Obama Memo Edits NEW FINAL

OPEN MEMORANDUM
To: Barack Hussein Obama

From: Sidney Powell
www.SidneyPowell.com
Date: May 13, 2020
Re: Your Failure to Find Precedent for Flynn Dismissal
Regarding the decision of the Department of Justice to dismiss charges against General
Flynn, in your recent call with your alumni, you expressed great concern: “there is no
precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just
getting off scot-free. That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic —
not just institutional norms — but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk.”
Here is some help—if truth and precedent represent your true concern. Your statement
is entirely false. However, it does explain the damage to the Rule of Law throughout your
administration.
First, General Flynn was not charged with perjury—which requires a material false
statement made under oath with intent to deceive.1 A perjury prosecution would have
been appropriate and the Rule of Law applied if the Justice Department prosecuted your
former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe for his multiple lies under oath in an
investigation of a leak only he knew he caused.
McCabe lied under oath in fully recorded and transcribed interviews with the Inspector
General for the DOJ. He was informed of the purpose of the interview, and he had had
the benefit of counsel. He knew he was the leaker. McCabe even lied about lying. He lied
to his own agents—which sent them on a “wild-goose-chase”—thereby making his lies
1
As a “constitutional lawyer,” surely you recall that perjury (or false statements) also
requires intent to deceive. In Bronston v. United States, 409 U.S. 352 (1973), the
Supreme Court reversed a conviction of perjury. In Bronston, the defendant’s answer was
a truthful statement, but not directly responsive to the question and ultimately misled
federal authorities. The Court determined: “A jury should not be permitted to engage in
conjecture whether an unresponsive answer, true and complete on its face, was
intended to mislead or divert the examiner; the state of mind of the witness is relevant
only to the extent that it bears on whether "he does not believe [his answer] to be true."
To hold otherwise would be to inject a new and confusing element into the adversary
testimonial system we know.” Id. at 359. The FBI agents who interviewed General
Flynn specifically noted that his answers were true or he believed his answers to be
true—completely defeating criminal intent. Furthermore, General Flynn knew and
remarked they had transcripts of his conversations.
1
“material” and an obstruction of justice. Yet, remarkably, Attorney General Barr declined
to prosecute McCabe for these offenses.
Applying the Rule of Law, after declining McCabe’s perjury prosecution, required the
Justice Department to dismiss the prosecution of General Flynn who was not warned, not
under oath, had no counsel, and whose statements were not only not recorded, but were
created as false by FBI agents who falsified the 302.
Second, it would seem your “wingman” Eric Holder is missing a step these days at
Covington & Burling LLP. Indelibly marked in his memory (and one might think, yours)
should be his Motion to Dismiss the multi-count jury verdict of guilty and the entire case
against former United States Senator Ted Stevens. Within weeks of Mr. Holder becoming
Attorney General, he moved to dismiss the Stevens prosecution in the interest of justice
for the same reasons the Justice Department did against General Flynn—egregious
misconduct by prosecutors who hid exculpatory evidence and concocted purported
crimes.
As horrifying as the facts of the Stevens case were, they pale in comparison to the targeted
setup, framing, and prosecution of a newly elected President’s National Security Advisor
and the shocking facts that surround it. This case was an assault on the heart of liberty—
our cherished system of self-government, the right of citizens to choose their President,
and the hallowed peaceful transition of power.
Third, the inability of anyone in your alumni association to find “anybody who has been
charged [with anything] just getting off scot-free” would be laughable were it not so
pathetic.
Many of your alum feature prominently in the non-fiction legal thriller published in 2014:
Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice. A national best-
seller, it focusses on the egregious prosecutorial misconduct of your longest serving White
House Counsel, Kathryn Ruemmler; your counter-terrorism advisor Lisa Monaco;
Loretta Lynch’s DAG for the Criminal Division Leslie Caldwell; and Mueller protégé
Andrew Weissmann. While they worked as federal prosecutors on the Enron Task
Force—under the purported supervision of Christopher Wray—they destroyed Arthur
Andersen LLP and its 85,000 jobs; sent four Merrill Lynch executives to prison on an
indictment that criminalized an innocent business transaction while they hid the evidence
that showed those defendants were innocent for six years. Both cases were reversed on
appeal for their over-criminalization and misconduct. Indeed, Andersen was reversed by
a unanimous Supreme Court.
Fourth, even if your many alumni don’t remember multiple cases that had to be reversed
or dismissed for their own misconduct, Judge Emmet Sullivan should remember
dismissing the corrupted case against Ted Stevens. Judge Sullivan is the judicial hero of
Licensed to Lie. It is that case that caused Judge Sullivan to enter the strong Brady order
the Mueller and D.C. career prosecutors violated repeatedly in the Flynn prosecution.
2
Fifth, there is precedent for guilty pleas being vacated. Your alumni Weissmann and
Ruemmler are no strangers to such reversals. At least two guilty pleas they coerced by
threats against defendants in Houston had to be thrown out—again for reasons like those
here. The defendants “got off scot-free” because—like General Flynn—your alumni had
concocted the charges and terrorized the defendants into pleading guilty to “offenses” that
were not crimes. Andersen partner David Duncan even testified for the government
against Andersen in its trial, but his plea had to be vacated. Enron Broadband defendant
Christopher Calger had his plea vacated. There are many others across the country.
Sixth, should further edification be necessary, see Why Innocent People Plead Guilty,
written in 2014 by federal Judge Jed Rakoff (a Clinton appointee). Abusive prosecutors
force innocent people to plead guilty with painful frequency. The Mueller special counsel
operation led by Andrew Weissmann and Weissmann “wannabes” specializes in
prosecutorial terrorist tactics repulsive to everything “justice” is supposed to mean. These
tactics are designed to intimidate their targets into pleading guilty—while punishing them
and their families with the process itself and financial ruin.
Most important, General Flynn was honest with the FBI agents. They knew he was—and
briefed that to McCabe and others three different times. At McCabe’s directions, Agent
Strzok and McCabe’s “Special Counsel” Lisa Page, altered the 302 to create statements
Weissmann, Mueller, Van Grack, and Zainab Ahmad could assert were false. Only the
FBI agents lied—and falsified documents. The crimes are theirs alone.
Seventh, the D.C. circuit in which you reside vacated a Section 1001 case for a legal
failure much less egregious than those in General Flynn’s case. United States v. Safavian,
528 F.3d 957 (D.C. Cir. 2008). Safavian sought advice from his agency’s ethics board and
did not give them all the relevant info. The jury convicted him on the theory it was a 1001
violation to conceal the information from the government ethics board. The court
disagreed: “As Safavian argues and as the government agrees, there must be a legal duty
to disclose in order for there to be a concealment offense in violation of § 1001(a)(1), yet
the government failed to identify a legal disclosure duty except by reference to vague
standards of conduct for government employees.” General Flynn did not even know he
was the subject of an investigation—and in truth, he was not. The only crimes here were
by your alumni in the FBI, White House, intelligence community, and Justice
Department.
These are just a few obvious and well-known examples to those paying any attention to
criminal justice issues.
Finally, the “leaked” comments from your alumni call further evinces your obsession with
destroying a distinguished veteran of the United States Army who has defended the
Constitution and this country “from all enemies, foreign and domestic,” with the highest
honor for thirty-three years. He and many others will continue to do so.

Obama Memo Edits NEW FINAL

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Obama Memo Edits NEW FINAL

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Obama Memo Edits NEW FINAL

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

OPEN MEMORANDUM

To: Barack Hussein Obama

You might also like