Connect with us

Politics

Gen. Michael T. Flynn “The Character Assassination of an American Patriot”

Published

on


How can our country let this travesty of justice happen?

When Barack Hussein Obama, 44th President of The United States was welcoming in President Elect Donald J. Trump, there was something subtle but telling  in their conversation, although in hindsight monumental. President Obama warned President Elect Trump of two things. 1) Kim Jong-Un 2) General Michael T. Flynn former Director of Intelligence under President Obama. Looking back you would ask why would President Obama mention General Flynn, a decorated war hero, in the same breathe as Kim Jong-Un, the ruthless despot dictator of North Korea, who off and on, on occasion threatens to blow up the United States? Once uncovered that Michael Flynn bumped heads with the Obama administration over the strategy and tactics in combating ISIS, domestic spying, the Iran deal and other security issues it makes sense. So as they say Flynn knows where the bodies are buried so it behooved Obama to silence the man who knew too much.

Once Gen. Flynn was designated as public enemy #1 in that infamous January 2017 oval office meeting with President Obama and his top officials including Vice President Joe Biden, Flynn was a dead man walking. On his way out the door President Obama expanded the powers of the NSA world wide to more easily share intelligence. What that did was trigger felonious classified information leaking on Trump campaign officials like never before to establish a nefarious narrative that Trump and his administration were working with the Russians. If you had Russian salad dressing on your salad it would be leaked to the media, and then portrayed as the most dangerous salad in existence to be taken down by a highly lethal Navy SEAL Team. This worked beautifully with full complete and gleeful cooperation of the media.

An important note. There was never any Russian collusion, and 53 Obama administration officials and Intelligence agents testified under oath that they never saw or possessed any derogatory information on the Trump campaign and Russia as it pertains to any illegalities. No collusion, no obstruction. But on television they all would lie and say Trump is definitely working with Putin. General Flynn’s investigation was also being dropped for lack of derogatory information until FBI agent Peter Strzok desperately petitioned to keep the investigation of Flynn open. Now we see this move was to manufacture something, anything negative to take down General Flynn.

Flynn was hired as National Security Director by President Trump. This set off alarm bells within the Obama administration. Within days FBI Director James Comey sent over to the Whitehouse 2 agents to interview General Flynn as he was under investigation. But the agents were sent over, breaking normal protocols and disguising the investigation interview as just a friendly chat. Flynn was told by Andy MccAbe the FBI #2 that he did not need to notify Whitehouse counsel or summon any legal representation. Mind you at this ponit, General Flynn had been investigated, cleared, spied on and unmasked and had not committed any crimes. General Flynn did nothing wrong or illegal within his job as a Trump administration official or private citizen.

The Whitehouse interview was to be used to say Flynn lied or did something illegal. But at that time even the two FBI agents Joe Pientka and Peter Strzok said they thought Flynn was being truthful. Once Robert Mueller Special Counsel came on the scene then all of a sudden Flynn was charged with misleading the FBI even though the agents said initially he was being truthful. The FBI 302’s notes of the original interview have been lost and subsequent notes altered. The FBI had the Flynn call transcript with Russian official Kislyak and were fully abreast of the conversation but were trying to get Flynn to make some misstatements this is known as a perjury trap. If you get a date wrong as George Papadopoulos you could be charged with perjury during an FBI interview. In all of the reporting I’ve seen on this I never hear it explained that Gen. Flynn talked with almost 30 countries in 24 hours. If I talk to 30 different world leaders in 24 hours while I am on vacation I don’t think every word with every leader would be engraved in my memory. From the January oval office meeting Bill Priestep, FBI lawyer had notes that read, “what is our goal with Flynn, to get him to lie so we can prosecute him or to get him fired?” The last time I looked FBI agents weren’t in the business of getting people fired. This was a classic witch hunt.

General Flynn’s legal team was from the law firm of former Attorney General under President Obama his so called wing man Eric Holder. So Flynn was not in good hands. His legal team made a deal with the prosecution to make a plea deal in exchange for not prosecuting Flynn’s son who had a four month old baby at the time. So Flynn had over 2 million dollars in legal fees, sold his house and staring at the prospect of having his family prosecuted. So facing this seemingly insurmountable challenge Flynn plead guilty because he was bankrupt and to save his family. I never see this explained on most newscasts.

In comes the heroine, famed lawyer and best selling author Sydney Powell. She pushed for Brady material (exculpatory evidence) that was illegally withheld from Flynn. Once the evidence came out that exonerated Flynn he withdrew his guilty plea and with the grace of GOD the DOJ under AG Bill Barr dropped the charges. Now a rogue judge Emmitt Sullivan is pulling a hail mary stunt to let in friends of the court try to argue against Flynn. This is highly immoral and unethical by the judge. There is no precedence to what he is doing. Only a prosecutor can prosecute not a judge. Powell filed a motion in circuit court to strike down this attempt by the judge to prosecute a dropped case. The court ruled that Judge Emmitt Sullivan has until June 1st to explain to the court why he is taking this extraordinary action. No matter what happens, President Trump will see General Flynn a free man but will let the case play out and hopefully the court will eventually honor the dismissal of the case. News@11

 

By Michael Ameer

 

#feature

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Immigration

Majority of Americans Support Mass Deportation – CBS Poll

Published

on

In a recent CBS poll, it has been found that 62% of Americans support the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants from the United States. This result reflects the growing public sentiment in favor of stricter immigration policies and the enforcement of existing laws.

The poll, conducted by CBS, surveyed a diverse group of American citizens to gauge their opinions on various issues related to immigration. The findings indicate a significant shift in public opinion, with a majority of respondents expressing their support for the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.

The results of the poll are not entirely surprising, given the ongoing debates and discussions surrounding immigration reform in the United States. Many Americans believe that the current immigration system is flawed and that stricter measures are necessary to address the issue of illegal immigration.

Proponents of mass deportation argue that it is a necessary step to protect the country’s borders and ensure the safety and security of American citizens. They believe that undocumented immigrants pose a threat to the nation’s economy, social services, and national security.

However, critics of mass deportation argue that it is an inhumane and impractical solution to the problem of illegal immigration. They point out that many undocumented immigrants have lived in the United States for years, contributing to their communities and the economy. Mass deportation, they argue, would result in the separation of families and would be detrimental to the well-being of those affected.

The findings of the CBS poll are likely to fuel further discussions and debates on immigration reform in the United States. As the issue continues to be a contentious topic, it remains to be seen how policymakers will respond to the growing public support for mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.

In conclusion, the recent CBS poll indicates that a majority of Americans support the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants. This finding reflects the growing public sentiment in favor of stricter immigration policies and the enforcement of existing laws. As the debate on immigration reform continues, it is crucial for policymakers to consider the diverse perspectives and opinions of the American people in order to find a balanced and effective solution to the issue of illegal immigration.

Continue Reading

Health

mRNA COVID-19 Injections Not Vaccines – Ninth Circuit Rules

Published

on

In a recent decision that has stirred up discussions across the nation, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the COVID-19 mRNA injections do not qualify as vaccines under traditional medical definitions. This decision was made in a lawsuit brought by the Health Freedom Defense Fund and other plaintiffs against the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). The court’s decision could potentially expose pharmaceutical companies to future liability lawsuits, as it challenges the legal protections typically afforded to vaccine manufacturers.

The lawsuit against LAUSD was based on the claim that the district’s vaccine mandate infringed upon the plaintiffs’ fundamental right to refuse medical treatment. The court, in a majority opinion authored by Circuit Judge R. Nelson and supported by Judge Collins, asserted that the mRNA shots, marketed as vaccines, do not effectively prevent the transmission of COVID-19 but merely reduce symptoms in those who contract the virus. This distinction, the court argued, means that the injections should not be considered vaccines under traditional medical definitions.

The implications of this ruling are significant. If mRNA injections are not considered vaccines, then they may not be subject to the same legal protections as traditional vaccines. This could potentially open the door to liability lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies that have produced and distributed the injections.

The court’s decision has sparked a range of reactions on social media. Some users have expressed relief and support for the ruling, viewing it as a step towards greater transparency and accountability in the handling of the pandemic. Others have criticized the decision, arguing that it undermines public health efforts and could discourage the use of potentially life-saving treatments.

The ruling has also reignited debates about the handling of the pandemic and the promotion of alternative treatments. Some have questioned the effectiveness of the mRNA injections, while others have pointed to the rapid development and deployment of these treatments as a remarkable achievement in the face of a global crisis.

As the legal implications of this ruling continue to unfold, it is likely that the debate surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and the role of vaccines in public health will continue to evolve. The Ninth Circuit’s decision serves as a reminder of the complex legal and ethical issues at the heart of public health policy.

Continue Reading

Politics

President Trump: No More Tip Taxes!

Published

on

In a recent rally in Las Vegas, former President Donald Trump announced his intention to eliminate taxes on tips for service industry workers if he were to be re-elected. This proposal, which would allow workers to keep their entire tip amount without taxation, has been met with enthusiasm and support from many Americans, particularly those in the service industry.

Trump’s pledge to abolish tip taxes is a bold move that could have a significant impact on the lives of millions of Americans. Service industry workers, including those in restaurants and hospitality, often rely heavily on tips as a significant portion of their income. These workers are typically not highly paid and often face financial instability. By promising to eliminate taxes on tips, Trump is positioning himself as an advocate for the working class, addressing a specific economic concern that directly affects their livelihoods.

The proposal also touches on broader debates about tax policy and economic inequality. While the elimination of taxes on tips could be seen as a populist move to help the working class, it also raises questions about the fairness of the tax system and the distribution of the tax burden. However, Trump’s pledge is a clear indication of his commitment to supporting American workers and addressing the economic challenges they face.

Critics argue that while the policy may benefit service industry workers, it could also lead to unintended consequences, such as encouraging employers to shift more of their employees’ compensation to tips, potentially leading to reduced wages. However, these concerns should not overshadow the potential benefits of Trump’s proposal.

In conclusion, Trump’s pledge to abolish tip taxes is a bold move that could have a significant impact on the lives of millions of Americans. By addressing a specific economic concern that directly affects the livelihoods of service industry workers, Trump is demonstrating his commitment to supporting American workers and addressing the economic challenges they face. While there are concerns about potential unintended consequences, the potential benefits of this proposal should not be overlooked. Trump’s pledge to abolish tip taxes is a clear indication of his commitment to making America great again for all Americans.

Continue Reading

Trending

Donate to Populist Wire

*Note: Every donation is greatly appreciated, regardless of the amount.