Skip to content
Jon McNaughton’s ‘Crossing the Swamp’ (2018) depicts the president, his wife Melania and daughter Ivanka, the vice president, various cabinet officials and advisers, and several alligators. Courtesy of Jon McNaughton (jonmcnaughton.com)

It is hard to know what to believe anymore. So many lies are told in the MSM, and government staff are the main source of misinformation while blaming “conspiracy theorists” for questioning the official line. The woke left tries to shut down any debate, while big tech is censoring free speech.

The courts still allow opposing sides to be heard, along with the opportunity to analyse and fact-check claims. This doesn’t mean the outcome is just, fair, or equitable, because the law is, according to Dickens, an ass. But at least an observer can listen to a serious argument.

In the United States, a current legal case before the courts has exposed just how deep the swamp is in American politics. Remarkably, both sides are now working together to show the entrenched government corruption. This is what Trump was talking about when he spoke of the need to “drain the swamp”.

Michael Flynn was a 3-star general. He retired from the military to become Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency under Obama until 2014, when he set up a private consultancy, Flynn Intel Group. In 2016, he joined the Trump campaign, and was appointed National Security Advisor in 2017. He lasted just 22 days before being forced to resign. He was a key scalp in the Mueller investigation that failed to find evidence of Russian collusion with Trump after a three-year witch hunt.

Flynn pled guilty to making false statements to Mueller. Essentially, the false statement was that he and his business partner in Flynn Intel group had NOT colluded with foreign governments.

His sentencing was delayed while a case was taken against his business partner, Bijan Rafiekian, now facing the same charges. The sentencing judge wanted to get that case out of the way so he could impose a harsh sentence on Flynn without Rafiekian involved in a plea deal.

But unlike Flynn, Rafiekian chose to defend the case under a different judge. In what initially seemed an incredible outcome, the new judge dismissed the charges. How could this be? If Flynn had already admitted the Flynn Intel Group had colluded, then Rafiekian could hardly deny it. But the evidence was clear. No collusion had occurred.

In fact, the evidence went way beyond that. Leaked emails from the FBI showed that they knew Flynn and Rafiekian were innocent and pushed ahead with the case anyway.

There is a legal requirement for the prosecution to provide the defence with any information that might exonerate the defendant. This is known as “disclosure”. The prosecution was shown to have withheld critical evidence and was ordered to provide everything.

This new material revealed that Flynn had been blackmailed by the FBI who were threatening his son with false charges. Flynn pled guilty to save his son’s career from being destroyed by a vindictive, dishonest, and all-powerful FBI who had lined up false witnesses and faked evidence against Flynn’s son.

With this out in the open, Flynn went back to court to retract his guilty plea. As his original statement was not false, there was no crime so he could not have pled guilty to making a false statement. Simple.

Prosecutions are carried out by the Department of Justice, not the FBI, and the DoJ was embarrassed that it has been misled. It applied to dismiss the case against Flynn.

The judge, Emmet Sullivan, a Democrat, refused.

Instead, the judge appointed another judge (who also happened to be a Democrat) to run the prosecution. It would be embarrassing to the Democrats and a victory to Trump right before the election to have Flynn officially exonerated. Proceeding with the case would not change the outcome, but it could delay it until after the election.

Flynn’s lawyer appealed this decision, supported by the DoJ. The appeal was heard by a panel of three judges. The two republican judges decided for Flynn, the democrat judge decided against the appeal, giving Flynn the win two to one.

The farce continued. Emmet Sullivan hired his own lawyer to appeal the appeal. A full panel of 9 judges of the court circuit heard the appeal and voted on party lines to overturn the decision.

Emmet Sullivan will get to have the case against Flynn prosecuted without the Department of Justice.

The Department of Justice has not remained silent through out this debacle. They had obtained more evidence that the FBI withheld illegally after it was ordered to hand everything over. This was another embarrassing breach of disclosure that proved the DoJ had been used as a pawn in a political game, so they kept looking. They found even more breaches. And some more after that. Followed by a fifth time. All of which has now been given to the defence.

The latest evidence has been published in court documents that can be accessed on-line. It is a bunch of text messages between FBI staff. It shows that the FBI briefed President Obama on its investigation into Flynn during Trump’s campaign. It shows the FBI agents involved were Clinton supporters. It shows Joe Biden knew of the intention to use blackmail. It shows attempts by the FBI agents to fake Russian collusion so that there could be an investigation if Trump won. And when Rafeikian won, it shows the FBI agents rushing out to buy professional indemnity insurance in case they get sued.

You can be sure that the democrats and Sullivan will be regretting his decision to drag the case out. The nest of lies and four years of media attacks on the Trump campaign are now unravelling. Just don’t expect any apologies from the MSM.

But don’t just trust me. Check for yourself. These days, this is the only way to be certain you are not being lied to. The information in this article has been obtained from a series of vlogs by Canadian lawyer David Freiheit, who has been following the case in detail. His youtube channel, Viva Frei, is fascinating with regular updates about legal cases hitting the news around the world. His position is apolitical and his focus is on legal analysis of the facts and arguments presented in court. Links to court documents are provided, and he interviews other lawyers for alternative views. Best of all, he talks fast and doesn’t pad out the story.

If you enjoyed this BFD article please share it.

Latest