An interesting article from Fox News asks the question of whether Mueller’s special counsel attorney Brandon Van Grack misled Judge Sullivan in the Flynn case by not being forthcoming about the background documents under the DOJ Brady obligation.
Additionally, as a consequence of the Flynn evidence discoveries people are now asking why the FBI and DOJ did not produce these documents earlier. Representative Jim Jordan is specifically asking these questions of current FBI Director Chris Wray.In response to the Fox News article the FBI has released a statement which itself is very interesting. Apparently the FBI Director is trying to dig himself and his institution out of a hole; but it is only getting worse. First, here’s the follow-up from the FBI.
[FOX NEWS] – After this article was published, the FBI provided a statement to Fox News saying that under Wray’s leadership, the bureau had turned over relevant Flynn materials to the U.S. attorney probing possible FBI criminal misconduct during the Trump probe, John Durham — but the FBI didn’t say when exactly the handoff happened.“Under Director Wray’s leadership, the FBI has fully cooperated and been transparent with the review being conducted by U.S. Attorney Jeff Jensen, just as it has been with U.S. Attorney John Durham and was with Inspector General Michael Horowitz,” the statement read.
The FBI continued: “With regard to certain documents in the Michael Flynn matter from the 2016-2017 time period that are now the subject of reporting by the press, the FBI previously produced those materials to the Inspector General and U.S. Attorney Durham. The Flynn investigation was initiated and conducted during this time period, under prior FBI leadership.Since taking office, Director Wray has stressed the importance of strictly abiding by established processes, without exception. Director Wray remains firmly committed to addressing the failures under prior FBI leadership while maintaining the foundational principles of rigor, objectivity, accountability, and ownership in fulfilling the Bureau’s mission to protect the American people and defend the Constitution.” (link)
The FBI statement is factually flawed on many levels and substantively false on the specifics.
“With regard to certain documents in the Michael Flynn matter from the 2016-2017 time period that are now the subject of reporting by the press, the FBI previously produced those materials to the Inspector General and U.S. Attorney Durham.
Notice how this part of the statement does not say the exculpatory documents were turned over to the Special Counsel (they were). Also notice how Wray is attempting to deflect the timing by saying they were produced to the IG and Durham.
U.S. Attorney John Durham didn’t enter the picture until May 2019, as instructed by newly confirmed AG Bill Barr. So what was the FBI doing with those documents prior to Durham in 2017 and 2018?
The prosecution of Flynn started mid-2017; and Chris Wray knew of the specific misconduct within the FBI at the same time. Remember, Wray removed James Baker from official duty as FBI legal counsel in December 2017 [LINK] approximately three weeks after the corrupt and coerced Flynn guilty plea on November 30th.
FBI Director Wray allowed James Baker remained in the FBI, in some unknown capacity, through May 4, 2018, when Baker officially resigned [LINK] By late December 2017 Wray clearly knew several FBI officials were participants in a multitude of corrupt schemes, including the prosecution of Michael Flynn.
The sheer volume of removals from the FBI outlines the extent of Chris Wray’s knowledge. Think about it….
FBI Agent Peter Strzok was removed; FBI lawyer Lisa Page was removed; FBI counsel James Baker was removed; FBI public relations officer Michael Kortan was removed; and eventually FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was removed. All of these removals surrounded discovery of their corrupt and political activity in 2016, 2017 and early 2018….
…But the evidence was not provided to the Flynn defense until April 2020?
Let’s not forget in July 2018, a full year after FBI Director Chris Wray took over leadership, the FBI lied to the FISA court about the Carter Page FISA application; and the DOJ/FBI made the ridiculous claim the FISA application was still adequately predicated.
So it seems more than a little ridiculous for FBI Director Chris Wray to justify the hidden documents by saying the FBI did turn them over to John Durham (2019) and/or AUSO Jeff Jensen in 2020; when he held back the evidence in 2017, 2018, while the underlying activity was being discovered.
Also don’t forget the original purpose of U.S. Attorney John Lausch (Chicago), yeah, remember him? In 2018 John Lausch’s entire function was to produce documents.
Additionally, if the FBI did factually turn over all of these documents to Inspector General Michael Horowitz while three distinct IG investigations were ongoing, then how did the IG claim they could find “no evidence of political bias”, when the explosive documents – specifically the Bill Priestap notes – show direct evidence of biased intent? What does that say about the fidelity of the Inspector General?
Lastly, again the construct of the Mueller investigation being used as a shield surfaces. Not only did the corrupt Mueller probe control various elements within the DOJ and FBI, but the Mueller probe as an “ongoing investigation”, shielded those documents from sunlight and discovery.
Again, Chris Wray pointing out how his institution turned over documents and evidence to Durham (2019/2020) and Horowitz doesn’t reconcile with how his FBI participated in the corrupt Mueller investigation; and it does not seem accidental in today’s defense Director Wray mysteriously omits outlining prior FBI document production to the special counsel team.
