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.

Trump fired Berman, lied about it, then said he did.

I'm surprised you even realize what a true statement or a false one looks like.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This decision is what people should be rioting in the streets over. It’s ironic that the House is holding hearings right now over Barr and Trump’s politization of the DOJ right now. The court is saying Flynn can’t be held accountable for lying under oath several times on record because he shouldn’t have been charged. And working secretly for a foreign government while also working for our government is okay.

Many innocent people plead guilty.

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?

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?

Anonymous wrote:This decision is what people should be rioting in the streets over. It’s ironic that the House is holding hearings right now over Barr and Trump’s politization of the DOJ right now. The court is saying Flynn can’t be held accountable for lying under oath several times on record because he shouldn’t have been charged. And working secretly for a foreign government while also working for our government is okay.

Anonymous wrote:This decision is what people should be rioting in the streets over. It’s ironic that the House is holding hearings right now over Barr and Trump’s politization of the DOJ right now. The court is saying Flynn can’t be held accountable for lying under oath several times on record because he shouldn’t have been charged. And working secretly for a foreign government while also working for our government is okay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It might be taken up by the entire DC Circuit Court. If not, it'll likely be treated as a one-off, similar to Bush v. Gore. Political rather than precedential. Which doesn't make the courts look good.

Actually, it is precedential. That was the basis of the appeal. DOJ asked it to be dropped.

As for the Defense, there was plenty of exculpatory information to show that the prosecution should never have happened. Misbehavior on the part of FBI and exculpatory information was withheld from defense. Apparently, more exculpatory information about Strozk was released yesterday.

If any of what you wrote were true, this ruling wouldn't be so awful.

Oh, don't worry. What PP wrote is true. Newly released Strzok notes show that Comey said in the WH meeting that the Flynn calls "appear legit"....that Obama wanted the "right people" on the case...and Biden advocating for the Logan Act.

https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1275803339738021890

Do y'all have any idea what "exculpatory" means? Do you have a dictionary?

Sure. An example being that the FBI was going to drop their investigation because no derogatory information had been uncovered. Until Strzok got involved.
This wasn't given to the defense.

They hadn't talked to Flynn yet. Keeping the investigation open until that happens isn't good or bad, usual or unusual, exculpatory or inculpatory. It's just investigating.

But sure, lying to the FBI is fine. Now.