Was Flynn entrapped?

[jc456]

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

Every conviction and/or plea has been approved by a Federal Judge. Every defendant has had legal representation. Every single filing, action, arrest, charge has been covered by media in detail. The conspiracy reality you want to believe does not exist.


Sorry.

plea deals are done for reasons sometimes outside the charges, as was Flynn's. And in his case it was done using the trap.

 

[Skylar]

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.

how does that resolve the entrapment exactly?

What 'entrapment'?

 

[Skylar]

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

Every conviction and/or plea has been approved by a Federal Judge. Every defendant has had legal representation. Every single filing, action, arrest, charge has been covered by media in detail. The conspiracy reality you want to believe does not exist.


Sorry.

plea deals are done for reasons sometimes outside the charges, as was Flynn's. And in his case it was done using the trap.

And by 'trap', you mean the FBI asked Flynn questions?

If so, I don't think 'trap' means what you think it means

 

[Lesh]

And that makes you less than nothing. The judge isn't very happy that Mueller didn't comply and turn over ALL documents. This case is getting thrown out and then I wouldn't be surprised to see Flynn sue Mueller into oblivion.

Really. And when that doesn't happen...what will you say?

Oh wait. You're a troll. You'll just move on to another venue

 

[Skylar]

And that makes you less than nothing. The judge isn't very happy that Mueller didn't comply and turn over ALL documents. This case is getting thrown out and then I wouldn't be surprised to see Flynn sue Mueller into oblivion.

Really. And when that doesn't happen...what will you say?

Oh wait. You're a troll. You'll just move on to another venue

Probably invent an even more elaborate conspiracy theory about corrput judges and the 'deep state'.

Its the conservative go-to everytime the bug of their pseudo-legal gibberish meets the windshielf of the actual law, real judges and actual court rulings.

 

[bripat9643]

How many years you think Flynn gets? Cohen got 3.

Probably no jail time at all if the plea deal holds up.

I wonder how all of Flynn's defenders are going to react if it turns out that he ended up providing testimony against Trump?

The judge is going to throw out the charges, so there won't be any jail time, fool.

Says the soul so wildly ignorant about the law that he insisted that miranda rights have to be read to people who aren't in custody.

Yeah, your command of the topic really doesn't amount to much.

Why don't you bother these morons who believe a plea agreement constitutes valid evidence of something?

 

[Lesh]

The documents confirm that those agents LIED to Flynn and Mueller is trying to cover it up

Not even close. Flynn was told that they were going to be asking about the meeting with the Russian Ambassador and sanctions.

That's what they asked about and that's what he lied about

Oh...

 

[bripat9643]

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

Every conviction and/or plea has been approved by a Federal Judge. Every defendant has had legal representation. Every single filing, action, arrest, charge has been covered by media in detail. The conspiracy reality you want to believe does not exist.


Sorry.

Flynn did not have legal representation when he was interrogated by Strzok.

 

[Skylar]

How many years you think Flynn gets? Cohen got 3.

Probably no jail time at all if the plea deal holds up.

I wonder how all of Flynn's defenders are going to react if it turns out that he ended up providing testimony against Trump?

The judge is going to throw out the charges, so there won't be any jail time, fool.

Says the soul so wildly ignorant about the law that he insisted that miranda rights have to be read to people who aren't in custody.

Yeah, your command of the topic really doesn't amount to much.

Why don't you bother these morons who believe a plea agreement constitutes valid evidence of something?

Its a sworn statement of Flynn's guilt. Again, take a look for yourself. Flynn admits to committing crimes:

Michael Flynn Plea Agreement Documents

Jump right to the point titled 'Defendant's Acceptance'. And pay special attention to Michael Flynn's signature.

Remember....and this point is fundemental, Brit: you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

 

[bripat9643]

The documents confirm that those agents LIED to Flynn and Mueller is trying to cover it up

Not even close. Flynn was told that they were going to be asking about the meeting with the Russian Ambassador and sanctions.

That's what they asked about and that's what he lied about

Oh...

How do we know what he even said? The original 302s don't exist. Strzok's after the fact 302 doesn't prove jack shit.

 

[Lesh]

How many years you think Flynn gets? Cohen got 3.

Probably no jail time at all if the plea deal holds up.

I wonder how all of Flynn's defenders are going to react if it turns out that he ended up providing testimony against Trump?

The judge is going to throw out the charges, so there won't be any jail time, fool.

Says the soul so wildly ignorant about the law that he insisted that miranda rights have to be read to people who aren't in custody.

Yeah, your command of the topic really doesn't amount to much.

Why don't you bother these morons who believe a plea agreement constitutes valid evidence of something?

This idiot seems to have latched on the phrase "plea agreement" as if that means something in this context. That is an agreement between the accused and the prosecutor. The Court can be advised of it but his TESTIMONY is all the court is really concerned about. Testimony like "Yes your honor I am guilty and this is why and what I did"

 

[Skylar]

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

Every conviction and/or plea has been approved by a Federal Judge. Every defendant has had legal representation. Every single filing, action, arrest, charge has been covered by media in detail. The conspiracy reality you want to believe does not exist.


Sorry.

Flynn did not have legal representation when he was interrogated by Strzok.

And there's no requirement that attorney be present when someone is being questioned by federal investigators.

Remmeber, Miranda rights only involve *custodial* interrogations......interrogations that occur after a suspect is in custody by the police. Flynn never was. The interview occured at his office and was voluntarily given.

 

[bripat9643]

How many years you think Flynn gets? Cohen got 3.

Probably no jail time at all if the plea deal holds up.

I wonder how all of Flynn's defenders are going to react if it turns out that he ended up providing testimony against Trump?

The judge is going to throw out the charges, so there won't be any jail time, fool.

Says the soul so wildly ignorant about the law that he insisted that miranda rights have to be read to people who aren't in custody.

Yeah, your command of the topic really doesn't amount to much.

Why don't you bother these morons who believe a plea agreement constitutes valid evidence of something?

Its a sworn statement of Flynn's guilt. Again, take a look for yourself. Flynn admits to committing crimes:

Michael Flynn Plea Agreement Documents

Jump right to the point titled 'Defendant's Acceptance'. And pay special attention to Michael Flynn's signature.

Remember....and this point is fundemental, Brit: you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

It's what What Flynn agreed to with a gun held to his head. It is evidence of nothing. It can't be used in any other court case.

Saying a guilty plea is a sworn statement of the defendant's guilt is a tautology. You're saying a guilty plea is a guilty plea. It's absolutely meaningless. All you proved is that you are unable to commit logic.

Remember....and this point is fundamental, fat homo: you're a fucking idiot.

 

[bripat9643]

How many years you think Flynn gets? Cohen got 3.

Probably no jail time at all if the plea deal holds up.

I wonder how all of Flynn's defenders are going to react if it turns out that he ended up providing testimony against Trump?

The judge is going to throw out the charges, so there won't be any jail time, fool.

Says the soul so wildly ignorant about the law that he insisted that miranda rights have to be read to people who aren't in custody.

Yeah, your command of the topic really doesn't amount to much.

Why don't you bother these morons who believe a plea agreement constitutes valid evidence of something?

This idiot seems to have latched on the phrase "plea agreement" as if that means something in this context. That is an agreement between the accused and the prosecutor. The Court can be advised of it but his TESTIMONY is all the court is really concerned about. Testimony like "Yes your honor I am guilty and this is why and what I did"

You're trying to claim it can be used in a case against Trump. You're a fucking moron.

 

[Skylar]

How many years you think Flynn gets? Cohen got 3.

Probably no jail time at all if the plea deal holds up.

I wonder how all of Flynn's defenders are going to react if it turns out that he ended up providing testimony against Trump?

The judge is going to throw out the charges, so there won't be any jail time, fool.

Says the soul so wildly ignorant about the law that he insisted that miranda rights have to be read to people who aren't in custody.

Yeah, your command of the topic really doesn't amount to much.

Why don't you bother these morons who believe a plea agreement constitutes valid evidence of something?

This idiot seems to have latched on the phrase "plea agreement" as if that means something in this context. That is an agreement between the accused and the prosecutor. The Court can be advised of it but his TESTIMONY is all the court is really concerned about. Testimony like "Yes your honor I am guilty and this is why and what I did"

Oh, Brit knows nothing. And he's proud of it. The thing to remember is that to conservatives, the law is whatever they FEEL it is. They don't actually care what the real law says, or how plea agreements work, or even what the Supreme Court rules.

They only care about how they FEEL the law should be. Which is what Brit is arguing.

Alas, the court's don't give a fiddler's fuck what some online hack FEELS about the law. Courts abide the actual law, the actual court rulings.

And in the actual plea agreement......Flynn accepted the Statement of Offense and signed his name and stipulates to its accuracy under the penalty of perjury.

Which they don't know.....because they refuse to look at the plea agreement. And then laughably argue that if they won't look at the agreement, then it doesn't have any evidence.

You can't fix stupid.

 

[bripat9643]

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

Every conviction and/or plea has been approved by a Federal Judge. Every defendant has had legal representation. Every single filing, action, arrest, charge has been covered by media in detail. The conspiracy reality you want to believe does not exist.


Sorry.

Flynn did not have legal representation when he was interrogated by Strzok.

And there's no requirement that attorney be present when someone is being questioned by federal investigators.

He needs to be advised of his right to have an attorney present. McCabe lied and told him he didn't need one. There is simply no way that such actions are constitutional.

 

[Skylar]

Probably no jail time at all if the plea deal holds up.

I wonder how all of Flynn's defenders are going to react if it turns out that he ended up providing testimony against Trump?

The judge is going to throw out the charges, so there won't be any jail time, fool.

Says the soul so wildly ignorant about the law that he insisted that miranda rights have to be read to people who aren't in custody.

Yeah, your command of the topic really doesn't amount to much.

Why don't you bother these morons who believe a plea agreement constitutes valid evidence of something?

Its a sworn statement of Flynn's guilt. Again, take a look for yourself. Flynn admits to committing crimes:

Michael Flynn Plea Agreement Documents

Jump right to the point titled 'Defendant's Acceptance'. And pay special attention to Michael Flynn's signature.

Remember....and this point is fundemental, Brit: you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

It's what What Flynn agreed to with a gun held to his head. It is evidence of nothing.

Says you, citing your imagination. And the useless pseudo-legal idiocy that you tell yourself has no relevance to the actual law, the actual plea deal.

In the actual plea deal, Flynn stipulatesthat the Statement of Offense was accurate *under penalty of perjury*.

Its evidence in any court of law. That you pretend otherwise is meaningless. As you're nobody.

 

[bripat9643]

Probably no jail time at all if the plea deal holds up.

I wonder how all of Flynn's defenders are going to react if it turns out that he ended up providing testimony against Trump?

The judge is going to throw out the charges, so there won't be any jail time, fool.

Says the soul so wildly ignorant about the law that he insisted that miranda rights have to be read to people who aren't in custody.

Yeah, your command of the topic really doesn't amount to much.

Why don't you bother these morons who believe a plea agreement constitutes valid evidence of something?

This idiot seems to have latched on the phrase "plea agreement" as if that means something in this context. That is an agreement between the accused and the prosecutor. The Court can be advised of it but his TESTIMONY is all the court is really concerned about. Testimony like "Yes your honor I am guilty and this is why and what I did"

Oh, Brit knows nothing. And he's proud of it. The thing to remember is that to conservatives, the law is whatever they FEEL it is. They don't actually care what the real law says, or how plea agreements work, or even what the Supreme Court rules.

They only care about how they FEEL the law should be. Which is what Brit is arguing.

Alas, the court's don't give a fiddler's fuck what some online hack FEELS about the law. Courts abide the actual law, the actual court rulings.

And in the actual plea agreement......Flynn accepted the Statement of Offense and signed his name and stipulates to its accuracy under the penalty of perjury.

Which they don't know.....because they refuse to look at the plea agreement. And then laughably argue that if they won't look at the agreement, then it doesn't have any evidence.

You can't fix stupid.

It's meaningless. the minute he's sentenced, the plea agreement is null and void. If he testifies in another trial, he will be charged with perjury if he repeats the horseshit in his plea agreement. It's a lie.

 

[Skylar]

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

Every conviction and/or plea has been approved by a Federal Judge. Every defendant has had legal representation. Every single filing, action, arrest, charge has been covered by media in detail. The conspiracy reality you want to believe does not exist.


Sorry.

Flynn did not have legal representation when he was interrogated by Strzok.

And there's no requirement that attorney be present when someone is being questioned by federal investigators.

He needs to be advised of his right to have an attorney present.

Nope. Only if he's in custody does he need to be advised of his right to an attorney. Says who? Says Miranda v. Arizona. Shall we look the Supreme Court's findings regarding 'custodial interrogations' together?

See, Brit....you're running into the same problem over and over again. You keep presenting your imagination as the law. While ignoring the actual law.

And your imagination is irrelevant. As you're nobody.

 

[bripat9643]

The judge is going to throw out the charges, so there won't be any jail time, fool.

Says the soul so wildly ignorant about the law that he insisted that miranda rights have to be read to people who aren't in custody.

Yeah, your command of the topic really doesn't amount to much.

Why don't you bother these morons who believe a plea agreement constitutes valid evidence of something?

Its a sworn statement of Flynn's guilt. Again, take a look for yourself. Flynn admits to committing crimes:

Michael Flynn Plea Agreement Documents

Jump right to the point titled 'Defendant's Acceptance'. And pay special attention to Michael Flynn's signature.

Remember....and this point is fundemental, Brit: you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

It's what What Flynn agreed to with a gun held to his head. It is evidence of nothing.

Says you, citing your imagination. And the useless pseudo-legal idiocy that you tell yourself has no relevance to the actual law, the actual plea deal.

In the actual plea deal, Flynn stipulatesthat the Statement of Offense was accurate *under penalty of perjury*.

Its evidence in any court of law. That you pretend otherwise is meaningless. As you're nobody.

ROFL! That's why Mueller is a criminal. He forced Cohen to perjure himself. He should go to prison for that alone.