Skip to main content

November 26, 2019
Flynngate

By: Saul Montes-Bradley II, VP of Communications

How an Islamist Organization Set Up a Top Member of the Trump Administration With The Complicity of a Venal Press and Corrupt Politicians.

The set-up

This story starts, as so many others, with officers in the Obama administration misrepresenting the truth, and goes on to the criminal targeting of an American hero in a caper that, as I am writing this, still goes on. 

It started at the Act! Meeting on July 15, 2016. In the first part of this video you can see President Obama lying about himself, Radical Islamic terrorism and then candidate Donald Trump. On minute 10:30, General Flynn walks into the stage and by minute 13:30 he expresses his opinion on Obama's friend, Tagypp Erdogan, and the military coup then taking place in Turkey. 

What General Flynn stated then is as absolutely true today as it was the day he stated it, to wit: Turkey is a NATO ally that until very recently was seeking entry into the European Union. Under Kemal Atatürk it was established as a secular state with a strict separation between church and state, and under its Constitution it was the military's resposibility to ensure the protection of that secular state.  

Erdogan’s Welfare Party, reborn as the Justice and Development Party, has been at pains to destroy that secular state since its irruption in the Turkish political scene in the 80's in association with that other Islamist, friend of the Clintons and head of the Hizmet Movement, Fetullah Gülen. 

Listen to General Flynn. He is no friend of political Islamism, and he states so with unusual candor. He was not happy with the Obama administration’s coziness with the Turkish radical Islamists, and states so with equal candor. That did not endeared him to President Obama or his minions.  

Keep that in mind, for this is ground zero of a scandal still unfolding before our eyes. 

On September 15, 2016, General Flynn's consulting firm, The Flynn Intel Group (FIG), filed a Lobbying Registration form under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. Notice that the firm was already registered, and this filing was merely to add a new client, Inovo AB, of the Netherlands.  

Then, on November 8, 2016, General Flynn penned an opinion piece in The Hill: Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support.

Everything the General stated in that op-ed is true and consistent with his views before and after any work his firm may have done on behalf of Inovo AB. Indeed, Turkey is our NATO ally, whether Erdogan and his minions like it or not. Yes, our ally is in trouble, in the grasp of an Islamist movement that aims to throw it back to the Middle Ages; and yes, Fettulah Gülen is both a friend of the Clintons, to whom he owes his fraudulently obtained residence in the US, and he "portrays himself as a moderate, but he is in fact a radical Islamist." 

Four days later, on November 12, 2016, the reply came from Gülen's Islamists in Turkish Minute: Trump’s top military aide lobbies for Dutch company linked to Turkey’s Erdoğan. This is important. Turkish Minute is an online publication produced exclusively by Yavuz Altun, an old hand of Gülen’s in Zaman, the Islamists' daily rag, and since 2015 the editor of Püff, a satirical Islamist magazine born as a supplement of Zaman, a platform for anti-American and anti-Jewish conspiracy theories

Turkish Minute's hit piece was the first to describe Inovo as a Turkish government entity linked to Erdogan. As we shall see, a falsehood that the American press and, worse, the Independent Counsel were too lazy or too corrupt to vet, and totally debunked by Judge Anhony J. Trenga on July 9, 2019, as he precluded any mention of it in a trial associated with FIG: "it is further ORDERED that Defendant Bijan Rafiekian's Motion In Limine to Preclude the Government from Arguing that Turkey Funded FIG's Work for Inovo AG be, and the same hereby is GRANTED..."

Lo and behold! Despite the patent falsehood of the allegations, almost immediately, on November 14, 2016, Politico picked up the Gulenists' canard: Trump adviser linked to Turkish lobbying. A company tied to Erdogan's government hired retired general Michael Flynn's lobbying firm, and two days later, on November 16, that paragon of independent Journalism, The Daily Caller, followed suit: Trump Adviser Recently Met With Relative Of Turkey’s President, followed on November 17 by The Intercept: "Turkish Client Paid Trump Adviser Michael Flynn’s Company “Tens of Thousands” of Dollars for Lobbying,

These planted articles in the partisan press mimicking the one in Fetullah Gülen's broadside were deemed sufficient grounds for a letter from the ineffable and quite unlamented Elijah Cummings on November 18, "requesting documentation."  

This was the signal for large media corporations and partisan bloggers to pick up the canard and run with it.

The first one to bite was, not surprisingly, NBC. Then came, in quick succession, Witf, Quartz, Commentary, NBC, The New York Times, Fortune, PBS News Hour, Foreign Policy, AEI and last, but not least, The Huff & Puff, with this jewel by Jessica Schulberg. Ms. Schulberg, either the most ignorant scribe in a profession riddled by ignoramuses, a functionally illiterate nincompoop or, more likely, a willing participant in a shameless campaign to discredit Trump's nominee to head the NSC, carps: "Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn said in July that the military’s attempt to overthrow the government was 'worth clapping for.' Now he calls Turkey an ally." In point of fact, Turkey was then and is now a valuable NATO ally of the US; the Turkish Army's declared objective of performing its Constitutional duty to act as guarantors of the secular Turkish state was, indeed, "worth clapping for;" and despite the whining of the American left, Erdogan and his Islamist minions are NOT Turkey. The fallacies in this article are the same that were later picked up by the Special Counsel, if somewhat embellished. 

The barrage ended as suddenly as it had begun. As if whoever was pushing the narrative had decided it was time for a pause, the news disappeared from the American press just as the FBI began its "investigation" into General Flynn based on the patently false narrative concocted by an Islamist publication controlled by Fetullah Gülen with assistance from Rep. Elijah Cummings, lest that other and equally false charade, the “Russia investigation,” proved insufficient.  

It was February 2017 before any mention was made of the Turkey caper again. This time, it was ushered in by the Washington Post as part of a "timeline" leading to the General's resignation. 

Then, on March 7th 2017, following pressure by DoJ officials, a new Flynn Intel Group FARA registration took place. It contained a disclaimer that, as far as FIG knew, "Inovo is a privately owned company that  has not received, directly or indirectly, funds or financial support from  any government during the course of its engagement of Flynn Intel Group Inc., including the Republic of Turkey."  

Yet, the following day, the Associated Press quickly went on the spin: “A lawyer for the former U.S. Army lieutenant general and intelligence chief said in paperwork filed Tuesday with the Justice Department's Foreign Agent Registration Unit that Flynn was voluntarily registering for lobbying that could be construed to have principally benefited the Republic of Turkey." And the headline read: Former Trump aide Flynn says lobbying may have helped Turkey. Of course, neither can that benefit be inferred from the FARA filing, nor has anyone at any time since provided any proof of such a relationship. 

The patent falsehood of the claim mattered not. USA Today got in the act and the floodgates opened again: Task & Purpose, The New York Times, McClatchy, The Daily Caller, The New Yorker, The Wall Street Journal (This piece adds a twist to the Gulenists' canard. Now, the General was planning a "removal," soon to become "illegal extradition" and eventually "kidnapping" in the febrile mind of the spinmeisters), The Daily Wire, Business Insider, Daily News, CNN, The Washington Times, Snopes, Medium, Boulder Weekly, News, Consortium News, Mother Jones, Talking Points Memo, McClatchy, CBS News, and the Center for American Progress, all parroting Gülen's narrative. In so doing, they were providing a public rationale for leftovers in the DoJ to threaten General Flynn with indictment if he did not play ball. Then, just as before, silence. 

The canard was safely planted in the American consciousness, and it was time to let the Special Counsel do its job. 

Anybody who has taken even a cursory look at General Flynn’s career would know that whoever suggests that he may, at any time and for whatever reason, been in cahoots with or attempted to assist in any way the leader of an Islamist movement is a driveling galoot, a brainless parrot or a shameless liar. Oftentimes, all three, as the articles quoted above show. The idea is simply preposterous. Yet, months of endless repetition through a myriad of news outlets took their toll and be it through ignorance or malice, many in Washington subscribed to the canard without the slightest effort to get at the root of it. This was, in turn, exploited by those who were only too happy to create problems for the fledgling Trump administration. 

By May 2017, the story had all but died, though it has been revived, like clockwork, on the first week in November of every year since, notably, and with more vigor than usual, as I discussed in social media at the time, on the eve of the charges filed against General Flynn. 

On September 13, 2017, an article saw the light on NBC News: Mike Flynn's Son Is Subject of Federal Russia Probe, by Julia Ainsley, Carol Lee and Ken Dilanian, three partisan hacks and the most prolific pushers of that absurd “Russia” canard. 

“Michael G. Flynn, the son of President Donald Trump's former national security adviser, is a subject of the federal investigation into Russian meddling in the presidential election and possible collusion between Moscow and the Trump campaign, according to four current and former government officials.

The inquiry into Flynn is focused at least in part on his work with his father's lobbying firm, Flynn Intel Group, three of the officials said. It's unclear when the focus on Flynn began.”

“The younger Flynn,” the three scribes added for effect, “worked closely with his father, whose connections to foreign governments, including Russia and Turkey, have been a subject of federal and congressional investigations.”

We know how those “investigations” started in July 2016 (Russia) and in December 2016 (Turkey), made public when Acting Secretary of Justice Sally Q. Yates invoked an obscure—and probably unconstitutional—law, the “Logan Act” to justify her meddling based on an equally absurd theory planted using the same methods as the Turkey Canard…but let’s take a closer look.  

The investigation on General Flynn, fraudulently concocted by Sally Q. Yates, was ostensibly over two phone calls he had made as part of his work as designated National Security Advisor, fully sanctioned and with knowledge of the outgoing administration’s State Department and, as usual, set up by illegal leaks to the press to frame the story: 

“As you know, the Committee has been very concerned regarding the purported unauthorized disclosures of classified information, particularly when they pertain to intelligence collection on, or related to, U.S. persons (USP). To take a prominent example, a January 12, 2017 article in a major newspaper was the first to claim that "Retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, [then President-Elect] Trump's choice for national security adviser .... phoned Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29. Such stories would appear to contain the unauthorized disclosure of USP identities. This potential misuse is a key reason why the Intelligence Comununity (IC) has developed robust ''minimization procedures" for the protection of USP information, including requiring the "masking" of USP identities in most circumstances.” See page 189 of the House Intelligence Report

The Report's conclusions are damning: “U) Finding #22: General Flynn pleaded guilty to making a false statement to the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding his December 2016 conversations with Ambassador Kislyak, even though the Federal Bureau of Investigation agents did not detect any deception during Flynn's interview.” And, we might add, even though the FBI cleared General Flynn of any wrongdoing two days before that interview, as reported on January 23rd by the Washington Post

Why did General Flynn, then, took a plea at all? How did we get to that point? As President Trump stated on December 13, 2018, “They gave General Flynn a great deal because they were embarrassed by the way he was treated...” and we are going to dissect that process now. 

...

caption

General Flynn was interviewed regarding those conversations on January 24, 2017, barely a day after the FBI announced the end of the investigation, by two FBI agents led by the now infamous Peter Strzok and Joe Pientka. Strzok conducted the interview and Pientka was responsible for taking notes and producing the report. That interview was arranged by Deputy Director Andrew McCabe under orders from Director James Comey. Later, Mr. Comey admitted that the purposefully ignored protocol to ensure that General Flynn would NOT have the assistance of Counsel. Still, Strzok and Pientka found the general to be open, candid and truthful, just as none of the other characters involved (Sally Yates, James Comey and Andrew McCabe) seemed to agree on the predicate for the investigation. 

...

We now know that, for months, the DoJ and later the Special Counsel failed to break General Flynn into admitting any wrongdoing for the simple reason that, as the FBI knew since January 23rd, 2017, there was no wrongdoing. 

Then it all changed. Taking a page from Andrew Weissman’s misdeeds in the Arthur Andersen caper a few years earlier, the Special Counsel began threatening the general with involving his family in endless litigation, regardless of the absence of predicate: Give us something or we are going after your son, too.

The threat took on an ominous public dimension with that piece from Ainsley, Lee and Dilanian on September 13, 2017, resuscitating the Turkey Canard and threatening the general’s family, to boot. Still, it did not work. Until November 5, 2017, that is. 

A new barrage on the Turkey fallacy opened up with this NBC article, again from the Three Stooges of the Russia Canard: Mueller Has Enough Evidence to Bring Charges in Flynn Investigation

“Federal investigators have gathered enough evidence to bring charges in their investigation of President Donald Trump's former national security adviser and his son as part of the probe into Russia's intervention in the 2016 election, according to multiple sources familiar with the investigation.”

Really? They had evidence? Not really. But the threats finally had the desired effect. 

Facing the possibility of his son being endlessly dragged through court on trumped-up charges, the man who had faced danger and enemy fire on behalf of his countrymen countless times caved in and negotiated a deal that involved pleading to a BS charge of lying to FBI investigators regarding the two phone calls in exchange for his son’s freedom from harassment. 

The Plea Agreement, drawn on November 30, 2017 was filed the following day with Judge Rudolf Contreras, a friend of former AG Eric Holder and FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page with many explanations due in reference to FISC orders to spy on the Trump campaign. 

As part of that agreement, General Flynn signed a Statement of the Offence, copping to two “serious crimes”: that of not revealing that he had asked the Russian ambassador “not to escalate” after the Obama administration recklessly expelled 35 Russian diplomats days before a new administration was sworn in, and that he “did not remember a follow up conversation.” 

As insurance, and as a reminder of the consequences if he reneged, he was made to add a paragraph on the Turkey canard, for which NO CHARGES were ever proffered:  

caption

Where did that FARA filing come from? As you will recall, FIG had filed its FARA registrations timely, adding INOVO as a client in September 2016. Yet, in March of 2017, as General Flynn was under investigation for the Russia hoax, he was under great pressure from the DOJ to make and additional filing. The effort was spearheaded by David Laufman: 

“the FARA division, including Mr. David Laufman, Department of Justice National Security Division, Chief, Counterintelligence and Export Control Section, were putting unprecedented pressure on Covington to complete and file the FARA registration for Flynn Intel Group (“FIG”). Mr. Laufman directed this effort despite the fact he tendered his resignation just days before his high pressure phone call to Covington (the same day of Mr. Flynn’s resignation as National Security Advisor) in which it would appear that Mr. Laufman was threatening subpoenas before Covington even filed. Indeed, the FARA unit was so eager to have FIG’s filing that Ms. Heather Hunt—then head of the FARA section—responded to Covington at 10:50 pm the night it was filed.”

As part of the Plea Agreement, General Flynn waived indictment, thereby relieving the prosecutors from any burden of proof, and waived his right to trial, thereby surrendering himself to the will of the Court. 

On December 1st, 2017, Judge Contreras presided over the Plead Hearing: “Why don't you go through the facts that you think you can prove at trial?” He asked the prosecutor. A lengthy exposition followed regarding the phone calls to the Russian ambassador, but no reference was made, and no questions were asked, regarding the singular closing statement to the Statement of Offense, the immateriality of the alleged false statements, and the lack of benefit for the defendant on a lopsided agreement where no underlying crime existed. And just like that, with a few more formalities, Judge Contreras accepted the plea.  

On December 7th, barely six days after accepting this obnoxious plea, for reasons that are still unclear, Judge Contreras recused himself and the case was reassigned to Judge Emmett Sullivan. 

A few days later, as was his custom, Judge Sullivan entered an order demanding that the prosecution disclose all “evidence [that] is material either to guilt or to punishment,” what is generally known as a “Brady” order. 

On February 16th, 2018, he further clarified his Brady order “Finally, if the government has identified any information which is favorable to the defendant but which the government believes not to be material, the government shall submit such information to the Court for in camera review.”

After a series of delays and requests for postponement, Judge Sullivan called the parties to his presence on Agust 15th, 2018, before he would consent to any further delay: 

“It was easier to bring you in and have a discussion, especially since I've never had the occasion to meet with this group, and there was a level of discomfort at the thought of just appearing at a sentencing proceeding for someone I've never met before, so I didn't want to do that. So this gives me an opportunity to engage with Mr. Flynn and with counsel and to discuss the issue of sentencing, which is foremost.” He ended the very short session with: “I've read the transcript. I was deprived of the opportunity to engage you at the plea sessions, the case was before another judge. It's difficult to discern demeanor, but I read the transcript. We'll have discussions on the sentencing date, and I'm sure I'll have some questions for you or your attorney.”

As we shall see, that he did. 

While charges were never filed against General Flynn on the Turkish matter, the Special Counsel periodically raised the subject. The most egregious reference was made in the "Sentencing Memorandum" filed on December 4, 2018, states" 

"On election day in 2016, the defendant published an op-ed for the Turkey project that called for the removal of a cleric residing in the United States whom the President of Turkey blamed for the failed coup in that country. See Michael T. Flynn, Our ally Turkey is in crisis and needs our support, THE HILL (Nov. 8, 2016). The cleric’s responsibility for the coup attempt was a subject of great debate, and the defendant’s op-ed about the cleric’s role was valuable to the Republic of Turkey’s efforts to shape public opinion. The defendant falsely represented in his FARA filings that the op-ed was written at his own initiative, as opposed to for the Turkey project and the Republic of Turkey, and thus again deprived the public of the very transparency FARA was designed to ensure. The defendant’s false statements impeded the ability of the public to learn about the Republic of Turkey’s efforts to influence public opinion about the failed coup, including its efforts to effectuate the removal of a person legally residing in the United States."

Think about this. 

General Flynn was never charged in connection with any crime involving the Republic of Turkey. His opinion article in The Hill was the exercise of an American citizen of his right under the Constitution to express his opinion without hindrance, AND IN PUBLISHING THE SAME HE DID NOT DEPRIVE ANYONE OF ANYTHING. Further, the prosecution alleged that facts (whether relevant or not) were false, without providing any rational for their assertions, an impossibility given the nature of the OPINION piece. 

In fact, if there was anyone who was being deprived of anything, it was General Flynn, facing unsubstantiated allegations on matters that were not related to his case without the possibility of challenging it in court or confronting his accuser. 

As to the unfounded accusation that he had published that op-ed “for the Turkey project and the Republic of Turkey,” perhaps we should be reminded that nowhere did the prosecution ever submitted ANY proof that would back-up any such work on behalf of the Republic of Turkey.  

Mueller's Special Counsel managed in that short sentence, to trample upon three dear amendments in our Bill of Rights, the most damning, perhaps, that of attempting to criminalize opinion. 

Alas, the Judge could not help but be influenced by this grievous assault on our liberties, but not in the way I expected. With consternation, sitting beside Sarah Carter and Tom Fitton and not far from Sidney Powell, I heard the Judge go on a rant (for which he later apologized) stating that IF these facts were true, the general may have committed treason. The work of the Special Counsel was done. 

A galactic sized “IF.” 

I expected the General's counsel to go ballistic over this shameful display. Nothing. Crickets. Not one mention of the prosecution's efforts to criminalize legal behavior to influence the court. 

No wonder he sacked them. 

It started well enough. Judge Sullivan stated that "I cannot recall any incident in which the Court has ever accepted a plea of guilty from someone who maintained that he was not guilty, and I don't intend to start today."

Fair enough. 

But when General Flynn refused to take down his plea and insisted he was ready for sentencing, the Judge changed his tone: 

"In certain special circumstances, I have over the years appointed an independent attorney to speak with a defendant, review the defendant's file, and conduct necessary research to render a second opinion for a defendant. Do you want the Court to consider appointing an independent attorney for you in this case to give you a second opinion?"

Again, the answer was no.  

"Do you still want to plead guilty, or do you want me to postpone this matter, give you a chance to speak with your attorneys further, either in the courtroom or privately at their office or elsewhere, and pick another day for a status conference? And I'm happy to do that.

 The reply: "I appreciate that, but no, Your Honor."

After making some very pointed questions regarding the misconduct of Peter Strzok and Andrew McCabe (who, by then, had repeatedly committed perjury before Congress and been sacked from the Special Counsel and the FBI), and discrepancies in the various memoranda of the FBI interview and the 302, the Judge insisted: 

"Mr. Flynn, anything else you want to discuss with me about your plea of guilty? This is not a trick. I'm not trying to trick you. If you want some time to withdraw your plea or try to withdraw your plea, I'll give you that time. If you want to proceed because you are guilty of this offense, I will finally accept your plea.”

General Flynn's answer: "I would like to proceed, Your Honor."

Then Judge Sullivan went into a rehash of the case: 

"I'm going to request that you gentlemen have a seat because I want to, for the record -- and again, because I wasn't the original judge who accepted the plea in the first instance, I want to talk about the plea agreement and the facts that are relevant for the Court's consideration..." 

And he went on a long discourse finally arriving at the point that concerns us: 

"Finally, Mr. Flynn made false statements or omissions regarding his contacts with foreign governments, specifically, the Republic of Turkey, when filing documents with the Department of Justice pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act, commonly referred to as FARA.

On March 7th, 2017, Mr. Flynn filed multiple documents pursuant to the Foreign Agents Registration Act. In the filings, he made false statements or omissions by stating that his company, the Flynn Intel Group, Incorporated did not know whether or the extent to which Turkey was involved in a project he and his company performed, quote, for the princ