Michael Flynn’s Motion to Compel Brady Evidence is Compelling by Larry C Johnson

Larry Johnson-5x7

For those who have not taken time to read what Michael Flynn’s lawyer filed with the court (it was initially sealed) you now no longer have an excuse. I am going to spoon feed you. The motion is compelling and tells a very different story about General Flynn’s case. Here’s the bottomline–the Obama Administration illegally spied on Flynn and were working in concert with Fusion GPS. This was illegal.

Flynn’s attorney, the amazing Sidney Powell, is demanding access to forty items of information. Let’s review them one-by-one:

  1. A letter delivered by the British Embassy to the incoming National Security team after Donald Trump’s election, and to outgoing National Security Advisor Susan Rice (the letter apparently disavows former British Secret Service Agent Christopher Steele, calls his credibility into question, and declares him untrustworthy).

Got that? With Trump on his way to the White House the Brits realized that their previous actions of spying against Trump were likely to be exposed. They were witting of Christopher Steele’s efforts to paint Trump as a Russia stooge and apparently decided to try to get out front and, like the police inspector in Casablanca, profess shock that there was gambling in the casino. Untrustworthy? One more nail in the whole sordid FISA warrant fiasco. If the Brits had informed the U.S. Government that Steele could not be trust then how could Comey and McCabe and Rosenstein sign off on the FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page? I also would like to know who tipped off Sidney Powell to this juicy piece of evidence.

2. The original draft of Mr. Flynn’s 302 and 1A-file, and any FBI document that identifies everyone who had possession of it (parts of which may have been leaked to the press, but the full original has never been produced). This would include information given to Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates on January 24 and 25, 2017.

What did the FBI and Obama DOJ know and when did they know it? There was nothing that General Flynn did the met the threshold for allowing the U.S. Government to collect against him. But that did not stop the lawless Obama team from going after him.

3. All documents, notes, information, FBI 302s, or testimony regarding Nellie Ohr’s research on Mr. Flynn and any information about transmitting it to the DOJ, CIA, or FBI.

This is a bombshell. We already know, thanks to testimony from Nellie’s husband, Bruce Ohr, that he was passing info gathered by Nellie as an employee of Fusion GPS to the FBI. This means Fusion GPS was not collecting only on Donald Trump, but was going after others in the Trump campaign. If the FBI used any of this information to target Flynn with FISA collection they have a big problem.

4. All payments, notes, memos, correspondence, and instructions by and between the FBI, CIA, or DOD with Stefan Halper—going back as far as 2014—regarding Michael Flynn, Svetlana Lokhova, Mr. Richard Dearlove (of MI6), and Professor Christopher Andrew (connected with MI5) and Halper’s compensation through the DOD Office of Net Assessment as evidenced by the whistleblower complaint of Adam Lovinger, addressed in our brief. This includes David Shedd (former Deputy Director of DIA) and Mike Vickers, who were CIA officers; James H. Baker; former DIA Director LTG Stewart; former DIA Deputy Director Doug Wise; and the DIA Director of Operations (DOD). This should also include any communications or correspondence of any type arising from the investigation or alleged concerns about Mr. Flynn that contained a copy to (as a “cc” or “bcc”) or was addressed directly to the DNI James Clapper and his senior staff; to CIA Director Brennan and his senior staff; or to FBI Director Comey, his Deputy Andrew McCabe and senior staff.

Sidney Powell knows what the feckless, corrupt media staunchly refuse to consider–the targeting of Michael Flynn for a bogus counter intelligence investigation was part of a larger act of sedition on the part of the CIA, the FBI and even DOD. Operatives like Stefan Halper were trying to manufacture crimes rather than uncover actual bad behavior. This material is radioactive as far as the Trump coup plotters are concerned and I am certain that John Brennan, Jim Clapper, Susan Rice, Sally Yates and Jim Comey are praying that this info stays hidden.

5. The Flynn 302 dated January 19, 2017, mentioned in the Mueller Report.

John Solomon reported earlier this year that FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, appearing before the House Intelligence Committee, testified under oath that the two agents who interviewed Flynn “didn’t think he was lying.” This kind of information should appear in the Flynn 302.

6. All and unredacted Page-Strzok text messages. Mr. Van Grack’s October 4, 2018, letter asserts: “To the extent the text messages appear to be incomplete or contain gaps, we do not possess additional messages that appear to fill such gaps.” The government should be compelled to identify to whom “we” refers, where the originals are, and whether any of the gaps have been filled or accounted for.

The FBI has tried various tactics to thwart the release of the Page-Strzok messages, but the damning texts continue to trickle out.

7. All documents, reports, correspondence, and memoranda, including any National Security letter or FISA application, concerning any earlier investigation of Mr. Flynn, and the basis for it. (The existence of these earlier investigations was disclosed in the Mueller Report; see Vol. II at pp. 24, 26.)

This is the heart of the matter–on what basis was a counter intelligence investigation of General Flynn authorized? What Sidney Powell knows is that there is no foundation to justify such an investigation.

8. All transcripts, recordings, notes, correspondence, and 302s of any interactions with human sources or “OCONUS lures” tasked against Mr. Flynn since he left DIA in 2014.

“OCONUS lures” is bureaucratic speak for human spies operating outside the United States trying to entrap a target. Think of it this way, you are a fat, old guy. You sitting in a pub in London. A beautiful woman walks in and decides you are the most interesting man in the world. She plies you with drinks and intimates that you will enjoy sexual congress with her. But she also is asking if you’ll be willing to meet with a nefarious Russian. You are only thinking about how lucky you are to be on the verge of scoring with this babe. You agree to anything. Welcome to an OCONUS lure. She’s the bait and you are the fat fish eager to gobble it down.

9. The unredacted Page-Strzok text messages as well as text messages, emails and other electronic communications to, from, or between Andrew McCabe, James Comey, Rod Rosenstein, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, John Carlin, Aaron Rouse, Carl Ghattas, Andrew Weissmann, Tashina Gauhar, Michael Steinbach, , and Zainab Ahmad, regarding Mr. Flynn or the FISA applications or any surveillance (legal or illegal) that would have reached Mr. Flynn’s communications.

If you think that the targeting of Flynn was a rogue operation or the work of one crazed FBI agent, think again. The effort to take out and destroy Michael Flynn was a top down operation. Sidney Powell wants the communications outlined above in order to flesh out her allegation of an Obama directed plot.

10. All evidence concerning notification by the Inspector General of the DOJ to the Special Counsel of the Strzok-Page text messages, including the actual text of any messages given to the Special Counsel, and the dates on which they were given. Although the Inspector General notified Special Counsel of the tens of thousands of text messages between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page no later than July 2017—the prosecutors did not produce a single text message to the defense until March 13, 2018.

This is a simple Brady matter–the prosecution is withholding information the defense is entitled to.

11. All evidence of press contacts between the Special Counsel Office, including Andrew Weissmann, Ms. Ahmad, and Mr. Van Grack from the departure of Peter Strzok from Special Counsel team until December 8, 2017, regarding Mr. Flynn.

Any covert action requires an information warfare component, i.e., propaganda. Weissmann and his team were briefing the press on background in order to portray Michael Flynn as a Russian stooge. Getting these documents helps prove that the prosecutors were operating illegally and unethically.

12. Unredacted copies of all memos created by or other communications from James Comey that mention or deal with any investigation, surveillance, FISA applications, interviews, or use of a confidential human source or “OCONUS lures” against Mr. Flynn.

What did Jim Comey, former FBI Director, know and when did he know it? Sidney Powell would not be asking for memos that did not exist.

13. An unredacted copy of all of James Comey’s testimony before any Congressional committees.

There is still Comey testimony Congress that is sealed. This tells me that Ms. Powell has been briefed on key material that has not been made public.

14. The James Comey 302 for November 15, 2017, and all Comey 302s that bear on or mention Mr. Flynn.

Demonstrating Comey’s role in the effort to destroy Michael Flynn is part of the “fruit of the poisonous tree” strategy that Sidney Powell is pursuing. “Fruit of the poisonous tree” refers to evidence illegally or improperly collected. Such evidence can destroy a case. I think the evidence currently in the public domain indicates that Flynn was a victim of this nefarious tactic.

15. Notes and documents of any kind dealing with any briefings that Mr. Flynn provided to DIA after he left the government.

When Michael Flynn went to Russia or spoke to foreigners, even after he no longer worked at DIA, he followed protocol and let the folks handling his clearance know that he was so engaged. Do not be surprised to discover that someone at DIA was passing Flynn’s info (which was provided by Flynn to DIA) was being passed to the Obama White House and ultimately DOJ.

16. Any information, including recordings or 302s, about Joseph Mifsud’s presence and involvement in engaging or reporting on Mr. Flynn and Mifsud’s presence at the Russia Today dinner in Moscow on December 17, 2015.

Was British spy Joseph Mifsud, who was posing as some sort of Russian operative, wired for sound and directed to target Michael Flynn? Mifsud’s presence at the December 2015 Russia Today dinner was not a coincidence. He was an intelligence asset carrying out a mission for the Brits that had the blessing of the CIA and the FBI.

17. All notes, memoranda, 302s, and other information about the McCabe-Strzok meeting or meetings with Vice President-Elect or Vice President Pence (these meetings were referenced in the Mueller Report at Vol II, p. 34).

Did Andrew McCabe, as has been reported, direct Peter Strzok to change the original draft of his 302 interview with Michael Flynn? That is what this documentary evidence can show.

18. All Mary McCord 302s or interviews, including when she knew that Mr. Flynn did not have “a clandestine relationship with Russia.”

Mary McCord was head of the FBI’s National Security Division. She knows what questions Flynn was being asked and she knows how information he provided was being used in other investigations. She is a fact witness regarding the allegation that Flynn had a clandestine relationship with Russia.

19. Any Sally Yates 302s or other notes that concern Mr. Flynn, including treatment of her meetings with FBI Agents on January 24 and 25, 2017, her meetings with anyone in the White House, and the draft 302 of the Flynn interview on January 24 she reviewed or was read into.

When you are building a case of Government misconduct, the communications and knowledge of Acting Attorney General Sally Yates will be an important piece of the picture.

20. An internal DOJ document dated January 30, 2017, in which the FBI exonerated Mr. Flynn of being “an agent of Russia.”

Sidney knows. There is a DOJ document that acknowledges Michael Flynn is innocent of the original charge (and justification for the FISA warrant) that he was acting on behalf of Russia.

21. All information provided by Kathleen Kavalec at the Department of State to the FBI regarding Christopher Steele prior to the first FISA application.

When you show that a senior State Department officer was telling DOJ prior to the first FISA application that Christopher Steele was a fraud, then you have established more grounds that the foundation of the case against Flynn was “poisoned.”

22. Any and all evidence that during a senior-attended FBI meeting or video conference, Andrew McCabe said “First we fuck Flynn, then we fuck Trump,” or words to that effect.

Someone who sat in on that meeting has alerted the Flynn team to McCabe’s reckless and immature outburst. I think it is unlikely that this meeting was recorded, but let’s not discount the FBI’s ability to act stupidly.

23. The two-page Electronic Communication (EC) that allegedly began the “Russia Collusion” investigation.

This is a document sent by CIA Director John Brennan to FBI Director Jim Comey. It references the intel collected, largely by the Brits, in the previous ten months that implicated Trump and his team in Russian subterfuge. Left unsaid in the memo was the fact that much of the so-called “intel” was the product of directed intelligence dangles and lures designed to create or fabricate such a narrative.

24. All information that underlies the several FISA applications, including any information showing that any of the assertions in the applications were false, unverified, or unverifiable.

This is real simple. Senior DOJ and FBI officials (e.g., Lynch, Yates, Comey and McCabe) affirmed or swore under oath that the information in the FISA application for Carter Page was true and verified. It was based almost entirely on the Steele Dossier. There already is ample evidence in the public arena that these officials should have known that Steele was a fabricator. Is there any document they relied on to reject the information coming form Kathleen Kavalec and Bruce Our warning them to stay away from Steele?

25. All documents, notes, information, FBI 302s, or testimony regarding any debriefing that Bruce Ohr gave to anyone in the FBI or Department of Justice regarding Christopher Steele.

Based on testimony before the House Government Operations committee we already know that Ohr doubted Steele but was passing the bogus info to the FBI. Sidney Powell just wants the actual documents to buttress the Ohr testimony.

26. Testimony, interviews, 302s, notes of interviews of all persons who signed FISA applications regarding Mr. Flynn or anyone that would have reached Mr. Flynn’s communications, without regard to whether those applications were approved or rejected.

Sounds like there were some failed attempts to get a FISA warrant on Flynn. This is one more bit of circumstantial evidence that insiders are talking to Flynn’s lawyers.

27. All FISA applications since 2015 related to the Russia matter, whether approved or rejected, which involve Mr. Flynn or reached his communications with anyone.

Up to this point we have been told the first FISA application was made in October 2016. This is Sidney Powell’s way of telling you that these efforts started in 2015 and were motivated by Democrat politics rather than legitimate national security concerns.

28. Information identifying reporters paid by Fusion GPS and/or the Penn Quarter group to push “Russia Collusion,” communications regarding any stories about Mr. Flynn, and any testimony or statements about how the reporters were used by the government regarding Mr. Flynn.

Part of the “fruit of the poisonous tree” defense entails showing the conspiracy between the U.S. Government and the press to portray Michael Flynn as a Russian colluder. The Carter Page FISA application shows one facet of this technique. Christopher Steele’s report was “leaked” to Michael Isiskoff, a marginally competent hack pretending to be a journalist. Isikoff wrote it up and published it. The FBI cited this as “evidence” in the FISA application. Total bullshit but who cares when you are running a covert operation.

29. FBI 302s of KT McFarland, notes of interviews of her or her own notes, and text messages with Mr. Flynn from approximately December 27, 2016, until Flynn’s resignation.

These notes are important because they are likely to show that Flynn’s communications with Russia’s Ambassador (and other foreign ambassadors) was known to the Trump campaign and was appropriate and legal activity for an incoming National Security Advisor.

30. Any information regarding the SCO’s and DOJ’s destruction of the cell phones of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page (after being advised of the thousands of text messages that evidenced their bias) that has been classified or otherwise not available to the public from the published Inspector General Report.

Destroying evidence in a criminal investigation is obstruction of justice. This is just one more example of the FBI’s illegal conduct with respect to investigating General Flynn.

31. Any information regarding eradication of cell phone data, texts, emails, or other information belonging to Peter Strzok and Lisa Page that created the “gap” identified by the IG.

Just part of a thorough request for evidence of FBI misconduct, such as withholding or hiding evidence.

32. Information about any parts of any polygraph examinations failed by Peter Strzok after Mr. Flynn was first the subject of any FBI investigation—authorized or unauthorized.

Not sure what this means. Was Peter Strzok subjected to a polygraph? If so, when?

33. Brady or Giglio material newly discovered by the government (and by the Inspector General in his separate investigations) in the last two years.

This is a blanket request. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that established that the prosecutionmust turn over all evidence that might exonerate the defendant (exculpatory evidence) to the defense. Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the prosecution’s failure to inform the jury that a witness had been promised not to be prosecuted in exchange for his testimony was a failure to fulfill the duty to present all material evidence to the jury, and constituted a violation of due process, requiring a new trial.[1]

34. A full unredacted and copies of the recordings of Mr. Flynn’s calls with Ambassador Kislyak or anyone else that were reviewed or used in any way by the FBI or SCO in its evaluation of charges against Mr. Flynn.

Will be interesting to see if the FBI as well as the NSA has these recordings. The recordings exist. They are routinely vacuumed  up by NSA. Was anyone else on the U.S. side snooping?

35. All FBI 302s, notes, memoranda of James Clapper regarding Mr. Flynn, and the cell phone and home phone records of Mr. Clapper and David Ignatius between December 5, 2016, and February 24, 2017. Although not previously requested, the government should be compelled to produce:

Clapper was working frantically behind the scenes to fan the flames of the Russian collusion delusion. There is strong evidence he was the source for the David Igantius piece in the Washington Post on 12 January 2017, where he began creating the public case against General Flynn. Ignatius wrote: “According to a senior U.S. government official, Flynn phoned Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29, the day the Obama administration announced the expulsion of 35 Russian officials as well as other measures in retaliation for the hacking. What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions?”

Let me reiterate one critical fact–IT WAS NOT ILLEGAL OR IMPROPER FOR GENERAL FLYNN TO TELL THE RUSSIANS THAT OBAMA WAS AN IDIOT AND THE SANCTIONS WERE STUPID. In my book that would have been a truthful statement. But that is not what Flynn said. He was far more professional. But the Obama Administration, knowing that Flynn had talked to the Russian Ambassador decided to use that specific act to attack Flynn and get him charged.

36. Unredacted scope memos written for the Special Counsel and any requests by Special Counsel that mention Mr. Flynn or his son.

The misconduct did not stop with the firing of Jim Comey. Robert Mueller and his team continued to pour poison on the prosecution tree of General Flynn.

37. All FBI 302s or any notes of interviews of David Ignatius or any other reporter regarding the publication of information concerning Mr. Flynn and/or the reporters’ contacts with James Clapper, Andrew McCabe, John Brennan, Michael Kortan, or anyone in the FBI, DNI, DOD, DOJ, or CIA regarding Mr. Flynn.

This tells me that Sidney Powell has been tipped that during the course of the Inspector General’s investigation, evidence of improper contacts with Mr. Ignatius emerged and that there are documents about this.

38. FBI 302s and interview notes of Jim Woolsey, including notes by SCO members of conversations with Woolsey about Mr. Flynn, Flynn Intel Group, the Turkey project, and his separate meeting with officials of Turkey after the meeting that was the subject of the FIG FARA filing.

Ambassador Woolsey and his wife have been in communication with the FBI regarding the Sept. 19, 2016 meeting Ambassador Woolsey was invited to attend by one of Gen. Flynn’s business partners,” Woolsey spokesman Jonathan Franks said in a statement. Franks clarified that the FBI has been “in communication” with Woolsey both before and after the matter was taken over by Mueller’s office.”

This effort to frame Flynn turned up nothing of importance. As I have written previously, the so-called FARA violation by Flynn was a CIA setup, made possible with the help of Israeli intelligence.

39. All communications between Mr. David Laufman, Ms. Heather Hunt and any other member of the National Security Division regarding the FARA registration for Mr. Flynn and FIG and notes, reports or recordings of their interaction with Covington & Burling with regards to the filing and its contents. See Def.’s Resp. to the Ct.’s Order of July 9 & Gov.’s Filing of July 10, Ex. D, July 11, 2019, No. 17-232-EGS.

I published a piece in August outlining the elements of this attempt to entrap Flynn on a FARA violation. You can read it here.

40. Unredacted notes of the [FBI’s Pientka?] and Strzok from the interview of Mr. Flynn on January 24, 2017.

These notes will tell the story of whether or not the two FBI agents believed Flynn or thought he was lying. McCabe stated the Agents did not believe Flynn was lying.

Sidney Powell’s demand for Brady and Giglio material is not a desperation play. The desperation will be on the part of the prosecutors who are being exposed and liars and lawbreakers. Fortunately, Judge Sullivan hates such prosecutorial misconduct and has a long record of coming down hard on such actions.

Sidney Powell’s actions also highlights the incompetence of General Flynn’s original lawyers. They should be disbarred in my view. They facilitated a miscarriage of justice and the improper prosecution of an American patriot.

This entry was posted in Larry Johnson, Russiagate. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Michael Flynn’s Motion to Compel Brady Evidence is Compelling by Larry C Johnson

  1. Diana C says:

    Thank you for all of this. I’ve always felt that Flynn’s situation is the saddest part of the Democrats’ (especially the Obama Democrats’) effort to to undermine anyone connected to Trump. Your detailed outline of Flynn’s case should help in some way to get him some justice.
    It’s just very sad that Flynn has had to pay such a high price for the obvious spiteful actions of a President and his administration to undermine an incoming administration. It makes common citizens lose any sort of respect for our “deep state” and makes us wonder why anyone would want to work in that environment.
    I hope Flynn can eventually be released and exonerated. That would not bring back the time he’s spent in this mess or the money he’s lost–not to mention his family’s
    People should never be a used as a means to an end. That is the real evil that is taking over our governing class. It’s a real lack of concern for the importance of each and every human life. And that lack of concern shows exactly how much they don’t understand or respect the founding principles of our government.

  2. blue peacock says:

    It would appear that what Judge Sullivan believes is going to be pivotal. I’m willing to bet that the DOJ will not be forthcoming on any of these discovery materials and will argue that it is irrelevant to the sentencing since Flynn in his plea deal waived all his future rights. Ms. Powell is arguing that Judge Sullivan enforce his Brady order.
    So, the ball is effectively in Sullivan’s court. We’ll see how he rules.
    If he rules that these discovery materials should be produced I can see the DOJ withdrawing the prosecution on the grounds that national security “sources & methods” will be compromised. That’s their usual cop out when they’re caught on these matters. My speculation is that under no circumstance will they release any of these discovery requests even if they are held under contempt for prosecutorial misconduct.

  3. And here is the surprise–Sidney Powell already has obtained, not from the government, several of these documents. If the Government claims they don’t exist or they can’t find them she present them to the judge and he will open a can of whoop ass on the Weissmann crowd.

  4. MP98 says:

    Obviously Flynn was railroaded, but how did he get 3 stars?
    He talked to the FBI without a lawyer and then he hired really incompetent lawyers.
    He pretty much put himself in this jackpot.

  5. Seriously? He was a military intelligence officer. He didn’t spend his spare time watching law and order. And why should he believe that the FBI was out to fuck him? He thought the system was fair. He didn’t imagine that the FBI was acting like the KGB

  6. Don Quixote says:

    RE:MP98/Johnson exchange-
    Why, when initially interviewed, did Flynn fudge the content of his conversation(s) with Kislyak? He had to be aware that his tenure at DIA had been a thorn in the side of the prior administration’s Syria policy/propaganda. And surely he was not so isolated and tone deaf that he didn’t see the narrative that was taking shape?

  7. Don Quixote says:

    Sadly, “we are all honorable men here” is a lousy assumption to make

  8. Fred says:

    Why, when interviewed by the FBI, did his memory not provide a word for word match for the transcript obtained when spying on Kislayak? Better yet, show us the transcript, or can’t American voters be trusted with that information?

  9. Vig says:

    He didn’t imagine that the FBI was acting like the KGB
    well yes, its no doubt a good editorial decision on SST to delegate the more US culture related themes to others (Publius Tacitus in mind here).
    Otherwise I wouldn’t mind to be on Powell’s research team. My favorite items start in the 30`s section, if I recall correctly.

  10. As Fred correctly notes, you do not know what Flynn actually said. WHAT WE DO KNOW is that McCabe testified to HPSCI that the FBI agents did not believe Flynn had lied. So, you are just accepting the establishment smear as true.

  11. All,
    The story of the memo from Sir Mark Lyall Grant, then National Security Adviser, expressing lack of confidence in the dossier attributed to Steele, was first broken by John Solomon in ‘The Hill’ in May.
    (See https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/446050-did-brits-warn-about-steeles-credibility-before-muellers-probe-congress .)
    Without doubt, it is an extremely important piece of evidence, and Sidney Powell is absolutely right to be placing it at the front of the list of documents she is seeking.
    However, there is every reason to suspect that, when written, it was part of a panic-stricken and also disingenuous attempt by elements in the British government to put as much distance as possible between them and ‘Russiagate’ by, as it were, making Steele the ‘patsy.’
    And there is good reason to fear that it may now be used, not just by people on our side but also on yours, to deflect a much larger share of responsibility for the conspiracy on to him than is deserved.
    The account Solomon gave actually raised a lot of questions. A ‘source familiar with Flynn’s account’ was quoted as saying he had ‘no recollection of receiving the British communiqué or what might have happened to it, meaning that President Trump likely was not told about it.’
    However, ‘Congressional investigators’ were quoted by Solomon as saying they had been approached by a ‘whistleblower’, actually a former member of Flynn’s team, who told them that ‘he personally delivered the memo to Flynn on Jan. 12, 2017’, and, among other things, ‘also claimed to overhear Flynn’s team discussing the memo.’
    If this is the case, it suggests that although that figure has been appallingly treated by a bunch of thoroughly unscrupulous people, he made their task easier by failing to use a potentially devastating weapon which, unintentionally, the British end of the conspiracy had given him.
    It looks however as though Sidney Powell has a much better idea of how to handle figures like Clapper and Brennan, and their British counterparts.
    As to what was going on at our end, it is material that Solomon also reports that there was a slightly earlier email from ‘a subordinate national security official in Britain’, which ‘did not address Steele’s credibility but communicated that the British had nothing to do with leaking or reacting to the dossier.’
    So much at least I think we can take at face value.
    What is apparent from the early news coverage of the dossier, following its publication by ‘BuzzFeed’ on 10 January, and the naming of Steele as supposed author the following day, is total confusion, with some of the reporting suggesting that the sources quoted wanted to hang him out to dry, others that they wanted to defend him.
    There appears however to have been a clear transition, most significantly, in the views attributed to the head of MI6, Sir Alex Younger.
    On 13 January, Martin Robinson, UK Chief Reporter for ‘Mail Online’, published a report whose headlines seem worth quoting in full:
    ‘“I introduced him to my wife as James Bond”: Former spy Chris Steele’s friends describe a “show-off” 007 figure but MI6 bosses brand him an idiot” for an “appalling lack of judgement” over the Trump “dirty dossier”’
    The sub-headings read:
    ‘– Intelligence expert Nigel West says friend is like Ian Fleming’s famous character
    ‘ – He said: “He’s James Bond. I actually introduced him to my wife as James Bond”
    ‘ – Mr West says Steele dislikes Putin and Kremlin for ignoring rules of espionage
    ‘ – Angry spy source calls him “idiot” and blasts decision to take on the Trump work
    ‘ – Current MI6 boss Sir Alex Younger is said to be livid about reputation damage’
    (See https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4117040/I-introduced-wife-James-Bond-Former-spy-Chris-Steele-s-friends-shadowy-007-figure-MI6-bosses-brand-idiot-appalling-lack-judgement-Trump-dirty-dossier.html .)
    This looks to have been the ‘party line’ at the time when Lyall Grant’s memorandum was written.
    Only two days later, however, Sir Alex Younger’s views seems to have changed, with an alacrity worthy of a Stalinist ‘apparatchik’.
    So on 15 January, Kim Sengupta, Defence Editor of the ‘Independent’, produced a report headlined:
    ‘Head of MI6 used information from Trump dossier in first public speech; Warnings on cyberattacks show ex-spy’s work is respected.’
    (See https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-dossier-mi6-christopher-steele-russia-documents-alex-younger-a7528681.html )
    Two particularly interesting paragraphs in that report:
    ‘In one of his recent tweets, Mr Trump described Mr Steele as a “failed spy”. He also claimed in another tweet that “James Clapper [director of national intelligence] called me yesterday to denounce the false and fictitious report that was illegally circulated. Made up, phony facts. Too bad!”
    ‘Mr Steele had, in fact, a highly successful career in MI6, received a number of commendations and is highly regarded by both British and American intelligence agencies. Mr Clapper pointed out that what he had actually said was that the intelligence service “has not made any judgement that the information in this document is reliable”.’
    A possible interpretation of this is that there had been hurried transatlantic consulations between the conspirators, and it had been decided – very likely on the initiative of those on the American side – to abandon the earlier strategy of making Steele the ‘patsy’, of which the Lyall Grant memorandum was a manifestation.
    Meanwhile, Clapper, as in the conspiracy to use the Ghouta ‘false flag’ to inveigle the American and British governments into handing the Syrian sarin arsenal over to jihadists, was playing both sides.
    An important point to keep in mind is that a lot of the conspirators are clearly not very bright.
    As to the calibre of MI6, in addition to looking at the shifty face which stares out from the ‘Independent’ story – he would be a shoo-in for a role like ‘Third Murderer’ in Macbeth – it is useful to read the text of the speech by Sir Alex Younger to which Sengupta refers.
    (See https://www.sis.gov.uk/news/inside-the-modern-day-mi6.html .)
    A favourite line of mine comes in his discussion of the – actually largely mythical – notion of ‘hybrid warfare’: ‘In this arena, our opponents are often states whose very survival owes to the strength of their security capabilities; the work is complex and risky, often with the full weight of the State seeking to root us out.’
    Leaving aside the fact that this is borderline illiterate, what it amazing is Younger’s apparent blindness to clearly unintended implications of what he writes.
    If indeed, the ‘very survival’ of the Russian state ‘owes to the strength of [its] security capabilities’, the conclusions, seen from the point of view of any patriotic inhabitant of that country, would seem obvious.
    It was, the head of MI6 appears to be telling us, the coming to power of Putin and the ‘siloviki’ which preserved Russia from imminent destruction, and these are the people competent to defend it against the worst that Younger, Steele, and their associates on both sides of the Atlantic can do.

  12. Elmo Zoneball says:

    “5. The Flynn 302 dated January 19, 2017, mentioned in the Mueller Report.”

    The FBI interview of Flynn in the WH was on 24 Jan 2017.
    If there is a 302 on Flynn dated 19 Jan, it’s about something OTHER than what Flynn said in the FBI interview conducted 5 days later.

  13. Rhondda says:

    Thank you for this ‘spoon bread’, Mr. Johnson. It’s tasty! I have read it three times– once aloud after dinner to my husband.
    Sidney Powell continues to amaze. She is indeed a Honeybadger Lady. We need more like her.
    But I must say that the whole thing makes me wonder if perhaps Flynn hasn’t been a bit of the Brer Rabbit. (I am hoping so, actually.) Because, as others have also noted, his seeming naivete presented during these legal troubles rather flies in the face of his three stars. Not saying stars=smarts, but it does seem like it would at least be an indicator of manipulative cunning. I find it hard to believe that he just feel off the turnip truck.

  14. Keith Harbaugh says:

    Thank you for your detailed review of the Powell/Flynn Motion.
    BTW, two links to PDFs of Powell’s original motion are at this sundance column.
    You wrote (but I have added the emphasis):

    [Re item 2] There was nothing that General Flynn did [that] met the threshold for allowing the U.S. Government to collect against him.

    [then, after Powell’s request [item 7] for info “concerning any earlier investigation of Mr. Flynn, and the basis for it.” you wrote]
    This is the heart of the matter—
    on what basis was a counter intelligence investigation of General Flynn authorized?

    I think it is vital to compare this explicitly to how Susan Rice viewed the matter back in early January 2017.
    Susan Rice wrote in her “memo-to-herself” on the day Trump was inaugurated, 2017-01-20:

    President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.
    [After that there is a classified redaction, of unknown length.]
    The President asked [Comey] to inform him if anything changes in the next few weeks that should affect how we share classified information with the incoming team.

    Senators Grassley and Graham somehow obtained access to this memo, and asked Rice several questions re her memo. Rice referred the matter to her attorney, who responded to the senators with a letter, dated 2018-02-23, which stated (emphasis added):

    President Obama and his national security team
    were justifiably concerned about
    potential risks to the Nation’s security
    from sharing highly classified information about Russia
    with certain members of the Trump transition team,
    particularly Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

    In light of
    concerning communications between members of the Trump team and Russian officials, before and after the election,
    President Obama, on behalf of his national security team,
    appropriately sought the FBI and the Department of Justice’s guidance on this subject.

    While serving as National Security Advisor,
    Ambassador Rice was not briefed on the existence of any FBI investigation into allegations of collusion between Mr. Trump’s associates and Russia,
    and she later learned of the fact of this investigation from Director Comey’s subsequent public testimony.
    Ambassador Rice was not informed of any FISA applications sought by the FBI in its investigation,
    and she only learned of them from press reports after leaving office.

    BTW, the links, and my knowledge of the situation, are from a recent (2019-09-15) sundance column, which contains more extensive text of the memo and letter.
    Obviously, this certainly opens up questions about where the views Rice expressed came from.
    I would certainly hope that people with the appropriate clearances, and without political bias, examine that question and report the answers, to the extent they can.
    Very glad Sydney Powell and you are attempting to answer those questions.

  15. Keith Harbaugh says:

    An extremely worthwhile sundance column, linking to Sidney Powell’s 2019-09-30 SUPPLEMENTAL STATUS REPORT to Judge Sullivan:
    “Flynn Lawyer Tells Judge Motive Behind Why Flynn Took Guilty Plea…”, 2019-10-01
    Several highlights (emphasis added) from sundance’s quite lengthy, but meaty, column, in which
    sundance draws a number of inferences that may or may not be actually true:

    As highlighted, Michael Flynn -under pressure from Mueller’s prosecutors- signed a plea
    to avoid his son, Mike Flynn Jr., being indicted/accused.
    As we suspected General Flynn signed a plea deal
    to avoid seeing his son charged with a fabricated FARA violation.

    In the two-and-a-half years following [testimony before Congress of Clapper and DAG Sally Yates], there was nothing that would deliver the answer as to: who unmasked General Michael Flynn?
    The reason is simple, Flynn wasn’t unmasked – because
    Flynn was under FISC authorized active surveillance.
    [So sundance infers, using reasoning he describes in the sequel.]

    Put it all together and….
    (1) There was never an unmasking request because the collection was not incidental….
    (2) Because the intercept was not incidental.
    (3) Because the intercept was part of the FISA court granting a surveillance warrant.
    [Not sure about sundance’s logic there. Was something left out?}
    The lack of incidental collection is why FISA-702 doesn’t apply;
    and why there’s no paper trail to an unmasking request.
    The intercept was not ‘incidental‘ because the intercept was the result of direct monitoring and FISC authorized surveillance being conducted on Michael Flynn.

    There are only three options:

    1. Incidental collection = unmasking request.
    2. Direct intercept / Legal = Active FISA Title-1 surveillance authority.
    3. Direct intercept / Illegal = Active surveillance without Title-1 authority.

    All of the evidence from documents over the past two years indicates #2 was the status of Michael Flynn at the time of the Sergey Kislak call.
    The incoming National Security Advisor of President-Elect Donald Trump was under active Title-1 FBI surveillance as granted by the FISA court.
    That’s how the FBI intercepted the phone call with Sergey Kislyak
    and why there’s no unmasking request.
    This doesn’t deal with the propriety of the FISA warrant, or the legal basis,
    the legal predicate that must exist prior to granting the FISA warrant.
    However, accepting that Michael Flynn was under court approved surveillance reconciles all the issues.
    Additionally, this would explain two more issues.
    #1) President Obama warning incoming President Trump not to hire Michael Flynn as his Nat. Sec. Advisor; and
    #2) a very strong possibility that Flynn’s status is the redacted paragraph in the January 20th, 2016, Susan Rice memo.

    This FBI surveillance background of Flynn would also reconcile another unusual date within the Mueller report.
    An FBI 302 written on January 19th, 2017, before the Flynn interview on January 24th, 2017, about Kislyak

  16. Keith Harbaugh says:

    The Government responded to Powell’s request that they produce Brady evidence on Tuesday, Oct 1.
    Links to their two responses are at, as usual, a sundance column:
    “Prosecution Responds to Flynn Discovery Motion – Government Refuses to Provide Any Additional Evidence…”, 2019-10-01
    You may access the government’s response directly at these two links:
    To summarize, the government’s response was, as expected, essentially “F..k you”.
    It has been suggested that this now allows Sidney Powell to present to the court examples of the material she has requested,
    that she somehow has acquired through non-official channels,
    and assert that they are relevant and the govt. is negligent in not seeing that and producing those.
    If she does so, how Judge Sullivan would rule is certainly a good question.
    BTW, I believe in Judge Sullivan’s 2019-09-10 order requesting the govt. response, he set a deadline for that response of Tuesday, 2019-09-24.
    If anyone knows how that deadline got extended or ignored, I would like to hear it.
    Also, if anyone knows of a way to find these motions, briefs, and responses without relying on sundance to provide links, I would really like to learn that.
    I tried https://www.courtlistener.com/ , but couldn’t figure out the right search criteria, if such exist.

  17. Marie Gauron says:

    He did what he did on purpose. This was a “super deep” operation to get incriminating info out in the open.

  18. Keith Harbaugh says:

    Eureka! I found how (one way, at least) to use courtlistener.com to get ALL the docket info on the Flynn case.
    First give google this search entry:
    michael t. flynn site:courtlistener.com
    The resulting top hit currently points to:
    And indeed, that seems to be a list of ALL relevant docket items.
    This gives a way to follow what is happening in the case without relying on sundance.
    And BTW, the most recent docket entry should be quite interesting to those at SST interested in the Flynn case.
    Flynn’s attorney is requesting the govt. provide “the data and metadata” on two Blackberries she asserts the govt. possesses, which once belonged to none other than Joseph Mifsud.
    She is extremely specific on the identities of those Blackberries, giving among other things their IMEI, PIN, and SIM Card Id
    (how on earth did she get that info? I guess a little birdie told her 🙂
    As to why she wants to know what is/was on those phones, she writes (but the emphais is added):

    This information is material, exculpatory, and relevant to the defense of Mr. Flynn,
    and specifically to the “OCONUS LURES” and agents that western intelligence tasked against him likely as early as 2014 to arrange—unbeknownst to him—
    “connections” with certain Russians
    that they would then use against him in their false claims.

    The phones were used by Mr. Joseph Mifsud.

Comments are closed.