Attorney General William Barr knows how politically sensitive the Michael Flynn case is so he’s taken the rare step to order an outside prosecutor to review the case against Flynn.
The case against Michael Flynn, President Trump’s former national security adviser, should be thrown out because it was a set up from the beginning (SEE BELOW).
With the addition of Sidney Powell as Flynn’s lawyer, he’s got a fighting chance to get this case thrown out and expose the dirty cops who set him up.
Powell spoke out about the move by Barr last night:
According to the New York Times, Barr has also tapped outside prosecutors to review other politically sensitive cases being handled by the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C.
PREVIOUS REPORT ON THE TRAP SET BY DIRTY COPS: CLAPPER ORDERED THE “KILL SHOT” ON FLYNN:
Texts show that Clapper put the hit on Flynn by directing a Washington Post reporter to “take the kill shot on Flynn.”
Included: new Page/Strzok texts.
Discussion between Lisa Page and Peter Strzok re: editing the Flynn 302.
Strzok to Page: "I made your edits"
Also discussion of misleading leadership re: picking up 302. pic.twitter.com/w5wuU3SwZh
— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) October 25, 2019
The total arrogance and disregard for any law they may be breaking is unreal.
They left the interview thinking Flynn didn’t lie but they altered the 302 to frame Flynn!
Manipulation of the Flynn 302 — two weeks after the interview. (1/24/17 vs 2/10/17; timeline key.)
Agent notes say Flynn wasn't sure he spoke to Kislyak on the UN vote.
The 302 says different. pic.twitter.com/Nf0xfi6FFZ
— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) October 25, 2019
They didn’t quite cover their tracks because they NEVER thought they’d lose the election.
Watch him squirm…
James Clapper gave off all sorts of uncomfortable vibes during an interview with CNN’s Don Lemon last night. This was after the news that the investigation into how the Russia hoax against Trump started took a sharp turn. It’s now a criminal case (see report below).
Watch below as Clapper goes into playing innocent and wondering what in the world could be considered a “criminal infraction”:
According to the New York Times– Justice Department officials have shifted an administrative review of the Russia investigation closely overseen by Attorney General William P. Barr to a criminal inquiry, according to two people familiar with the matter. The move gives the prosecutor running it, John H. Durham, the power to subpoena for witness testimony and documents, to impanel a grand jury and to file criminal charges.
As Mr. Durham’s investigation moves forward, the Justice Department inspector general is wrapping up his own inquiry into aspects of the F.B.I.’s conduct in the early days of the Russia investigation. Among other things, the inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, is scrutinizing the application for a warrant to wiretap Mr. Page.
Mr. Barr has not said whether Mr. Durham’s investigation grew out of the inspector general’s findings or something that prosecutors unearthed while doing interviews or reviewing documents. But the inspector general’s findings, which are expected to be made public in the coming weeks, could contribute to the public’s understanding of why Mr. Durham might want to investigate national security officials’ activities in 2016.
Barr reportedly told embassy officials in Italy that he “needed a conference room to meet high-level Italian security agents where he could be sure no one was listening in.”
A source in the Italian Ministry of Justice told The Daily Beast earlier this month that Barr and Durham were played a taped deposition made by Joseph Mifsud, the professor who allegedly told ex-Trump aide George Papadopoulos that the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. Mifsud reportedly was explaining to investigators in the deposition why people would want to harm him, and why he needed police protection.
Papadopoulos has suggested he was connected with Mifsud as part of a setup orchestrated by intelligence agencies.
Sources told Fox News that Durham was “very interested” to question former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan, an anti-Trump critic who recently dismissed the idea. The New York Times reported Thursday that Durham’s criminal review has prompted some CIA officials to obtain criminal legal counsel in anticipation of being interviewed.
Brennan and Clapper were at the helm not only when Mifsud spoke to Papadopoulos, but also when the unverified and largely discredited dossier, written by British ex-spy Christopher Steele and funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee, was used to help justify a secret surveillance warrant against former Trump adviser Carter Page in the run-up to the 2016 election.
The FBI apparently obscured the fact that the Clinton campaign and DNC funded the dossier in its warrant application, telling the secret court only that the dossier was prepared at the behest of an unidentified presidential campaign.
The New York Times is reporting that the Justice Department’s review of the Trump-Russia collusion investigation has turned into a criminal inquiry. Of course, the New York Times is careful to craft the narrative about the criminal investigation, as they attempt to convince their reader that any findings by AG Barr related to the dirty dealings of the Deep State and their spying on Trump are for the purposes of helping Trump win the election.
The media and Democrats know things are about to get very ugly for a lot of people who never thought they’d get caught. Watch how quickly they turn this criminal investigation into a campaign enhancer for Trump, who they are starting to see they can’t beat in 2020.