Wisconsin stay-at-home order is 'definition of tyranny,' state Supreme Court justice suggests

A conservative state Supreme Court justice in Wisconsin suggested Tuesday that the extension of the state’s stay-at-home order was the “definition of tyranny” and compared it to U.S. internment camps for Japanese-Americans during World War II.
"Isn't it the very definition of tyranny for one person to order people to be imprisoned for going to work, among other ordinarily lawful activities?" Justice Rebecca Bradley said during video oral arguments of a lawsuit brought by Republican state lawmakers against Democratic Gov. Tony Evers and State Health Secretary Andrea Palm, The Washington Post reported.
Palm issued a statewide stay-at-home order March 24 that is set to expire May 26.
“The people never consented to a single individual having that kind of power," Bradley said.

"The people never consented to a single individual having that kind of power."
— Justice Rebecca Bradley, Wisconsin Supreme Court

Republicans say the order goes too far and ignores state rulemaking laws and doesn’t allow for oversight, RiverTowns.net reported.
“I’ll direct your attention to another time in history, in the Korematsu decision, where the court said the need for action is great and time is short, and that justified ‘assembling together and placing under guard all those of Japanese ancestry’ in assembly centers during World War II,” Bradley added, according to The Post.
The 1944 Korematsu decision upheld the use of Japanese internment camps.
Evers’ administration argued that it’s vital to keep the order in place.
“People will die if this order is enjoined with nothing to replace it,” Colin Roth, assistant attorney general of Wisconsin, said.
He argued the state’s Department of Health Services has the power “to do whatever is necessary to combat a novel, deadly, communicable disease like the one we’re facing today.”
Chief Justice Patience Roggensack said “there’s an awful lot of emotion” being displayed in the case, “because we are in the middle of a pandemic that all sides agree on," according to Madison.com. She didn't say when the court would rule.
Another conservative on the court, Justice Daniel Kelly, was defeated by more liberal Justice Jill Karofsky last month.
Several U.S. states have already started to reopen some businesses following stay-at-home orders.
The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Dan Crenshaw reacts to jailing of salon owner, says some leaders ‘drunk with power’

Tuesday’s jailing of a hair salon owner in Texas for defying a coronavirus shutdown order just doesn’t cut it, U.S. Rep. Dan Crenshaw wrote Tuesday.
In fact, the punishment dished out to Dallas business owner Shelley Luther was another example of public officials overstepping their authority during the crisis, the congressman wrote on Twitter.
“These punishments are NOT just,” Crenshaw wrote. “They are not reasonable. Small-minded ‘leaders’ across the country have become drunk with power. This must end.”
At a hearing, Judge Eric Moye called Luther’s action “selfish,” and claimed she had “disrespected the orders of the state, the county and this city,” FOX 4 of Dallas-Fort Worth reported.
Luther claimed she had to reopen her business because a federal loan had arrived too late to help her, according to the Dallas Morning News.
He said Luther could avoid jail if she would apologize, pay a fine, and remain shut down until a statewide reopening of salons takes effect Friday.
But Luther opted for jail instead.
"I have to disagree with you, sir, when you say that I'm selfish because feeding my kids is not selfish,” Luther told the judge, according to FOX 4. “I have hairstylists that are going hungry because they would rather feed their kids. So, sir, if you think the law is more important than kids getting fed, then please go ahead with your decision. But I am not going to shut the salon.”
It was the latest example where Americans were finding themselves up against what many viewed as harsh punishments.
In late April, a 40-year-old Idaho mother was arrested for allegedly refusing to leave a closed playground where she had brought her two children to play.
Her arrest later prompted a demonstration at city hall by more than 100 supporters.
In North Carolina, members of the “ReOpen NC” group were arrested last week, accused of resisting a public officer and violating the Democratic governor’s executive order.
“If you feel the need to stay home, it is your God-given right to do so. But we want to live!" suspect Ashley Elaina Smith said. “[Gov.] Roy Cooper has shown again and again how out of touch he really is. With his illogical declarations of who’s essential and who’s not, he’s effectively destroyed generational family businesses and many good businesses alike. He’s got to go. November’s coming, baby.”
Across the country, governors such as Laura Kelly of Kansas and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan have faced opposition for the shutdown orders, such as Kelly’s limits on church gatherings – which faced GOP opposition and later a temporary restraining order – and Whitmer’s restrictions against traveling to relatives’ homes, and on sales of items such as gardening supplies, both of which were scaled back after public protests.

Congressional leaders support deductions for PPP borrowers

Congressional lawmakers are thinking that the Internal Revenue Service may have gotten it wrong when it ruled that borrowers of the Paycheck Protection Program couldn't receive tax deductions on expenses.
That ruling may not be the last word, according to Forbes.
Lawmakers on Tuesday alerted the Treasury Department that the IRS ignored the intent of the PPP.
The IRS was concerned about a double tax benefit, which according to lawmakers, may not be a bad thing.
They argue the purpose of the plan was to provide economic and specifically tax benefits to businesses to make it possible to maintain workers.
The group of congressional members is headed by Chuck Grassley and Richard Neal, the chairmen of the top tax committees in the Senate and the House, respectively.
PPP loans are largely expected to be allocated toward payroll expenses (75 percent), but the remaining 25 percent can be put toward rent, mortgage interest, utilities and interest on other debt obligations.

Hannity bashes 'truly disgusting' Obama letter hitting Biden-Ukraine probe: 'What were you hiding?'

Sean Hannity opened his show Tuesday by reacting to what he called a "truly dishonest, disgusting" letter obtained by Fox News indicating that former President Barack Obama has privately bashed Senate Republicans’ investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden and his son's dealings in Ukraine, a probe Obama's office said lent credence to a “Russian disinformation campaign."
"The office of the former president, Barack Obama, blasted a congressional investigation into Biden's dealing with Ukraine," Hannity said. "Wonder why. Now, the office actually accused the investigation [of] giving credence to a 'Russian disinformation campaign,' and this ridiculous letter insinuated lawmakers were just spreading Russian propaganda."
"This is all a lie, what Obama put out tonight," Hannity continued, calling the letter "truly disgusting and dishonest."
"In reality, it was Obama. It was his administration. It was Biden. They are the ones that spent months and months propagating the Russian disinformation campaign. Uh, Barack? Did you ever hear of the dirty Russian dossier that Hillary Clinton paid for? Of course you have."
The letter, addressed to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), which manages presidential records, was written in response to a request on Nov. 21, 2019, by Sens. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Ron Johnson R-Wis., for Obama administration records on Ukraine-related meetings.
The letter described the senators' request as improper use of the NARA’s release terms and a supposed effort “to shift the blame for Russian interference in the 2016 election to Ukraine.”
It goes on to cite testimony from former National Security aide Fiona Hill who derided the idea of Ukrainian interference in the 2016 election as a “fictional narrative that is being perpetrated and propagated by the Russian security services.”
"Members of your administration, they used that unreliable Clinton-bought-and-paid-for, Russian misinformation from the get-go filled with Russian lies," Hannity said, addressing Obama. "Why? To deny Carter Page his civil liberties and civil rights because your people were spying, meaning [former FBI Director] Jim Comey and company, on the Trump campaign deep into the Trump presidency.
"That would be under your watch. Your guy, Jim Comey and company," Hannity went on. "That same Russian dossier was used to commit fraud on FISA applications, premeditated fraud."

"In reality, it was Obama. It was his administration. It was Biden. They are the ones that spent months and months propagating the Russian disinformation campaign."
— Sean Hannity, Fox News

The letter's release comes after Grassley and Johnson, who respectively chair the Senate Finance Committee and the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, sent a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last month demanding more information on the Obama administration’s dealings in Ukraine.
"What did Obama know, and when did he know it? What did Biden know and when did he know it?" Hannity questioned.
"Ultimately, if President Obama was so concerned about Russian collusion, then he would've listened to Congressman Devin Nunes because Nunes warned Biden and Obama that in 2014, Russia would be playing around in their elections as they have in the past. He wouldn't have dismissed  [Utah Sen. Mitt] Romney's warning in 2012 either," Hannity said.
"Well, Barack, what... were you hiding from we, the people? We would like answers."
Fox News' By Bradford Betz and Mike Emanuel contributed to this report.

Gavin Newsom King of California Cartoons

Biden pressed to choose a black woman as his running mate

 

FILE - In this Feb. 22, 2020, file photo, Democratic presidential candidate former Vice President Joe Biden speaks during a caucus night event in Las Vegas. As Biden’s search for a vice presidential running mate heats up, he is facing growing pressure to choose a black woman. (AP Photo/John Locher, File)

DETROIT (AP) — 

After a devastating start to the Democratic primary, Joe Biden’s campaign was revived when black voters in South Carolina and throughout the South overwhelmingly sided with him. Now that he’s the presumptive Democratic nominee, black voters and leaders are pressing for him to pick a black woman as his running mate.

Biden launched a committee last week to begin vetting possible candidates for the vice presidency, a process he has said will likely last through July. He has already committed to picking a woman.

But black voters and leaders say he needs to go further and pick a black woman. They argue that Biden’s success — and that of the Democratic Party as a whole — depends on black people turning out to vote in November. They want a tangible return for their loyalty, not just a thank you for showing up on Election Day.

“Black people want an acknowledgement of the many years of support they have given the Democratic Party,” said Niambi Carter, a Howard University political science professor.

House Minority Whip Jim Clyburn, whose endorsement in South Carolina was widely credited with helping widen Biden’s winning margin and start his avalanche of March primary victories, said “clearly” he would prefer a black woman. But he insisted he’s not pushing Biden in that direction.

“I’m the father of three grown African American women. So naturally I prefer an African American woman, but it doesn’t have to be,” Clyburn said. “I’ve made that very clear.”

Biden has been unusually vocal about the people he would consider as running mates. He’s referenced two black women, Sen. Kamala Harris of California and Stacey Abrams, the former Democratic nominee for governor in Georgia. Other black women, including Rep. Val Demings of Florida and Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, have also been mentioned.

But Biden is also thought to be considering several white women, including Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

President Donald Trump said his November opponent owes the spot to Warren, theorizing that Sen. Bernie Sanders “would have won every single state on Super Tuesday” if Warren had dropped out of the primary race earlier.

In an interview Monday with the New York Post, Trump dismissed Abrams while claiming responsibility for her defeat in the 2018 Georgia governor’s race.

Zerlina Maxwell, a political analyst and former director of progressive media for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, said this is an opportunity for Biden to recognize the political force of black women.

“The Democratic nominee needs to make it completely clear that they understand the moment and that they understand that black women are the foundation of a successful Democratic Party at every level,” Maxwell said.

Adrianne Shropshire, executive director of Black PAC, said black voters are looking for “authenticity.”

“When folks have talked to us about what they want in a candidate, it is someone who can relate to them,” Shropshire said, noting the coronavirus’s disparate impact on black Americans.

But she said that doesn’t mean that a vice presidential nominee has to be a black woman.

“Having a black running mate checks that box for a lot of people, but I would also say in the same way that black voters weren’t simply during the primary contest saying, ‘Who’s the black candidate?’ I don’t think black voters are doing that for the vice presidential choice either,” she said, later adding the bottom line: “Ultimately, people want to win.”

Tharon Johnson, a prominent black strategist who worked for Barack Obama’s two presidential campaigns, said Biden’s focus should be on “energy,” not necessarily on race.

“I am totally, 100% behind the narrative that it’s time for a black woman on the ticket,” Johnson said. “But he has to consider a lot of metrics. Who can he bring on that will increase enthusiasm and drive turnout in those states that matter most in November? And what characteristics are there that will bring that excitement?”

Biden campaign co-chair Cedric Richmond, a Louisiana congressman and a former Congressional Black Caucus chairman, is a forceful advocate for African Americans within Democratic politics. But he’s also absolute in his assertion that Biden cannot be forced to check a demographic box.

“I’m not sure that the VP is going to throw names out there just to appease people,” Richmond said.

Symone Sanders is the highest-ranking black woman on Biden’s staff and played a key role in shoring up Biden’s campaign in South Carolina. But he also has an older cadre of advisers reminding him of the complicated calculations in putting together a winning coalition.

Kenneth Walden, a 26-year-old black man who lives in the battleground state of North Carolina, said the pick must be a black woman.

“And if not, I believe that it would be a repeat of 2016, where we had an all-white ticket and everybody was not energized,” said Walden, who works in telecommunications and on a YouTube show. “Black people are going to feel betrayed. We’re not just voting based off just party lines anymore.”

Cierra Conerly, a 32-year-old entrepreneur and small-business owner, said she’s torn about whom she wants to see on the ticket, but she said it needs to be someone who can identify strongly with diverse groups.

“I’m African American, I’m a woman, I’m a business owner and I’m also LGBTQ” said Conerly, who lives in Arizona, another state Democrats hope to flip. “All of those aspects are really important and I want someone who is going to be able to speak to those.”

Taylor Harrell, the political director for Mothering Justice, a nonprofit that advocates for mothers, said Biden’s choice shouldn’t be all that complicated: Choose a black woman.

“It’s become a cute catchphrase to say ‘trust black women’ or that black women are the backbone of the Democratic Party, so if we’re truly the backbone, being the backbone should essentially mean being the vice president,” Harrell, a Detroit resident, said. “White people have had a voice for so long and having a black woman will allow us to feel like our voices are going to continue to be heard after they’ve been put on pause for these past four years.”

___

Barrow reported from Atlanta.

Newsom's office refuses records request on 'murky' $1B mask deal with Chinese company

Gov. Gavin Newsom, the Democrat from California, has denied a public records request from the Los Angeles Times seeking details into a nearly $1 billion deal for protective masks from a Chinese car manufacturer.
Newsom's office has been criticized over lack of transparency into the contract for weeks and the latest refusal will likely raise even more suspicions. The paper reported that his office has insisted that disclosure into the deal with BYD, which stands for Build Your Dreams, could jeopardize the mask delivery.
“Publishing the agreement now — before performance under the contract is complete — would introduce substantial and unnecessary risk to the State’s ability to secure necessary supplies,” Ryan Gronsky, an attorney with the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, wrote to the Times.
Last month, Newsom told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow that Sacramento had just inked a deal to buy 200 million masks monthly, which was considered at the time to be a massive haul amid the international scramble for protective gear needed in the fight against the coronavirus.
“As a nation-state, with the capacity to write a check for hundreds of millions, no billions, of dollars, we’re in a position to do something bold and big,” Newsom told reporters the next day.
Democratic state Assemblyman Richard Bloom, a budget committee member, said  last month details of the BYD deal “are very murky.”
The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services told the paper that the contract does not need to be made public. A statement said that the agency determined that “all responsive records are exempt from disclosure, including exemptions for records reflecting attorney work product, attorney-client privileged information, or other information exempt from disclosure under federal or state law.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report

NY attorney general looking into sex-harassment claims at NBC News, reporter says

NBC Fake News

The New York Attorney General's office is looking into NBC News over reported claims of sexual harassment there, investigative journalist Rich McHugh revealed to Fox News' "Tucker Carlson Tonight" on Monday night.
Host Tucker Carson began the interview by asking McHugh if he had heard that the New York AG has been "investigating" NBC News over "sexual abuse, sexual harassment claims."
"Yes I have, Tucker," McHugh confirmed. "That is true. I'm aware of it. I've been looking into it for a story. It was the New York Attorney General's office civil division, so we're not sure if it could lead into anything criminal, but I do know that they've been looking into this and interviewing employees over a number of months."
"Well, that's kind of amazing," Carlson reacted. "So, just to be completely clear... the New York Attorney General's office is looking into NBC News. Remarkable."
McHugh, a freelance journalist whose latest work has been published in Business Insider, previously worked as a producer at NBC News and had collaborated with Ronan Farrow on the reporting of disgraced film mogul Harvey Weinstein, which the network had buried.
Farrow revealed in his 2019 book "Catch and Kill" that top executives at NBC News chose not to run the Weinstein story back in 2017, partly to shield one of its top anchors, Matt Lauer. The network later fired Lauer after accusations of sexual misconduct against him emerged.
The office of the New York attorney general did not immediately respond to Fox News' request for comment.
It was announced earlier Monday that NBC News chairman Andy Lack will leave the company by the end of the month as part of a major shake-up at Comcast’s NBCUniversal. It is unclear if Lack's exit from the network is tied to any actions by the New York attorney general. Lack previously had feuded with Farrow over the network's handling of his Weinstein reporting.
Lack "decided to step down and will transition out of the company at the end of the month," the company announced in a statement on its organizational restructure, taking effect immediately.
The restructured company will pair NBCUniversal’s television networks -- including MSNBC, USA, SYFY, Bravo, Oxygen and E! -- with its new streaming service, Peacock, into one division headed by NBCUniversal television and streaming chairman Mark Lazarus.
"This is the right structure to lead NBCUniversal into the future during this transformational time in the industry," NBCUniversal chairman Jeff Shell said in a statement. "Mark has a proven track record across every aspect of our television business from sports to local stations to entertainment. He is the ideal leader to oversee our television and streaming portfolio in this newly formed division, which allows us to have a more unified approach to our content strategy."
Telemundo chairman Cesar Conde has been named chairman of NBCUniversal News Group, which now includes NBC News, MSNBC and CNBC.
"Cesar is a well-respected, strategic leader who has succeeded in multiple roles at NBCUniversal since joining the company in 2013, Shell said.
Lazarus and Conde will report directly to Shell. NBC News president Noah Oppenheim, MSNBC president Phil Griffin and CNBC president Mark Hoffman will now report to Conde.
The moves were Shell's first major changes to NBCUniversal since he replaced longtime Lack ally Steve Burke as CEO earlier this year.
Fox News' Brian Flood contributed to this report. 

Flynn bombshells cast doubt on Mueller prosecutor Brandon Van Grack's compliance with court order

Explosive, newly unsealed evidence documenting the FBI's efforts to target national security adviser Michael Flynn -- including a top official's handwritten memo debating whether the FBI's "goal" was "to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired" -- calls into question whether Brandon Van Grack, a Justice Department prosecutor and former member of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's Team, complied with a court order to produce favorable evidence to Flynn.
Since February 2018, Van Grack has been obligated to comply with D.C. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan's standing order in the Flynn case to produce all evidence in the government’s possession “that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant’s guilt or punishment.”
The order also requires the government to submit favorable defense evidence to the court, including possible "impeachment evidence" that could undermine witnesses, even if the government believes the evidence “not to be material.”
Van Grack has long informed Sullivan that the government’s so-called "Brady" obligations, referring to prosecutors' duty to turn over exculpatory materials to defendants, have been met. In an October 2019 filing, Van Grack denied governmental misconduct and assured the court that the government “has complied, and will continue to comply, with its discovery and disclosure obligations, including those imposed pursuant to Brady and the Court’s Standing Order.”
In that same October 2019 motion, Van Grack elaborated on those claims, telling Sullivan that the government had not “affirmatively suppressed evidence” or hid Brady material. He denied that government was “aware of any information that would be favorable and material to [Flynn] at sentencing.”
Van Grack further dismissed arguments by Flynn's attorney, Sidney Powell, that “General Flynn was targeted and taken out of the Trump administration for concocted and political purposes” as “conspiracy theories.”

Special counsel Robert Mueller walks from the podium after speaking at the Department of Justice Wednesday, May 29, 2019, in Washington, about the Russia investigation. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)

What Van Grack didn’t inform the court about – and didn’t provide to Flynn – was the newly unsealed January 4, 2017 "Closing Communication" from the FBI Washington Field Office, which recommended the FBI close its investigation of Flynn, as its exhaustive search through government databases “did not yield any information on which to predicate further investigative efforts."
Van Grack also failed to provide evidence to Flynn’s attorneys that anti-Trump former FBI agent Peter Strzok then immediately intervened and instructed the FBI case manager handling the Flynn investigation to keep the probe open, followed by indicators that the bureau would seek to investigate Flynn for possible violations of an obscure 18th century law known as the Logan Act -- which has never been utilized in a modern prosecution.
Another Strzok text mentions that the FBI’s "7th floor" – meaning FBI leadership – may have been involved in the decision to keep the Flynn case alive.
Instead, Van Grack characterized Flynn’s alleged false statements as critical to the FBI’s “legitimate and significant investigation into whether individuals associated with the campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump were coordinating with the Russian government in its activities to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.”
He argued to Sullivan that Flynn’s “conduct and communications with Russia went to the heart of that inquiry.” And Van Grack said that Flynn’s alleged “false statements to the FBI on January 24, 2017, were absolutely material.”
But by that time, the FBI had already cleared Flynn of any improper ties or coordination with Russia. Shedding light on internal FBI deliberations, notes from the then-assistant director of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division Bill Priestap -- written before the Flynn interview and after discussions with then-FBI Director James Comey and then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Fox News is told -- show discussions of whether their “goal” was “to get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.”

In this July 26, 2017 photo, Bill Priestap, assistant director of the FBI's Counterintelligence Division, testifies during a Judiciary Committee hearing into alleged collusion between Russian and the Trump campaign. (Reuters)

These unsealed notes further suggest that agents planned in the alternative to get Flynn “to admit to breaking the Logan Act” when he spoke to then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak during the presidential transition period.
The Logan Act has never been used in a modern criminal prosecution and has a questionable constitutional status; it was enacted in 1799 in an era before telephones and was intended to prevent individuals from falsely claiming to represent the United States government abroad.
"Any criminal investigation grounded in Logan Act questions is an obvious political pretext to attack the Trump Administration," GOP Reps. Jim Jordan and Mike Johnson wrote to FBI Director Christopher Wray on Monday, in a letter seeking in-person interviews and key documents. "FBI attorney Lisa Page admitted to Congress the Justice Department saw the Logan Act as an 'untested' and 'very, very old' statute."
This new evidence puts Van Grack at risk for accusations that he was misleading Sullivan as to the materiality of Flynn’s statements to FBI agents Strzok and Joe Pientka when they interviewed him in the White House on January 24, 2017.
Jordan and Johnson are now specifically seeking to question Pientka, who participated in the January 2017 White House interview that led to Flynn's prosecution.
Fox News has previously determined that Pientka was also intimately involved in the probe of former Trump aide Carter Page, which the DOJ has since acknowledged was riddled with fundamental errors and premised on a discredited dossier that the bureau was told could be part of a Russian disinformation campaign.
Pientka was conspicuously removed from the FBI's website after Fox News contacted the FBI about his extensive role in Crossfire Hurricane Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) matters -- a change first noticed by Twitter user Techno Fog -- but sources say Pientka remains in a senior role at the agency's San Francisco field office.
The FBI, speaking to Fox News last December, asserted that reporting on Pientka's identity would potentially endanger his life and would serve no legitimate journalistic purpose. Republicans have previously sought to question Pientka, however, beginning in 2018. On Monday, the FBI declined to provide any additional comment.
For an individual to be prosecuted for a false statement offense under federal law, the lie must be “material.” The newly revealed materials strongly suggest the FBI wasn’t truly concerned about Flynn’s call with Kislyak during the presidential transition period. If the questioning of Flynn by Strzok and Pientka were based on a pretext, that revelation would arguably defeat any assertion that Flynn’s purported lies were material.
Other reports of edited information and a secret agreement may put the issues surrounding the compliance with Sullivan’s standing order into context.
For example, the Mueller Report omitted key parts of a voicemail from Trump lawyer John Dowd to Flynn’s former lawyers discussing a joint defense agreement and the exchange of information.
Additionally, the release of emails from Flynn’s former attorneys at Covington & Burling revealed the existence of “a lawyers unofficial understanding that they are unlikely to charge [Michael Flynn Jr.] in light of the [Flynn’s] Cooperation Agreement.”
Per Flynn's former lawyers, this served to "limit" what the government "have to disclose" to any defendant against whom Flynn would have to testify.
That arrangement is contrary to the stated terms of the November 30, 2017 plea offer signed by Van Grack, Flynn, and his lawyers, which represents that there were no other “agreements, promises, or understandings” between the special counsel’s office and Flynn.
Andrew McCarthy, a former federal prosecutor and Fox News contributor, has noted: “[F]ederal law requires all terms of a plea agreement to be disclosed to the court; prosecutors are not at liberty to obscure plea terms because they are embarrassed or tactically harmed by having agreed to them.”
The dispute over the government’s compliance with Sullivan’s standing order may bolster Flynn’s efforts to withdraw his plea or, ultimately, have the case dismissed due to government misconduct.
Powell has stated that she expects more evidence to be produced soon, and has implied the FBI doesn't even have any proof Flynn discussed the Obama administration's sanctions with Russia's ambassador. "No lawyer for @GenFlynn has heard the recording or seen the transcript [of Flynn's intercepted calls with the ambassador]," Powell wrote on Twitter on Sunday. "I bet $1000 there is no mention of 'sanctions.'"
During the White House interview, Flynn told the agents "not really" when asked if he had sought to convince Kislyak not to escalate a brewing fight with the U.S. over sanctions imposed by the Obama administration, according to a FD-302 witness report prepared by the FBI that has been disputed by Flynn's defense team. Flynn also reportedly demurred when asked if he had asked Russia to veto a U.N. Security Council resolution that condemned Israel’s settlements in the West Bank, the FBI claimed. (The Obama administration abstained in that vote.)
According to the FBI's 302, Flynn issued other apparently equivocal responses to FBI agents' questions, and at various points suggested that such conversations might have happened or that he could not recall them if they did.
Meanwhile, Van Grack’s name has been absent from the government’s latest court filings and they have yet to respond to Flynn’s latest motion to dismiss.
Fox News' Brooke Signman and David Spunt, as well as Wilson Miller and The Associated Press, contributed to this report.

Online School Cartoons