U.S. judge orders special counsel to turn over evidence on Michael Flynn

Reuters | 12/13/2017 | Sarah Lynch

[itsahoot]

This judge is no doubt waiting for the IG report

The IG report is an updated version of this copout.

I don't comment on open investigations
and everything is under investigation.

[txhurl]

Look at #37?

[Seeking the truth]

Ah the old days....the men in grey suits, purple rage, turtles on fence posts, microphones in the Oval Office walls...etc.

[RitaOK]

Thank you very much! So this’s will go to Flynn defense. I’ve opined that Flynn beats this rap. Weinstein has been overturned on occasions. Why not Strzok and Mueller?

Thanks, sss2.

[Seeking the truth]

Ah the old days....the men in grey suits, purple rage, turtles on fence posts, microphones in the Oval Office walls...etc.

[Repealthe17thAmendment]

Since Flynn has pled guilty, does he still have an opportunity to withdraw his plea? It doesn’t seem like he has expressed an interest in doing that, even though the news has been filled with reasons to question the conviction. My guess is the Mueller is still holding something over him.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks advance_copy.

[DoughtyOne]

“:^)

[RitaOK]

This court thing with the judge calling for Mueller to cough up some documentation on suspicious bias against Flynn by FBI Sp.Counsel may result in something.

Trump does not have to risk impeachment by actually firing Mueller, but he can command information be delivered to other sources, perhaps the Judicial Committee, in the House. I am sorry the President feels boxed in from making commands, when it comes to the Justice Department and this special counsel, Mueller.

Trump is faster than waiting on surrogates to assert themselves and demand answers. I hope this court has clout to cause transparency.

[SSS Two]

So this’s will go to Flynn defense. I’ve opined that Flynn beats this rap.

Yes, you are right. Also note the point made by the OP. I followed a lot of Abramoff-related cases in the DC District Court. Many of those cases resulted in plea deals. I never saw a judge issue a Brady order in a case with a plea deal. Brady material is intended to provide the defense with exculpatory evidence for trial.

[RitaOK]

Amazing. Thank you for that tutorial. Hang around here more often.
Rita

[DoughtyOne]

I agree RitaOK.

I believe in investigations, but I also believe they need to be on the up and up, and not merely gotcha efforts to convict people for process laws so an investigator can claim not to have gone home empty handed.

If a guy is caught in a lie, and there was no criminality to hide, I think a judge should tell the prosecutor to knock it off.

As I understand it, that’s basically what Flynn was taken to task for.

An investigator should not be able to blackmail someone over an immaterial mistake. I would expand that to cover intentional lies too.

Hey, I lied to you. I did nothing wrong. It doesn’t matter because I wasn’t doing it to hide something.

If felt uncomfortable admitting to that, and I lied.

Big deal! Get over it.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

How long can you get away with not talking to the FBI?

[Jim from C-Town]

According to the 5th Amendment, forever.

Ask John & Patsy Ramney.

You are never required to talk to the police, the FBI or any law enforcement agent. EVER.

[Bshaw]

“This is a big deal since the case and conviction may be tainted if the court determines that the surveilled conversations relied on were obtained through a fraudulently obtained FISA warrant, i.e., the FISA application presented to the FISA court included phony dossier facts that the affiant knew or had reason to know was fabricated and thereby perpetrated a fraud on the FISA court.”

Winner, winner chicken dinner!!

I have zero doubt Mueller wants to nail Trump and nail him hard. Unduly hard.

However, at this point in the game, Mueller might be feeling like he’s running out of options to extricate himself, and his team, with their liberty and pensions intact.

I see lots of guilty people in the Special Counsel’s investigation; unfortunately, they all appear to be on his team....

[advance_copy]

Hey, I lied to you. I did nothing wrong. It doesn’t matter because I wasn’t doing it to hide something.

Here's something that could be a real kicker. The "lie" was told back in January. At that time, information was leaking like a sieve from Obama supporters in the deep state, including highly classified secrets.

There was also major "hype" about Russia, Russia, Russia just kicking off then. The NY times had a front page article on the very day of inauguration about investigators "wire tapping" the Trump transition team.

So, Flynn's likely motive for lying was not to prevent himself or anyone else from being charged with anything. Rather, he was lying to prevent the content of his discussion with the Russian ambassador from leaking, which would have touched off huge headlines.

Given that the contents of sensitive negotiations with a major foreign power should not be splattered all over the papers as it was sure to do if it leaked, Flynn was just trying to protect the country. And given what we know now about the FBI agent(s) that interviewed him, he was absolutely right.

[trebb]

Might depend on how bad they lied to him and threatened to get the “deal”...

[DoughtyOne]

Yes, the good old days. Ha!