Barr Installs Outside Prosecutor to Review Case Against Michael Flynn, Ex-Trump Adviser

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. This is a first. I agree with Chris Cuomo.

This has already been dealt with a few posts ago, including the brief that outlines the judge's thinking after he personally parsed the drafts word by word.

aka nothingburger

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. This is a first. I agree with Chris Cuomo.

This has already been dealt with a few posts ago, including the brief that outlines the judge's thinking after he personally parsed the drafts word by word.

aka nothingburger

Judge's words: "things happen and documents get lost. I mean, it just happens."

Sorry. This doesn't fly. Since the FBI never records interviews, this is the ONLY record of what happened. Any FBI agent who has ever entered information on a 302 will tell you that they don't get "lost."
Perhaps this is just one of the reasons why Jeff Jensen recommended to Barr that the case be dropped. He was an FBI agent for 10 years and knows this just DOESN'T happen."

[Anonymous]

Sorry. This doesn't fly. Since the FBI never records interviews, this is the ONLY record of what happened. Any FBI agent who has ever entered information on a 302 will tell you that they don't get "lost."
Perhaps this is just one of the reasons why Jeff Jensen recommended to Barr that the case be dropped. He was an FBI agent for 10 years and knows this just DOESN'T happen."

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow. This is a first. I agree with Chris Cuomo.

This has already been dealt with a few posts ago, including the brief that outlines the judge's thinking after he personally parsed the drafts word by word.

aka nothingburger

Judge's words: "things happen and documents get lost. I mean, it just happens."

Sorry. This doesn't fly. Since the FBI never records interviews, this is the ONLY record of what happened. Any FBI agent who has ever entered information on a 302 will tell you that they don't get "lost."
Perhaps this is just one of the reasons why Jeff Jensen recommended to Barr that the case be dropped. He was an FBI agent for 10 years and knows this just DOESN'T happen."

But you didn't even read the (very long) memo opinion. So you don't know anything.

[Anonymous]

But you didn't even read the (very long) memo opinion. So you don't know anything.

And you obviously have not read the government's filing to dismiss and Powell's filings. A very long list of egregious actions by the prosecution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But you didn't even read the (very long) memo opinion. So you don't know anything.

And you obviously have not read the government's filing to dismiss and Powell's filings. A very long list of egregious actions by the prosecution.

DP, but I have read it. It is literally nothing new. There is a reason the judge is troubled by it. You are reading way more into this whole episode and are missing the forest for the trees. There is a reason why so many of Flynn's conversations (as "masked American") raised concern with law enforcement, which prompted the multiple requests from different interested parties to release different Americans names (that all happened to be one person) - Flynn was:

- illegally making arrangements to sell US nuclear secrets to the Saudi's
- making arrangements to kidnap the Turkish cleric from Pennsylvania
-Coordinating a US vote to Israel's benefit contrary to US policy in 2016
-Coordinating US policy with Russia as it related to sanctions

All while under the payroll of the Turks, Saudi's and Israeli's without a FARA disclosure.

If the actual crimes here are nothing to you and you are more concerned about the potential of a missing 302 than all I can ask is why you support traitors and not US law enforcement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But you didn't even read the (very long) memo opinion. So you don't know anything.

And you obviously have not read the government's filing to dismiss and Powell's filings. A very long list of egregious actions by the prosecution.

DP, but I have read it. It is literally nothing new. There is a reason the judge is troubled by it. You are reading way more into this whole episode and are missing the forest for the trees. There is a reason why so many of Flynn's conversations (as "masked American") raised concern with law enforcement, which prompted the multiple requests from different interested parties to release different Americans names (that all happened to be one person) - Flynn was:

- illegally making arrangements to sell US nuclear secrets to the Saudi's
- making arrangements to kidnap the Turkish cleric from Pennsylvania
-Coordinating a US vote to Israel's benefit contrary to US policy in 2016
-Coordinating US policy with Russia as it related to sanctions

All while under the payroll of the Turks, Saudi's and Israeli's without a FARA disclosure.

If the actual crimes here are nothing to you and you are more concerned about the potential of a missing 302 than all I can ask is why you support traitors and not US law enforcement.

That is such BS. Total BS.
There is no proof of the charges you are accusing him of.

And, as incoming National Security Advisor, he had every right - and responsibility - to speak to foreign diplomats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But you didn't even read the (very long) memo opinion. So you don't know anything.

And you obviously have not read the government's filing to dismiss and Powell's filings. A very long list of egregious actions by the prosecution.

DP, but I have read it. It is literally nothing new. There is a reason the judge is troubled by it. You are reading way more into this whole episode and are missing the forest for the trees. There is a reason why so many of Flynn's conversations (as "masked American") raised concern with law enforcement, which prompted the multiple requests from different interested parties to release different Americans names (that all happened to be one person) - Flynn was:

- illegally making arrangements to sell US nuclear secrets to the Saudi's
- making arrangements to kidnap the Turkish cleric from Pennsylvania
-Coordinating a US vote to Israel's benefit contrary to US policy in 2016
-Coordinating US policy with Russia as it related to sanctions

All while under the payroll of the Turks, Saudi's and Israeli's without a FARA disclosure.

If the actual crimes here are nothing to you and you are more concerned about the potential of a missing 302 than all I can ask is why you support traitors and not US law enforcement.

That is such BS. Total BS.
There is no proof of the charges you are accusing him of.

And, as incoming National Security Advisor, he had every right - and responsibility - to speak to foreign diplomats.

It’s not our fault you don’t understand what is and what is not allowed under the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But you didn't even read the (very long) memo opinion. So you don't know anything.

And you obviously have not read the government's filing to dismiss and Powell's filings. A very long list of egregious actions by the prosecution.

DP, but I have read it. It is literally nothing new. There is a reason the judge is troubled by it. You are reading way more into this whole episode and are missing the forest for the trees. There is a reason why so many of Flynn's conversations (as "masked American") raised concern with law enforcement, which prompted the multiple requests from different interested parties to release different Americans names (that all happened to be one person) - Flynn was:

- illegally making arrangements to sell US nuclear secrets to the Saudi's
- making arrangements to kidnap the Turkish cleric from Pennsylvania
-Coordinating a US vote to Israel's benefit contrary to US policy in 2016
-Coordinating US policy with Russia as it related to sanctions

All while under the payroll of the Turks, Saudi's and Israeli's without a FARA disclosure.

If the actual crimes here are nothing to you and you are more concerned about the potential of a missing 302 than all I can ask is why you support traitors and not US law enforcement.

That is such BS. Total BS.
There is no proof of the charges you are accusing him of.

And, as incoming National Security Advisor, he had every right - and responsibility - to speak to foreign diplomats.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But you didn't even read the (very long) memo opinion. So you don't know anything.

And you obviously have not read the government's filing to dismiss and Powell's filings. A very long list of egregious actions by the prosecution.

DP, but I have read it. It is literally nothing new. There is a reason the judge is troubled by it. You are reading way more into this whole episode and are missing the forest for the trees. There is a reason why so many of Flynn's conversations (as "masked American") raised concern with law enforcement, which prompted the multiple requests from different interested parties to release different Americans names (that all happened to be one person) - Flynn was:

- illegally making arrangements to sell US nuclear secrets to the Saudi's
- making arrangements to kidnap the Turkish cleric from Pennsylvania
-Coordinating a US vote to Israel's benefit contrary to US policy in 2016
-Coordinating US policy with Russia as it related to sanctions

All while under the payroll of the Turks, Saudi's and Israeli's without a FARA disclosure.

If the actual crimes here are nothing to you and you are more concerned about the potential of a missing 302 than all I can ask is why you support traitors and not US law enforcement.

That is such BS. Total BS.
There is no proof of the charges you are accusing him of.

And, as incoming National Security Advisor, he had every right - and responsibility - to speak to foreign diplomats.

It’s not our fault you don’t understand what is and what is not allowed under the law. [/quote]

But there is no evidence that he did what was charged--it's missing. That is a problem. There is evidence, however, that he was railroaded. Why didn't the prosecution turn over the exculpatory evidence when asked? Why did they withhold documents leaving it to another US Attorney to find? After all, the SC had those documents. Why weren't they shared?

[Anonymous]

Read the very long memorandum brief. Then read the DOJ's motion.

One of them is sensible, deals with facts and the law. And the other one is silly. But at least it isn't going on about the "missing 302". At least it's better than that.

The judge already addressed everything. It's all there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But you didn't even read the (very long) memo opinion. So you don't know anything.

And you obviously have not read the government's filing to dismiss and Powell's filings. A very long list of egregious actions by the prosecution.

DP, but I have read it. It is literally nothing new. There is a reason the judge is troubled by it. You are reading way more into this whole episode and are missing the forest for the trees. There is a reason why so many of Flynn's conversations (as "masked American") raised concern with law enforcement, which prompted the multiple requests from different interested parties to release different Americans names (that all happened to be one person) - Flynn was:

- illegally making arrangements to sell US nuclear secrets to the Saudi's
- making arrangements to kidnap the Turkish cleric from Pennsylvania
-Coordinating a US vote to Israel's benefit contrary to US policy in 2016
-Coordinating US policy with Russia as it related to sanctions

All while under the payroll of the Turks, Saudi's and Israeli's without a FARA disclosure.

If the actual crimes here are nothing to you and you are more concerned about the potential of a missing 302 than all I can ask is why you support traitors and not US law enforcement.

That is such BS. Total BS.
There is no proof of the charges you are accusing him of.

And, as incoming National Security Advisor, he had every right - and responsibility - to speak to foreign diplomats.

It’s not our fault you don’t understand what is and what is not allowed under the law.

There are links in the article for evidence of each statement.

There was ample precedent for the president-elect to put out feelers to foreign leaders.

A memo from the Podesta files released by WikiLeaks shows that the Obama team had planned for the “president-elect and senior officials (to) begin confidential policy consultations with key actors in U.S. and abroad” between Thanksgiving and Inauguration Day.
Obama also openly used emissaries and go-betweens to meet with foreign leaders during his transition.
And for overwrought members of “the resistance” who think the unenforceable Logan Act is suddenly in play, recall that in 2008 then-candidate Obama arranged substantive foreign policy discussions with numerous foreign dignitaries and leaders during an overseas campaign trip before the election.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/12/04/flynn-talk-russian-ambassador-legal-james-robbins/917714001/

[Anonymous]

Then why did Flynn lie to Pence about it? And the FBI?

There's some evidence that Flynn coordinated his phone calls to Kislyak with Trump through KT MacFarlane. But he denied all of it. And so did she.

Did he go off script? Is he just a pathological liar?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Flynn’s call with Kisliak was not an unmasking. Flynn was in the DR at the time Kisliak called him - it was right around the time Obama expelled the Russian ambassadors, which is probably what prompted the call from Kisliak. When both parties are not in the US, the President and only the President can authorize the revealing of the identity of BOTH parties. Timing matters.

Yates described why Flynn's name wasn't minimized. She said this in 2017.

Y'all have no memory, no attention span. All of this has been covered.

There were many times he WAS unmasked. I”m speaking of the phone call Flynn had from the DR. You have not posted a link to support your claim

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Then why did Flynn lie to Pence about it? And the FBI?

There's some evidence that Flynn coordinated his phone calls to Kislyak with Trump through KT MacFarlane. But he denied all of it. And so did she.

Did he go off script? Is he just a pathological liar?

As for the Pence thing, when the FBI told Pence he had lied, he likely believed them. I think he likely did not realize the depth of the problems in the FBI. Remember, we likely still would not know had the DOJ IG not discovered the texts between Page and Strozk.

And, since the original 302 is missing, and transcripts indicate that they told Comey he did not lie, that accusation is questionable.

They threatened to go after his son. He was out of money.

If there were evidence he committed more egregious crimes, the Special Counsel would have charged him with that. They were looking for red meat and this was the best they could do. And, remember, the Special Counsel's office was full of partisans.