Was Flynn entrapped?

[OKTexas]

Checking Robert Mueller
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL DECEMBER 13, 2018

Robert Mueller has operated for 19 months as a law unto himself, reminding us of the awesome and destructive powers of special counsels. About the only possible check on Mr. Mueller is a judge who is wise to the tricks of prosecutors and investigators. Good news: That’s what we got this week.

Former national security adviser Mike Flynn a year ago pleaded guilty to one count of lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about his conversations with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. Mr. Flynn’s defense team this week filed a sentencing memo to Judge Emmet Sullivan that contained explosive new information about the Flynn-FBI meeting in January 2017.

It was arranged by then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who personally called Mr. Flynn on other business, then suggested he sit down with two agents to clear up the Russia question. Mr. McCabe urged Mr. Flynn to conduct the interview with no lawyer present—to make things easier.

The agents (including the infamous Peter Strzok) showed up within two hours. They had already decided not to inform Mr. Flynn that they had transcripts of his conversations or give him the standard warning against lying to the FBI. They wanted him “relaxed” and “unguarded.” Former Director James Comey this weekend bragged on MSNBC that he would never have “gotten away” with such a move in a more “organized” administration.

The whole thing stinks of entrapment, though the curious question was how the Flynn defense team got the details. The court filing refers to a McCabe memo written the day of the 2017 meeting, as well as an FBI summary—known as a 302—of the Flynn interview. These are among documents congressional Republicans have been fighting to obtain for more than a year, only to be stonewalled by the Justice Department. Now we know why the department didn’t want them public.

They have come to light thanks to a man who knows well how men like Messrs. Mueller and Comey operate: Judge Sullivan. He sits on the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, and as he wrote for the Journal last year, he got a “wake-up call” in 2008 while overseeing the trial of then-Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska. Judge Sullivan ultimately assigned a lawyer to investigate Justice Department misconduct.

The investigator’s report found prosecutors had engaged in deliberate and repeated ethical violations, withholding key evidence from the defense. It also excoriated the FBI for failing to write up 302s and for omitting key facts from those it did write. The head of the FBI was Mr. Mueller.

Judge Sullivan has since made it his practice to begin every case with a Brady order, which reminds prosecutors of their constitutional obligation to provide the defense with any exculpatory evidence. On Dec. 12, 2017, days after being assigned the Flynn case, Judge Sullivan issued such an order, instructing Mr. Mueller’s team to turn over “any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant’s guilt or punishment.” Had any other judge drawn the case, we likely would never have seen these details of the FBI’s behavior.

It’s clear that something has concerned the judge—who likely sees obvious parallels to the Stevens case. The media was predicting a quick ruling in the Flynn case. Instead, Judge Sullivan issued new orders Wednesday, demanding to see for himself the McCabe memo and the Flynn 302. He also ordered the special counsel to hand over by Friday any other documents relevant to the Flynn-FBI meeting.

Given his history with the FBI, the judge may also have some questions about the curious date on the Flynn 302—Aug. 22, 2017, seven months after the interview. Texts from Mr. Strzok and testimony from Mr. Comey both suggest the 302 was written long before then. Was the 302 edited in the interim? If so, by whom, and at whose direction? FBI officials initially testified to Congress that the agents did not think Mr. Flynn had lied.

Judges have the ability to reject plea deals and require a prosecutor to make a case at trial. The criminal-justice system isn’t only about holding defendants accountable; trials also provide oversight of investigators and their tactics. And judges are not obliged to follow prosecutors’ sentencing recommendations.

No one knows how Judge Sullivan will rule. His reputation is for being no-nonsense, a straight shooter, an advocate of government transparency. Whatever the outcome, he has done the nation a favor by using his Brady order to hold prosecutors to some account and allow the country a glimpse at how federal law enforcement operates. Which is the very least the country can expect.

Outline - Read & annotate without distractions

It is hard not to come to the conclusion that two different forms of justice exist in this country, one for democrats and another for their adversaries. Specifically anyone with ties to Trump.

Oh, and did you know that the iphones issued to Strozk and Page by the SCO were determined BY SOMEONE IN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE to contain ‘No substantive texts, notes or reminders', so the phones were wiped clean and restored to factory settings, meaning anything on them was gone. That was done after both of them were removed from the SCO investigation back in the summer of 2017, but given that many within Mueller's organization were friends/supporters/associates/donors to the Clintons, how much credence should we give to those determinations?

We don't know what information was summarily destroyed, but the whole process stinks to high heaven. Maybe it's all coincidental and innocent of wrong-doing, no proof that it wasn't because once again any possible incrimination evidence has been deleted. You know, after awhile a patttern kind of emerges.

The OIG was able to recover more than 19,000 texts between Strozk and Page on their old government-issued Samsung Galaxy S5 devices that had been lost due to the agency’s “collection tool failure.” The OIG did not include the content of these texts in the report. I suspect at some point maybe we'll find out more about what really happened.

DOJ Destroyed Missing Strzok/Page Texts Before IG Reviewed Them

It's simple for flynn, don't lie.

Both Comey and McCabe told congress he didn't. So who lied?

.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Flynn fucked himself

not one single human held a gun to his head and made him lie or answer questions without a lawyer present - NOT ONE.

He was conned into giving an interview without being Mirandized...Clear and unambiguous entrapment.

The guy was a three star general, not a crackhead. He knew full well what he was doing.

 

[Oddball]

The guy was a three star general, not a crackhead. He knew full well what he was doing.

Irrelevant....Investigators are required to Mirandize subjects of interrogations.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The guy was a three star general, not a crackhead. He knew full well what he was doing.

Irrelevant....Investigators are required to Mirandize subjects of interrogations.

Nope, dope.

When Must Police Read Me Miranda Rights - LawInfo

When Must The Police Read Me My Miranda Rights?

The Miranda warning is usually given when a person is arrested. However, the Miranda Rights attach during any “custodial interrogation” (when a person is substantially deprived of their freedom and not free to leave) even if the suspect hasn't been formally arrested. However, the police do not have to advise you of your Miranda rights before asking any question. If a person is not in police custody, no Miranda warning is required and anything the person says can be used at trial if the person is later charged with a crime. This exception most often comes up when the police stop someone on the street to question him or her about a recent crime or the person blurts out a confession before the police have an opportunity to deliver the warning. If a person believes that he or she is a potential suspect in a crime, then it may be wise to politely decline to answer questions, at least until after consulting an attorney.

 

[OKTexas]

Checking Robert Mueller
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL DECEMBER 13, 2018

Robert Mueller has operated for 19 months as a law unto himself, reminding us of the awesome and destructive powers of special counsels. About the only possible check on Mr. Mueller is a judge who is wise to the tricks of prosecutors and investigators. Good news: That’s what we got this week.

Former national security adviser Mike Flynn a year ago pleaded guilty to one count of lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about his conversations with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. Mr. Flynn’s defense team this week filed a sentencing memo to Judge Emmet Sullivan that contained explosive new information about the Flynn-FBI meeting in January 2017.

It was arranged by then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who personally called Mr. Flynn on other business, then suggested he sit down with two agents to clear up the Russia question. Mr. McCabe urged Mr. Flynn to conduct the interview with no lawyer present—to make things easier.

The agents (including the infamous Peter Strzok) showed up within two hours. They had already decided not to inform Mr. Flynn that they had transcripts of his conversations or give him the standard warning against lying to the FBI. They wanted him “relaxed” and “unguarded.” Former Director James Comey this weekend bragged on MSNBC that he would never have “gotten away” with such a move in a more “organized” administration.

The whole thing stinks of entrapment, though the curious question was how the Flynn defense team got the details. The court filing refers to a McCabe memo written the day of the 2017 meeting, as well as an FBI summary—known as a 302—of the Flynn interview. These are among documents congressional Republicans have been fighting to obtain for more than a year, only to be stonewalled by the Justice Department. Now we know why the department didn’t want them public.

They have come to light thanks to a man who knows well how men like Messrs. Mueller and Comey operate: Judge Sullivan. He sits on the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, and as he wrote for the Journal last year, he got a “wake-up call” in 2008 while overseeing the trial of then-Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska. Judge Sullivan ultimately assigned a lawyer to investigate Justice Department misconduct.

The investigator’s report found prosecutors had engaged in deliberate and repeated ethical violations, withholding key evidence from the defense. It also excoriated the FBI for failing to write up 302s and for omitting key facts from those it did write. The head of the FBI was Mr. Mueller.

Judge Sullivan has since made it his practice to begin every case with a Brady order, which reminds prosecutors of their constitutional obligation to provide the defense with any exculpatory evidence. On Dec. 12, 2017, days after being assigned the Flynn case, Judge Sullivan issued such an order, instructing Mr. Mueller’s team to turn over “any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant’s guilt or punishment.” Had any other judge drawn the case, we likely would never have seen these details of the FBI’s behavior.

It’s clear that something has concerned the judge—who likely sees obvious parallels to the Stevens case. The media was predicting a quick ruling in the Flynn case. Instead, Judge Sullivan issued new orders Wednesday, demanding to see for himself the McCabe memo and the Flynn 302. He also ordered the special counsel to hand over by Friday any other documents relevant to the Flynn-FBI meeting.

Given his history with the FBI, the judge may also have some questions about the curious date on the Flynn 302—Aug. 22, 2017, seven months after the interview. Texts from Mr. Strzok and testimony from Mr. Comey both suggest the 302 was written long before then. Was the 302 edited in the interim? If so, by whom, and at whose direction? FBI officials initially testified to Congress that the agents did not think Mr. Flynn had lied.

Judges have the ability to reject plea deals and require a prosecutor to make a case at trial. The criminal-justice system isn’t only about holding defendants accountable; trials also provide oversight of investigators and their tactics. And judges are not obliged to follow prosecutors’ sentencing recommendations.

No one knows how Judge Sullivan will rule. His reputation is for being no-nonsense, a straight shooter, an advocate of government transparency. Whatever the outcome, he has done the nation a favor by using his Brady order to hold prosecutors to some account and allow the country a glimpse at how federal law enforcement operates. Which is the very least the country can expect.

Outline - Read & annotate without distractions

It is hard not to come to the conclusion that two different forms of justice exist in this country, one for democrats and another for their adversaries. Specifically anyone with ties to Trump.

Oh, and did you know that the iphones issued to Strozk and Page by the SCO were determined BY SOMEONE IN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE to contain ‘No substantive texts, notes or reminders', so the phones were wiped clean and restored to factory settings, meaning anything on them was gone. That was done after both of them were removed from the SCO investigation back in the summer of 2017, but given that many within Mueller's organization were friends/supporters/associates/donors to the Clintons, how much credence should we give to those determinations?

We don't know what information was summarily destroyed, but the whole process stinks to high heaven. Maybe it's all coincidental and innocent of wrong-doing, no proof that it wasn't because once again any possible incrimination evidence has been deleted. You know, after awhile a patttern kind of emerges.

The OIG was able to recover more than 19,000 texts between Strozk and Page on their old government-issued Samsung Galaxy S5 devices that had been lost due to the agency’s “collection tool failure.” The OIG did not include the content of these texts in the report. I suspect at some point maybe we'll find out more about what really happened.

DOJ Destroyed Missing Strzok/Page Texts Before IG Reviewed Them

A lie is a lie - not alternative facts. LOCK HIM UP!

Funny, that wasn't your opinion when the bitch lied to congress.

.

 

[Dragonlady]

Flynn fucked himself

not one single human held a gun to his head and made him lie or answer questions without a lawyer present - NOT ONE.

He was conned into giving an interview without being Mirandized...Clear and unambiguous entrapment.

He was the Head of the NRA. He wasn't interviewed as a suspect, nor was he being charged with a crime. The LYING that he did in the interview, was the crime.

Flynn was in no danger of being charged with anything when he walked into that room. By lying to the FBI, he INSTANTLY became the subject of the investigation. Flynn did this to himself.

 

[B. Kidd]

Checking Robert Mueller
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL DECEMBER 13, 2018

Robert Mueller has operated for 19 months as a law unto himself, reminding us of the awesome and destructive powers of special counsels. About the only possible check on Mr. Mueller is a judge who is wise to the tricks of prosecutors and investigators. Good news: That’s what we got this week.

Former national security adviser Mike Flynn a year ago pleaded guilty to one count of lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about his conversations with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. Mr. Flynn’s defense team this week filed a sentencing memo to Judge Emmet Sullivan that contained explosive new information about the Flynn-FBI meeting in January 2017.

It was arranged by then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who personally called Mr. Flynn on other business, then suggested he sit down with two agents to clear up the Russia question. Mr. McCabe urged Mr. Flynn to conduct the interview with no lawyer present—to make things easier.

The agents (including the infamous Peter Strzok) showed up within two hours. They had already decided not to inform Mr. Flynn that they had transcripts of his conversations or give him the standard warning against lying to the FBI. They wanted him “relaxed” and “unguarded.” Former Director James Comey this weekend bragged on MSNBC that he would never have “gotten away” with such a move in a more “organized” administration.

The whole thing stinks of entrapment, though the curious question was how the Flynn defense team got the details. The court filing refers to a McCabe memo written the day of the 2017 meeting, as well as an FBI summary—known as a 302—of the Flynn interview. These are among documents congressional Republicans have been fighting to obtain for more than a year, only to be stonewalled by the Justice Department. Now we know why the department didn’t want them public.

They have come to light thanks to a man who knows well how men like Messrs. Mueller and Comey operate: Judge Sullivan. He sits on the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, and as he wrote for the Journal last year, he got a “wake-up call” in 2008 while overseeing the trial of then-Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska. Judge Sullivan ultimately assigned a lawyer to investigate Justice Department misconduct.

The investigator’s report found prosecutors had engaged in deliberate and repeated ethical violations, withholding key evidence from the defense. It also excoriated the FBI for failing to write up 302s and for omitting key facts from those it did write. The head of the FBI was Mr. Mueller.

Judge Sullivan has since made it his practice to begin every case with a Brady order, which reminds prosecutors of their constitutional obligation to provide the defense with any exculpatory evidence. On Dec. 12, 2017, days after being assigned the Flynn case, Judge Sullivan issued such an order, instructing Mr. Mueller’s team to turn over “any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant’s guilt or punishment.” Had any other judge drawn the case, we likely would never have seen these details of the FBI’s behavior.

It’s clear that something has concerned the judge—who likely sees obvious parallels to the Stevens case. The media was predicting a quick ruling in the Flynn case. Instead, Judge Sullivan issued new orders Wednesday, demanding to see for himself the McCabe memo and the Flynn 302. He also ordered the special counsel to hand over by Friday any other documents relevant to the Flynn-FBI meeting.

Given his history with the FBI, the judge may also have some questions about the curious date on the Flynn 302—Aug. 22, 2017, seven months after the interview. Texts from Mr. Strzok and testimony from Mr. Comey both suggest the 302 was written long before then. Was the 302 edited in the interim? If so, by whom, and at whose direction? FBI officials initially testified to Congress that the agents did not think Mr. Flynn had lied.

Judges have the ability to reject plea deals and require a prosecutor to make a case at trial. The criminal-justice system isn’t only about holding defendants accountable; trials also provide oversight of investigators and their tactics. And judges are not obliged to follow prosecutors’ sentencing recommendations.

No one knows how Judge Sullivan will rule. His reputation is for being no-nonsense, a straight shooter, an advocate of government transparency. Whatever the outcome, he has done the nation a favor by using his Brady order to hold prosecutors to some account and allow the country a glimpse at how federal law enforcement operates. Which is the very least the country can expect.

Outline - Read & annotate without distractions

It is hard not to come to the conclusion that two different forms of justice exist in this country, one for democrats and another for their adversaries. Specifically anyone with ties to Trump.

Oh, and did you know that the iphones issued to Strozk and Page by the SCO were determined BY SOMEONE IN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE to contain ‘No substantive texts, notes or reminders', so the phones were wiped clean and restored to factory settings, meaning anything on them was gone. That was done after both of them were removed from the SCO investigation back in the summer of 2017, but given that many within Mueller's organization were friends/supporters/associates/donors to the Clintons, how much credence should we give to those determinations?

We don't know what information was summarily destroyed, but the whole process stinks to high heaven. Maybe it's all coincidental and innocent of wrong-doing, no proof that it wasn't because once again any possible incrimination evidence has been deleted. You know, after awhile a patttern kind of emerges.

The OIG was able to recover more than 19,000 texts between Strozk and Page on their old government-issued Samsung Galaxy S5 devices that had been lost due to the agency’s “collection tool failure.” The OIG did not include the content of these texts in the report. I suspect at some point maybe we'll find out more about what really happened.

DOJ Destroyed Missing Strzok/Page Texts Before IG Reviewed Them

Most likely... Mueller is corrupt

When Mueller hired Andrew Weissmann he lost all credibility to me.

Yep, Andrew Weismann is a shit eating partisan progressive....

The 'chink' woman lawyer on Muellers team previously worked for Hillary when her e-mails/server was being investigated!

 

[Oddball]

He was the Head of the NRA. He wasn't interviewed as a suspect, nor was he being charged with a crime. The LYING was the crime.

Flynn was in no danger of being charged with anything when he walked into that room. By lying to the FBI, he INSTANTLY became the subject of the investigation. Flynn did this to himself.

The intent of the agents was clear...They weren't there for a social call, and Comey just admitted as much.

 

[OKTexas]

Checking Robert Mueller
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL DECEMBER 13, 2018

Robert Mueller has operated for 19 months as a law unto himself, reminding us of the awesome and destructive powers of special counsels. About the only possible check on Mr. Mueller is a judge who is wise to the tricks of prosecutors and investigators. Good news: That’s what we got this week.

Former national security adviser Mike Flynn a year ago pleaded guilty to one count of lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about his conversations with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. Mr. Flynn’s defense team this week filed a sentencing memo to Judge Emmet Sullivan that contained explosive new information about the Flynn-FBI meeting in January 2017.

It was arranged by then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who personally called Mr. Flynn on other business, then suggested he sit down with two agents to clear up the Russia question. Mr. McCabe urged Mr. Flynn to conduct the interview with no lawyer present—to make things easier.

The agents (including the infamous Peter Strzok) showed up within two hours. They had already decided not to inform Mr. Flynn that they had transcripts of his conversations or give him the standard warning against lying to the FBI. They wanted him “relaxed” and “unguarded.” Former Director James Comey this weekend bragged on MSNBC that he would never have “gotten away” with such a move in a more “organized” administration.

The whole thing stinks of entrapment, though the curious question was how the Flynn defense team got the details. The court filing refers to a McCabe memo written the day of the 2017 meeting, as well as an FBI summary—known as a 302—of the Flynn interview. These are among documents congressional Republicans have been fighting to obtain for more than a year, only to be stonewalled by the Justice Department. Now we know why the department didn’t want them public.

They have come to light thanks to a man who knows well how men like Messrs. Mueller and Comey operate: Judge Sullivan. He sits on the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, and as he wrote for the Journal last year, he got a “wake-up call” in 2008 while overseeing the trial of then-Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska. Judge Sullivan ultimately assigned a lawyer to investigate Justice Department misconduct.

The investigator’s report found prosecutors had engaged in deliberate and repeated ethical violations, withholding key evidence from the defense. It also excoriated the FBI for failing to write up 302s and for omitting key facts from those it did write. The head of the FBI was Mr. Mueller.

Judge Sullivan has since made it his practice to begin every case with a Brady order, which reminds prosecutors of their constitutional obligation to provide the defense with any exculpatory evidence. On Dec. 12, 2017, days after being assigned the Flynn case, Judge Sullivan issued such an order, instructing Mr. Mueller’s team to turn over “any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant’s guilt or punishment.” Had any other judge drawn the case, we likely would never have seen these details of the FBI’s behavior.

It’s clear that something has concerned the judge—who likely sees obvious parallels to the Stevens case. The media was predicting a quick ruling in the Flynn case. Instead, Judge Sullivan issued new orders Wednesday, demanding to see for himself the McCabe memo and the Flynn 302. He also ordered the special counsel to hand over by Friday any other documents relevant to the Flynn-FBI meeting.

Given his history with the FBI, the judge may also have some questions about the curious date on the Flynn 302—Aug. 22, 2017, seven months after the interview. Texts from Mr. Strzok and testimony from Mr. Comey both suggest the 302 was written long before then. Was the 302 edited in the interim? If so, by whom, and at whose direction? FBI officials initially testified to Congress that the agents did not think Mr. Flynn had lied.

Judges have the ability to reject plea deals and require a prosecutor to make a case at trial. The criminal-justice system isn’t only about holding defendants accountable; trials also provide oversight of investigators and their tactics. And judges are not obliged to follow prosecutors’ sentencing recommendations.

No one knows how Judge Sullivan will rule. His reputation is for being no-nonsense, a straight shooter, an advocate of government transparency. Whatever the outcome, he has done the nation a favor by using his Brady order to hold prosecutors to some account and allow the country a glimpse at how federal law enforcement operates. Which is the very least the country can expect.

Outline - Read & annotate without distractions

It is hard not to come to the conclusion that two different forms of justice exist in this country, one for democrats and another for their adversaries. Specifically anyone with ties to Trump.

Oh, and did you know that the iphones issued to Strozk and Page by the SCO were determined BY SOMEONE IN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE to contain ‘No substantive texts, notes or reminders', so the phones were wiped clean and restored to factory settings, meaning anything on them was gone. That was done after both of them were removed from the SCO investigation back in the summer of 2017, but given that many within Mueller's organization were friends/supporters/associates/donors to the Clintons, how much credence should we give to those determinations?

We don't know what information was summarily destroyed, but the whole process stinks to high heaven. Maybe it's all coincidental and innocent of wrong-doing, no proof that it wasn't because once again any possible incrimination evidence has been deleted. You know, after awhile a patttern kind of emerges.

The OIG was able to recover more than 19,000 texts between Strozk and Page on their old government-issued Samsung Galaxy S5 devices that had been lost due to the agency’s “collection tool failure.” The OIG did not include the content of these texts in the report. I suspect at some point maybe we'll find out more about what really happened.

DOJ Destroyed Missing Strzok/Page Texts Before IG Reviewed Them

Most likely... Mueller is corrupt

When Mueller hired Andrew Weissmann he lost all credibility to me.

Yep, that asshole has a reputation of destroying lives, withholding evidence and being overturned.

.

 

[edward37]

Flynn fucked himself

not one single human held a gun to his head and made him lie or answer questions without a lawyer present - NOT ONE.

He was conned into giving an interview without being Mirandized...Clear and unambiguous entrapment.

He was the Head of the NRA. He wasn't interviewed as a suspect, nor was he being charged with a crime. The LYING that he did in the interview, was the crime.

Flynn was in no danger of being charged with anything when he walked into that room. By lying to the FBI, he INSTANTLY became the subject of the investigation. Flynn did this to himself.

And a man in his position knows damn well what it means to lie to 2 fbi agents

 

[Lesh]

You have a right to remain silent anytime

Absolutely, Flynn chose not to

 

[Lesh]

And why did Comey and McCabe say Flynn didn't lie in testimony before congress.

I'm not aware that they DID say that but he pled guilty to lying to the FBI.

Keep up

 

[Mr.Blonde]

A man who was in Flynn's position needed to be made perfectly clear that he was being interviewed for an investigation.

Is there a Miranda requirement that was violated? There was not.

There was talk about attorneys and McCabe suggested "this would be quicker if we don't involve them"

That in no way absolves Flynn for lying.

The High Court has ruled many times, that when you are a subject of a investigation you have to be read your "Rights", no exceptions noted.

No it hasn’t.

When you are under arrest you have a right to remain silent and be advised by a lawyer

Under investigation has no such protection

You have a right to remain silent anytime. Riddle me this batman, why did it take the FBI 7 months to do the 302 on the Flynn interview? And why did Comey and McCabe say Flynn didn't lie in testimony before congress. Freaks like you just refuse to see our government isn't all peaches and cream. Really sad.

.

Comey I believe said there were minor discrepancies in Flynn's interview answers, but it wasn't anything major.

So he got minor details wrong that anyone could have made when being asked what happened months ago.

 

[edward37]

He was the Head of the NRA. He wasn't interviewed as a suspect, nor was he being charged with a crime. The LYING was the crime.

Flynn was in no danger of being charged with anything when he walked into that room. By lying to the FBI, he INSTANTLY became the subject of the investigation. Flynn did this to himself.

The intent of the agents was clear...They weren't there for a social call, and Comey just admitted as much.

When 2 senior FBI officers visit you you better be telling the truth

 

[OKTexas]

who here thinks the FBI needs to Mirandize a National Security Advisor before they ask him to answer some questions about conversations he had with Russia's ambassador? (hint this is NOT a trick question.) LOL

That would depend if is was a simple conversation as the FBI indicated or an evidentiary interview.

.

 

[Lesh]

Both Comey and McCabe told congress he didn't. So who lied?

Quote and link

 

[Lesh]

That would depend if is was a simple conversation as the FBI indicated or an evidentiary interview.

Simple conversations don't involve TWO FBI agents or discussions about the presence of lawyers

 

[B. Kidd]

Checking Robert Mueller
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL DECEMBER 13, 2018

Robert Mueller has operated for 19 months as a law unto himself, reminding us of the awesome and destructive powers of special counsels. About the only possible check on Mr. Mueller is a judge who is wise to the tricks of prosecutors and investigators. Good news: That’s what we got this week.

Former national security adviser Mike Flynn a year ago pleaded guilty to one count of lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about his conversations with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. Mr. Flynn’s defense team this week filed a sentencing memo to Judge Emmet Sullivan that contained explosive new information about the Flynn-FBI meeting in January 2017.

It was arranged by then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, who personally called Mr. Flynn on other business, then suggested he sit down with two agents to clear up the Russia question. Mr. McCabe urged Mr. Flynn to conduct the interview with no lawyer present—to make things easier.

The agents (including the infamous Peter Strzok) showed up within two hours. They had already decided not to inform Mr. Flynn that they had transcripts of his conversations or give him the standard warning against lying to the FBI. They wanted him “relaxed” and “unguarded.” Former Director James Comey this weekend bragged on MSNBC that he would never have “gotten away” with such a move in a more “organized” administration.

The whole thing stinks of entrapment, though the curious question was how the Flynn defense team got the details. The court filing refers to a McCabe memo written the day of the 2017 meeting, as well as an FBI summary—known as a 302—of the Flynn interview. These are among documents congressional Republicans have been fighting to obtain for more than a year, only to be stonewalled by the Justice Department. Now we know why the department didn’t want them public.

They have come to light thanks to a man who knows well how men like Messrs. Mueller and Comey operate: Judge Sullivan. He sits on the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia, and as he wrote for the Journal last year, he got a “wake-up call” in 2008 while overseeing the trial of then-Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska. Judge Sullivan ultimately assigned a lawyer to investigate Justice Department misconduct.

The investigator’s report found prosecutors had engaged in deliberate and repeated ethical violations, withholding key evidence from the defense. It also excoriated the FBI for failing to write up 302s and for omitting key facts from those it did write. The head of the FBI was Mr. Mueller.

Judge Sullivan has since made it his practice to begin every case with a Brady order, which reminds prosecutors of their constitutional obligation to provide the defense with any exculpatory evidence. On Dec. 12, 2017, days after being assigned the Flynn case, Judge Sullivan issued such an order, instructing Mr. Mueller’s team to turn over “any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant’s guilt or punishment.” Had any other judge drawn the case, we likely would never have seen these details of the FBI’s behavior.

It’s clear that something has concerned the judge—who likely sees obvious parallels to the Stevens case. The media was predicting a quick ruling in the Flynn case. Instead, Judge Sullivan issued new orders Wednesday, demanding to see for himself the McCabe memo and the Flynn 302. He also ordered the special counsel to hand over by Friday any other documents relevant to the Flynn-FBI meeting.

Given his history with the FBI, the judge may also have some questions about the curious date on the Flynn 302—Aug. 22, 2017, seven months after the interview. Texts from Mr. Strzok and testimony from Mr. Comey both suggest the 302 was written long before then. Was the 302 edited in the interim? If so, by whom, and at whose direction? FBI officials initially testified to Congress that the agents did not think Mr. Flynn had lied.

Judges have the ability to reject plea deals and require a prosecutor to make a case at trial. The criminal-justice system isn’t only about holding defendants accountable; trials also provide oversight of investigators and their tactics. And judges are not obliged to follow prosecutors’ sentencing recommendations.

No one knows how Judge Sullivan will rule. His reputation is for being no-nonsense, a straight shooter, an advocate of government transparency. Whatever the outcome, he has done the nation a favor by using his Brady order to hold prosecutors to some account and allow the country a glimpse at how federal law enforcement operates. Which is the very least the country can expect.

Outline - Read & annotate without distractions

It is hard not to come to the conclusion that two different forms of justice exist in this country, one for democrats and another for their adversaries. Specifically anyone with ties to Trump.

Oh, and did you know that the iphones issued to Strozk and Page by the SCO were determined BY SOMEONE IN THE SPECIAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE to contain ‘No substantive texts, notes or reminders', so the phones were wiped clean and restored to factory settings, meaning anything on them was gone. That was done after both of them were removed from the SCO investigation back in the summer of 2017, but given that many within Mueller's organization were friends/supporters/associates/donors to the Clintons, how much credence should we give to those determinations?

We don't know what information was summarily destroyed, but the whole process stinks to high heaven. Maybe it's all coincidental and innocent of wrong-doing, no proof that it wasn't because once again any possible incrimination evidence has been deleted. You know, after awhile a patttern kind of emerges.

The OIG was able to recover more than 19,000 texts between Strozk and Page on their old government-issued Samsung Galaxy S5 devices that had been lost due to the agency’s “collection tool failure.” The OIG did not include the content of these texts in the report. I suspect at some point maybe we'll find out more about what really happened.

DOJ Destroyed Missing Strzok/Page Texts Before IG Reviewed Them

Most likely... Mueller is corrupt

When Mueller hired Andrew Weissmann he lost all credibility to me.

Yep, Andrew Weismann is a shit eating partisan progressive....

The 'chink' woman lawyer on Muellers team previously worked for Hillary when her e-mails/server was being investigated!

Jeannie Rhee is her name. Worked for Hillary in 2015.

 

[Lesh]

A man who was in Flynn's position needed to be made perfectly clear that he was being interviewed for an investigation.

Is there a Miranda requirement that was violated? There was not.

There was talk about attorneys and McCabe suggested "this would be quicker if we don't involve them"

That in no way absolves Flynn for lying.

The High Court has ruled many times, that when you are a subject of a investigation you have to be read your "Rights", no exceptions noted.

No it hasn’t.

When you are under arrest you have a right to remain silent and be advised by a lawyer

Under investigation has no such protection

You have a right to remain silent anytime. Riddle me this batman, why did it take the FBI 7 months to do the 302 on the Flynn interview? And why did Comey and McCabe say Flynn didn't lie in testimony before congress. Freaks like you just refuse to see our government isn't all peaches and cream. Really sad.

.

Comey I believe said there were minor discrepancies in Flynn's interview answers, but it wasn't anything major.

So he got minor details wrong that anyone could have made when being asked what happened months ago.

Quote and link....

 

[lantern2814]

He was the Head of the NRA. He wasn't interviewed as a suspect, nor was he being charged with a crime. The LYING was the crime.

Flynn was in no danger of being charged with anything when he walked into that room. By lying to the FBI, he INSTANTLY became the subject of the investigation. Flynn did this to himself.

The intent of the agents was clear...They weren't there for a social call, and Comey just admitted as much.

When 2 senior FBI officers visit you you better be telling the truth

And he did. According to the agents who did the interview. It's funny watching you leftards crying and moaning over this. Mueller, Comey and the rest of the crooks just got caught. By their own words and deeds. This judge won't put up with Mueller's BS. Not informing Flynn this was an official interview and denying him legal representation? Naughty naughty. Maybe you lefties best learn to follow the law.