Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Devin Nunes: John Durham could 'intercede' in Michael Flynn case
washington examiner ^ | 8/2/2020 | daniel Chaitin

Posted on 08/02/2020 1:01:44 PM PDT by bitt

U.S. Attorney John Durham's criminal inquiry into the Russia investigation could disrupt the case against retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, according to a top House Republican.

Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, told Fox Business on Thursday that there are two factors that could shake up the protracted legal fight.

"I think a couple things could intercede here. One could be that Durham or another U.S. attorney comes up with indictments," the California congressman said. "The second thing is that there could be more evidence that could show up."

Durham's investigation, which Democrats fear could amount to an "October surprise," is expected to produce a report by the end of the summer, according to the Justice Department.

A federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., agreed on Thursday to take up the case involving the Justice Department's motion to drop the prosecution of President Trump's former national security adviser. Nunes contended that the court is "overwhelmingly" Democratic and is trying to "stall" with less than 100 days until Election Day.

Flynn, a target of the special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, pleaded guilty in December 2017 to lying to FBI investigators about his conversations with a Russian envoy during the presidential transition period. After changing legal teams, Flynn started to argue this year he was innocent and had been set up by the FBI. The Justice Department then moved to drop the prosecution, but the judge overseeing the case, Emmet Sullivan, has resisted immediately doing so.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Government; Politics/Elections; US: California; US: Connecticut; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: california; connecticut; devinnunes; districtofcolumbia; durham; emmetsullivan; fisa; flynn; johndurham; michaelflynn; mikeflynn; rodrosenstein
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last
To: bitt

Judge Sullivan’s son got into some very real trouble some years ago and someone “connected” got the kid off. Sullivan owes that “someone” some very real favors for keeping the kid out of the slammer and he is trying his damnedest to repay....


21 posted on 08/02/2020 3:18:12 PM PDT by soozla (Truth prevails, regardless of who is willing to accept it ~ now or later.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bitt

Powell needs to be rescued from her shoddy legal representation.

Barr tried it once, but Powell mucked up the case so bad that she gave Sullivan all the legal grounds he needed to look into the case to inquire why Flynn lied under oath.

It looks like Trump will have to rescue her.

There are two reasons Durham will not interfere to help her out. First, on what grounds? And second, why?


22 posted on 08/02/2020 3:44:57 PM PDT by Gratia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bitt; All

Hairface and Billy Bagpipes at The Department of Injustice. We’re looking, listening, examining. F.I.B. is quiet.

Face - Words - Deeds

It’s a BIG club out here, and you’re not in it. 330 million vs. 535++++

We have choices, as do you, every day. Part of the problem or part of the solution?


23 posted on 08/02/2020 4:08:21 PM PDT by PGalt (Past Peak Civilization?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JonPreston

You’re right. Durham is a big nothing burger. There won’t be any indictments and if there is a report it will be full of “maybe”, “kind of”, “not sure”, “couldn’t prove”. Can you imagine being Trump and having to put up with this crap from a feckless GOP and the RATs. I can’t understand why Trump wants this job.


24 posted on 08/02/2020 4:18:38 PM PDT by abbastanza
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bitt
These press stories miss this part:

... the Government has concluded that the interview of Mr. Flynn was untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI's counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn--a no longer justifiably predicated investigation that the FBI had, in the Bureau's own words, prepared to close because it had yielded an "absence of any derogatory information." Ex. 1 at 4, FBI FD-1057 "Closing Communication" Jan. 4, 2017 (emphases added). The Government is not persuaded that the January 24, 2017 interview was conducted with a legitimate investigative basis and therefore does not believe Mr. Flynn's statements were material even if untrue. ...

... there was no question at the FBI as to the content of the calls; the FBI had in its possession word-for-word transcripts of the actual communications between Mr. Flynn and Mr. Kislyak. See Ex. 5 at 3; Ex. 13. at 3. With no dispute as to what was in fact said, there was no factual basis for the predication of a new counterintelligence investigation.

There was no crime. Even if Flynn's plea is taken as "I lied to the FBI," there is no crime.

Gets into the weeds, but Sullivan is aware of the materiality requirement, and he never made a finding that the lie was material.

25 posted on 08/02/2020 4:28:35 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Couldn’t there be some type of charges against Sullivan and his actions?


26 posted on 08/02/2020 4:46:04 PM PDT by Balata (Structure determines Function)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Balata
-- Couldn't there be some type of charges against Sullivan and his actions? --

No. Judges have near perfect absolute immunity for judicial acts, even if undertaken with literal malice. This is an immunity that the judges have given themselves as a class.

Congress could temper this immunity, and exposes judges to criminal and civil charges. One thing that keeps this from happening is courts policing their own, but when the courts fail to do that, action must be taken to correct the problem.

27 posted on 08/02/2020 4:58:55 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: abbastanza

Well said and I agree completely.


28 posted on 08/02/2020 5:22:13 PM PDT by JonPreston (Covid19 is communist Chinese bioweapon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

SCOTUS? Well Roberts would vote with the other Dems against Flynn and his case. Or vote to decline hearing the case.

All of it is just to stall until the election.


29 posted on 08/02/2020 6:33:44 PM PDT by Engedi (SCOTU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: bitt

I think time is just about running out on Durham. The DoJ will not indict anyone connected to politics after Labor Day. They won’t want to be perceived as interfering with an election. Ironic, since the entire case is about the Democrats interfering in the last election.


30 posted on 08/02/2020 6:39:51 PM PDT by Repealthe17thAmendment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repealthe17thAmendment

They’re not indicting anyone of significance because it was Obama running the op


31 posted on 08/02/2020 10:31:13 PM PDT by datricker (the war of 2024 will be fought at 2.4Ghz stock up on aluminium foil now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bitt
Devin Nunes: John Durham could 'intercede' in Michael Flynn case

The question remains "will he"... my guess. NO, he will NOT!

32 posted on 08/02/2020 10:47:54 PM PDT by VideoDoctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lodi90

I expect that Durham will procure indictments and guilty pleas and will issue an interim report to Barr summarizing his work. Three people whom I regard as well-informed and credible — attorney Joe DiGenova, reporter John Soloman, and blogger Sundance at Conservative Tree House — all broadly indicate as much. And perhaps most significant of all, President Trump seems satisfied with Barr and Durham.


33 posted on 08/03/2020 1:35:50 AM PDT by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lodi90

I expect that Durham will procure indictments and guilty pleas and will issue an interim report to Barr summarizing his work. Three people whom I regard as well-informed and credible — attorney Joe DiGenova, reporter John Soloman, and blogger Sundance at Conservative Tree House — all broadly indicate as much. And perhaps most significant of all, President Trump seems satisfied with Barr and Durham.


34 posted on 08/03/2020 1:35:50 AM PDT by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Rockingham

You can expect all you want but it’s not going to happen. Durham hired a bunch of Democrats for his staff. Durham has left low hanging fruit like FIB FISA forger Clinesmith uncharged.

Those are not things a prosecutor does with an interest in aggressively pursuing a case against the coupists does. The contrast with the Mueller coup couldn’t be more stark. It’s night and day. Where there is a will, there is a way.


35 posted on 08/03/2020 6:09:23 AM PDT by lodi90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: lodi90

“Durham and his Democrat prosecutors....”


Who are these ‘Democrat prosecutors’ you keep posting about?

Do you have names?


36 posted on 08/03/2020 6:12:30 AM PDT by nesnah (Liberals - the petulant children of politics)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-36 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson