Who framed Michael Flynn? All of the pieces are in place and they lead right into the obama White House

@Randy: It would be quite a trick for Flynn to influence any military decisions about arming any ally, but the left are such believers! Trump was sworn in January 20,17 Flynn resigned Feb 13, 17. General Mattis was in charge of ME military decisions for the first year of the administration.
Still love our cuddly General Maddog.
Its Gen. H.R. McMaster I really felt couldnt be trusted.

@Greg:

When did Michael Flynn register as a foreign agent?

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the charges against him. But since you seem to be grasping at straws, I guess that’s all you’ve got.

Wikipedia? Really? Articles written by those who don’t even attach their names to what they publish? And you find that trustworthy?

You aren’t even honest enough to admit that your post #40, as with many of your posts on Flynn, was just a regurgitation of the Lawfare blog.

@Greg: Gen. Flynn never broke any laws. Obama wanted him out of the way. Mueller wanted him to lie against Trump. That’s all it was about.

@Greg: greggie, you lost but then you have always been a loser. You can write all you want, but you lack the legal training and mentality to understand even if you wanted to understand.

May 12, 2020 – Judge in Michael Flynn case delaying decision on DOJ request to abandon prosecution

WASHINGTON – A federal judge is delaying an immediate decision on a Justice Department request to abandon the prosecution of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, saying that he will allow time for outside parties to challenge the government’s position.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, in a Tuesday order, said he would set a schedule for parties to submit their challenges at a later date, injecting more drama into the case against the former Army general who first pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI in 2017 about his communications with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

In the brief order, Sullivan did not address the Justice Department’s effort to drop the case, saying only that he “anticipates that individuals and organizations” will attempt to file arguments of their own.

“Accordingly, at the appropriate time, the Court will enter a scheduling order governing the submission of any amicus curiae briefs,” Sullivan said.*

Flynn’s lawyers quickly responded, saying that outside parties had no standing in the case.

“A criminal case is a dispute between the United States and a criminal defendant,” Flynn’s lawyers argued in their own filing. “There is no place for third parties to meddle in the dispute, and certainly not to usurp the role of the government’s counsel. For the Court to allow another to stand in the place of the government would be a violation of the separation of powers.”

No place for third parties to meddle in the dispute? Tell that to Donald Trump.

Describing the case as drawing “extraordinary national and international interest,” attorneys for Flynn said outside parties were “free to express their views” but there was no provision to join an ongoing criminal case.

The attorneys made repeated reference to a group of former prosecutors they dubbed “Watergate prosecutors” who sought to enter the case, but they asked the judge to deny them a forum. Justice’s decision has prompted a wave of protest, including from about 2,000 former department officials who have called for the ouster of Attorney General William Barr.

“The ‘Watergate Prosecutors’ have no special role and no authority whatsoever to insert themselves in this litigation on behalf of anyone,” Flynn’s attorneys said. “They are no different than all those whose requests and attempts this court has quickly and resoundingly denied.”

Instead, Flynn’s lawyers appealed for the judge to follow the Justice Department’s recommendation.

“Moreover, this travesty of justice has already consumed three or more years of an innocent man’s life – and that of his entire family,” the attorneys argued. “No further delay should be tolerated or any further expense caused to him and his defense. This Court should enter the order proposed by the government immediately.”

Former federal prosecutors said Sullivan’s move is highly unusual and suggests the judge will take his time in deciding whether to dismiss the case against Flynn.

“Then again, I cannot remember another instance where a defendant pleaded guilty twice and then the DOJ moves to dismiss the case. Under no regime except Trump has anything like this occurred,” said Patrick Cotter, a former federal prosecutor. Cotter said he’s one of the signatories in a third-party brief that will be filed soon.

Sullivan’s decision also raises the likelihood that the Justice Department would be required to present evidence to support its motion to dismiss, Cotter said. The department also could appeal Sullivan’s order and force him to accept the motion.

Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law professor at George Washington University, said allowing third parties to weigh in “can certainly add more heat but not light.”

“More importantly, it is unlikely to change the outcome,” Turley said on Twitter. “This appears to confirm that he is unlikely to go quietly into the night with a ruling on the papers.”

Sullivan’s directive comes less than a week after the Justice Department set off a political firestorm by announcing its intention to drop the prosecution of the retired Army general.

Justice officials, in court documents filed Thursday, claimed that the FBI’s 2017 interview of the then-national security adviser was “unjustified” as they sought to learn about his communications with then-Ambassador Kislyak.

That’s what they’re claiming. But the judge decides—not Flynn’s lawyers, or Donald Trump, or William Barr. A sworn acknowledgement of the accuracy of the charges and a guilty plea were already submitted and accepted by the court; the case had already moved to the sentencing stage; no exculpatory evidence has been submitted.

In that interview, Flynn lied when he told agents that he had not discussed sanctions imposed against Russia by the Obama administration. He subsequently pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with Russia special counsel Robert Mueller before reversing course early this year when he sought to withdraw his plea, asserting that he was duped by federal investigators.

Duped? He wasn’t tricked into signing anything, and there’s nothing the least bit difficult to understand about what he swore to.

“The government is not persuaded that the January 24, 2017 interview was conducted with a legitimate investigative basis and therefore does not believe Mr. Flynn’s statements were material even if untrue,” the Justice Department concluded. “Moreover, we do not believe that the government can prove either the relevant false statements or their materiality beyond a reasonable doubt.”

The decision by the Justice Department flies in the face of a searing rebuke of Flynn by Sullivan, who oversaw an initial sentencing hearing in December 2018.

“Arguably, you sold your country out,” Sullivan said then. “I’m going to be frank with you. This is a very serious offense. It involves making false statements to the FBI on the premises of the White House – in the West Wing.”

Yeah, it certainly does. It is VERY odd that Trump’s New and Improved DoJ intends to just blow all of that off—without being persuaded to do so by any meddlesome third party, of course.

* “An amicus curiae brief is a persuasive legal document filed by a person or entity in a case, usually while the case is on appeal, in which it is not a party but has an interest in the outcome—typically in the rule of law that would be established by the court in its ruling.”

The complaint by Flynn’s attorneys that outside parties having no standing in the case are being invited to file briefs is patently absurd. Amicus curiae briefs are usually filed by those who are not directly involved a case. Their interest is usually in the effect of the precedent that might be set.

Flynn’s lawyers are playing to Trump and his base, not to the court and the rule of law.

Tell it to the judge.

The submission of an amicus curiae brief doesn’t require any standing in the case.

Judges don’t take orders from William Barr. The DoJ is part of the Executive Branch, not the Judicial Branch. Nor do judges take orders from the President, for the same reason.

As I suggested before: Tell it to the judge.

The judge apparently thinks the b.s. the DoJ and Flynn’s lawyers are up to might set a precedent that could have a negative impact on the rule of law.

I’m inclined to agree. I’ll go even further: Trump’s behavior to date has had a negative impact on the rule of law, and has diminished the constitutional powers of Congress as a check and balance against Executive overreach.

@Greg: That corrupt judge would not allow amicus briefs to be filed during the trial, briefs that supported Gen. Flynn. Now that the case has completely fallen apart, he allows outside third parties to offer an “opinion” on, not the Gen., but the case itself. This is nothing but a frightened little Obama pulling strings to try to keep more dirt on him from being exposed. They may regret dragging this out further.

What Sullivan provides is further proof the trial was a set up against Gen. Flynn, just like the ambush interview was. He must be patterning his court on Schiff’s one-sided idea of “justice”. Filthy police state garbage.

It sometimes becomes tempting to counter such comments by pointing out where the stupidity can actually be found, but that only turns a debate into a juvenile name-calling contest. Maybe that’s actually the goal?

I think I’ll just refer folks back to Post #59, and leave the name-calling and insults to others.

@kitt, #72:

The General is charged with lying to the FBI, that’s it…

Flynn was charged only with that in return for an agreement to cooperate and provide information in connection with a broader and far more important investigation involving a serious matter of national security. He could have been charged with secretly acting as a paid agent of two foreign powers, working to further objectives that ran counter to the official policies and objectives of the U.S. government. That wasn’t just a failure to register as required by law; it also involved violation of the Logan Act. In addition, perjury is necessarily involved somewhere. Either he lied under oath when he swore that what he was being charged with was true and accurate, or he lied during the initial FBI interview and when he recently withdrew his first sworn statement. Both cannot be true.

Compounding the lies would involve even greater legal jeopardy that he was in already—unless he had been assured by Team Trump that his loyalty would be rewarded with dismissed charges or a presidential pardon. About any such an offer—which would be nothing less than witness tampering—little can be known. Though his now-dumped first attorney undoubtedly knows a lot that could be useful, he remains bound to silence by attorney/client privilege. His current attorneys sure as hell won’t be revealing anything.

The whole dismissal situation stinks like a fish that’s been too long out of the refrigerator. The judge certainly isn’t unaware of the smell. Nor is he likely unaware that his own personal reputation is being publicly attacked for daring to wrinkle his nose.

@Greg: greggie, just move on. Like everything else you have thought, you were wrong again. Have you no pride. Do you enjoy always being wrong?

@Greg: Flynn resigned, the FBI convinced Pence he had been lied to.

secret conversations with the ambassador

Flynn was doing his job. Did you know that people in the administrative branch talk to foreigners all the time, often classified or secret?
How stupid you are to attempt that hyperbole BS with anyone over 2.
As far as a Trumps enemies list try that one with a 2 year old he does not go after people as Barry did with the IRS and IC agencies, he tweets things or says things.
Many of those servants were not held in the highest regard except by themselves they are psychopaths and dirty cops attorneys with zero ethics.
Its all documented brother, texts, documents, and testimony.

@Greg:

. In the run-up to becoming Trump’s National Security Advisor, he had secret conversations with the ambassador of one of those powers regarding sanctions imposed by the then-current administration, and then lied about it when questioned by the FBI.

He was the incoming National Security Advisor. He had every right and responsibility to be talking with foreign leaders AND trying to make sure harsh sanctions were not applied to the US. He was doing his job… as a patriot. Perhaps that is what Obama found unsettling.

The Vice President of the Trump administration subsequently asserted that Flynn had also lied to him. That was why Trump said he fired him. Have you forgotten all about that?

The investigators lied to Pence and Trump. Naturally, they were not yet used to members of their OWN GOVERNMENT and fellow Americans lying to them, working at the behest of the former administration or foreign entities, but they were learning.

The one and only context of the Russian “investigation” was to undo a legal election and destroy the Trump administration. Trump and Gen. Flynn had to be destroyed or all the Obama corruption was going to be exposed. Hillary was supposed to win and bury all that. She and the Democrats couldn’t win a rigged election. Drastic action needed to be taken.

The FBI themselves said, as hard as they looked, as much as they spied, as much as they WANTED to find Gen. Flynn was worthy of suspicion, they couldn’t find a goddamn thing. So, they had to send a couple of maggots with big grins on their faces to buddy up to the General, get him to drop his guard and make some mistake about a conversation they had the written transcripts to, but he did not.

Oh, there’s a simple explanation, alright. It’s also the most obvious. It’s SEDITION. The Obama administration politicized and weaponized the DOJ, FBI and IC and directed it to try and wreck Trump’s campaign and, when that failed, to destroy his administration. They didn’t give a SHIT what happened to the country; they were desperate to protect their sorry, corrupt asses.

@Meremortal: Are you talking about the billions that Obama sent to Iran to support terrorism?

@Meremortal: And we are now finding out that Brennan had information showing the Russians had a preference for Hillary (as common sense would tell you) but withheld that information from Congressional panels.

But, remember; it’s all a conspiracy theory, there’s no such thing as “deep state” and Obama was “scandal free”. Keep repeating it.

@Deplorable Me:

He was the incoming National Security Advisor. He had every right and responsibility to be talking with foreign leaders AND trying to make sure harsh sanctions were not applied to the US. He was doing his job… as a patriot.

Uh, no. “Incoming” is not a legally-recognized status that confers special official powers on someone before they take office. He had no right to attempt to supersede the policies and initiatives of the then-current presidential administration with those of one that did not yet officially exist. Our nation only has one constitutional federal government at a time.

As for doing his job, perhaps he was—as an unregistered and undisclosed paid agent of a foreign power. He didn’t reveal any such professional relationship until March 7, 2017. Possibly he should have included such minor details on his application for the job of national security advisor.

Russia was only part of the problem. There was also Turkey, and discussion of some highly questionable means for turning a lawful U.S. resident over to the Turkish government—the same government that later turned its suppression of the Kurds into open warfare as Trump looked cross, twiddled his thumbs, and cleared the way for the Syrian government to move into Kurdish-held territory in Syria.

You might notice that both of Flynn’s relationships played into the Trump administration’s policy toward Russia and Turkey. Do you think that was coincidence?

Which lies are you referring to? Flynns? Trumps? There are none in my own comments.

I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you haven’t got a clue what the facts mentioned in Post #85 refer to.

Uh huh. Have you got an explanation for Trump’s changing story, for how two contradictory statements made by Flynn can both be true without involving perjury, or for why it was OK for a national security advisor to have been a paid agent of foreign powers that the Trump administration was conducting negotiations with, without having bothered to disclose that fact?

False news! and I was framed by Obama Deep State conspirators! really doesn’t quite get it.

@Deplorable Me, #92:

No, sorry, but Gen. Flynn had every right AND obligation to be speaking with the Ambassador.

Sorry, but that is completely incorrect.

Flynn could have reasonably been expected to have a general discussion with the Russian ambassador, but no constitutional authority yet existed for him to attempt to influence Russian responses to imposed sanctions. Flynn knew that perfectly well, or he wouldn’t have attempted to conceal that particular aspect of his discussion from the FBI.

Flynn did have a legal obligation to reveal that he was working as the paid agent of a foreign power, which he failed to do. He most certainly should have disclosed this fact before accepting the position of national security advisor. The fact that he did not immediately compromised him, making him vulnerable to the threat of public exposure. The longer it went on, the more serious the threat would have become.

The Russians certainly would have realized this. Kompromat is one of their standard and most frequently utilized tools, at any level where they believe they can gain advantage by its application. They routinely get the goods on people as a means of exerting influence, and routinely arrange situations that maneuver unwary people into that position. Michael Flynn was an ideal target. They had already lured him closer by way of his attendance as a paid speaker at a dinner attended by Vladimir Putin, using RT America as the cash conduit. These people plan ahead. They invest time, money and energy on spec, looking for their possible return to come in the future.

They haven’t actually given a credible explanation for a damn thing. Certainly no one here is referencing it. Nor has the DoJ given a remotely credible explanation for dropping the case shortly before sentencing. That’s supposed to be covered by the deep state conspiracy theory that’s being pushed in the media. They’ve nearly blown a gasket because the the presiding judge intends to hear opinions on that.

Go ahead and try me. Problem is, you haven’t got any credible explanations to refer to. They’ve never been presented here because they’re not actually out there anywhere to be found. There’s nothing out there but a smoke screen that’s intended to hide the obvious. They’re going to try to keep on blowing smoke until the election.

I notice no one has had a thing to say about the points raised in post #85 and post #93. I’ll take that as a concession that there really is nothing to say; that you have no more problem with Trump’s constant lies to your faces than you do with Flynn’s lies to the FBI, to the court, and possibly to the Vice President*; that you don’t really give a damn that Flynn was the paid agent of a foreign power and failed to disclose it as require by law, but that the Russians sure as hell knew, and could have had that hanging over the head of a U.S. president’s national security advisor; and that it’s equally OK if Trump’s flunky in the DoJ makes all of this go away on some transparently lame pretense that nobody who gives the matter a moment’s thought would ever accept as reasonable.

* Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump

I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI. He has pled guilty to those lies. It is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful. There was nothing to hide!

11:14 AM · Dec 2, 2017

I honestly think there may be no limit to the b.s. some people would ignore to keep Trump in the White House. It isn’t as if they’re holding their noses so that many great and good things can be accomplished for the nation. That’s apparent from the rapidly compounding negative results. With regard to that, we probably haven’t seen anything yet.