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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there crickets on Biden pushing for the Logan Act against Flynn, per Strozk?

What did Biden know and when did he know it?

I‘M really ok with the executive branch putting a stop to treasonous behavior. Why aren’t you?

Nothing Flynn did was treasonous. Flynn knew the process and in time would figure out the scheme being run by the Obama Administration of spying on fellow Americans without cause. That, my friend is treasonous.

Umm...

These Flynn delusions are laughable.

No derogatory information....doesn't get any plainer than that, my friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there crickets on Biden pushing for the Logan Act against Flynn, per Strozk?

What did Biden know and when did he know it?

Nothing wrong with Biden bringing it up. What is wrong is that Biden has said he knew nothing about the criminal investigation into Flynn.

And, the fact that Biden was advocating for the Logan Act shows, that once again, he is on the wrong side of the issue.
The Logan Act, enacted in 1799, has NEVER been successfully prosecuted. If anyone should be prosecuted under the Logan Act, it should be John Kerry.

Remind me when Flynn was charged with violating the Logan Act?

Sounds like Biden didn't know anything about the criminal investigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there crickets on Biden pushing for the Logan Act against Flynn, per Strozk?

What did Biden know and when did he know it?

I‘M really ok with the executive branch putting a stop to treasonous behavior. Why aren’t you?

Nothing Flynn did was treasonous. Flynn knew the process and in time would figure out the scheme being run by the Obama Administration of spying on fellow Americans without cause. That, my friend is treasonous.

Umm...

These Flynn delusions are laughable.

No derogatory information....doesn't get any plainer than that, my friend.

Friend, you wouldn't be a very good investigator if you closed all your cases without ever talking to anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there crickets on Biden pushing for the Logan Act against Flynn, per Strozk?

What did Biden know and when did he know it?

Nothing wrong with Biden bringing it up. What is wrong is that Biden has said he knew nothing about the criminal investigation into Flynn.

And, the fact that Biden was advocating for the Logan Act shows, that once again, he is on the wrong side of the issue.
The Logan Act, enacted in 1799, has NEVER been successfully prosecuted. If anyone should be prosecuted under the Logan Act, it should be John Kerry.

Remind me when Flynn was charged with violating the Logan Act?

Sounds like Biden didn't know anything about the criminal investigation.

Pay attention.
Strzok's handwritten notes.

Not surprised you aren't aware. They were only released YESTERDAY! After years of this crap going on.
Brady material withheld. Hopefully, those who decided not to give this material to the defense will be prosecuted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are there crickets on Biden pushing for the Logan Act against Flynn, per Strozk?

What did Biden know and when did he know it?

Nothing wrong with Biden bringing it up. What is wrong is that Biden has said he knew nothing about the criminal investigation into Flynn.

And, the fact that Biden was advocating for the Logan Act shows, that once again, he is on the wrong side of the issue.
The Logan Act, enacted in 1799, has NEVER been successfully prosecuted. If anyone should be prosecuted under the Logan Act, it should be John Kerry.

Remind me when Flynn was charged with violating the Logan Act?

Sounds like Biden didn't know anything about the criminal investigation.

Pay attention.
Strzok's handwritten notes.

Not surprised you aren't aware. They were only released YESTERDAY! After years of this crap going on.
Brady material withheld. Hopefully, those who decided not to give this material to the defense will be prosecuted.

I am aware. There's a reason no one but Powellites are excited by this stuff. It's not Brady material.

[Anonymous]

I am aware. There's a reason no one but Powellites are excited by this stuff. It's not Brady material.

Notes say that Comey said the call seemed to be "legit." That's not exculpatory?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I am aware. There's a reason no one but Powellites are excited by this stuff. It's not Brady material.

Notes say that Comey said the call seemed to be "legit." That's not exculpatory?

Well, what did Flynn say about the calls when they asked him? Did he confirm that they were legit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am aware. There's a reason no one but Powellites are excited by this stuff. It's not Brady material.

Notes say that Comey said the call seemed to be "legit." That's not exculpatory?

Well, what did Flynn say about the calls when they asked him? Did he confirm that they were legit?

We don't know since the original 302 has never been produced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am aware. There's a reason no one but Powellites are excited by this stuff. It's not Brady material.

Notes say that Comey said the call seemed to be "legit." That's not exculpatory?

Well, what did Flynn say about the calls when they asked him? Did he confirm that they were legit?

We don't know since the original 302 has never been produced.

We've got something better and also something that is produced often enough.

We've got the notes. Go read them, if you haven't yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I am aware. There's a reason no one but Powellites are excited by this stuff. It's not Brady material.

Notes say that Comey said the call seemed to be "legit." That's not exculpatory?

Well, what did Flynn say about the calls when they asked him? Did he confirm that they were legit?

We don't know since the original 302 has never been produced.

Dp- great. So let’s hear the call.

[Anonymous]

It's now legal to lie to the FBI.

Congratulations, GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's now legal to lie to the FBI.

Congratulations, GOP.

But, the reports from the FBI initially said he did not lie. It was Mueller team that said he lied.......

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's now legal to lie to the FBI.

Congratulations, GOP.

But, the reports from the FBI initially said he did not lie. It was Mueller team that said he lied.......

The motion to withdraw the charges, the subject of the petition for mandamus, says that he lied. But they gave some handwavey explanation about why it's okay. "Predicate" etc.

It's undisputed that he lied. That's okay now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's now legal to lie to the FBI.

Congratulations, GOP.

You mean...thanks to Andrew McCabe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's now legal to lie to the FBI.

Congratulations, GOP.

You mean...thanks to Andrew McCabe.

No.

Flynn stans are ridic. Lol