Connect with us

Nation

DOJ Lawyers Hint At Explosive New Evidence That Led Barr To Drop Charges Against Michael Flynn

Published

on

michael flynn case

Michael Flynn’s case took center stage again Tuesday, as his attorney Sidney Powell argued to the D.C. Circuit Court that dismissing the case against her client is the judicial and appropriate legal action to take since Justice Department prosecutors had asked for the case to be dismissed.

Stunningly, it appears that there is more evidence that has not been made public in the case of Flynn that led the Department of Justice and Attorney General William Barr to request that the charges be dropped. For Powell and Flynn the news of new evidence supporting his innocence is significant.

It has been a tumultuous battle over the past year against Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, who has been fighting against the DOJ’s decision to drop the charges against the three-star general, who once served under President Obama as his director of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Powell has been arguing all year that Sullivan’s actions teeter on extreme bias against her client and she has also stated that his actions, which have prolonged the case against Flynn, are unjustified.

The Justice Department attorney Jeffery Wall, along with Powell argued and answered questions of the panel that was grilling them on all the details of the case. It was during the trial that Wall hinted at the new evidence in support of Flynn.

He told the judges that Barr’s decision to drop the charges against Flynn, were in part, due to information that the DOJ hasn’t yet shared with the public. Wall said “the Attorney General sees this in the context of nonpublic information from other investigations.”

“It may be possible that the attorney general had before him information that he was not able to share with the court and so what we put in front of the court were the reasons that we could, but it may not be the whole picture available to the executive branch,” he added. “The attorney general made that decision or that judgment on the basis of lots of information. Some of it is public and fleshed out in the motion. Some of it is not.”

The hint at more evidence and information obtained by Barr in Flynn’s case is not surprising as the Justice Department has its own ongoing investigation into the FBI’s alleged malfeasance in the handling of Flynn’s case and that of its investigation into President Donald Trump’s campaign.

Wall did not reveal what the information might be but it may have something to do with the ongoing investigations at the Justice Department.

These Justice Department investigations are separate but concurrent with the current trial against Flynn that was instigated by the same culprits in the FBI. Sullivan’s handling of the case before his court has been consistently criticized by Flynn’s supporters, who view the charges against him as concocted.

Powell, who has been fighting for Flynn’s freedom since taking over his case last year, told the 10 panel judge court that her client is guaranteed by the Constitution a fair and speedy trial. His trial has been nothing of the sort, she argued, as Sullivan, who is overseeing his case has failed to adhere to the Justice Department’s request to dismiss the case against her client.

“Gen. Flynn is a defendant without a prosecutor,” Powell told the court. She stressed to the judges that it’s the DOJ that determines whether or not to prosecute a case, not the judge that is supposed to be ‘by law’ impartial.

She also argued that Sullivan’s “court can’t continue a prosecution on its own.” 

The arguments, both by Powell and by the Justice Department, cited the case of U.S. v. Fokker as D.C. Circuit Court precedent for Flynn’s case. Powell noted that the case used a mandamus and the situation in the Fokker case was similar Flynns.

The panel of judges, however, was tough and they pushed Powell on both the historical context of the Fokker trial and the arguments made by Sullivan’s amicus curiae.

For example, Judge Judith Rogers pointed out that in the case of Fokker the judge had already ruled making the situation different than that of Flynns.

Powell, however, argued that it was not up to Sullivan to appoint himself as a pseudo prosecutor in Flynn’s case based on the actions he has taken to ensure that the case is not dismissed against her client. For example, she noted that the process of dragging out the case is unconstitutional to his right to a speedy and fair trial, as well as Sullivan’s actions because the process he created in the case is “way beyond the pale.”

Powell reiterated that the process installed by Sullivan into Flynn’s case shows extraordinary bias on the part of Sullivan who went out of his way to appoint his friend and retired judge, John Gleeson, as his amicus curiae in the case. Gleeson’s arguments on behalf of the court in a case where the executive branch had dropped charges is extraordinarily unusual. Why? Because a mountain of evidence has surfaced revealing that Flynn is not guilty of a crime. There was never any precedent, what-so-ever, to charge him or investigate him as a conspirator of the Russian government and further, the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn never believed he was lying.

Moreover, days before the FBI special agents interviewed Flynn at the White House in January, 2017 an FBI memo of the counterintelligence investigation into Flynn revealed that “no derogatory information” was found on Flynn, nor anyone associated with Flynn.

The memo literally asked that the investigation into the three-star general be dropped but former FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok refused to drop the case and continued the investigation into Flynn. Strzok has since been fired from the FBI for his actions during the now debunked Russia Trump campaign investigation.

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Adviser to Fauci bragged about helping him evade FOIA, ‘he is too smart’ to get caught

Published

on

Screen Shot 2021 05 17 at 10.47.34 AM

The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic published evidence ahead of a hearing that explains the senior scientific adviser to then-National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci actually bragged about helping Fauci evade the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The adviser, David Morens, admitted in his own communications to intentionally evading FOIA by using a Fauci’s private Gmail address or just handing him documents in person, according to the newly disclosed emails.

The 35-page report on Morens includes previously unreleased emails including:

An April 21, 2021 email shows Morens contacted EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak, whom Morens has described as his “best friend” and a U.S. taxpayer conduit for the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as well as Boston University and New England Biolabs researchers.

The subject line references “CoV research in China, GoF, etc.,” referring to EcoHealth-facilitated coronavirus research at WIV that could make a virus more transmissible or dangerous. The National Institutes of Health recently admitted it funded gain-of-function research under that definition but not a stricter regulatory definition.

“PS, i forgot to say there is no worry about FOIAs,” Morens wrote. “I can either send stuff to Tony on his private gmail, or hand it to him at work or at his house. He is too smart to let colleagues send him stuff that could cause trouble.”

A May 13, 2021 email to the same recipients referred to “our ‘secret’ back channel” by which Morens connected Fauci to a journalist named “Arthur,” apparently to discuss the feds’ preferred narrative that SARS-CoV-2 emerged naturally rather than via lab leak. The email cited an article on the message board Virological.

Gerald Keusch, associate director of the National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratory Institute at BU, emailed Daszak Oct. 25, 2021 to relay a phone conversation with “David,” who is “concerned about the privacy of text” and email sent and received on his “government phone” because they “could be FOIA’able.”

“Tony has told him not to be in touch with you and EHA for the time being,” Keusch wrote. Morens relayed that Daszak should get his story straight on EcoHealth’s claim that NIH locked it out of the system when it tried to file its year-five progress report that disclosed an arguable gain-of-function experiment.

Earlier in the day, Morens told Daszak “i will be meeting with Tony about this later on.” The subject line of the thread was “Draft response to Michael Lauer,” deputy director for extramural research at NIH.

Morens also told Daszak that Fauci and then-NIH Director Francis Collins are “trying to protect you, which also protects their own reputations,” apparently meaning against allegations that U.S. tax dollars passed through EcoHealth funded research that may have led to SARS-CoV-2’s emergence.

The subcommittee said it found emails that revealed “likely illegal” practices, including an April 2020 email in which Morens shared a “new NIAID implementation plan” with Daszak and an August 2020 email in which Daszak mentioned a “kick-back” to Morens after NIH awarded $7.5 million to EcoHealth.

Continue Reading

Trending