Billy the Bagman's duplicity has convinced Trump supporters, but will it convinced the judge?

[Fort Fun Indiana]

See, to normal, sane people, the fact that they didn't try to use "Russia, Russia, Russia" in the last impeachment attempt would tell you that it's a non-starter, a dead end

But to geniuses like you, dreaming up a scenario that hasn't happened yet, you are saying "i told you so" in a future fantasy. How freaking bizarre.

This is the world liberals live in. I'm just adapting to the culture. Kind of like a modern day Jane Goodall.

Right, its everyone else's fault you are embarrassing yourself. Sure.

It's not embarrassing to study uncivilized creatures to try to understand where they went wrong.

Haha, yes, keep going. Give us all the excuses for why you act like a dumbass.

Awww, now you're just going all juvenile and stupid and stuff. Did my facts and logic get you all upset?

Uh, you're the little babyman trying to say that the reason you act like a moron is because those other people did too, that one time. Embarrassing behavior for a grown man.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

He didn't lie to the FBI, moron. They even said so.

Don't bother telling such easily refutable lies with me, liar.

How are you going to refute it, quote a doctored 302?

No need to refute it. He lied. The FBI referred him for prosecution for it. Then he pled guilty. Twice.

 

[hadit]

See, to normal, sane people, the fact that they didn't try to use "Russia, Russia, Russia" in the last impeachment attempt would tell you that it's a non-starter, a dead end

But to geniuses like you, dreaming up a scenario that hasn't happened yet, you are saying "i told you so" in a future fantasy. How freaking bizarre.

This is the world liberals live in. I'm just adapting to the culture. Kind of like a modern day Jane Goodall.

Right, its everyone else's fault you are embarrassing yourself. Sure.

It's not embarrassing to study uncivilized creatures to try to understand where they went wrong.

Haha, yes, keep going. Give us all the excuses for why you act like a dumbass.

Awww, now you're just going all juvenile and stupid and stuff. Did my facts and logic get you all upset?

Uh, you're the little babyman trying to say that the reason you act like a moron is because those other people did too, that one time. Embarrassing behavior for a grown man.

You could try to find a quote saying that, you know, since you're all upset about it and everything, and after failing, admit you're being juvenile and stupid and stuff. You know, try to act like an adult.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

could try to find a quote saying that

And you could scroll up to find your own comments and pathetic whataboutism. Let's see which happens first! Try not to whine all night.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

maybe given a little more time the missing report, the 302 report can be found.

It's not missing.

Flynn Redux: What Those FBI Documents Really Show

A lot of people seem to be expecting Michael Flynn's sudden vindication. They should take a deep breath.

www.lawfareblog.com

it’s not

Rep. Devin Nunes, ranking Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday that the original documents summarizing the FBI interview where Micahel Flynn is alleged to have perjured himself are "missing."

"The original report that was used to brief the United States Congress, that report is missing. It's gone, poof, we can't find it," Nunes told Fox Business anchor Maria Bartiromo on Fox News's Sunday Morning Futures.

wrong!! the original 302 is missing. it was destroyed and a new one was created by Strzok and Page, two rabid bigot Trump haters who made it seem that discouraging Russia from retaliating against us was somehow a crime rather than an heroic act, and his job.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

you'll find your accusation is based on a lying tweet from Trump

wrong, based on fact the original 302 is missing which showed agents thought Flynn was not lying. First time in American History! And, new report was prepared by two rabid bigot Trump haters, Strzok and Page. Is that a liberals idea of justice and civil liberty? Suppose black people were railroaded that way?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

No need to refute it. He lied. The FBI referred him for prosecution for it. Then he pled guilty. Twice.

pled guilty to loving his son, you mean?

 

[bripat9643]

He didn't lie to the FBI, moron. They even said so.

Don't bother telling such easily refutable lies with me, liar.

How are you going to refute it, quote a doctored 302?

No need to refute it. He lied. The FBI referred him for prosecution for it. Then he pled guilty. Twice.

You lie, moron. You regurgitate TDS talking points as if they were the ten commandments.

 

[hadit]

could try to find a quote saying that

And you could scroll up to find your own comments and pathetic whataboutism. Let's see which happens first! Try not to whine all night.

Don't need to, it's your problem.

 

[berg80]

wrong, based on fact the original 302 is missing

I don't think you could be more full of shit if you tried.

“The Court summarily disposes of Mr. Flynn’s arguments that the FBI conducted an ambush interview for the purpose of trapping him into making false statements and that the government pressured him to enter a guilty plea,” Sullivan wrote. “The record proves otherwise.

Flynn set for Jan. 28 sentencing after judge rejects claims ex-Trump aide was tricked

The former national security adviser pleaded guilty to a felony false statement charge, but has since claimed that he was unfairly targeted.

www.politico.com

Trump is talking about pardoning Michael Flynn based on a made-up claim

There is no evidence the FBI "lost" any records.

www.motherjones.com

What is a Trumplehead to do in the face of the judge calling out Powell's bullshit for being bullshit?

It's obvious. Point to Billy the Bagman's duplicity as evidence Sullivan is wrong. Which is why Barr lied about the FBI's conduct in the first place.

 

[berg80]

"Key to the Justice Department’s argument in its motion to dismiss is the fact that, after four months of investigation without finding any derogatory information, the FBI was prepared to close its case on Flynn. A draft internal FBI document dated Jan. 4, 2017, shows that the bureau had sketched out a memo closing the probe, though the document includes the usual caveat that if new information were identified, the FBI would consider reopening the investigation.

But before the case was actually closed, the FBI learned that Flynn had spoken to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in late December 2016. According to the Justice Department’s motion, the FBI had transcripts of the relevant calls, likely obtained through surveillance of Kislyak authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. By this time, Flynn had been named as Trump’s national security adviser.

In those calls, Flynn had asked Russia not to retaliate for sanctions imposed by the Obama administration as punishment for election interference. Flynn had also asked Russia to vote against a United Nations resolution regarding Israeli settlements. On their face, these calls potentially undermined the foreign policy of the United States. What’s more, on Jan. 15, 2017, Mike Pence, then the vice president-elect, made public statements that contradicted the transcripts of Flynn’s calls— a fact that, as documented in the Mueller report, “alarmed senior DOJ [Department of Justice] officials.” And so, the FBI decided to keep the investigation open. FBI agents interviewed Flynn on Jan. 24, four days after Trump took office. During that interview, Flynn falsely denied his statements regarding sanctions and the U.N. vote. He later pleaded guilty to one count of false statements for telling these lies."

Why the Flynn Interview Was Predicated
The Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is flawed in many ways, but one of its weakest arguments is that the investigation of Flynn was not properly “predicated.”

www.lawfareblog.com

 

[bripat9643]

"Key to the Justice Department’s argument in its motion to dismiss is the fact that, after four months of investigation without finding any derogatory information, the FBI was prepared to close its case on Flynn. A draft internal FBI document dated Jan. 4, 2017, shows that the bureau had sketched out a memo closing the probe, though the document includes the usual caveat that if new information were identified, the FBI would consider reopening the investigation.

But before the case was actually closed, the FBI learned that Flynn had spoken to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in late December 2016. According to the Justice Department’s motion, the FBI had transcripts of the relevant calls, likely obtained through surveillance of Kislyak authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. By this time, Flynn had been named as Trump’s national security adviser.

In those calls, Flynn had asked Russia not to retaliate for sanctions imposed by the Obama administration as punishment for election interference. Flynn had also asked Russia to vote against a United Nations resolution regarding Israeli settlements. On their face, these calls potentially undermined the foreign policy of the United States. What’s more, on Jan. 15, 2017, Mike Pence, then the vice president-elect, made public statements that contradicted the transcripts of Flynn’s calls— a fact that, as documented in the Mueller report, “alarmed senior DOJ [Department of Justice] officials.” And so, the FBI decided to keep the investigation open. FBI agents interviewed Flynn on Jan. 24, four days after Trump took office. During that interview, Flynn falsely denied his statements regarding sanctions and the U.N. vote. He later pleaded guilty to one count of false statements for telling these lies."

Why the Flynn Interview Was Predicated
The Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn is flawed in many ways, but one of its weakest arguments is that the investigation of Flynn was not properly “predicated.”

www.lawfareblog.com

Senior Obama DOJ officials (Loretta Lynch) were alarmed because it appeared Trump wasn't going to carry out Obama's foriegn policy?

That is a crime!

 

[berg80]

Senior Obama DOJ officials (Loretta Lynch) were alarmed because it appeared Trump wasn't going to carry out Obama's foriegn policy?

That is a crime!

"The Logan Act (1 Stat. 613, 18 U.S.C. § 953, enacted January 30, 1799) is a United States federal law that criminalizes negotiation by unauthorized American citizens with foreign governments having a dispute with the United States." Flynn's conversation with Kislyak about the UN resolution violated the letter of the law.

Why must I explain these simple matters to you nitwits?

Because your heads are full of right wing media lies and copious amounts of horseshit about everything.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Here's an interesting question. Since Judge Sullivan has already ruled on much of the bogus bullshit Billy the Bagman pulled out of his fat ass............

December, he described an in camera review he did in December 2018, in part to make sure the summaries of the Mary McCord and Sally Yates 302s was adequate disclosure.

As to Requests a through f and Request i, the government has provided Mr. Flynn with: (a) “information from interviews with [Mr.] McCabe that could reasonably be construed as favorable and material to sentencing”; (b) “information that could reasonably be construed as favorable and material to sentencing about such pre-interview discussions, including the language quoted in the request”; (c) “information about such post-interview debriefings that could reasonably be construed as favorable and material to sentencing”; (d) “information from former [Principal] Associate Deputy Attorney General Matthew Axelrod’s interview report that could reasonably be construed as favorable and material to sentencing”; (e) “information from [Ms.] McCord’s interview report that could reasonably be construed as favorable and material to sentencing, including the information quoted in the request”; (f) “information from [Ms.] Yates’ interview report that could reasonably be construed as favorable and material to sentencing, including the information quoted in the request”;
[snip]
Based on an in camera review of the government’s sealed submissions to the Court on December 14, 2018, see, e.g., Min. Order of Dec. 17, 2018; Gov’t’s Opp’n, ECF No. 122 at 16 n.8; Gov’t’s Notice of Disc. Correspondence, ECF No. 123 at 3, the Court agrees with the government that the requested information in Requests a through f and Request i has already been provided to Mr. Flynn in the form of appropriate summaries, see Gov’t’s App. A, ECF No. 122-1 at 6-7.

GIVEN THAT SULLIVAN ACCOUNTED FOR THESE DOCUMENTS, HIS MATERIALITY ANALYSIS IS UNLIKELY TO CHANGE
As noted, Sullivan might decide that some of these documents should have been provided under Brady, in spite of his ruling on them. But unless he does, it’s unlikely his view on the materiality of Flynn’s lies will change, contrary to the footnote in Shea’s memo yesterday.

7 The Government appreciates that the Court previously deemed Mr. Flynn’s statements sufficiently “material” to the investigation. United States v. Flynn, 411 F. Supp. 3d 15, 41-42 (D.D.C. 2019). It did so, however, based on the Government’s prior understanding of the nature of the investigation, before new disclosures crystallized the lack of a legitimate investigative basis for the interview of Mr. Flynn, and in the context of a decision on multiple defense Brady motions independent of the Government’s assessment of its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

.........................why would he pretend his whiny little ***** complaint justifies the DOJ dropping the charges against the confessed criminal Flynn?


For the consumption of Trumpleheads of course. Barr knows all he has to do is throw a bunch of manure on the wall and RWM will do the rest by misinforming the knuckle dragging rubes who drool at the mention of the Adulterer-in-Chief's name.

Exactly. Even if Sullivan rejects the motion, the deep-state, liberal agenda will be seen to have foiled their righteous crusade for justice yet again. They will be apoplectic, which was the goal all along. To create some egregious outrage for the campaign to use.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

They said they’d be unable to prove the case.

Attorney General William Barr was clear in an interview with CBS News on Thursday evening: "People sometimes plead to things that turn out not to be crimes, and the Department of Justice is not persuaded that this was material to any legitimate counterintelligence investigation. So it was not a crime."

Attorney General William Barr was clear in an interview with CBS News on Thursday evening: "People sometimes plead to things that turn out not to be crimes, and the Department of Justice is not persuaded that this was material to any legitimate counterintelligence investigation. So it was not a crime."

Sullivan is in no way obliged to accept that rationale.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

He did not lie and FBI said so at time

Well that's a lie right there. Sorry liar, i ignored the rest.

House Intel report: Comey testified FBI agents saw no 'physical indications of deception' by Flynn

Former FBI Director James Comey testified to House Intelligence Committee that FBI agents did not believe that Michael Flynn, who was national security adviser, intentionally lied about talks with Russia’s ambassador, according to a newly unredacted report from the committee.

www.foxnews.com

.

Derp....
From your link
“Deputy Director McCabe confirmed the interviewing agent’s initial impression and stated that the 'conundrum that we faced on their return from the interview is that although [the agents] didn’t detect deception in the statements that he made in the interview … the statements were inconsistent with our understanding of the conversation that he had actually had with the ambassador,'” the report states."

 

[berg80]

wrong, based on fact the original 302 is missing which showed agents thought Flynn was not lying.

Wrong again. You don't stand a ******* chance, nitwit.

Trump says FBI said Flynn didn't lie to them. That's untrue

In his first interview since being cleared of criminally conspiring in Russia’s 2016 election interference, President Do

www.politifact.com

Messages between Strzok and Page dated Jan. 23 and Jan. 24 describe disagreement among FBI leadership—seemingly Priestap, McCabe and FBI Director James Comey—though it is not clear specifically what is at issue. Another message from Jan. 24 shows Strzok alerting a redacted correspondent about an email containing suggestions for how McCabe should prepare for a call with Flynn—the same email contained in the first batch of documents from Jensen and described above.

Finally, messages between Strzok and Page dated Feb. 10 appear to show the two discussing unspecified edits to an unidentified document. The Times writes that the messages concern,

editing notes on the questioning of Mr. Flynn. His lawyers said they were further evidence that the F.B.I. doctored the interview notes known as a 302, a claim that the judge overseeing Mr. Flynn’s case, Emmet G. Sullivan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, has previously rejected.

None of this material gives rise to a colorable claim of misconduct, and as the Times notes, Sullivan has already rejected the notion that the 302 was doctored. As the judge wrote back in December: “[T]he Court agrees with the government that there were no material changes in the interview reports, and that those reports track the interviewing FBI agents’ notes.” Sullivan went on: “Having carefully reviewed the interviewing FBI agents’ notes, the draft interview reports, the final version of the FD302, and the statements contained therein, the Court agrees with the government that those documents are ‘consistent and clear that [Mr. Flynn] made multiple false statements to the [FBI] agents about his communications with the Russian Ambassador on January 24, 2017.’”

Flynn Redux: What Those FBI Documents Really Show

A lot of people seem to be expecting Michael Flynn's sudden vindication. They should take a deep breath.

www.lawfareblog.com

 

[berg80]

All the Trumpletards duped by Billy the Bagman should read this.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000016f-109b-d105-af6f-97bb428b0000

 

[berg80]

Would Trumpletards like to know why Sullivan has explored the possibility of charging Flynn with perjury relative to his plea agreement?

On November 30, 2017, Mr. Flynn affirmed: “I have read every word of this [SOF], or have had it read to me. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, after consulting with my attorneys, I agree and stipulate to this [SOF], and declare under penalty of perjury that it is true and correct.” SOF, ECF No. 4 at 6. Mr. Flynn’s attorney acknowledged the same. Id.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=0000016f-109b-d105-af6f-97bb428b0000

Because..........."I agree and stipulate to this [SOF], and declare under penalty of perjury that it is true and correct.”

Meaning that the claims he is making now indicate he lied under penalty of perjury when he confessed.

Got it?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Would Trumpletards like to know why Sullivan has explored the possibility of charging Flynn with perjury relative to his plea agreement?

Yes, we know that's the theory. In practice, anyone who ever pleads guilty must answer those questions. No one has EVER BEEN CHARGED with perjury for pleading guilty and then withdrawing that plea. Only stupid motherfucking idiots are making that bullshit argument.

Furthermore, Judge Sullivan is not the U.S. Attorney. He has no authority to file charges against Flynn for perjury. The ONLY action he MIGHT be able to take against Flynn is to hold him in contempt of court, but given the history of pleas being withdrawn and no other courts ever holding other defendants in contempt for such action, it would be an abuse of discretion at a minimum (if that's even the standard of review).

.