With the DC Circuit Court issuing a decision on the writ of mandamus, the Flynn case is back in the news again. The court has ordered Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case. As I have said previously, I would like to see Michael Flynn off the hook so to speak. However, the longer the case hangs on, the more corruption that is being exposed.
There has been another interesting development in the Flynn case. On Tuesday the DOJ provided more exculpatory evidence to the Flynn defense team. This led to a filing that includes hand-written notes taken by FBI agent Peter Strzok around key dates in early January 2017. Strzok is a former Deputy Assistant Director of the FBI. Strzok is also rumored to be CIA.
The filing was initially under seal. The filing was unsealed on Wednesday.
Newly released notes appear to confirm President Obama’s oversight role and VP Biden’s participation role in the surveillance and leak operation against Michael Flynn, who was the incoming Trump administration national security adviser. The handwritten notes appear to show President Obama himself personally directed former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates to investigate Flynn for having routine phone calls with a Russian counterpart. Biden appears to have suggested the Logan Act as a means to go after Flynn.
Strzok’s handwriting is atrocious. Even mine is not this bad. There is debate about what is actually written here. However, there is some consensus around the following:
Rogers-Comey-Yates: Flynn calls. Other countries.
Comey-Yates: Team found (?) useless
Biden: “Logan Act”
Obama: “These are unusual times.”
Biden: “I’ve been on the intelligence committee for ten years and I never…”
Obama: “Make sure you look at things – have the right people on it.”
Obama: “Is there anything I should not be telling the transition team.”
Comey: “Flynn-Kislyak calls but appear legit.”
It would be nice to know what is redacted. However, I have a theory about that.
These notes appear to be from a briefing that Comey gave to Strzok and others within the FBI regarding conversations he had with Obama with Biden present. Most probably this took place on January 4th, 2017. This puts the lie to Biden’s statement that he knew nothing about what was going on with Flynn.
https://twitter.com/CCM1956/status/1261332793235312641
What jumps out right away from the notes is that Comey is saying there nothing there in regards to Flynn (“appears legit”). In other words, Comey is saying there is no predication for an investigation of Flynn. And let’s remember that the WFO of the FBI had conducted a five-months’ long investigation of Flynn. That investigation also appeared to have no predication. They had closed that on January 4th due to a “lack of derogatory information.”
This does not matter to Obama, the former law professor. He tells Comey to “look at things.” Obama also tells Comey to handpick investigators (“have the right people on it’). These would be agents who would not care about predication.
Strozk’s notes are at odds with Susan Rice’s memo to self on Inauguration Day. Rice wrote the email at the direction of Neil Eggleston, Obama’s White House Counsel.
In it she related how President Obama told everyone to do things “by the book.”
Just what book was Rice referring to? Why doesn’t this admonition appear in Strzok’s notes? Would Comey have forgotten something as important as that? It seems unlikely.
Could it be that this was an invention after the fact by Susan Rice or by the White House Counsel? Sally Yates, who was also in the meeting with Obama, did not mention it in her 302 on the meeting.
One of Obama’s favorite defenses whenever a scandal broke in his administration was to say that he first learned of it from the news media. However, in this case, James Clapper, DNI, had removed that possibility when Clapper brought “tech cuts” on the Flynn investigation into the White House during the first few days in January, 2017.
“Tech cuts” are printouts of conversations that had been recorded by surveillance. Clapper used these cuts to brief Obama. In a very real sense Clapper “infected” the White House with knowledge of an official FBI investigation into Michael Flynn. Regardless of prior events, now the White House had been officially informed.
So, Obama’s usual defense of plausible deniability was not available. Rice’s memo-to-self, written at the direction of the White House Counsel on Inauguration Day, appears to be an attempt to distance Obama from Flynn investigation. This would make it seem that any deviance by the FBI would be the result of “rogue” agents including Comey gone astray. Was this an attempt by Obama to “throw Comey under the bus?”
Perhaps, Brett Tolman, former US Attorney for the district of Utah, summed up this attempt by Rice best.
This is what a President or VP instructs Wh counsel to do so they can try and control a problematic narrative. This is not what you do when it is a legitimate national security investigation. https://t.co/bZ1QjqiBJA
— Brett L. Tolman (@tolmanbrett) May 20, 2020
All of this ignores the fact that the main substance of the meeting was how to target Flynn for his legitimate activities as a member of PDJT’s transition team. Flynn was a very serious threat to the cover-up of the Obama administration’s attempts to derail PDJT’s bid for the Presidency.
Now put yourself in James Comey’s shoes. BTW I have no sympathy for Comey. On January 4th, Comey is told to investigate Flynn. This is despite Comey informing the President that there is no predication to do so. On January 5th(according to the Rice memo), Obama tells Comey and Yates to do everything “by the book.”
So, which was it? Perhaps, both. Keep in mind that the law enforcement side has to be done by the big book. However, the national security side has a much smaller book. And the Obama administration had routinely ignored the limitations of that book with the mining of the NSA data feeds for political opposition research. Effectively there was no book.
What was the FBI tasked to do by the White House? The only thing that can be proven at this point is that the FBI was tasked to find out why the Russians had not reacted more strongly to Obama’s expulsion of Russian diplomats. This meant producing the “tech cuts” mentioned above.
Strzok’s notes are the first documentary evidence that the FBI may have been tasked to do something else. These notes are second-hand accounts. They could just be another layer of CYA going on. Getting some of these people under oath in front of a grand jury might provide more insight.
Let’s add in one other item. Prior to the Flynn ambush interview, Bill Priestap had a meeting with the players involved. His hand-written notes indicate some lack of clarity about the process of the interview. A transcript of his notes is provided below.
Priestap appears to be somewhat outside the real reason for going after Flynn. Was Priestap being duped? Or is this his version of a CYA memo?
Another question that needs to be asked is “Why now?” Why is this exculpatory evidence being produced now? Was it just discovered by USA Jensen? That would seem unlikely. And why the significant redactions? Why hasn’t the media published this information?
Regarding the why now, I think this may be a warning to Judge Sullivan that the gig is up. Sullivan tried to stop filings in the case as they were dripping out of the DOJ. This also puts the en banc DC Circuit Court on notice that, if they decide to take up this farce en banc, much more info will be released that will not be in favor to the court. The phrase “egg on their faces” comes to mind. One could dream that such machinations would not be needed. However, this is Washington that we are talking about. Politics is very much a part of court cases like this.
As far as the redactions are concerned, I theorize that there may be evidence there that John Durham does not want exposed as yet. The DOJ just provided what they felt was appropriate to the Flynn case. The DOJ does not want to tip their hand about who else might be in their sights.