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

[Anonymous]

This is all looking very bad for Barack and Co.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think Joe will have to clarify his comments now that we know his name was on the list requesting the unmasking of Flynn.
Coincidentally, he made the request the same day the Ignatius story came out identifying Flynn.

Exactly. Poor Joe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is all looking very bad for Barack and Co.

Check your glasses, friend.

[Anonymous]

Let’s see how long it takes for Obama to adjust his story...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see how long it takes for Obama to adjust his story...

He told Trump not to hire him. He was right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s see how long it takes for Obama to adjust his story...

He told Trump not to hire him. He was right.

Flynn told Obama what he didn't want to hear.

[Anonymous]

This is not going to go well for Flynn.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/13/judge-appoints-retired-judge-to-represent-flynn-prosecution-256509

[Anonymous]

And there's more...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/us/politics/bill-priestap-michael-flynn.html?smid=tw-share

Department officials reviewing the Flynn case interviewed Bill Priestap, the former head of F.B.I. counterintelligence, two days before making their extraordinary request to drop the case to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. They did not tell Judge Sullivan about Mr. Priestap’s interview. A Justice Department official said that they were in the process of writing up a report on the interview and that it would soon be filed with the court.

The department’s motion referred to notes that Mr. Priestap wrote around the bureau’s 2017 questioning of Mr. Flynn, who later pleaded guilty to lying to investigators during that interview. His lawyers said Mr. Priestap’s notes — recently uncovered during a review of the case — suggested that the F.B.I. was trying to entrap Mr. Flynn, and Attorney General William P. Barr said investigators were trying to “lay a perjury trap.”

That interpretation was wrong, Mr. Priestap told the prosecutors reviewing the case. He said that F.B.I. officials were trying to do the right thing in questioning Mr. Flynn and that he knew of no effort to set him up. Media reports about his notes misconstrued them, he said, according to the people familiar with the investigation.

Mmmmm, I love the smell of Rule 11 in the morning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And there's more...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/us/politics/bill-priestap-michael-flynn.html?smid=tw-share

Department officials reviewing the Flynn case interviewed Bill Priestap, the former head of F.B.I. counterintelligence, two days before making their extraordinary request to drop the case to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. They did not tell Judge Sullivan about Mr. Priestap’s interview. A Justice Department official said that they were in the process of writing up a report on the interview and that it would soon be filed with the court.

The department’s motion referred to notes that Mr. Priestap wrote around the bureau’s 2017 questioning of Mr. Flynn, who later pleaded guilty to lying to investigators during that interview. His lawyers said Mr. Priestap’s notes — recently uncovered during a review of the case — suggested that the F.B.I. was trying to entrap Mr. Flynn, and Attorney General William P. Barr said investigators were trying to “lay a perjury trap.”

That interpretation was wrong, Mr. Priestap told the prosecutors reviewing the case. He said that F.B.I. officials were trying to do the right thing in questioning Mr. Flynn and that he knew of no effort to set him up. Media reports about his notes misconstrued them, he said, according to the people familiar with the investigation.

Mmmmm, I love the smell of Rule 11 in the morning.

Probably the most important excerpt from that piece is this.....

Mr. Priestap told investigators that he did not remember the circumstances surrounding the notes that he took, and that he was giving them his interpretation of the notes as he read them now, according to a person familiar with his interview.

[Anonymous]

Seems that Samantha Powell was, ahem, less than truthful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And there's more...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/13/us/politics/bill-priestap-michael-flynn.html?smid=tw-share

Department officials reviewing the Flynn case interviewed Bill Priestap, the former head of F.B.I. counterintelligence, two days before making their extraordinary request to drop the case to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan. They did not tell Judge Sullivan about Mr. Priestap’s interview. A Justice Department official said that they were in the process of writing up a report on the interview and that it would soon be filed with the court.

The department’s motion referred to notes that Mr. Priestap wrote around the bureau’s 2017 questioning of Mr. Flynn, who later pleaded guilty to lying to investigators during that interview. His lawyers said Mr. Priestap’s notes — recently uncovered during a review of the case — suggested that the F.B.I. was trying to entrap Mr. Flynn, and Attorney General William P. Barr said investigators were trying to “lay a perjury trap.”

That interpretation was wrong, Mr. Priestap told the prosecutors reviewing the case. He said that F.B.I. officials were trying to do the right thing in questioning Mr. Flynn and that he knew of no effort to set him up. Media reports about his notes misconstrued them, he said, according to the people familiar with the investigation.

Mmmmm, I love the smell of Rule 11 in the morning.

And you believe him? I'm SURE he would just come right out and say "Yes! I was trying to set him up!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

He was not charged with perjury.

Flynn plead guilty to lying to the FBI about having discussed sanctions with the Russian ambassador during the presidential transition. That is perjury.

No, it's not. Despite what Obama says.

Ok, so what are the charges that Flynn twice plead guilty to and affirmed under oath and before a judge?

Making false statements. That is a different charge than perjury. He was not under oath during the interview, thus, no perjury charge.

Like I said, Perjury:

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1260706619492429824

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems that Samantha Powell was, ahem, less than truthful.

Requests for unmasking are legal and common and not at all synonymous with “leaking.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which Obamaite leaked to wapo???? That is a crime

This is the problem. You are so focused on "who leaked to the press" that you seem to not care about the conversations Flynn had and the potential illegality of them and are just fine with sweeping those under the rug.

DP.
Leaking this info to the press is a felony. And, it happened 4 years ago. About time for accountability.
Conversations Flynn had? Do you think if Grenelll thought his conversations were an issue that we would be having this discussion?

Grenell is just as corrupt, that is why he is there. You don't get it, they are all corrupt and covering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is not going to go well for Flynn.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/13/judge-appoints-retired-judge-to-represent-flynn-prosecution-256509

John Gleeson applied for the job.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/11/flynn-case-isnt-over-until-judge-says-its-over/