WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT – Prosecutor Brandon Van Grack sends a letter to Flynn’s defense team today containing a stunning, almost impossible to comprehend, admission of a mistake central to the claims of the prosecution.  In March 2018 the FBI presented notes taken by agents Pientka and Strzok, now they say they made a ‘mistake’.
For almost two years the DOJ misidentified, misattributed, and never corrected that the authors of the Flynn interview notes were actually reversed.  All of the notes attributed to FBI Agent Peter Strzok actually were taken by FBI Agent Joseph Pientka, and vice-versa:

(LINK)

What kind of f**kery is this?  The DOJ never confirmed the authorship of the FBI notes that are central to the FD-302, upon which the entire prosecution claim of Flynn lying to investigators is based? …Seriously?
(more…)

In the case against Lt. General Michael Flynn, his lawyer Sidney Powell previously filed a motion to compel (MTC) Brady material from the prosecution (here).  Because the MTC raised stunning, potentially game-changing, legal and ethical issues the prosecution requested the opportunity to file a surreptitious reply to the court; a “surreply”. (here)
Judge Sullivan directed the prosecution to file their surreply, and then granted the defense the opportunity to file a sur-surreply, a response to the prosecution’s last argument. Today Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell filed that response (full pdf below).

Having read thousands, perhaps tens-of-thousands, of legal filings, motions and court documents presenting arguments of material consequence, this sur-surreply to the arguments of the prosecution is artful in its succinct intent of getting to the nub of it.
What makes this articulate reply to the court so effective, in addition to the declared truth within it, is how it is written to both Judge Emmet Sullivan and the public.  This is a motion deserving of a read by anyone who has followed the travesty of the Flynn inquisition in detail or in summary. Do not cheat yourself out of the enjoyment; read it.
The response to the prosecution argument cuts through the chaff and countermeasures and identifies the ridiculous and necessary schemes played by the prosecution, starting with their preposterous position that Flynn’s plea did not require the government to provide exculpatory, Brady, evidence.  Page One:
(more…)

I’m going to attempt to remove the legal linguistics and explain what appears to be a highly predictable process most are ignoring.
BASELINE – After the 2018 mid-terms, and in preparation for the “impeachment” strategy, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler hired Lawfare group members to become House committee staff…. Chairman Schiff hired former SDNY U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman (link), and Chairman Nadler hired  Obama Administration lawyer Norm Eisen and criminal defense attorney Barry Berke (link).  House Speaker Nancy Pelosi then hired Douglas Letter as House General Counsel – all are within the Lawfare network.
♦On October 25th DC Judge Beryl Howell granted the House Judiciary Committee (HJC) request for legal authority to receive 6e grand jury material underlying the Mueller report.
Additionally, within the Howell decision she officially recognized the HJC effort was predicated on a constitutional impeachment process.
In essence Howell’s opinion granted the HJC with “judicial enforcement authority.”
♦The DOJ moved to appeal the decision and requested a “stay” pending appeal.  Judge Howell rejected the “stay” motion.
The DOJ appealed to the DC Court of Appeals.  A panel of three judges issued an “administrative stay”, blocking enforcement of the Howell ruling while the appeal was reviewed.
The temporary administrative stay was granted to freeze the status quo while the court considers whether to grant a longer stay that would remain in effect until the DOJ appeal is argued or decided (deadline tomorrow).  The outcome is pending.  Judge Merrick Garland is the Chief Judge of the DC Appeals court.
(more…)

Very nice trick here by the Lawfare advisory and rules committee that is handling the construct of the “Official House Inquiry” on impeachment.  It is such a good trick it has everyone crossed-up and confused.  Likely, that is by design.

On Thursday of this week Speaker Pelosi is bringing to the floor a resolution to affirm her previous declaration of an “Official House Inquiry”.  Mrs. Pelosi is very purposefully and carefully telling reporters this is not a “House resolution on impeachment”.  Read the wording carefully:

(LINK)

Speaker Pelosi is holding a vote, a resolution, to affirm her previous declaration of a House “inquiry”.  The resolution is currently being written by Lawfare. Pelosi is not delivering a House “Resolution on Impeachment” for a vote, because if she did hold a vote on an impeachment resolution, the minority and the Executive branch would gain rights therein.
This is a House vote to show support for Pelosi’s previous unilateral decree.   Right now the rules committee is adding language to the resolution that will provide additional one-sided support for a completely partisan process: “and for other purposes”.
Note in this video, Pelosi is careful to say “this is not an impeachment resolution”:
(more…)

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy weighs in on the latest developments within the Michael Flynn case.   As McCarthy points out, if Judge Sullivan doesn’t accept the defense position of gross misconduct by the prosecution; and if Sullivan does not dismiss the case; Flynn could end up on a worse position than the prior plea agreement.
Additionally McCarthy discusses the potential risks present for John Brennan, James Clapper and James Comey; and then goes in to his perspective on the impeachment inquiry.

After filing an explosive response motion to compel Brady material, outlining a conspiracy to frame her client, defense attorney Sidney Powell appears on Fox Business with Lou Dobbs to discuss the stunning material within her presentation to the court.

There’s a clear set of battle lines now evident amid the ongoing political and legal dynamic:  Nadler, Pelosi, Lawfare and the Deep State media -VS- Durham, Barr, Trump and the MAGA movement.
Playing directly into this dynamic today Obama appointed Judge Beryl Howell has ruled (full pdf below) an impeachment by unilateral decree is constitutionally valid; and as an outcome House Judiciary Committee Jerry Nadler can have access to some of the Mueller grand jury material that was used as evidence in the “Mueller-Weissmann Report”.

It’s important to note Judge Howell granted access to only that grand jury material that was used in the Mueller Report, not a blanket authority to gain all witness testimony or grand jury material writ large.  However, having said that, the most troubling part of the decision is the background construct of the Weissmann team’s original objective.
From the outset; from the moment they started; from day number one; Weissmann, Lawfare and crew (Mueller was a special counsel figurehead only) always intended for the grand jury material to be handed to Chairman Jerry Nadler for the specific purposes of writing articles of impeachment.   This is absolutely critical to remember.
The originating goal was to use the special counsel investigation to assemble evidence of obstruction. Then to frame the assembly of all evidence toward the future goal of writing articles of impeachment.  This was the sole purpose of their coordination with Lawfare.
(more…)

Representative John Ratcliffe is one of only four House members who have reviewed every known classified document surrounding the 2016 political surveillance, Spygate and the use of the FISA court; including John Brennan’s two-page ‘electronic communication’ that started the FBI investigation.  So when John Ratcliffe is discussing what potential criminal activity John Durham is investigating and he says “FISA act and court“, that specific use of wording is subtle like a brick through a window to those who follow closely.
Everyone is aware that IG Michael Horowitz is looking at the Carter Page FISA application and potential misrepresentations to the FISC; that’s the “FISA court” part.  However, no-one has even hinted that anyone in government might be looking at the FBI abuse of the NSA database; and/or the outlined surveillance violations by Judge Rosemary Collyer; which would fall under the “FISA act” part.   Interesting word choices.  WATCH:

In a lengthy court filing surrounding the issues of Brady discovery material, Mike Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell, drops some serious evidentiary bombshells on the court.  Ms. Powell brings Lady Justice to the courtroom, and her revelations are stunning. [Full pdf’s below]

We’re going to go through the primary filing and four exhibits to the evidence Attorney Sidney Powell is delivering to Judge Emmet Sullivan which contain some explosive discoveries.  Toplines including:
(1) Lisa Page edited the Flynn 302’s, then forgot when questioned by DOJ officials, then re-remembered when shown her texts. (2) The 302’s themselves were written with lies that do not match notes taken during the interview. (3) The felony leaker of the Flynn-Kislyak phone call is named (James Baker). (4) New texts from Page and Strzok that highlight the entrapment plan. (5) ODNI James Clapper telling WaPo reporter Ignatius to “take the kill shot on Flynn“. (6) The purposeful use of Judge Contreras to take the December 1st 2017 plea agreement; and much, much more.

(more…)

U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley sent a forboding tweet a few days ago outlining the possibility of the FISA investigation would result in a “deep six” cover-up.

Grassley has a unique perspective on a very specific element to the construct of the FISA application, and the political use therein, that most have forgotten.  Back in 2018 when Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Grassley was hot on the trail of a very specific individual that has had almost no attention since. The election clock ran out on Grassley; the mid-terms took place; and Grassley was never able to get to his target.
The background to this tweet needs a little context {GO DEEP} and surrounds two individuals who have NOT been identified as being questioned by either IG Michael Horowitz or U.S. Attorney John Durham.
Those two individuals are: Daniel Jones, former lead staffer for former SSCI Vice-Chair Dianne Feinstein; and a lawyer for Christopher Steele named Adam Waldman.
(more…)