"Slow Down the Video:" Flynn Network Lawyers Are Gaslighting Courts, Clients, and the Country
Are Patrick Byrne's lawyers trying to lose in order to cause MAGA to believe the courts are hopelessly corrupt? Flooding the zone with crazy, flashbacks of 2020.
Flynn-linked attorney shoves opposing counsel at a deposition—on camera—then files a brief insisting to the court that if they slow the video enough it looks like self-defense. That same attorney also files a bond petition for Tina Peters fifteen months after the deadline, and publicly accuses the judges in the case of treason. A second Flynn-linked attorney is about to go to prison after her trial next week, but she doesn’t seem to think the trial will even happen. A third Flynn-linked attorney is given access to some of the most classified intelligence in the U.S. government despite a track record of court sanctions and a prediction, which two sources with direct knowledge attribute to him, that the Supreme Court would vote 9-0 to reinstall Trump in 2021.
This is all coming to light in the last couple weeks, and Michael Flynn and self-described Obama Tier One CIA Asset Patrick Byrne are the glue that binds these stories together.
The attorneys orbiting the Flynn network—Peter Ticktin, Stefanie Lambert, Kurt Olsen, and associated attorneys all funded by Patrick Byrne—have demonstrated a pattern so consistent it demands an uncomfortable question: are they incompetent, or is failure the intended outcome? Either these lawyers are staggeringly bad at their jobs, or their serial courtroom losses serve a broader psychological operation—one that convinces their followers the judicial system is hopelessly rigged and primes them for radicalization when the system fails to deliver the vindication they’ve been promised.
Let’s begin with a November 2025 email so extraordinary that one attorney described it to me as “one of the craziest things I’ve ever seen.”
On Nov. 11, 2025, attorney Peter Ticktin emailed one of former Dominion officer Eric Coomer’s lawyers (cc’ing Stefanie Lambert) with the subject line “CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT OFFER.” In it, Ticktin claimed that “investigations and prosecutions” by the DOJ, FBI, Homeland Security, and the “Department of National Intelligence” (sic) were “underway,” then urged Coomer to “turn state’s evidence,” promising to help obtain “full immunity,” and even floating witness protection.
The timing is consequential.
Right now, Kurt Olsen—Flynn network “Stop the Steal” lawyer behind Mike Lindell’s 2021 claims that SCOTUS would vote 9-0 to put Trump back in office—has been elevated into a role where he is interacting with the federal government at the highest levels on 2020 election claims. Reuters has reported that Olsen pressed an ODNI contractor to search for “evidence” of 2020 voter fraud and that the FBI identified Olsen as the source of a referral that kicked off a DOJ probe in Fulton County, Georgia.
Four sources aided Politico with a recent piece on Olsen’s role. One, who claims to have spoken directly with Trump, told Politico, “Effectively what he [Trump] said was, ‘this is your chance.’ Now, anything that they want, they can get.” Another, described as a “close Trump ally,” said Olsen “will find some super classified report, say it’s evidence of fraud, but really it’s just completely out of context.”
This is strong confirmation for my piece published two weeks ago questioning DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s proximity to Flynn network operatives.
Here’s how it comes together:
Ticktin + Lambert claim proximity to federal agencies/investigations and offer immunity/witness protection.
Olsen simultaneously reported to be operating inside those same agencies with the highest security clearance.
Olsen, Ticktin, and Lambert are extremely close to each other. Olsen is currently representing Lambert in a criminal case in Hillsdale County in which Lambert is a defendant. They also worked together on Tina Peters’ defense.
As I showed two weeks ago, Lambert was working directly with the U.S. Attorney who, under Gabbard’s oversight, led a seizure of Dominion equipment in Puerto Rico based on claims that attorney Matt DePerno warned months prior to be fraudulent.
Flynn, Byrne, and other Flynn network operatives lavish frequent praise on Gabbard, even as they denigrate Trump and the rest of his staff.
At the center of all of this is Flynn’s close partner Patrick Byrne, who pays these attorneys. Since Byrne has admitted to being a CIA asset, this begs the question: is this all part of a broader psychological operation to foment violent right wing extremism by convincing a segment of MAGA that the election and judicial systems are hopelessly rigged?
Four filings from the past several days make the pattern impossible to ignore.
The Exhibit: A “Settlement Offer” That Reads Like a Prosecution Threat
Ticktin’s email tells Coomer’s attorney that Coomer is in a “labyrinth,” that authorities will “find the evidence” of his “criminal involvement,” and that federal investigations for treason are already underway. Then comes the pitch:
“…permit Ms. Lambert and me to join your legal team and arrange for full immunity by the DOJ in exchange for truthful testimony…”
“In fact, we may need to assist Mr. Coomer in the Witness Protection Program.”
Despite years of disastrously bad lawyering by Byrne’s team—Olsen and Lambert both sanctioned by multiple courts—Ticktin offers his and Lambert’s services to Coomer, suggesting they can “arrange for full immunity” on behalf of the federal government. Without any publicly-known indictments.
The email sounds like an indirect message from Olsen himself, who has been trying to prove the “Three Muskateers” claims that Venezuela steals elections through 20-year-old Smartmatic backdoors supposedly preserved by Dominion.
They even admit what they need: “Mr. Coomer is a necessary witness who links Smartmatic with Dominion in the criminal enterprise”—a tacit admission they can’t prove their claims any other way.
At a December deposition, Ticktin reiterated his claim of inside knowledge of a secret prosecution:
“Your client is a traitor. Your client is going to be prosecuted as far as I know under the criminal laws of… the United States.”
Remember, at this same time in November, Peter Ticktin went on Joe Oltmann’s podcast to threaten Tina Peters’ judges with charges of treason. He genuinely seems to think he speaks with the power of federal investigation and prosecution.
The Sanctions Motion: Violence at a Deposition
Coomer’s team filed motion for sanctions in Coomer v. Byrne, alleging that before a January 27, 2026 deposition in Tampa, Plaintiff’s counsel was physically assaulted—first by Ticktin, then by Byrne.
Coomer’s attorneys included video footage and signed affidavits from the court reporter—a neutral officer hired by Ticktin’s own side, who saw Byrne shoving himself into Cain and slapping him on the neck—and a hotel employee who corroborated Cain’s description of the events. The hotel surveillance video shows Ticktin approaching Coomer’s counsel and initiating physical contact on two separate occasions.
Byrne’s Response: Gaslighting the Court in Slow Motion
On February 20, Byrne and Ticktin filed their response with an astonishing defense: they claim that if you slow the hotel surveillance video down enough, frame by frame, you can see that Cain actually initiated physical contact with Ticktin from behind a pillar. The filing includes still photographs and links to slow-motion clips Ticktin prepared, arguing that Cain’s foot appears “toe to toe” with Ticktin’s in one frame, then his torso “emerges” past the pillar.
I’m including Ticktin’s slowed-down videos below so you can judge for yourself:
Having watched both versions, in my view the slowed-down footage makes the case against Ticktin even more clearly. At normal speed there’s perhaps a sliver of ambiguity about contact behind the pillar. Slowed down, the sequence is unmistakable: Ticktin initiates the shove, Cain absorbs it without retaliating.
And yet Ticktin spills 19 pages of legal rambling ink swearing that it was all Cain’s fault.
Ticktin’s filing inadvertently admits the key fact—that he pushed Cain—but insists it was “defensive.” This despite the video footage, hotel employee’s declaration, court reporter’s affidavit, and Byrne’s own admissions on Lindell TV where he confessed to “stamping” on Cain’s foot and jabbing him in the throat.
Most remarkably, the response asks the court to sanction Cain, disqualify his law firm, refer him for criminal prosecution, and report him to bar associations—even as it repeatedly claims the videos show something they do not. Ticktin is gaslighting the court.
We should soon see if the court sees it that way.
Tina Peters: Another Case Study in Flynn Network Legal Malpractice
I’ve covered the malpractice by Tina Peters’ legal team since her August 2024 trial. The latest example came last week, on February 18. The Colorado Court of Appeals dismissed Tina Peters’ petition seeking review of her bond denial. The reason? Her attorneys filed it more than fifteen months past the forty-nine-day deadline.
The district court denied Peters bond on October 3, 2024. Her attorneys didn’t file the petition until January 30, 2026—over 480 days later. The petition didn’t even acknowledge it was untimely. Only after the prosecution pointed it out did Ticktin and Lambert address the issue, citing Peters’ pursuit of other remedies as “good cause.” The court was unpersuaded, noting those alternative avenues don’t excuse missing this deadline when nothing prevented a timely filing.
Peters also invoked the Jenkins decision (announced November 26, 2025) as a reason for delay—but the court noted she still waited another sixty-five days after that ruling, with no explanation.
This is either staggering incompetence or calculated indifference. Peters is in prison. Filing a petition fifteen months late is malpractice, unless they weren’t representing Peters but the ones paying the attorneys—Byrne and Mike Lindell.
Important backstory: Kurt Olsen is widely credited as the attorney advised Peters to commit fraud and related crimes to get Conan Hayes (whom Joe Oltmann has said is a CIA asset) into the EMS room with the security cameras shut off and no chain of custody. He then helped lead her defense—the same defense so counterproductive it provoked the sentencing judge into throwing the book at her.
Olsen was also sanctioned by Arizona courts for false statements while representing Kari Lake. Two sources with direct knowledge have told me Olsen was the attorney Mike Lindell was referring to when he promised in 2021 that SCOTUS would rule 9-0 to reverse 2020—a prediction so detached from reality it could only come from someone unserious or deliberately stoking false expectations.
This is the man now accessing some of the most classified intelligence in the U.S. government and leading the investigation Trump is depending on to get the SAVE Act passed.
Lambert’s Trial: The Tina Peters Playbook, Again
And then there’s Stefanie Lambert’s criminal trial in Michigan, scheduled to begin March 2—one week from today.
Lambert faces charges in Oakland County Circuit Court (Case No. 2023-285759-FH) related to her unauthorized access to election equipment. On February 19, Chief Circuit Judge Jeffery S. Matis issued an order on the prosecution’s motion to exclude all defense exhibits at trial. The order notes that the court has ordered Lambert to produce her trial exhibits to the prosecution no less than seven times, with the most recent order entered on November 3, 2025—over three months ago. To date, not all exhibits have been produced.
The court found Lambert has had “ample opportunity to comply” and that her reasons for failing to do so “are without merit.” Judge Matis ordered Lambert to produce all trial exhibits by February 23 at 4:30 p.m.—or they will be excluded at trial under MCR 6.201(J).
Lambert filed a shocking but not surprising response at the deadline. The filing is sealed because it includes details about her minor daughter’s medical records. A source with direct knowledge told me that Lambert argued her daughter had to undergo surgery on Friday and that she was unable to prepare the exhibits as a result. The court has not yet ruled on whether this constitutes sufficient cause, meaning we are now one week from the planned trial start date with the possibility that the defense will have no exhibits at all.
This makes eight times the court has ordered the defense to produce its exhibits and in every case Byrne’s attorneys have failed to do so. It sounds like “my dog ate my homework,” but I suspect it’s something more. Just as Tina Peters’ gold star mom status and her husband’s death were used to emotionally manipulate MAGA into adopting her as a martyr, Lambert’s single mom status will be used as well. And like nearly every one of their other filings, this claim about her daughter requiring emergency surgery could be intended not just for the court, but for the public.
If the pattern sounds familiar, it should. Lambert, Kurt Olsen, and attorney Dan Hartman—who is now also on Lambert’s defense team—were all involved in the legal strategy behind Tina Peters’ criminal defense in Colorado. In that case, the defense team spent years attempting to turn Peters’ trial into a show trial referendum on the 2020 election rather than mounting a defense against the actual charges. After years of wrangling and what the court characterized as deceptive filings, the judge in that case had enough and ruled that the defense could not introduce claims of election fraud at trial—a decision that, whatever its merits, the Flynn network immediately seized on to claim the judge was biased against Peters and infringing on her First Amendment rights.
The Peters playbook worked perfectly—not as a legal defense, but as content. Peters was convicted on all counts and sentenced to nine years. But the Flynn network got exactly what it needed: a martyr, a narrative of judicial persecution, and a rallying cry that the system is rigged. And even better for them, President Trump appears to have bought into their deceitful narratives, repeating the lie numerous times publicly that “Tina Peters is only in prison because she exposed the fraud.”
As I’ve repeatedly shown, that statement is patently false on every count. She is in prison because she knowingly broke the law, and nothing that she did proved anything at all.
Now the same attorneys behind Peters’ imprisonment, running the same playbook, appear to be engineering the same outcome for Lambert. Eight orders to produce exhibits, none fully complied with, a week before trial. And this is consistent with the rest of her behavior in the last couple years of pre-trial legal wrangling. Either this defense team is incapable of meeting basic legal obligations, or the chaos is the strategy—and the conviction is the content in the pursuit of a revolution.
Timeline of Recent Events
Nov. 11, 2025 — Ticktin emails Coomer’s attorney claiming federal investigations are underway; offers immunity + witness protection.
Dec. 15, 2025 — Ticktin calls Coomer a “traitor” during Byrne’s deposition.
Jan. 27, 2026 — Coomer deposed in Tampa; counsel physically assaulted by Ticktin and Byrne.
Jan. 30, 2026 — Peters’ attorneys file bond petition—15 months past deadline.
Feb. 6, 2026 — Coomer’s sanctions motion filed with video evidence and witness affidavits.
Feb. 9, 2026 — Politico reports Olsen accessing highly classified intelligence to investigate 2020.
Feb. 18, 2026 — Colorado Court of Appeals dismisses Peters’ bond petition as untimely.
Feb. 20, 2026 — Byrne/Ticktin file response claiming slowed video proves Cain was the aggressor. They ask the court to sanction Cain instead.
March 2, 2025 — Stefanie Lambert trial set to begin.
The through-line is unmistakable: at every turn, Flynn network attorneys produce legal work that fails their clients but succeeds as content for the narrative machine.
Stefanie Lambert and Ticktin Law Group have not responded to requests for comment.
Conclusion: The Purpose Is the Revolution
Since 2020, every case the Flynn network legal team has engaged in follows the same arc. Grand promises of legal wins. Aggressive public narratives. Then courtroom conduct so deficient it guarantees defeat—which becomes the next round of grievance narratives to convince their followers the judicial system—like the election system—is hopelessly corrupt.
Ticktin offers witness protection he can’t deliver, then physically shoves opposing counsel on camera and asks a judge to believe the video shows the opposite of what it shows. Olsen promises the Supreme Court will vote 9-0, is sanctioned for lying in Kari Lake’s case, then leads a defense so provocative the judge throws the book at his client, then gets handed the keys to the nation’s most classified intelligence. Lambert defies eight court orders to produce exhibits one week before trial, following the exact playbook that buried Tina Peters. Peters’ own attorneys file a bond petition fifteen months late while she sits in prison.
At some point, one must acknowledge that a pattern this consistent stops being incompetence and starts being design. The question isn’t whether these attorneys are failing their clients. They are, objectively and repeatedly. The question is whether anyone in this network actually cares—or whether the failures are the product, manufactured grievances sold to an audience that has been primed to believe the system will never deliver justice.
That belief is the most dangerous outcome of all. Not because the justice system is above criticism (it isn’t) but because a movement convinced that courts, elections, and institutions are all irredeemably corrupt has no reason to participate in any of them—and instead can easily be led to violently take matters into their own hands.
As I was editing this story this morning, this post from my favorite account on X came up:
The Flynn network’s attorneys aren’t building arguments or issues. They’re building a revolution.