Barr is apparently withholding transcripts of Flynn calls with Kislyak from judge who ordered them

[pnwmom]

Last edited Fri May 31, 2019, 07:24 PM - Edit history (2)

to be turned over to the court.

The only transcript that was turned over was the one included in Mueller's report involving John Dowd.

This is related to Judge Emmit Sullivan and Flynn's sentencing -- and withholding these documents from the judge for the specified reasons is NOT normal procedure, according to Renato Marriotti (third tweet)

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Spencer Hsu
✔
@hsu_spencer
Judge Emmet Sullivan of DC sought transcripts of Flynn's calls with Russian ambassador Kislyak, but govt said that "it is not relying on any other recordings, of any person, for purposes of establishing the defendant’s guilt or determining his sentence." Stay tuned for judge.

Kristine Phillips
✔
@kristinegWP
Judge Emmet Sullivan had ordered the Justice Department to make public the redacted portions of the Mueller report that dealt with Michael Flynn, as well as transcripts of calls between Flynn and the Russians. Today's disclosures don't include those.

Renato Mariotti
✔
@renato_mariotti
Judge Sullivan is required by 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) to consider the "history and characteristics" of Flynn as well as the "nature and circumstances" of his offense when imposing a sentence.

Prosecutors routinely tell the judge *all* relevant information they have at sentencing.

[FBaggins]

1. Don't know whether it's Barr or not...

... but they’re definitely telling the judge that it isn’t within the court’s power to review.

In theory that could be true... but how can the court determine that none of their other evidence was found due to something on those calls (and thus “fruit of the poisoned tree” and inadmissible)??

[malaise]

2. This will be interesting n/t

[MFGsunny]

3. Betting Judge Sullivan ain't gonna be amused about not getting Kislyak call transcript

and am dying to see/hear his "calm, cool, collected" thoughts on the matter.

[OnDoutside]

7. One would hope. We haven't had a lot of hope lately.

[StarfishSaver]

48. GMTA!

[tymorial]

4. Barr and Trump folie a deux.

They both are under the delusion that they can do whatever the hell they want with impunity. I am waiting for Congress to step in and take control of our rogue executive branch.

[wasupaloopa]

13. Don't wait for the Senate repukes.

[GitRDun]

5. Will only delay the inevitable disclosure

If the judge wants it as a part of sentencing approval I can’t imagine they will be allowed to withhold it.

[Glimmer of Hope]

6. Someone needs to put Barr in his place.

[abqtommy]

8. SmugThug Big Fat Bottom Barr's place is in a cell!

[Clarity2]

9. Isn't this contempt of court?

Jfc, lock someone up already. They are overstepping boundaries to see what they can get away with. Nobody is held accountable, and they go for bigger and bigger things. Trial balloon.

[davekriss]

11. A question, what can the judge do about it?

The tools for enforcement are almost all within the executive branch. Kinda a “you and whose army” moment.

[TruckFump]

18. It's direct contempt.

There are two kinds of contempts. One is to punish someone he or she has done -- usually a singular action such as yelling, "Fuck you" at a judge during a trial or hearing. The other is to coerce, for lack of better terms, someone into compliance with a court order. On this second kind of contempt, a judge can keep someone in jail forever basically. Remember the lady who would not testify against Bill Clinton and the judge put her in jail. That is what I am thinking Barr may be looking at.

[davekriss]

24. But who would enforce contempt for the judge?

My fear is Barr would surround himself with FBI or similar while the judge would have to deputize some citizens. We’d Never get to him. This administration is normless and lawless enough to pull something like that and, if they did, then the guantlet is down and it will be a very tough fight to get our republic back.

I guess my glass is half empty tonight...

[DeminPennswoods]

32. The US Marshalls will arrest him

They work for the courts afaik.

[davekriss]

60. The US Marshalls fall under the executive branch

They are part of the Department of Justice and, thus, work for Attorney General Barr. They do occupy a gray area as they are the primary enforcement arm for the federal courts as well. Any court order to arrest Barr puts them between a rock and a hard place. Who do they answer to, the branch that writes their paychecks and holds their careers in their hands or the branch they are sort of “loaned out” to?

The Marshal Service has many real Patriots in it who honor country before party, but still it is a conundrum. It will not be easy for us to keep our republic.

[TruckFump]

38. US MARSHALLS

The judge has officers of the law in his/her courtroom. A federal judge pretty much has unlimited powers to enforce his or her orders. My late husband was an AUSA and the horror stories he would tell about what a district judge was like if anyone defied his/her orders. Remember Judge Julius Hoffman and the Chicago Seven? Any atty with any experience in the federal courts would NEVER defy a federal judge. Shudder!!!!!!

[Tarc]

42. Thing is, though, the US Marshals Service is a part of the executive branch

and reports to...unfortunately...the Attorney General.

This could get tricky.

[TruckFump]

44. An order from a judge is an order from a judge.

And, IMO, a judge could deputize anyone he or she wants and send them after Barr. I have appeared in federal court on several occasions and there are some federal judges that I would NEVER defy.

[StarfishSaver]

49. The Marshals are part of the executive branch, but they report to the judges and are very loyal

to them. I think the Marshals might be very likely to follow the judge's order, not the DOJ's, if it came to that.

But even if they didn't, the judge does have the power to deputize law enforcement outside of the executive branch to carry out a contempt citation.

But no matter what, this would provoke a crisis.

[TeamPooka]

55. The DOJ would have to find a more powerful judge to issue a stay to the Marshal's with

the judge's contempt order in order to prevent them from following their charge.
The problem there is you need to find a law/precedent/lawful reason to convince said powerful judge to issue the stay.
Unless they are totally corrupt...

[StarfishSaver]

56. They may try to appeal the contempt order to an appellate court

But it would be difficult since a judge has a great deal of discretion to order compliance and failure to comply with that lawful order is per se contempt. The appellate court would have to find the judge abused his discretion in issuing the order and that is very unlikely, even with a very conservative court.

[TeamPooka]

57. as I said, finding the legal basis for such an action is the challenge to the DOJ there

and having read some of the recent garbage the White House/ DOJ legal team has served up, the DOJ and WH are not up to the job.

[StarfishSaver]

58. They're definitely not up to the job. But that won't stop them from trying ...

[TomSlick]

51. I would be astounded if the US Marshall Service did not arrest Barr if the Judge ordered it.

My expectation would be that the Judge would order Barr to appear in Court and show cause why he should not be found in contempt. I cannot imagine that even Barr would violate an order to appear. If Barr did not appear, the Judge would order the Marshall Service to go fetch him.

If Barr both violated an order to appear and somehow resisted arrest by the Marshalls Service, then Congress would have no choice but to impeach him.

[ancianita]

26. Isn't Barr somewhere outside Washington?

[TruckFump]

39. Does not matter if a person is presently before the court.

The court has the power over them. If an order was made for Barr to appear, the judge would enforce the order by sending a federal marshal to get him. Federal courts have nationwide power. It does not matter where Barr is or where he lives. If a federal judge want his ass in court, Barr WILL BE in court. May be in a suit or maybe in an orange jump and cuffs...but Barr WILL BE there.

The judge may "ask" first, but don't take it that he or she has no power to get someone's ass before the bench.

[keith sw]

10. And they'll get away with it

they get away with about everything. And as usual, the Dems are sitting around twiddling their thumbs

[wasupaloopa]

14. What are you saying the Dems can do to make Barr turn over the recordings?

[keith sw]

34. So if the Dems can't do anything

A judge can’t do anything, Congress can’t do anything, what was the point in The Whole Mueller investigation?

[wasupaloopa]

59. There will be new legislation if we get control of government

[FrankBooth]

16. Yeah "obviously" it's all the Dems fault

Maybe you should try thumb-twiddling instead of posting anti-Democratic nonsense on a site for Democrats.

[keith sw]

33. Yeah

Because I tell the truth I should stop posting. Makes perfect sense

[DemocracyMouse]

40. I thought this was a site for a Democratic "underground"...

Presumably that means giving a voice to those Democrats who think outside the box (or at least under it!)

[FrankBooth]

43. Not one word of your post was truth

The Democrats have nothing to do with this case. Zero. Nada. That's not disputable.

If you want to spout nonsense, expect pushback.

[uponit7771]

12. So now they're going against the courts too ... Some bastards

[iluvtennis]

30. Ditto. Just disgusting. Crime team trump just pissing all over our institutions/laws.

[Ilsa]

15. I wish someone would arrest Barr.

Let him know that he isn't the only big dog in town.

[bluestarone]

41. I do too!

THAT would be very interesting! I'm believing that tRUMP would pardon him as many times as he can! I'm afraid that is what will be happening in our future! (State charges tRUMP CANNOT pardon) so we need to get these bastards with something in some state i guess, but what?

[dlk]

17. Next Up, a Show Cause/Contempt Hearing

This is a judge who will not tolerate noncompliance with his orders. There could very well be jail time in the near future for certain DOJ officials.

[DeminPennswoods]

22. Yes, indeed

nt

[FakeNoose]

50. Does FOIA apply here?

Asking for a friend.

[dlk]

52. If the DOJ Refuses to Release in Response to a Court Order

Then the DOJ would refuse to release under FOIA. Judge Sullivan may speed things along. Buckle up...

[BlueJac]

19. Just another step to stone wall the people!

[triron]

20. Had a feeling this would happen. Hope the judge is not as 'patient' as the democrats in congress.

[DeminPennswoods]

21. FTR, Sullivan was the judge who ordered the DHS plane

that was deporting a couple of migrants turned around back to the US immediately. He threatened to put Sessions and several other Trump appointees in jail.

Barr better not trifle with this jurist or he'll find himself arrested for contempt of court.

[OnDoutside]

23. If Sullivan can't get it, it really doesn't augur well for the rest.

[LenaBaby61]

27. "If Sullivan can't get it, it really doesn't augur well for the rest."

Same here.

[DeminPennswoods]

25. Sullivan has already seen the all the evidence

He knows what's in the transcript of this call. Wouldn't that be correct?

[pnwmom]

29. I'm not sure about that. Amy Berman Jackson saw the full unredacted report, but I haven't heard

that about Sullivan.

[DeminPennswoods]

31. Sullivan should have all the relevent documents

related to Flynn, though, right? The call between him and Kislyak is the predicate for the charge of lying to the FBI and everything else that's followed. Sullivan doesn't have to follow the prosecutors sentencing recommendations. He could decide if the transcript isn't released that Flynn will spend a long time in jail.

[pnwmom]

35. He should but I don't think he does. The (former) Mueller team is arguing that the documents

aren't relevant to the sentencing, so they're withholding them.

[still_one]

28. Perhaps the state where he passed the Bar should consider disbarring Barr as a first step

[Ligyron]

36. There you go!

I have no idea if such is possible but if so are there not a few more lawyers in Trumplickistan that need to be disbarred?

[still_one]

37. Yes, and I guess none of that appears likely. I don't even know if Congress has the authority to

impeach an AG

[TrollBuster9090]

46. Ditto for Don McGann. nt

[TrollBuster9090]

45. Sullivan should ISSUE A BENCH WARRENT for that ugly toad's ARREST!

Let's see how Bullfrog Barr likes spending the night in the courthouse lockup.

[StarfishSaver]

47. I cannot WAIT to see Judge Sullivan's reaction to this

It should be a goodie.

[pnwmom]

54. I know! Maddow thinks he'll respond quickly. Too bad this had to happen on a Friday.

[Kid Berwyn]

53. Makes me want to know what Trump and Putin talk about 1-on-1, too.

There’s a ton of stuff CIA stooge Barr has kept secret over the years.

Bill Barr: The Cover-Up General

"At the center of the criticism is the chief artic­ulator of Bush's imperial presidency," we reported in 1992, "the man who wrote the legal rationale for the Gulf War, the Panama invasion, and the officially sanctioned kidnapping of foreign nationals abroad"

by FRANK SNEPP
The Village Voice, APRIL 18, 2019



The Village Voice, October 27, 1992

“Attorney General William Barr is the Best Reason to Vote for Clinton”

Excerpt....

SON OF THE CIA

It was 21 years ago, in 1971, that I first encountered William Barr. Both of us were working for the CIA at the time, he as a novice China analyst, I as a member of the agency’s Vietnam task force. Jovial and un­assuming, he took his cues easily from an overly politicized office chief. It was a to­ken of things to come.

Three years before, we had brushed shoulders unknowingly on Columbia Uni­versity’s roiling campus. Both of us were on the other side of the barricades as antiwar demonstrations there blasted our genera­tion into a decade of rage. Barr, a conserva­tive student spokesman, preached tough­ness to the university administration, of which his father, then dean of the engineer­ing faculty, was a leading light. Years later, this same damn-the-torpedoes zeal would commend Barr to his ultimate father figure, George Bush. When Cuban refugees penned up at an Alabama prison rioted and took hostages in the summer of 1991, depu­ty attorney general Barr ordered the place stormed. Soon afterward, Bush tapped him for the attorney general slot itself.

Barr first met Bush in the CIA. In 1976, having shifted to the agency’s legislative office, he helped write the pap sheets that director Bush used to fend off the Pike and Church committees, the first real embodiments of Congressional oversight of the CIA. Intimates say the experience was for­mative for Barr, turning him into an impla­cable enemy of congressional intrusions on executive prerogative.

“The most radical period I had probably was when I was sort of a moderate Republi­can,” he later acknowledged. Sure enough, Barr stayed safe within conservative clutch­es even after leaving the agency in 1977. Armed with a night-school law diploma, he asked for — and got — Bush’s backing for a clerkship appointment to Malcolm Wilkey of the Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C. Years later, as attorney general, Barr would name Wilkey to investigate the House Banking scandal. Wilkey repayed the favor with a wrenchingly partisan in­quiry. Feeding the press overheated charges of wrongdoing, he scored points off the Democratic Congress just as the adminis­tration itself was being pilloried for its failed economics.

Source...

https://www.villagevoice.com/2019/04/18/attorney-general-william-barr-is-the-best-reason-to-vote-for-clinton/

Chapter and verse since Jimmy Carter crossed paths with the Safari Club, Capitalism’s Invisible Army sends its own fixer... So it’s Big Oil to the Rescue and the Seven Sisters Escape Justice Once Again with this guy Barr. Ask why Putin gave Rex Tillerson a thumbs up.

[DeminPennswoods]

61. WaPo's Devlin Barrett was on with Maddow

last night talking about this. He's the WaPo national security reporter. He said in none of their court filings has DoJ/SCO ever acknowledged the existence of the intercepted calls although everyone knows the US (and most nations) monitor calls from foreign embassies/diplomats. Thus DoJ/SCO cannot provide something they've said they don't have even though everyone knows they have it. Essentially, DoJ/SCO do not want to publish "sources and methods".

Barrett's speculation is that there will be a back and forth between Sullivan and the gov't, but that Sullivan's a judge who wants what he wants, when he wants it. My guess is that Sullivan will get the transcripts or audio either in his chambers or filed under seal, but we, the public, won't see what was said for a long time. My guess is also that Flynn's going to jail, not get 0 prison time, when he's sentenced.