Lots of things going on in/around the two legal cases involving Michael Flynn today. The origination of the DOJ shift in position involves the indirect case (EDVA) where Flynn is/was a witness in the FARA (Foreign Agent Registration Act) case against Bijan Rafiekian and the Flynn Intel Group.
Hat Tip to Techno-Fog for a litany of legal filings assembled today [132 pages here]. This is somewhat complex to explain.
The direct case against Flynn (Judge Sullivan court – Washington DC), where Flynn copped a guilty plea for lying to FBI investigators, has a sentencing predicated on Flynn’s ongoing cooperation in the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) case against Bijan Rafiekian and FIG (Flynn Intel Group). However, in a stunning move today the DOJ prosecuting Rafiekian now says it will not call Flynn as a witness; and further the DOJ state they now consider Flynn an “unindicted co-conspirator”.
From court filings (on behalf of Flynn) we find the reason. Michael Flynn refused a demand by the DOJ to testify that the Flynn Group FARA filing was completed with knowingly false information and contained “false statements”.
Michael Flynn refused to testify to this DOJ construct because the claim was not true.
Michael Flynn and his lawyers say there was no intentional filing of false information in the Flynn Group FARA submissions; and the FARA forms were submitted based on legal advice provided for their completion. If there were mistakes in the FARA filing, they were not falsehoods and/or mistakes made purposefully or with purposeful intent.
When Flynn agreed to the plea for lying, he was agreeing with hindsight and accepting the government position that some of the material in the FARA submission was false. However, Flynn did not admit that anything was intentionally false, but rather an outcome of mistakes made within a process that relied on legal advice.
(Source – pg 6)
It is worth noting here that Flynn lawyers call out former DOJ-NSD Official David Laufman for pressuring Flynn to sign the FARA submission; a FARA submission the DOJ would later claim contained false information.
The DOJ prosecutors wanted Flynn to say that he, the group and Bijan Rafiekian, knew the information on the FARA submissions was false. Flynn refused; and would not testify to that falsehood in the case. As a result the DOJ retaliated against Flynn by changing his position to a “co-conspirator” and cancelling his testimony.
The DOJ prosecutors don’t want Flynn to testify (no longer want his cooperation) because his testimony would undercut the foundation of their case against Bijan Rafiekian.
Here’s Flynn’s Filing:
.
So with Flynn’s cooperation now at issue in the secondary EDVA case, in the primary case against Flynn himself, Judge Sullivan (Washington, DC) wants some answers:
BACK TO EDVA – The lawyers for Bijan Rafiekian, also filed motions to dismiss the DOJ indictment based on the prosecutors inability to prove the Flynn Intel Group knowingly acted on behalf of the Turkish government.
Essentially Rafiekian is arguing the Flynn group were hired and advocating for private interests and they had no reason to belief the Turkish government was behind the contract. This is the essential underpin for the FARA registration. If the Flynn Group didn’t know they were contracted by a foreign government, they wouldn’t know how to fill out the FARA forms.
Here’s where it gets interesting and a picture starts to emerge. It is possible, very possible, the DOJ-NSD using their legally authorized database and surveillance access, knew the background principals behind the Flynn Group contract were members of the Turkish Government. [DOJ-NSD head David Laufman knew] However, Flynn, Rafiekian and their lawyers did not know; and therefore signed a FARA submission that was later shown to be false.
Yes, Laufman -representing the DOJ- knowingly pressured Flynn to sign a FARA submission while withholding evidence the DOJ would later use to prove the FARA submission contained materially false information. That’s how it looks.
The same David Laufman who sat in on the Clinton email interview. The same David Laufman who was FBI official Monica McLean’s lawyer when things got sketchy about her work with “beach friend” Christine Blasey-Ford…
… Yes, THAT David Laufman.
♦ In a late breaking development, Judge Anthony Trenga (EDVA) ruled the DOJ has not presented evidence sufficient to establish “evidence of a conspiracy” for the purposes of admitting the hearsay statements of alleged co-conspirator (Flynn).
TECHNO: “Notably absent” from the DOJ’s proffer is “any evidence… that Flynn… has admitted that he made certain false statements in the FARA filing” that was part of the alleged conspiracy.
(Source)
TECHNO: “the FARA statement and related filings do not reflect the existence of the alleged conspiracy to act as undisclosed Turkish agents”
TECHNO: Turkey funding – the US didn’t have the evidence. “the US may not argue or state to the jury that Turkey … funded the work by Flynn Intel Group under the contractual agreement”
Here’s the EDVA Ruling:
.
Bear with me…
Here’s what I THINK is going on…. Keep in mind we saw this in 2016, and we warned about something weird going on in the background, but we did not know what it was.
Now we have hindsight to overlay with our CTH warnings in late 2016 (Oct/Nov).
I suspect the DOJ-NSD knew Flynn was lobbying for clients closely related to the Turkish government. I suspect Flynn was already under Title-3 surveillance (confirmed by Mueller report) and this lobbying issue likely became the legal predicate for a Flynn Title-1 FISA warrant. [Go Deep To See] That 2016 FISA warrant, likely approved by FISA Judge Rudy Contreras, allowed the DOJ-NSD -via FBI (Strzok)- to launch a counterintelligence investigation into the people who hired Flynn as a lobbyist.
If my suspicion is correct, in addition to the larger surveillance issues upon Flynn, the DOJ-NSD knew the people who contracted Flynn and Rafiekian were a ‘front‘ for senior Turkish officials (not withstanding possible WH coordination).
(See Page 132 – Flynn Docs)
So when Flynn was confronted by DOJ-NSD head David Laufman, he was being *interviewed* by a DOJ official who knew more about the contract initiator than Flynn did. The DOJ-NSD and David Laufman was involved because manipulating FARA violations was the method to conduct surveillance (SEE HERE).
David Laufman then pressured Flynn in January 2017 to sign the FARA submission, knowing it contained material that was false, but unbeknownst to Flynn. This later became the predicate for the FARA case against Flynn and Rafiekian.
However, there’s a twist as highlighted by the Judge Trenga order.
The DOJ (Laufman first) knew the background of the FARA filing was false because they had conducted a FISA Title-1 investigation prior to the Flynn FARA submission; and the DOJ (Mueller team now in 2017) knew the Turkish government was behind the lobbying contract…..
….But the DOJ cannot tell the court how they knew the lobbying contract was from the Turkish government, because they didn’t want to reveal the FISA surveillance; AND the DOJ may have an additional interest in hiding their knowledge of their origination of the lobbying contract by the Turkish government,… because it might have been somewhat coordinated by the Obama White House (pro-brotherhood, and pro-Erdogan).
See the issue?
Slimy bastards.
