История победителей

[tijd]

Утверждая, что "история пишется победителями", Билл Барр пересказывает Германа Геринга на Нюрнбергском процессе: "Der Sieger wird immer der Richter und der Besiegte stets der Angeklagte sein".

Barr is paraphrasing Nazi Hermann Göring in the Nuremberg trials:
“The victor will always be the judge, and the vanquished the accused.”

Note that the Attorney General and DOJ hold the power to swing a close election and pick the winner. https://t.co/axbqfyYaGD
- Jed Shugerman (@jedshug) May 8, 2020

It is unsurprising @realDonaldTrump enjoys wallowing in his fetid self-indulgence, but I find it surreal that so many other government officials encourage his ignorance, incompetence, & destructive behavior.

BTW, history will be written by the righteous, not by his lickspittle.
- John O. Brennan (@JohnBrennan) May 9, 2020

Барр два раза вмешался в правосудие совершенно беспрецедентным образом: чтобы скостить срок Роджеру Стоуну и чтобы снять обвинение с Майкла Флинна. В обоих случаях он использовал своего помощника, Тимоти Шиа, которого в обход Конгресса поставил исполнять обязанности федерального прокурора в Вашингтоне. До этого Шиа помогал Барру замять скандал с самоубийством Эпштейна.

Attorney General William Barr on Thursday named Timothy Shea, one of his closest advisers, to be the next top prosecutor in the nation’s capital.
Shea will lead the largest U.S. attorney’s office in the country, which has been historically responsible for some of the most significant and politically sensitive cases the Justice Department brings in the U.S.
He is a senior counselor to the attorney general and was Barr’s right-hand man helping institute reforms at the federal Bureau of Prisons after Jeffrey Epstein’s death at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City. <...>
In the wake of Epstein’s death, Barr and Shea worked hand-in-hand to manage the crisis and investigation into the circumstances surrounding the wealthy financier’s death. Shea visited the jail days after Epstein’s suicide and helped advise the attorney general as Barr shook up the agency’s leadership, removing its acting director.
https://apnews.com/940f5fb382a31399544429a700e56385



Предыдущего прокурора, Джесси Лиу, отстранили якобы в связи с переводом на другую работу. По правилам она должна была продолжать исполнять обязанности прокурора до тех пор, пока Сенат не утвердил ее на новую должность. Но Барр спешил и не стал этого дожидаться. В итоге Трамп отозвал назначение Лиу, и она осталась ни с чем, а на важном для Барра и Трампа прокурорском месте оказался верный цепной пес Шиа.

The U.S. attorney who had presided over an inconclusive criminal investigation into former acting FBI director Andrew McCabe was abruptly removed from the job last month in one of several recent moves by Attorney General William Barr to take control of legal matters of personal interest to President Donald Trump, according to multiple people familiar with the matter.
A person familiar with the matter confirmed to NBC News that Trump has rescinded the nomination of Jessie Liu, who had been the U.S. attorney for Washington, D.C., for a job as an undersecretary at the Treasury Department. <...>
Barr named Timothy Shea as interim U.S. attorney for Washington on Jan. 30. His announcement noted that it's the largest U.S. attorney's office in the country and highlighted Shea's "reputation as a fair prosecutor."
It didn't mention that Liu had been unceremoniously pushed out. Liu had been picked for a job in the Treasury Department, and normally she would have remained as U.S. attorney until the Senate voted on her nomination, current and former officials said. Trump has now rescinded her nomination to be undersecretary for terrorism and financial crimes.
The change in the Flynn sentencing recommendation, coming in the midst of Trump's impeachment trial, got less attention than it might have.
On Jan. 7, after Flynn moved to withdraw his guilty plea, prosecutors in the case recommended a sentence that included possible jail time. Their original recommendation was probation, given that Flynn had cooperated in special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation.
But, people familiar with the matter said, senior Justice Department officials pressured prosecutors to reverse course. On Jan. 29, the government filed a new document with the court saying a sentence of probation was "reasonable."
The next day, Barr announced the appointment of Shea, a former federal prosecutor.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1135231

Initially it wasn't clear that Liu's nomination was pulled due to the handling of the politically sensitive cases, but CNN has now confirmed it was. Trump made the final decision to pull the nomination two days before her scheduled confirmation hearing.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/12/politics/jessie-liu-treasury-nomination-roger-stone/index.html



Перед своим бесцеремонным отстранением Лиу под давлением Барра безуспешно пыталась возбудить уголовное дело в отношении Эндрю Маккейба, но присяжные Большого жюри не увидели в его действиях состава преступления, и расследование было закрыто.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) will no longer pursue criminal charges against former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, closing a high-profile case against the former official whose conduct during the 2016 election came under intense scrutiny.
"We write to inform you that, after careful consideration, the Government has decided not to pursue criminal charges against your client, Andrew G. McCabe, arising from the referral by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) to our Office of conduct,” wrote two officials from the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office. "Based on the totality of the circumstances and all of the information known to the Government at this time, we consider the matter closed."
https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/483119-doj-wont-charge-former-fbi-deputy-director-andrew-mccabe

Маккейб судит министерство юстиции за незаконное увольнение.

Andrew McCabe, the ousted deputy director of the FBI, says the Trump administration is withholding evidence related to his lawsuit. McCabe sued the FBI and the Department of Justice after he was fired in March 2018 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions just two days before he was set to retire.
McCabe's attorney, Murad Hussain, filed a declaration on Tuesday claiming that several agencies and 30 individuals - including current FBI Director Chris Wray, Attorney General William Barr and Mr. Trump - have yet to hand over any materials requested as part of his lawsuit against his former employer.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/former-fbi-deputy-director-andrew-mccabe-says-doj-is-withholding-evidence-related-to-lawsuit-against-former-employer/

В судебном иске говорится:

"Trump demanded Plaintiff’s personal allegiance, he sought retaliation when Plaintiff refused to give it, and Sessions, Wray, and others served as Trump’s personal enforcers rather than the nation’s highest law enforcement officials, catering to Trump’s unlawful whims instead of honoring their oaths to uphold the Constitution. Were it not for Trump’s plan and scheme and the complicity of Defendants and other Executive Branch subordinates, Plaintiff would have otherwise been permitted to retire as he had long planned."
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6446515/McCabe-Complaint.pdf

A pleasure to meet, by phone, Simone Ledeen, the new DAS for the Middle East at the @DeptofDefense. We look forward to continuing the partnership between the Peshmerga and US military in the fight against ISIS at this time of new challenges. https://t.co/wuWbf8MrJi pic.twitter.com/S1iUrVLpPo
- Bayan Sami Rahman (@BayanRahman) April 30, 2020

Донос на прокурора Джесси Лиу для Трампа подготовила Барбара Ледин, персонаж отчета Мюллера и соучастник деятельности Флинна по попыткам контакта с российскими хакерами.

Shortly before withdrawing the nomination of the former D.C. U.S. attorney for a top Treasury role, the president reviewed a memo on Liu's alleged misdeeds, according to a source with direct knowledge.
Ledeen wrote the memo, and its findings left a striking impression on Trump, per sources with direct knowledge. Ledeen declined to comment.
A source with direct knowledge of the memo's contents said it contained 14 sections building a case for why Liu was unfit for the job for which Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin selected her, including: <...>
- Signing "the sentencing filing asking for jail time" for Gen. Michael Flynn (a friend of Ledeen's). <...>
- Not indicting former deputy director of the FBI Andrew McCabe.
https://www.axios.com/trump-memos-deep-state-white-house-ce5be95f-2418-433d-b036-2bf41c9700c3.html

Ныне дочка печально известного семейства Лединых назначена в Пентагона ответственной за Ближний Восток. Мечты Флинна и его соавтора о новой священной войне приближаются к осуществлению.

Ledeen had worked in Afghanistan with Gen. Michael Flynn, who would become scourge of the Obama administration and later President Trump’s first, short-lived national security advisor. Simone Ledeen’s advisory role to Flynn would overlap with that of her father’s. Michael Ledeen would go on to co-author Flynn’s first book, The Field of Fight: How We Can Win the Global War Against Radical Islam and its Allies, released in the heady days of summer 2016. I read it at the time and the book is a real page-turner, because it’s hard to look away from unproven assertions that “the war is on,” as Flynn and Leedeen write, “We face a working coalition that extends from North Korea and China to Russia, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Bolivia, Venezuela and Nicaragua.”
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/state-of-the-union/the-curious-ascension-of-simone-ledeen/



Руками своего бывшего помощника, а ныне и.о. федерального прокурора Барр сделал два шага, которые юристы находят совершенно беспрецедентными и выходящими за рамки закона: написал обращения в суд об урезании срока Роджеру Стоуну и о снятии обвинения с Майкла Флинна. Прокуроры, которые вели дело, отказались подписывать эти бумаги и ушли в самоотвод, либо уволились.

Тысячи бывших работников министерства юстиции в администрациях как демократических, так и республиканских президентов подписали коллективное письмо:

“Mr. Barr’s actions in doing the President’s personal bidding unfortunately speak louder than his words. Those actions, and the damage they have done to the Department of Justice’s reputation for integrity and the rule of law, require Mr. Barr to resign. But because we have little expectation he will do so, it falls to the Department’s career officials to take appropriate action to uphold their oaths of office and defend nonpartisan, apolitical justice.”
https://medium.com/@dojalumni/doj-alumni-statement-on-the-events-surrounding-the-sentencing-of-roger-stone-c2cb75ae4937

Попытка повлиять на приговор Стоуну не имела прямого действия - в суд пришел карьерный прокурор и сказал, что согласен с изначальной командой прокуроров. Судья скостила срок, но подчеркнула, что делает это независимо от Барра и не находит никаких нарушений в действиях прокуроров, ушедших в отставку из-за несогласия с ним.

Crabb: There was nothing in bad faith with the initial prosecution team’s recommendation.

ABJ: It’s not about bad faith. It was fully consistent with current DOJ policy, wasn’t that true?

Crabb: Yes
- Andrew Prokop (@awprokop) February 20, 2020

IN SUM:

-DOJ calls for 7-9 years for Stone.
-Barr intervenes (and Trump tweets)
-DOJ reverses, calling for lesser sentence
-Stone prosecutors quit case
-New prosecutors re-reverse, argue for 7-9 years; won't say who ordered 1st reversal; defend prosecutors who quit.
- Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) February 20, 2020

In court, however, prosecutor John Crabb, who'd signed the memo asking for a lighter sentence, advocated for the higher sentencing guidelines in the original recommendation. He also apologized to the judge for any confusion caused by the dueling memos.
Crabb said the confusion was not caused by the original trial team, which, he said, had authorization from the U.S. attorney for Washington to file the original sentencing memo. He said the issue was miscommunication between Barr and the U.S. attorney's office in Washington.
"DOJ and the U.S. attorney's office is committed to enforcing the law without fear, favor or political influence," Crabb said.
Trump has lambasted the original prosecutors for unfairly targeting Stone, calling their conduct "disgusting."
Jackson defended the four, who resigned from the case after their sentencing recommendation was overridden.
"Any suggestion that the prosecutors in this case did anything untoward or unethical is incorrect," Jackson said. While she disagreed with its recommended sentence, Jackson said "the government's initial memorandum was thorough, well-researched and supported" by the record.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/trump-associate-roger-stone-sentenced-3-years-4-months-prison-n1138516



Но цель Барра была, по всей видимости, в другом - послать сигнал Стоуну, что о нем не забыли, а продолжают заботиться наверху. Это делалось не из солидарности к бывшему товарищу, а для прикрытия Трампа. Есть все основания полагать, что Трамп врал в показаниях Мюллеру, когда речь шла о разговорах со Стоуном про сливы Викиликс. Важно, чтобы Стоун продолжал держать язык за зубами об этих разговорах и втихомолку ждать президентского помилования.

Mr. Trump wrote that he was “not aware during the campaign of any communications” between “any one I understood to be a representative of WikiLeaks” and people associated with his campaign. Mr. Stone was convicted last week of lying to congressional investigators about his efforts to reach out to WikiLeaks and his discussions with the campaign.
“I do not recall discussing WikiLeaks with him,” Mr. Trump also wrote of Mr. Stone, “nor do I recall being aware of Mr. Stone having discussed WikiLeaks with individuals associated with my campaign.”
But the publicly available portions of the Mueller report suggest that evidence exists to the contrary. Several Trump aides, including Michael D. Cohen and Rick Gates, testified that they heard Mr. Trump discussing coming WikiLeaks releases over the phone.
And in October 2016 Stephen K. Bannon, the campaign chairman, wrote in an email that Mr. Stone had told the campaign “about potential future releases of damaging material” by WikiLeaks shortly before it began publishing more hacked emails.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/18/us/politics/trump-mueller-impeachment.html

Through his attorneys, Trump was asked by Mueller’s team whether he knew about WikiLeaks’s releases in advance. He claimed not to recall any conversations with Stone about upcoming releases.
At Stone’s trial, prosecutors made clear what they saw as his motivation for lying to Congress and, later, pressuring Credico not to testify honestly about their interactions.
“The evidence in this case will show that Roger Stone lied to the House Intelligence Committee because the truth looked bad for the Trump campaign and the truth looked bad for Donald Trump,” prosecutor Aaron Zelinsky said during his opening statement.
At the conclusion of the trial, prosecutor Jonathan Kravis echoed that sentiment.
“He knew that if the truth came out about what he was doing in 2016, it would look terrible,” he said. “Roger Stone knew that if this information came out, it would look really bad for his longtime associate Donald Trump.”
Zelinsky and Kravis are two of the four members of the prosecutorial team who resigned their positions Tuesday after Trump called for a lighter sentence for Stone.
It is clearly the case that Stone’s false statements were aimed at protecting Trump, to at least some extent. He testified before the House Intelligence Committee on Sept. 26, 2017, a few months after Trump had fired FBI Director James B. Comey and Mueller had been appointed to consider whether Trump’s campaign had coordinated with Russia’s efforts to interfere with the 2016 campaign. By denying his own contacts with WikiLeaks during the hearing, Stone prevented the public from knowing about a possible connection between Trump and that Russian effort.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/12/we-know-what-roger-stone-did-mr-president-he-lied-your-defense/

“I will never testify against Trump.” This statement was recently made by Roger Stone, essentially stating that he will not be forced by a rogue and out of control prosecutor to make up lies and stories about “President Trump.” Nice to know that some people still have “guts!”
- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 3, 2018

TRUMP: "I learned a lot from Richard Nixon -- don't fire people. I learned a lot. I study history ... of course there was one big difference: Number one he may have been guilty and number two he had tapes all over the place." pic.twitter.com/wgzKCumavL
- Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 8, 2020

Не нужно напоминать, что давление на свидетеля - серьезное преступление (до 20 лет тюрьмы) и именно за такое давление Стоун получил нешуточный срок.

Подобные же соображения действуют в случае Флинна. Трамп тупо отказался отвечать на вопросы Мюллера про переговоры Флинна с Кисляком, потому что в это время у Флинна было соглашение о сотрудничестве со следствием, и Трамп не знал, что именно Флинн сообщил Мюллеру.

SPECIAL COUNSEL’S OFFICE:
b. Following the Obama Administration’s imposition of sanctions on Russia in December 2016 (“Russia sanctions”), did you discuss with Lieutenant General (LTG) Michael Flynn, K.T. McFarland, Steve Bannon, Reince Priebus, Jared Kushner, Erik Prince, or anyone else associated with the transition what should be communicated to the Russian government regarding the sanctions? If yes, describe who you spoke with about this issue, when, and the substance of the discussion(s).
c. On December 29 and December 31, 2016, LTG Flynn had conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about the Russia sanctions and Russia’s response to the Russia sanctions.
i. Did you direct or suggest that LTG Flynn have discussions with anyone from the Russian government about the Russia sanctions?
ii. Were you told in advance of LTG Flynn’s December 29, 2016 conversation that he was going to be speaking with Ambassador Kislyak? If yes, describe who told you this information, when, and what you were told. If no, when and from whom did you learn of LTG Flynn’s December 29, 2016 conversation with Ambassador Kislyak?
iii. When did you learn of LTG Flynn and Ambassador Kislyak’s call on December 31, 2016? Who told you and what were you told?
iv. When did you learn that sanctions were discussed in the December 29 and December 31, 2016 calls between LTG Flynn and Ambassador Kislyak? Who told you and what were you told?
d. At any time between December 31, 2016, and January 20, 2017, did anyone tell you or suggest to you that Russia’s decision not to impose reciprocal sanctions was attributable in any way to LTG Flynn’s communications with Ambassador Kislyak? If yes, identify who provided you with this information, when, and the substance of what you were told.
e. On January 12, 2017, the Washington Post published a column that stated that LTG Flynn phoned Ambassador Kislyak several times on December 29, 2016. After learning of the column, did you direct or suggest to anyone that LTG Flynn should deny that he discussed sanctions with Ambassador Kislyak? If yes, who did you make this suggestion or direction to, when, what did you say, and why did you take this step?
i. After learning of the column, did you have any conversations with LTG Flynn about his conversations with Ambassador Kislyak in December 2016? If yes, describe when those discussions occurred and the content of the discussions.
TRUMP: (No answer provided.)
https://apnews.com/98f22511be924ced895ce5c0bfedfe37

Мы знаем, что во время переговоров с Кисляком Флинн разговаривал как минимум с КТ Макфарланд, которая в это время находилась с Трампом в Маралаго. Макфарланд вместе с Флинном скрывала тот факт, что в переговорах обсуждались санкции, пока не узнала, что у ФБР есть прослушка разговора, после чего изменила свои показания.

Разумно предположить, что, пользуясь безнаказанностью, Флинн, Макфарланд и Трамп продолжают врать про то, что было известно лично Трампу и про инструкции, которые Трамп давал Флинну о санкциях. Беспрецедентный шаг, на который решился Барр, был необходим, чтобы дать очередной сигнал Флинну держать язык за зубами.



Барру пришлось вмешиваться в том числе потому, что напортачила адвокат Флинна. Она послала в суд заявление о том, что Флинн отзывает свое признание вины, потому что сделал его, когда был введен в заблуждение своими предыдущими адвокатами (из уважаемой адвокатской конторы Covington & Burling). Судья потребовал объяснения у прошлых адвокатов, и они его предоставили.

Federal prosecutors are studying more than 100 pages of new written declarations from former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s ex-lawyers as the Justice Department decides how to respond to Flynn’s bid to unwind his guilty plea on the grounds that his old legal team failed to give him proper advice.
In a court filing Friday, prosecutors asked a judge for at least two more weeks to review the formal statements from four of Flynn’s former lawyers at firm Covington & Burling. The declarations arrived Thursday accompanied by over 500 pages of exhibits, prosecutors said.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Jocelyn Ballantine said prosecutors may still decide they need to conduct direct questioning of Flynn’s former lawyers about his attempt to withdraw his guilty plea.
“The declarations are detailed, and span numerous topics that arose during Covington’s 30-month representation of Mr. Flynn,” Ballantine wrote. “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.”
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/24/michael-flynn-ex-lawyers-statements-207025

В судебном разбирательстве могла возникнуть неприятная для Флинна ситуация, когда ему пришлось бы признаваться во вранье под присягой либо когда он признавал вину, либо когда пытался это призвание отозвать.

Understand that from the moment Judge Emmet Sullivan picks up this motion to withdraw his plea, Sullivan will be faced with Flynn claiming he lied, at least once, under oath. Take your pick which one of these statements under oath Flynn now claims to be a lie, but at least one of them necessarily is. And Sullivan has made it clear he plans to put Flynn back under oath to resolve all this.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2020/01/31/mike-flynn-seizes-the-rope-to-hang-himself-with-pick-your-perjury/

The hashtag appears to have gained traction today due to Sidney Powell, Michael Flynn's attorney. Powell has previously retweeted multiple major QAnon accounts, tweeted QAnon language, and appeared on QAnon YouTube shows. https://t.co/AItOII5Cft https://t.co/Q7qaoVtaoB pic.twitter.com/QHuBlEmyRF
- Alex Kaplan (@AlKapDC) April 11, 2020

Шарлатанка, которая ныне трудится адвокатом Флинна, в целом не отличается квалификацией и подвержена заигрыванию с теориями заговора и культом QAnon.

Барру необходимо было срочно вмешаться, пока дело не дошло до суда. В записке об отзыве обвинения Флинну, подписанной Шиа, признается вранье Флинна ФБР, но утверждается, что оно не было преступлением, поскольку не касалось чего-либо существенного (material). Многие комментаторы немедленно указали на полную абсурдность такого заявления.



Рэнделл Элиасон (For more than eight years, Mr. Eliason specialized in white collar crime as a member of the Public Corruption/Government Fraud section. From 1999 to 2001, he served as chief of that section, supervising a staff of eleven AUSA’s prosecuting white collar cases in federal court. https://www.law.gwu.edu/randall-d-eliason):

"The government’s motion to dismiss the case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn is like nothing I’ve ever seen. It’s a political screed dressed up as legal analysis, promoting the “deep state” conspiracy fantasies of President Trump. It epitomizes the politicization of the Justice Department under Attorney General William P. Barr. It is, in the truest sense of the word, lawless.
Flynn pleaded guilty in December 2017 to lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russia’s ambassador to the United States in the weeks leading up to Trump’s inauguration. But in 2019, Flynn hired new lawyers and in January he moved to withdraw his guilty plea and have the case dismissed, alleging government misconduct. Now, after defending the prosecution for more than two years, the Justice Department says it agrees with Flynn after all: He’s an innocent man.
The government claims it can’t prove that Flynn’s lies were material. A conviction on false statements requires materiality, but it’s a very low bar. A lie need only have the potential to influence a government decision. But the Justice Department now says it has concluded there was no legitimate reason for the FBI to interview Flynn and so any lies he told could not possibly be material.
The timeline in the government’s own pleading belies this claim. In early 2017, the FBI was investigating possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russian actors. After initially planning to close the file on Flynn, the FBI learned that January about his conversations with the Russian ambassador the previous month. Based on that new information, agents decided to keep the file open and interview him about those and other contacts. That, the government now says, was improper.
Let’s be clear about what the Justice Department is saying here: If you’re investigating the Trump campaign’s Russia contacts, and learn new information about a former campaign official (and now member of the administration) who recently had Russia contacts, there’s no good reason to talk to him. That claim is absurd on its face."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/08/justice-departments-lawless-reversal-michael-flynn/

Чак Розенберг:

"Had Flynn been asked his favorite ice cream flavor by FBI agents and told them it was vanilla when he preferred chocolate, that would be immaterial. But lying to the FBI about his conversation with a Russian diplomat, given his financial and other ties to Russia, in the wake of massive Russian interference in our 2016 election, and during an FBI counterintelligence investigation concerning Russia? That is material - plain and simple.
Trump calls Flynn a 'great warrior' after DOJ drops charges
Now, in a stunningly dishonest intervention orchestrated by Attorney General William P. Barr, the Justice Department posits that Flynn’s false statements were not material and that the charge to which he pleaded guilty should be dismissed.
So, it might be helpful to make a partial list of those who seemingly thought Flynn’s lies were material just, as they say, for the record:
- President Trump thought Flynn’s lies were material. He fired Flynn in 2017 for lying to Vice President Pence and tweeted that year that he “had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI.” White House chief of staff Reince Priebus, according to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report, recalled that Trump was angry at Flynn for lying about the conversation he had with the Russian diplomat.
- Vice President Pence thought Flynn’s lies were material, stating he knew at the time Flynn was fired that Flynn “lied to me” and that “the president made the right decision [to fire] him.” It seems that Flynn’s lies were material to Trump and Pence.
- Senior Justice Department officials, including acting attorney general Sally Yates and National Security Division Chief Mary McCord, thought Flynn’s lies were material, because, as the Mueller report noted, they were concerned it “[created] a compromise situation for Flynn because … the Russian government could prove Flynn lied.” That, as the report further noted, afforded leverage over Flynn such that Russia “could use that derogatory information to compromise [Flynn].”
- Federal prosecutors detailed to the Special Counsel’s Office thought Flynn’s lies were material. They signed their names to court documents that outlined the facts that supported his guilty plea, including the material false statements Flynn made. That six-page statement of the offense is part of the public record.
- Federal District Judge Rudolph Contreras thought Flynn’s lies were material. Flynn pleaded guilty to the charge of making a material false statement in his courtroom in December 2017. A judge will accept a guilty plea in federal court only if there is a factual basis for it and only if all the elements of the offense are proved. If the judge did not believe the lies were material, he presumably would not have accepted the plea agreement.
- Federal District Judge Emmet Sullivan thought Flynn’s lies were material. Flynn restated his guilty plea in front of Sullivan in December 2018, after the case was transferred to his court. Further, in December 2019, Sullivan noted in a written order that Flynn’s false statements to the FBI were clearly material.
- Flynn’s two original experienced defense attorneys thought Flynn’s lies were material. They signed their names to a plea document, noting that they “concur in [Flynn’s] desire to adopt and stipulate to this Statement of the Offense as true and accurate.”
- Michael Flynn thought his lies were material. He signed his name to a plea agreement “knowingly and voluntarily and because [he was] in fact, guilty of the crime charged.” Flynn stipulated to a filed “Statement of the Offense” and declared “under penalty of perjury that it is true and correct.” That statement - to which Flynn agreed - noted that Flynn “made materially false statements and omissions during an interview with the [FBI] on January 24, 2017” and then spelled out, in detail, those false material statements. Flynn pleaded guilty in front of one federal judge, maintained his guilty plea in front of a second federal judge and, while under oath, twice admitted that he lied and that his lies were material."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/10/long-list-people-who-thought-flynns-lies-were-material/



Судья Салливан известен непредсказуемостью, и никто не берется предсказать, каким образом он в данном случае рассудит. Но опций у него немного.

Judge Sullivan, who still presides over Mr. Flynn’s case, has three important lines of inquiry available to him. First, he can examine why the highly regarded former prosecutor of Mr. Flynn withdrew from the case moments before the Justice Department’s astonishing filing. Last year, after the Supreme Court essentially held that the Trump administration had lied about the census and several Justice Department attorneys attempted to withdraw from the case, the presiding federal judge refused and began an inquiry into the attorneys’ withdrawal. A similar inquiry is appropriate here.
Second, the judge can examine the department’s reasoning and inquire into whether it is legally sound, including through on-the-record hearings. And finally, the judge can reject the Justice Department’s request to drop the charges “with prejudice.” Granting the request would mean that no future Justice Department could rethink the matter and revive the charges. There’s no reason for the judge to grant that. If he doesn’t see any wrongdoing by earlier investigators and prosecutors - and he hasn’t so far - then he can allow the charges to be dropped without prejudice. That way, it’s possible that a future Justice Department could take another look.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/08/opinion/michael-flynn-trump-barr.html

В любом случае его действия помогут установить правду.

From William Barr's 1991 Senate confirmation hearing: "Nothing could be more destructive of our system of government, of the rule of law, or Department of Justice as an institution, than any toleration of political interference with the enforcement of the law." pic.twitter.com/9AQDtvMExQ
- CSPAN (@cspan) December 7, 2018

BARR: "It's the AG's responsibility to enforce the law evenhandedly. The AG must ensure that the enforcement of the law is above politics. Nothing could be more destructive of the rule of law than any toleration of political interference with the enforcement of the law." pic.twitter.com/oAGGNwiKCd
- Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 15, 2019

Почему я это так подробно разбираю? Среди " четырех коней Апокалипсиса" - угроз, которые принес Трамп, было "бесплодное окончание расследования Мюллера". Если Флинн останется на свободе, в этом будет определенная бесплодность.

Другой важной вехой также станет решение Верховного суда о передачи материалов расследования Мюллера в Конгресс.

The Supreme Court on Friday granted a Trump administration request to temporarily shield redacted grand jury materials related to former special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe from the Democratic-led House.
The order, signed by Chief Justice John Roberts, halts the disclosure of secret grand jury transcripts and exhibits that Democratic lawmakers had initially requested as part of the House impeachment inquiry into President Trump.
The move pushes back a lower court’s disclosure order on the materials, which was set to take effect Monday, while the justices consider the administration’s request for a longer delay.
Roberts gave the Democratic-led House Judiciary Committee until May 18 to file its response.
The administration has said it plans to formally appeal a lower court ruling that granted Democrats access to secret grand jury materials stemming from Mueller's 22-month investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/496798-supreme-court-grants-trump-administration-request-to-temporarily

Дополнительно на этой неделе в Верховном суде рассматривается вопрос о передаче в Конгресс и прокуратуру Нью-Йорка налоговых деклараций Трампа по официальным запросам.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court will hear telephonic arguments in three cases addressing whether Trump can keep his tax and financial information from being disclosed, whether from Congress or criminal prosecutors. In Trump v. Vance, which involves a New York state grand jury investigation, Trump’s lawyers argue that, even when it comes to purely private conduct, the presidency insulates him from the legal process.
The case arises from a criminal investigation into the Trump Organization, and it seems there’s plenty worth examining: whether, as suggested by extensive reporting in this newspaper and other outlets, Trump’s businesses may have dodged taxes. And whether Trump’s hush-money payments, made through his lawyer Michael Cohen to porn star Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal, violated state law. (Cohen pleaded guilty to federal crimes arising from those payments, which the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan said were made “at the direction of Individual-1” - Trump.)
The state grand jury subpoenaed the Trump Organization and Trump’s accounting firm, Mazars, seeking tax returns and financial records. Trump sued to block the subpoena to Mazars - on the ground that he’s president. The lower federal courts rejected his pleas, and now he’s in the Supreme Court. Where he will lose - or should.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/08/george-conway-why-trump-will-lose-court/

На кону стоит, ни много ни мало, принцип верховенства закона в старейшей демократии мира.