Former National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn is involved in two heavily connected legal cases that came from the special counsel appointment of Robert Mueller.  One direct case is in DC District Court, Judge Emmet Sullivan; and one indirect case in the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA), Judge Anthony Trenga.

The DC case is the direct case against Michael Flynn where Flynn took a plea deal and has been in a rather tentacled sentencing phase since November 2017.  The EDVA case is the FARA case against Flynn’s former business associate Bijan Rafiekian where Flynn was going to be a witness (now cancelled).
While the larger issues connecting both cases are somewhat complex, some details released last week reveal a concerning bigger picture that originated long before Robert Mueller became special counsel in May 2017.  [Back story HERE and HERE and HERE]
I’m going to make the assumption the reader is familiar with the backstory noted above; and additionally, in full disclosure for the reader, this is openly written for the research benefit of the Flynn defense team – with whom I’ve had no contact.
Of particular interest to me was the revelation that DOJ National Security Division head David Laufman engaged with Flynn in January 2017, and was the lead point of contact within the DOJ-NSD when Flynn was filing FARA compliance documents, as part of the transition into the Trump administration.
(more…)

The motives for Pelosi, Nadler and Schiff to call-up former special counsel Robert Mueller are transparently obvious.  The committees are hoping to weaponize Mueller’s appearance to attain a political edge; and that’s why committee staff have spent weeks in detailed coaching and strategy sessions with Robert Mueller and his Lawfare team members.
House Judiciary Committee ranking member Doug Collins discusses the political collusion between Mueller, the DOJ/FBI “small group” and the House committee chairmen.
Pelosi, Nadler and Schiff have constructed the rules so there’s only one hour of open hearing, and one hour of closed-door testimony, per committee? C’mon man !! Their purpose to protect Mueller from questions about the corrupt investigation is stupidly visible.

.
There’s additional value in the notation from Bill Hemmer as he shares his discussion with Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes for those with eyes and ears to accept.
(more…)

The DOJ made a move today after a failed attempt to label Michael Flynn a co-conspirator in the case against his former business partner Bijan Rafiekian. [Backstory Here]
In today’s development [h/t Techno Fog] the DOJ is calling Michael Flynn Jr as a witness to replace the witness testimony of his father, Lt. Gen Gen Michael Flynn.

(Source Link)

Given what we know about how the DOJ pressured Michael Flynn Sr. to take the plea deal based on threats against his son Flynn Jr; and against the backdrop of the DOJ losing with Judge Anthony Trenga in EDVA; the DOJ now appears to be re-leveraging the original plea to compel cooperation from Jr.
This explains why the DOJ said yesterday they would await the DC sentencing (against Flynn Sr.) pending the outcome of the EDVA case against Bijan Rafiekian.
The DOJ in DC said they anticipated Flynn Sr might be a witness for Rafiekian’s defense; so they’ve moved to put Flynn Jr. in opposition to any potentially supportive testimony from Flynn Sr. in EDVA by revisiting (re-leveraging) the threat against Flynn Jr.
If Flynn Jr. didn’t agree to testify in the Rafiekian case, the DOJ would likely have cancelled his father’s plea agreement in DC and re-initiated cases -with new charges- against both Flynns’.
This also explains why corrupt U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu added new lawyers in the DC case.  Sneaky bastards.   In essence, Jessie Liu is anticipating a change in plea from Flynn, per new Flynn lawyer Sidney Powell, and proactively positioning the DC case to reignite against both the father and the son if: (a) the Rafiekian case goes sideways; or, (b) Flynn Sr. changes his plea agreement.
The benefits for purposefully charging in two distinct courts now surfaces.
(more…)

Some updates in the Michael Flynn case.  As requested the DOJ has filed a response to Judge Sullivan’s order.   The DC judge wanted to know what the status of the prosecution position was now that Michael Flynn is no longer a cooperating witness for the DOJ in the EDVA case, against his former business partner.
The prosecution responds:

(Source Link)

(more…)

Breakthrough – Things Making Sense Now…

Lots of things going on in/around the two legal cases involving Michael Flynn today.  The origination of the DOJ shift in position involves the indirect case (EDVA) where Flynn is/was a witness in the FARA (Foreign Agent Registration Act) case against Bijan Rafiekian and the Flynn Intel Group.
Hat Tip to Techno-Fog for a litany of legal filings assembled today [132 pages here].  This is somewhat complex to explain.

The direct case against Flynn (Judge Sullivan court – Washington DC), where Flynn copped a guilty plea for lying to FBI investigators, has a sentencing predicated on Flynn’s ongoing cooperation in the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) case against Bijan Rafiekian and FIG (Flynn Intel Group).  However, in a stunning move today the DOJ prosecuting Rafiekian now says it will not call Flynn as a witness; and further the DOJ state they now consider Flynn an “unindicted co-conspirator”.
From court filings (on behalf of Flynn) we find the reason.  Michael Flynn refused a demand by the DOJ to testify that the Flynn Group FARA filing was completed with knowingly false information and contained “false statements”.
Michael Flynn refused to testify to this DOJ construct because the claim was not true.
Michael Flynn and his lawyers say there was no intentional filing of false information in the Flynn Group FARA submissions; and the FARA forms were submitted based on legal advice provided for their completion.  If there were mistakes in the FARA filing, they were not falsehoods and/or mistakes made purposefully or with purposeful intent.
(more…)

Comey FBI apologist, Fusion GPS co-conspirator and Lawfare Alliance media narrative engineer, Natasha Bertrand, has an outline published today on the background interview of dossier author Christopher Steele.

From within the article, beyond the sympathetic propaganda, some overarching details are interesting:
♦(1) As expected Mr. Steele would only talk to OIG investigators from Horowitz’s office; Steele would not speak to speak to U.S. Attorney John Durham.
♦(2) The interview took place at the same time President Trump traveled to the U.K (June 3rd-5th) for a state visit.  Likely coordinated so FBI officials could travel innocuously without media scrutiny (lots of security officials traveled on behalf of U.S. interests at the time); likely the preferred timing of Steele himself.
♦(3) The interview(s) took place over two days for a total of sixteen hours of conversation. The recent reports of IG delay and follow-up interviews are almost certainly related to the outcome of the investigative findings (ie. Kathleen Kavalec cooperation etc.).
(more…)

Attorney General William Barr discusses the shift in DOJ approach to support President Trump’s request to put the citizenship question on the 2020 census; also his support for Robert Mueller if the special counsel should change his mind and not testify on July 17th to the House Intelligence and Judiciary committees.

(more…)

Real Clear Investigations has a deep dive into the underpinnings of the Mueller report surrounding the sketchy conclusions about Russian interference.  What Real Clear outlines parallels our own review where most of the substance claimed by Andrew Weissmann, Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein is essentially baseless.

(RCI) […] The report claims that the interference operation occurred “principally” on two fronts: Russian military intelligence officers hacked and leaked embarrassing Democratic Party documents, and a government-linked troll farm orchestrated a sophisticated and far-reaching social media campaign that denigrated Hillary Clinton and promoted Trump.
But a close examination of the report shows that none of those headline assertions are supported by the report’s evidence or other publicly available sources. They are further undercut by investigative shortcomings and the conflicts of interest of key players involved: (read more)

(more…)

In a new report Fox News journalist Catherine Herridge outlines a “reluctant witness” who has recently agreed to cooperate with DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz and his review of potential FISA abuse by the Obama DOJ and FBI.

Fox News – Key witnesses sought for questioning by Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz early in his investigation into alleged government surveillance abuse have come forward at the 11th hour, Fox News has learned.

Sources familiar with the matter said at least one witness outside the Justice Department and FBI started cooperating — a breakthrough that came after Attorney General William Barr ordered U.S. Attorney John Durham to lead a separate investigation into the origins of the bureau’s 2016 Russia case that laid the foundation for Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe.

(more…)

In our opinion the content of the diary by former FBI Director James Comey, as outlined in what has formally been called “The Comey Memos”, is devastating to the U.S. Department of Justice and FBI.   How do we know? Because the FBI is fighting like hell to keep even descriptions of the memo(s) content from becoming public.

Rather complex backstory with citations HERE and HERE and HERE.

In the background of what was The Mueller Investigation, there was a FOIA case where the FBI was fighting to stop the release of the Comey memos.  Within that courtroom fight Mueller’s lead FBI agent David Archey wrote a series of declarations to the court describing the content of the memos and arguing why they should be kept classified.
The FOIA fight shifted.  The plaintiffs argued for public release of the content of the FBI agent’s descriptions, now known as the “Archey Declarations”.
After a lengthy back-and-forth legal contest, on June 7th Judge James E Boasberg agreed to allow the FBI to keep the Comey memo content hidden, but instructed the DOJ/FBI to release the content of the Archey Declarations.
Today, the U.S. Department of Justice -under Attorney General Bill Barr- while waiting until the last minute (28 days since prior ruling), filed a motion [full pdf below] to block the release of the Archey Declarations, despite the June 7th court order.
(more…)