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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:En Banc panel reject Flynn's motion 8-2 and remands to Judge Sullivan. the opinion is a full repudiation of Barr and Powell.

Nice to see SOMETHING normal happening in our country right now.

All stacked with Obiden appointees. SCOTUS will reject this ruling

I don't think you understand the composition of the the Appeals Court if that is your statement. And it is pretty rich given how many appointees of Obama's were shelved by McConnell.

The ruling is rooted in law, try reading it.

I don't think you understand criminal law as it relates to the appeals court if that is your state,ent. And it's pretty thin given this is the first criminal case ever in the history of our republic where the prosecutor dropped the case due to the hiding of brady material..

DP here. You definitely did not understand the ruling. This was not a decision on merit. The court did not rule on whether the prosecution was right to drop the case. It ruled that Judge Sullivan can ask for a hearing where they have to explain their decision. The prosecution's reasoning may be perfect. But the judge does get to hear about it.

Will Sullivan demand why the doj and Covington Burling withheld Brady evidence as well?

Maybe. I think the legally important is why Flynn pled guilty if he thought he wasn't. If they can show that he was coerced, then he may go free. I am not saying they can or can't do it, just that I think that's what the judge wants to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:En Banc panel reject Flynn's motion 8-2 and remands to Judge Sullivan. the opinion is a full repudiation of Barr and Powell.

Nice to see SOMETHING normal happening in our country right now.

All stacked with Obiden appointees. SCOTUS will reject this ruling

I don't think you understand the composition of the the Appeals Court if that is your statement. And it is pretty rich given how many appointees of Obama's were shelved by McConnell.

The ruling is rooted in law, try reading it.

I don't think you understand criminal law as it relates to the appeals court if that is your state,ent. And it's pretty thin given this is the first criminal case ever in the history of our republic where the prosecutor dropped the case due to the hiding of brady material..

DP here. You definitely did not understand the ruling. This was not a decision on merit. The court did not rule on whether the prosecution was right to drop the case. It ruled that Judge Sullivan can ask for a hearing where they have to explain their decision. The prosecution's reasoning may be perfect. But the judge does get to hear about it.

Will Sullivan demand why the doj and Covington Burling withheld Brady evidence as well?

Maybe. I think the legally important is why Flynn pled guilty if he thought he wasn't. If they can show that he was coerced, then he may go free. I am not saying they can or can't do it, just that I think that's what the judge wants to know.

He pled to protect his son. Andrew Weissman told Flynn his son didn't register his foreign lobbying efforts. Sick DOJ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:En Banc panel reject Flynn's motion 8-2 and remands to Judge Sullivan. the opinion is a full repudiation of Barr and Powell.

Nice to see SOMETHING normal happening in our country right now.

All stacked with Obiden appointees. SCOTUS will reject this ruling

I don't think you understand the composition of the the Appeals Court if that is your statement. And it is pretty rich given how many appointees of Obama's were shelved by McConnell.

The ruling is rooted in law, try reading it.

I don't think you understand criminal law as it relates to the appeals court if that is your state,ent. And it's pretty thin given this is the first criminal case ever in the history of our republic where the prosecutor dropped the case due to the hiding of brady material..

DP here. You definitely did not understand the ruling. This was not a decision on merit. The court did not rule on whether the prosecution was right to drop the case. It ruled that Judge Sullivan can ask for a hearing where they have to explain their decision. The prosecution's reasoning may be perfect. But the judge does get to hear about it.

Will Sullivan demand why the doj and Covington Burling withheld Brady evidence as well?

Maybe. I think the legally important is why Flynn pled guilty if he thought he wasn't. If they can show that he was coerced, then he may go free. I am not saying they can or can't do it, just that I think that's what the judge wants to know.

He pled to protect his son. Andrew Weissman told Flynn his son didn't register his foreign lobbying efforts. Sick DOJ.

If this upsets you, I have bad news. DOJ does this and much worse on a regular basis. So do local prosecutors.

I don't give a crap about Michael Flynn, and I don't think DOJ did anything wrong in prosecuting him under the standard that many others have been prosecuted. If you don't like that he was charged for lying to the FBI, ask your representatives to change the law - 18 USC 1001. But please spare me about how unfair Flynn's prosecution was. They use this statute all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you were falsely accused, lost your home and your own counsel ignored and didn't share Brady material, trolling on Twitter is the least you would do.

Falsely accused? He pled guily, not once, but twice, both in written word and oral affirmation, so really 4 times.

Lying to a fbi agent is a process crime. Flynn took the plead to save his son for not registering as a foreign lobbying agent. If you have kids and a heart you w[hold understand this plea. Speaking of lying under oath still waiting for the Comey indictment for lying to congress.

Treason is not a process crime. Yeah, great let’s see the Fox land inspired Comey indictment come to pass. I’m sure Barr will throw out some bs for an October surprise where he names Comey, just to get something juicy in the papers, but will ultimately have nothing. Trump is the most corrupt president in American history. He is surrounded by felons, qanon looniea and saps who buy the concept of a deep state. You will be sadly let down soon. Once Trump, hopefully without foreign election interference help, is told politely to vacate the White House once he loses, you’ll see a real, non corrupt set of facts.

Treason? As the incoming DNI he can and should be talking to foreign ambassadors. Remember the Russian Ambassador was calling to complain about Obama expelling Russians from the USA after they spent 100k on Facebook ads. Doing this week's after the election and before the innaguration reminds me of someone taking their ball and going home because it was the 88th minute and losing the soccer match.

He was the incoming National Security Advisor, NOT DNI. And the Russians we expelled were expelled as retaliation for Russia committing cyber crimes against us. I know this Administration is completely in bed with the Russians, but the previous ones since post WW II were not.

And if the conversations were totally routine and on the up and up, why lie?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:En Banc panel reject Flynn's motion 8-2 and remands to Judge Sullivan. the opinion is a full repudiation of Barr and Powell.

Nice to see SOMETHING normal happening in our country right now.

All stacked with Obiden appointees. SCOTUS will reject this ruling

I don't think you understand the composition of the the Appeals Court if that is your statement. And it is pretty rich given how many appointees of Obama's were shelved by McConnell.

The ruling is rooted in law, try reading it.

I don't think you understand criminal law as it relates to the appeals court if that is your state,ent. And it's pretty thin given this is the first criminal case ever in the history of our republic where the prosecutor dropped the case due to the hiding of brady material..

DP here. You definitely did not understand the ruling. This was not a decision on merit. The court did not rule on whether the prosecution was right to drop the case. It ruled that Judge Sullivan can ask for a hearing where they have to explain their decision. The prosecution's reasoning may be perfect. But the judge does get to hear about it.

Will Sullivan demand why the doj and Covington Burling withheld Brady evidence as well?

Maybe. I think the legally important is why Flynn pled guilty if he thought he wasn't. If they can show that he was coerced, then he may go free. I am not saying they can or can't do it, just that I think that's what the judge wants to know.

This doesn’t make any sense. If the choices are between everything being on the up-and-up and the DOJ having improperly coerced Flynn’s guilty plea, Sullivan would have just rubber stamped DOJ’s request to drop the charges. Sullivan ordered a hearing first because he is concerned the request to drop the charges may have been improper.

[Anonymous]

Gleeson has filed his brief, and it is scathing in its indictment of the DOJ's request to dismiss the charges against Flynn. Here's the introduction:

To describe the Government’s Motion to Dismiss as irregular would be a study in understatement. In the United States, Presidents do not orchestrate pressure campaigns to get the
Justice Department to drop charges against defendants who have pleaded guilty—twice, before two different judges—and whose guilt is obvious. And the Justice Department does not seek to dismiss criminal charges on grounds riddled with legal and factual error, then argue that the validity of those grounds cannot even be briefed to the Court that accepted the defendant’s guilty plea. Nor does the Justice Department make a practice of attacking its own prior filings in a case, as well as judicial opinions ruling in its favor, all while asserting that the normal rules should be set aside for a defendant who is openly favored by the President.

Yet that is exactly what has unfolded here. There is clear evidence that the Government’s Motion to Dismiss the case against Defendant Michael T. Flynn rests on pure pretext. There is clear evidence that this motion reflects a corrupt and politically motivated favor unworthy of our justice system. In the face of all this, the Government makes little effort to refute (or even address) the evidence exposing its abuses—and the arguments it does advance only further undermine its position. Instead, the Government invokes a parade of false formalities that would reduce this Court to a rubber stamp. The Government’s motion should therefore be denied.

I have a hunch that Judge Sullivan will deny the government's motion to dismiss.

[Anonymous]

This is pretty damning.....

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents tasked by fired former Director James Comey to take down Donald Trump during and after the 2016 election were so concerned about the agency’s potentially illegal behavior that they purchased liability insurance to protect themselves less than two weeks before Trump was inaugurated president, previously hidden FBI text messages show. The explosive new communications and internal FBI notes were disclosed in federal court filings today from Sidney Powell, the attorney who heads Michael Flynn’s legal defense team.

“[W]e all went and purchased professional liability insurance,” one agent texted on Jan. 10, 2017, the same day CNN leaked details that then-President-elect Trump had been briefed by Comey about the bogus Christopher Steele dossier. That briefing of Trump was used as a pretext to legitimize the debunked dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and compiled by a foreign intelligence officer who was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch.

“Holy crap,” an agent responded. “All the analysts too?”

“Yep,” the first agent said. “All the folks at the Agency as well.”

“[C]an I ask who are the most likely litigators?” an agent responded. “[A]s far as potentially suing y’all[?]”

“[H]aha, who knows….I think [t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece,” the first agent said.

While the names of the agents responsible for the texts are redacted, the legal filing from Powell, quoting communications from the Department of Justice (DOJ

https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/24/trump-was-right-explosive-new-fbi-texts-detail-internal-furor-over-handling-of-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is pretty damning.....

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents tasked by fired former Director James Comey to take down Donald Trump during and after the 2016 election were so concerned about the agency’s potentially illegal behavior that they purchased liability insurance to protect themselves less than two weeks before Trump was inaugurated president, previously hidden FBI text messages show. The explosive new communications and internal FBI notes were disclosed in federal court filings today from Sidney Powell, the attorney who heads Michael Flynn’s legal defense team.

“[W]e all went and purchased professional liability insurance,” one agent texted on Jan. 10, 2017, the same day CNN leaked details that then-President-elect Trump had been briefed by Comey about the bogus Christopher Steele dossier. That briefing of Trump was used as a pretext to legitimize the debunked dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and compiled by a foreign intelligence officer who was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch.

“Holy crap,” an agent responded. “All the analysts too?”

“Yep,” the first agent said. “All the folks at the Agency as well.”

“[C]an I ask who are the most likely litigators?” an agent responded. “[A]s far as potentially suing y’all[?]”

“[H]aha, who knows….I think [t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece,” the first agent said.

While the names of the agents responsible for the texts are redacted, the legal filing from Powell, quoting communications from the Department of Justice (DOJ

https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/24/trump-was-right-explosive-new-fbi-texts-detail-internal-furor-over-handling-of-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

1) The federalist is a russia funded news "source"
2) this is nothing new and has already been debunked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is pretty damning.....

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents tasked by fired former Director James Comey to take down Donald Trump during and after the 2016 election were so concerned about the agency’s potentially illegal behavior that they purchased liability insurance to protect themselves less than two weeks before Trump was inaugurated president, previously hidden FBI text messages show. The explosive new communications and internal FBI notes were disclosed in federal court filings today from Sidney Powell, the attorney who heads Michael Flynn’s legal defense team.

“[W]e all went and purchased professional liability insurance,” one agent texted on Jan. 10, 2017, the same day CNN leaked details that then-President-elect Trump had been briefed by Comey about the bogus Christopher Steele dossier. That briefing of Trump was used as a pretext to legitimize the debunked dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and compiled by a foreign intelligence officer who was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch.

“Holy crap,” an agent responded. “All the analysts too?”

“Yep,” the first agent said. “All the folks at the Agency as well.”

“[C]an I ask who are the most likely litigators?” an agent responded. “[A]s far as potentially suing y’all[?]”

“[H]aha, who knows….I think [t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece,” the first agent said.

While the names of the agents responsible for the texts are redacted, the legal filing from Powell, quoting communications from the Department of Justice (DOJ

https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/24/trump-was-right-explosive-new-fbi-texts-detail-internal-furor-over-handling-of-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

The Federalist?

Also, it's very common for IC people to have PLI. It's not out of the ordinary in the least.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is pretty damning.....

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents tasked by fired former Director James Comey to take down Donald Trump during and after the 2016 election were so concerned about the agency’s potentially illegal behavior that they purchased liability insurance to protect themselves less than two weeks before Trump was inaugurated president, previously hidden FBI text messages show. The explosive new communications and internal FBI notes were disclosed in federal court filings today from Sidney Powell, the attorney who heads Michael Flynn’s legal defense team.

“[W]e all went and purchased professional liability insurance,” one agent texted on Jan. 10, 2017, the same day CNN leaked details that then-President-elect Trump had been briefed by Comey about the bogus Christopher Steele dossier. That briefing of Trump was used as a pretext to legitimize the debunked dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and compiled by a foreign intelligence officer who was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch.

“Holy crap,” an agent responded. “All the analysts too?”

“Yep,” the first agent said. “All the folks at the Agency as well.”

“[C]an I ask who are the most likely litigators?” an agent responded. “[A]s far as potentially suing y’all[?]”

“[H]aha, who knows….I think [t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece,” the first agent said.

While the names of the agents responsible for the texts are redacted, the legal filing from Powell, quoting communications from the Department of Justice (DOJ

https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/24/trump-was-right-explosive-new-fbi-texts-detail-internal-furor-over-handling-of-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

1) The federalist is a russia funded news "source"
2) this is nothing new and has already been debunked.

I could give a crap what you think about the source.
They have the texts. They have the evidence.

And, what exactly has been "debunked?"

That the agents took out insurance because they were afraid of what was going to happen?
Or, that they worried about what a new AG might find?
Or, that they were worried about a FOIA?
Or, that they used NSLs to spy on Flynn's finances?

What exactly has been debunked?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is pretty damning.....

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents tasked by fired former Director James Comey to take down Donald Trump during and after the 2016 election were so concerned about the agency’s potentially illegal behavior that they purchased liability insurance to protect themselves less than two weeks before Trump was inaugurated president, previously hidden FBI text messages show. The explosive new communications and internal FBI notes were disclosed in federal court filings today from Sidney Powell, the attorney who heads Michael Flynn’s legal defense team.

“[W]e all went and purchased professional liability insurance,” one agent texted on Jan. 10, 2017, the same day CNN leaked details that then-President-elect Trump had been briefed by Comey about the bogus Christopher Steele dossier. That briefing of Trump was used as a pretext to legitimize the debunked dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and compiled by a foreign intelligence officer who was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch.

“Holy crap,” an agent responded. “All the analysts too?”

“Yep,” the first agent said. “All the folks at the Agency as well.”

“[C]an I ask who are the most likely litigators?” an agent responded. “[A]s far as potentially suing y’all[?]”

“[H]aha, who knows….I think [t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece,” the first agent said.

While the names of the agents responsible for the texts are redacted, the legal filing from Powell, quoting communications from the Department of Justice (DOJ

https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/24/trump-was-right-explosive-new-fbi-texts-detail-internal-furor-over-handling-of-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

1) The federalist is a russia funded news "source"
2) this is nothing new and has already been debunked.

I could give a crap what you think about the source.
They have the texts. They have the evidence.

And, what exactly has been "debunked?"

That the agents took out insurance because they were afraid of what was going to happen?
Or, that they worried about what a new AG might find?
Or, that they were worried about a FOIA?
Or, that they used NSLs to spy on Flynn's finances?

What exactly has been debunked?

DP here. The problem here is that this is not evidence. Knowing how sue happy Trump is, even if those individuals did everything correctly, they might want insurance anyway at that point. Of course you are free to have your own interpretation, but it is still not evidence of wrongdoing, because there is nothing illegal about buying insurance.

[Anonymous]

Eye roll and debunked are the liberal OK signs.

[Anonymous]

As an insurance lawyer, I can tell you that had this actually happened and those agents been sued, the policies they supposedly purchased for the first tome right before the election would have done absolutely nothing for them. Coverage would be barred based on some combination of prior knowledge/prior acts exclusions, policy period limitation and retroactive dates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is pretty damning.....

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents tasked by fired former Director James Comey to take down Donald Trump during and after the 2016 election were so concerned about the agency’s potentially illegal behavior that they purchased liability insurance to protect themselves less than two weeks before Trump was inaugurated president, previously hidden FBI text messages show. The explosive new communications and internal FBI notes were disclosed in federal court filings today from Sidney Powell, the attorney who heads Michael Flynn’s legal defense team.

“[W]e all went and purchased professional liability insurance,” one agent texted on Jan. 10, 2017, the same day CNN leaked details that then-President-elect Trump had been briefed by Comey about the bogus Christopher Steele dossier. That briefing of Trump was used as a pretext to legitimize the debunked dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and compiled by a foreign intelligence officer who was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch.

“Holy crap,” an agent responded. “All the analysts too?”

“Yep,” the first agent said. “All the folks at the Agency as well.”

“[C]an I ask who are the most likely litigators?” an agent responded. “[A]s far as potentially suing y’all[?]”

“[H]aha, who knows….I think [t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece,” the first agent said.

While the names of the agents responsible for the texts are redacted, the legal filing from Powell, quoting communications from the Department of Justice (DOJ

https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/24/trump-was-right-explosive-new-fbi-texts-detail-internal-furor-over-handling-of-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

1) The federalist is a russia funded news "source"
2) this is nothing new and has already been debunked.

I could give a crap what you think about the source.
They have the texts. They have the evidence.

And, what exactly has been "debunked?"

That the agents took out insurance because they were afraid of what was going to happen?
Or, that they worried about what a new AG might find?
Or, that they were worried about a FOIA?
Or, that they used NSLs to spy on Flynn's finances?

What exactly has been debunked?

This information has already been hashed out. I am surprised Sidney Powell signed a document suggesting this was new information. Literally go about about 30 pages in this thread and these exact texts were already discussed. There is literally nothing new here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is pretty damning.....

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents tasked by fired former Director James Comey to take down Donald Trump during and after the 2016 election were so concerned about the agency’s potentially illegal behavior that they purchased liability insurance to protect themselves less than two weeks before Trump was inaugurated president, previously hidden FBI text messages show. The explosive new communications and internal FBI notes were disclosed in federal court filings today from Sidney Powell, the attorney who heads Michael Flynn’s legal defense team.

“[W]e all went and purchased professional liability insurance,” one agent texted on Jan. 10, 2017, the same day CNN leaked details that then-President-elect Trump had been briefed by Comey about the bogus Christopher Steele dossier. That briefing of Trump was used as a pretext to legitimize the debunked dossier, which was funded by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign and compiled by a foreign intelligence officer who was working for a sanctioned Russian oligarch.

“Holy crap,” an agent responded. “All the analysts too?”

“Yep,” the first agent said. “All the folks at the Agency as well.”

“[C]an I ask who are the most likely litigators?” an agent responded. “[A]s far as potentially suing y’all[?]”

“[H]aha, who knows….I think [t]he concern when we got it was that there was a big leak at DOJ and the NYT among others was going to do a piece,” the first agent said.

While the names of the agents responsible for the texts are redacted, the legal filing from Powell, quoting communications from the Department of Justice (DOJ

https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/24/trump-was-right-explosive-new-fbi-texts-detail-internal-furor-over-handling-of-crossfire-hurricane-investigation/

1) The federalist is a russia funded news "source"
2) this is nothing new and has already been debunked.

I could give a crap what you think about the source.
They have the texts. They have the evidence.

And, what exactly has been "debunked?"

That the agents took out insurance because they were afraid of what was going to happen?
Or, that they worried about what a new AG might find?
Or, that they were worried about a FOIA?
Or, that they used NSLs to spy on Flynn's finances?

What exactly has been debunked?

You should give a crap about the source. Some sources are more trustworthy than others. Did you believe Uranium One, or Seth Rich or Vince Foster or Pizzagate? Because those are all frenetic issues pushed hard by unstrustworthy sources that later turned out to be false stories...just like what Flynn is trying to do here and as ginned up by The Federalist and other "sources" that are not trustworthy. If one were to go out in public with the crap that these "sources" claimed were true, one would be ridiculed as a conspiracy theorist, because, for most sane people, facts matter.