US v Michael Flynn update April 24, 2020, More delays by US attorneys and former counsel, 100 pages of text and more than 500 pages of partly redacted
“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
And I’ve now found a witness who says the original 302 did in fact say that Flynn was honest with the agents.”...Attorney Sidney Powell
“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
*** Update See Below ***
From Citizen Wells April 10, 2020.
“Covington & Burling LLP (“Covington”) submits this Supplemental Notice to provide information to the Court about the transfer of the case file to successor counsel.”
“In reviewing materials in response to the Court’s March 6, 2020 Order (Doc. 174) to respond to Mr. Flynn’s specific allegations in his Supplemental Motion to Withdraw Plea of Guilty (Doc. 160), however, we have found emails and two pages of handwritten notes that were not previously transferred to successor counsel. With respect to the emails, this appears to have resulted from errors in the process of collecting and searching electronic materials that were not contained in the working case file. The two pages of notes appear to have been inadvertently missed during the file transfer process. Today, we made a supplemental transfer to Mr. Flynn’s current counsel of the emails and notes identified to date as not having been transferred previously. We are in the process of working with our information technology personnel, as
expeditiously as possible, to determine what other materials were not captured by the prior electronic searches and to collect and transfer them promptly to Mr. Flynn’s current counsel. We will apprise the Court when this is completed and will provide any further information that the Court requires.”
Today April 24, 2020 we learn.
The United States of America, by and through the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, files this status report. On February 27, 2020, the Court ordered the parties to file a joint proposed order setting forth the terms of the waiver of the attorney-client privilege and the authorization of disclosure of information with respect to Mr. Flynn’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims by no later than 12:00 PM on March 6, 2020. On March 6, the parties filed a Joint
Stipulation and submitted a joint proposed Order, consistent with the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.6, proposing that Covington and Burling, LLP (“Covington”) be ordered to take all actions reasonably necessary to respond to defendant Flynn’s specific allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel. The Court issued this Order on the afternoon of March 6, 2020. On April 3, 2020, the Court ordered the government to provide a status report
informing the Court of the status of the production from Covington & Burling LLP or, if feasible, proposing a briefing schedule, by no later than 12 p.m. on April 24, 2020.
As required by the Court’s Order of March 6, Covington has provided to the government five timely and substantial productions of documents “reasonably necessary” to respond to the “specific allegations” made by the defendant in his motions to withdraw his plea. On April 23, 2020, Covington provided the government with signed declarations from four Covington attorneys. The government promptly produced these declarations to defense counsel; in total, the declarations comprise more than 100 pages of text and more than 500 pages of partly-redacted exhibits.1
The declarations are detailed, and span numerous topics that arose during Covington’s 30-month representation of Mr. Flynn. The government needs additional time to review these declarations and to determine whether it needs to conduct any interviews of Covington personnel or to seek additional declarations or supporting documents. Should any issues arise that the government and Covington are unable to resolve, the government will file a motion with the Court,along with any relevant declarations and exhibits, for resolution.
In order to allow the government adequate time to review the declarations and exhibits that have been produced by Covington and to conduct any additional inquiries, the government respectfully asks this Court to allow the government two additional weeks to provide a further status update and, if feasible, a proposed briefing schedule.
Wherefore the government asks this Court to order it to provide a further status update and, if feasible, a proposed briefing schedule, no later than 12 p.m. on May 8, 2020.”
*** Update 6:00 PM ***
Attorney Sidney Powell filed the following today April 24, 2020.
“SUPPLEMENT TO MR. FLYNN’S MOTION TO DISMISS
FOR EGREGIOUS GOVERNMENT MISCONDUCT
On January 29, 2020, Michael T. Flynn (“Mr. Flynn”) submitted his Motion to Dismiss for Egregious Government Misconduct and in the Interest of Justice. ECF No. 162. Mr. Flynn now files this brief Supplement to his Motion to Dismiss for Government Misconduct. This afternoon, the government produced to Mr. Flynn stunning Brady evidence that proves Mr. Flynn’s allegations of having been deliberately set up and framed by corrupt agents at the top of the FBI.
It also defeats any argument that the interview of Mr. Flynn on January 24, 2017 was material to any “investigation.” The government has deliberately suppressed this evidence from the inception of this prosecution—knowing there was no crime by Mr. Flynn.
In addition, Mr. Flynn’s counsel has found further evidence of misconduct by Mr. Van Grack specifically. Not only did he make baseless threats to indict Michael G. Flynn, he made a side deal not to prosecute Michael G. Flynn as a material term of the plea agreement, but he required that it be kept secret between himself and the Covington attorneys expressly to avoid the
requirement of Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972). Exs. 1, 2.
Since August 2016 at the latest, partisan FBI and DOJ leaders conspired to destroy Mr. Flynn. These documents show in their own handwriting and emails that they intended either to create an offense they could prosecute or at least get him fired. Then came the incredible malfeasance of Mr. Van Grack’s and the SCO’s prosecution despite their knowledge there was no crime by Mr. Flynn. All this new evidence, and the government has advised there is more to come,
proves that the crimes were committed by the FBI officials and then the prosecutors. The government’s misconduct in this case is beyond shocking and reprehensible. It mandates dismissal.
Furthermore, this Court should order the government immediately to provide the defense with unredacted copies of the documents in Exhibit 3, filed under seal. Those documents were
filed under seal solely in an abundance of caution because the government produced them under the protective order, and we request that they be unsealed. Consequently, Mr. Flynn is filing Exhibit 3 to this Supplement contemporaneously and asks that the Court promptly unseal the document.
This case is a shameful blight on the American justice system. “The first duties of the officers of the law are to prevent, not to punish crime. It is not their duty to incite to and create crime for the sole purpose of prosecuting and punishing it. . . [I]t is unconscionable, contrary to public policy, and to the established law of the land to punish a man for the commission of an offense of the like of which he had never been guilty, either in thought or in deed, and evidently never would have been guilty of if the officers of the law had not inspired, incited, persuaded, and
lured him to attempt to commit it.” Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435, 444-45 (1932) (quoting Butts v. United States, 273 F. 35, 38 (8th Cir. 1921)).
For the reasons above, and those previously briefed, this Court must dismiss this concocted prosecution of General Flynn in full recognition of the travesty of justice that it is.”