A little background on Flynn’s original defense lawyers’ conflict of interest, and a few other things as well
[NOTE: I’m hoping to post Part II of the Sullivan piece tomorrow (Part I is here). The present post provides some background to the other posts, but it’s not primarily about Sullivan.]
There are so many issues in the Flynn case – so many ways he was dealt a lousy hand as well as mistreated – that it’s hard to recall them all. One is the conflict of interest in which his initial lawyers were embroiled.
And it’s a lulu.
One of the possible charges against Flynn involved alleged FARA violations of a somewhat complicated law that until three years ago was ordinarily met with a fine for violations if it was prosecuted at all. But rather recently things changed:
Earlier [in 2019], the Assistant Attorney General for the National Security Division publicly confirmed the Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) intention to make Foreign Agents Registration Act (“FARA”) a criminal enforcement priority. This newfound priority has resulted in surge of FARA prosecutions — including the cases against Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn and Greg Craig — with no sign of slowing down.
FARA, which was originally enacted in 1938 to combat Nazi propaganda, is a disclosure statute that requires persons acting as agents of foreign principals in a political or quasi-political capacity to make periodic public disclosure of their relationship with the foreign principal, as well as activities, receipts and disbursements in support of those activities. Failure to register with the DOJ can result in criminal penalties — Despite the seriousness of FARA’s penalties, it has long been an afterthought because of federal prosecutors’ hesitancy in bringing FARA prosecutions.1 DOJ brought only seven criminal FARA cases between 1966 and 2015 (securing FARA convictions in just three cases) and had not employed FARA’s civil injunctive relief since 1991. In the last three years, however, there has been a significant uptick in the number of FARA prosecutions.
Beware of laws that have been on the books but rarely enforced and then suddenly used as tools to get political enemies. It turns out that the most important conflict of interest for Flynn’s lawyers involved FARA.
Here’s an article from last January that explains:
FARA is a complex law, and people who must make filings under it often seek the assistance of counsel…If the government subsequently asserts the FARA filing…is criminally false, the attorney is potentially implicated along with the client.
The lawyer’s interest in defending his or her actions may conflict with the obligation to zealously defend the client. Furthermore, the attorney can be a key witness if the client is charged, which may also disqualify the lawyer from representing the client in the criminal case.
In Flynn’s case, the Covington lawyers would have been witnesses either for or against Flynn regarding his FARA filings [involving work of the Flynn Intel Group regarding Turkey] and any related potential criminal charge brought against him…
Thus, the Covington attorneys who helped Flynn prepare his filings could become the star defense witnesses if they said any mistake in the filings was their responsibility rather than Flynn’s. In that event, no conflict would arise between Flynn’s interest and Covington’s interest.
On the other hand, if Flynn provided incorrect information to Covington that was included in the FARA filings, a clear conflict emerges because Covington has an interest in absolving itself from any responsibility and placing the blame entirely on Flynn. If Flynn had deliberately provided false information to Covington, the Covington attorneys would become witnesses against Flynn, and no lawyer at the Covington firm could represent Flynn with respect to the FARA charge.
If, instead, Flynn innocently provided incorrect or incomplete information to Covington, the situation becomes muddier…
Flynn’s current counsel [Sidney Powell] says this last scenario is what actually happened, that Flynn innocently provided incorrect information to Covington. It is certainly implausible that Flynn would hire a reputable firm like Covington and pay it a six-figure fee to prepare FARA filings on his behalf, only to deliberately provide the attorneys false information for inclusion in those filings. Nonetheless, the government alleged this is exactly what Flynn did.
Notwithstanding the potential conflict of interest between it and Flynn, Covington represented Flynn in his plea negotiations with the government and struck an agreement whereby Flynn effectively admitted to both lying to the FBI and making a false statement in his FARA filings. Technically, Flynn pleaded guilty to only one count of making a false statement to the FBI; he did not plead guilty to making false statements in his FARA filings. The written Statement of Offense submitted to the court as part of Flynn’s plea, however, includes facts relating to both offenses. The government inserts facts about other offenses in a Statement of Offense when it wants to establish that those facts are “relevant conduct,” which the court then considers along with the offense of conviction in imposing a sentence.
Flynn now disputes whether he admitted in the Statement of Offense that he knew at the time he provided the FARA information to Covington that it was false. He says he only learned so later. To constitute a criminal false statement, the information must be false, and the defendant must know so at the time he makes the statement. If a person makes an incorrect statement he or she then believes to be true, no offense has been committed.
That ended up being important for many reasons, including that sentencing hearing on December 18, 2018 that I wrote about in Part I. One of things that happened was that one day before that sentencing hearing for Flynn, Flynn’s associate Bijan Kian (also known as Rafiekian) and another man named Alptekin (see his history here) were indicted for FARA violations and the now-familiar charge of lying to the FBI, connected with their dealings with Turkey. Both men had been picked up as part of the Mueller investigation into Flynn.
During that extraordinary sentencing hearing (see the transcript) that occurred one day after the indictment of the two men (the timing was almost certainly no coincidence), one of the reasons Sullivan gave for warning Flynn that Flynn might get prison time despite the fact that even the prosecutor wasn’t recommending it was that Flynn hadn’t yet fulfilled everything the government might want of him. Sullivan hinted that he might – might – relent and not give him prison time if Flynn cooperated fully in testifying to help them with their case against Rafiekian and Alptekin.
Flynn got the hint, and then accepted the delay in sentencing with the understanding that he would testify. Mueller obviously wasn’t through with Flynn yet, and this was a reminder to Flynn that he (and/or his son) could get more punishment for Flynn’s own supposed FARA violations if he didn’t play ball with Mueller. And no doubt Flynn’s lawyers were well aware, with all this FARA violation prosecution going on, that they could be in trouble too, if Flynn didn’t cooperate and stick to his guilty plea.
For anyone who wonders why Flynn’s sentencing was so delayed, it was because they were waiting for the other trial and his testimony against the men. However, in the meantime Flynn fired his Covington lawyers and hired Sidney Powell in late spring of 2019, and then things began to change.
Flynn recounted some of these issues he had with his Covington lawyers in this document he filed with the court in January of 2020 (I suggest you read the whole thing), asking to be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea. If you go to numbers 17, 19, and 25, you’ll see what he says about the Covington lawyers and the FARA violations (I can’t cut and paste from that document, so you’ll need to go to the link to see it).
Ultimately, Flynn didn’t testify in the trial of his former colleagues, because he refused to say that statements any of them made in the FARA findings were knowingly false. Therefore his testimony would not have been useful to the prosecutors, and was not what they had expected (you might say it wasn’t what they’d bargained for). Although a jury found Rafiekian guilty anyway, the judge threw the case out, ruling that there was no evidence of guilt and the jury had received incorrect instructions on the elements of the crime.
It’s my sense that Flynn’s coerced testimony would have been the best evidence the prosecutors had, and without that there really wasn’t much of a case at all. The whole thing was a house of cards constructed by Mueller, and it fell down when Flynn pulled out.
Just as you might expect, Flynn’s prosecutors retaliated
The government now argues [in January of 2020] that Flynn reneged on his agreement to cooperate in the Virginia case, has reversed course on accepting his criminal responsibility for the FARA filings, and thus his sentence should not be mitigated. Accordingly, it seeks a jail sentence of up to six months’ imprisonment for Flynn. In making this argument, the government relies heavily on Flynn’s plea agreement and his Statement of Offense.
So about a year later, the prosecution made good on Sullivan’s earlier threat from the sentencing hearing. They’d been waiting for his help with the other trial, and he withdrew it. And it got worse – and here’s where that conflict of interest comes in again:
In a highly unusual request by the government [prosecutors], it seeks to force Flynn to disavow those claims or else lose any sentencing credit for cooperation and accepting responsibility. Defendants have a Fifth Amendment right to be silent even at a sentencing proceeding and cannot be compelled to answer such questions. The government requesting that the court quiz Flynn to disavow positions his current counsel is raising on his behalf is extraordinary.
Flynn is now experiencing the unpleasant effects of his conflict of interest with Covington and his misinterpretation of what he was admitting to in his guilty plea. The government now wants the court to question Flynn, before he is sentenced, about his claims of innocence and his misunderstanding of the FARA issue.
Such an unusual request speaks to how the government appears to believe that the fault for the tangled sentencing situation lies entirely with Flynn and that, having “repented” his plea, he is now playing fast and loose with the truth before the court. But another distinct — and more likely — possibility is that Covington, hindered by its own conflict of interest, was not as zealous an advocate as it should have been in resisting the FARA charge and was not as clear with its client as it should have been in explaining the consequences of his guilty plea, including the FARA issue in the Statement of Offense..
Ya think?
Good grief, Flynn has been poorly served by his attorneys prior to Powell, and by the legal system so far. “Poorly served” is a euphemism, of course. He’s been screwed by it.
Oh, and one more thing. Let’s not forget what happened in April of 2020:
Former lawyers of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn say they’ve found thousands of additional documents related to his case that hadn’t been handed over to his new lawyers. In response, the judge presiding over the case has ordered the former lawyers to redo the search for everything they have related to the case…
“Covington determined that an unintentional miscommunication involving the firm’s information technology personnel” caused the firm to search not all of the Flynn-related emails, but only a subset that they prepared in response to document requests in a related case with Flynn’s former business partner Bijan Rafiekian, the filing said…
Powell said in an April 24 filing that Flynn was provided by the Department of Justice (DOJ) with new exculpatory evidence that “proves” he was “deliberately set up and framed by corrupt agents at the top of the FBI.”
The evidence was filed under seal and thus isn’t available to the public; Powell has asked Sullivan to unseal it.
The documents were produced as a result of an ongoing review of the case by Jeffrey Jensen, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, who was directed in January to perform the review by Attorney General William Barr.
Jensen’s investigation precipitated an awful lot of action, didn’t it? And then of course it led to the Barr DOJ asking that the case be dropped, followed by the stunning actions by Sullivan in refusing to do so, which brings us right up to the present.
This case is nothing if not complicated, and this post isn’t even Part II yet. But in a way it’s actually quite simple: Flynn was framed, and those who framed him seem determined to make it stick.
Again, everything that’s happened to Flynn suggests the solution is institutional death for the Department of Justice along with scarifying the federal criminal code. In particular, replicate what’s done in New York and other states: a requirement for a perjury or false statements charge is that the subject be under oath or he have affixed his signature to a written instrument with a jurat. Replicate what the police department in Slidell La does: record interviews and have certified stenographers type up transcripts. Replicate what’s done on the local level and put prosecutors and police in separate departments. Strip prosecutors of any franchise to initiate investigations.
But I didn’t know until this day that Judge Sullivan has been black all along.
___________________________________
–“The Godfather” – “Barzini”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tw7NIomrjmM
These government people seem to be wanting to run the country instead of follow the constitution and law and being public servants. This stuff makes me sick at my stomach because if it is actual fact and and I do think it is we have been sold down the river so far we probably will never make it back.
While you’re right that those who framed him seem determined to make it stick.
it seems to me relevant that everybody knows somebody is guilty.
So it’s either Flynn or … those who framed him.
It’s a death cage match. Somebody comes out guilty.
except
except
no indictments, no problem.
I’m certain Flynn was mistreated. I’m hoping there are indictments.
Trump seems to be hoping that, too. Here with Sharyl Attkisson:
http://fullmeasure.news/news/full-episodes/full-measure-may-24-2020-interview-with-the-president
The Podesta brothers, one of whom ran Hillary’s campaign, were also questioned about FARA but, wonder of wonders, there was no prosecution.,
Thanks to you once again for such finely detailed investigating, Ms. Neo. As others have noted, the prosecution/persecution of Flynn is all about the arbitrary and selective application of extremely powerful tools in the hands of extremely powerful extremists, being brought to bear against the suffering individual.
…”the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.”
…” obtaining benefit through coercion. In most jurisdictions it is likely to constitute a criminal offense.”
…”the gaining of property or money by almost any kind of force or threat of violence, property damage, harm to reputation, or unfavorable government action. ”
Yes, I think the word extortion fits by definition. The Why? of this will be is the most interesting part.
A bit tangential perhaps, but the media has been such a large component of the problem, and the turn-about of the Democrats from critics of big government and the IC in particular, I bring this post to your attention, in order to point out a significant mindset in the people who are supposedly the sophisticated Washington observers.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/remember-when-liberals-despised-the-national-security-state/
The post begins by describing an incident in April 1975, when “former director of national intelligence Richard Helms, then the U.S. ambassador to Iran, left a hearing room where he had been grilled for three hours about CIA misdeeds then coming to light in the wake of the Watergate scandal.”
Helms lashed out at CBS reporter Daniel Schorr for airing a story alleging CIA assassination attempts against various foreign leaders, calling them lies.
(I do not take a position; the point is that Helms accused Schorr of committing fake news.)
Then the author recounts an earlier incident during the 1964 Goldwater campaign when Schorr did, in verifiable fact, broadcast a “bogus story” about Goldwater “appealing to right-wing elements in Germany.”
Excuse me?!?!
Nothing about their switch from disclosing abuse in the secret agencies to abetting it needs some kind of angst-ridden explaining.
The Dan Schorr of yesterday demonstrated clear bias against Republicans on two different occasions — one that was proved false, and one that is still debated.
The Dan Schorrs of today are still demonstrating clear bias — against Republicans.
Maybe Schorr was the stopped clock, and most likely there are GOP abuses, but the media (no need now to even modify it as “left wing” because there wasn’t any other kind) were never motivated by any concern about reining in corrupt power unless it was being wielded by the right.
They only come after Republicans, and they always lie if the truth doesn’t fit their agenda.
They were then, and are now, perfectly happy with wielding that power themselves.
They haven’t changed their views on the abuse of power: they just want a monopoly on it.
We shall see what the electorate does in November, but I think the behaviour of the Democratic party has from the very beginning of its reaction to the 2016 election felt justified in going outside the law or any standard of truth to retain power. And been naively open about it. They don’t seem to have any sense that they are rather like that knight in the Monty Python film who, after he has both legs and arms cut off, still wants to fight and insists his wounds are ‘just a scratch’. I don’t think many of them have enough self insight to see they may be condemning their party to oblivion. I know from ordinary Democratic friends and family who still see the situation through the lens of the MSM that the Democrats believe they can regain power and even change the legal structure to ensure permanent power, but I don’t think they have understood how transparent they are. What I think is going to happen is that Trump will continue to peel off centrist voters who can see what is going on and vote accordingly. Candice Owen’s Blexit movement is an obvert example of this peeling off process, but I suspect it is going on inside many voters. Persisting in framing Flynn is an astonishing example of an unforced error. I don’t see them getting away with it despite the apparent collusion of many Republicans like Ryan and Graham in the larger schlomozzle. I think the jig is up and they are dead men walking.
Usually when people get caught doing something wrong, they’ll at least stop the bad behavior while denying they ever did it in the first place. What’s going on now with Judge Sullivan is like Bill Clinton walking out on the White House lawn with Monica and getting serviced in the middle of his impeachment trial.
Mike
“Persisting in framing Flynn is an astonishing example of an unforced error.” – Lorenz
A couple of days ago, J E Dyer addressed the question of why the Democrats didn’t quit pushing the Flynn case once it blew up after Powell came on board and their own perfidy became ever more apparent — what was the motive driving their quite unhinged persecution of the general? Some suggested Obama ego, or protecting his legacy, and other typical political motives, but she thinks it goes much deeper.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2020/05/25/real-jcpoa-asking-the-right-question-about-michael-flynn-and-judge-sullivans-folly/
“…much deeper…”
Yes.
And it’s the very ESSENCE of the Obama administration.
As such, viewing it as an “unforced error” can only be a non sequitur (and precisely the sort of misapprehension that a decent person would make).
We are dealing with a level of wickedness that is difficult—perhaps impossible—for any decent person to comprehend.
The stuff of (Rhodesian?) fiction, of movies.
Of Nazism and Communist regimes.
And since 2008 (at least), the stuff of the “fundamentally transformed” Democratic Party, along with other elements of America (and American institutions) that that party has—successfully—fundamentally transformed.
Regarding Sullivan’s “bizarre” decision, it is really NOT SO BIZARRE…if the goal of the good judge’s actions is to keep Michael Flynn (essentially a political prisoner) twisting in the wind for as long as possible—for as long as Obama and his henchmen deem necessary. That is, forever and a day.
Which is THE ONLY THING that makes sense here.
So….what might Sullivan and his wretched allies do to make sure that can be accomplished?
What will Sullivan do to delay, to stall, to drag this thing out for as long as he can, to subvert justice, to ensure that the abuse, destruction and public degradation of Michael Flynn continue?
Let’s see….
Demand time to “marshall” his arguments (for this “complex” case)?
Claim illegal “Trumpian” government “interference” and “politicization”?
Demand adamantly (and with all the righteous indignation that he—and the MSCM can muster) that HIS (Sullivan’s) human rights are being violated by the rogue Trumpian administration? That HE (Sullivan) cease being abused and railroaded by the Trumpian regime?
Feign illness?
Mental distress?
Victimization?
Once again, the whole thing is a “Fatal Distraction” meant to turn the tables by focusing on Trump’s “Illegal” government and “demonstrating” just how Trump and his supporters are the TRUE threat facing America.
And drag this national obscenity out..indefinitely.
These guys never stop. And never will.
Palestinian Rules!!
When did evil resulting in Obamagate begin to be visible?
Barry writes: “And since 2008 (at least), the stuff of the “fundamentally transformed” Democratic Party, along with other elements of America (and American institutions) that that party has—successfully—fundamentally transformed.”
One turning point was when the media decided to lustily lie to the people. And we saw this in 1999, when the New York Times decided that Ken Starr was a sex-hating Puritan, and thus President Clinton was impeached only over sex – despite no mention of the word within the Bill of Impeachment.
In fact, it was not about sex but three actual crimes like perjury and obstruction. The Bar only held him accountable for one, and thereby lifting his license to practice law. The Republican Senators vacated their oaths of office not to do so. Nevertheless, the NYTimes mythology “it was all about mean Republicans who hate sex,” an invention and lie, became the Truth that was taught.
The media craziness and their leadership of the Democrat Party was just starting. But this is when I think US decline began.
Between late 2003 and the next year when Michael Moore’s fake documentary “Fahrenheit 451” swept away all reason, decline was in someplace sense obvious.
Prestigious and the most important Democrat Senators from Rockefeller in West Virginia, Ted Kennedy, and Dick Durban called out George Bush as worse than Hitler, worse than Stalin, and worse than Saddam Hussein! (Don’t hold me to those names to those leaders, but the acid and ridiculous triumvirates were all there, then.) All over abuse in a prison in Baghdad attracting little attention there bu generating over 50 front page stories in the New York Times.
Rule by the crazy mob in the US had taken root: gasbagging and gaslighting was now the way political was was going to be conducted in the US, while Bush turned another and another cheek.
Giving the US political system an other and another and another election to generate improvement, in the end, only saw the unrepentant Marxist re-elected. When that happened, The psychopolitical blogger drsanity turned the light out on new posts. My Tea Party friends saw this as the message to generate a US exit plan, if at al possible.
Trump’s side has just begun to expose all His perfidy. Believe it or not, these are still early days in this saga.
John Solomon and Sara Carter, the reporters who picked up the investigative torch from two anonymous FBI agents in White Hats in December, 2017, reckon that we only know 10 to 30% of the Obamunist corruption or treason story. (From a recent Sebastian Gorka interview program.)
If so, then this story, Obamagate, will last through the next administration as well – that is, if Trump wins a second term.
I don’t know about any mythical filling up of Galt’s Gulch in that time. I’m only highly sceptical about any return to the world from it, over the next four years. Or any Restoration of the Rule of Law or Return to Reason that would make it worthwhile. The irrational are attached to the Ruling Class at the hip. How could Trump and his ally’s ever sever that fundamental tie?
OT this post, but of possible interest in threads to come: a 16m oral reading of UnderCoverHuber’s twitter thread on George Popadopolos, showing that he was misled, induced, and framed very much like Gen Flynn by the FIB
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=583&v=l1q-sHV2cOI&feature=emb_logo
“…misled, induced, and framed…”
It’s clearly the Obamination SOP.
(And one would have to add the travesty of investigation abuses committed against Carter Page along with the attempted destruction of quite a few others.)
But it works—and how! it works—leading to specious drivel such as this (albeit written by a pathetically partisan, if “earnest” sounding, “Lawfare” hack):
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/ben-wittes-five-conclusions-mueller-report/588259/
Key graf:
“Mueller does not accuse the president of crimes. He doesn’t have to. But the facts he recounts describe criminal behavior.” etc., ad nauseum.
Multiplied several million—billion—times over. By a ubiquitous, corrupt (but generally respected and believed(?)) media.
Which is THE CRUX of the matter: it most definitely works. It pays. (Can it possibly be peeled back? Ever be refuted? Ever be wholly disproven? Can these accused, including Trump—especially Trump—ever be exonerated, given the sheer multiplier effect of this disgusting campaign?)
For even if the vicious plot does somehow get exposed—revealed in part or in whole—though that of course was/is NOT supposed to happen—CANNOT BE ALLOWED to happen!—it is so convoluted, intricate and complex, so well-constructed and meticulously fashioned, that it sounds like it CAN ONLY be the ridiculous concoction of a hysterical conspiracy theorist. QED
(Is there an award for evil genius? Maybe there should be. What would Mueller et al. give them, I wonder….)
Mike Doran interviews Flynn’s Turkish client Ekim Alptekin on YouTube in three videos: Part one (27:15) https://youtu.be/zldEW0tE0yA
Part 2 (30:22) https://youtu.be/Wfs3FaFYS0M
Part 3 (42:19) https://youtu.be/OJ7sn6J3Kvg
The Dan Schorr of yesterday demonstrated clear bias against Republicans on two different occasions — one that was proved false, and one that is still debated.
Schorr was one of the left’s potent weapons on Vietnam and on Iraq.
The first big abuse by Obama’s team was Papadopoulis. His book is well worth reading. One reason he was not hurt worse was that he outsmarted the team by being an honest man. He was “given” $10,000 in cash as a “retainer” by a mysterious Israeli in Cyprus. He was suspicious and left the cash with a lawyer in Greece. When he arrived in the US, he was immediately arrested by FBI with no warrant and they assumed he would have the cash on him or in his luggage. When it wasn’t there, a Keystone Kops scenario followed.
Flynn was just not suspicious enough,.
When it wasn’t there, a Keystone Kops scenario followed.
What makes this right is that Andrew Weissmann gets disbarred. Won’t happen, of course.
Could he at least be sentenced to “Having to raise money for Joe Biden” in perpetuity?
https://tennesseestar.com/2020/05/23/muellers-pit-bull-to-headline-fundraiser-for-joe-biden/
Mike K reminds us of an important point that seems to be overlooked far too often: someone working with the FBI set up Papadopoulis to be arrested on arrival in the US from a trip he had been invited on by people working with the plot. If Papadopoulis had arrived in the US with $10,000 and not declared it, he would have been guilty of a currency violation. That would have been a quick way to gather him up so they could begin to put pressure on him.
How many of us would think to leave that payment outside the US upon return from a trip? It appeared to be a valid payment (retainer) for employment he was promised. But the fact that it was exactly the amount of money that would trigger a charge of violating currency transfer laws was a tipoff that perhaps Papadopoulis recognized in advance.
I think that was clearly a trap. And I believe it was set up by people working for the Obama administration. Crafty, devious, evil. All those things. Papadopoulis was either very lucky or very smart to avoid that trap.
As for the JCPOA, I believe the simplest explanation is the best: it was created to strengthen Iran, not to keep them in check. I see the strong hands of Valerie Jarrett and John Kerry, with their Iranian connections, behind this effort. It was not about nuclear weapons, it was about changing the power balance in the Islamic world in favor if Shia Islam. And Obama was a very willing accomplice to the effort.
“…the simplest explanation is the best…”
Indeed.
And so, what happens if we take this piece of Occamic (Okhamic?) wisdom just a “tiny step” further?
IOW, what (foreign policy objective—or should that be, “moral imperative”?…) has the Mullahcracy pledged to fulfil from Day 1? And reiterated, and reiterated and reiterated after that, ad infinitum?
Gateway Pundit reports Judge Sullivan arranged for a speaking engagement for James Comey at Howard University for a $100000!!! You cannot make this stuff up!!
There is a rather curious article (along with a follow-up) in what I consider to be a generally respectable and reliable Israeli news site (that is, if middle-of-the-road-to-perhaps-slightly-left-of-center journalism is something one might consider “generally reliable” or “generally respectable), in which we find Charles Tawil, that “mysterious Israeli” referred to above (or one of them), being interviewed:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-named-by-trump-russia-probe-convict-dismisses-absurd-spy-allegations/
One might ask, why is this guy being interviewed in the first place? And why in the “Times of Israel” of all places?
And the answer would seem to be in clear view: as the link says, to “[dismiss] absurd spy allegations” while putting the ball right back in Papadopoulous’s (i.e.,Trump’s) court. (Someone’s covering all the bases, I guess…)
And so we read about the whole sordid episode from Mr.—“Israeli businessman”—Tawil’s POV.
Fair enough (in fact, fascinating enough); but something rings more than just a wee bit false, as our “non-spy” does seem to be “protesting just a bit too much” (taking a leaf out of that master-of-fiction, Susan Rice’s book?)….
In any event, Papadopoulous was, among other things, probed by Mueller’s “team” regarding suspicions that he may have “acted on behalf of the Israeli government” (sure! why not?), which was no doubt a deft if not classy touch by the Mueller crew (and Papadopoulos’s Israeli “business partners” (or potential business partners…).
https://www.timesofisrael.com/convicted-ex-adviser-to-trump-probed-over-israel-ties-launches-us-congress-bid/
Ah, spycraft… (Surely they shouldn’t have to “try so hard”.
File under: Where is Joseph Mifsud when you REALLY need him?
@ Barry Meislin, on “What will Sullivan do to delay…?”
Well, what if Wilkinson will have Sullivan drench his reply with legalese, so that the MSM follows none of it?
Then, have her “explain” it to the cameras, so as to guide the MSM to interpret it, as implying that those Circuit judges who vote vs. her client are so Rayciss, that the MSM can then go full agitProp, for antiFa/ BLM to deploy “civil disobedience” (e.g. sit-ins etc., by the Circuit courthouse doors).
Whatever delay tactics Sullivan uses, will be an unprecedented test for the U.S. judicial system.
If the Circuit court lets itself be rolled in this case, millions of Deplorables will conclude that, as a practical matter, they should expect only faux justice from this system.
Wouldn’t it be super cool, if DJT could get Pence to announce his retirement, w/ Ms. Powell to take his place!
Even most Hoosiers would be ecstatic, esp. if, by that time, Flynn is a free man.
To the entire GOP grass roots, her role in freeing him makes her the MJ of U.S. law.
For them, she all-but Walks on Water, and will also be a saint for suburban “swing” women, once they absorb the magnitude of her victory for Flynn.
Tho I can’t find her birthdate, I presume her age to be a non-issue.
millions of Deplorables will conclude that, as a practical matter, they should expect only faux justice from this system.
The people paying attention will conclude that. Most people aren’t paying attention. The horrid behavior of the Democratic Party during the Kavanaugh imbroglio appears to have not injured them at all. Their constituency likes that sort of thing or pretends it did not happen. Swing voters are motivated by odd and idiosyncratic factors.
Isn’t Mifsud the guy who fell down an elevator shaft on Cyprus? Cyprus does have elevator shafts?
Richard Aubrey:
More likely a boating accident.
This is what Judge Maximum John Sirica told the Watergate defendants and it is why they claimed you can’t get a fair trial in the DC courts. Nothing has changed.
“I recommend your full cooperation with the grand jury and the senate select committee. You must understand that I hold out no promise or hope of any kind to you in this matter, but I do say that should you decide to speak freely, I would have to weight that factor in appraising what sentences will finally be imposed in each case. Other facts will, of course, be considered, but I mention this because it is one over which you have control.”
I thought Mifsud was the guy everyone figured was dead and then resurfaced. Nothing suspicious there …
Isn’t Mifsud the guy who fell down an elevator shaft on Cyprus?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj8FIbuoWPY
He may have fallen down an elevator shaft in Cyprus… but then it seems he fell up one in Italy.
(Since then, those who know, or think they do, claim he takes the stairs….)
Richard Grenell has declassified a new batch of Russia probe documents on his way out as acting director of national intelligence, leaving the decision on whether to make those files public up to newly sworn-in Director John Ratcliffe. The documents include transcripts of phone calls that then-incoming National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak had in December 2016, during the presidential transition period. Grenell said publicly last week that he was in the process of declassifying those files, after House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., asked that he do so.
Trump has described first Grenell, and now now Ratcliffe, as “superstars”.
I agree on Grenell – he’s been surprisingly great. I have long wondered why Trump himself doesn’t declassify more of the semi-secret documents allowing the illegal spying. I’m so glad Grenell did do a lot of declassifying.
If Ratcliffe continues, he’ll be a superstar. If not, not.
(What would neo say here ? we …)
I have long wondered why Trump himself doesn’t declassify more of the semi-secret documents allowing the illegal spying.
Its a power that the president has, but i think he is holding it in reserve
as much as he seems to be a hot gun and all that, i think its calculated to seem that way… especially when you look at the options he has power to act on and how he doesnt and how he waits through things others would not..
I love plain-talkin’ neo!
Neo has noted that the Flynn case of entrapment and framing is like George Popadopolos and like K T McFarlain’s. To these we should add former Acting AG Matt Whitaker.
“I was AG, and they tried to set up even me” a 5 minute interview segment from a 36 minute interview with Sebastian Gorka
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXUFLdBZKCM
The club is growing. Can they sue as a group?
And we still do not know when Obama’s out of control security state surveillance began.
PS who is Whitakera? He was Deputy AG under Jeff Sessions, and Matt is hawking his new book on the Giacomo. His facts are good. However, he frames thing too much like Sessions, ie, as a GOP man, dedicated to preserving institutions – heedless that the rot is the institutional corruption itself and therefore endemic evil.