Category Archives: US Department of Justice

Michael Flynn motion to compel data of Joseph Mifsud Blackberries, Attorney Sidney Powell filing October 15, 2019, Exculpatory evidence of Russians false claims

Michael Flynn motion to compel data of Joseph Mifsud Blackberries, Attorney Sidney Powell filing October 15, 2019, Exculpatory evidence of Russians false claims

“Given the material defense counsel has requested, which remains outstanding, Mr. Van Grack’s denial that further Brady material exists is patently absurd. It demonstrates arrogance and utter contempt for the letter and the spirit of this Court’s explicit order, the rule of Brady v. Maryland, and the protections guaranteed to defendants by the U.S. Constitution.”…US v. Flynn motion to compel production of Brady Material 

“McCabe had a role in crafting the “insurance policy” in the event Mr. Trump was elected.  Expect to find Comey a part of that also.”…Attorney Sydney Powell

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

From the

MOTION TO PRODUCE NEWLY DISCOVERED BRADY EVIDENCE
AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT THEREOF

in United States v. Michael Flynn

“Michael T. Flynn (“Mr. Flynn”) requests the government be ordered to produce evidence that has only recently come into its possession. This evidence includes the data and metadata of the following two devices:
Manufacturer BlackBerry
Product 9900 Bold
Model RDV71UW
IMEI 351504055559948
PIN 2B08EC98
SIM Card ID 89441000302074582859
and;

Manufacturer BlackBerry
Product Classic SQC100-1
Model SQC100-1
IMEI 359892051315486
PIN 2BFD0057
SIM Card ID 89441000300487623120
The defense requested this information initially by email to Mr. Van Grack and Ms. Ballantine on Friday, October 11, 2019. The government did not reply to the email of October 11, but it did reply in response to the notice of our Motion on October 15, 2019.
This information is material, exculpatory, and relevant to the defense of Mr. Flynn, and specifically to the “OCONUS LURES” and agents that western intelligence tasked against him likely as early as 2014 to arrange—unbeknownst to him—“connections” with certain Russians that they would then use against him in their false claims. The phones were used by Mr. Joseph Mifsud.
Mr. Flynn is entitled to this information under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87 (1963). Brady’s mandate is fundamental to Due Process and crucial to ensure that prosecutors fulfill their obligation to seek justice rather than convictions. The rule of Brady does so “[b]y requiring the prosecutor to assist the defense in making its case,” and in that respect “the Brady rule represents
a limited departure from a pure adversary model.” United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667, 675 n.6 (1985). The government “may not knowingly use false evidence, including false testimony, to obtain a tainted conviction.” Napue v. People of State of Ill., 360 U.S. 264, 269 (1959). This Court’s Standing Order also requires that the government produce this information to Mr. Flynn.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.124.0_1.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Advertisements

FBI caught in Seth Rich records lie, Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019 court filing, FBI records subpoenaed again, US Attorney Deborah Sines: “the FBI was looking into that”

FBI caught in Seth Rich records lie, Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019 court filing, FBI records subpoenaed again, US Attorney Deborah Sines: “the FBI was looking into that”

“The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those
records in bad faith.”…Attorney Ty Clevenger October 11, 2019

Mueller, as a matter of determined policy, omitted key steps which any honest investigator would undertake. He did not commission any forensic examination of the DNC servers. He did not interview Bill Binney. He did not interview Julian Assange. His failure to do any of those obvious things renders his report worthless.”…Craig Murray

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

From the

MOTION TO COMPEL FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION TO
COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM

Filed by Attorney Ty Clevenger on October 11, 2019.

“On July 3, 2019, the Plaintiff served a subpoena duces tecum on the FBI that
commanded production of information related to Seth Rich and Aaron Rich:
1. Produce all data downloaded from all electronic devices that belonged to Seth
Conrad Rich (born on or about January 3, 1989) as well as all data, documents,
records or communications indicating how the devices were obtained and who was responsible for downloading the information.
2. Produce all data, documents, communications, records or other evidence indicating whether Seth Conrad Rich (hereinafter “Seth Rich”), his brother Aaron Rich, or any other person or persons were involved in transferring data from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks, either directly or through intermediaries.
3. Produce all documents, communications, records or other evidence reflecting
orders or directions (whether formal or informal) for the handling of any evidence pertaining to Seth Rich’s or Aaron Rich’s involvement in transferring data from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.

4. Produce all documents, records, or communications exchanged with any other
government agencies (or representatives of such agencies) since July 10, 2016
regarding (1) Seth Rich’s murder or (2) Seth Rich’s or Aaron Rich’s involvement in transferring data from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.
5. Produce all recordings, transcripts, or notes (e.g., FD-302 forms) reflecting any interviews of Aaron Rich or any other witness regarding (1) the death of Seth Rich or (2) the transfer of data from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.
6. In an August 13, 2018 letter from Assistant U.S. Attorney Kathleen Mahoney
(EDNY) to Ty Clevenger pertaining to Ty Clevenger v. U.S. Department of
Justice, et al., Case No. 18-CV-01568 (EDNY), Ms. Mahoney wrote that she had
conferred with the FBI (her client) regarding whether it assisted the Seth Rich
investigation:
I subsequently ascertained from the FBI that as part of the search that it
conducted in response to your FOIA request, the Washington, D.C. Field
Office was contacted. They responded that they did not open a case or
assist in the investigation and have no records.
In an August 22, 2018 letter from Assistant U.S. Attorney Kathleen Mahoney
(EDNY) to Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom in the same case, Ms. Mahoney wrote as
follows:
Plaintiff then inquired by email on August 16, whether the FBI had
searched for records with the Computer Analysis and Response Team
(“CART”). On August 20, the undersigned responded by email that the FBI
had advised that it did not reach out to CART because the FBI had not
assisted in the investigation (the D.C. police declined the FBI’s assistance)
but that the searches that the FBI did conduct would have located any
CART records.
Produce all records, documents, data, or communications (e.g., text messages or
telephone records) identifying the person or persons who offered FBI assistance
and the person or persons who declined it on behalf of the D.C. police. Also
produce the full contents of any such communications wherein the offer of
assistance was made or rejected.
7. Produce all data, documents, records or communications obtained by the FBI’s Computer Analysis and Response Team (“CART”) regarding Seth Rich and/or Aaron Rich.
8. Produce all data, documents or records (including texts or emails) that reflect any meetings or communications from July 10, 2016 until July 10, 2017 between
former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and any and all of the following: (1)
Seymour Myron “Sy” Hersh (born on or about April 8, 1937); (2) Washington,
D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser; and/or (3) former Democratic National Committee Interim Chairwoman Donna Brazile.”

“1. The FBI clearly has records pertaining to Seth Rich, and it has withheld those records in bad faith.”

“In August of 2019, Michael Isikoff of Yahoo!News published the fifth episode of
“Conspiracyland,” a podcast series about the murder of Seth Rich, and in that episode he interviewed former Asst. U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia had assigned Ms. Hines to investigate the murder of Mr. Rich, and a full copy of the interview can be found at https://tunein.com/podcasts/News–
Politics-Podcasts/Conspiracyland-p1231856/?topicId=132591823. In Episode 5, Mr. Isikoff discussed a Fox News report that the FBI had copies of communications between Seth Rich and Wikileaks:
Isikoff: “As soon as she heard the [Fox News] story, Sines reached out to the FBI.”

Sines: “Of course I did. Of course I did.”

Isikoff: “And what did they tell you?”

Sines: “No.”

Isikoff: “No.”

Sines: “No. No connection between Seth and Wikileaks. And there was no
evidence on his work computer of him downloading and disseminating things
from the DNC.”

Isikoff: “As it turned out, there was one sliver of truth in the Fox story. The FBI
had been examining Seth’s computer, not for any ties to the DNC emails or
Wikileaks, but because they saw unusual activity by a foreign hacker after his
death.”

Sines: “There were allegations that someone, maybe more than one person, was
trying to invade Seth’s Gmail account and set up a separate account after Seth was murdered, and the FBI was looking into that. I presumed they were trying to
create a fake Gmail account or get into Seth’s Gmail account so they could dump
false information in there.”

Isikoff: “So just to be clear, the FBI had only investigated an attempt to hack into
Seth Rich’s email when they saw activity after he died. When we contacted the
Bureau’s Washington Field Office, a spokesperson said it had never opened an
investigation into the DNC staffer’s death, pointing out that the FBI had no
jurisdiction over local crimes. Andrew McCabe, the Bureau’s acting director at
the time, told us something else. He had personally reached out to his agents
when he heard the Seth Rich conspiracy stories and was informed there was
nothing to them. There was no ‘there’ there, McCabe said he was told.” (emphasis added).
Transcript of Excerpt, Conspiracyland, Episode 5 (emphasis added).2

In other words, Mr. Hardy’s claim that the FBI had no records about Seth Rich was false. And the fact that the FBI refused to search in CART, the place where responsive records most likely would be found, is strong evidence of bad faith.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.183024/gov.uscourts.txed.183024.75.0.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Rosenstein advised Mueller “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions” , Judicial Watch DOJ lawsuit released Rod Rosenstein communications

Rosenstein advised Mueller “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions” , Judicial Watch DOJ lawsuit released Rod Rosenstein communications

“Robert Mueller, like Andrew McCabe and the rest of the anti-Trump criminal conspirators, consider themselves above the law and on a divine mission to unseat Trump.  Mueller’s conflicts of interest, starting with his relationship with James Comey, are well documented. His role, along with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, in covering up the FBI’s early investigation into Russia’s nuclear bribery in the Uranium One case are also a matter of public record.”…American Thinker Dec. 19, 2017

“McCabe had a role in crafting the “insurance policy” in the event Mr. Trump was elected.  Expect to find Comey a part of that also.”…Attorney Sydney Powell

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

From Judicial Watch.

“DOJ DOCS SHOW ROSENSTEIN ADVISING MUELLER ‘THE BOSS’ DOESN’T KNOW ABOUT THEIR COMMUNICATIONS — JUDICIAL WATCH”

“Judicial Watch released 145 pages of Rod Rosenstein’s communications that include a one-line email from Rod Rosenstein to Robert Mueller stating, “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions” and “off the record” emails with major media outlets around the date of Mueller’s appointment.

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the DOJ failed to respond to a September 21, 2018, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-00481)). Judicial Watch seeks:

Any and all e-mails, text messages, or other records of communication addressed to or received by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein between May 8, 2017, and May 22, 2017.

The time period referred to in this suit is critical. On May 8, 2017, Rosenstein wrote a memo to President Trump recommending that FBI Director James Comey be fired. The next day, President Trump fired Comey. Just three days later, on May 12, Rosenstein sent an email assuring Robert Mueller that “The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions.”

In a May 16, 2017 email, sent the day before Mueller’s appointment, Rosenstein emailed former Bush administration Deputy Attorney General and current Kirkland & Ellis Partner, Mark Filip stating, “I am with Mueller. He shares my views. Duty Calls.  Sometimes the moment chooses us.”

And on May 17 Rosenstein appointed former FBI Director Robert Mueller to investigate Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Also, during the same time period, between May 8 and May 17, Rosenstein met with then-acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe and other senior Justice Department FBI officials to discuss wearing a wire and invoking the 25th Amendment to remove President Trump.

The documents also show that, again during the same time period, Rod Rosenstein was in direct communication with reporters from 60 MinutesThe New York Times and The Washington Post. In an email exchange dated May 2017, Rosenstein communicated with New York Times reporter Rebecca Ruiz to provide background for this article about himself. Ruiz emailed Rosenstein a draft of the article, and he responded with off-the-record comments and clarifications.”

Read more:

https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/judicial-watch-doj-docs-show-rosenstein-advising-mueller-the-boss-doesnt-know-about-their-communications/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Misconduct Assistant United States Attorney investigative summary October 2, 2019, US Justice Dept IG, Improperly disclosed grand jury materials to unauthorized individual

Misconduct Assistant United States Attorney investigative summary October 2, 2019, US Justice Dept IG, Improperly disclosed grand jury materials to  unauthorized individual

“Robert Mueller, like Andrew McCabe and the rest of the anti-Trump criminal conspirators, consider themselves above the law and on a divine mission to unseat Trump.  Mueller’s conflicts of interest, starting with his relationship with James Comey, are well documented. His role, along with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, in covering up the FBI’s early investigation into Russia’s nuclear bribery in the Uranium One case are also a matter of public record.”…American Thinker Dec. 19, 2017

“McCabe had a role in crafting the “insurance policy” in the event Mr. Trump was elected.  Expect to find Comey a part of that also.”…Attorney Sydney Powell

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

From the office of The Inspector General, US Justice Department October 2, 2019.

“INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY

Findings of Misconduct by a then Assistant United States Attorney for Improperly Disclosing Grand Jury Materials to an Unauthorized Individual
The Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) initiated this investigation upon the receipt of information from the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia (USAO-DC) regarding allegations that an Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA), who is no longer employed by DOJ, improperly disclosed District of Columbia Superior Court grand jury materials to an unauthorized individual.

The OIG investigation substantiated the allegation that the AUSA improperly disclosed Superior Court grand jury materials to an unauthorized individual, in violation of the Code of the District of Columbia and the District of Columbia Superior Court Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Criminal prosecution of this matter was declined.

The OIG has provided its report to the Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA), the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), and the USAO-DC for appropriate action.

***

Unless otherwise noted, the OIG applies the preponderance of the evidence standard in determining whether DOJ personnel have committed misconduct.”

https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2019/f191002a.pdf

Let’s see, who could it be this time.

So many choices.

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Andrew G. McCabe indictment, Judge Reggie B. Walton: indict or not or internal department records will be released to public, “undermine the credibility…of the Justice Department … also the court.”

Andrew G. McCabe indictment, Judge Reggie B. Walton: indict or not or internal department records will be released to public, “undermine the credibility…of the Justice Department … also the court.”

“Robert Mueller, like Andrew McCabe and the rest of the anti-Trump criminal conspirators, consider themselves above the law and on a divine mission to unseat Trump.  Mueller’s conflicts of interest, starting with his relationship with James Comey, are well documented. His role, along with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, in covering up the FBI’s early investigation into Russia’s nuclear bribery in the Uranium One case are also a matter of public record.”…American Thinker Dec. 19, 2017

“McCabe had a role in crafting the “insurance policy” in the event Mr. Trump was elected.  Expect to find Comey a part of that also.”…Attorney Sydney Powell

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

From the NY Times.

“The Justice Department has come under increasing pressure in its investigation of the former deputy F.B.I. director Andrew G. McCabe, as a federal judge threatened to release internal department records unless prosecutors decide whether to move forward with or abandon the politically charged case.

Judge Reggie B. Walton of Federal District Court for the District of Columbia, who is presiding over a lawsuit over F.B.I. documents related to Mr. McCabe’s firing last year, said at a hearing on Monday that he would soon begin releasing them. The Justice Department has argued that the materials should stay confidential while prosecutors investigate Mr. McCabe over whether he lied to internal investigators about dealings with the news media.

“You all have got to cut and make your decision,” Mr. Walton said, according to a transcript. “It’s not a hard decision, and I think it needs to be made. If it’s not made, I’m going to start ordering the release of information because I think our society, our public, does have a right to know what’s going on.”

Mr. McCabe, long a target of President Trump’s, was the subject of a scathing report by the Justice Department inspector general’s office that faulted him for violating media policy and repeatedly misleading its investigators.”

“This matter is a high-profile matter,” Judge Walton said. He added that as long as prosecutors hold off on deciding how to proceed, they “undermine the credibility not only of the Justice Department because it’s not making these hard decisions, but also the court.”

Read more:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/us/politics/andrew-mccabe-judge-prosecutors.html

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

Sidney Powell June 6, 2019 letter to Attorney General Barr filed in US v. Flynn October 1, 2019, “dismiss the prosecution of General Flynn in the interest of justice”

Sidney Powell June 6, 2019 letter to Attorney General Barr filed in US v. Flynn October 1, 2019, “dismiss the prosecution of General Flynn in the interest of justice”

“Given the material defense counsel has requested, which remains outstanding, Mr. Van Grack’s denial that further Brady material exists is patently absurd. It demonstrates arrogance and utter contempt for the letter and the spirit of this Court’s explicit order, the rule of Brady v. Maryland, and the protections guaranteed to defendants by the U.S. Constitution.”…US v. Flynn motion to compel production of Brady Material 

“Prosecutors Brandon Van Grack of the Justice Department’s national security division, who was formerly on Mr. Mueller’s team, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Curtis, of Washington, provided little explanation as to why they were not turning over the transcripts.”…Pittsburgh Post-Gazette June 1, 2019

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

From the Sidney Powell June 6, 2019 letter to Attorney General Barr filed as Attachment 1 in the US v. Michael Flynn case on October 1, 2019.

“To that end, we request:

(i) The appointment of new government counsel with no connection to the Special Counsel team of attorneys or agents to conduct review of the entire Flynn case for Brady material that has not been produced and prosecutorial misconduct writ large.
(ii) A determination of when, how, and on what basis the first investigation of General Flynn began.
(iii)The preservation of all electronic devices issued to anyone by Special Counsel and preservation of their text messages, emails, and any other means of electronic communications.
(iv) A review of currently classified information that we believe to be Brady for declassification, or at minimum, production to me of a summary of that information.
(v) Interviews of additional witnesses we can identify that the Special Counsel did not interview because they would have created exculpatory information.
(vi) Consideration of the specific targeting of General Flynn and the disparate way in which he was treated as compared to others similarly situated–even by SCO.
(vii)At the end of this internal review, we believe there will be ample justification for the Department to follow the precedent of the Ted Stevens case and move to dismiss the prosecution of General Flynn in the interest of justice–whether it be we ink a simple joint motion or sua sponte by the Department.”

Read more:

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.122.2.pdf

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

Flynn prosecution case unraveling?, Supplemental status report September 30, 2019, US v. Rafiekian, “Mr. Van Grack knew that was not true”

Flynn prosecution case unraveling?, Supplemental status report September 30, 2019, US v. Rafiekian, “Mr. Van Grack knew that was not true”

“Given the material defense counsel has requested, which remains outstanding, Mr. Van Grack’s denial that further Brady material exists is patently absurd. It demonstrates arrogance and utter contempt for the letter and the spirit of this Court’s explicit order, the rule of Brady v. Maryland, and the protections guaranteed to defendants by the U.S. Constitution.”…US v. Flynn motion to compel production of Brady Material 

“Prosecutors Brandon Van Grack of the Justice Department’s national security division, who was formerly on Mr. Mueller’s team, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Curtis, of Washington, provided little explanation as to why they were not turning over the transcripts.”…Pittsburgh Post-Gazette June 1, 2019

“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells

 

United States v. Michael T. Flynn

Supplemental Status Report

September 30, 2019.

“At the Court’s request, counsel have previously updated the Court on the status of the case in the Eastern District of Virginia, United States v. Rafiekian, No. 1:18-cr-00457, in which Mr. Flynn was a cooperating witness. As described in Dkt. 98, Mr. Flynn cooperated with the government in multiple additional witness preparation sessions for more than 30 hours, waived
attorney-client privilege on many issues, provided documents and substantial cooperation—until the government decided at the last minute not to use him as a witness.

On September 24, 2019, Judge Anthony Trenga of the Eastern District of Virginia granted Mr. Rafiekian’s motion for acquittal in its entirety. In a thorough 39-page opinion (attached), Judge Trenga acquitted him on one count of conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C §371 and one count of acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government in violation of 18 U.S.C. §951.
Rafiekian, at Dkt. 372.

The government changed its tack as to Mr. Flynn when he would not testify exactly as the government demanded. It suddenly claimed it needed to name him as a coconspirator to admit one piece of evidence for which it already had another means of admission. Judge Trenga wrote:

On July 3, 2019, the Government filed a Notice of Correction to the Record [], in
which it advised the Court that it no longer planned to call Flynn as a witness in its case in chief. The Government also took the position for the first time, contrary to its earlier in-court statements, that Flynn was regarded as a co-conspirator and that it would seek to have his out-of-court statements introduced pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(E).
Id. at 11.

Yet, “neither the original nor superseding indictment in this case references Flynn as a member of the alleged conspiracy or as an agent of the Turkish government; and in response to the Court’s explicit questioning, the Government stated in open court that Flynn, who it planned to call as a witness, was not a member of the charged conspiracy and that it would not rely upon
his testimony to establish the foundation for the admission of Alptekin’s hearsay statements.” Id.

As to the substantive counts, Judge Trenga held that “[t]he Government [] failed to offer substantial evidence from which any rational juror could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Rafiekian knowingly acted and caused others to act in the United States as an agent of a foreign government without proper notification to the Attorney General in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 951.”
Id. at 25. The court’s analysis made clear that there was “no substantial evidence that Rafiekian agreed to operate subject to the direction or control of the Turkish government.” Id.

The court determined that even though the government contended that “the payments made to FIG from Inovo and from FIG to Alptekin allow[ed] the inference that Rafiekian was acting as an agent of the Turkish government or that Alptekin was acting as the agent of Turkey in retaining
FIG,” there was “no evidence, direct or otherwise, sufficient to reasonably infer that Turkey funded the engagement of FIG, or that the engagement was not in fact funded by a group of Turkish businessmen, as Rafiekian stated consistently throughout.” Id. at 28.

Further, the court held, id. at 33, that “[t]he Government [had not] presented sufficient evidence for a rational jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Rafiekian conspired with Alptekin or anyone else to violate 22 U.S.C. § 618(a)(2), and that “[t]here [wa]s no evidence of discussion or suggestions, let alone an agreement, express or implied, to either avoid filing under FARA or to cause the filing of a false FARA registration statement.” (emphasis added).

The government’s own timeline failed to support its theory of the case:

[t]he superseding indictment alleges that the alleged conspiracy began from at least July 2016; but the DOJ did not even raise the specter of a need for a FARA filing until its letter to Flynn dated November 30, 2016 (which did not become known to Flynn until December 24, 2016), by which time FIG had ceased operations and was not performing any work for Inovo or anyone else.”
Id. at 34.

Ultimately, according to the court, the government’s case rested on unsupported assumptions:

The Government claims ‘the three co-conspirators [Rafiekian, Flynn, and Alptekin] again gave substantially identical explanations [in the FARA filings] that the jury plainly deemed false and used as further evidence of a concerted agreement to lie.’. . . But that contention ignores the lack of evidence to establish the presumed conspiracy, or any agreement, among these three individuals concerning the FARA filing, as discussed above.

Id.

Judge Trenga also granted, in the alternative, a motion for new trial, against the (highly unlikely) possibility that his primary ruling of acquittal would be reversed or vacated. Upon further analysis, he realized the “jury was not adequately instructed as to the role of Michael Flynn in light of the government’s in-court judicial admission that Flynn was not a member of the alleged
conspiracy and the lack of evidence sufficient to establish his participation in any conspiracy; and there was a substantial danger that the jury drew inferences against Rafiekian with respect to the existence of and his participation in the alleged conspiracy based on a belief that Flynn could be regarded as a member of the alleged conspiracy.” Id. at 36-37.

Finally, the court underscored the need to fulfill the scienter requirement, which burden the government had not carried, holding that “the mens rea requirement under this general intent statute required the government to prove that the defendant knew he was acting in a manner not authorized by statute or regulation.” Id. at 37.1

Remarkably, the government did not indict the specious Rafiekian case until more than a year after the Flynn indictment—just a few days before Mr. Flynn was to be sentenced in this Court—when the government was concerned that Mr. Flynn would withdraw his plea.

Even more troubling, Mr. Van Grack was determined that Mr. Flynn would testify in the Rafiekian case that he had knowingly signed a false FARA registration, even though Mr. Van Grack knew that was not true and Mr. Flynn had not agreed to that in the course of his plea agreement. Mr. Flynn’s refusal to get on the witness stand and lie for the government on that point prompted a heated tirade from Mr. Van Grack with Mr. Flynn’s lead counsel, in which Mr. Van Grack claimed Mr. Flynn had agreed to plead to a knowing and intentional false FARA filing. Dkt. 98-1.

In our endless document review, we now have a draft of the statement of offense that proves the contrary, showing similar language deleted. The absence of that language from the statement of offense or any charge of a false filing did not deter Mr. Van Grack from doubling down.
Enraged that Mr. Flynn reject their demand to lie, the prosecutors in the EDVA (Mr. James Gillis, Mr. Evan Turgeon, and Mr. John Gibbs, with Mr. Van Grack’s oversight) retaliated with an ex parte gag order and sealed filing on July 3. For the first time, the prosecutors claimed that Mr. Flynn was a co-conspirator. They put Michael Flynn Jr. on the witness list for the Rafiekian trial.

They even had FBI Agent Taylor contact the latter directly, despite knowing he was represented by counsel. See Dkt 246 in EDVA; Dkt. 95 in this Court.

In sum, however, the entire prosecution failed for lack of evidence of any conspiracy or anyone acting as a foreign agent. As Judge Trenga wrote: “the Government has failed to offer substantial evidence . . . that Rafiekian knowingly acted and caused others to act . . . as an agent of a foreign government,” and there was “no evidence Rafiekian agreed to operate subject to the
direction or control of Turkey,” and “no competent evidence . . . Alptekin acted as the type of ‘intermediary’ [as] the Government contend[ed].” Op. at 25.”

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.121.0.pdf

 

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/