The Next President is...

[Danger41]

On 3/17/2020 at 12:37 PM, HossHarris said:

I / we’ve been calling it Kung flu since it started. Keep up!

Personally, I’m a fan of the “sweet and sour sickin’” 

[AirGuardianC141747]

Looks like Flynn is back let the conspiracy theories solidify. Time for Deep State to be revealed, just give it some time. DOJ/FBI just unbelievable if true, we’ll see. Once we get the economy rolling forward again it’s time for Mr. T do his work.

[brickhistory]

Reprehensible that DOJ/FBI fought so long and hard to hide the, apparently, exculpatory information regarding Flynn.  Including, and especially, the secret deal that DOJ and Flynn's original attornies worked out in secret, without Flynn's knowledge, because DOJ had found some legally threatening "discrepancies" in the law firm's operations.  So Flynn's original lawyers advised he fall on the grenade in order, at least partly, to protect themselves from further government investigation.  Flynn was never aware of these shenanigans.

 

 

Separate and unrelated:  And all women must be believed.  Right?  Right!?

[lloyd christmas]

50 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Separate and unrelated:  And all women must be believed.  Right?  Right!?

The double standard is mind blowing.  Seriously, it is absolutely unbelievable.  

[Sua Sponte]

5 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Separate and unrelated:  And all women must be believed.  Right?  Right!?

Depends, are you a Commander who's close to promotion/retiring and afraid of the negative impact that your career will suffer if you don't? Then yes.

[brickhistory]

Documents released yesterday by FBI reveal the investigation of Flynn was "to get him to lie or to get him fired."  This in the notes of the then head of FBI Counterintelligence in a strategy meeting in Comey's office before the interview with agents was arranged.

 

[Sua Sponte]

1 hour ago, brickhistory said:

Documents released yesterday by FBI reveal the investigation of Flynn was "to get him to lie or to get him fired."  This in the notes of the then head of FBI Counterintelligence in a strategy meeting in Comey's office before the interview with agents was arranged.

 

Apparently he forgot about that whole 5th Amendment thing?

[brickhistory]

Or, after specifically asking the Deputy Director of the FBI, "Should I have a lawyer present during the interview?" and being told no, so Flynn trusted his government.

Which is on him.

https://youtu.be/zOXtWxhlsUg

[Sua Sponte]

5 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Or, after specifically asking the Deputy Director of the FBI, "Should I have a lawyer present during the interview?" and being told no, so Flynn trusted his government.

Which is on him.

https://youtu.be/zOXtWxhlsUg

If he was read his rights, and chose to still make a statement, that's on him. If he was wasn't read his rights, then asked to make self-incriminating statements, that's a 5th and 6th Amendment violation (Miranda v. Arizona). However, SCOTUS holding in Frazier v. Cupp (1969) that law enforcement deception with regard to a target's confession is legal. Either way, regardless what anyone every tells you, no U.S. Citizen can be compelled to make a self-incriminated statement in any form. And if law enforcement, or really anyone, is questioning you about details about an alleged crime that you're the target of, they're never there for your benefit.

https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=umrsjlr

Edited April 30, 2020 by Sua Sponte

[Sim]

4 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Documents released yesterday by FBI reveal the investigation of Flynn was "to get him to lie or to get him fired."  This in the notes of the then head of FBI Counterintelligence in a strategy meeting in Comey's office before the interview with agents was arranged.

Lame stream fake media will not talk about it - given that they were part of the setup. 

But this man will go over entire thing. 

 

[HossHarris]

4 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

If he was read his rights, and chose to still make a statement, that's on him. If he was wasn't read his rights, then asked to make self-incriminating statements, that's a 5th and 6th Amendment violation (Miranda v. Arizona). However, SCOTUS holding in Frazier v. Cupp (1969) that law enforcement deception with regard to a target's confession is legal. Either way, regardless what anyone every tells you, no U.S. Citizen can be compelled to make a self-incriminated statement in any form. And if law enforcement, or really anyone, is questioning you about details about an alleged crime that you're the target of, they're never there for your benefit.

https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=umrsjlr

People usually fuck themselves by not knowing that they are the target. 
 

never pass up the opportunity to shut the fuck up. 

[AirGuardianC141747]

So true, so true. Time to unF*ck one’s self and F*ck up the others responsible.

Edited May 1, 2020 by AirGuardianC141747

[TreeA10]

If you can find the video, in an interview, Comey admits to taking advantage of the confusion in the new administration to send agents over to interview Flynn without the usual requirement of going through the White House counsel.  Interesting. 

[Prosuper]

Never never ever speak to a FBI agent without your lawyer in the room and never never ever hire a law firm where Eric Holder is a partner if you work for a Republican President. Spent 5 years in DC , I hated every second of it. Disbarments and indictments for everyone. But will not hold my breath to see perp walks of key members of the last administration.   Two tiered justice system, if you think this would never happen to you but they went after a retired 3 star General our country and Constitution is doomed.

[brickhistory]

3 hours ago, Prosuper said:

Never never ever speak to a FBI agent without your lawyer in the room and never never ever hire a law firm where Eric Holder is a partner if you work for a Republican President. Spent 5 years in DC , I hated every second of it. Disbarments and indictments for everyone. But will not hold my breath to see perp walks of key members of the last administration.   Two tiered justice system, if you think this would never happen to you but they went after a retired 3 star General our country and Constitution is doomed.

A-fukcing-men.

[brickhistory]

Boo-YA!

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/nation/ap-exclusive-justice-dept-dropping-flynns-criminal-case/

The Justice Department said it had concluded that Flynn’s interview by the FBI was “untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn” and that the interview on January 24, 2017 was “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis.”

[fire4effect]

On 5/2/2020 at 11:12 AM, Prosuper said:

Never never ever speak to a FBI agent without your lawyer in the room and never never ever hire a law firm where Eric Holder is a partner if you work for a Republican President. Spent 5 years in DC , I hated every second of it. Disbarments and indictments for everyone. But will not hold my breath to see perp walks of key members of the last administration.   Two tiered justice system, if you think this would never happen to you but they went after a retired 3 star General our country and Constitution is doomed.

Interaction with law enforcement in general. How often do we interact with law enforcement that doesn't have the potential to cost us at least a couple hundred bucks with a ticket? Honestly the only time I want to interact with law enforcement is if I'm engaging more than 1-2 active shooters. Up until that point I'm pretty good at protecting myself. Like with the AME and your medical. No one comes out having a better day than when they went in.

[brickhistory]

This doesn't seem quite right:

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

Quote

A federal judge is signaling that he might pursue perjury or contempt charges against former national security adviser Michael Flynn over his effort to abandon an earlier guilty plea to a charge of lying to the FBI.

Same judge, by the way, who called Flynn, literally, a traitor in court and then had to walk that back with an apology.  Same judge who agreed with now withdrawn DOJ counsel that "all exculpatory material was out there" as he claimed last year.  Kinda disregards all the exculpatory stuff "found" in the last week.

But fair and impartial.

Go judiciary.

[Sua Sponte]

7 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

This doesn't seem quite right:

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

Same judge, by the way, who called Flynn, literally, a traitor in court and then had to walk that back with an apology.  Same judge who agreed with now withdrawn DOJ counsel that "all exculpatory material was out there" as he claimed last year.  Kinda disregards all the exculpatory stuff "found" in the last week.

But fair and impartial.

Go judiciary.

I’m sorry, I guess I missed the part where Flynn didn’t admit to lying, then admitted again to lying during another pre-trial hearing to the judge during the plea inquiry? Even when he wanted to change his plea to not guilty he still never said he didn’t lie. What was he fired for again? Something, something, lying to Pence? You can do three things when law enforcement is “interviewing” you: tell the truth, lie, shut the fuck up. I recommend doing the latter. I don’t really want to hear about “entrapment” coming from a career military officer, who was a commander at various levels throughout his career, which meant he probably “interviewed” and gave Article 31 right advisements to people suspected of committing a crime. 

Since Barr is Trump’s personal lapdog, the dismissal isn’t surprising. It was either that a pardon. I expect to see Roger Stone’s pardon by the end of the year.

[waveshaper]

18 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

This doesn't seem quite right:

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

Same judge, by the way, who called Flynn, literally, a traitor in court and then had to walk that back with an apology.  Same judge who agreed with now withdrawn DOJ counsel that "all exculpatory material was out there" as he claimed last year.  Kinda disregards all the exculpatory stuff "found" in the last week.

But fair and impartial.

Go judiciary.

Also, the same Judge that did the following back in 2009/IAW AG Eric Holders Holders orders (long);

Executive Summary
The investigation and prosecution of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens were
permeated by the systematic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence
which would have independently corroborated Senator Stevens’s defense and his
testimony, and seriously damaged the testimony and credibility of the
government’s key witness. Months after the trial, when a new team of prosecutors
discovered, in short order, some of the exculpatory information that had been
withheld, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) moved to set aside the verdict and to
dismiss the indictment with prejudice. New prosecutors were assigned after U.S.
District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan held two of the previous prosecutors in contempt
for failing to comply with the Court’s order to disclose information to Senator
Stevens’s attorneys and to the Court regarding allegations of prosecutorial
misconduct which were made after trial by an FBI agent who had worked on the
case.

Judge Sullivan granted the government’s motion and dismissed the
indictment with prejudice on April 7, 2009, finding that “There was never a
judgment of conviction in this case. The jury’s verdict is being set aside and has no
legal effect.” On the same day, Judge Sullivan appointed Henry F. Schuelke III, the
undersigned, “to investigate and prosecute such criminal contempt proceedings as
may be appropriate” against the six prosecutors who conducted the investigation
and trial of Senator Stevens. The investigation lasted two years and required the
examination and analysis of well over 128,000 pages of documents, including the
trial record, prosecutors’ and agents’ emails, FBI 302s and handwritten notes, and
depositions of prosecutors, agents and others involved in the investigation and trial.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/325801/court-report-on-stevens-ethics-case.pdf

[lloyd christmas]

4 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

I’m sorry, I guess I missed the part where Flynn didn’t admit to lying, then admitted again to lying during another pre-trial hearing to the judge during the plea inquiry? Even when he wanted to change his plea to not guilty he still never said he didn’t lie. What was he fired for again? Something, something, lying to Pence? You can do three things when law enforcement is “interviewing” you: tell the truth, lie, shut the fuck up. I recommend doing the latter. I don’t really want to hear about “entrapment” coming from a career military officer, who was a commander at various levels throughout his career, which meant he probably “interviewed” and gave Article 31 right advisements to people suspected of committing a crime. 

Since Barr is Trump’s personal lapdog, the dismissal isn’t surprising. It was either that a pardon. I expect to see Roger Stone’s pardon by the end of the year.

You must have missed a lot of the parts.  There is more to the story IRT to Flynn and how things went down with the FBI.  Given the way things are playing out with this whole now confirmed fake Russia collusion story, unmaskings and 3 years of straight up lies from those in government/federal law, I can't give the feds the benefit of the doubt on this one.  My money is on the good guys.

[Sua Sponte]

2 hours ago, lloyd christmas said:

You must have missed a lot of the parts.  There is more to the story IRT to Flynn and how things went down with the FBI.  Given the way things are playing out with this whole now confirmed fake Russia collusion story, unmaskings and 3 years of straight up lies from those in government/federal law, I can't give the feds the benefit of the doubt on this one.  My money is on the good guys.

No, I read the indictment, not Fox & Friends hot take on the “facts.” I’m the last person to have faith on the DOJ/Feds, it’s called a “court of law” not a “court of truth.” If the Feds didn’t disclose exculpatory evidence, that’s a Brady violation and it should absolutely be dismissed. But that also doesn’t negate the fact Flynn lied to Pence, which was the reason why Trump fired him. And no one can be compelled to talk to law enforcement. Apparently Flynn was too stupid to realize that. The irony in this is the same guy who started chants to “lock her up.” I guess what you view as “good” depends on where you fall on the partisan line. 

[brickhistory]

Flynn was not charged nor plead guilty to perjury.  He was charged with making a false statement to FBI agents.  But the false statement is only a crime if the underlying reason the FBI was interviewing him had a basis in fact for such an investigation.  Which it did not.  According to FBI documents and personnel engaged with this at the time.  That info was never revealed to Flynn or the court, despite it being mandatory to do so and the judge specifically ordering DOJ to provide any such.  Then DOJ scoffed at the notion.

And then the material was released last week.  It was revealed that Flynn's interview basis was not material, therefore the lie (which the agents said they didn't think he was, btw) to the FBI doesn't matter legally.

If he lied to Pence, that's between them.  

Both sides agreed to drop the case.

The judge is now making up a charge of perjury to the court because Flynn pled guilty to the court.  Twice.  The judge seems to think that's perjury.

Not a lawyer, but I'm fairly sure that this isn't the first time a defendant has made a guilty plea only to seek to withdraw it later.

And the de facto prosecutor that the judge has appointed was a co-author of a very anti-Flynn and DOJ op-ed in Monday's Washington Post.

Doesn't seem to be a disinterested party.

Shenanagins on the part of the judge and most likely to be stomped on at appeal.

[Sua Sponte]

1 hour ago, brickhistory said:

Flynn was not charged nor plead guilty to perjury.  He was charged with making a false statement to FBI agents.  But the false statement is only a crime if the underlying reason the FBI was interviewing him had a basis in fact for such an investigation.  Which it did not.  According to FBI documents and personnel engaged with this at the time.  That info was never revealed to Flynn or the court, despite it being mandatory to do so and the judge specifically ordering DOJ to provide any such.  Then DOJ scoffed at the notion.

And then the material was released last week.  It was revealed that Flynn's interview basis was not material, therefore the lie (which the agents said they didn't think he was, btw) to the FBI doesn't matter legally.

If he lied to Pence, that's between them.  

Both sides agreed to drop the case.

The judge is now making up a charge of perjury to the court because Flynn pled guilty to the court.  Twice.  The judge seems to think that's perjury.

Not a lawyer, but I'm fairly sure that this isn't the first time a defendant has made a guilty plea only to seek to withdraw it later.

And the de facto prosecutor that the judge has appointed was a co-author of a very anti-Flynn and DOJ op-ed in Monday's Washington Post.

Doesn't seem to be a disinterested party.

Shenanagins on the part of the judge and most likely to be stomped on at appeal.

Well, he allegedly perjured himself to the judge in question by pleading guilty, which he did twice under oath, to lying. Now he's saying he never lied. So, he's either lying then (that he never lied) or he's lying now. That's what the judge wants to know by appointing a former federal judge to investigate if there's probably cause to charge him with contempt/perjury. Considering arguendo, if the FBI interview "had no basis" then why would he:

1. Talk to them

2. Lie to them

If the lie doesn't matter legally, then why is the judge considering a contempt/perjury charge? And as for the "de facto prosecutor" you mean retired federal judge? He seems about as a disinterested party as the AG who was appointed by a president, confirmed by the majority of the president's political party in the Senate, who then dismissed criminal charges against the president's former pick as the National Security Council, even though the accused plead guilty twice in federal court to lying.

 

[TreeA10]

A couple aspects of this whole debacle that still needs some daylight.  I'm not a lawyer nor have I stayed at a Holiday Inn express but A) a form is required to request unmasking and on that form a reason must be stated.  Samatha Power, US Ambassador to the UN testified under oath that she knew nothing of unmasking  is shown to have made 7 unmasking requests.  Why did she lie and why did she make the requests?  Why did Biden make a request 8 days prior to leaving office?  B)  2 FBI agents conduct interviews.  One agent asks questions and the other FBI agent makes notes during interviews and those notes are documented in something called a 302.  Only the note taking agent, normally, making the notes edits the 302.  However, in Flynns case, other agents, inluding Strzok, and his paramour, the Lawyer Page, apparently made edits.  Where is the original stating they didn't think Flynn was lying and who made edits?