Posted on 08/30/2019 2:06:55 PM PDT by Cboldt
While prosecutors
routinely recite their full knowledge of and compliance with their Brady obligations, in truth they
often scoff at them and continue to play games to win convictions at all costs. Meanwhile, the
defense does not know what the defense does not know.
This problem was demonstrated dramatically in the prosecution of United States Senator
Ted Stevens. In fact, it was the prosecutorial misconduct in that case that led this Court to adopt
the Brady order it now routinely enters in every criminal case. Unfortunately, the government
learned nothing from the rebukes in Stevens. It has engaged in even more malevolent conduct in
the prosecution of Mr. Flynn.
(Excerpt) Read more at courtlistener.com ...
Corrupt federal prosecutors doing what corrupt federal prosecutors do. Nothing new...same old, same old.
Powel is signaling that she is considering defense provious counsel did not explore, in particular, a claim of selective prosecution.
IV. There Are Serious Fourth Amendment Violations.In addition, there are egregious Fourth Amendment violations at issue in this case. Either Mr. Flynn was (i) the subject of a pretextual counter-intelligence investigation apparently resulting from an FBI/CIA operation routed and funded through the Office of Net Assessment in the Department of Defense, using Stefan Halper to smear him as an "agent of Russia;" (ii) part of the documented abuses of the NSA database; (iii) the subject of a criminal leak of classified information regarding his conversations with Ambassador Kislyak; (iv) illegally unmasked; or (v) some combination of the above.
Judge Rosemary Collyer, Chief Judge of the FISA court, has already found serious Fourth Amendment violations by the FBI in areas that likely also involve their actions against Mr. Flynn. Much of the NSA's activity is in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment. Not only did the last administration--especially from late 2015 to 2016--dramatically increase its use and abuse of "about queries" in the NSA database, which Judge Collyer has noted was "a very serious Fourth Amendment issue," it also expanded the distribution of the illegally obtained information among federal agencies.10 Judge Collyer determined that former FBI Director Comey gave illegal unsupervised access to raw NSA data to multiple private contractors. ...
The judge has a reputation on Brady material. It is one of the best.
Not going to hold my breath. The press was not interested in the prosecutorial corruption surrounding the Stevens debacle, or the undoing of Arthur Andersen, etc. Seems the press favors corruption.
Agree, well written.
The takeaway for most intelligent people should be, never speak to a Fed without Counsel present.
I like this part with more at the link: I think Flynn has some good lawyers now.
“The prosecutors here—at the time including Mr. Van Grack, Ms. Zainab Ahmad, and
members of the Special Counsel team under the direction and supervision of Mr. Andrew
Weissmann—engaged in conduct even more pernicious than failing to comply with their legal
and ethical obligations under Brady and the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct.
They affirmatively suppressed evidence (hiding Brady material) that destroyed the
credibility of their primary witness, impugned their entire case against Mr. Flynn, while at the
same time putting excruciating pressure on him to enter his guilty plea and manipulating or
controlling the press to their advantage to extort that plea. They continued to hide that
exculpatory information for months—in direct contravention of this Court’s Order—and they
continue to suppress exculpatory information to this day.”
Selective prosecution is a hard claim to prevail on. A claim of a bad faith prosecution might be more productive.
Without any research, I think that might be foreclosed until he withdraws the guilty plea. Malicious prosecution depends on WINNING (not being convicted).
The general picture I get here is that he now has an attorney who is intrested in protecting and asserting all of his rights whereas the previous attorneys were content to milk him for every dollar he had and then turn him over to be a plaything of the liberal prosecution team.
theconservativetreehouse.com post on the subject filing.
Where in hell is the pardon for Flynn??
i would let it play out and find more corruption and a plea from his attorney before a pardon is granted...
The execrable Susan Rice's email sent to herself on Trump's inauguration day---just hours before she was scheduled to leave purported to document part of the strange meeting Obama held.
As Obama's top security aide, Rice was nervous about the fact that, at the president’s direction, she had failed
“to share information fully as it relates to Russia” with President Trump’s incoming national security team........
NOTE: Rice was being replaced by Gen Flynn.
Her actions violated longstanding American tradition. Outgoing administrations have always cooperated in the transition to a new administration, whether of the same or the opposing party, especially on matters relating to national security.
Susan Rice is far from the brightest bulb on the tree, but she was well aware that by concealing facts ostensibly relating to national security from her counterpart in the new administration–General Michael Flynn–she was, at a minimum, violating longstanding civic norms.
If she actually lied to Flynn, she could have been accused of much worse. So Rice wanted to be able to retrieve her email, if she found herself in a sticky situation, and tell the world that she hid relevant facts about Russia from the new administration on Barack Obama’s orders.
What were the secrets that Obama wanted to keep from the new Trump administration?
We can easily surmise that
<><>the Steele memo was paid for by the Democratic Party;
<><>that the FBI had to some degree collaborated with Steele;
<><>that the Clinton campaign had fed some of the fake news in the dossier to Steele;
<><>that Comey’s FBI had used Steele’s fabrications as the basis for FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign.
These were among the facts that Obama and his minions didn’t want Michael Flynn and Donald Trump to know. Susan Rice, we can infer, was told to keep these secrets, and if anyone ever asked why she had failed to disclose them to Michael Flynn and others on Trump’s team, or even lied to those people, she would have the defense that President Obama ordered her to do it.
There may be more to it than this. The redacted paragraph likely contains more information about what it was that Rice wasn’t supposed to tell the Trump team. One of these days, we will learn what was blacked out.
The fact that Michael Flynn was Susan Rice’s counterpart in the incoming administration may also be significant. We know that the FBI agents who interviewed General Flynn–even Peter Strzok!–reported that they didn’t think he had lied about anything.
And yet, Obama’s DOJ and Bob Mueller’s “investigation”–basically a continuation of Obama’s corrupt Department of Justice under another, less accountable name–persecuted Flynn to the point where he finally pled guilty to a single count of lying to the FBI in order, as he says, to end the madness and the financial drain.
Why were the Democrats so determined to discredit General Flynn? Perhaps because they wanted to pre-empt any outrage that may otherwise have followed on revelations that the Obama administration’s National Security Advisor hid important facts from Gen Flynn, her successor, during the transition, and may have lied to him about those facts, in violation of all American tradition.
He is bankrupt. I think it is enough.
Sydney Powell certainly seems to be the “man” for this job.
“Where in hell is the pardon for Flynn??”
after Jan. 2021
Why pardon? Flynn will have the case dismissed based on this filing.
Perhaps. Perhaps not.
Meanwhile, Paul Manafort is being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment - given his metaphorical jaywalking - and will very likely die a crippled man in prison.
Pardoning Michael Flynn - no matter how richly deserved - would not restore rule of law to this nation.
It would not even qualify as a band-aid on a gaping wound.
I tend to agree. The DOJ will be embarrassed and possibly have the prosecuting attorneys both censures, fined or possible disbarred if they fail to answer the motion,
So if they continue to stall the defense’s legitimate motions on Brady material, I think Ms. Powell should submit a motion for dismissal in thirty days from her filing. The only out for the DOJ and those dirty attorneys is to not contest the motion for dismissal in my opinion. (I am not a licensed attorney)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.