Michael Flynn response to prosecution opposition to motion to dismiss Feb 18, 2020, “government’s response admits astounding and widespread government misconduct”
“Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they call ‘The Resistance’ and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the executive branch.” …Attorney General Barr
“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October 23, 2019
“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019
From the Michael Flynn response to prosecution opposition to motion to dismiss February 18, 2020.
“The government’s February 12, 2020, response in opposition to Mr. Flynn’s Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 169, demonstrates only its adamant refusal to recognize its obligations to seek justice not convictions and to produce evidence favorable to the defense under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). It continues to disregard this Court’s Brady order, which required it to produce
information favorable to the defense since December 2017.
Now, more than two years after this Court’s order—and more than one year after the “extended plea colloquy” on which the government repeatedly harps—the defense learned from a stunning report of the Inspector General (“IG Report”) that one of the two FBI agents, who broke all protocols to interview Mr. Flynn in the White House on January 24, 2017, was a surreptitious participant in a presidential briefing on August 17, 2016. The FBI assigned him specifically to
collect information from and about Mr. Flynn to give the FBI further advantage and insights in the agents’ plan to interview Mr. Flynn in the White House if Trump won the election. The IG Report revealed conduct of this agent and in the highest tiers of the FBI that is indeed “so grossly shocking and so outrageous as to violate the universal sense of justice.” United States v. Restrepo, 930 F.2d
705, 712 (9th Cir. 1991).
If the government and this Court fail to acknowledge it, then surely a court will find that this is the very case that mandates the exercise of a court’s supervisory power if not the constitutionally required application of Brady to dismiss this prosecution because of the government’s appalling and unrepentant attitude. Bank of Nova Scotia v. United States, 487 U.S. 250, 263 (1988); see Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959) (conviction obtained on known false
evidence cannot stand).”
“The government’s response admits astounding and widespread government misconduct as detailed in the IG Report regarding the Crossfire Hurricane investigation and FISA applications, yet Mr. Van Grack refuses to admit any impact on Mr. Flynn’s case. For these reasons and those in Mr. Flynn’s Motion to Dismiss and other briefs, the government’s outrageous misconduct
mandates dismissal of this prosecution with prejudice. Its opposition proves no interest in justice, defies credulity, and demonstrates the government’s reprehensible and unrepentant attitude toward the most serious of all issues that affect due process and the administration of justice.”