Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Seriously? "They had nothing on Flynn"?
They have the call intercepts of Flynn discussing sanctions and they have him lying about it. That is a slam dunk.
That motherfucking orange traitor is killing this country.
"President Trump accused the career investigators and prosecutors involved in the Flynn case of “treason” and threatened that they should pay “a big price.” It is incumbent upon the other branches of government to protect from retaliation these public servants and any others who are targeted for seeking to uphold their oaths of office and pursue justice."
Why are there always just "process crimes", i.e. no real crimes, just "lying" to investigators?
General Flynn had no legitimate reason to be questioned by the FBI w/o a whitehouse lawyer present.
In case you forgot what the real crimes are here:
1. The FBI falsifying evidence against Carter Page.
2. The FBI signing off on a FISA application that the info was verified, when it wasn't true
3. The FBI conducting illegal "spying" on the Trump campaign and admin.
4. Conducting the illegal Mueller Investigation, looking into Russian Collusion with no direct evidence, yet ignoring the Steele Dossier connection between Russia and the DNC/Hillary campaign.
5. The partisan "impeachment" of Trump with no crime committed.
When the FBI’s sting operation "Crossfire Hurricane" targeted a low-level Trump campaign operative before the 2016 election far more was at stake than who would be the next President. Two years later we are learning that the very soul of our Republic, the Constitution, was under attack. Before...
www.americanlibertyreport.com
"Even though there was more than enough to indict Clinton, Comey declared she did not break the law but was rather “reckless.” Trump, on the other hand, was not the subject any criminal charges. Instead, the bureau initiated a counterintelligence investigation in the hopes that evidence of crimes committed by Trump officials would be discovered. Why the difference? Criminal cases involve grand juries, and judges, and full disclosure. Counterintelligence investigation is shrouded in secrecy. One demands a crime already exists, the other hopes to find one it can then turn over to the criminal courts to prosecute."
2000 former DOJ employees out of how many former DOJ employees? It was formed in 1870 suffice it to say no one from that time is still around but it would be fair to say the number of former employees is very large and 2000 might not constitute a very large percent of them.
Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Seriously? "They had nothing on Flynn"?
They have the call intercepts of Flynn discussing sanctions and they have him lying about it. That is a slam dunk.
That motherfucking orange traitor is killing this country.
"President Trump accused the career investigators and prosecutors involved in the Flynn case of “treason” and threatened that they should pay “a big price.” It is incumbent upon the other branches of government to protect from retaliation these public servants and any others who are targeted for seeking to uphold their oaths of office and pursue justice."
Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Seriously? "They had nothing on Flynn"?
They have the call intercepts of Flynn discussing sanctions and they have him lying about it. That is a slam dunk.
It's especially devious of Barr to make disparaging comments about career prosecutors when he knows DOJ policy prohibits them to speak publicly about the Flynn case.
Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Seriously? "They had nothing on Flynn"?
They have the call intercepts of Flynn discussing sanctions and they have him lying about it. That is a slam dunk.
Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Not at all, anyone actually listening knows they had nothing on Flynn and that there was prosecutorial misconduct. This would require a willingness to actually open one eyes and mind though, that leaves Progs out.
Seriously? "They had nothing on Flynn"?
They have the call intercepts of Flynn discussing sanctions and they have him lying about it. That is a slam dunk.
"It is now up to the district court to consider the government’s motion to dismiss the Flynn indictment. We urge Judge Sullivan to closely examine the Department’s stated rationale for dismissing the charges — including holding an evidentiary hearing with witnesses — and to deny the motion and proceed with sentencing if appropriate. While it is rare for a court to deny the Department’s request to dismiss an indictment, if ever there were a case where the public interest counseled the court to take a long, hard look at the government’s explanation and the evidence, it is this one. Attorney General Barr’s repeated actions to use the Department as a tool to further President Trump’s personal and political interests have undermined any claim to the deference that courts usually apply to the Department’s decisions about whether or not to prosecute a case."
DOJ Alumni Statement on Flynn Case
We, the undersigned, are alumni of the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) who have collectively served both Republican and…
www.americanlibertyreport.com
