So the DoJ is moving to drop the false criminal case against Michael Flynn, and the DNI is saying that the Intelligence Community is willing to release testimony transcripts in accordance with the House Intelligence Committee’s 2018 vote. The recommendation to drop the case against Flynn was made by a U. S. Attorney who spent 10 years with the FBI and 10 years as a career prosecutor. The transcripts were cleared by career intelligence officers.
… there are things happening that aren’t related to the Wuhan virus pandemic.
Perhaps the most significant political development over the past few days has been the release of FBI and DoJ paperwork, including handwritten notes, about the Flynn case and how that investigation was handled. At first blush, the documents seem to paint a picture of official corruption, suggesting not only that General Flynn should be exonerated, but that some government officials may deserve disbarment, jail time, and other sanctions.
The optics of the story aren’t good for the Deep State, but they could be even worse for the Democrats who are on the verge of nominating a key figure of the administration that corruptly used the Deep State for its political ends. The opposing sides campaign ads almost write themselves.
On The Other Podcast last Saturday I suggested that the smarter members the Democrat/Media/Deep State complex will use Tara Reade’s accusations against Joe Biden as the way to prevent his nomination (“See. We believe this woman.”) now that he’s served the purpose of stopping the Bernie Bros from seizing the party. The process has started; WaPo has published an opinion piece calling for Biden to address Ms. Reade’s claims. The coming fight for control of a brokered convention should be interesting to watch. I have no idea who will crawl out from under which rock and grab the nomination.
Allahpundit writes about the “news” that Eric Holder’s signature on the warrants for Fox News reporter James Rosen’s emails was not pro forma. The AG was deeply involved. And the President has ordered the AG to investigate the matter.
Imagine how dismayed Eric Holder will be when he finds out what Eric Holder’s done.
Ace is also on the case too. He suspects an interesting motive for the prolonged intrusion into Mr. Rosen’s communications, a loyalty investigation
Do you see what’s going on there? Not only do they want to see which of Obama’s people are disloyal in the actual case, they also want to keep secretly reading a private citizen’s email for years in order to find other sources of leaks in other matters.
(H/T, Instapundit) Well, yes, those of us who were working in the news business back in the early ’70s do see certain similarities to Nixon.
I have to tell you that is exactly the approach that the Nixon administration took. They said, “These are all second-rate things. We don’t have time for this. We have to devote our time to the people’s business.” You’re taking exactly the same line they did.
Yes, but what other line is left for them? The White House staff clearly isn’t able to tell the truth. Consider Preiffer’s rant to Chris Wallace about the irrelevance of facts.
What did the President know, and when did he know it? And where was he and what was he doing when he got told?
You know, I’m beginning to look forward to the day when this generation’s Fred Thompson asks the analogous question to “Mr. Butterfield, were you aware of the existence of any listening devices in the Oval Office of the President?”
UPDATE—Stacy McCain offers the Cliffs Notes version of the White House response: “Shut up, Republicans!”
Watch this video. It suggests a reason why there might be sufficient White House involvement to explain the panic leading to the claim of executive privilege for the Fast and Furious documents.
Hans A. von Spakovsky reports over at PJ Media on apparent perjury by a Justice Department career lawyer. He describes an attempted cover up during an investigation by the DoJ Inspector General into illegal leaks of confidential documents to the Washington Post concerning a Texas reapportionment case.
Von Spakovsky reports that the lawyer, whose reasoning in the Texas case was ultimately rejected by the Supreme Court in LULAC v. Perry, has not been disciplined but has been assigned to the current review of Texas reapportionment based on the 2010 census.
Eric Holder must think that her “state of mind” was OK when she lied under oath to the IG investigators.
Von Spakovsky sums up:
And who was the civil rights analyst whose name was on the “rambling, barely coherent memo” leaked to the Washington Post? It was Stephanie Celandine Gyamfi. For the Voting Section chief to assign this admitted perjurer to review Texas’s 2011 decennial redistricting submission is a serious affront to justice. It should greatly concern Texas authorities, who have a right to expect an objective, impartial, nonpolitical, and nonideological review of their plan. An admitted criminal who harmed Texas before should not sit in judgment of the state’s current redistricting plan.
Then again, why should we be surprised? Look at how Eric Holder and his Department have mishandled the investigation into Operation Fast & Furious and repeatedly misled Congress. Holder told Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI.) that whether you are lying or misleading Congress “has to do with your state of mind.” Perhaps Holder believes that perjury is now passé, or at least that a DOJ employee does not have the requisite “state of mind” when the ideological cause is deemed righteous enough. But when zealots like Ms. Gyamfi, for whom the truth is no obstacle to the pursuit of partisan gains, are allowed to control the levers of justice, we all suffer.
Read the whole thing.
UPDATE—Tina Korbe posts on the DoJ’s assertion that the AG wasn’t playing the race card when he said,
Of that group of critics, Mr. Holder said he believed that a few—the “more extreme segment”—were motivated by animus against Mr. Obama and that he served as a stand-in for him. “This is a way to get at the president because of the way I can be identified with him,” he said, “both due to the nature of our relationship and, you know, the fact that we’re both African-American.”
I wonder what state of mind one must be in to believe that isn’t a racially-based remark.
UPDATE 2—Ed Morrissey adds:
Assuming that the story is true, this still leaves Holder in the hot seat. If Gyamfi somehow avoided the technical commission of perjury (and there are many technical details involved), she still would have committed obstruction of justice.