Framing Flynn

The “Kill Shot” sets up a showdown at Deep State Corral.

“Lawyers for former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn reportedly filed a motion on Thursday in which they allege that the Department of Justice manipulated a document to frame their client and is withholding exculpatory evidence,” reports Joel Pollack at Breitbart.

Flynn’s legal team, headed by Sidney Powell, alleges that Peter Strzok’s FBI partner Lisa Page substantially altered the notes of Flynn’s interview. The Flynn team also flags former FBI general counsel James Baker as the source of leaks to David Ignatius of the Washington Post. The filing also alleges that former National Intelligence Director James Clapper told the reporter to “take the kill shot on Flynn.” Clapper’s team denied it, but the kill shot was hardly the only concern.

Attorney General William Barr tasked U.S. Attorney John Durham to investigate those 2016-17 events, and last week it emerged that Durham’s probe is now a full-blown criminal inquiry. As Fox News reports this means “Durham can subpoena witnesses, file charges, and impanel fact-finding grand juries.” Some of the potential witnesses boast a high profile.

Former CIA boss John Brennan, who voted for the Stalinist Gus Hall in 1976, is reportedly one of those Durham would like to interview. Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who thought that ISIS was a secular organization, is another. This pair, along with others in the “intelligence community,” are reportedly seeking counsel.

Barr and Durham have already listened to a deposition from the mysterious Joseph Mifsud, reportedly tasked with setting up Trump aide George Papadoploulos as a Russian conduit for dirt on Hillary Clinton. This operation, abetted by the FBI, landed Papadopoulos in jail. He has since written Deep State Target and appears to be mounting a legal counterattack.

The Deep State drones also cobbled together a fake dossier funded by the Democratic National Committee, This was deployed to secure FISA warrants that would empower spying on American citizens in the Trump campaign. DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has been looking into that, and last week announced that his report would soon be made public with “few redactions.” Democrats and their media allies promptly exploded, evidently unaware that a campaign of leaks, false charges and FISA fraud could involve criminal activity.

Rachel Maddow of MSNBC dismissed Durham’s investigation as a “frame job,” a “false flag operation,” and a “conspiracy theory that the attorney general of the United States appears to have been going around the world trying to prove.” Maddow also defended her MSNBC colleague John Brennan and other players such as Andrew McCabe, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, James Clapper and the eager Strzok and Page.

Judiciary Committee boss Jerold Nadler and House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff charged in a statement that the DOJ has “lost its independence and become a vehicle for President Trump’s political revenge.” And so on, as though the vast Russia collusion hoax was not 100 percent political, just like the covert operation now being run by Adam Schiff.

An anonymous conspirator Schiff calls a “whistleblower” advances hearsay from a letter anybody can read, and never-Trump diplomats spout off behind closed doors. As Julie Kelly explains at American Greatness, this sets up a showdown.

“The race is on to see who will survive, -- the duly elected president of the United States or a modern-day Praetorian Guard comprised of former law enforcement and intelligence officials tasked with taking down that president.” As Barr’s team closes in on the key players, “House Democrats are escalating efforts in their attempt to impeach Trump before Barr’s department starts issuing indictments.”

As Kelly sees it, if Trump goes down first, the criminal inquiry could all be discredited or halted as the product of an “illegitimate presidency.” Hillary Clinton has telling anybody who will listen that Trump “knows he’s an illegitimate president,”  and 2020 candidate Kamala Harris proclaims “we have a confession” and “dude gotta go. He gotta go, and this is the impeachment process.” For those who find this confusing, a classic film provides enlightenment.

In Absence of Malice, a corrupt district attorney leaks a fake story to frame the innocent Michael Gallagher, played by Paul Newman. Someone with “no face and no name” is trying to pin a crime on him. Gallagher runs an operation of his own and turns the tables on the accuser. That brings in Assistant U.S. Attorney General James J. Wells, played by Wilford Brimley, who holds a hearing. When that concludes, Wells says, two things are going to be found true. The U.S. Department of Justice is going to know what is going on, and “I’m gonna have somebody’s ass in my briefcase.”

In similar style, John Durham is going to find out what was going on with the Russia collusion probe. John Huber, U.S. Attorney for Utah, is conducting a separate investigation. Michael Flynn’s attorney wants to know about the “kill shot” on her client, and George Papadopoulos is talking about Joseph Mifsud and his handlers.

Many high-profile asses are on the line, and it’s going to be quite a show. As President Trump likes to say, we’ll have to see what happens.


Wondering what happened to your Disqus comments?

Read the Story