Earlier this evening Fox Business News host Lou Dobbs interviewed Michael Flynn’s defense attorney Sidney Powell about the status of the case. Great Interview:
Amid stunning new revelations and evidence in the case against Lt. General Michael Flynn, Sean Hannity invites Flynn’s legal counsel Sidney Powell on his show so she can listen to him talk about it.
But seriously… I’m not kidding… watch this bizarre interview. Sean Hannity asks Sidney Powell several times to talk about the case against Roger Stone. What the heck?
Instead of asking questions about the case and her court filings, Hannity goes on to talk about what his sources are telling him about the documents that Ms Powell filed. This is the most odd non-interview you might ever watch. Something is VERY wrong here.
Fox News host Tucker Carlson provided some additional insight into the Flynn documents that were filed with the court last Friday noting the potential for the documents to be unsealed tomorrow. According to an earlier report by Maria Bartiromo the documents relate to notes taken by former FBI legal counsel James Baker; and surround the events that encompassed the FBI interview of General Flynn in January 2017. WATCH:
.
In a supplement to the defense motion to dismiss [pdf here] we discover some of the evidence of prosecutorial misconduct turned over by the DOJ to the Flynn defense. Specifically Lt. General Michael Flynn’s plea was based on: (1) a framing by the FBI; and (2) a threat against Michael Flynn Jr. if his father didn’t sign the plea.
If the reports are accurate it is very likely Judge Sullivan will allow the plea to be removed. If the documents are as strong as outlined the entire case could be dismissed.
Yesterday Maria Bartiromo caused a stir when she tweeted that sources told her “Michael Flynn will be exonerated this week. It was a total fraud. A set up.”
Today, in an interview with Georgia Rep. Doug Collins Ms. Bartiromo expands on what she was told.
Apparently, former FBI chief legal counsel James Baker made notes surrounding the FBI meeting where agent Peter Strzok and agent Joseph Pientka interviewed National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. According to Bartiromo James Baker’s notes are exculpatory in that they show the intent and purpose of the FBI interview was to set-up Lt Gen. Flynn.
.
Baker was removed from his position December 21, 2017, around the same time when James Wolfe was removed from the SSCI. James Baker resigned from the FBI on May 4, 2018, right in the middle of the 2018 FBI cover-up operations. When Baker resigned the James Wolfe indictment was hidden & sealed (since March ’18); the Julian Assange indictment was hidden and sealed (since March ’18); and two months later the FBI lied to the FISA court (July 12, 2018).
The in the spring and summer of 2018 the DOJ/FBI was trying to: (1) protect Robert Mueller’s fraudulent investigation; (2) hide their prior corruption, including fisa; and (3) delay everything until the Democrats could take the House in the mid-terms.
In a supplement to the defense motion to dismiss [pdf here] we discover some of the evidence of prosecutorial misconduct turned over by the DOJ to the Flynn defense. Specifically Lt. General Michael Flynn’s plea was based on a threat against Michael Flynn Jr. if his father didn’t sign the plea. This will very likely get the plea dismissed.
Because the exhibits had to be filed under seal, they are heavily redacted; however, Flynn’s defense counsel, Sidney Powell, has asked the court to release & unredact the full content of the exhibits so the world can see the coercion behind the corrupt plea agreement.
The Mueller prosecution team lead by Brandon Van Grack put the agreement and threat in writing, but they also made a deal with the former defense team to hide the terms in an effort to cover-up their misconduct. Coercion to force a plea is unethical and unlawful.
The full filing is below.
A very interesting development that could prove to be quite important. Today Michael Flynn’s counsel received a letter from the DOJ notifying his defense the Missouri U.S. Attorney, who was brought in to review all of the evidence in the case, has delivered new evidence and information on the case filed under seal. Here’s the letter:
Further reporting from Sean Davis at the Federalist gives some background on the sealed evidence that indicates the provided information is exculpatory. According to Davis’s sources the internal investigative documents “will reflect poorly on the FBI.”
A Washington Examiner report on a recent expansion of John Durham’s team, to include U.S. Attorney Anthony Scarpelli, may reconcile recent earlier reports by John Solomon of “clear evidence” showing Durham is narrowing in on some key DOJ and FBI figures.
According to the Examiner Scarpelli was brought over in part based on his work on Violent Crimes and the Narcotics Trafficking Section of the DOJ. In that capacity Anthony Scarpelli would hold a Top Secret/SCI clearance (he does); which becomes a valuable necessity for the specifics of the type of investigation ongoing.
WASHINGTON – […] Amid the pandemic, Durham and a team of prosecutors and investigators have continued their work, even requesting witness information after the country largely shut down in March because of coronavirus restrictions, according to people briefed on the investigation. Leading up to the lockdown, Durham’s team had spent many days a month reviewing classified intelligence inside a special facility for reviewing classified documents known as a SCIF.
John Solomon appears on Fox Business News with Lou Dobbs to discuss his latest article about HPSCI Chairman Adam Schiff blocking release of congressional transcripts.
Additionally, Solomon again says he believes “clear evidence” exists to show that U.S. Attorney John Durham is going to indict people in/around the DOJ/FBI/CIA surveillance operation against Donald Trump….. and there will be more declassified material being released soon.
Foolishness and betrayal of our country have served to reveal dangers within our present condition. Misplaced corrective action, regardless of intent, is neither safe nor wise. The intelligence apparatus was weaponized against our candidate by those who controlled the levers of government. That said, today’s SSCI defense of political corruption is infuriating.
To understand what is taking place within the Mark Warner and Richard Burr report it is worthwhile revisiting the 2014 House Intelligence report by Mike Rogers and Dutch Ruppersberger which was presented in defense of severe corruption in/around Benghazi.
The HPSCI report from Rogers-Ruppersberger was a cover-up operation intended to defend their own interests and involvement in the CIA/State Dept. operation in Libya. Only after the 2014 report was it discovered that republican Mike Roger’s wife was actually connected to the illegal arms sales in Libya. Therein was the motive and conflict.
Similarly, today’s Senate Intelligence report from Mark Warner and Richard Burr, defending the construct of the ICA, is itself intended to cover their own involvement in the CIA/FBI corruption against candidate, and President, Donald Trump. The evidence of their complicit activity is within the story of SSCI security Director James Wolfe, and how the DOJ covered-up the FISA leak in order to cover-up institutional SSCI corruption.
Various mainstream media reports have discussed the latest declassification releases by saying the releases show the Steele Dossier was infected with “Russian Disinformation”.
The framework of this “Russia disinformation” defense narrative is completely and utterly false. The fabrications within the Steele Dossier assembly of lies, came almost exclusively from operatives in and outside government associated with the Clinton campaign; and a dedicated group of purposeful allies in the intelligence community; who were attempting to weaponize intelligence, even false intelligence for similar political purposes.
However, that said, in 2018 CTH outlined this exact defense and why they would deploy it. Below I am re-posting a research outline from August 2018; and what you will find in the conclusion of the outline is this:
By doubling down on the Russian Collusion narrative the conspirators created a ‘catch-22’ defense. They could/can claim Deripaska was/is giving disinformation in his version of events to support the interests of Russia and sewing chaos in America etc. And any Republican who would give Deripaska a platform to tell what happened in 2016 would be doing the bidding of Vladimir Putin. See how that works?
The soft coup team protects themselves by impugning the motive of Deripaska, and diminishing his credibility under the auspices of Russian disinformation.
Sound familar? Let’s revisit the 2018 entire outline and see how predictable this was.