Political Persecution & Judicial Activism: The Latest in the General Flynn Case

Political Persecution & Judicial Activism: The Latest in the General Flynn Case

June 17, 2020 – Attorney for General Michael T. Flynn, Sidney Powell filed a Memorandum in Opposition to Amicus with the Court. The filing is the latest in what has come to be viewed by a large portion of the public as a clear case of political railroading.

D.C. Federal Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan has “activists” in his family who appear to be overtly political and leaning to the far left. This is not to suggest that Sullivan is letting his personal family opinions color his perception of the case. I believe Judge Sullivan is being pressured into pursuing the Flynn case.

According to Sara A. Carter, in an article entitled Powell Files Motion Against Gleeson: It’s A ‘Wrap-up’ Smear Against Flynn the case is starting to appear overtly political:

Sidney Powell, the defense attorney for Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, filed a scathing response in the court Wednesday against federal Judge John Gleeson’s amicus brief, which asked the court to reject the Justice Department’s request to drop all charges against Flynn. Powell’s motion is powerful and contains a lengthy time-line revealing the stunning evidence discovered by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, as well as, the litany of new evidence uncovered by U.S. Attorney Jeffery Jensen, who was appointed by the Justice Department to conduct an independent review of Flynn’s case.

Powell argues in her brief that the ‘irony and sheer duplicity’ of Gleeson’s accusations ‘against the Justice Department now—which is finally exposing the truth—is stunning.’ 

Gleeson submitted his lengthy brief on July 10, on behalf of D.C. Federal Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, who appointed him as the amicus and is refusing to drop the case against Flynn. He is doing all this despite the fact that both the Justice Department and defense agree the charges should be dropped against President Donald Trump’s former National Security Advisor.

Powell also pointed out in her motion of opposition Wednesday that Gleeson’s amicus filing on behalf of Sullivan is a ‘wrap-up smear’ against Flynn.

‘It demonstrates the difference between a Department of Prosecutions and a Department of Justice,’ Powell argues in her conclusion regarding Gleeson’s amicus. ‘It shows how the Department of Justice, as the government’s representative in every federal criminal case, has the power to walk into courtrooms and ask judges to remedy injustices. For these reasons and those stated in our other briefs, the only lawful action this court can take is to dismiss the case with prejudice on the Government’s motion and vacate the plea.’

Further Powell states in her motion, that Gleeson’s ‘Amicus elides the reality of the egregious government misconduct of the FBI Agents—particularly that of [former FBI Director James] Comey, {Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew] McCabe, [former Special Agent Peter] Strzok, [Former FBI Attorney Lisa] Page, [FBI Special Agent] Joe Pientka, [former FBI Assistant of Counterintelligence Bill] Priestap and others who met repeatedly to pursue the targeted ‘take-out’ of General Flynn for their political reasons and those of the ‘entirety lame duck usic.” Much of this has been revealed in the December 19, 2019, IG Report, the 86 pages of newly produced exonerating material produced by U.S. Attorney Jensen, filed in the Government’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 198), and hundreds of the texts between Strzok and Page demonstrating abject bias.’

‘Amicus is lost down the rabbit hole on the other side of the looking glass— where ‘nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn’t be. And what it wouldn’t be, it would,’ argues Powell. – Sara A. Carter

Powell also made reference to U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen and his findings. Tapped by Attorney General Bill Barr to review the Flynn case, Jensen found exculpatory information that had been withheld and buried. Among the most damning discoveries, Jensen uncovered a January 4, 2017 memo from the FBI that stated the Flynn case should have been closed much earlier. It showed how the top level of the FBI intervened to keep the case open to set a “perjury trap.”

Catherine Herridge, investigative journalist formerly of Fox News and now at CBS News, has been covering the abuses in the Flynn case.

It is also worth noting that the Department of Justice has subpoenaed emails between Judge Sullivan and Judge John Gleeson in this case.

Not only did the first judge in the Flynn case, Rudolph Contreas have to recuse himself, we later learned he was friends with Peter Strzok the biased FBI agent in the Flynn case.

Gleeson is not a neutral party and Judge Sullivan lacked the authority to appoint him.

Over 85 documented inconsistencies, errors and lies have been gleaned from the Mike Flynn case. These are extremely important when we consider the personal toll this case has taken on the Flynn family. It seems evident to anyone who has actually read all the documents, that General Flynn was set up and framed.

We still do not have the original 302 from the case, and there are many questions about the underlying predicates. This case has been a political hit-job from the beginning.

Think of it: a 3-Star General in the United States Army, with a flawless 33-year record of service, and former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. If they can frame him, what do you think they can do to you?

This case is still ongoing, we will update as more information becomes available. 

See a spelling or grammar error? Let us know! Highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments