Trump pardons Michael Flynn
“It is my Great Honor to announce that General Michael T. Flynn has been granted a Full Pardon.”
Donald Trump has issued a full pardon to former General Michael Flynn, who was wrongfully targeted by the FBI during the 2016-2017 transition as part of a broader effort to undermine and sabotage the incoming administration.
Based on records recently declassified, it appears that Obama and Biden were in on the targeting, on the pretext of a Logan Act violation. Internal FBI records showed that the FBI agents did not believe Flynn intentionally lied, and Jim Comey, the scummiest FBI Director in 50 years, bragged how Comey arranged for an ambush interview with Flynn because the new administration was disorganized.
Flynn eventually pled guilty to lying to the FBI, after he was heavily in debt from legal fees and his son was threatened with prosecution.
When Flynn sought to withdraw his plea, Judge Emmett Sullivan launched a vindictive judicial torment of Flynn, including bringing in a Flynn-hating ex-judge to advocate that the government not be permitted to drop the case and that Flynn be held in criminal contempt. Sullivan eventually won in the Court of Appeals en banc, which said that an appellate panel decision ordering Sullivan to dismiss the case was premature. After that Sullivan continued for months the judicial torture of Flynn, dragging out proceedings with an apparent intent to keep the case alive until a new administration.
Flynn’s federal ordeal, including Judge Sullivan’s vindictive crusade, now are over.
Trump should line up additional pardons for people targeted because they were associated with Trump. Set them all free.
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
General Flynn was never guilty of anything in the first place.
What you say is true, but doesn’t the issuing of a pardon carry with it the taint that Flynn was guilty of something?
Sullivan put both Flynn and Trump in a box. Powell and Flynn both wanted to see the process to a successful end; namely, a dismissal of the indictment because no crime had been committed, a conclusion with which the DOJ agreed. But Sullivan foiled that by his delaying the expected dismissal.
Trump was boxed in. Unsure if he’ll be POTUS for a 2d term, and wanting to give relief and freedom to Flynn, he issued the pardon.
how much time to Sullivan need, he could have made the right call months ago. there was no guarantee that Sullivan was ever going to rule in Flynn’s favor.
I hope Flynn speaks out very soon about Sullivan’s abuse of power and then files suit against multiple parties including the first law firm he hired.
Traitor Sullivan is long overdue for his French haircut.
When does he ask the Scooter Libby question?
I think you’re thinking of Raymond Donovan.
The Judge got exactly what he wanted.
not sure why this post sounds as upbeat as it does
a pardon here will be accepted as admission of guilt on Flynn’s end, where there was no guilt in the first place
this is what we call a bad pardon, especially the timing of it and makes one wonder if the entire Trump camp is just packing it in at this point
Not sure why you’re getting the downvotes You’re exactly right. And that’s what we were told while all this played out. Nobody wanted Trump to pardon Flynn because it’s an admission of guilt.
Also, why now? Even if Trump thinks neither the courts nor state legislatures will remedy this stolen election, he has a month, month and a half before leaving office to grant the pardon. I’m not sure what to think about that.
Maybe Trump wanted to end torment of Flynn? A Christmas present, and a nice start for the new year.
Also a great warning shot across the bow of all the traitors in this country.
It won’t just be “accepted” as an admission of guilt. Accepting the pardon is legally considered an admission of guilt. That’s why he didn’t do this before.
As for why now rather than in a month or two, since it appears almost inevitable that it will be needed, let the poor man at least have a peaceful Thanksgiving. If it ends up not being necessary after all, he can still refuse it and keep fighting.
As I understand it, he is guilty of lying about being guilty of something. It’s past time a stop was put to the nonsense.
He’s not even guilty of that, because they weren’t supposed to be asking him about it, and he was not aware that he owed them the truth and should therefore be careful what he said. He was deliberately led to believe it was a casual conversation.
So was Martha Stewart. She was guilty of lying about not doing something that turned out not to be illegal in the first place.
“Based on records recently declassified, it appears that Obama and Biden were in on the targeting, on the pretext of a Logan Act violation.”
It burns my ass that Flynn was put through years of torture on this pretext, while this very week the Biden transition team — imbued with PRECISELY the same state of non-official status that Flynn had — has been soliciting foreign heads of state as aggressively as a barful of Thai hookers.
Every case turns on its own facts. Everyone who isn’t dishonest knows that Michael Flynn is innocent and was the victim of a political prosecution. In this case, the acceptance of a pardon proves that an innocent man whose case is controlled by an evil judge will sometimes have to accept a pardon in order to escape from an ordeal he doesn’t deserve.
The taint here is all on Judge Sullivan. His persecution of an innocent man forced President Trump to pardon the innocent man, to put an end to the persecution. Sullivan should resign in disgrace.
Why would a tyrant who has just “won” resign?
Sullivan is one of those oppressors that historically have had to be taken out by extreme and personal measures. I foresee this sort of activity coming to a head again, perhaps even in my lifetime.
>> “Accepting the pardon is legally considered an admission of guilt. ”
In what sense can this possibly be true? I don’t believe there is any case so holding, but even more broadly, how could it be true? The very definition of the pardon wipes the charge and conviction away. How could it be considered a “legal admission of guilt”?
Take a simple example: a felon is pardoned, and is later called to the stand to testify. Can the prior conviction be introduced for impeachment under FRE 609? No. Can you introduce it to prove collateral estoppel effect in a civil trial on overlapping issues? No. Can you introduce it to prevent a lawyer from being able to practice law? No.
Here’s what the Supreme Court said about the effect of pardons:
“A pardon reaches the punishment prescribed for an offence and the guilt of the offender. If granted before conviction, it prevents any of the penalties and disabilities consequent upon conviction from attaching; if granted after conviction, it removes the penalties and disabilities and restores him to all his civil rights.”
This the exact opposite of a “legal admission of guilt.” It is the removal of legal guilt.
Burdick v United States.
“Circumstances may be made to bring innocence under the penalties of the law. If so brought, escape by confession of guilt implied in the acceptance of a pardon may be rejected, preferring to be the victim of the law rather than its acknowledged transgressor, preferring death even to such certain infamy.”
Oops, I hit “submit” too early.
“This brings us to the differences between legislative immunity and a pardon. They are substantial. The latter carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it. The former has no such imputation or confession.”
As for Burdick, the old adage that cases stand for what they do, not what they say, applies. The issue in Burdick did not involve any legal admission of guilt. It was simply whether a person was entitled to reject a pardon. Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1866), which I quote above seems to be actually on point.
Unless you can cite a case in which a pardon is deemed to have legal significance establishing evidence of guilt, I think Garland is the law.
Can you explain that theory (and perhaps provide some citation)? This theory seems to imply that only the guilty can be pardoned but not the innocent. That would be patently absurd and does not seem to be in line with the history of pardons in the world.
I doubt that the Constitution requires the pardonee to accept the pardon in the first place, and if it doesn’t, clearly the action of the President cannot be the admission of guilt of a third party.
Which leads me to doubt that theory. But I’m willing to learn more about absurd interpretations of law by US judges…
A pardon does require acceptance. The Supreme Court has been clear on that. And it has said that accepting it implies a confession of guilt. It offered this as a reason why a person might not want a pardon, and why he cannot be forced to accept one — he might rather suffer the penalty than confess guilt and bear the disgrace.
But I think most people are not like that. Indeed we have proof of this every day, in the form of all the innocent people who plead guilty to crimes they never committed, because they’d rather bear the disgrace and the lesser penalty they have negotiated, than risk a harsher penalty. Everyone knows this happens all the time, which is why in normal people’s eyes a guilty plea is really no proof of guilt. Flynn himself has shown that he is such a person because he did plead guilty, accepting on himself the disgrace of such an admission, and deeming that better than the consequences he would have faced had he refused the deal. So he would clearly welcome a pardon, if the alternative is to face the penalties an angry judge might impose.
It is a problem that the legal presumption and the reality don’t match up very well. Not just a problem for Flynn but for the entire legal system. Our system depends for its continued existence on an elaborate structure of pretense and lies, on inducing and even ordering people to swear under oath to things everybody knows aren’t true.
Thank you for the answer, Milhouse.
In effect, we agree. Whether you have a legal fiction of “acceptance” of guilt or not, the effect immediately attaching to the fictitious acceptance of guilt would be to wipe that guilt and its attached admission away.
But for that same reason the Supreme Court should not be able to make any declaration on that point because it must be obiter dictum: if the pardon is rejected be the person to whom it is tendered, there is no admission of guilt at all, so there is no case of admission of guilt by accepting the pardon; or it is accepted but then the pardon’s effect immediately blots out the guilt and therefore whether or not the recipient has in fact been guilty – in other words there are two possible cases: there was no guilt in the first place and the pardon has no effect in the sense that it cannot blot out what is not there, or there was guilt and the pardon has the effect of blotting out the guilt. In both possible cases the result is the same: there is (now) no guilt to which any legal consequence may be attached. Which would render all disquisition about it dictum.
My apologies. A couple of much needed coffees later, let me try again.
Thank you for the answer.
I am not convinced regarding the “acceptance of guilt” though. As far as I can tell, the Supreme Court has said a pardon “is a deed to the validity of which delivery is essential”. As for delivery, it, in turn, “is not complete without acceptance” (cf. United States v. Wilson, 32 U.S. 150 ). This indicates that “acceptance of delivery” is essential for the validity of a pardon, not “acceptance of guilt”.
You have cited Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915). The special circumstances here were that the pardon in question was designed to remove the right to not make a statement before a grand jury. Because the Supreme Court held that here Burdick effectively rejected the pardon the “imputation of guilt” they mention is not dispositive for the actual judgment.
Burdick makes mention that someone maintaining innocence can be pardoned after being convicted, which also militates against the contention that “acceptance of guilt” is needed for the pardon to be able to enter into effect.
However, all this is more or less academic. We agree on the practical question. And in Flynn’s case, you can argue that – at least according to the biased judge – he has validly pleaded guilty. Even if someone requires an admission of guilt for the validity of a pardon that condition would be fulfilled here.
Of course, with a valid pardon, any possible guilt is wiped away in the eye of US federal law (as Publius_2020 cited above).
Dig deep, considering the judge’s conduct, I bet there is a lot of dirt. He deserves to receive the same treatment , be crushed financially, and then go to jail. The same applies to lots of other swamp critters.
Pethaps either Judge Sullivan holds Obama in high esteem as some kind of “perfect man” or messianic figure, or Obama holds something over him. Obama used domestic intelligence to target his political enemies, but it makes sense to me that he would also collect compromising information about his “friends” to apply pressure as needed. But this of course is only my theory.
Bet there will be some interesting new information coming forth from Flynn. Hope he has a security detail.
Maybe he can write a book which names and toasts a bunch of the players.
We already know the two big snakes Obama and Biden.
I love Flynn
Thank you President Trump
In other news:
Time to pull Sullivan backward through a keyhole.
need to Nifong that guy
Retreat through the looking glass. Pull him from the rabbit hole. Restore life, where there is abortion. Reconstitute bodies, where there are parts. Free the carbon. Whack the wind turbines. Clear the Green blight. Muzzle the virus, not the people… and so on and so forth.
A fire hardened stake wound not be enough punishment.
Mmmmm Steak… 🙂
Nice to be pardoned but seems to me his life is still in ruins. Will Flynn be reimbursed all of the money that he has spent on defending himself? Will he be able to regain his reputation? Will those that targeted him and maliciously prosecuted him for the sole reason to ruin his life be held accountable for their actions? . He’ll forever be the one that plead guilty and then was pardoned by Trump.Not a nice thing to live with the rest of your life if your looking for meaningful employment during the next administration.
No, he won’t get his money back; even if he were completely acquitted and vindicated that wouldn’t happen, unfortunately.
And no, he doesn’t get his reputation back, because accepting a pardon is officially considered an admission of guilt. We all know he’s innocent, but those who don’t want to admit that won’t have to.
But he will be an important footnote in history detailing the abuses of the Democrat Congressional reptiles and bias judiciary. Meanwhile, Biden is openly in discussion with other national leaders before becoming President-Elect. It’s good being king….
You are the only person in the world who thinks that Michael Flynn’s acceptance of this pardon is an admission of guilt. It’s an admission that he was tired of being persecuted by a rogue Judge.
As a matter of law it constitutes an admission of guilt. That’s not my opinion, it’s the Supreme Court’s. We all know that in this case it’s a false admission, just as the guilty plea he entered was false; but the fact is that it is one, which is why he would much rather not have needed it.
Have not read the case, but have read that is dicta, not a rule of law. Pardons can be used to exonerate one wrongly convicted.
Flynn withdrew his plea before he was pardoned. Where does that land it what can only be considered legal la-la land?
The General has been receiving crowdfunding help from members of the public.
still considered a felon though correct?
I’m copying and pasting the first thing I saw from the Justice Department (https://www.justice.gov/file/20206/download): “A pardon reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offence and the guilt of the offender; and when the pardon is full, it releases the punishment and blots out of existence the guilt [for the offense], so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence.”
thought I had seen something few months ago about that part still sticking which is why pardon not done earlier.
may be remembering wrong.
No, it is clear that the status disability of “felon” is removed. The quotation (above) is from a Supreme Court case involving charges of treason (during the civil war), and whether Congress could bar lawyers from practicing law based on prior treason offenses that were the subject of a pardon. The Court held that it could not.
It is Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1866), for those of you scoring at home.
Been saying for months I thought Judge, Jury and Executioner Sullivan was daring Trump to pardon him, the thought being someone innocent person isn’t need of a pardon.
Someone who is innocent and being railroaded by those placed by the incoming administration is in need of a pardon.
Meaning normally pardoned people are innocent. Gen Flynn was totally innocent from the beginning.
Sullivan would be a judge in any totalitarian Hell hole and fit right in.
No, normally pardoned people are guilty, and the law presumes that accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt. In this case Flynn is not guilty, but he needs the pardon because he’s not being treated fairly and without it he can expect a harsh sentence.
For the same reason Trump should pardon himself and his whole family and cabinet. It won’t look good, but the alternative is likely to be persecution, abusive investigation, and the constant threat of malicious prosecution, all motivated not by any genuine concern about potential offenses but by hatred and bigotry.
So, is Gen. Flynn the KRAKEN?
Maybe they need the General now.. for something specific. I doubt this was done without consulting his attorney… as busy as she is.
I hope so. General Flynn has enough knowledge to know where a lot of “things” are buried in the US Deep State.
The QAnon folk have been saying for a long time now that Flynn will be able to provide extremely damaging evidence against the deep state once the case against him is resolved. Apparently he was under some kind of gag order, and the reason Sullivan was ordered to stall was to keep it in place for as long as possible?
I guess we’re going to get an interesting test of that theory now.
We’re in a fight. There were forces trying to keep General Flynn on the sidelines. Now the gloves are off. Wonder what General Flynn knows and what his part in the fight he’ll have. Looks like we’re going to find out.
Trump should pardon Judge Sullivan and create a taint against the jurist.
Quick note to the media.
Donald J Trump is still the President of The United States.
So F all of you bitches.
Like everyone here, I have mixed feelings about this. I wish the pardon weren’t necessary. If the election had gone better he wouldn’t need it. But while there’s still some flicker of hope left, it doesn’t look good, so this is the next best thing. And he doesn’t have to accept it immediately; he can hang on to it and not say anything until he next has a court date. It’s only then that he would have to pull the pardon out, so it’s only then that he would have to officially accept it, which unfortunately means officially accepting guilt, even if it isn’t actually true.
TRO’s were issued against certification in NV and PA today.
I’m not a lawyer, but as I understand it, TRO’s are considered ‘extraordinary relief,’ and typically granted where there is high probability of success on the merits
Whoever loses the PA case will likely go to the PA supreme court who will rule against Trump’s interest 5-2.
From there, I believe it’s Alito’s 3rd district, or directly to SCOTUS.
This is more encouraging than anything I’ve seen in the news this week….
A political solution to 16 trimesters of witch hunts, warlock trials, and protests… projections.
gotta ask, if this was an option, that trump could have taken, why has he waited until now?
it makes zero sense that trump would wait until now.
i smell a rat somewhere.
he could have boosted his re-election chances with this move.
he has recently said, that troops in afghanistan would be brought home. this would have also helped greatly, before the election.
why has trump delayed these moves until now???
Answered several times above. Ideally Flynn wants to be vindicated in court, which can’t happen if he accepts a pardon. Accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt, and he’s not guilty.
But if Biden takes over then the prosecution will resume, and Flynn will have no chance, so he’ll need the pardon. It’s not ideal but it’s better than going to prison. So Trump has issued it now and Flynn can have a happy Thanksgiving. In the unlikely event that Trump manages to win after all, Flynn can just send it back with a note thanking him for it but graciously declining it.
What crime did the turkey commit?
You can’t be serious. The annual “pardon” of the turkeys is not a real pardon at all; it’s a little show presidents have been performing for the benefit of children, just like NORAD pretending to track Santa Claus.
Whoa, wait a minute. You mean NORAD doesn’t track Santa Claus? That can’t be right. How does he manage to get into North American airspace and navigate freely without setting off the air defense system? I think that alone contradicts your presumption, so take it back.
And you can’t possibly be stupid enough to think that I was, although you do seem to have a history of missing the point.
“why has he waited”
Maybe to free Flynn to go on the offensive? I hope!!
A nice gesture for Democrats, who need something to rage about tomorrow. What would they do if they could not find something to rage about? Be happy or thankful? No, these attributes are not in their makeup.
Oh, I’m sure they’d find something else to rage about. They always do.
They’d simply rage about having nothing to rage about. That’s not likely though, what are the odds of them not having something to rage about, even if it’s raging about not having anything to rage about?
If Republicans didn’t enjoy 2018 and 2020 losses they need to impeach Sullivan within a nanosecond of next time they get the house.
The judiciary can not be allowed to remain the toy of the democrat party.
I am wondering why he was pardoned today, rather than at the very end of Trump’s term, as seems to be usual.
Was he subject to some kind of gag order that is released now that he has been pardoned?
If so, could he be the person Sydney Powell will be relying on to testify to the existence of Kraken, the CIA’s clandestine surveillance/election altering system?
If so, could this be the reason Trump pardoned him today?
It is not necessarily over. The president’s pardon applies to federal crimes that Congress has established by statute. The contempt power derives from common law, though it is codified in the U.S. criminal code. There is an argument that Judge Sullivan could find Flynn in contempt and sentence him to time in jail; the judge asked his amicus, former federal judge John Gleeson, to brief the issue of contempt based on what Judge Sullivan maintains were perjurious statements by Flynn at his plea hearing. Gleeson concluded Sullivan could find Flynn guilty of contempt, summary contempt, which does not require a trial, as it occurred in the judge’s presence. If Sullivan were to do so and sentence Flynn to jail time, it would be the US Marshal’s Service that would have to take Flynn into custody. The hitch is that the Marshals work for the Dept. of Justice, in the executive department. Trump could order the marshals to desist from taking Flynn into custody. What then? A true constitutional crisis.
Where did you get that idea? The president’s pardon applies to all “offenses against the united states”, not just those created by statute.
No, he’s got a point. I can see Sullivan being that hard-headed and stupid to order Flynn detained for contempt of court.
I can also see Trump ordering the Marshalls to stand down for as long as it takes the AG (or whatever section of the DOJ is appropriate) to issue a finding that the contempt of court charge is meritless on its face and that the trial is over, done, kaput, say goodnight Gracie, and that any further pronouncements from Sullivan about the case are beyond his authority and will not be responded to.
And five minutes later, releasing every single paper involved in the case fully unredacted regardless of the FBI or CIA’s screaming.
That’s still executive vs judicial; the contest will continue.
Sullivan can hold him in contempt of court, but that is an offense against the united states, so Trump can immediately pardon him for it. In fact, since any purported contempt must have already been committed, he can pardon him for it now and save Sullivan the trouble.
If the Trump administration didn’t leak like a sprinkler, I’d have Trump sign a pardon for the contempt of court charge secretly and pass a copy to the Prosecution. That way if Sullivan *is* dumb as a box of hammers and tries to toss Flynn in jail for contempt, the Prosecution can simply say “Excuse me, Your Honor. I think you want to read this first.”
Has Sydney filed in Georgia yet?
Where would she file?
I don’t even know where to look.
She didn’t file… crickets
Time is running out. She had better get kraken.
Yes Gateway Pundit has the story and link to the filing. One of the things she is asking is to throw out 96,000 ballots, lots of stuff about the signature verification, request for security tapes for Atlanta voter count, and allegation that the actions of the Secretary of State regarding signatures and other items were a violation of the Georgia Constitution.
I am sure that some of the attorneys on this board can and will provide a recap and analysis for our Thanksgiving reading.
Filed lawsuits in both GA and PA yesterday.
Whoops – GA and MI. I think. Not PA. I got The GA complaint second, so my brain was fried after reading the first complaint.
Will Flynn now be available to serve as Trump’s Defense Secretary? Is he also available to testify against Obama which was the reason they tried to destroy him?
A thought I had, is I wonder if this is related to what might come before the Supreme Court related to the election fraud issues in the swing states. Chief Justice Roberts is seen by many to be a politician as much as a judge. Perhaps Trump and Sydney Powell want to take the Flynn issue off the table so that Roberts couldn’t split the baby by throwing out the Flynn case to appease Trump voters, and allowing the blatant voter fraud to stand there by winning plaudits from the liberal press and the rest of the establishment?
Question: Does Flynn’s defense team even have to show up in Sullivan’s court for the next scheduled appearance in the clown show? Or is this just an end to the travesty with no more chances for Sullivan to preen?
Question: Will this pardon interfere with Flynn’s most probable wrongful prosecution lawsuit against the DOJ? He has most certainly suffered fiscal and other injuries due to the Obama-era meritless investigation, and a few hundred million dollars in return would be a good start to discourage such political prosecutions in the future.
Yes, Sullivan can take no judicial notice of the pardon until he is formally informed of it by the defense lawyers. Judges can’t act on what they read in the newspapers; they can only act on what is properly presented to them in court.
Unlike non-incumbent presidential candidates, who can apparently usurp the foreign policy powers of the United States on the say-so of newspapers.
Those who are capable of thinking for themselves Flynn never lost his reputation or credibility.
The only people who will be thinking like this will be the brain dead zombies on the left.
Which is the US Government.
The President probably should declassify any and all files pertaining to the Flynn persecution so that Gen. Flynn can successfully sue all agencies and bad actors involved.
And even if the US MSM won’t report on it, there are enough anti-American media in Europe and Canada to cover it, should their current main target Trump disappear.
And they won’t take being silence by Twitter or any other tech giant, and the EU laws don’t contain anything close to the judge-made total immunity…
The Georgia Kraken:
Sorry, it took me a while to prepare my comments below. By then, you had posted your two links. They would have saved me a little time. But it is still notable that the defendants in Georgia are Republicans and that Giuliani is only involved in PA for now. Helps understand why there was a “distancing”.
The Michigan Kraken:
Important to note that two much bigger events happened at the same time LI was preoccupied with other things. One, Giuliani presented his case to REPUBLICAN-ONLY hearing in PA laying out his case for DEMOCRAT voter fraud.
Two, Powell “released the Kraken”.
“The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Atlanta on behalf of several Georgia residents, electors and Republican Party officials and named Gov. Brian Kemp, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and state election board members as defendants.
THAT is why Trump’s official legal team “distanced” themselves from Powell. Powell is playing “long ball” by taking on The Uniparty Swamp. Giuliana is playing “small ball” by focusing on the tactical issue of winning specific states.
While Wood is also seemingly playing “small ball” by suing his own state of Georgia, his case is overlaps Powell’s so it looks to me that this is why Powell started with Georgia. Lay out the more immediate state-specific cases that can be ruled on first. Then when the broader implications are laid out and ruled on, pursue to much large case that will suck in the Uniparty, governmentinstitutions, media and foreign corruption.
We are WINNING! I would think that this is good news!
Link to Powell’s filing:
Hopefully, once both halves of the Uniparty are destroyed by “the Kraken”, there will finally be a return to sanity.
I find several things interesting. First and foremost the same day that Trump pardons Flynn, his attorney, Sidney Powell files suits in MI and GA claiming essentially that Trump lost in those states because of industrial level election fraud, both with ballot stuffing and then the ballot counting. My original thought was: was this a quid pro quo deal? But reading the GA complaint, I noticed that, again, Powell knows a lot more than she should know, in this case about Dominion and their machines. Before, it was about all of the stuff that had gone on in the FBI, etc in the Flynn entrapment. My thoughts right now is that Powell and Flynn allowed Trump to issue the pardon because this freed up both of gem to work on the election fraud cases (both GA and MI so far). These are both potentially massive cases with dozens and dozens of witnesses, so far, and just as many facts presented. The MI complaint was almost 100 pages, and the GA complaint was over 100 pages long, both overflowing with factual assertions.
My thoughts on Flynn is that he was taken out by the civilian side of the Intelligence Community because he knew much too much about where all the bodies were hidden. But having spent his long career there, he still has very deep ties to the military side of the IC, and now, even more than before Trump, they control the NSA. And I think that that is where all of the intelligence that Powell has been privy to over the last year or so is coming from, and that includes a lot of the dirt on the Dominion machines utilized across the country.
We shall see.