DOJ drops case against Michael Flynn

CS natureboy · May 10, 2020

Obama White House may have seen 'opportunity to disrupt' Flynn, ex-FBI official says
By Victor Garcia | Fox News

Reaction from Kevin Brock, former assistant director of intelligence for the FBI.

It would be "abominable" if the Obama White House was behind the FBI's controversial interview of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, a former assistant director of intelligence for the bureau said Friday night.

Kevin Brock shared his observations during an appearance on Fox News' "The Ingraham Angle," where he responded to reports that former President Barack Obama had claimed the “rule of law is at risk" after the Justice Department dropped its case against Flynn over charges of lying to investigators.

"I think they saw this as an opportunity to disrupt the general. And I think what we have to find out [is...] -- this is critically important -- did the FBI conduct this interview at the behest of the White House or was it motivated by their own now well-established personal biases and prejudices against the president?" Brock told guest host Raymond Arroyo.

"That has to be determined. If it's the former ... Well, if it's either, it's abominable."

“The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed -- about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn,” Obama said, according to Yahoo! News, in a web talk with members of the Obama Alumni Association.

“And the fact that there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free," Obama reportedly said. "That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic -- not just institutional norms -- but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk."

Yahoo! News, in reporting the tape, noted that Obama incorrectly states the charges against Flynn, who was not charged with perjury. Instead, Flynn pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in the transition period between the Obama and Trump administrations. But Flynn’s supporters have long argued that the FBI set a perjury trap for Flynn.

Brock disagreed with Obama's alleged comments.

"My response to that is the abrogation of the rule of law was conducting an investigation that was not legally predicated," Brock said. "So if I go in and I talk you, Raymond, about something... that's not a federal crime as an FBI agent and I accuse you of doing it and I have proof that you did it, but it's not a federal crime... and you lie to me. There's no materiality there because there's no reason for me to be investigating in the first place."

New details emerged this week about what Obama himself knew at the time of the Flynn case. Obama warned the Trump administration against hiring Flynn and said he was “not a fan” of the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

ace's n 8's · May 10, 2020

CS natureboy said: ↑

Obama White House may have seen 'opportunity to disrupt' Flynn, ex-FBI official says
By Victor Garcia | Fox News
Reaction from Kevin Brock, former assistant director of intelligence for the FBI.

It would be "abominable" if the Obama White House was behind the FBI's controversial interview of former national security adviser Michael Flynn, a former assistant director of intelligence for the bureau said Friday night.

Kevin Brock shared his observations during an appearance on Fox News' "The Ingraham Angle," where he responded to reports that former President Barack Obama had claimed the “rule of law is at risk" after the Justice Department dropped its case against Flynn over charges of lying to investigators.

"I think they saw this as an opportunity to disrupt the general. And I think what we have to find out [is...] -- this is critically important -- did the FBI conduct this interview at the behest of the White House or was it motivated by their own now well-established personal biases and prejudices against the president?" Brock told guest host Raymond Arroyo.

"That has to be determined. If it's the former ... Well, if it's either, it's abominable."

“The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed -- about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn,” Obama said, according to Yahoo! News, in a web talk with members of the Obama Alumni Association.

“And the fact that there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free," Obama reportedly said. "That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic -- not just institutional norms -- but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk."

Yahoo! News, in reporting the tape, noted that Obama incorrectly states the charges against Flynn, who was not charged with perjury. Instead, Flynn pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador in the transition period between the Obama and Trump administrations. But Flynn’s supporters have long argued that the FBI set a perjury trap for Flynn.

Brock disagreed with Obama's alleged comments.

"My response to that is the abrogation of the rule of law was conducting an investigation that was not legally predicated," Brock said. "So if I go in and I talk you, Raymond, about something... that's not a federal crime as an FBI agent and I accuse you of doing it and I have proof that you did it, but it's not a federal crime... and you lie to me. There's no materiality there because there's no reason for me to be investigating in the first place."

New details emerged this week about what Obama himself knew at the time of the Flynn case. Obama warned the Trump administration against hiring Flynn and said he was “not a fan” of the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.
Click to expand...

Taken from this article:

"My response to that is the abrogation of the rule of law was conducting an investigation that was not legally predicated," Brock said. "So if I go in and I talk you, Raymond, about something... that's not a federal crime as an FBI agent and I accuse you of doing it and I have proof that you did it, but it's not a federal crime... and you lie to me. There's no materiality there because there's no reason for me to be investigating in the first place."
Click to expand...

Is this not essentially the same damn thing that all of the leftists were doing at various state-run leftist News sources during interviews?...just talking?...claiming that Trump is conspiring with Russia to get elected, as they were lying their ass's off?....When will they be convicted of a crime?

Dearelliot · May 10, 2020

How are the Trump people doing with indictments, Indictments as opposed to having Trump shills broadcast lies and stories, I don't mean the Republican definition of indictments! What's the count I haven't read the paper this morning, Any FBI people in prison, Hillary, Comey, any of them set up a defense fund, contacted the DNC for money for legal cost? Seems its pretty one sided, what a difference between parties when it comes down to talk, or action. Well to be fair the Trump people are working day and night to try to free the convicted republican criminals. you have to give them that .

stumbler · May 10, 2020

Trump’s former acting assistant AG issues scathing editorial against Bill Barr for ‘twisting my words’ about Flynn

In a shocking editorial with the New York Times, Mary B. McCord, the acting assistant attorney general for national security at the Justice Department from 2016 to 2017, said that Attorney General Bill Barr twisted her words to justify letting Michael Flynn off.

Writing Sunday, McCord noted that the move by the Justice Department to dismiss charges against Flynn because prosecuting him “would not serve the interests of justice.”

After a decades-long career under both GOP and Democratic presidents, McCord said the “302” report shows the disagreements among the leadership about how to handle Flynn’s illegal actions.

“But the report of my interview is no support for Mr. Barr’s dismissal of the Flynn case. It does not suggest that the FBI. had no counterintelligence reason for investigating Mr. Flynn,” wrote McCord. “It does not suggest that the FBI’s interview of Mr. Flynn — which led to the false-statements charge — was unlawful or unjustified. It does not support that Mr. Flynn’s false statements were not material. And it does not support the Justice Department’s assertion that the continued prosecution of the case against Mr. Flynn, who pleaded guilty to knowingly making material false statements to the FBI, ‘would not serve the interests of justice.'”

She explained why, using only the documents the government has filed in court or released publicly.

“Notably, Mr. Barr’s motion to dismiss does not argue that the FBI. violated the Constitution or statutory law when agents interviewed Mr. Flynn about his calls with Mr. Kislyak,” she said. “It doesn’t claim that they violated his Fifth Amendment rights by coercively questioning him when he wasn’t free to leave. Nor does the motion claim that the interview was the fruit of a search or seizure that violated the Fourth Amendment. Any of these might have justified moving to dismiss the case. But by the government’s own account, the interview with Mr. Flynn was voluntary, arranged in advance, and took place in Mr. Flynn’s own office.”

She said that without violations of the Constitution or statues, the Barr-Shea motion is a “contorted argument” that Flynn lying wasn’t important to the case, so it doesn’t matter.

“Materiality is an essential element that the government must establish to prove a false-statements offense. If the falsehoods aren’t material, there’s no crime,” she explained.

Barr’s “materiality theory” is concocted by saying the FBI shouldn’t have been investigating Flynn in the first place. The DOJ claims that the FBI opened an investigation into Flynn in 2016 as part of the investigation into Trump and the Russia scandal, and it intended to close it in early Jan. 2017 until the conversation occurred where Flynn told Kislyak they’d be relaxing sanctions against Russia for election intrusion.

“Discounting the broader investigation and the possibility of Russian direction or control over Mr. Flynn, the department’s motion myopically hones in on the calls alone, and because it views those calls as ‘entirely appropriate,’ it concludes the investigation should not have been extended, and the interview should not have taken place,” said McCord.

Nothing she said in her account supports the DOJ’s conclusion, McCord explained. “It is disingenuous for the department to twist my words to suggest that it does.”

The account of her interview is a difference of opinion about what to do about Flynn lying to incoming Vice President Mike Pence and others in the administration. Such a lie opens Flynn up to being blackmailed by any government who threatened to out him for the lie.

“This is where the FBI disagreed with the Justice Department’s preferred approach,” wrote McCord. “The FBI wasn’t ready to reveal this information to the incoming administration right away, preferring to keep investigating, not only as part of its counterintelligence investigation but also possibly as a criminal investigation. Although several of us at Justice thought the likelihood of a criminal prosecution under the Logan Act was quite low (the act prohibits unauthorized communications with foreign governments to influence their conduct in relation to disputes with the United States), we certainly agreed that there was a counterintelligence threat.”

That’s why they were so eager to warn the incoming administration about the dangerous situation they were in with Flynn as the new Director of National Intelligence.

“By the time Justice Department leadership found out, agents were en route to the interview in Mr. Flynn’s office,” she explained.

Her July 2017 interview was about her frustration with the FBI’s conduct using language like “flabbergasted” to describe the reactions. They weren’t necessarily opposed to the interview with Flynn, and it was more about notification than anything. She also said that interviews with Flynn should have been at the Justice Department, not the White House. There are protocols that should have been followed, and she said former FBI Director James Comey didn’t. Nor was the DOJ consulted.

“The Barr-Shea motion to dismiss refers to my descriptions of the FBI’s justification for not wanting to notify the new administration about the potential Flynn compromise as ‘vacillating from the potential compromise of a ‘counterintelligence’ investigation to the protection of a purported ‘criminal’ investigation,'” McCord quoted. “But that ‘vacillation’ has no bearing on whether the FBI was justified in engaging in a voluntary interview with Mr. Flynn. It has no bearing on whether Mr. Flynn’s lies to the FBI were material to its investigation into any links or coordination between Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election.”

More significant, however, it also has no bearing on whether Flynn’s lies to the FBI were material to the situation put himself in when he lied to Pence and the rest of the administration.

“In short,” she closed, “the report of my interview does not anywhere suggest that the FBI’s interview of Mr. Flynn was unconstitutional, unlawful, or not ‘tethered’ to any legitimate counterintelligence purpose.”

Read the full editorial at the New York Times.
Click to expand...

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/tr...-bill-barr-for-twisting-my-words-about-flynn/

deleted user 555 768 · May 11, 2020

The deep state was deep enough to reach the top
------------------------------------
President Obama was in on plot to 'frame' Flynn, attorney says

Michael Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell joins ‘Sunday Morning Futures.’

Former National Security Adviser Gen. Michael Flynn's lead attorney accused top officials of orchestrating a plot to frame her client, insisting that former President Barack Obama himself was in on it.

Flynn had initially pleaded guilty to providing a false statement to the FBI regarding his contact with a Russian ambassador, but later changed his story and pushed back by questioning the FBI's tactics.

"These agents specifically schemed and planned with each other how to not tip him off, that he was even the person being investigated," Powell told Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures," pointing to evidence that FBI agents took a casual approach with Flynn, not telling him they were investigating him and not warning him that it would be a federal crime to lie during their conversation.

"So they kept him relaxed and unguarded deliberately as part of their effort to set him up and frame him," Powell said.

According to recently released testimony, President Obama revealed during an Oval Office meeting weeks before the interview that he knew about Flynn's phone call with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, apparently surprising then-Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates.

After the meeting, Obama asked Yates and then-FBI Director James Comey to "stay behind." Obama "specified that he did not want any additional information on the matter, but was seeking information on whether the White House should be treating Flynn any differently, given the information."

"The whole thing was orchestrated and set up within the FBI, [former Director of National Intelligence James] Clapper, [Former CIA Director John] Brennan, and in the Oval Office meeting that day with President Obama," Powell said.

When asked if she believes that Flynn was the victim of a plot that went all the way up to Obama, Powell said, "Absolutely."

As far as whether anyone will face charges over this, and, if so, who, Powell simply said it will be up to Attorney General Bill Barr and Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham, who has been investigating the origins of the Russia probe.

Powell said she believes the judge will sign off on Flynn's charges being dismissed as soon as Monday.

deleted user 555 768 · May 11, 2020

stumbler said: ↑

scathing editorial against Bill Barr for ‘twisting my words’ about Flynn
Click to expand...

Dastardly thing twisting someones words, inst it stumbles?

stumbler · May 11, 2020

Adam Schiff says Trump is trying to convince Americans ‘not to believe the transcripts’ of Russian scandal

Speaking to MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) said that the White House and President Donald Trump are trying to tell Americans not to believe what they read in the transcripts that were finally released from the House Intelligence Committee on Thursday.

“It’s pathetic, not surprising, but pathetic, the degree to which the vice president will mimic anything the president says,” said Schiff. “Apparently it’s not the vice president’s view a national security advisor that lies to him about contacts he’s having with the Russians, that’s perfectly fine, he’d be happy to have him around.”

“Let’s not forget what the lies were about,” Schiff continued. “The Russians interfered in our election in 2016 to help elect Donald Trump, and shortly thereafter, Barack Obama imposed sanctions on the Russians for interfering in our democracy. And then Mike Flynn has a conversation with the Russians and reportedly told the Russians, ‘don’t react to these sanctions.’ The implication being, ‘we’re going to make this problem go away.’ After all, we know the Russians helped elect Donald Trump, and this is what he lied about. He lied about those conversations with the Russians that were meant to undermine the sanctions imposed on their interference in our democracy.”

Schiff said that Attorney General Bill Barr says that the lies don’t matter.

“That’s breathtaking,” he continued. “Now, they couldn’t say he didn’t lie because he pled guilty repeatedly. He also said in his plea these were material lies, and so far now Bill Barr to do the president’s bidding, for Mike Pence to echo the president’s attempt to rewrite history is a full-scale assault on the rule of law. And it’s so discouraging for this former Justice Department, former USA.”

Watch below:
Click to expand...

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/ad...o-believe-the-transcripts-of-russian-scandal/

deleted user 555 768 · May 11, 2020

stumbler said: ↑

Adam Schiff says Trump is trying to convince Americans ‘not to believe the transcripts’ of Russian scandal
Click to expand...

Is that the same Adam Schiff that said he had direct evidence of collusion, the same Adam Schiff who lied about a conversation Trump had,
the same Adam Schiff who held back Justice dept transcripts as long as he could to prevent exposure of the phony lying impeachment process, that Adam Schiff...may be you should check your source, never been known for their accuracy ya know

Truthful 1 · May 11, 2020

Poor Flynn they fucked his life up, any not one fucking scumbag is going to pay for it . All of the totally guilty. Tons of evidence, and the fuckers will walk free . And still have jobs . Making great money . They win as always .

ace's n 8's · May 11, 2020

Truthful 1 said: ↑

Poor Flynn they fucked his life up, any not one fucking scumbag is going to pay for it . All of the totally guilty. Tons of evidence, and the fuckers will walk free . And still have jobs . Making great money . They win as always .
Click to expand...

Whoa...whoa...whoa...

Settle down...not over yet.

ace's n 8's · May 11, 2020

Vice President Pence signals support for Flynn’s return to Trump admin.

Vice President Mike Pence has said he would be happy to welcome General Michael Flynn back to the White House. During a recent interview, he announced he would support Flynn’s return to the administration.

President Trump also appeared to agree and has said he would certainly consider it.

This came after the Justice Department dropped its case against Flynn this week. Both Pence and the president have praised Flynn’s character and condemned the case against him as partisan entrapment.

Dearelliot · May 11, 2020

Anyone wondering why guilty people are still walking the streets could ask has Fox news people and the Republican congressmen been lying about these people as a means of trying to misdirect the real evidence the people are hearing about our conniving treacherous president,
Better wake up and smell the coffee guys you have been lied to by your own party. Pay attention to who goes to trial and who doesn't! A few here love to post up the wanted posters Hillary, Comey et al, to wave the flag, they do it daily here. but alas no indictments nada...
Just proves you cant trust the Republican party anymore!

conroe4 · May 11, 2020

Pay attention to the headlines about your man they are going downhill fast.
That conniving thief will be sinking.

Heard this for the past 4 years. Stumbles, got ya a new sock, didja? lol

Dearelliot · May 11, 2020

Four years of not allowing anyone to testify, hiding behind lawyers, as we all know he has and does! Well the ol con man got the AG and senate in his pocket so the people will do their job in November, then you guys get to cry real tears when the truths and indictments come out like snowflakes falling, it wont be all make believe BS like with Trump

conroe4 · May 11, 2020

Heard it for 4 years now, SOS, DD.

It's coming, wait for it, pay attention to the headlines folks. Trump's going down!!!

Dearelliot · May 11, 2020

did you ever hear that about Hillary?

stumbler · May 11, 2020

shy guy said: ↑

Is that the same Adam Schiff that said he had direct evidence of collusion, the same Adam Schiff who lied about a conversation Trump had,
the same Adam Schiff who held back Justice dept transcripts as long as he could to prevent exposure of the phony lying impeachment process, that Adam Schiff...may be you should check your source, never been known for their accuracy ya know
Click to expand...

The obvious liar is you @shy guy.

Prosecutor who quit DOJ over handling of Roger Stone blasts Flynn dismissal

A career prosecutor who resigned from the Department of Justice (DOJ) over its handling of President Trump’s longtime ally Roger Stone broke his silence Monday to denounce the DOJ’s recent move to drop charges against former Trump adviser Michael Flynn.

Jonathan Kravis was a member of the four-person prosecution team that withdrew from Stone’s case earlier this year after top DOJ officials overruled career prosecutors to seek a lighter sentence against Stone. Kravis took the extraordinary step of quitting the department entirely.

On Monday he commented publicly for the first time about his decision to leave the DOJ, highlighting what he sees as an alarming trend of the department putting “political patronage ahead of its commitment to the rule of law.”

“I feel compelled to write because I believe that the department’s handling of these matters is profoundly misguided, because my colleagues who still serve the department are duty-bound to remain silent and because I am convinced that the department’s conduct in the Stone and Flynn cases will do lasting damage to the institution,” Kravis wrote in a Washington Post op-ed.

Kravis and the other prosecutors who secured Stone’s conviction for lying to Congress and witness tampering recommended in February that Stone be sentenced to between seven and nine years in prison. But after top department officials intervened to ask the judge to impose a sentence that was "far less," the prosecution team withdrew, a move that was widely assumed to have been done in protest.

Kravis, in his op-ed, removed all doubt about his motivation for leaving — and for breaking his silence.

“At the time, I thought that the handling of the Stone case, with senior officials intervening to recommend a lower sentence for a longtime ally of President Trump, was a disastrous mistake that the department would not make again,” he wrote. “I was wrong.”

The former prosecutor went on to blast DOJ’s decision to drop the case against Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, despite Flynn having pleaded guilty to lying to federal agents. Former federal prosecutors broadly criticized the decision and administration critics saw the move as yet more evidence of DOJ’s politicization under Attorney General William Barr.

Kravis called the development in Flynn’s case “an equally appalling chapter” to the handling of Stone’s case that prompted his departure.

The cases quickly drew comparisons, particularly after career prosecutor Brandon Van Grack, who had helped secure Flynn’s plea agreement, abruptly withdrew from the case, without explanation, less than an hour before DOJ moved to drop the charges. He reportedly also withdrew from other cases, but has not resigned.

Kravis said he was speaking out in part because rank-and-file prosecutors cannot.

“The dedicated public servants who remain cannot respond publicly to those who claim that the department acted appropriately in these cases. But I can, and I say this,” Kravis wrote. “If the department truly acted because of good-faith commitments to legal positions, then where is the evidence of those commitments in other cases that do not involve friends of the president?”
Click to expand...

https://thehill.com/regulation/4970...andling-of-roger-stone-blasts-flynn-dismissal

deleted user 555 768 · May 11, 2020

stumbler said: ↑

The obvious liar is you @shy guy.
Click to expand...

Be nice Bumbles, play fair, ...and dont ruin my good name,

stumbler · May 11, 2020

shy guy said: ↑

Be nice Bumbles, play fair, ...and dont ruin my good name,
Click to expand...

Your good name is phony lying woman hating non-fucker. As I have consistently proven.

shootersa · May 11, 2020

This from rear admiral butt nugget, the forum hater and lie spreader.

Log in or Sign up

CS natureboy Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

Dearelliot Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

deleted user 555 768 Porn Star Banned!

deleted user 555 768 Porn Star Banned!

stumbler Porn Star

deleted user 555 768 Porn Star Banned!

Truthful 1 coal fired windmills Banned!

ace's n 8's Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

Dearelliot Porn Star

conroe4 Lake Lover In XNXX Heaven

Dearelliot Porn Star

conroe4 Lake Lover In XNXX Heaven

Dearelliot Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

deleted user 555 768 Porn Star Banned!

stumbler Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

DOJ drops case against Michael Flynn

nproxy.org

Log in or Sign up

CS natureboy Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

Dearelliot Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

deleted user 555 768 Porn Star Banned!

deleted user 555 768 Porn Star Banned!

stumbler Porn Star

deleted user 555 768 Porn Star Banned!

Truthful 1 coal fired windmills Banned!

ace's n 8's Porn Star

ace's n 8's Porn Star

Dearelliot Porn Star

conroe4 Lake Lover In XNXX Heaven

Dearelliot Porn Star

conroe4 Lake Lover In XNXX Heaven

Dearelliot Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

deleted user 555 768 Porn Star Banned!

stumbler Porn Star

shootersa Frisky Feline

Useful Searches

nproxy.org