General Michael Flynn will likely go down in history as one of the first men to go up against the Deep State and win.
The former national security adviser was nabbed early in the Robert Mueller-led RussiaGate probe on charges of lying to the FBI. Over the course of the next several years, Flynn and his legal team attempted to prove his innocence against a number of crooked cops within the FBI and against a judge who seemed hellbent on putting the highly decorated military man behind bars.
It was only after a series of handwritten notes from the FBI were declassified that Flynn’s charges were dropped, as these notes indicated clearly that The Bureau had openly considered tricking Flynn into lying to them. This would allow them to hold Flynn hostage, essentially.
And even though Michael Flynn walks free, the work of his legal team is far from over.
Two recent events, tangentially related, likely were lost in the news cycle of the spike in COVID-19 cases and continued civil unrest in American cities. The first development was the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordering Judge Emmet Sullivan to dispose of former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s case, followed by the disclosure of additional FBI notes related to the matter.
Flynn’s attorney, Sidney Powell, petitioned the court to order Sullivan to dismiss the appeals court case. Since both the prosecution and defense agree that the case should be dismissed, it had been in judicial limbo while the judge was deciding if he wanted to dismiss it or move forward with sentencing. This is the second federal court in less than a year to rebuke the FBI, with Judge Neomi Rao’s opinion noting the agency’s handling of cases related to the failed Russia collusion narrative. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court also did so in December.
The second, and perhaps more significant, news was the revelation that additional evidence in the FBI’s possession was not previously turned over to Flynn or his attorneys. In a landmark case that is rapidly becoming known to many Americans, the Supreme Court held in Brady v. Maryland in 1963 that prosecutors must disclose the existence of exculpatory evidence to a defendant, regardless of how they obtained it or if it relates to their theory of prosecution. And therein lies a two-part problem with the recent disclosure of a handwritten note by fired deputy assistant FBI director Peter Strzok.
James Comey – then Director of the FBI – appears to be directly implicated as well.
So what is in the Strzok notes that might be problematic? First, Comey apparently advised the group that Flynn’s phone call with Russia’s former ambassador Sergey Kislyak “appears legit.” This is significant because it provides evidence that when Comey dispatched agents, including Strzok, 19 days later to interview Flynn, there apparently was not really a counterintelligence concern, which now appears to be the after-the-fact justification for the interview. Notes by former FBI Assistant Director Bill Priestap, disclosed earlier, appear to validate this as well.
While Flynn’s legal victory is still very much worthy of celebration, it appears that the real value in this harrowing episode will come as Powell and her team expose the Deep State for what it truly is.
Become an insider!
Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.