Connecting the dots in Clinesmith’s Russiagate guilty plea.

[the other mike]

This guy's cooperating, which means bigger heads are gonna roll soon.

Some interesting things to note about the false-statements charge which former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith is pleading guilty today.

The charge is contained in a criminal information. That is a form of formal allegation the Justice Department uses when a defendant agrees to waive indictment (i.e., forego his right to have the grand jury find probable cause to charge a crime). It is often, but by no means always, used in connection with a defendant who is pleading guilty under a cooperation agreement.

We will know more about the terms under which the negotiated plea is being entered when Clinesmith appears in court. Federal law requires that all material understandings attendant to a guilty plea be disclosed to the judge.

The charge is false statements under Section 1001(a)(3) of the federal penal code. That provision makes it a crime knowingly and willfully to make and use a false writing or document, aware that it contains a materially false entry of some kind. It is punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment.

Connecting Dots in Clinesmith’s Russiagate Guilty Plea | National Review

Some interesting things to note about the false statements to which former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith is pleading guilty today.

www.nationalreview.com

 

[the other mike]

Here's the man who got the ball rolling.

 

[berg80]

"But later in 2017, a supervisory F.B.I. agent handling the third and final renewal application asked Mr. Clinesmith for a definitive answer on whether Mr. Page had been an agency source, according to Mr. Horowitz’s report.

Mr. Clinesmith incorrectly said that Mr. Page was “never a source” and sent the C.I.A.’s information to the supervisor. He altered the original email to say that Mr. Page had not been a source — a material change to a document used in a federal investigation.

The agent relied on the altered email to submit the application seeking further court permission to wiretap Mr. Page, the inspector general wrote. By changing the email and then forwarding it, Mr. Clinesmith misrepresented the original content of the document, which prosecutors said was a crime.

Mr. Clinesmith’s argued that he did not change the document in an attempt to cover up the F.B.I.’s mistake. His lawyers argued that he had made the change in good faith because he did not think that Mr. Page had been an actual source for the C.I.A."

Ex-F.B.I. Lawyer Expected to Plead Guilty in Review of Russia Inquiry (Published 2020)

Prosecutors did not reveal any evidence of the kind of broad anti-Trump conspiracy among law enforcement officials that the president has long alleged.

www.nytimes.com

Does Clinesmith's inconsequential mistake, having no bearing on whether the FISA warrants were justified according to the DoJ's own analysis...........

Justice Department Completes Review of Errors in FISA Applications

The Justice Department reported that most of the errors identified by the Office of the Inspector General were minor and none invalidated surveillance authorizations.

www.lawfareblog.com

.......................rise to the level of Flynn's lie to the FBI? Nope.

Too bad Barr is conducting a witch hunt or he'd swoop in and announce the DoJ was dropping the charges against Clinesmith.

 

[the other mike]

"But later in 2017, a supervisory F.B.I. agent handling the third and final renewal application asked Mr. Clinesmith for a definitive answer on whether Mr. Page had been an agency source, according to Mr. Horowitz’s report.

Mr. Clinesmith incorrectly said that Mr. Page was “never a source” and sent the C.I.A.’s information to the supervisor. He altered the original email to say that Mr. Page had not been a source — a material change to a document used in a federal investigation.

The agent relied on the altered email to submit the application seeking further court permission to wiretap Mr. Page, the inspector general wrote. By changing the email and then forwarding it, Mr. Clinesmith misrepresented the original content of the document, which prosecutors said was a crime.

Mr. Clinesmith’s argued that he did not change the document in an attempt to cover up the F.B.I.’s mistake. His lawyers argued that he had made the change in good faith because he did not think that Mr. Page had been an actual source for the C.I.A."

Ex-F.B.I. Lawyer Expected to Plead Guilty in Review of Russia Inquiry (Published 2020)

Prosecutors did not reveal any evidence of the kind of broad anti-Trump conspiracy among law enforcement officials that the president has long alleged.

www.nytimes.com

Does Clinesmith's inconsequential mistake, having no bearing on whether the FISA warrants were justified according to the DoJ's own analysis...........

Justice Department Completes Review of Errors in FISA Applications

The Justice Department reported that most of the errors identified by the Office of the Inspector General were minor and none invalidated surveillance authorizations.

www.lawfareblog.com

.......................rise to the level of Flynn's lie to the FBI? Nope.

Too bad Barr is conducting a witch hunt or he'd swoop in and announce the DoJ was dropping the charges against Clinesmith.

We really needed the NYTimes spin on it. Thanks.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"But later in 2017, a supervisory F.B.I. agent handling the third and final renewal application asked Mr. Clinesmith for a definitive answer on whether Mr. Page had been an agency source, according to Mr. Horowitz’s report.

Mr. Clinesmith incorrectly said that Mr. Page was “never a source” and sent the C.I.A.’s information to the supervisor. He altered the original email to say that Mr. Page had not been a source — a material change to a document used in a federal investigation.

The agent relied on the altered email to submit the application seeking further court permission to wiretap Mr. Page, the inspector general wrote. By changing the email and then forwarding it, Mr. Clinesmith misrepresented the original content of the document, which prosecutors said was a crime.

Mr. Clinesmith’s argued that he did not change the document in an attempt to cover up the F.B.I.’s mistake. His lawyers argued that he had made the change in good faith because he did not think that Mr. Page had been an actual source for the C.I.A."

Ex-F.B.I. Lawyer Expected to Plead Guilty in Review of Russia Inquiry (Published 2020)

Prosecutors did not reveal any evidence of the kind of broad anti-Trump conspiracy among law enforcement officials that the president has long alleged.

www.nytimes.com

Does Clinesmith's inconsequential mistake, having no bearing on whether the FISA warrants were justified according to the DoJ's own analysis...........

Justice Department Completes Review of Errors in FISA Applications

The Justice Department reported that most of the errors identified by the Office of the Inspector General were minor and none invalidated surveillance authorizations.

www.lawfareblog.com

.......................rise to the level of Flynn's lie to the FBI? Nope.

Too bad Barr is conducting a witch hunt or he'd swoop in and announce the DoJ was dropping the charges against Clinesmith.

The Coup plotters started turning on each other. I fully expect the leaders to receive the death penalty for sedition and treason

 

[tyroneweaver]

"But later in 2017, a supervisory F.B.I. agent handling the third and final renewal application asked Mr. Clinesmith for a definitive answer on whether Mr. Page had been an agency source, according to Mr. Horowitz’s report.

Mr. Clinesmith incorrectly said that Mr. Page was “never a source” and sent the C.I.A.’s information to the supervisor. He altered the original email to say that Mr. Page had not been a source — a material change to a document used in a federal investigation.

The agent relied on the altered email to submit the application seeking further court permission to wiretap Mr. Page, the inspector general wrote. By changing the email and then forwarding it, Mr. Clinesmith misrepresented the original content of the document, which prosecutors said was a crime.

Mr. Clinesmith’s argued that he did not change the document in an attempt to cover up the F.B.I.’s mistake. His lawyers argued that he had made the change in good faith because he did not think that Mr. Page had been an actual source for the C.I.A."

Ex-F.B.I. Lawyer Expected to Plead Guilty in Review of Russia Inquiry (Published 2020)

Prosecutors did not reveal any evidence of the kind of broad anti-Trump conspiracy among law enforcement officials that the president has long alleged.

www.nytimes.com

Does Clinesmith's inconsequential mistake, having no bearing on whether the FISA warrants were justified according to the DoJ's own analysis...........

Justice Department Completes Review of Errors in FISA Applications

The Justice Department reported that most of the errors identified by the Office of the Inspector General were minor and none invalidated surveillance authorizations.

www.lawfareblog.com

.......................rise to the level of Flynn's lie to the FBI? Nope.

Too bad Barr is conducting a witch hunt or he'd swoop in and announce the DoJ was dropping the charges against Clinesmith.

and you're going to give Flynn the same latitude you are giving clinesmith?

 

[westwall]

"But later in 2017, a supervisory F.B.I. agent handling the third and final renewal application asked Mr. Clinesmith for a definitive answer on whether Mr. Page had been an agency source, according to Mr. Horowitz’s report.

Mr. Clinesmith incorrectly said that Mr. Page was “never a source” and sent the C.I.A.’s information to the supervisor. He altered the original email to say that Mr. Page had not been a source — a material change to a document used in a federal investigation.

The agent relied on the altered email to submit the application seeking further court permission to wiretap Mr. Page, the inspector general wrote. By changing the email and then forwarding it, Mr. Clinesmith misrepresented the original content of the document, which prosecutors said was a crime.

Mr. Clinesmith’s argued that he did not change the document in an attempt to cover up the F.B.I.’s mistake. His lawyers argued that he had made the change in good faith because he did not think that Mr. Page had been an actual source for the C.I.A."

Ex-F.B.I. Lawyer Expected to Plead Guilty in Review of Russia Inquiry (Published 2020)

Prosecutors did not reveal any evidence of the kind of broad anti-Trump conspiracy among law enforcement officials that the president has long alleged.

www.nytimes.com

Does Clinesmith's inconsequential mistake, having no bearing on whether the FISA warrants were justified according to the DoJ's own analysis...........

Justice Department Completes Review of Errors in FISA Applications

The Justice Department reported that most of the errors identified by the Office of the Inspector General were minor and none invalidated surveillance authorizations.

www.lawfareblog.com

.......................rise to the level of Flynn's lie to the FBI? Nope.

Too bad Barr is conducting a witch hunt or he'd swoop in and announce the DoJ was dropping the charges against Clinesmith.

Intentionally altering an official document is not a mistake you fucking loon.

 

[westwall]

"But later in 2017, a supervisory F.B.I. agent handling the third and final renewal application asked Mr. Clinesmith for a definitive answer on whether Mr. Page had been an agency source, according to Mr. Horowitz’s report.

Mr. Clinesmith incorrectly said that Mr. Page was “never a source” and sent the C.I.A.’s information to the supervisor. He altered the original email to say that Mr. Page had not been a source — a material change to a document used in a federal investigation.

The agent relied on the altered email to submit the application seeking further court permission to wiretap Mr. Page, the inspector general wrote. By changing the email and then forwarding it, Mr. Clinesmith misrepresented the original content of the document, which prosecutors said was a crime.

Mr. Clinesmith’s argued that he did not change the document in an attempt to cover up the F.B.I.’s mistake. His lawyers argued that he had made the change in good faith because he did not think that Mr. Page had been an actual source for the C.I.A."

Ex-F.B.I. Lawyer Expected to Plead Guilty in Review of Russia Inquiry (Published 2020)

Prosecutors did not reveal any evidence of the kind of broad anti-Trump conspiracy among law enforcement officials that the president has long alleged.

www.nytimes.com

Does Clinesmith's inconsequential mistake, having no bearing on whether the FISA warrants were justified according to the DoJ's own analysis...........

Justice Department Completes Review of Errors in FISA Applications

The Justice Department reported that most of the errors identified by the Office of the Inspector General were minor and none invalidated surveillance authorizations.

www.lawfareblog.com

.......................rise to the level of Flynn's lie to the FBI? Nope.

Too bad Barr is conducting a witch hunt or he'd swoop in and announce the DoJ was dropping the charges against Clinesmith.

The Coup plotters started turning on each other. I fully expect the leaders to receive the death penalty for sedition and treason

I doubt we will get that lucky, but i can still hope.

 

[the other mike]

Let's take John Brennan's word for it.

It's all a big distraction by Trump's authoritarian regime.

John O looking rough at home a few weeks ago;

 

[the other mike]

 

[bripat9643]

Let's take John Brennan's word for it.

It's all a big distraction by Trump's authoritarian regime.

John O looking rough at home a few weeks ago;

Why would any intelligent person take the traitor criminal Brennan's word for it?