Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Flynn's broke, Democrats go on lying, and the FBI coup plotters get away with everything. Some justice.

---

Damn some of you guys are stupid and easily duped by con artists. Let me explain it to you. Trump, Barr bad...

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
second - what you're doing is called transference. Every bad trait you find in humans you arbitrarily assign to Trump and his supporters because it makes you feel better. These are the lies you tell yourself in order to make life tolerable.

All I can say is ' Sucks to be you for the next 4 1/2 years '.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
You FUCKING SEDITIOUS COWARDS who are pushing the narrative that is some how Trump or Barr's fault can all go FUCK THE HELL OFF! You did this and you got your asses CAUGHT because that fucking cult Hillary LOST!!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

AURaptor, you are not Mal Reynold, you are crazy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

AURaptor, you are not Mal Reynold, you are crazy.

---

Mal was a true believer, and it took 1 horrific loss for him to lose his faith. My change of heart took a bit longer.

You have nothing to throw at me because the facts are undeniably on my side. You can't even address the Podesta testimony. You'll dance around w/ empty claims and petty insults, and it'll amount to nothing.

There was an illegal attempted coup on a duly elected President, by Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats, and there's not 1 damn thing you can say to deny it.

You SHOULD be furious that such ' fundamental change ' meant corruption on a scale unheard of before, but like so many on the Left, you don't care. You even reject the concept of " Justice ", because all you want to do is win.

Sorry, but you're going to have to get used to disappointment.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Then we get to see the real rappy. Not a very bright guy who believes negative, false bullshit posted by others reinforcing your warped beliefs.

---

Quote:

---

The FBI interviews Michael Flynn to ask about this call. They already have the transcripts, so they know what’s on it. And in the course of that interview, Michael Flynn lies. He says that he didn’t mention sanctions during this call at all. And it’s a crime to lie to federal investigators.

Fast forward to December 2017. Michael Flynn pleads guilty, admits that he lied, that he knew his statements were false at the time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by WISHIMAY:

I've had that conversation with him. He literally believes that if he can find other people who think like him that it must mean HE is correct.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Flynn wasn't mirandized. He wasn't under oath. Nor was he testifying before a grand jury.

Obama flat out lied when he claimed Flynn perjured himself.

Is Obama an utter moron, who doesn't know the law?

Or does he think just him saying that will gaslight useful idiots, like Second, to repeat the lie over and over and over until the gen public believes it?


Probably a bit of both, I'll bet.

---

Quote:

---

When you interview a suspect, you (a) let him or her know that they are the subject of the investigation and (b) provide him or her with any memory aids such as transcripts, diaries, notes. emails etc to allow them to refresh their memories.

What is a lie? It is a deliberate and knowing misrepresentation of what the person believes to be the truth. Unless you provide the suspect with a refresher, you can't tell whether they lied or misspoke/forgot.

That is why the FIB notes on the interview are crucial. The FIB prides itself in being human lie detectors. That is one of the skills that they look for, and hone, in their agents. The people who interviewed Flynn wrote AT THE TIME that they didn't believe he was lying. As far as they could tell, he believed he was telling the truth.

Well, maybe Flynn is a stonecold liar. He WAS head of DIA after all, another spook. But the way the FIB conducted this whole investigation (which was clearly set up to entrap Flynn) and withheld exculpatory evidence ... well, we'll never know. If the FIB had done a by-the-book investigation and shown Flynn the transcript he would have been forced to admit "Yep, I said that" and then we would be discussing whether or not that was worthy of prosecution. But IMHO they must have felt that Flynn's conversstion was not much, and in their eagerness to entrap him they bungled the case and they REALLY bungled the prosecution by withholding evidence from the defense.

It was all illegal by the FIB and malicious, politically-motivated prosecution. Very much like Ukrainegate, which the transcript showed was not much either.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
To repeat myself because SECOND prefers to ignore the truth.

HEY SECOND, I highlighted the important part for you.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: To repeat myself because SECOND prefers to ignore the truth.
HEY SECOND, I highlighted the important part for you.

SECOND: Flynn’s lies mattered to the judge, who didn’t gloss over their implications during an exchange with the defendant. “Not only did you lie to the FBI

---

Quote:

---

but you lied to senior officials in the Trump transition team and administration,”

---

Quote:

---

Sullivan said. “Those lies caused the then vice president-elect, incoming chief of staff, and then press secretary to lie to the American people.

---

Quote:

---

Moreover, you lied to the FBI about three different topics, and you made those false statements while you were serving as the national security adviser, the president of the United States’ most senior national security aid. I can’t minimize that.”

---

Quote:

---

“So all along you were an unregistered agent of a foreign country, while serving as the national security adviser to the president of the United States,” Judge Sullivan told Flynn. Moments later, he charged: “Arguably, you sold your country out.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

All of which shows why Sullivan should recuse himself from the case.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

As usual, SECOND does not look at, or for, evidence. He only sees what he wants to see, and repeats what he wants to hear.

IMHO, what could really have gotten Flynn in trouble was his work for a firm that was being paid by Turkey. He made quite a bit of money on that, as I recall. His contacts with Russia were, by comparison, petty.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
This is not about "going to trial", this is about sentencing. Judge Emmett Sullivan wants to sentence a man who both prosecutors and defense now say is "not guilty". In doing so, he is far overreaching the powers of his bench by appointing ANOTHER prosecutor. Judges are not defense, nor are they prosecutors. They should sit in the middle and make sure that everything is done according to law, and at this point Emmett Sullivan himself is breaking the law.

If the FIB hadn't made such a hash of the case, and if the prosecutors hadn't withheld key evidence from the defense, we may have been looking at a legitimate case. But as it stands the case was so thoroughly botched it can't be resuscitated, not even by a judge.

I have posted since the beginning that I think Flynn was acting as an unregistered representative of a foreign agent (Turkey). There is a money-trail, and I was disturbed by some of the things he was discussing with Turkey, because he has a huge giant grotch against Iran. But the usual "punishment" is to let the offender register after-the-fact. As far as his discussions with Kislyak, I doubt there is much in there to prosecute. He was not "selling out" America.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK

---

Quote:

---

SIGNYM: This is not about "going to trial", this is about sentencing. Judge Emmett Sullivan wants to sentence a man who both prosecutors and defense now say is "not guilty". In doing so, he is far overreaching the powers of his bench by appointing ANOTHER prosecutor. Judges are not defense, nor are they prosecutors. They should sit in the middle and make sure that everything is done according to law, and at this point Emmett Sullivan himself is breaking the law.

If the FIB hadn't made such a hash of the case, and if the prosecutors hadn't withheld key evidence from the defense, we may have been looking at a legitimate case. But as it stands the case was so thoroughly botched it can't be resuscitated, not even by a judge.

I have posted since the beginning that I think Flynn was acting as an unregistered representative of a foreign agent (Turkey). There is a money-trail, and I was disturbed by some of the things he was discussing with Turkey, because he has a huge giant grotch against Iran. But the usual "punishment" is to let the offender register after-the-fact. As far as his discussions with Kislyak, I doubt there is much in there to prosecute. He was not "selling out" America.

CC: Interesting. Trump says he fired Flynn because he lied to the VP and the FBI. And Flynn himself says he lied about several things to the FBI, including working for another country while being our National Security Chief.
But you want to go against Trump, the FBI , the Judge, and Flynn on this... doesn't get much more telling or dim.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
More bullshit from SECOND.

When you interview a suspect, you (a) let him or her know that they are the subject of the investigation and (b) provide him or her with any memory aids such as transcripts, diaries, notes. emails etc to allow them to refresh their memories.

What is a lie? It is a deliberate and knowing misrepresentation of what the person believes to be the truth. Unless you provide the suspect with a refresher, you can't tell whether they lied or misspoke/forgot.

That is why the FIB notes on the interview are crucial. The FIB prides itself in being human lie detectors. That is one of the skills that they look for, and hone, in their agents. The people who interviewed Flynn wrote AT THE TIME that they didn't believe he was lying. As far as they could tell, he believed he was telling the truth.

Well, maybe Flynn is a stonecold liar. He WAS head of DIA after all, another spook. But the way the FIB conducted this whole investigation (which was clearly set up to entrap Flynn) and withheld exculpatory evidence ... well, we'll never know. If the FIB had done a by-the-book investigation and shown Flynn the transcript he would have been forced to admit "Yep, I said that" and then we would be discussing whether or not that was worthy of prosecution. But IMHO they must have felt that Flynn's conversstion was not much, and in their eagerness to entrap him they bungled the case and they REALLY bungled the prosecution by withholding evidence from the defense.

It was all illegal by the FIB and malicious, politically-motivated prosecution. Very much like Ukrainegate, which the transcript showed was not much either.



-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

#WEARAMASK

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
So YOU'RE willing to agree with Trump and Pence?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Trump DOJ Grossly Distorted Facts In Call To Drop Flynn Case

---

Now, there's a person who's not about to be confused by the facts.

---

Fact: Michael Flynn pleaded guilty. Twice. Even President Trump has said his former national security adviser lied to the F.B.I.

When asked about the plea at the time, Mr. Trump said, “I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the vice president and the F.B.I.”

Mr. Flynn did lie, as he admitted to under oath in a court of law — twice. He told investigators, falsely, that he had not communicated with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, about possible changes to American foreign policy toward Russia even before Mr. Trump took office.

To review: Mr. Barr is now saying he cannot prove charges to which Mr. Flynn has twice pleaded guilty in court — and for which there is ample evidence. Very funny, Mr. Barr. lol.

Mr. Trump, his original explanation for firing Mr. Flynn notwithstanding, promptly crowed that his former aide was an “innocent man” who had been targeted by the Obama administration. Very funny, Mr. Trump. lol.

www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/opinion/michael-flynn-charges-dropped.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

SignyM: So YOU'RE willing to agree with Trump and Pence?


CC: So YOU'RE not? I'm not the crusader for Flynn - you are.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Why don't you ever criticize Trump for something real, like his inability to withdraw troops from the Mideast, or his reliance on The Fed (which is the biggest driver of wealth inequality in the USA) and the stock market bubble, or the deficits?

---

Quote:

---

Taibbi: Democrats Have Abandoned Civil Liberties


Pundits are cheering. A trio of former law enforcement and judicial officials saluted Sullivan in the Washington Post, chirping, “The Flynn case isn’t over until a judge says it’s over.” Yuppie icon Jeffrey Toobin of CNN and the New Yorker, one of the #Resistance crowd’s favored legal authorities, described Sullivan’s appointment of Judge John Gleeson as “brilliant.” MSNBC legal analyst Glenn Kirschner said Americans owe Sullivan a “debt of gratitude.”

One had to search far and wide to find a non-conservative legal analyst willing to say the obvious, i.e. that Sullivan’s decision was the kind of thing one would expect from a judge in Belarus. George Washington University professor Jonathan Turley was one of the few willing to say Sullivan’s move could “could create a threat of a judicial charge even when prosecutors agree with defendants.”

Whatever one’s opinion of Flynn, his relations with Turkey, his “Lock her up!” chants, his haircut, or anything, this case was never about much. There’s no longer pretense that prosecution would lead to the unspooling of a massive Trump-Russia conspiracy, as pundits once breathlessly expected. In fact, news that Flynn was cooperating with special counsel Robert Mueller inspired many of the “Is this the beginning of the end for Trump?” stories that will someday fill whole chapters of Journalism Fucks Up 101 textbooks.

The acts at issue are calls Flynn made to Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak on December 29th, 2016 in which he told the Russians not to overreact to sanctions. That’s it. The investigation was about to be dropped, but someone got the idea of using electronic surveillance of the calls to leverage a case into existence.

In a secrets-laundering maneuver straight out of the Dick Cheney playbook, some bright person first illegally leaked classified details to David Ignatius at the Washington Post, then agents rushed to interview Flynn about the “news.”

A Laurel-and-Hardy team of agents conducted the interview, then took three weeks to write and re-write multiple versions of the interview notes used as evidence (because why record it?). They were supervised by a counterintelligence chief who then memorialized on paper his uncertainty over whether the FBI was trying to “get him to lie” or “get him fired,” worrying that they’d be accused of “playing games.” After another leak to the Washington Post in early February, 2017, Flynn actually was fired, and later pleaded guilty to lying about sanctions in the Kislyak call, the transcript of which was of course never released to either the defense or the public.

Warrantless surveillance, multiple illegal leaks of classified information, a false statements charge constructed on the razor’s edge of Miranda, and the use of never-produced, secret counterintelligence evidence in a domestic criminal proceeding – this is the “rule of law” we’re being asked to cheer.


https://taibbi.substack.com/
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/taibbi-democrats-have-abandoned-ci
vil-liberties

---

Quote:

---

Flynn's lawyers accuse outside counsel of 'flagrant personal and partisan assault'
By Harper Neidig - 06/17/20 02:09 PM EDT


Flynn's lawyers accuse outside counsel of 'flagrant personal and partisan assault'
© Getty Images

Michael Flynn's lawyers on Wednesday accused a former federal judge appointed to argue against the Department of Justice's (DOJ) effort to drop its charges against the former national security adviser of engaging in a "flagrant personal and partisan assault."

John Gleeson, who was tapped to serve as an amicus to offer a counter-argument against the DOJ's unusual reversal, last week urged the court not to allow the DOJ to drop the charges and accused Flynn of perjury.

"The irony and sheer duplicity of Amicus’s accusations against the Justice Department now—which is finally exposing the truth—is stunning," Flynn's lawyers wrote in a court filing. "Amicus’s filing is a 'wrap-up smear.' It is an affront to the Rule of Law and a raging insult to the citizens of this country who see the abject corruption in this assassination by political prosecution of General Flynn. This court exuviated any appearance of neutrality when it unlawfully appointed Amicus as its own adversary to make these scurrilous arguments."


Gleeson, through a spokesman, declined to comment.

Gleeson, who is now in private practice, laid out his case last week against the DOJ's surprising move to withdraw its charges. He accused the department of "gross abuse of prosecutorial power" in seeking to help President Trump's political ally and argued that Judge Emmet Sullivan is within his authority to reject the move.

The DOJ also pushed back against Gleeson's arguments on Wednesday, saying that Sullivan is obligated by law to approve the motion to withdraw the charge that Flynn lied to the FBI about his communications with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. in late 2016.

"The Constitution vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when—and when not—to prosecute potential crimes," the DOJ argued.

Flynn's legal team has asked the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene in the case and order Sullivan to accept the DOJ's motion to drop charges. They argued that Sullivan does not have the authority to appoint Gleeson to act as an amicus in the case.

And they accused Gleeson of being "the most-biased amicus," pointing to a Washington Post op-ed he published just before his appointment in which he suggested that "improper political influence" played a role in the decision to drop charges against Flynn.

After hearing oral arguments last week, the D.C. Circuit is expected to issue a decision at some point in the near future about whether Sullivan can proceed with deliberating over the DOJ's motion.

In the meantime, Sullivan has scheduled oral arguments over the motion for July 16.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SO, to recap the Flynn case ...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
T

Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.


John Bolton’s bombshell Trump book: eight of its most stunning claims

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND

DEFAMATION ... blah blah blah ... Russia ... blah blah bah... Trump .... blah blah blah

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND

DEFAMATION ... blah blah blah ... Russia ... blah blah bah... Trump .... blah blah blah

---

FIFY

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by second:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SECOND

DEFAMATION ... blah blah blah ... Russia ... blah blah bah... Trump .... blah blah blah

---

FIFY

---

Hey Russian Troll: Besides some other major crimes, Flynn got caught in a very minor crime: talking on the phone to the Russian ambassador. In exchange for cooperation with Mueller's investigation of Russian interference with the 2016 election, Flynn was only charged with lying about that phone call. But Trump thinks he and Attorney General Barr can free Flynn of that minor charge without using a Presidential Pardon. Maybe they can. If the judge does sentence Flynn, maybe Trump will use a pardon on Flynn. Who knows? Certainly not Trump. He is too stupid to plan 180 days ahead. Ask John Bolton's staff about how dumb Trump is. They will give you an earful: https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/status/1273347802026979328

Dec 18, 2018 - Here's what Michael Flynn has admitted
www.axios.com/michael-flynn-guilty-plea-kislyak-russia-turkey-8d185a76
-980c-4d6b-8fe6-daa712b3da78.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Second, I think I've pissed off sig the russian troll.

T

Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Hey SERIAL DEFAMER: TALKING WITH THE RUSSIAN AMBASSADOR IS NOT A CRIME.

You're such a liar. You have NO PROBLEM spreading lies, including lies about me.

---