The Powell factor in the Flynn case

Former Assistant United States Attorney Sidney Powell now represents Michael Flynn in the criminal case that still awaits his sentencing. This past Monday Powell and Flynn appeared together in court for a status hearing before Judge Emmet Sullivan. A partially redacted transcript of the hearing is posted here on Scribd. Margot Cleveland commented on the hearing last week in the Federalist column “Michael Flynn Attorney Suggests Special Counsel Withheld Key Information From His Defense.”

Powell wants to see additional information from the government. The information she wants appears to bear on the merits of the case against Flynn and is in large part classified. Powell asserted: “I do think most of the information I will need to review may be classified.” Powell wants a security clearance to get access to the information, but it is not apparent to me from whom she intends to get the information or even what it relates to.

Cleveland cites an August 25, 2017, letter, from then Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley requesting that the Department of Defense and the Defense Intelligence Agency “declassify a key piece of information from” a classified briefing provided to Judiciary Committee members about Flynn. Cleveland quotes Grassley’s statement that declassification would “not pose any ongoing risk to national security,” and “would be in the public interest, and in the interest of fairness to Lt. General Flynn.”

Cleveland comments that, at a minimum, it appears those documents should previously have been provided to Flynn. Cleveland also takes up the recordings or transcripts of calls involving Flynn that the government has refused to produce.

What is happening here? We necessarily await further proceedings in Flynn’s case to get any idea what Powell is talking about. The transcript provides no answers. The many mysteries of the Flynn case abide.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses