Federal Judge In Sentencing General Flynn Drops Bombshell On FBI!

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by federalist50, Dec 15, 2018.

  1. federalist50

    federalist50 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2016
    Messages:
    887
    Likes Received:
    602
    Trophy Points:
    93
    The judge in the sentencing of General Flynn discovered that the required F302's of the interview with General Flynn that took place in January of 2017 were dated August 22, 2017. Therefore he demanded that the FBI submit all 302's for his review. The FBI essentially set Flynn up by telling him he didn't need his lawyer and that it was just a conversation and not that he was under investigation! The take away from this is never, ever talk to a federal prosecutor or the FBI without an attorney present!

    This is the same judge who threw out a conviction of Alaska republican Senator Ted Stevens when it was discovered that the prosecutors convinced the contractor who did remodeling of his house in the amount of $150,000 to lie and back their claim that Stevens did not pay for the renovations. Wait, it gets better, two of the prosecutor on that case now work for, wait for it, yep, Robert Mueller. Who was the FBI director during that investigation/prosecution? Yep, Robert Mueller! Andrew Weissmann is Muller's bit bull. This guy had two convictions of people he prosecuted and sent to prison over turned because he withheld exculpatory evidence from defense attorney's which proved their clients were innocent. One by the circuit court of appeals and one by the Supreme Court by a 9-0 vote! How often does that happen? Why he still has a license to practice law on Mueller hired him for the Russian investigation is a mystery to me. So much for honesty and integrity of the FBI and DOJ!

    http://thefederalist.com/2018/12/13...opped-major-bombshell/?utm_campaign=ACTENGAGE
     
  2. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    ER, not to put too fine a point on it, but are you trying to posit that the National Security Advisor of the United States could be set up to lie because the two FBI agents he was being interviewed by didn't tell him its a crime to lie to them?

    Yep, how was Flynn to know he was committing a crime when he lied? I mean he was only the NSA, the former head of DIA and a three star general. Nope, it was a frame job because the agents didn't warn him not to lie.

    kinda reminds me of that famous courtroom scene:

    Captain Queeg:
    Ahh, but the strawberries that's... that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic... that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist, and I'd have produced that key if they hadn't of pulled the Caine out of action. I, I, I know now they were only trying to protect some fellow officers...
     
    TomFitz, Lee Atwater and Bowerbird like this.
  3. RodB

    RodB Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    22,358
    Likes Received:
    11,141
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No real mystery. Mueller knows how good a conniving pit bull Weissmann is.
     
  4. RodB

    RodB Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    22,358
    Likes Received:
    11,141
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not sure what you are implying, but Flynn felt no need to be precise and exact about dates, times, specific words in a non-investigative interview with the FBI or anyone else. He was certain the FBI just wanted a general briefing on some of his Russian contacts -- all quite normal. But little did Flynn know that the FBI possessed illegally obtained transcripts of the exact conversations he had with the ambassador. That by itself would have been thrown out of a court in normal jurisprudence.
     
  5. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,132
    Likes Received:
    16,079
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Once you read the details, it is scary to see what these investigators have done. I've been thinking that the judge is likely to overturn Flynn's conviction; possibly have some contempt or other charges for the prosecutors and investigators. I'm not sure if there is recourse or where it is in this situation, but it would seem reasonable for Flynn to then file suit or claims against the investigators for the violation of his rights, and ask for recovery of all the costs of defending himself, which were enough that he lost his home to them. Like to see some genuine justice for a change.
     
    drluggit, jay runner, Stevew and 2 others like this.
  6. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They were not illegally obtained. They were part of an ongoing counter intelligence operation, or do you think Kysliak is treated as a us citizen when it comes to surveillance?

    As for Flynn being casual. You lie you lie, regardless of the setting, but I can see how you want to dismiss his mendacity as no big deal. Apparently neither the FBI, the DOJ, the judge nor Flynn agree with you. But of course you know best. I suggest you jump on a plane to DC and sort those clowns out.
     
    Lee Atwater likes this.
  7. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    there is no recourse. Flynn pleaded guilty. In order to do that he had to submit an elocution in which he clearly admits his guilt of the crime. That's how it works.

    What's even more mind boggling is that Flynn employed lawyers who were so incompetent that they missed this whole ridiculous squirrel about an original interview form. Especially when there are so many other non-lawyers that can clearly see how Flynn was the total victim of a deep state criminal conspiracy to exact justice from the guilty.
     
  8. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,560
    Likes Received:
    16,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You familiar with Miranda? This is a clear violation of that precedent. This is why the judge is torqued and rightly so. And please note the interviewers said they didn't think Flynn was lying. The crucial point isn't whether what Flynn said was correct down to the last detail it is whether or not he knew it wasn't. One can be wrong without necessarily lying.
     
    Stevew and spiritgide like this.
  9. RodB

    RodB Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    22,358
    Likes Received:
    11,141
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Flynn was a US citizen unmasked from a FISA surveillance on the Russian ambassador in direct violation of US law.
     
    spiritgide, Stevew and squidward like this.
  10. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He was being interviewed. He wasn't a criminal suspect at the time, nor was he in custody. Are you familiar with Miranda?

    And its pretty clear from the papers filed which you obviously didn't bother to peruse that Flynn had been CONSTANTLY and REPEATEDLY been lying about what he and Kisylak were discussing, long before the interview.

    But of course the National Security Advisor, the former DIA chief and a retired three star general wouldn't know that anything he said to legal authorities in an official "interview" had better be the truth to the best of his knowledge, is a given in trumpian circles.

    Who knew telling a lie was so complicated?
     
    ronv likes this.
  11. ARDY

    ARDY Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2015
    Messages:
    8,386
    Likes Received:
    1,704
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Lol, that pretty much covers it... not lying to the fbi, what a novel concept....
     
    Jonsa likes this.
  12. petef56

    petef56 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,121
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    63
    That's very close to what they say in this video about our personal encounters with law enforcement. Always use your 5th amendment right because there's absolutely no advantage to giving testimony that will more likely be used against you than to your benefit.

    Taking the 5th, has nothing to do with guilt or innocence. I know Trump has said something contrary to this, but he's dead wrong about that.



    --pete--
     
  13. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sorry but I'm afraid "unmasking" is not illegal if proper procedures are followed. And if an american citizen interacting with the Russian Ambassador and spy master in america isn't good reason to unmask that individual then perhaps you can explain why there is an unmasking process to begin with. You do realize that anyone who does business with a known spy of an adversarial foreign government will be caught up in the routine surveillance of the counter espionage agencies, don't you? That ain't illegal but keep trying to find the crime.

    The fruit of the poison tree defense was trashed long ago as nothing more than obfuscation. Its not the crime or the criminal, its the badges and the lawyers who are trashing the law.
     
  14. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    16,377
    Likes Received:
    7,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I did not see the words 'lawyer' or 'attorney' in those qualifications and as far as I can tell, he never set foot in a law school. It was not in a courtroom. He was not under arrest, nor a suspect. Now I believe he knew he was lying. I believe the elocution may still probably valid. (this is in the hands of the judge and he certainly asked the right questions before he accepted it) But I am not prepared to say that a man who spent his entire adult life and his entire post high school education in the hands of the military, knows what the law is here. But I am pretty sure they did, and if the date on the paperwork is wrong, somebody should be explaining in court out how it got there. If the paperwork is absent, somebody should be explaining in court why it is absent.
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2018
    Giftedone likes this.
  15. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do not agree that a man with that kind of career experience wouldn't know that lying to an FBI agent in an interview isn't a crime. Remember all that lock her up bullshit? He knew because he was accusing hillary of doing what he did.

    I totally agree that there are issues with the submission then they should be explained to the judge. Know many judges that work on friday nights or over the weekend? Not that the lack of opportunity to address issues/questions is in anyway going to stop the trumpettes screaming about witchhunts and nefariousness on the part of meuller and the fbi. Make hay while ye can, I guess.
     
  16. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,470
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Flynn had already lied three times. Flynn was already committed to his lie by the time the FBI spoke to him, observing that Flynn had previously chosen to “make false statements about his communications with the Russian ambassador… when he lied about that topic to the media, the incoming Vice President, and other members of the Presidential Transition Team.” He used the very same story with the FBI agents. That's a felony.

    A lieutenant general and a former director of DIA has to be told that lying to the FBI is a felony? Seriously, do you really think that?

    This is not a bombshell. When it comes to Mueller's report, this issue and what your article said about Weissmann will be totally irrelevant.

    You can't question the investigation itself. So, you and the Freedom Caucus question the investigators. That is a tactic borne of sheer desperation.
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2018
  17. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Mueller clown - at least parts of the investigation - are such an absurd anathema to the basic principles of Justice and the rule of law.

    For example - The head of the NSA lies to congress (felony 1) about en mass spying on US citizens (felony 2). Not only is he not charged and not punished - he keeps his job. At the same time the full power of the State is used to go after those that would out criminal actions in Gov't (and I am talking about those that went through legitimate channels .. not Snowden or Manning).

    Who was it that was going after some of these patriotic citizens who risked much to out Gov't crimes .... one guess .. the last name starts with M.

    Then we have Flynn - who in a situation that was borderline entrapment - in relation to something quite banal - have the full weight of the State thrown at him.

    "Equal Justice Under the Law" anyone ? anyone ? "Hello, Hello" :)
     
  18. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Something quite banal? I mean whats the big deal with a national security advisor who lies to his administration/s legal authorities about his unreported dealings with foreign governments and their agents, prior to his appointment?
     
  19. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,560
    Likes Received:
    16,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nope. Flynn was lied to.
     
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2018
  20. Silver Surfer

    Silver Surfer Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,871
    Likes Received:
    2,233
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The liberal hypocricy at its 'best'.Some serious and monumental lies said by Brennan, Clapper and Comey to both Congress and Senate are perfectly acceptable.On the other hand, some minor lies,most likely because person couldn't remember exact details, are somehow bigger deal than lying to Congress and Senate.Knowingly.Beggars belief!
     
    RodB likes this.
  21. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He did report (as per the post) his dealings and this is very banal in comparison to Clapper lying to congress (felony 1) about an en mass spying on US citizens (felony 2).

    It is further "banal" in that nothing in his conversations - that he said he didn't remember (which was the lie) were criminal in nature .. which matters.

    Perhaps you should try reading a post before giving a knee jerk response consisting of platitudes rather than context.
     
    Silver Surfer likes this.
  22. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    by who?
     
  23. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113
    sure thing. Another complete mystery why all those great legal minds defending such innocent people like Flynn couldn't figure out what you have learned from fox news. Its kinda like why no republican trumpian DOJ prosecutor hasn't struck a grand jury to investigate clinton. Or in your example why clapper wasn't clapped.

    I guess its just a case of gross legal incompetence on all sides, which begs the question, why pay those clowns when there are so many other non lawyers that know what the hell is really going on.
     
  24. Giftedone

    Giftedone Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Messages:
    63,706
    Likes Received:
    13,464
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I did not learn about Clapper on Fox - although I am sure they reported it. Few media outlets did not report it.

    Although I have some legal expertise - none is needed. Clapper lied to congress (felony 1) about en mass spying on US citizens (felony 2).

    I do not have to be a legal expert to know that he was neither charged nor punished for these crimes.

    That you have not figured out that it is common in our system for the Establishment elite to get away with high crimes - is not my fault and it is sure not because of any lack of evidence.
     
    Silver Surfer likes this.
  25. garyd

    garyd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    56,560
    Likes Received:
    16,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    McCabe for openers and Comey who by telling him he didn't need a lawyer also told him that this wasn't an official interview.
     

Share This Page