Was Flynn entrapped?

[OKTexas]

Checking Robert Mueller
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL DECEMBER 13, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Outline - Read & annotate without distractions

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

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

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

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

DOJ Destroyed Missing Strzok/Page Texts Before IG Reviewed Them

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

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

.

So why did he plead guilty?

He was bankrupted and his family was threatened, what would you do? Classic extortion, but it's not illegal when the government does it.

.

 

[Skylar]

They


DON'T


CARE

Oh, I get it. But it doesn't diminish my enjoyment of rubbing their nose in their own hapless, batshit induced ignorance....but presenting the evidence they've neither read, nor have any use for.

What we're seeing right now are the hard limits of the pseudo-legal gibberish that conservatives tell each other in their echo chambers, splattering like a bug on the windshield of the *actual* law, *actual* plea deals, *actual* convictions in front of real judges and real prosecutors.

 

[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

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

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

.

So why did he plead guilty?

He was bankrupted and his family was threatened, what would you do? Classic extortion, but it's not illegal when the government does it.

.

How about NOT lying to federal investigators?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Railroaded, had his Civil Rights Violated, was illegally wire tapped, was illegally unmasked, was charged with lying despite official reports that stated he was not lying, had his family threatened, had his life ruined, was financially devastated, and all because Hillary Clinton couldn't win even with cheating in debates, rigging her own primary, and colluding with Russia to arrange a 24-7 wiretapping operation on The Trump Campaign with the sole purpose being to obtain inside information on The Trump Campaign's Strategy sessions.

Prosecutorial Misconduct does not even begin to scratch the surface.

This is the kind of stuff you read about that went on in Stalinist Russia.

Or rather than your stupidly complicated, wildly elaborate and increasingly unhinged conspiracy theory involving everyone from the FBI to the Justice Department to Facebook.......there's a much simpler explaination that's overwhelmingly supported by the evidence.

Trump is a liar. And he surrounded himself with liars.

Oh, and as usual.....you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Federal agents only have to read a person their miranda rights if that person is in custody. Which Flynn wasn't when he lied to federal investigators.

Remember Brit.....you're clueless. So your pseudo-legal rants about topics you clearly don't comprehend don't amount to much.

If they don't advise him of his rights, nothing he says can be used against him.

Says you, citing yourself. Back in reality, Miranda warnings are required after arrest. Which Flynn wasn't when he lied to federal investigators.

The Miranda warning (from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision), requires that officers let you know of certain facts after your arrest, before questioning you. An officer who is going to interrogate you must convey to you that:

Miranda Rights: What Happens If the Police Don't Read You Your Rights

Despite what you think you might have heard while watching an episode of Law and Order: SVU.....you don't actually know what you're talking about.

How many law classes have you taken or are you just playing one on the Internet?

 

[Skylar]

Railroaded, had his Civil Rights Violated, was illegally wire tapped, was illegally unmasked, was charged with lying despite official reports that stated he was not lying, had his family threatened, had his life ruined, was financially devastated, and all because Hillary Clinton couldn't win even with cheating in debates, rigging her own primary, and colluding with Russia to arrange a 24-7 wiretapping operation on The Trump Campaign with the sole purpose being to obtain inside information on The Trump Campaign's Strategy sessions.

Prosecutorial Misconduct does not even begin to scratch the surface.

This is the kind of stuff you read about that went on in Stalinist Russia.

Or rather than your stupidly complicated, wildly elaborate and increasingly unhinged conspiracy theory involving everyone from the FBI to the Justice Department to Facebook.......there's a much simpler explaination that's overwhelmingly supported by the evidence.

Trump is a liar. And he surrounded himself with liars.

Oh, and as usual.....you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Federal agents only have to read a person their miranda rights if that person is in custody. Which Flynn wasn't when he lied to federal investigators.

Remember Brit.....you're clueless. So your pseudo-legal rants about topics you clearly don't comprehend don't amount to much.

If they don't advise him of his rights, nothing he says can be used against him.

Says you, citing yourself. Back in reality, Miranda warnings are required after arrest. Which Flynn wasn't when he lied to federal investigators.

The Miranda warning (from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision), requires that officers let you know of certain facts after your arrest, before questioning you. An officer who is going to interrogate you must convey to you that:

Miranda Rights: What Happens If the Police Don't Read You Your Rights

Despite what you think you might have heard while watching an episode of Law and Order: SVU.....you don't actually know what you're talking about.

How many law classes have you taken or are you just playing one on the Internet?

I'm not quoting me.

The Miranda warning (from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision), requires that officers let you know of certain facts after your arrest, before questioning you. An officer who is going to interrogate you must convey to you that:

Miranda Rights: What Happens If the Police Don't Read You Your Rights

While you are only quoting yourself. Our sources are not equal.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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

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

That in no way absolves Flynn for lying.

Flynn is not even contesting the fact that he lied.

He was not given any choice!

Says who?

Not Flynn. Flynn says he wasn't cooerced at all and that he freely admits his guilt.

OK, dumbass! What exactly did he plead guilty to? What was he said that was a lie? You don't even know do you? Apparently everyone at the FBI was fine with it until Mueller came along!

Here's his plea agreement. Read it yourself.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

Or give us more excuses why you don't have the faintest clue what you're talking about.

So why does the plea agreement fail to identify the member of the Presidential Transition Team (PTT) and include any evidence presented by that individual?

That is sufficient grounds to reject the deal.

Flynn basically agreed to anything to get Mueller off his back! Nothing he did was illegal, but Mueller was looking to trap him in hopes of getting dirt on Trump. That didn't happen, so now Mueller is scrambling to save face.

That is the story, cut and dried, and YOU don't lie it because it shows YOUR hypocrisy.

 

[otto105]

Checking Robert Mueller
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL DECEMBER 13, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Outline - Read & annotate without distractions

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

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

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

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

DOJ Destroyed Missing Strzok/Page Texts Before IG Reviewed Them

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

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

.

So why did he plead guilty?

He was bankrupted and his family was threatened, what would you do? Classic extortion, but it's not illegal when the government does it.

.

So, “lock em up” flynn put his family’s financial future in jeopardy by lying about his contacts with Russians.


Not the governments fault.

 

[Lesh]

So why does the plea agreement fail to identify the member of the Presidential Transition Team (PTT) and include any evidence presented by that individual?

That is sufficient grounds to reject the deal.

Flynn basically agreed to anything to get Mueller off his back! Nothing he did was illegal, but Mueller was looking to trap him in hopes of getting dirt on Trump. That didn't happen, so now Mueller is scrambling to save face.

That is the story, cut and dried, and YOU don't lie it because it shows YOUR hypocrisy.

You gotta stop listening to the lies of Trump and Ghouliani

 

[Kondor3]

Flynn lied.

If he had told the truth, he would not find himself in such a state.

Another Gubmint Lifer gone wrong.

Pity... so much good service to the Republic... vaporized by a bad choice, late in life.

Well, General... in your next incarnation, be a Truth Teller... better luck next time... lie down with dogs, you get fleas... sux to be you.

 

[eagle1462010]

Flynn fucked himself

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

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

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

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

They went into his office under false pretenses.......His conversations with Russians was completely legal. That is the job and that is the job he was doing.

They didn't follow normal FBI protocol.......and originally stated he wasn't lying......then later they needed to squeeze him and used it. Took 7 months to process the 302.........normally about a month.

The one that signed the interview was FIRED........caught lying under oath several times.........Comey.

The one that called and set up the meeting was FIRED........and was recommended by the AG for investigation and indictments........

The one at the interview.........WAS FIRED .....for unethical conduct........known BIAS......and caused the entire FBI to get Diversity training........LOL.........Peter lunatic Strzok.............

Stinks to the high heavens and anyone who doesn't think this was a set up from the get go has nothing but air between their earlobes.

 

[OKTexas]

Checking Robert Mueller
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL DECEMBER 13, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Outline - Read & annotate without distractions

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

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

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

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

DOJ Destroyed Missing Strzok/Page Texts Before IG Reviewed Them

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

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

.

So why did he plead guilty?

He was bankrupted and his family was threatened, what would you do? Classic extortion, but it's not illegal when the government does it.

.

How about NOT lying to federal investigators?

For about the 50th damn time, the interviewers, Comey and McCabe said he didn't. Comey and McCabe said it under oath to congress, should they now be prosecuted for perjury? And yes a link has been provided, feel free to look it up in this thread.

.

 

[Lesh]

How many law classes have you taken or are you just playing one on the Internet?

And your law degree was from where?

Google Miranda. It pertains to ONLY those in custody

 

[Lesh]

.His conversations with Russians was completely legal.

He probably shouldn't have lied about them then...and he did...over and over.

That's what he was fired for...the lies

 

[Skylar]

Flynn is not even contesting the fact that he lied.

He was not given any choice!

Says who?

Not Flynn. Flynn says he wasn't cooerced at all and that he freely admits his guilt.

OK, dumbass! What exactly did he plead guilty to? What was he said that was a lie? You don't even know do you? Apparently everyone at the FBI was fine with it until Mueller came along!

Here's his plea agreement. Read it yourself.

https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download

Or give us more excuses why you don't have the faintest clue what you're talking about.

So why does the plea agreement fail to identify the member of the Presidential Transition Team (PTT) and include any evidence presented by that individual?

That is sufficient grounds to reject the deal.

Says you, citing whatever pseudo-legal gibberish you care to make up. The same hapless soul that gave us comic misunderstandings of how miranda warnings work. Demonstrating elegantly that you have no idea what you're talking about.

Back in reality, Flynn's plea deal hasn't been rejected. Flynn has admitted his guilt. And *no* party to his case is contesting that. Not the judge, not the prosecutors, not Flynn's lawyers, not Flynn.

Flynn basically agreed to anything to get Mueller off his back! Nothing he did was illegal, but Mueller was looking to trap him in hopes of getting dirt on Trump. That didn't happen, so now Mueller is scrambling to save face.

That is the story, cut and dried, and YOU don't lie it because it shows YOUR hypocrisy.

Says you, citing your imagination. Which has no relevance to the actual legal proceedings. And not recognizing your imagination as the law isn't 'hypocrisy'. Its merely the recognition of your irrelevance.

 

[otto105]

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

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

.

So why did he plead guilty?

He was bankrupted and his family was threatened, what would you do? Classic extortion, but it's not illegal when the government does it.

.

How about NOT lying to federal investigators?

For about the 50th damn time, the interviewers, Comey and McCabe said he didn't. Comey and McCabe said it under oath to congress, should they now be prosecuted for perjury? And yes a link has been provided, feel free to look it up in this thread.

.

And for the 50th time facts proved flynn was lying and he plead guilty.

 

[OKTexas]

Checking Robert Mueller
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL DECEMBER 13, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Outline - Read & annotate without distractions

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

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

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

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

DOJ Destroyed Missing Strzok/Page Texts Before IG Reviewed Them

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

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

.

So why did he plead guilty?

He was bankrupted and his family was threatened, what would you do? Classic extortion, but it's not illegal when the government does it.

.

So, “lock em up” flynn put his family’s financial future in jeopardy by lying about his contacts with Russians.


Not the governments fault.

See post 151.

.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

This is the kind of stuff you read about that went on in Stalinist Russia.

Or rather than your stupidly complicated, wildly elaborate and increasingly unhinged conspiracy theory involving everyone from the FBI to the Justice Department to Facebook.......there's a much simpler explaination that's overwhelmingly supported by the evidence.

Trump is a liar. And he surrounded himself with liars.

Oh, and as usual.....you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Federal agents only have to read a person their miranda rights if that person is in custody. Which Flynn wasn't when he lied to federal investigators.

Remember Brit.....you're clueless. So your pseudo-legal rants about topics you clearly don't comprehend don't amount to much.

If they don't advise him of his rights, nothing he says can be used against him.

Says you, citing yourself. Back in reality, Miranda warnings are required after arrest. Which Flynn wasn't when he lied to federal investigators.

The Miranda warning (from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision), requires that officers let you know of certain facts after your arrest, before questioning you. An officer who is going to interrogate you must convey to you that:

Miranda Rights: What Happens If the Police Don't Read You Your Rights

Despite what you think you might have heard while watching an episode of Law and Order: SVU.....you don't actually know what you're talking about.

How many law classes have you taken or are you just playing one on the Internet?

I'm not quoting me.

The Miranda warning (from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision), requires that officers let you know of certain facts after your arrest, before questioning you. An officer who is going to interrogate you must convey to you that:

Miranda Rights: What Happens If the Police Don't Read You Your Rights

While you are only quoting yourself. Our sources are not equal.

It must be true because I read it on the Internet!

The Miranda warnings are based on the 5th Amendment's right to not self-incriminate. If you think Flynn's rights were not violated by the FBI, you are full of shit.

The judge is going to do a tap dance on Mueller's head after he tosses the case and sets Flynn free. We will see next week!

It doesn't matter anyway! Trump has already written his pardon and it is sitting on his desk ready for signature!

 

[Skylar]

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

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

.

So why did he plead guilty?

He was bankrupted and his family was threatened, what would you do? Classic extortion, but it's not illegal when the government does it.

.

How about NOT lying to federal investigators?

For about the 50th damn time, the interviewers, Comey and McCabe said he didn't.

No they didn't. Says who? Says Comey.

“What I recall telling the House Intelligence Committee is that the agents observed none of the common indicia of lying — physical manifestations, changes in tone, changes in pace — that would indicate the person I’m interviewing knows they’re telling me stuff that ain’t true,” Comey said. “They didn’t see that here. It was a natural conversation, answered fully their questions, didn’t avoid. That notwithstanding, they concluded he was lying.”

AP FACT CHECK: Trump falsely claims Flynn didn't lie to FBI

And of course, Flynn insisted that he *did* lie to federal investigators.

You're literally insisting I ignore both Comey AND Flynn on Flynn's crimes....and instead believe you.

Um, why would any rational person ever do that?

 

[OKTexas]

Flynn fucked himself

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

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

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

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

They went into his office under false pretenses.......His conversations with Russians was completely legal. That is the job and that is the job he was doing.

They didn't follow normal FBI protocol.......and originally stated he wasn't lying......then later they needed to squeeze him and used it. Took 7 months to process the 302.........normally about a month.

The one that signed the interview was FIRED........caught lying under oath several times.........Comey.

The one that called and set up the meeting was FIRED........and was recommended by the AG for investigation and indictments........

The one at the interview.........WAS FIRED .....for unethical conduct........known BIAS......and caused the entire FBI to get Diversity training........LOL.........Peter lunatic Strzok.............

Stinks to the high heavens and anyone who doesn't think this was a set up from the get go has nothing but air between their earlobes.

They chose to ignore facts in favor of trolling.

.

 

[Skylar]

Or rather than your stupidly complicated, wildly elaborate and increasingly unhinged conspiracy theory involving everyone from the FBI to the Justice Department to Facebook.......there's a much simpler explaination that's overwhelmingly supported by the evidence.

Trump is a liar. And he surrounded himself with liars.

Oh, and as usual.....you don't have a clue what you're talking about. Federal agents only have to read a person their miranda rights if that person is in custody. Which Flynn wasn't when he lied to federal investigators.

Remember Brit.....you're clueless. So your pseudo-legal rants about topics you clearly don't comprehend don't amount to much.

If they don't advise him of his rights, nothing he says can be used against him.

Says you, citing yourself. Back in reality, Miranda warnings are required after arrest. Which Flynn wasn't when he lied to federal investigators.

The Miranda warning (from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision), requires that officers let you know of certain facts after your arrest, before questioning you. An officer who is going to interrogate you must convey to you that:

Miranda Rights: What Happens If the Police Don't Read You Your Rights

Despite what you think you might have heard while watching an episode of Law and Order: SVU.....you don't actually know what you're talking about.

How many law classes have you taken or are you just playing one on the Internet?

I'm not quoting me.

The Miranda warning (from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision), requires that officers let you know of certain facts after your arrest, before questioning you. An officer who is going to interrogate you must convey to you that:

Miranda Rights: What Happens If the Police Don't Read You Your Rights

While you are only quoting yourself. Our sources are not equal.

It must be true because I read it on the Internet!

In comparison to what? You citing yourself?

Laughing.....you don't know what you're talking about.

The Miranda warnings are based on the 5th Amendment's right to not self-incriminate. If you think Flynn's rights were not violated by the FBI, you are full of shit.

Or....I don't accept whatever hapless pseudo-legal gibberish you make up as having any relevance.

As your only source....is yourself. And you don't know what you're talking about.

The Miranda warning (from the U.S. Supreme Court's Miranda v. Arizona decision), requires that officers let you know of certain facts after your arrest, before questioning you. An officer who is going to interrogate you must convey to you that:

Miranda Rights: What Happens If the Police Don't Read You Your Rights

Which, for no particular reason....you ignore. And replace with your imagination. Is that really it? Just you making shit up on a topic you know nothing about and then insisting your imagination is the law?

If so, that was easy.