Posted on August 18 2019
Before we dive in to Flynn’s recent Motion to Clarify. I think you might find that this previous writeup potentially helpful.. .or at the minimum I dissected Flynn’s “hot-mess-express” train-wreck, also known as Flynn's December 2018 Sentencing Hearing.
You might recall, this was the hearing that caused Twitter to break itself in half. Where the profound political polarization deepened, And then both the Alt-Right and Alt-Left decided to amplify hardly credible “conspiracy theories” with the horseshoe narrative reared it’s ugly head. During the December 2018 highly contentious Sentencing Hearing - the transcript clearly shows Flynn’s Hearing went off-the-rails almost immediately.
As further explained below:
This archived twitter thread (RIP to yet another twitter account) of Julian Assange’s Indictment might be worth rereading. This previously archived Mueller Report twitter thread might be worth rereading too.
Volume I - Flynn the following is in the format of page number is not the number marked on the page) and “x” is the enumeration of Flynn’s mentions on said page. I only criteria I used to discard other mentions of Flynn is the quantitative mentions of Flynn had to be greater than four:
Page 15 x 5, 70 x 12, 150 x 20, 153 x 10, 157 x 25, 168 x 13, 175 x 55, 176 x 116, 177 x 70, 178 x 98, 179 x 18, 180 x 120, 181 x10, 191 x 20, 202 x 13, 203 x 14
Volume 11 - Flynn & Trump’s Obstructive Acts Again the format is page (not the page marked on the report) number and “x” = the enumeration of Flynn per page. It is clear based on the numbers alone but unequivocally affirmed by the actual substance that Flynn played a prominent role in the Special Counsel’s Investigation into Trump’s Obstructive Behavior. No fuzz. Absolutely crystal clear:
209 x 9, 211 x 10, 215 x 45, 217 x 5, 218 x 8, 224 x 10, 227 x 5, 228 x 15, 236 x 110, 237 x 20, 238 x 135, 241 x 105, 242 x 90, 243 x 60, 245 x 5, 246 x 15, 258 x 70, 249 x 19, 250 x 90, 231 x 30, 252 x 7, 254 x 55, 253 x 50, 254 x 55, 255 x 50, 256 x 13, 257 x 7, 258 x 135, 259 x 23, 260 x 15, 261 x 5, 287 x 35, 294 x 4, 301 x 25, 324 x 5, 332 x 40, 333 x 28, 334 x 85, 343 x 12, 344 x 15, 360 x 5, 404 x 25, 425 x 35, 426 x 15 and 443 x 7
Exhibit 2, appears to be (possibly) Assistant Director McCabe...but I don’t see anything new...beyond two names, this appears to be a redundant filing based on the FISA warrant & previously released FBI 302. Open Source Link to Exhibit 2, found here.
Flynn - Travel Motion to Clarify
I think it’s important to note that prior to the December 2018 a few events transpired. Specifically Flynn was one of the very first targets to cooperate with the Government. In doing so, I strongly suggest you reread page 5 of his Plea Deal
U.S. v. Michael T. Flynn (1:17-cr-232, District of Columbia)
“Lieutenant General Michael T. Flynn (Ret.), of Alexandria, Va., pleaded guilty on Dec. 1, 2017, to making false statements to FBI agents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001.”
Pages 5 and 6 of Flynn’s Plea Deal - reads in part
8 (b) Your client shall cooperate fully, truthfully, completely, and forthrightly with this Office and other Federal, state, and local law enforcement authorities identified by this Office in any and all matters as to which this Office deems the cooperation relevant. Your client acknowledges that your client's cooperation may include, but will not necessarily be limited to: answering questions; providing sworn written statements; taking government-administered polygraph examination(s); and participating in covert law enforcement activities
What you might have forgotten on December 1, 2017 after Flynn was processed and entered his guilty plea, the Court RoR’d him (Release on his personal recognizance) and at the time the Court did not order any travel restrictions.
Incidentally you might also remember that on December 7, 2017 Flynn’s Case was reassigned from Judge Contreras to Judge Sullivan. At the time of the Flynn’s Case reassignment I speculated that the “cause” may (operative word) been FISC related, specifically Judge Contreras serves as a FISC Judge, his term expires on May 18, 2023. The reason I remember this “blip”? Easy, I had reported Jacob Wohl, Judicial Watch and GatewayPundits tweets. All of whom straight up doxed Judge Contreras, posting his home address and his voting record. I tagged the US Marshals and then long form reported the offending tweets. To wit Twitter summarily suspended my account. Because how dare I say something when I see something that could endanger an Article III Judge. (note my extreme sarcasm).
During the December 2018 sentencing hearing (remember the Judge asked the parties four times “do you want to delay sentencing”) the Judge noted that there were zero travel restrictions ordered, as such Judge Sullivan issued the following minute order:
On August 14, 2019 Flynn filed a Motion to Clarify concerning the previous travel restrictions (December 2018 minute Order) and comments made by the Court during the June 24, 2019 Hearing:
“but there are no impediments to him traveling as long as he -- and I don't want to misspeak, but pretrial has procedures in place. You have to let them know a certain number of days or hours beforehand. There are -- they aren't going to -- they're not going to impede on his ability to travel, . . . I'm certainly not impeding his ability to travel, but he just needs to follow the procedures like everyone else.”
Accordingly on August 16, 2019 the Court issued the following minute order. I converted it in to a pdf and uploaded to my public drive, found here, in my opinion this is a reasonable compromise. Although if I’m going to be frank, I personally think it’s untoward that Flynn can gallivant around the Country giving political speeches in support of the Administration and GOP writ large while simultaneously asking for the public to pour money in to his Legal Defense Fund. But again that’s my opinion and you’re welcome to disagree with me. Given I’ve been completely transparent about my thoughts on Flynn.
As noted in Mueller’s Report (both volumes) I previously drew your attention to the Mueller Report and the iterations. of Flynn in both Volume I & II and noted that Flynn & FIG’s attorney (same one mentioned above) had a proffer with the Special Counsel’s Office
Moreover in May of 2019 - we learned that Flynn was sliding into Members of Congress DMs. You might assume that’s completely irrelevant. My counter argument is, generally speaking Judges have wide latitude when a defendant is sentenced. Meaning that Judges can and often do factor in a “defendant’s prior acts”. And sure you could argue “so what, Flynn sent a couple of DMs” that argument is horribly flawed because those DMs show Flynn vacillated in “accepting responsibility for his actions” to “the whole Investigation is a Hoax and witch hunt”. There’s really no way to predict if Judge Sullivan will consider Flynn’s vacillation.
Conversely it would be a really good time to remind you of July 9 thru 11th, in my opinion this was a clear signal that the Government and Flynn had locked horns. I uploaded the July 10th filing by the Google to my google drive, found here, but this isn’t all that surprising it because it clearly appears the Government is hedging their bets.
setting aside the high coveted Government 5K1 letter. This is a letter that the Government submits in advance of sentencing which -almost- always particularize the “substantial assistance” at sentencing. See United States Sentencing Commission - Chapter 5, found here, the relevant subsection reads in part:
PART K - DEPARTURES
1. SUBSTANTIAL ASSISTANCE TO AUTHORITIES
5K1.1. Substantial Assistance to Authorities
Upon motion of the government stating that the defendant has provided substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of another person who has committed an offense, the court may depart from the guidelines.
(a) The appropriate reduction shall be determined by the court for reasons stated that may include, but are not limited to, consideration of the following:
(1) the court’s evaluation of the significance and usefulness of the defendant’s assistance, taking into consideration the government’s evaluation of the assistance rendered;
(2) the truthfulness, completeness, and reliability of any information or testimony provided by the defendant;
(3) the nature and extent of the defendant’s assistance;
(4) any injury suffered, or any danger or risk of injury to the defendant or his family resulting from his assistance;
(5) the timeliness of the defendant’s assistance.
Admittedly I was incorrect in my prediction that Flynn’s former business partner(s) EDVA Trial would be dismissed. The reality is at times the Government’s case was on shaky grounds. Notwithstanding a jury of peers found Flynn’s former business partner guilty. What you may not know is on August 17, 2019 Rafiekian filed the following motions (three in all)
Memorandum in Support by Bijan Rafiekian re 342 MOTION for Acquittal Defendant Rafiekian's Motion for Judgment of Acquittal Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29 -- Memorandum of Law in Further Support of Motion for Judgment of Acquittal Pursuant to Federal Rule of Procedure 29
MOTION for New Trial Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33 by Bijan Rafiekian
Memorandum in Support by Bijan Rafiekian re 361 MOTION for New Trial Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33
Admittedly I stopped tracking the Rafiekian Case because I found it problematic for the Government and for Flynn. Do not conflate that with me supporting the Defendants, because I don’t. However until I pulled down yesterday’s filing, I had no idea that Judge Trenga had:
“..reserving decision on Rafiekian’s Rule 29 motion, this Court noted substantial issues with the government’s case, recognizing that it was “very, very circumstantial” and “[m]uch of it is very speculative.”
I should also disclose I haven’t read the Trial Transcripts because I’ve been oddly preoccupied with my bonbon eating. Although part of me wonders why the Defendants didn’t fight harder for more stringent “jury instructions” or put up a tougher fight during the voir dire process but as the July 23, 2019 minute entry stipulates:
Any further briefings on Defendant's Rule 29 Motion are due by 8/17/2019 with responses to be submitted by 8/24/2019. Motion Hearing on Rule 29 Motion(s) set for 9/5/2019
This matter isn’t settled, yet.
Moreover some really weird events occurred July 9th thru July 11th. Part of the rationale of “delaying” Flynn’s Sentencing is the Government informed the Court they would be calling Flynn as a witness in his former business Partners EDVA -FARA Criminal Trial. Yet on July 11, 2019 the Government filed their witness list and their subsequent amended witness list
Which is why I suggested you re-read Flynn’s December 2017 Plea Deal. Because it was not lost on me that the Government pulled Flynn Sr as a Prosecution witness but then later included his Son as a witness to be called. Again I don’t have a magic crystal ball but it is clear that something happened shortly after July 4th between the Government and Flynn. It was clear to me that once Flynn retained new counsel the “cooperation” between Flynn & the Government, specifically Van Grack hit a bit of a speed bump. Which culminated in the Government not calling Flynn Sr as a witness. It’s unclear, what if any impact that will have on the Government’s final letter to the Court. But one thing is clear Flynn shouldn’t be trusted and his vacillating between being a cooperating witness offering the Government “substantial assistance” versus an obvious combative relationship.
At any rate I suppose we will find out in due course time what Flynn’s sentencing will be and eventually we will know the tic toc of what happened between Flynn and the Government. Specifically concerning Flynn’s removal as the Government’s witness in the Rafiekian EDVA-Alexandria criminal trial. Unsurprisingly Judge Trenga has yet to issue a final judgment in Rafiekian’s Trial but it makes sense since he reserving his decision as three motions were filed yesterday. So clearly this isn’t over.
While you're here, throw us a bone.
Mad Dog is thrilled to have Spicy in our PAC(k). We are proud to provide a space for her tireless, hard hitting, in-depth investigations. But we can’t do it without you.
Our numbers are growing. Our voices are being heard. Our campaigns are making a difference. Help us, and Spicy, continue to fight the good fight. Consider a donation to help support the work of Mad Dog PAC today.