Connect with us

Nation

INSURANCE POLICY? FBI analysts investigating Flynn purchased liability insurance

Published

on

michael flynn andrew mccabe

FBI analysts charged with investigating then-candidate Donald Trump and his associates over an alleged and now-debunked conspiracy with Russia “all went and purchased professional liability insurance” because they anticipated they may be guilty of wrongdoing, according to new documents released Thursday.

The statement was made on January 10, 2017, in text messages released by Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s lawyer Sidney Powell as part of her multiple requests for exculpatory evidence. At the time, it appears the FBI team anticipated that “the whole thing is pretty ugly…we shall see how things pan out,” adding “[t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece.”

“The whole thing is pretty ugly…we shall see how things pan out,” adding “[t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece,” FBI agent in text

And if they were ever questioned by “the new AG…then yada yada yada…we all get screwed.”

The retired three-star general, who served as White House National Security under Trump, has been in a tense battle with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to clear his name. Last month, Attorney General William Barr and the Department of Justice urged Judge Emmet Sullivan to drop all charges against Flynn citing evidence that had not yet been made public.

“There was no case against General Flynn,” Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell wrote of the new documents in a brief Thursday. ‘There was no crime. The FBI and the prosecutors knew that. This American hero and his entire family have suffered for four years from public abuse, slander, libel, and all means of defamation at the hands of the very government he pledged his life to defend. For these reasons and all those previously briefed, the Government’s Motion to Dismiss should now be granted with prejudice instanter for multiple violations of Case 1:17-cr-00232-EGS Document 248 Filed 09/24/20 Page 11 of 13 12″

She added, “Brady and the wrongful prosecution of General Flynn when the agents and prosecutors knew there was no crime. This hideous abuse of power and travesty of justice has only been exacerbated by the unprecedented and baseless rulings of this court, and it should not continue another day.”

RELATED

Source: McCabe allegedly at the center of Durham’s probe, as new info reveals dossier source was a suspected Russian agent

Follow Jennie Taer on Twitter @JennieSTaer

Continue Reading

Immigration

BREAKING: Senate votes down both articles of impeachment against Mayorkas in party-line vote

Published

on

Mayorkas

The Senate voted down two articles of impeachment Wednesday which alleged Department of Homeland Security Secretary  Alejandro Mayorkas engaged in the “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” regarding the southern border in his capacity as DHS secretary. The second claimed Mayorkas had breached public trust.

What resulted in a party-line vote, began with Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., proposing a point of order declaring the first article unconstitutional, to which the majority of senators agreed following several failed motions by Republicans. The article was deemed unconstitutional by a vote of 51-48, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, voting present.

Fox News reports:

Schumer’s point of order was proposed after his request for unanimous consent, which would have provided a set amount of time for debate among the senators, as well as votes on two GOP resolutions and a set amount of agreed upon points of order, was objected to by Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo.

Schmitt stated in his objection that the Senate should conduct a full trial into the impeachment articles against Mayorkas, rather than the debate and points of order suggested by Schumer’s unanimous consent request, which would be followed by a likely successful motion to dismiss the articles. 

Republican senators took issue with Schumer’s point of order, as agreeing to it would effectively kill the first of the two articles. Several GOP lawmakers proposed motions, which took precedence over the point of order, to adjourn or table the point, among other things. But all GOP motions failed. 

After another batch of motions to avoid voting on Schumer’s second point of order, which would deem the second article unconstitutional, the Senate agreed to it. The vote was along party lines 51-49, with Murkowski rejoining the Republicans. 

Continue Reading

Trending