gets off at this late stage…he’s’ financially ruined…govt suffers a little bad PR in the conservative new media (MSM won’t touch it)…but docs remain hidden/unproduced. Deep State remains unexposed. Powell is a hero to her client, but accountability for these arrogant elitist traitors remains exclusively in the lap of Barr and Durham, who so far have not visibly done much to inspire confidence.

    We may need divine intervention to break this open.

    Liked by 11 people

  26. ann says:

    Am I wrong to say “This is not an attorney who is protecting a guilty client” ? .

    I’d think a person who was guilty would want to evidence found nonadmissible.

    Like

  27. Bogeyfree says:

    Why is everyone giving AG Barr a pass on all of this?

    The DOJ prosecutors WORK FOR HIM. HE is their boss. So if you have an ex district attorney alleging Brady issues wouldn’t one expect the highest attorney in the land to immediately confront HIS EMPLOYEES, his DOJ prosecutors and ask them directly if ANY exculpatory evidence was withheld?

    It’s a simple yes or no question.

    One would think if they said yes, Barr would have immediately halted this case and since that has not happened, IMO either he has asked them and they said no and believes them or he has not asked them directly and agrees with the DOJ prosecutors position against Flynn and does not believe there was any Brady issues

    IMO this case and the pressure Sidney is applying IMO tells me a lot about AG Barr.

    Liked by 3 people

    • cboldt says:

      I would not expect the AG to be involved in all the pretrial motions that demand production. How many of those are filed a year?
      Similar with awareness of contents of FISA warrant applications. 3,000/year, 10 a day. No time for anything else if just FISA warrant applications are studied page for page, allegation for allegation.
      Even worse in this case, SC is fairly well walled-off from the usual weak and imperfect control structure.
      One crooked cop, one crooked prosecutor, those people have lots of power and can ruin lives just as quickly as the crooked judges do.

      Liked by 1 person

    • For Eyes says:

      Many of US are NOT giving him a pass at this point. Our high expectations have not been met.

      Liked by 1 person

      • ristvan says:

        YET. Patience. As recommended many times here before.

        Liked by 10 people

        • ann says:

          Ristvan.

          I’ realise I say hasty things. And Often Im sorry..

          . The impatience comes from a complete unfamiliarity w criminal law.& the past decades of DoJ doing dirty deeds while we are almost powerless to stop them , short of resorting to armed revolt.

          So I try to look on this as a breakthrough in transparency. This mess took along time to build, and won’t be easy task to take their illegitimate power away.

          Like

          • ristvan says:

            Ann, understand your impatience. But I have near 40 years experience battling this and related matters. No battleship turns on a dime. The Captain says make it so, and 1/2 hour later it is so.
            The law is similar. Haste definitely makes waste. A bulletproof case, whether criminal (here), Section 302 trade (my personal experience), or civil (my personal experience in re our summer cottage riparian land dispute in Canada that took three years and a gross ‘prosecution’ survey mistake to prove and resolve) simply takes time to build properly. There are lots of twists and turns in the law. Good defense attorneys know them all, and will try them all. Ms. Sidney Powell now defending Gen. Flynn is an example on our side.
            Brady, expanded scope, FISA, EC…
            She is very good and artfully giving a master criminal law class. Follow her and savor her chess game.

            Liked by 8 people

            • ann says:

              Thanks Ristvan. You are a cherished person on this site
              I bet you don’t realise how often you, cboldt and many others have calmed me down by making sense of this mess. 💡 .
              Ha! 🇺🇸

              Like

              • cboldt says:

                The biggest leg up is to not trust what the press says about a case or controversy. They never get it just right.
                The errors swing both ways. Hannity says “Sixth amendment violation!” Nope.
                Too, and this is a bitter pill, the law is not and should not be the solution to all ills. This idea has empowered courts and legislators to step WAY out of bounds. Sometimes a public “awakening and uprising” is the best and only decent solution.
                You can bet that Comey and company were as careful as could be to not commit an act that is easly cast as criminal. Unethical all day long, sure, and in a HUGE way. Temper your expecatations all around. The world is an imperfect place. The law is a minor tool – do NOT make the law too powerful, becuase people like Comey will abuse it to their advantage, and public disadvantage.

                Liked by 2 people

                • ann says:

                  Agree. Choldt.

                  Don’t know quite how to articulate it, but you describe a creeping intrusion of law fare into matters which belong to the greater polity.

                  A progressive exclusion of voices from outside the Obscurantist legal forum.

                  Not everything fits inside little legal boxes. 🇺🇸

                  Like

    • johneb18 says:

      Yes!

      Like

    • SAM-TruthFreedomLiberty says:

      That’s not how it works.
      The simple take on the proceedings and then the immediate loud slander of people just cause you don’t understand is maddening.

      It’s not as easy as your mind works. That’s why President Trump didn’t just release it all in ’17. Have to be nimble.. That said.. he might need some people running around with pitchforks to get things to happen.. so carry on. *sigh*

      Liked by 1 person

  28. Tom says:

    this was nothing more than blackmail, forcing him to lie to protect his family – classical muleface/ weissel stalinist strategy

    Liked by 3 people

    • Toenail says:

      I am not sure they “forced” him to lie. I believe they “forced” him to say he lied to avoid total destruction. Or at least his lawyers told him it would save him from destruction.

      Liked by 1 person

  29. Bogeyfree says:

    When do we start……..Sidney for AG or We want Sidney…….chant?

    I don’t tweet but wish someone would suggest to PT he consider replacing Barr with Sidney.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. Firefly says:

    Recall that when the DOJ originally thought they had Strozk’s buddy Rudolph Contreras as the Judge. But then Judge Contreras recused and Sullivan appointed.

    Liked by 4 people

  31. snailmailtrucker says:

    I see a Future Supreme Court Justice in Ms. Sydney Powell !

    Liked by 2 people

  32. Bogeyfree says:

    Wouldn’t you think due to the sensitivity and high profile exposure this case carries that AG Barr would have looked into these 40 points of Sidney’s already and knows the answers?

    He has unredacted access to EVERYTHING.

    So outside the coup plotters and perpetrators who do you think would be the next most embarrassed person if the judge reveals all the documents Sidney wants??

    IMO there is ZERO chance that any of these documents will see the light of day out in a public forum.

    Sidney just may help force PT’s hand addressing more HR issues soon!

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Genie says:

    Van Grack, you have a term paper due. Better get started.

    Liked by 2 people

  34. ristvan says:

    Lurking Lawyer here.
    This unsealing exposes a two pronged Sidney Powell pitbull strategy.

    1. True unquestionably relevant Brady material concerning Flynn. Stuff like the original 302 and discussions with Yates prior to the SC and Weissmann. Or the expanded scope allowing Weissmann to ho after Flynn’s son in order to force Flynn to plead guilty. Or the Kisylak recordings. Failure to produce this Brady stuff is prosecutorial misconduct warranting dismissal with prejudice. Asserting it isn’t relevant is nonsense (original notes and 302). And asserting Flynn’s plea waived rights to it has already been shot down by judge Sullivan. The plea deal was not not in his court and he did not assent to those hardball provisions.

    2. Steele and related stuff. The EC. This goes after the very legitimacy of the SC in the first place, an alternative route to dismissal of charges not lawfully brought in the first place. Another words, show Spygate was illegal and Flynn walks because unlawfully investigated and prosecuted, no Brady.

    This presents Van Grack with an enormous dilemma from which he can only extract himself and avoid potential disbarment by providing both. The 1 stuff gets him personally off the hook. Finally complying is better than never complying. The 2 stuff isn’t his responsibility; he just throws the Spygate perps under the bus to save himself.

    And this also gives Judge Sullivan an easy path. A number of the 40 enumerated items must exist, like Pientka notes and original 302 draft. Expanded scope from Rosenstein. The UK letter on Steele, that Sidney must somehow have firm evidence of. That stuff doesn’t materialize, he just lowers the boom.

    Liked by 15 people

    • Another Scott says:

      That’s an easy one – they’ll just #1 it, let the judge throw it out and walk away. The judge is the bad guy, they are still fellow travelers and thus protected. Do they really care about the final outcomes? They’ve harvested plenty of great optics and can say in the end there was a technicality beyond their control.

      Liked by 1 person

    • johnnyfandango says:

      The mystery man Pientka. Why haven’t we heard from him on camera or committee? Where is the press to chase him down in the streets and question him?
      Let’s also not forget that McCabe had an ax to grind against Gen. Flynn. Talk about bias.
      https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-26/mccabes-revenge-circa-suggests-flynn-investigation-was-launched-pure-retaliation

      Like

    • L4grasshopper says:

      As before, this requires the Judge to not be corrupt.

      That this is the very guy that got played in the Stevens case would seem to make it more likely that he will be very firm on the Brady requirements.

      But the Swamp is relentless. And is very hungry. Is Sullivan up to the challenge?

      Liked by 4 people

      • ristvan says:

        L4, good point. Based on how Sullivan reacted in the Stevens case, my betting his he is not Swamp. But we shall soon find out.

        Liked by 6 people

        • cboldt says:

          The framework is to limit damage to the institutions. I doubt SC gets thrown under the bus, that is too big a sactrifice, even if its just and proper, this is not the venue to reach that conclusion. That’s for Congress to knaw on.
          Call a selective prosection if the elements are shown – this can be done with the evidence that bears closely to the Flynn interview and little else. Was there monkey business with that 302? How are similarly situated government officials treated in 18 USC 1001 cases?
          Sullivan doesn’t want to become a pariah among his almost certainly liberal peers on the bench and in his offices.

          Liked by 1 person

          • ann says:

            Does that mean the DoJ’s pattern of intentional “lack of candor”, as per FISC Judge Collyer re writ applications will likely be avoided in Flynn’s case ?

            Cause of that legal principle of judicial economy (~)?

            Something about confining a ruling to smallest point.

            Sure wish that rule applied to our judiciary, who eagerly advocate for illegal migrants, no ID votes & sanctuary status.

            can’t trust judges to mind rules or adhere to strict standards.

            Like

            • cboldt says:

              FISC and surveillance is a huge can of worms, and it will not be resolved in the Flynn case, that’s for sure.
              I think what happens there is just a bunch of hand waving and promises to be more careful and never let this happen again. It’s BS, just like FISC was supposed to curtail surveillance (lots of anger and hand waving in Congress, Church Committee, etc.) and in the end, more surveilance than ever, better hidden than ever. FISA did the opposite of what it was promised to do.

              Liked by 1 person

              • ann says:

                Do you think it’s possible to pressure the AG into a nonpartisan apolitical oversight board?
                A separate, fire walled CLEAN structure that recruits unconnected outsiders ?

                Not through Congress. Just POTUS & The AG.
                Cause status Quo is wired for malfeasance: intell breaches, privacy violations, even stuff like witness protection is eradicated.
                I’m pestering you. I’ll stop. 😂

                Like

                • cboldt says:

                  Every attempt at “routine civilian oversight” that I am aware of has turned into a disaster. Civilian activists occupy valuable time, and a new vector for distrust is created.
                  The structure of the system is pretty good. The issue is the people in it, and in large part, the issue is the public is ignorant (not their fault) of how things work, so they fall for BS answers and crap for accountability.
                  On the federal side, the federal government is literally 100 or 1000 times more powerful than the constitution allows it to be, and that power is a magnet for sociopaths. I see no quick fix, for sure. I pray it collpases of its own dishonesty – the states will maintain order just fine.

                  Liked by 2 people

                • ann says:

                  Okay.
                  Thanks Choldt. No more pestering tonight Ha!

                  PS. Your wisdom reminds me of my father. Said the same thing.

                  Like

        • cdnintx says:

          Judge Jeanine Pirro was on Hannity with Sidney Powell the other day and she said she personally thinks Sullivan is a good Judge.

          Like

      • My instincts say that Judge Sullivan likely has a case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, like most people in DC. Once you get afflicted by TDS, all reason, fairness, and logic go out the window. I guess we’ll find out over the next few months.

        Like

    • Battleship Wisconsin says:

      Three questions:

      1) How much overlap is there between the Flynn Exculpatory Document List (FEDL), as compiled by Sidney Powell, and the Sundance Sunlight Document List (SSDL), as compiled by our CTH host? Is it 50 percent? Maybe 75 percent? Could it be as much as 90 percent?

      2) What are the potential impacts on the future prospects for successfully indicting and convicting the senior Spygate perpetrator command staff — Comey, Yates, Brennan, and Clapper — if all the material on the Flynn Exculpatory Document List (FEDL) is produced by the government and is eventually made public?

      3) Is it possible the DOJ would refuse to allow public release of some or all of the material on the Flynn Exculpatory Document List because it might become relevant in future prosecutions which might be pursued against other persons now under DOJ investigation?

      Liked by 2 people

      • ristvan says:

        I can answer your #2. It would be OK because became public via a criminal trial proceeding, therefore no ‘government’ declass intent to bias potential jurors could be argued by any defense counsel. Standard voir dire woild handle the residue of potential bias.

        Liked by 5 people

    • Let’s not stop there.

      “Failure to produce this Brady stuff is prosecutorial misconduct warranting dismissal with prejudice.”

      Time for Prosecution of Prosecutor(s) – mercilessly.

      Personal favorite: “Special Counsel Powell” to clean house of every Obama embed.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Erik Heter says:

      I honestly don’t see how Van Grack and the others get out of this, even with #1. If they’ve been dragging their feet and trying to avoid production of the material stuff regarding Flynn, that’s clear violation of the Brady order and would probably get him cited for contempt, no?

      Liked by 2 people

  35. William Barker says:

    FLYNN… is the GOOD GUY. His lawyer, Sidney Powell, represents TRUTH, JUSTICE, and the AMERICAN WAY.

    (Gang. I’m BEING SERIOUS. She really DOES! Read up about her! Why she isn’t Trump’s AG… is a mystery.)

    So… WHO is FLYNN’S OPPONENT? The DOJ. The TRUMP DOJ.

    WHO is Powell fighting to get the TRUTH from? The DOJ. The TRUMP DOJ.

    *** WHAT’S SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND…??? ***

    BARR… is on TEAM MUELLER. Just as SESSIONS… was on TEAM MUELLER. Just as ROSENSTEIN… was the crucial pillar for ILLEGITIMATELY EMPOWERING TEAM MUELLER!

    What am I missing…??? Yes. We have an ADVERSARIAL system of justice; that’s our system. But the DOJ is SUPPOSED to represent the GOOD GUYS!

    Again… TRUMP’S DOJ… BARR’S DOJ… WRAY’S FBI… THEY’RE FIGHTING *FOR* TEAM MUELLER AGAINST TEAM FLYNN… AGAINST TEAM POWELL!

    Trump could shut this $hit down in a SECOND with a simple executive order. He’s had this power ALL ALONG… since January 20, 2017.

    Geezus… I wish SUNDANCE would answer my points. I’d LOVE to get an HONEST response to my critique from Tom Fitton.

    *** WHERE AM I GOING WRONG…??? ***

    Like

  36. Comrade Mope says:

    #9 electronic communications of what looks like the Weissmann Special Counsel team. Can anyone confirm? IF so, Aaron Rouse was involved in the October 1, 2017 Las Vegas shooting investigation. Why would the Mueller investigation send its people to Las Vegas for this shooting?

    Liked by 6 people

  37. islandpalmtrees says:

    One of the 40 Brady Items requested by Flynn Defense was regarding the comment made by Andrew McCabe reportedly included this phrase “F**k Flynn and then we F**k Trump,” according to direct FBI sources. Many of his top lieutenants applauded and cheered such rhetoric.result of this discovery.

    Then should it not be possible to file a complaint stating in effect that McCabe denied Flynn’s rights under the “Color Of Law”?

    https://truepundit.com/exclusive-fbis-own-political-terror-plot-deputy-director-and-fbi-brass-secretly-conspired-to-wage-coup-against-flynn-trump-2/

    But, I was puzzled by the Brady request not including a demand for the names, of those attending each of the meetings in which Andrew McCabe made similar statements? Reference below for added detail.

    Reportedly this was one of several such meetings held in seclusion among key FBI leaders since Trump was elected president, FBI sources confirm. At the congregation where McCabe went off the political rails and vowed to destroy Flynn and Trump, there were as many as 16 top FBI officials, inside intelligence sources said.

    Liked by 1 person

    • We may be seeing “multiple waves” of Brady Materials demands
      … each triggered by prior wave(s)-then-discovery.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Comcernedcitizen says:

      A sucessful prosecution of Flynn (guilty plea) was essential to the success of the seditious conspiracy against President Trump (F Trump). This is why the corrupt Special Counsel thought it necessary to violate Flynn’s Constitutional Rights in order to ensure that guilty plea.
      Flynn had to fall, by any means necessary, to give credence to the obstruction case against the President. Remember, Comey’s memos led to the obstruction investigation that was handed off to the Special Counsel. Comey alleged that the President was trying to get him to drop the Flynn case (“I hope you go easy on him”). So, a Flynn conviction was essential in order to bring a viable obstruction case agaiinst President Trump. That was the endgame. The Flynn case was just the opening move.
      Sidney Powell is exposing the seditious conspiracy in her defense of Gen, Flynn.

      Liked by 1 person

      • BitterC says:

        I am now a bit confused. If Flynn was being told he wasn’t in trouble for the calls with Kyslyak and cleared from being a “Russian agent”, why did the President ask Comey to let it go? Let WHAT go? Lying to Pence wasn’t criminal and Flynn was fired the day before the let it go convo.

        Did they lie to Flynn about being cleared, or did Comey lie to President Trump about Flynn being under some kind of investigation?

        Liked by 1 person

        • islandpalmtrees says:

          Really good question. Wish I had an answer to this too.

          Pure speculation: “Comey lied to President Trump about Flynn being under some kind of investigation”

          Like

  38. Another Scott says:

    Before we throw Flynn’s old counsel out the window remember it was a very different landscape back then. Flynn and his legal team may have been in survival mode fighting against Rosenstein, Weismann and the likes…

    Like

    • Eric C. says:

      I think that was the tactic, survive until special counsel closed shop. It was either Flynn and his counsels plan or his alone (used the previous firms connections to tread water)

      Liked by 1 person

    • Newhere says:

      Once Judge Sullivan was appointed to the case and issued the Brady Order, that’s when the landscaped changed. That’s when they had an even playing field to fight on. The Covington lawyers weren’t up to it. They were happy with a plea and no incarceration, and wanted to play nice and call it a win and keep their powder dry. (Look at how Sidney is being smeared as a partisan, camera-happy hack; Convington wanted to remain the equivalent of the “statesman”.)

      After the sentencing hearing with Judge Sullivan made clear he wouldn’t be play along with the pretense — that is, when Covington essentially laid bare the charade (attempting to drum up sympathy) and said essentially, “c’mon, let’s just go easy on him and go home,” and Sullivan laid down the gauntlet that if the defense would take its own injustices seriously, he wouldn’t either — well that’s when Flynn, saw the light. Fired ’em. Hired Sidney, came out fighting.

      The Covington lawyers were typical swamp dwellers, unwilling to risk reputation and cocktail party invites. Spineless. Typical.

      Sidney is a national hero. We are extremely lucky she took up the cause. There are very, very few attorneys who could and would fight with the courage and tenacity that she’s fighting. God bless.

      Liked by 10 people

  39. candyman says:

    After reading Sidneys’ book, I wonder if she took this case (in part) to somehow back door it to get to Weissmann?? Just a thought…

    Liked by 1 person

  40. Judge Sullivan has already made history with the right to “Brady Materials”.

    Next will be the right to claim the “Flynn Fifth” without objection.
    … “Innocent Self-Protection against DOJ-FBI Entrapment”.

    Liked by 2 people

  41. ozymandiasssss says:

    What exactly is an OCONUS lure(s)?

    Like

  42. Newhere says:

    If the government doesn’t drop this case, and Sidney motion for “egregious” prosecutorial conduct prevails — and especially if she obtains the evidence she’s seeking, and much of it becomes public — every other Special Counsel indictment is in jeopardy. As is the entire Mueller house of cards. Not to mention, other spygate related case prosecuted by Jessie Liu (Wolfe, possibly even Awan). It creates a basis to challenge other charges and deals, and minimally destroys the credibility of prosecutions out of DC and the Special Prosecutor’s Office. It’s like a grenade set to detonate in slow-motion, with damage that keeps spreading outward …..

    The small group still holed up in the DOJ must be terrified. They must be looking for cover — a way out that doesn’t destroy their narrative. At this point, they don’t *need* anything more from Flynn; the damage they needed to inflict is done; what they need now is for it all not to be unraveled.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if they exhaust themselves trying to spin some obtuse and pathetic narrative as cover for dropping the case. The stakes of proceeding at this point really couldn’t be higher. Better from the spygate perspective to drop some final BS story to try to destroy Flynn’s (and Powell’s) reputations, while packing up their slimy prosecution and slithering away.

    Liked by 3 people

  43. donnyvee says:

    From one of my favorite movies–Body Heat. Teddy Lewis: “I got a serious question for you: What the f**k are you doing? This is not sh*t for you to be messin’ with. Are you ready to hear something? I want you to see if this sounds familiar: any time you try a decent crime, you got fifty ways you’re gonna F**k up. If you think of twenty-five of them, then you’re a genius… and you ain’t no genius. You remember who told me that?”
    They had no idea how many ways they would screw up!

    Liked by 1 person

  44. islandpalmtrees says:

    A question, I guess for the lawyers. Would each of the 16 top FBI officials referenced below not be open to prosecution? I knew the crime was going to take place unless I reported it to a judge (before the fact).

    Reportedly this was one of several such meetings held in seclusion among key FBI leaders since Trump was elected president, FBI sources confirm. At the congregation where McCabe went off the political rails and vowed to destroy Flynn and Trump, there were as many as 16 top FBI officials, inside intelligence sources said.

    Common Law Felony: Accessory before the fact – At common law, an accessory before the fact is a pre-crime aider and abettor. They are generally not present at the scene of crime

    Common Law Felony: Accessory after the fact – An accessory after the fact is a post-crime aider that hinder the stopping of a crime.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cboldt says:

      Just generally, investigators have qualified immunity and prosecutors have absolute immunity for “official acts.” There is a very high bar to get over that, not impossible.
      Once over that bar, the typical remedies are not criminal sanctions. Case dismissed, money damages, disbarred, and that’s about it. Not that there are not possible crimes, just this sort of abuse of pwoer is not dealth with by throwing the prosecutor in jail. Mueller got away with letting people rot in jail when he knew it was unjust. Just sayin ….

      Liked by 3 people

      • All Too Much says:

        The money damages is a 29 USC Sec. 1983 case, which Flynn, and a lot of other people, will eventually file, includes an award of attorney fees and costs.

        Money doesn’t solve everything, but it can be a decent start.

        “Every person who, under color of [law] causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, …”

        Liked by 3 people

  45. felipe says:

    Outside CONtinental United States operatives (such as Halper, Misfud, Turk, etc.)

    Liked by 2 people

  46. oldschool says:

    I want to see Wiesman do the Epstien neck maneuver…

    Like

  47. gsonFIT says:

    Feds need to call in Robert Mueller to solve their conundrum

    Like

  48. k4jjj says:

    I have seen nothing which can give any comfort to the American people to have any further faith in the legal system of the United States.

    One brave warrior like Sydney Powell cannot overcome the vast army of demons. She is but one, single Joan of Arc with the courage of a lone Saint burned alive at the stake by the vast armies of legal Hell who have successfully conquered America.

    American Lawyers can break the law and destroy lives and bankrupt the innocent with impunity. American “justice” has proven it cannot survive its lawyers. They have no ethics and have proven they should never again be trusted. They have no incentive to be honest as they are allowed to conceal their crimes and maintain their licenses to steal and extort by the judges who maintain memberships of the legions of fellow scoundrels in their “club.”.

    What is paramount is not that the innocent be left alone. It is that this corrupt legal mob be allowed to continue to pillage and plunder and forever preserve their privileged lives of piracy as they revel and dance through gales of laughter upon their piles of stolen loot.

    American lawyers have proven their criminal guilt to the masses beyond all reasonable doubt.

    No mafia crime family has ever had the power wielded by this soulless horde.

    Liked by 2 people

    • donnyvee says:

      k4jjj–They are the mafia with badges.

      Liked by 1 person

    • We the people know says:

      Before being burned at the stake at 19 years old, the Maid of Orleans led the French army and defeated the English and saw to the coronation of King Charles VII, giving France back its French king.
      “Every man gives his life for what he believes. Every woman gives her life for what she believes. Sometimes people believe in little or nothing, and so they give their lives to little or nothing. One life is all we have, and we live it as we believe in living it…and then it’s gone. But to surrender who you are and to live without belief is more terrible than dying – even more terrible than dying young.”

      Liked by 2 people

    • Allard Otten says:

      Can sovereign immunity be waived somehow so this cast of characters can be tried under RICO? Could Barr/POTUS/Senate do that? RICO would wipe these conspirators out and give the next generation something to think about.

      The other possibility I see is that catastrophic evidence of corruption is uncovered, say along the lines of a blackmailed SCOTUS Justice, and Military tribunals are instituted until the DOJ can be rebuilt.

      Certainly seems like we’re at worst case scenario status at this point and we’ll need state of emergency measures to clean it up.

      Liked by 1 person

  49. We the people know says:

    33. Brady or Giglio material newly discovered by the government (and by the Inspector General in his separate investigations) in the past 2 years.

    Giglio Background
    Giglio comes from the case of Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972). Giglio was a United States Supreme Court opinion in 1972 which held that prosecutors essentially acquired a duty to disclose evidence about the credibility of government witnesses (often law enforcement witnesses) which had to be turned over following a request by defense counsel. “Giglio material” refers to material tending to impeach the character or testimony of a prosecution witness in a criminal proceeding. Defense counsel will then use the findings of deceptiveness or dishonesty to impeach a law enforcement officer’s account in a criminal proceeding.
    https://www.policelawblog.com/blog/2014/02/giglio-issues-for-law-enforcement-officers.html

    Liked by 4 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s