Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 22, 2020 - The Dan Bongino Show

40:01

Interview With General Flynn’s Lawyer Sidney Powell (Ep 1256)

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
	Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show interview series.
	You know I've been focused pretty heavily on the past few weeks on our shows, on the framing and the setup of Mike Flynn, specifically why the Obama administration had it in for Mike Flynn.
	A dedicated American patriot, a three-star general, Well, I'm very excited today to have as a guest Mike Flynn's attorney, the great Sidney Powell, who turned this case around and is getting the truth out there right now.
	Before we get to Sidney, today's show brought to you by our friends at Teeter.
	Teeter's Inversion Table is the best in the business.
	It lets you use gravity and your own body weight to decompress your spine and relieve pressure on your discs, surrounding nerves, and your joints, which in my case matters because I have really brutal arthritis.
	Decompressing on a Teter inversion table for a few minutes a day is a great addition to anyone's daily routine.
	I do it twice a day.
	It'll help you maintain a healthy spine, an active lifestyle, and supple joints, hopefully free of pain like it's been for me.
	It's helped my shoulders as well and my hips in addition to my back.
	If you have back pain, even if you don't have back pain, now's the time to get a teeter.
	Invert every day and keep your back and joints feeling terrific right now.
	Do it today.
	Some products I talk about I use regularly.
	This one I use twice a day.
	I've done my homework.
	Teeter has the best inversion table on the market.
	They're the best in the business.
	Over 3 million people.
	I did it myself.
	Trust in Teeter. They've been the best known name in inversion tables since 1981. For a
	limited time, you can get Teeter's new upgraded model of the inversion table, the Teeter Fit
	Spine with bonus accessories, Stretch Max handles, helps you stretch out your spine
	a little more, and the easy reach ankle system. It's really easy to get in, super easy to
	assemble. I did it myself. I'm not that handy. Plus a free inversion program app for the
	ultimate inversion experience.
	Teeter Inversion Tables have thousands of reviews on Amazon and are rated at 4.6 stars.
	And with this deal, you'll get $150 off when you go to teeter.com.
	You'll get free shipping, free returns, and a 60-day money-back guarantee, so there's absolutely no risk to you to try it out.
	Remember, you can only get the new Teeter Fit Spine Inversion Table plus a free inversion program app by going to Teeter, T-E-E-T-E-R.com slash Dan.
	Teeter.com slash Dan.
	I was just doing this in the garage the other day.
	UPS guy came in.
	I was like, Hey, you're hanging pretty good there.
	So it works great.
	Teeter.com slash Dan.
	Check it out.
	All right.
	Without further ado.
	Michael Flynn's attorney, Sidney Powell.
	All right, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show interview show.
	As I said before, looking forward to this guest, Miss Sidney Powell.
	Sidney, we've had a lot of great feedback about the unbelievable work you've done, not only for the country, but specifically for General Mike Flynn, who I believe is a political prisoner.
	So let me start by saying thank you there.
	I have a ton of questions for you.
	Let me just get right to it.
	I get this question a lot from my audience.
	Why did the general initially plead guilty in the case?
	Because that's the liberal response when it comes to General Flynn.
	They say, well, well, he pled guilty as if we shouldn't be in any way interested about what happened to him, the setup or the framing of Mike Flynn.
	Why did he plead guilty?
	Well, it was a combination of horrible things.
	One, he was completely misinformed.
	Important information was withheld from him by the government and then to some extent by his own counsel.
	And enormous pressure was put on him to plead immediately or they would indict his son, who had simply done administrative work, kept his calendar, Things like that for his company had no knowledge or role in any wrongdoing whatsoever, aside from the fact there wasn't any wrongdoing whatsoever.
	And they were just putting enormous pressure on him.
	He couldn't take any more.
	By this time, he'd had to sell his house.
	His legal fees were over $2 million.
	Everything.
	I mean, it had been nine months of relentless battering in the press and by lawyers, It was his own and the government's on FARA issues, the Foreign Agent Registration Act issues, as well as the purported false statements by the Mueller squad.
	And he just made what he thought was the best decision for his family to simply end it.
	I mean, if people want to know more about that, read an article by Jed Rakoff, a federal judge, in 2014.
	He was a Clinton appointee, and he wrote why innocent people plead guilty.
	It happens with painful frequency.
	It's one of the egregious atrocities of our criminal justice system.
	I'd say five to ten percent of our current prison population are innocent.
	Yeah, and I think having been me on the investigative side on the 1811 side as a federal agent, you on the legal side, I'm very sensitive to that.
	The pressure to take a plea and accept responsibility and get time off on a sentence is dramatic if your lawyer's telling you you have no chance of winning the case, even if you did nothing wrong.
	And what I find interesting about this particular case, obviously, Sydney, you know this better than anyone.
	And by the way, your book, License to Lie, correct?
	I'm getting the title right, correct?
	It's incredible.
	And I highly recommend it, folks.
	Sidney has some great books out there.
	License to Lie is my personal favorite.
	I'm going to get into some of that later with the Obama fixer and everything.
	But you see this all the time.
	You see people with this massive pressure.
	And in the Flynn case, this has become politicized.
	And what I find interesting or really terrifying about this is, you know, when it came, when it comes to cases like, you know, that have become a cause celeb on the left, like I bring up the Central Park Five.
	Didn't they at one point plead guilty too?
	And then liberals like, no, no, we got to look into some potential investigative malfeasance because, you know, this became this big case in Netflix.
	But then when it comes to General Flynn, where all this FBI Brady material comes out indicating this guy did nothing wrong in his frame, nobody seems to care anymore.
	I know it's very disappointing.
	It's a huge tragedy for the country and our criminal justice system.
	If we can't trust the people who are supposed to be At the highest level of trust to enforce our laws.
	It's hideous.
	And yes, there are hundreds of people on the National Database of Exonerations who entered guilty pleas.
	The Innocence Project frees people every day who have entered guilty pleas.
	It's because they are simply worn to a frazzle, have nothing left, see no way out.
	And if it can happen to somebody in General Flynn's position, who had the support of his family and everything else, imagine what the toll it takes on everybody else in society.
	If you've had one strike against you anywhere, God forbid, you are completely screwed.
	And yes, you're going to have to plead guilty, or you're looking at spending the rest of your life in prison, regardless of what the facts and the truth are.
	It reminds me of a friend of mine, Tom Fitton, from Judicial Watch.
	He always says that the process is the punishment.
	In other words, the government has unlimited resources.
	All it has to do is bring a case and keep the case going as it's done against the general for years, eventually exhausting the man's patience, resources, and health.
	And they have unlimited resources.
	The general doesn't.
	Thankfully, you came into this case and turned things around.
	After Covington, Berlin.
	And my humble opinion, I don't expect you to respond, but they did an absolutely awful job.
	I'll leave that for another day.
	But let me ask you this.
	This has come up on my show often, and I want to hat tip the great Twitter researchers out there doing real journalism who've been very interested in the General's case.
	And one of the things pointed out to me by a Twitter user, Steven McIntyre, who's done some good work on everything from climate change to this case, ironically, He looked at the 302, Sidney, you know, the edited one.
	We still have yet to see the original that's mysteriously disappeared.
	Right.
	But the edited 302, you know, the version they milked and got everything they could out of it, about the interview they conducted with General Flynn at the White House.
	What's fascinating is the word sanctions is nearly absent in there.
	So I'm going to ask you this.
	How could General Flynn be charged with lying about discussing sanctions with the Russians if in the FBI's own 302 document the word sanctions barely appears?
	They talk about expulsions of Russian diplomats, which is a separate issue.
	You can't lie about sanctions you were never asked about.
	Right.
	Well, yeah, that's one of the issues.
	No lawyer for General Flynn has ever been allowed to listen to the recording of his calls with Kislyak or see the transcript.
	And I'm convinced it's because sanctions never came up.
	The PNG persona non grata action that was taken in the expulsion of the diplomats is not, quote, sanctions, end quote.
	Sanctions were imposed later in January after these conversations.
	So he wouldn't have been thinking of what they were talking about even as sanctions.
	Now, Sydney, when it comes to the transcript, this alleged, I'm going to call it the alleged transcript of the December 29, 2016 call that the general had with the Russian ambassador, it's become the subject of this big legal fiasco and this joke of a case.
	There's some speculation out there that a transcript, a full transcript, doesn't exist.
	That there may be a technical cut of this call, there may be a summary of the call, but that a full transcript of this call, in fact, doesn't exist.
	Do you put any credence into that, or do you believe there is a transcript out there, a word-for-word transcript, and the government just refuses to turn it over?
	I really don't know, Dan.
	I mean, I've seen references to a transcript, but as a defense attorney, particularly knowing the things I know and saw in Licensed to Lie, I wouldn't trust a mere transcript.
	I'd have to listen to the entirety of the call myself to place any trust in what I was hearing, and even then I'd be suspect.
	And certainly with respect to the transcript, I'd want to do a very careful comparison of the two and wouldn't settle for anything less than that.
	Yeah, I think it's interesting, another Twitter user, the LastRefuge guys, and I bring them up because they've actually, a lot of these Twitter users have done better work than supposed, air quotes, journalists out there.
	They bring up the fact that... Oh yeah, totally.
	TechnoFog and UndercoverHumor.
	UndercoverHumor, TechnoFog, they're great.
	I'd be lost without those accounts.
	They're absolutely terrific.
	But Refuge, the LastRefuge guy, they bring up an interesting point.
	It's fascinating that Susan Rice is now publicly demanding that the transcripts of these calls, you know, be outed as if they contain some kind of, this is Sidney, this is the real information about the general selling the country, we've been promised forever, that never appears.
	They just constantly tarnish this guy's reputation.
	And one of the theories they have there, I'm just throwing it out there, is that the transcript doesn't exist, and she's de facto throwing Comey under the bus.
	Saying that, hey, you know, Jim, you told us about this call.
	We took your word at it.
	You don't even have a transcript.
	And that's why Susan Rice is out there in public now saying, hey, we'd love to see the transcripts.
	Wink and a nod.
	This is Comey's fault.
	Interesting theory.
	Yes, very.
	I mean, Susan Rice is in this up to her eyeballs.
	You know that.
	And has Katherine Rumler representing her or had Katherine Rumler representing her?
	I want to get to that because you are the specialist on The Fixer.
	You're in my show today.
	Well, we're taping this today on Thursday, so if you watch the show, what is it, 1255, Paula?
	Sidney's article in The Observer is actually referenced, so I want to get to that.
	I got a whole series of questions on that.
	But before I get to this, can we just put to bed finally to this myth?
	The General's call on the 29th, the 29th call, to be precise, precision matters here, was not unmasked.
	The media keeps pumping this myth in the public that the call was unmasked, I believe, to make it appear that it was some accidental, incidental collection of the general and that he wasn't hunted specifically and targeted.
	That's nonsense.
	Andrew McCabe has admitted in his own book, in his own writing, that they were tasked with finding that call by the PDB staff, the Presidential Daily Brief.
	So why does this unmasking myth that the general's call was unmasked and they just accidentally found his call somehow, why does this persist?
	Is this just media madness to take the blame from Obama?
	Well, there's some language in Comey's testimony before the Congressional Committee, I think it was March 2nd of 2017, before he was terminated, that the FBI people unmask him.
	But yes, they were following him.
	Comey admits that they were watching everything he did.
	And frankly, I think the P&G thing happened to trigger a call between him and Kislyak because they had cleared Flynn on absolutely everything.
	The harder they looked, the less they could find of anything except what a good man and honest man he is and how he's always done the right thing.
	So they kept trying and trying harder and harder to find some way to set him up and frame him.
	And so I think they deliberately did the PNG for that very purpose to trigger, because I knew it would trigger, a call between Kislyak and him as the Russian ambassador and the incoming national security advisor.
	And they were watching and waiting for it.
	Comey's testimony admits they were watching and waiting for that.
	Sidney, I have been, this is music, that's why I was smiling when you were saying this.
	I have been saying this for over two and a half years.
	A great source of mine, a long time ago, cued me into that.
	That it's clear since 2014 they're targeting General Flynn.
	It's clear now.
	We already know that.
	We know as far back as the dinner with Svetlana Lukova that the Obama administration, for a variety of reasons I'll actually get into next, can't stand General Flynn.
	They don't like, you know, truth tellers and patriots.
	That's not really the Obama administration's thing.
	So they're targeting him.
	It doesn't work.
	He's done nothing wrong.
	They've done an investigation on him, a counterintelligence investigation.
	They can find nothing.
	And I think you're right.
	They wait for him to leave.
	It's December 29th of 2016.
	He goes to the Dominican Republic.
	They persona non grata, they kick out Russian diplomats from Maryland to New York, knowing of course the incoming national security advisor is they're going to reach out to him.
	And that, I agree with you a thousand percent that they framed him from the start.
	And what's critical is, and if you just want to just quickly give your thoughts on this one too, at that point, December 29, 2016, the FBI has already determined that this case against Flynn is nonsense.
	They have no derogatory information.
	Exactly.
	He was completely clear of anything and everything they could imagine.
	Yeah.
	Do you find it odd that as far back as 2014, there seems to be a concerted effort by powerful people in the global intelligence community?
	Listen, I'm not one of these like conspiracy theory guys or anything.
	It's just obvious at this point that someone had an interest in Mike Flynn.
	He goes to this dinner over in London at Cambridge.
	He has this innocent meeting over there that he goes to and Svetlana Lakova is in attendance.
	And all of a sudden, a couple years later, allegations of some illicit affair thoroughly debunked by everybody there and anyone with any credibility, right?
	Why was that?
	Why was he targeted?
	Was it his active interest in reforming the intelligence community?
	Was it his opposition to the Iran deal, which happened later on?
	I mean, what made General Flynn such a target?
	I think it really started, and I don't know the date of it, but I think it was in 2014 when as head of DIA, he testified before Congress and completely blasted the Obama narrative on ISIS.
	I mean, he blew it up and he was the only one who did.
	I think Clapper and Brennan were sitting there saying, oh, it was not a problem and supporting the Obama administration's notion of it.
	And he said, no, it's a big problem.
	It's a huge problem.
	And he just told the truth about it in front of Congress, as well he should have.
	And that put the target on his back right there.
	And then, of course, he opposed the Iran deal.
	He knew what went on in Benghazi.
	He was going to downsize the intelligence agencies and audit them for all of Brennan's billions of dollars in off-book operations.
	He knew what everything that was going on that needed to be fixed and how dirty it was, and he wanted to fix it.
	That's why he joined with President Trump to, quote, drain the swamp, end quote.
	And boy, is there a lot to drain.
	Do you think President Obama had an active role in the targeting of General Flynn?
	It's certainly beginning to look that way.
	I understand no investigation has started with respect to that in particular, and I understand that.
	But I can't imagine that eventually the trail doesn't lead there.
	I'm sure there are a lot of more investigative steps that need to be taken before any sort of investigation like that would be open, because unlike the prior administration, this administration actually follows the rule of law.
	Attorney General Barr wants to do things the proper way, as if it would if anybody were involved.
	He's going to apply a reasonable suspicion standard and a probable cause standard where they should be applied as opposed to just saying, oh, I don't like that person or that's suspicious and open an investigation on them.
	I just find it interesting that President Obama seems to take a personal interest in Flynn repeatedly, in General Flynn.
	Telling President Trump not to hire him, which says to me he's frightened about something.
	And then in the infamous January 5th, 2017 meeting in the Oval Office, Obama's just, what, 15 days from leaving office, and General Flynn comes up again, remarkably, with Jim Comey and all of the spygate plotters, and they start asking a bunch of questions about General Flynn.
	This just seems odd that Barack Obama is 15 days from leaving office.
	I mean, I've been there for a presidential transition inside the White House.
	Typically, there were a lot of goodbyes, a lot of high fives, a lot of tears.
	It seems odd that he took such a personal interest in General Flynn.
	And if I may, because you are the expert, there is no bigger expert on the Katherine Rumler fiasco than you.
	I just find it strange that Susan Rice memorializes, excuse me, that meeting in a January 20th email 15 days later, and now Susan Rice's lawyer is Catherine Rumler, who you write in your book, Licensed to Lie, a must-read, folks.
	Go to Amazon today and read this, please.
	It's really good.
	Catherine Rumler, Obama's fixer, shows up again as Susan Rice's lawyer.
	It's just incredible.
	Oh yes, they are all involved.
	Sometime I will share with you my other theories about how all that happened.
	Yeah, but you know, you've written about this, how Catherine Rumler has a pre-existing relationship with Andrew Weissman, of course, one of Mueller's bulldogs on the prosecution team.
	You know, Mueller was involved in the Benghazi fiasco.
	You know, she was involved with the IRS fiasco, the Secret Service scandal.
	There always seems to be... And one other thing I discuss on my show today, you should watch it, 1255, there's a segment with you in it, it's only about 5-10 minutes long, but it's worth your time.
	She also appears, magically, defending the DNC in Carter Page, who was a victim of the dossier.
	In that case, Rumler, the Obama fixer, and even worse, Sidney, she turns up as the lawyer of an accused pedophile, George Nader, who Bob Mueller uses as one of his main informants.
	Yes, they are all intertwined, inextricably intertwined.
	I'll leave that there, but License to Lie, folks, check it out.
	We're going to take a quick break.
	We'll come back in a second more with Sidney Powell, attorney for General Mike Flynn and a real American patriot, both Mike Flynn and Sidney Powell.
	She's changed the game here.
	We'll be right back.
	All right, thank you for your patience.
	Our second sponsor today is Helix Sleep.
	They've come in handy lately.
	I've been very tired.
	I've had some really long days.
	Helix Sleep is different.
	They have a mattress here, and they have a quiz that takes just two minutes to complete.
	And it matches your body type and sleep preferences to the perfect mattress for you, not some generic mattress for someone else.
	It's matched to you.
	If you're a side sleeper like I am, a hot sleeper like me, you like a plush or a firm bed with Helix, there's no more guesswork, no more confusion, no more compromising, and no more buying mattresses built for someone else.
	This is built for you.
	Helix Sleep is rated the number one mattress by GQ and Wired Magazine.
	It is the most comfortable mattress I've ever slept on.
	We have one for me, one for my daughter, and we love them.
	Just go to HelixSleep.com slash Dan, take their two-minute sleep quiz, and they'll match you to a customized mattress that'll give you the best sleep of your life.
	They have a 10-year warranty.
	You'll get to try it out for 100 nights risk-free.
	They'll even pick it up for you if you don't love it, but you will.
	Had a friend come down, helped me out with a system around my house, came down from New York.
	We gave him my daughter's room.
	He's like, that was a really comfortable mattress.
	Not kidding.
	Right now, Helix is offering up to $200 off all mattress orders for our listeners.
	Go to HelixSleep.com slash Dan for up to $200 off your mattress order.
	HelixSleep.com slash Dan.
	Go today.
	Hey, think about it.
	My friend who slept at that mattress was customized for my daughter.
	He still loved it.
	Imagine if they could customize one for you.
	HelixSleep.com slash Dan.
	Go today.
	All right, welcome back.
	We're interviewing Sidney Powell, of course, attorney to General Mike Flynn.
	She's done a really amazing job.
	And really, I got so much tremendous feedback when I said you'd be on the show, Sidney, because people view you as a real, I know you don't see yourself this way, and I don't expect you to answer, but they see you as a real hero in this.
	You know, I believe there was some really poor legal coverage for General Flynn and a lot of exposure that shouldn't have been there, and you changed the whole game.
	I mean, Mike Flynn has become, the general's become a symbol for a lot of people.
	A symbol of an overreaching government.
	And from the bottom of my heart, you know, thank you for doing what you're doing.
	You've been doing a really amazing job.
	Thank you.
	It's my honor to represent him.
	He's one of the finest men I've ever had the pleasure to meet.
	A couple more questions for you.
	You've been very generous with your time, and I still haven't gotten yet to the writ of Mandamus, which just broke ironically before this started, but I wanted to save it for the end.
	David Kramer, who's one of John McCain's associates, he's involved in this through a number of different spygate mechanisms.
	I don't need to get into all the details, but At some point had possession of this infamous dossier.
	What's interesting about Kramer is we just saw his unredacted testimony, some of it for the first time.
	David Kramer says in that testimony that Christopher Steele, the, you know, the eponymously named Steele dossier, this fake dossier used to attack the Trump team, and it's in one of the memos, General Flynn himself, Kramer says that Christopher Steele had mentioned to him about this illicit affair General Flynn had with Svetlana Lakova, this Russian-born Svetlana Lakova in 2014.
	My question to you is, that's interesting.
	Because Christopher Steele wasn't at that 2014 dinner, and it's widely suspected that that information about this fake affair that never happened with this Russian-born woman Svetlana Lakova, that information's thought to have originated from Stephen Halper, a paid FBI spy.
	Does that make you question everything here?
	Oh, yes.
	Yeah.
	And Stephen Halper was being handled by Colonel James Baker in ONA.
	That's right.
	And they were paying him through ONA, the Office of Net Assessment in the Pentagon, which became a slush fund for all this kind of crap, instead of doing net assessments like it was supposed to, to protect the United States.
	And Baker, interestingly enough, at the Office of Net Assessments, you're right, these are documented contracts paid to Stephen Halper to essentially spy and do things like this for the government.
	David Ignatius, who wrote the article, the infamous article in the Washington Post in February of 2017 about the call between General Flynn and the Russian Ambassador Kislyak, It's already known through widely reported material that Baker and Ignatius had a pre-existing relationship.
	This web of deceit just never seems to end in this case.
	Yes, and on top of that, it was Clapper who called Ignatius after the passing the baton ceremony on January 10th and told him to pull the trigger or take the kill shot or whatever on the article on Flynn.
	So Clapper's all involved in it too.
	Well, this bothers me, this whole Halper angle.
	For the audience at home, I know Sidney and I are pretty well read in on the case, and forgive me if we're making leaps of assumptions here that you know all this, but just to kind of backtrack a little bit, Stephen Halper, we now know, was a paid informant for the United States government, the FBI.
	Stephen Halper is a source of a lot of the information in the Spygate case, but it's interesting because he also On August 10th of 2016, the FBI opens up cases on George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort, and Carter Page.
	Not on your client, General Flynn.
	But what's fascinating about this is the very next day, Sydney, August 11th in 2016, we know, according to the IG report, that Stephen Halper meets up with the FBI.
	What he says, gosh, we only know.
	And then five days later, magically, they open up a case on General Flynn, which says to me that this paid...
	And if you don't want to speculate, that's fine.
	I don't want to put you on the spot, but this would be the scandal of the century if the Pentagon's Office of Net Assessments is paying a spy to spy on a three-star general for no reason other than he opposed the political positions of Barack Obama.
	Well, I think that's a distinct possibility.
	I really do.
	I mean, Halpers is as scummy as they come, and he was Definitely tight with Baker.
	I mean, I've heard that they met behind closed doors with nobody else present any number of times on a regular basis.
	And also, the other important point is, it was August 15 that Strzok and Page did the text message to each other about the insurance policy.
	Then on August 16, they opened the case on Flynn.
	Then on August 17, they send Agent Pienka into the presidential briefing This is supposedly a very trusted relationship and instead Pianca spies on President Trump and is there to gauge and assess the mannerisms of General Flynn for the entire two hour briefing in case they need to interview him later as a subject, i.e.
	if Trump is elected and they want to send agents in to try and trap or frame Flynn exactly like they did.
	Sidney, do you find it odd, too, that in that Office of Net Assessments that's paying Stefan Halper?
	This is a Pentagon office, widely suspected of being involved in, you know, undercover kind of operations things, which is fine.
	I mean, I'm sure some of it may be legitimate U.S.
	intelligence gathering.
	This is certainly shady.
	But the office that's paying Halper, we have the, you know, we can see there were contracts there.
	It's not difficult to figure out.
	A whistleblower emerged from that Office of Net Assessments, a man by the name of Adam Lovinger.
	This was a man who was proposed to join, in some fashion, the National Security Council that General Flynn was ahead of.
	And this man, Mr. Lovinger, found some suspicious activity with these payments.
	And it's suspected one of the things he was suspicious of were these contracts with Halper.
	Again, a paid spy for the government who may have, in fact, been spying on General Flynn, according to multiple reports.
	Lovinger was then investigated himself.
	I mean, we were told by the Democrats in the media we're supposed to be celebrating whistleblowers.
	Do you have any thoughts on what happened to Lovinger?
	The real whistleblowers are totally screwed.
	I mean, Adam was a real whistleblower and he has been nothing but punished for being a whistleblower.
	And he had extremely valid complaints about abuse of funds and the Office of Net Assessment not doing what it was supposed to have been doing for the last 10 years.
	Yeah, God forbid.
	I mean, we take care of our... Remember, we were told whistleblowers are sacrosanct, unless, of course, they're whistleblowers that would actually blow the whistle on anything.
	Getting back to kind of liberal myths about this case, you know, obviously, I know why the general pled guilty to a crime he obviously didn't commit.
	I started that.
	But I just want the liberals to hear it from you.
	No one knows him better than you do.
	But one of the other things you hear often from talking heads on television who know absolutely nothing, mostly double-digit IQs, is they say, well, the government had him on this lobbying thing with Turkey.
	It was totally illegal.
	And you know, it's interesting when you actually read the case and some of the Mueller prosecutors and the awful work they did.
	At one point, the judge asks him in the case about this Turkish thing, and they say to him, hey, did you even bother to reach out to the Turkish government and check if this was actual lobbying for the Turkish government?
	And their answer, I believe, is, no, no, we didn't do that.
	Yeah, we kind of missed that part.
	So can you clear up this Farah Turkey thing for a minute?
	Because you hear it on TV all the time, and it's just utter nonsense.
	It is utter nonsense, and there's several reasons why.
	The first is that the Flynn Intel Group, which is the company that had the contract with a Dutch company, by the way.
	It was owned by a Turkish businessman, but it wasn't the government of Turkey.
	They had the contract to provide research and information that they were requesting, and so they Started to do that, but at the same time, nothing that the client asked him to do, he was dissatisfied with every bit of it.
	They didn't follow his directions or instructions at all, to the point he was livid and screamed at the end, this is what I paid you these hundreds of thousands of dollars for?
	I mean, he was completely dissatisfied.
	The other thing was that they filed a Lobbying Disclosure Act registration form, which is the largest single exception to a FARA filing by statute, and they did that timely when they took the contract.
	The other thing is that there are no false statements in the FARA registration form.
	The government actually made up the false statements.
	They took a chunk out of one sentence.
	One of the other statements was not from Flynn at all.
	It was from a law firm, and that's easily established by looking at the registration documents and the back documents that support it.
	They simply made up the false statements there, just like they made up the purported false statements from the 302.
	It was a complete frame job.
	And I don't think there were any false statements on the form, really.
	I mean, if Covington had pushed back on that like they should have and stood their ground, it wouldn't have even been included.
	So just to kind of backtrack for a minute, so the government has no false statements in the FARA forms, the lobbying forms, just a normal everyday talk.
	They have no false statements in the 302 and have yet to produce the original 302.
	They produce an edited one.
	And another thing, remember the edited transcript of the phone call with the White House lawyer where they allege the White House lawyers asking for national security and they leave out the point where he says, we're not talking about national security secrets.
	I mean, the malfeasance in this case is profound, and it leads me to my next question, given the breaking news of the day.
	What the heck is Judge Sullivan doing in this case?
	The government has clearly come forward now, seeing all this malfeasance, and said, we're not going to prosecute this.
	There's no case here.
	And the judge won't let it go.
	What is going on here?
	I wish I knew.
	Unfortunately, Judge Sullivan has just gone completely contrary to Supreme Court precedent that came out just two weeks ago in a unanimous decision by Justice Ginsburg.
	And completely contrary to a D.C.
	Circuit case called Fokker Services.
	And the court today ordered him to respond to our petition for writ of mandamus, which is an extraordinary writ against a judge that lies only when they have acted completely outside their line of authority as he has.
	And they issued a very succinct order saying You've got to file a response by June 1.
	I mean, usually they invite a response from the judge, but here they're ordering a response from Judge Sullivan.
	They cite FACR services and Rule 48a, which require him to accept the government's dismissal.
	I mean, it says with leave of court, but that's a purely ministerial section to provide that the defendant cannot be punished repeatedly by multiple prosecutions which wouldn't apply here because the government wants to dismiss it with prejudice as they should and he's instead of doing that he's invited briefs from
	And multiple people outside the case, which doesn't even exist in a criminal case.
	That's in violation of the Supreme Court decision.
	He appointed a specific amicus or friend of court to act as a prosecutor on his behalf.
	A 9-0 Supreme Court decision.
	Right?
	A 9-0 Supreme Court decision.
	And folks, listen to Ms.
	Powell, how unusual this is.
	The government has now come forward after the disclosure of this new material from the FBI, all of these handwritten notes, showing, in my opinion, clearly General Flynn's frame.
	The government has no interest in prosecuting anymore because it's a total loser, this case.
	The judge will not let the government drop the case.
	Now, one of the One of the great legal minds I rely on is Andy McCarthy over at National Review.
	He brought up an interesting point.
	This Rule 48, which states at some point that you need the leave of the court to dismiss a case.
	Andy McCarthy points out that, Sidney, this is done to protect defendants.
	Not the government!
	He makes the point that this is to prevent the government from having a really crappy case halfway through, and then dropping it, and then bringing the case again, and then bringing the case again.
	It's meant to protect the defendant from Melissa's prosecution, not the government.
	This is ridiculous what this judge is doing.
	Exactly.
	And it's also contrary to what he did in the Stevens case, where on a three-page motion to dismiss four Brady violations, like we have in this case, failure to disclose evidence favorable to the defense, he immediately granted the dismissal in a little half-page order.
	That's all it takes.
	He just needs to sign the order the government attached.
	He's dismissed other cases.
	We found cases even where guilty pleas had been entered.
	But the government moved to dismiss later, a long time later, for different reasons.
	Judge Leon signed three of those.
	There are cases all over the place.
	Oh, and this is another one you'll like.
	In the Enron-related cases, Mr. Weissman and his team are no stranger to losing guilty pleas that have to be vacated because the guilty plea of David Duncan, an Arthur Anderson partner, None of this is new.
	guilty plea of Christopher Calgar, an Enron executive, both had to be withdrawn
	because Weissman and his cohorts had bludgeoned them into pleading guilty to
	things that weren't even crimes. That's exactly what happened here. So none of
	this is new. It's all part of their whole malevolent prosecution scheme.
	One other thing, but more your thoughts on this one.
	I found this interesting too about the response to your writ of mandamus order.
	Number one, they made Judge Sullivan respond personally.
	In other words, not through any kind of amicus.
	He has to respond personally to this and they wanted him to respond by June 1st.
	Which is fascinating because the judge wanted outside people to brief on this.
	He's basically opening the court up to the Washington Post opinion section.
	He wanted those responses by June 10th.
	So it appears to me, I'm not a lawyer, you are, that the upper level court here, the district court, excuse me, the circuit court is saying to the district court judge, we're not playing this game anymore.
	You're going to respond before these amicus briefs are even in on June 10th.
	You're going to respond personally by June 1st.
	Am I reading that wrong?
	No, you're reading it correctly.
	For them to act this promptly, I mean, they just got it docketed yesterday.
	And for them to set a short fuse like this shows they appreciate the seriousness of the issues and the way it undermines the fair administration of justice.
	I mean, what Sullivan did is just egregious.
	Yeah.
	And completely unprecedented.
	I mean, I've been practicing longer than I want to publicly admit and dealt with hundreds of cases all in federal court.
	Never seen anything like this.
	And you know what's really disappointing, Sydney?
	I've watched your media appearances, I've followed you for, gosh, I interviewed you on my old show three years ago when I lived in a different house and a different network.
	You know, you've always been very respectful to Judge Sullivan.
	I've never, you know, you're not a flamethrower.
	I don't see you going on TV screaming and yelling.
	Not that any one present company exclude has ever done that.
	Wink and a nod.
	But that's not you.
	I mean, you don't do that.
	And it's just disappointing because it's, you know, you expect judges, regardless of their political ideology, their only job is to sit there and rule on the facts.
	And this case, sadly, seems to have taken a political turn.
	My last question, exit question for you here, but an important one nonetheless.
	Again, Sidney Powell, author of License to Lie, a terrific book.
	And if you ever want to look at her work, some of her prior articles on Obama's fixer, it's just, it'll really open your eyes.
	Really great stuff.
	It's in our show notes for the show today.
	When you filed this Brady motion, And the handwritten motion, in other words, for those non-legal folks out there, Sidney thought there was some potential evidence that General Flynn was innocent that wasn't being shown to them, and that you legally have to do that as an agent and a prosecutor.
	You have to turn that over.
	You can't take the person's innocent and prosecute them anyway.
	When you got that information that somehow the FBI had either been hiding or, I mean, I can't get in their heads, but it's just ridiculous how this stuff didn't appear.
	And you finally see these handwritten notes by the supervisors of the people who interviewed Mike Flynn, Bill Priestep, who supervised Peter Stroke, who interviewed General Flynn in that infamous interview where they accused him of lying.
	And you see this sentence in there.
	What's our goal?
	To get him to lie or to get him fired.
	As an attorney, are you thinking to yourself, this case is over?
	Yes, I was absolutely livid when I saw that.
	I mean, it was clear to me that he was talking to McCabe and McCabe had been determined to pursue it no matter what.
	And he was trying to either right the ship a little bit or at least prod his conscience to realize what their goal was.
	And instead, they were absolutely determined to go in there to frame him however they could.
	Yeah, when I saw that, when that broke, that was huge news.
	And I'll tell you, if it wasn't for this tragic situation we're going through now with this deadly virus, that news, the liberal media would have had a really hard time burying that.
	They're trying their hardest.
	Sydney, thank you so much.
	I can relay some honest expressions of gratitude from my audience who have been Really excited about this interview since I announced it the other day, and many of them wanted me to personally thank you for your role in exposing this.
	You've done a real service to America.
	I know you're a very humble person, but I want you to just accept it for what it is.
	People really appreciate the work, and please pass on to the General that we've all got his back.
	You know, we love him.
	He's become a symbol of something a lot bigger, so we really appreciate it, and thank you for being very generous with your time.
	Sidney Powell, folks.
	License to Lie.
	Pick up our book.
	Thanks again, Sidney.
	Thank you, Dan, and thank your audience for all their support.
	We feel it, and we appreciate it.
	You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.

▲