Flynn was framed!!!

[Jacuzzme]

Or the part about the government’s unlimited resources. Flynn wasn’t the first guy to throw in the towel or be financially ruined, and he won’t be the last. I like his new lawyer, she’s great, but if she’s not free then I still think the President should pardon him. He’s suffered enough, it’s time to call bullshit.

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

No, it still doesn't matter.

The narrative involved is Flynn's. He confessed.

The only thing we know about the new evidence is the defense attorney claims it shows Flynn was set-up.

Not sure how Flynn calling the Russian embassy, discussing the sanctions with the ambassador, and then lying about discussing the sanctions to the FBI is a setup. He did all that himself.
The call was recorded. No indication there was or was not a Logan violation.
Moot point. He was charged with lying about the subject he discussed, not the details of the subject he discussed.
He admitted lying to Pence and the FBI.

Hope you knew someone would point out you're the one denying the facts as they are currently known. You're naysaying the fact he admitted guilt.
Flynn is trying to pull his plea because his new attorney thinks they've found a technicality.

I guess we'll see. If he gets off he gets off.

In the meantime, Flynn remains a convicted felon.

The only triumph so far is justice.

Yes, he admitted guilt just like many people do even though they believe they are innocent because the FBI threatened to go after his son and keep coming after him until he is bankrupt, a known tactic of law enforcement.


But I would like to know if you think his speaking to the Russian Ambassador was in fact illegal and a violation of the Logan Act just out of curiosity because I don't believe it was.


I was hoping that an interview with Andrew McCarthy tonight on Tucker Carlson would be up on his sight but it isn't, maybe it will be up tomorrow.


The interesting point made is that the FBI, Peter Strzok doing the interview, had the transcript of the call so they knew exactly what was said. If they thought he had violated the Logan Act, why not arrest him right the? Why? My theory and McCarthy's who has done such interviews asked why they didn't say to Flynn "you said this and this, what did you mean by that" and give him a chance to explain but if you wanted to set a perjury trap which seems to have been the intent all along, you would question in hopes that he would say something different than what he said on the call and then you have him for saying something different and call that lying. They wanted Flynn gone, that was obvious from the beginning and it appears that the FBI set out to do just that.


https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/...he-flynn-case/


This goes to the point I’ve been pressing for years. There was no good-faith basis for an investigation of General Flynn. Under federal law, a false statement made to investigators is not actionable unless it is material. That means it must be pertinent to a matter that is properly under investigation. If the FBI did not have a legitimate investigative basis to interview Flynn, then that fact should have been disclosed as exculpatory information. It would have enabled his counsel to argue that any inaccurate statements he made were immaterial.




And that is far from the end of the matter.
As I’ve noted several times over the years, it has long been speculated that Flynn — though he did not believe he was guilty (and though the agents who interviewed him also did not believe he had intentionally misled them) — nevertheless pled guilty to false-statements charges because prosecutors from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s staff threatened him. Specifically, Flynn is said to have been warned that, if he refused to plead guilty, prosecutors would charge his son with a felony for failing to register with the Justice Department as a foreign agent. Such a so-called FARA violation (Foreign Agent Registration Act) is a crime that the DOJ almost never charged before the Mueller investigation, and it had dubious application to Flynn’s son (who worked for Flynn’s private-intelligence firm).


Well, Powell now contends that the new disclosures demonstrate that Mueller’s prosecutors — she specifically cites Brandon Van Grack, who now runs Justice’s FARA unit — did indeed promise Flynn that they would not charge his son if Flynn pled guilty. Worse, Powell avers that the prosecutors coerced Flynn and his counsel to keep this agreement secret. That is, this was to be a side deal that would not be written into the plea agreement and therefore would be kept from the court and the public.


Under federal law, all understandings that are relevant to a guilty plea must be disclosed to the judge. It would be not merely a serious ethical breach for government lawyers to fail to reveal such an arrangement. It would be a fraud on the court.


Of course, if a deal of the kind Powell is alleging had been disclosed, it would have illustrated the hardball that Mueller and his band of activist Democratic prosecutors were playing in an effort to nail President Trump. You’re stunned to hear it, I’m sure.
There is going to be more on this. But a few more points should be made.


First, Sidney Powell had nothing to do with negotiating Flynn’s guilty plea. To the contrary, she has been intrepid in investigating whether that plea was induced by prosecutorial misconduct. Flynn was originally represented by the very politically connected Washington firm of Covington & Burling. The firm’s performance has already raised questions: They counseled Flynn on his FARA submissions, filing the FARA documents with the DOJ on his behalf; and they also represented him in his plea negotiations with Mueller’s staff, which involved the integrity of these same FARA filings. That’s a conflict of interest, and though the DOJ maintains that Flynn waived it, there is a question about whether such a conflict is waivable. Now comes the claim about a side deal not to prosecute Flynn’s son. Let’s stress that nothing has been proved at this point. But if Covington’s lawyers colluded with government lawyers to make such a deal and conceal it from the court, that would raise very serious legal and ethical issues.


Second, the Flynn case is so patently disturbing that, weeks back, Attorney General Bill Barr assigned a very well-regarded prosecutor, St. Louis’s U.S. attorney Jeff Jensen, to review it. The new disclosures are a result of Jensen’s investigation. The Justice Department’s disclosure to Ms. Powell indicates that more revelations are forthcoming.


Third, Powell’s litigation on Flynn’s behalf has always been uphill — which is why she is to be lauded for pursuing it. The remedy for being bullied into a guilty plea is for the defendant to be permitted to withdraw his plea and fight the charges. In Flynn’s case, that has been an illusory remedy. He must fear that if he voided his agreement and withdrew his plea, prosecutors would be free to charge his son (and to add any new charges they could conjure up against Flynn himself). Confronted by this dilemma, Powell has pressed a daring strategy: try to so enrage the court about the misconduct that the judge would throw the case out rather than merely vacate the guilty plea and leave Flynn fighting the case from square one.


I still do not think, as a matter of law, that a court is going to find that the conduct requires dismissing the indictment — tempted as I might be, if I were the judge. More likely, a good judge would vacate the plea and put the ball in the Justice Department’s court. Does the DOJ really think this case could be prosecuted — or, more to the point, that it should be prosecuted? That it should have been charged in the first place?

57

As I’ve said on other occasions, Flynn should never have been prosecuted, and President Trump should long ago have pardoned him. But that’s water under the bridge. For General Flynn, it would probably be best if the court vacated the plea and the Justice Department then dropped the charges.
Finally, in Ball of Collusion, I included a section about the serial outrages in the baseless investigation of General Flynn, a decorated combat commander. We are going to run it at National Review. I concluded by opining that what happened to Flynn was deeply wrong but not illegal. The new disclosures may call for revisiting the latter conclusion.

[HedonistForever]

Here is the interview with Andy McCarthy I referred to. The interview starts at 2:30


https://video.foxnews.com/v/61524705...#sp=show-clips

[matchingmole]

Fox "News"




lol

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

I can see by the one meme you post over and over again, that you are telling us you can't think, you can only make an ass of yourself which you see as funny like the class clown who has nothing to say and knows it...

Leave the debating to those interested in it and take your "class clown act" somewhere it is appreciated like the toilet you seem so enamored with.

Originally Posted by matchingmole

Fox "News"

lol

The class clown prefers the Anderson pooper...

[lustylad]

I love Sidney Powell!

Carolina girl. Chapel Hill educated. And she scares the shit out of Andrew Weissman.

She neutered Mueller's "bulldog".


https://heavy.com/news/2019/06/sidney-powell/

[matchingmole]

Originally Posted by lustylad

The class clown prefers the Anderson pooper...

[lustylad]

Hey class clown - here's another one to add to your collection.

[Tsmokies]

All of the trumps criminal buddies were framed lol, or knew he was a fukn Moran. Too many to count though

[bambino]

Originally Posted by Tsmokies

All of the trumps criminal buddies were framed lol, or knew he was a fukn Moran. Too many to count though

What’s a “Moran”?

[nevergaveitathought]

george "bugs" moran

died of lung cancer while incarcerated at Leavenworth

man, I thought everyone knew that

[bambino]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

george "bugs" moran

died of lung cancer while incarcerated at Leavenworth

man, I thought everyone knew that

He didn’t say Bugsie

[oeb11]

Benjamin Siegel hated that nickname. Folks feared to use it to his face.

[oeb11]

LL- You may well have a patentable - maybe - but a saleable idea there.

The "Pelosi" lid!!!

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by oeb11

LL- You may well have a patentable - maybe - but a saleable idea there.

The "Pelosi" lid!!!

Sissy chap owns one. Every time he takes a poop he fantasizes about receiving TUMA from Nancy P!