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

[Anonymous]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/14/us/politics/michael-flynn-prosecutors-barr.html

Attorney General William P. Barr has assigned an outside prosecutor to scrutinize the criminal case against President Trump’s former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn, according to people familiar with the matter.

Yup, this is another reason Barr gave that AB interview. He is putting his thumb on "justice" for all Trump accomplishes and he wanted a veneer of legitimacy by main stream media. I am so disgusted at our media's inability to do Trump and Co's bidding.

[Anonymous]

92 page summary of why, what Barr is doing, is a total crock

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592/gov.uscourts.dcd.191592.144.0_3.pdf

[Anonymous]

Good thread here on Barr, this and the McCabe thing.

[Anonymous]

Since the new year, we have discovered that Liu was appointed to Treasury to get her out of oversight, she has resigned as of yesterday.

We have also found out that the Pittsburgh USAG office is reviewing the Rudy Russia disinformation stuff, the St Louis attorney is reviewing Flynn case.

Erik Prince case is likely dead.

What happened to Rudy's case in NY? If Parnas and Fruman can be charged, why not Rudy?

What happened to the 11 cases that Mueller spun off? Where is the "unnamed" case at the Supreme Court?

[Anonymous]

Barr is trying to undo Mueller.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Barr is trying to undo Mueller.

Precisely this.

[Anonymous]

Flynn was framed. He pled guilty because he was out of money and they were threatening to go after his son. That is not the way it is supposed to work. He did not collude with Russians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Flynn was framed. He pled guilty because he was out of money and they were threatening to go after his son. That is not the way it is supposed to work. He did not collude with Russians.

Framed people don't plead guilty. He is lucky he wasn't charged with treason. He made $600,000 in 2016 from his dealing with turkey. If he was running out of money, that was his problem. Maybe he should have charged RT more for his appearance in Moscow?

[Anonymous]

Paging Rod Rosenstein....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Barr is trying to undo Mueller.

Precisely this.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Flynn was framed. He pled guilty because he was out of money and they were threatening to go after his son. That is not the way it is supposed to work. He did not collude with Russians.

Flynn wasn't framed. He just lied to the FBI, worked for Turkey while he was supposed to be working for the US, and thinks he knows better than everyone else. He's a loon and a conspiracy theorist and a convicted-but-not-yet-sentenced criminal.

After the recent shenanigans, he may end up with a real trial and lots of charges. Bring it, outside prosecutor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Flynn was framed. He pled guilty because he was out of money and they were threatening to go after his son. That is not the way it is supposed to work. He did not collude with Russians.

Flynn wasn't framed. He just lied to the FBI, worked for Turkey while he was supposed to be working for the US, and thinks he knows better than everyone else. He's a loon and a conspiracy theorist and a convicted-but-not-yet-sentenced criminal.

After the recent shenanigans, he may end up with a real trial and lots of charges. Bring it, outside prosecutor.

The FBI "interviewed" him when he did not know he was being investigated. FBI agents said he did not lie--until they said he did. No lawyer. No notice.

compare this with HRC who was accompanied by more than one lawyer --and the lawyers themselves were fact witnesses who were given some immunities. Highly unusual. Ironic that Strozk was involved with both cases.

This is not the way it is supposed to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since the new year, we have discovered that Liu was appointed to Treasury to get her out of oversight, she has resigned as of yesterday.

We have also found out that the Pittsburgh USAG office is reviewing the Rudy Russia disinformation stuff, the St Louis attorney is reviewing Flynn case.

Erik Prince case is likely dead.

What happened to Rudy's case in NY? If Parnas and Fruman can be charged, why not Rudy?

What happened to the 11 cases that Mueller spun off? Where is the "unnamed" case at the Supreme Court?

damn....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Flynn was framed. He pled guilty because he was out of money and they were threatening to go after his son. That is not the way it is supposed to work. He did not collude with Russians.

Flynn wasn't framed. He just lied to the FBI, worked for Turkey while he was supposed to be working for the US, and thinks he knows better than everyone else. He's a loon and a conspiracy theorist and a convicted-but-not-yet-sentenced criminal.

After the recent shenanigans, he may end up with a real trial and lots of charges. Bring it, outside prosecutor.

The FBI "interviewed" him when he did not know he was being investigated. FBI agents said he did not lie--until they said he did. No lawyer. No notice.

compare this with HRC who was accompanied by more than one lawyer --and the lawyers themselves were fact witnesses who were given some immunities. Highly unusual. Ironic that Strozk was involved with both cases.

This is not the way it is supposed to work.

This is a strange argument. He was a good liar, he convinced the agents who interviewed him. So he should not be charged with lying to the FBI because he's good at it? The FBI should only charge poor liars?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Flynn was framed. He pled guilty because he was out of money and they were threatening to go after his son. That is not the way it is supposed to work. He did not collude with Russians.

Flynn wasn't framed. He just lied to the FBI, worked for Turkey while he was supposed to be working for the US, and thinks he knows better than everyone else. He's a loon and a conspiracy theorist and a convicted-but-not-yet-sentenced criminal.

After the recent shenanigans, he may end up with a real trial and lots of charges. Bring it, outside prosecutor.

The FBI "interviewed" him when he did not know he was being investigated. FBI agents said he did not lie--until they said he did. No lawyer. No notice.

compare this with HRC who was accompanied by more than one lawyer --and the lawyers themselves were fact witnesses who were given some immunities. Highly unusual. Ironic that Strozk was involved with both cases.

This is not the way it is supposed to work.

This is a strange argument. He was a good liar, he convinced the agents who interviewed him. So he should not be charged with lying to the FBI because he's good at it? The FBI should only charge poor liars?

Further, the OP seems to believe that the FBI is obligated to notify people that they are being investigated. That's not how this works.....