Michael Flynn: judge pauses justice department effort to dismiss case

Ramble on all you want counsler, lying to federal investigators while they are investigating a case is illegal, period. !!!!!!!!

 

Trump has no power over him. Thats just a fact.

 

He withdrew the plea before sentencing, which is what all the bru-ha-ha is over. He has been told by Trump DOJ that they will drop the charges (because they don't want the conversations to go public), so he attempted to withdraw his plea

 

not according to Barr and his DOJ. But it was under the previous DOJ...hmmmm, wonder why the man charged with doing the illegal bidding of the current POTUS would have the current POTUS DOJ dismiss the charges....hmmmmmm

Stevie Wonder can see that one

 

Original 302 missing and agents said he didn't lie so...

 

I guess you need to make up stories.

 

It's not rambling and your lack of rebuttal of the facts noted. What was the predicate crime he was "lying about"? Where was materiality to a crime? What were they asking they didn't already know? Prove he knowingly told a lie which the FBI at the time did not think he had. It was not an investigatory interview, at least they had told him it was not, quote the law that says I have to tell to truth to FBI agents who are not talking to me about an investigation into any illegality and have told me I don't need a lawyer as it is not an investigation. If a FBI agent asked has the President decided on a tax cut and Flynn knew he had but it was not information they want released yet and he said no could he be charged with a crime? What was the investigative purpose, what was the need to know?

 

Cite that he knew prior to the DOJ announcement.

 

The Judge ruled the transcripts wouldn't go public after he requested them to be...stop makign stuff up

 

Again, you have nothing but ramblings.

 

No according to the two FBI agents that "interviewed" without reading his rights and all the way to Comey.

Illegal biding? Transition teams are just that. They talk to foreign leadership for a reason....

 

He withdrew the plea in part because he found out his legal team ( that helped bankrupt him btw) worked a deal with the prosecution behind his back.... Beyond unethical but you know that does not matter as long as you win right? /facepalm

 

Again you have nothing in rebuttal, dodges noted. Try again

What was the predicate crime he was "lying about"? Where was materiality to a crime? What were they asking they didn't already know? Prove he knowingly told a lie which the FBI at the time did not think he had. It was not an investigatory interview, at least they had told him it was not, quote the law that says I have to tell to truth to FBI agents who are not talking to me about an investigation into any illegality and have told me I don't need a lawyer as it is not an investigation. If a FBI agent asked has the President decided on a tax cut and Flynn knew he had but it was not information they want released yet and he said no could he be charged with a crime? What was the investigative purpose, what was the need to know?

 

Refer to post #211

 

Wait!! Where's the part about his plea being made because his son was waterboarded and his wife had her fingernails pulled out??

As I see it, the only good thing that came out of the Flynn situation is that we know the Logan Act is a toothless law.

As such, I think Biden needs to get on the horn to Iran and NK now (from the Biden Batcave) and start planning for the future...

Let Iran know we would like to re-initiate the Nuclear deal and stuff like that..

 

True & Not True !

Trump can’t fire the judge, but he can Pardon Flynn or anyone else the judge wrongly convicts.

 

Yea, but, but what about OBAMAGATE, the deflection we need to get all the dying and sick people to not pay attention ? We need them looking at Sean Hannity and buying into Obamagate, the biggest Political heist since, well, Russiagate. Can you imagine being poor ole Trump and having to deal with all the PEOPLE and Country's out to get him ?

If it were not for all the money piled on behind these nut jobs, right wing think tanks, Zero Hedge Fake Obama articles from the right wing think tanks pushed off as NEWS. The gullible would be watching real news, the truth. The country and too many really gullible and lets face it, "DUMB" people buy into all these conspiracy theory's. It is sad ! If it were 50 years ago you would have 3 news station and independant news papers making politicians like TRUMP tell the truth.

 

Cite that he didn't....

If you dont think that Flynn and the Trump administration are communicating on this your seriously embarrassing yourself

 

Dude...the Judge order the transcripts publicly released last May...https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...68712a-7825-11e9-bd25-c989555e7766_story.html

a month later, the Judge then did a 180 and said no, they don't need to be made public, what we know about the call already (which is in the Mueller Report) is good enough https://www.foxnews.com/politics/do...of-key-flynn-phone-call-after-all-judge-rules

That was over a year ago...and when Mueller's team was prosecuting him. It wasn't until more idea was revealed and the Mueller holdover removed from the case for contining to not turn over evidence..and that evidence finally come to light that the case was droppped

 

It's your claim not mine, prove it.

 

They withheld it from the Judge.

 

Remember how the Left was so "deeply concerned" and as deeply committed to precedent as they were to #METOO? Yeah, Good Times!

WHEN THE LEFT LOSES AN EDITOR AT ROLLING STONE…Matt Taibbi: Democrats Have Abandoned Civil Liberties.

The Blue Party’s Trump-era Embrace of Authoritarianism Isn’t Just Wrong, it’s a Fatal Political Mistake


​

Circus Sullivan, the judge in the case of former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, is refusing to let William Barr’s Justice Department drop the charge. He’s even thinking of adding more, appointing a retired judge to ask “whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury.”

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.”

 

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 Kislyak calls to leverage a case into existence.

In a secrets-laundering maneuver, some felon first illegally leaked classified details to David Ignatius at the Washington Post, then agents rushed to interview Flynn about the “news.”

“The record of his conversation with Ambassador Kislyak had become widely known in the press,” is how Deputy FBI chief Andrew McCabe put it, euphemistically. “We wanted to sit down with General Flynn and understand, kind of, what his thoughts on that conversation were.”​

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” Obama says we should cheer.

Russiagate cases were often two-level offenses: factually bogus or exaggerated, but also indicative of authoritarian practices. Democrats and Democrat-friendly pundits in the last four years have been consistently unable to register objections on either front.

Flynn’s case fit the pattern. We were told his plea was just the “tip of the iceberg” that would “take the trail of Russian collusion” to the “center of the plot,” i.e. Trump. It turned out he had no deeper story to tell. In fact, none of the people prosecutors tossed in jail to get at the Russian “plot” – some little more than bystanders – had anything to share.

Remember George Papadopoulos, whose alleged conversation about “dirt” on Hillary Clinton with an Australian diplomat created the pretext for the FBI’s entire Trump-Russia investigation? We just found out in newly-released testimony by McCabe that the FBI felt as early as the summer of 2016 that the evidence “didn’t particularly indicate” that Papadopoulos was “interacting with the Russians.”