Flynn case dropped!!! Democrats revealed as LIARS!!!
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Friday, August 4, 2023 18:48
VIEWED: 15905
PAGE 8 of 20
Here are 13 questions we would ask of government counsel if we were Judge Sullivan:
1) One striking feature of your brief is that it does not seem to allege that any of Flynn’s constitutional rights were violated or that you are conceding that any government action with respect to this investigation was illegal. Am I reading the government’s position correctly that you wish to dismiss this case without conceding that Flynn’s rights were actually infringed?
2) Can you identify another case in which the government has argued for the dismissal of a guilty plea in the absence of either newly discovered evidence of actual innocence or the discovery of some sort of infringement of the defendant’s constitutional rights?
3) As I understand your position, you are taking the view that Flynn’s case should be dismissed because the investigation lacked a proper predicate at the time the FBI interviewed him, and that his lies thus could not have been material. Are you aware of any other case in which the government has asked for dismissal of any charge on the ground that the investigation lacked a proper predicate? And are you aware of any other circumstances in which the government, in a false-statements case, sought dismissal because the supposed lack of a predicate for the investigation made the lies supposedly immaterial?
4) The federal government commonly charges defendants with lying to investigators. Does the department intend to perform similar analyses of the predication and materiality of past false-statements cases and seek dismissals of other matters that may currently be pending presentencing that may run afoul of its new position?
5) In arguing that the investigation was not properly predicated, the government points to documentation of internal FBI discussions concerning whether or not to close its probe into Flynn—discussions that took place before the bureau learned of Flynn’s call with the Russian ambassador. This knowledge, in turn, prompted the FBI to continue its work and ultimately seek an interview with Flynn. The phone call, the government states, was not an adequate predicate for continuing the probe. Is the government’s position that, as a general matter of law or policy, the question of predication must be evaluated anew at each step of an investigation merely because there has been discussion of closing a case? Can the government cite another case in which it has ever taken that view?
6) The FBI decided to interview Flynn after discovering his phone call with Ambassador Kislyak and learning that Flynn had lied about the matter to Vice President Mike Pence and White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, both of whom then unknowingly repeated the lie to the public. Justice Department officials have since testified under oath that they worried this placed Flynn at risk of blackmail by the Russian government—because the Kremlin would, of course, know that Flynn had indeed spoken with Kislyak. Does the government really take the view that it would not be a counterintelligence threat for the Russian Federation to know that the national security adviser had lied to the vice president about contacts with its government related to election interference and sanctions? And does it really take the view that it is actually lawful to lie to the FBI in such an investigation?
7) Robert S. Litt, who served as general counsel to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence through the end of the Obama administration and was thus a sitting intelligence official during the relevant period, has posed the following hypothetical:
Someone who holds a grudge against you calls an FBI office and says that you are a Russian agent, providing fictitious details of invented meetings you have had with agents from Russia’s Federal Security Service. Before that call, the FBI had no information at all about you—let alone an open predicated investigation—but follows up with a public records search and an interview of you, and determines that there is no basis to the claim.
The logic
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
This is not about "going to trial", this is about sentencing. Judge Emmett Sullivan wants to sentence a man who both prosecutors and defense now say is "not guilty". In doing so, he is far overreaching the powers of his bench by appointing ANOTHER prosecutor. Judges are not defense, nor are they prosecutors. They should sit in the middle and make sure that everything is done according to law, and at this point Emmett Sullivan himself is breaking the law.
If the FIB hadn't made such a hash of the case, and if the prosecutors hadn't withheld key evidence from the defense, we may have been looking at a legitimate case. But as it stands the case was so thoroughly botched it can't be resuscitated, not even by a judge.
I have posted since the beginning that I think Flynn was acting as an unregistered representative of a foreign agent (Turkey). There is a money-trail, and I was disturbed by some of the things he was discussing with Turkey, because he has a huge giant grotch against Iran. But the usual "punishment" is to let the offender register after-the-fact. As far as his discussions with Kislyak, I doubt there is much in there to prosecute. He was not "selling out" America.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
#WEARAMASK
Interesting. Trump says he fired Flynn because he lied to the VP and the FBI. And Flynn himself says he lied about several things to the FBI, including working for another country while being our National Security Chief.
But you want to go against Trump, the FBI , the Judge, and Flynn on this... doesn't get much more telling or dim.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:So YOU'RE willing to agree with Trump and Pence?
SIGNYM: This is not about "going to trial", this is about sentencing. Judge Emmett Sullivan wants to sentence a man who both prosecutors and defense now say is "not guilty". In doing so, he is far overreaching the powers of his bench by appointing ANOTHER prosecutor. Judges are not defense, nor are they prosecutors. They should sit in the middle and make sure that everything is done according to law, and at this point Emmett Sullivan himself is breaking the law.
If the FIB hadn't made such a hash of the case, and if the prosecutors hadn't withheld key evidence from the defense, we may have been looking at a legitimate case. But as it stands the case was so thoroughly botched it can't be resuscitated, not even by a judge.
I have posted since the beginning that I think Flynn was acting as an unregistered representative of a foreign agent (Turkey). There is a money-trail, and I was disturbed by some of the things he was discussing with Turkey, because he has a huge giant grotch against Iran. But the usual "punishment" is to let the offender register after-the-fact. As far as his discussions with Kislyak, I doubt there is much in there to prosecute. He was not "selling out" America.
CC: Interesting. Trump says he fired Flynn because he lied to the VP and the FBI. And Flynn himself says he lied about several things to the FBI, including working for another country while being our National Security Chief.
But you want to go against Trump, the FBI , the Judge, and Flynn on this... doesn't get much more telling or dim.
Interesting indeed.
There is a lot of evidence that Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Obama, and a host of underlings and associates across the ocean acted improperly and illegally again Trump and his associates. So if you want to talk about collusion and unregistered foreign agents and lying why don't you look at them?
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
#WEARAMASK
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Thanks for all these relevant details, Signy. I'd forgotten most of them.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
More bullshit from SECOND.
When you interview a suspect, you (a) let him or her know that they are the subject of the investigation and (b) provide him or her with any memory aids such as transcripts, diaries, notes. emails etc to allow them to refresh their memories.
What is a lie? It is a deliberate and knowing misrepresentation of what the person believes to be the truth. Unless you provide the suspect with a refresher, you can't tell whether they lied or misspoke/forgot.
That is why the FIB notes on the interview are crucial. The FIB prides itself in being human lie detectors. That is one of the skills that they look for, and hone, in their agents. The people who interviewed Flynn wrote AT THE TIME that they didn't believe he was lying. As far as they could tell, he believed he was telling the truth.
Well, maybe Flynn is a stonecold liar. He WAS head of DIA after all, another spook. But the way the FIB conducted this whole investigation (which was clearly set up to entrap Flynn) and withheld exculpatory evidence ... well, we'll never know. If the FIB had done a by-the-book investigation and shown Flynn the transcript he would have been forced to admit "Yep, I said that" and then we would be discussing whether or not that was worthy of prosecution. But IMHO they must have felt that Flynn's conversstion was not much, and in their eagerness to entrap him they bungled the case and they REALLY bungled the prosecution by withholding evidence from the defense.
It was all illegal by the FIB and malicious, politically-motivated prosecution. Very much like Ukrainegate, which the transcript showed was not much either.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
#WEARAMASK
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
So YOU'RE willing to agree with Trump and Pence?
So YOU'RE not? I'm not the crusader for Flynn - you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Fact: Michael Flynn pleaded guilty. Twice. Even President Trump has said his former national security adviser lied to the F.B.I.
Originally posted by second:Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:
Trump DOJ Grossly Distorted Facts In Call To Drop Flynn Case
Now, there's a person who's not about to be confused by the facts.
When asked about the plea at the time, Mr. Trump said, “I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the vice president and the F.B.I.”
Mr. Flynn did lie, as he admitted to under oath in a court of law — twice. He told investigators, falsely, that he had not communicated with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, about possible changes to American foreign policy toward Russia even before Mr. Trump took office.
To review: Mr. Barr is now saying he cannot prove charges to which Mr. Flynn has twice pleaded guilty in court — and for which there is ample evidence. Very funny, Mr. Barr. lol.
Mr. Trump, his original explanation for firing Mr. Flynn notwithstanding, promptly crowed that his former aide was an “innocent man” who had been targeted by the Obama administration. Very funny, Mr. Trump. lol.
www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/opinion/michael-flynn-charges-dropped.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Data obtained by Fox News shows that thousands of unmasking requests have been fulfilled every year across both the Obama and Trump administrations, reflecting the often routine nature of these requests in intelligence work. The practice is regarded as an important national security tool, a view reflected by these numbers.
The Office of the Director of National Intelligence reported that in 2019, the Trump administration had 10,012 unmasking requests fulfilled; 16,721 requests fulfilled in 2018, and 9,529 requests fulfilled in 2017.
During 2016, the last year of the Obama administration, there were 9,217 unmasking requests fulfilled.
The numbers reflect how frequently national security and intelligence officials use this tool in their work. Unmasking occurs after U.S. citizens' conversations are incidentally picked up in conversations with foreign officials who are being monitored by the intelligence community. The U.S. citizens' identities are supposed to be protected if their participation is incidental and no wrongdoing is suspected. However, officials can determine the U.S. citizens' names through a process that is supposed to safeguard their rights. In the typical process, when officials are requesting the unmasking of an American, they do not necessarily know the identity of the person in advance.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/unmasking-requests-number-in-thousand
s-across-administrations-as-pols-demand-details
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Forced confessions aren't admissible in court.
Flynn committed no crime.
To accuse him of being anything other than a victim of a tyrannical political hit job is itself un-American.
Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen
I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.
" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I've never believed Trump. I'm not about "believing" anyone or anything. And I've never agreed globally with Trump. I thought I've made that clear, ever since he started running for president. To insinuate otherwise is just your standard lying.
SignyM: So YOU'RE willing to agree with Trump and Pence?
CC: So YOU'RE not? I'm not the crusader for Flynn - you are.
But the things that you criticize Trump for are bullshit: Russia!Russia! Ukrainegate. Racism. Kavanaugh. Flynn. It's all utter bullshit, made up whole cloth by the deep state and brought to you by the ever-compliant M$M. Just because I criticize people for believing obvious falsehoods doesn't mean I'm defending Trump.
Why don't you ever criticize Trump for something real, like his inability to withdraw troops from the Mideast, or his reliance on The Fed (which is the biggest driver of wealth inequality in the USA) and the stock market bubble, or the deficits?
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
#WEARAMASK
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Pleading guilty happens with a lot of people who can't match the resources of the prosecutors. They plead guilty because they don't have the resources to get real justice with a real trial and real jury and especially a real defense. It's not exactly a secret.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Undercover Huber
@JohnWHuber
Flynn’s original FD-302 is so important, the Special Counsel had to leak a prosecution threat against Flynn’s son just to avoid turning it over to his original lawyers Covington
THREAD
8:03 PM · May 15, 2020
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME