Amicus filing to the Appeals court:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Fh3mRD4Qp4IlNSMX88FoNgaZmbtm2DrO/view

It sort of blows Fokker out of the water.

General Mike Flynn, what they did to him,
And the people who did it, and I think you know who I'm talking about, I think you know,
It was a political hit job, pure and simple.
Our corrupt FBI, aided by the Democrats.

It was and is a disgrace.
That I can tell you.

Oh jeez. Flynn didn't know anything. He was just an unpatriotic nut.

And a liar. He should have lost his security clearance abut he was untruthful about his income.

The answer to that Hill Op-Ed is, no.

Flynn was and is a walking national security threat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

No, dear, the Republicans think it's okay to lie and to receive payments from other countries while working as the incoming ("incumbent") NSA.

They think it's just darling.

- former Republican

But, it is okay for the Dems to pay for Russian disinformation on a political opponent? Got it.

That isn't what happened and continuing to mischaracterize it doesn't do you any good service.

Maybe ask why Papadopolous, Sessions, Manafort, Page and a whole host of Trump 2016 orbit people were meeting with Russians and then lying about it? What sparked the FBI investigaton? It wasn't Christopher Steele.

We know. Christopher Steele and his Russian disinformation paid for by HRC and the DNC just gave the FBI and DOJ a way to create a media campaign to promote their false narrative.
As for the meetings with "Russians?" I think as time goes on you will discover that these "meetings" weren't what the FBI and media made them out to be.

But they waited until AFTER the election to begin the media campaign? Okay, makes total sense.

No, they didn't.
NY Times 10/31/16

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html

When this didn't work, they instituted their "insurance policy."

Again, after the election. It doesn’t make sense. Even if he had been impeached and removed from office, Pence would’ve been the President. Not HRC.

The insurance policy wasn't just to get rid of Trump. It was also to get Flynn out. Remember, it was Strzok who referenced "the insurance policy" and also insisted the case against Flynn remain open.
Not only was Flynn a threat to the Obama policies, he also knew how things worked within the IC. He may just uncover stuff.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/496170-did-the-fbi-target-michael-flynn-to-protect-obamas-policies-not-national

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

No, dear, the Republicans think it's okay to lie and to receive payments from other countries while working as the incoming ("incumbent") NSA.

They think it's just darling.

- former Republican

But, it is okay for the Dems to pay for Russian disinformation on a political opponent? Got it.

That isn't what happened and continuing to mischaracterize it doesn't do you any good service.

Maybe ask why Papadopolous, Sessions, Manafort, Page and a whole host of Trump 2016 orbit people were meeting with Russians and then lying about it? What sparked the FBI investigaton? It wasn't Christopher Steele.

We know. Christopher Steele and his Russian disinformation paid for by HRC and the DNC just gave the FBI and DOJ a way to create a media campaign to promote their false narrative.
As for the meetings with "Russians?" I think as time goes on you will discover that these "meetings" weren't what the FBI and media made them out to be.

But they waited until AFTER the election to begin the media campaign? Okay, makes total sense.

No, they didn't.
NY Times 10/31/16

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html

When this didn't work, they instituted their "insurance policy."

Again, after the election. It doesn’t make sense. Even if he had been impeached and removed from office, Pence would’ve been the President. Not HRC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

No, dear, the Republicans think it's okay to lie and to receive payments from other countries while working as the incoming ("incumbent") NSA.

They think it's just darling.

- former Republican

But, it is okay for the Dems to pay for Russian disinformation on a political opponent? Got it.

BS. Republicans paid and had access to the same info during the primaries. MSM had access to the same info before the election. Hillary's campaign had access to the same info. And none of them used it. No one has said the dossier was 100% accurate. It was always partially true, partially false, and partially unknown. Everyone who read it questioned it The entire point of disinformation is to create doubt. You do that by including mixed stuff. You include true stuff in order to raise doubts about false stuff. Russians have been doing disinformation since the Cold War. Nothing new. What is new is your tribe's willingness to accept Putin's help.

That is such BS.
Steele wasn't hired until HRC campaign and DNC got involved. That is when the infamous dossier was created.
And, don't try to claim that " Everyone who read it questioned it." I can't count the number of times I read on here "Has any of it been debunked?" And, left-wing posters continue to push the "pee" story.
Please. Don't gaslight us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

No, dear, the Republicans think it's okay to lie and to receive payments from other countries while working as the incoming ("incumbent") NSA.

They think it's just darling.

- former Republican

But, it is okay for the Dems to pay for Russian disinformation on a political opponent? Got it.

That isn't what happened and continuing to mischaracterize it doesn't do you any good service.

Maybe ask why Papadopolous, Sessions, Manafort, Page and a whole host of Trump 2016 orbit people were meeting with Russians and then lying about it? What sparked the FBI investigaton? It wasn't Christopher Steele.

We know. Christopher Steele and his Russian disinformation paid for by HRC and the DNC just gave the FBI and DOJ a way to create a media campaign to promote their false narrative.
As for the meetings with "Russians?" I think as time goes on you will discover that these "meetings" weren't what the FBI and media made them out to be.

But they waited until AFTER the election to begin the media campaign? Okay, makes total sense.

No, they didn't.
NY Times 10/31/16

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html

When this didn't work, they instituted their "insurance policy."

Wow. One article. And what does it say. It says FBI sees no clear link. At the time, of course, the FBI did not have all the info.

You read the headline. Read the whole piece.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

No, dear, the Republicans think it's okay to lie and to receive payments from other countries while working as the incoming ("incumbent") NSA.

They think it's just darling.

- former Republican

But, it is okay for the Dems to pay for Russian disinformation on a political opponent? Got it.

That isn't what happened and continuing to mischaracterize it doesn't do you any good service.

Maybe ask why Papadopolous, Sessions, Manafort, Page and a whole host of Trump 2016 orbit people were meeting with Russians and then lying about it? What sparked the FBI investigaton? It wasn't Christopher Steele.

We know. Christopher Steele and his Russian disinformation paid for by HRC and the DNC just gave the FBI and DOJ a way to create a media campaign to promote their false narrative.
As for the meetings with "Russians?" I think as time goes on you will discover that these "meetings" weren't what the FBI and media made them out to be.

But they waited until AFTER the election to begin the media campaign? Okay, makes total sense.

No, they didn't.
NY Times 10/31/16

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html

When this didn't work, they instituted their "insurance policy."

Wow. One article. And what does it say. It says FBI sees no clear link. At the time, of course, the FBI did not have all the info.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

No, dear, the Republicans think it's okay to lie and to receive payments from other countries while working as the incoming ("incumbent") NSA.

They think it's just darling.

- former Republican

But, it is okay for the Dems to pay for Russian disinformation on a political opponent? Got it.

That isn't what happened and continuing to mischaracterize it doesn't do you any good service.

Maybe ask why Papadopolous, Sessions, Manafort, Page and a whole host of Trump 2016 orbit people were meeting with Russians and then lying about it? What sparked the FBI investigaton? It wasn't Christopher Steele.

We know. Christopher Steele and his Russian disinformation paid for by HRC and the DNC just gave the FBI and DOJ a way to create a media campaign to promote their false narrative.
As for the meetings with "Russians?" I think as time goes on you will discover that these "meetings" weren't what the FBI and media made them out to be.

Then why lie about them? Why deny they happened? Why suggest they were about adoptions?

I think we will discover they were not the benign reviews of different vodka flavors, you make it out to be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

No, dear, the Republicans think it's okay to lie and to receive payments from other countries while working as the incoming ("incumbent") NSA.

They think it's just darling.

- former Republican

But, it is okay for the Dems to pay for Russian disinformation on a political opponent? Got it.

BS. Republicans paid and had access to the same info during the primaries. MSM had access to the same info before the election. Hillary's campaign had access to the same info. And none of them used it. No one has said the dossier was 100% accurate. It was always partially true, partially false, and partially unknown. Everyone who read it questioned it The entire point of disinformation is to create doubt. You do that by including mixed stuff. You include true stuff in order to raise doubts about false stuff. Russians have been doing disinformation since the Cold War. Nothing new. What is new is your tribe's willingness to accept Putin's help.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

How do republicans, especially the trumpkins, get away with asking "Have you stopped beating your wife?" questions all the time?

It's the only way they know to communicate.

Debate me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

No, dear, the Republicans think it's okay to lie and to receive payments from other countries while working as the incoming ("incumbent") NSA.

They think it's just darling.

- former Republican

But, it is okay for the Dems to pay for Russian disinformation on a political opponent? Got it.

That isn't what happened and continuing to mischaracterize it doesn't do you any good service.

Maybe ask why Papadopolous, Sessions, Manafort, Page and a whole host of Trump 2016 orbit people were meeting with Russians and then lying about it? What sparked the FBI investigaton? It wasn't Christopher Steele.

We know. Christopher Steele and his Russian disinformation paid for by HRC and the DNC just gave the FBI and DOJ a way to create a media campaign to promote their false narrative.
As for the meetings with "Russians?" I think as time goes on you will discover that these "meetings" weren't what the FBI and media made them out to be.

But they waited until AFTER the election to begin the media campaign? Okay, makes total sense.

No, they didn't.
NY Times 10/31/16

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html

When this didn't work, they instituted their "insurance policy."

Anonymous wrote:So, the Dems think it is okay for the FBI and prosecutors to lie and withhold information in order to get a conviction? They think that is justice? Wow.

How do republicans, especially the trumpkins, get away with asking "Have you stopped beating your wife?" questions all the time?