> The 41 pages of additional evidence demonstrate (i) his innocence; (ii) the absence of any crime; (iii) government misconduct in the investigation of General Flynn; and (iv) continuing prosecutorial misconduct in the suppression of evidence favorable to the defense in violation of Brady v. Maryland and this Court’s Brady order. ECF No. 20
Using a random twitter account's narrative to "debunk" a well established lawyer for a 35 year military general and DOJ's declassified statements is not how things work in the judicial system.
That twitter account is blatantly lying and the replies seem to be coming from an echo chamber.
For example here's a couple statements easily verifiably wrong. The twitter account says:
> Stuff that was already public (tho she didn't admit that)
This is so easily probably wrong. The interview of the FBI agent Barnett by USAO Jeff Jenson is from September 17, 2020 which was declassified yesterday. How this twitter account claims "already public"??
> Stuff that proves Peter Strzok didn't have it in for Flynn
This is also so easily provable wrong. The FBI agent Barnett (who was one of the agents specifically assigned to the Special Counsel's team) specifically says in his interview:
"“Barnett believed the prosecution of Flynn by SCO was used as a means to ‘get TRUMP,'” the report of his interview concluded."
The source of the Steele Dossier was literally a Russian agent and was investigated from 2009-2011 until he fled from the country. FBI knew about it in December 2016 as revealed yesterday.
Clearly that twitter account is spreading misinformation for political reasons and the echo chamber members are buying it because it fits the political narrative.
First off, Marci Wheeler is not a random Twitter account. She's an expert in legal and national security issues. She has been a prominent figure in this space for over 10 years. She's been writing about Flynn and the SCO investigation fro the very beginning.
Second, chiding me for linking a "random" Twitter account betrays a serious lack of self-awareness on your part, given that you've sprinkled random YouTube links throughout this discussion.
Her wikipedia literally states her occupation as "Independent journalist". You would rather believe a journalist who I have clearly exposed as lying and biased with proof. Good luck.
It's a random document posted on scribd. A few pages of messages with little context. Followed by the wild conclusion that there was no crime, based on the equivalent of 50 text messages in a case that surely has thousands of pages of evidence. I can't even tell what they're talking about in half the exchanges because theres no context.
Somebody here has an ax to grind, surprised it's getting upvoted.
It's not a random document. It's worse. It's an actual filing by Flynn's counsel in an attempt to get his case reversed/dismissed. A case in which he pleaded guilty. Twice. To two different judges.
It is propaganda though, and it's being coordinated by Barr, Jensen and other top level DOJ officials.
It's not "attempt to get his case reversed/dismissed", the justice department already dropped the case.
The judge overseeing the case is attempting to drag out his final ruling (which is a foregone conclusion, he cannot proceed without a prosecution) until past the election so he can get a different justice department to reinstate the charges, or get the President to pardon Flynn so he can score some political points for his party.
> "...the new disclosures demonstrate that Mueller’s prosecutors not only pressured Flynn with the possibility of indicting his son; they also secretly assured Flynn’s former counsel... that Flynn’s son would not be prosecuted if Flynn pleaded guilty. "
This is also more than a month old and a lot more facts have been released since then. Media simply not reporting them because it doesn't fit the narrative doesn't mean the facts aren't important.
Interrogators are allowed to lie. They threaten everyone. If this is grounds for releasing Flynn, they would have to release 2/3 of the people in prison.
I think it's disgusting that police are allowed to threaten and lie to you, but that's how it is for everyone in the US
So now you are justifying FBI's actions of threatening someone's son to coerce a guilty plea? Coercion into pleading guilty is what we all should be complaining about but seems like people are totally okay with it as long as it's against their political opponents which is disgusting.
I really don't think you are actually aware of the facts in this case (probably because you haven't read anything outside what the main stream media reports). I don't have the time to educate you on all the facts of such a long case. If you are really interested and in good faith, watch this playlist:
I don't get my "facts" from random youtube videos and social media. It's a conspiracy theory. If you consider random social media the best evidence out there, you're being played
It's not random YouTube videos. The videos are from 3 highly credentialed lawyers. Catherine Herridge is also a credentialed journalist for CBS News. Even NPR has reported this. Yet you call everything which doesn't fit your political narrative "conspiracy theory".
It definitely looks like propaganda. There's so little context you can't even tell what most of the conversations are about. And the text says "he's definitely not guilty" when the evidence presented doesn't show anything to determine if he's guilty or not
16 comments
[ 1.8 ms ] story [ 37.9 ms ] threadExplosive, indeed
> But thus far, all she's shown is that she's an order of magnitude sketchier.
https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1309251431543627777
That twitter account is blatantly lying and the replies seem to be coming from an echo chamber.
For example here's a couple statements easily verifiably wrong. The twitter account says:
> Stuff that was already public (tho she didn't admit that)
This is so easily probably wrong. The interview of the FBI agent Barnett by USAO Jeff Jenson is from September 17, 2020 which was declassified yesterday. How this twitter account claims "already public"??
> Stuff that proves Peter Strzok didn't have it in for Flynn
This is also so easily provable wrong. The FBI agent Barnett (who was one of the agents specifically assigned to the Special Counsel's team) specifically says in his interview:
"“Barnett believed the prosecution of Flynn by SCO was used as a means to ‘get TRUMP,'” the report of his interview concluded."
The source of the Steele Dossier was literally a Russian agent and was investigated from 2009-2011 until he fled from the country. FBI knew about it in December 2016 as revealed yesterday.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/25/get-trump-fbi-whistlebl...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-bad-intelligence-11601...
Clearly that twitter account is spreading misinformation for political reasons and the echo chamber members are buying it because it fits the political narrative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcy_Wheeler
Second, chiding me for linking a "random" Twitter account betrays a serious lack of self-awareness on your part, given that you've sprinkled random YouTube links throughout this discussion.
It's a random document posted on scribd. A few pages of messages with little context. Followed by the wild conclusion that there was no crime, based on the equivalent of 50 text messages in a case that surely has thousands of pages of evidence. I can't even tell what they're talking about in half the exchanges because theres no context.
Somebody here has an ax to grind, surprised it's getting upvoted.
It is propaganda though, and it's being coordinated by Barr, Jensen and other top level DOJ officials.
It's not "attempt to get his case reversed/dismissed", the justice department already dropped the case.
The judge overseeing the case is attempting to drag out his final ruling (which is a foregone conclusion, he cannot proceed without a prosecution) until past the election so he can get a different justice department to reinstate the charges, or get the President to pardon Flynn so he can score some political points for his party.
https://youtu.be/Tb2d9x0amuU
Also:
> "...the new disclosures demonstrate that Mueller’s prosecutors not only pressured Flynn with the possibility of indicting his son; they also secretly assured Flynn’s former counsel... that Flynn’s son would not be prosecuted if Flynn pleaded guilty. "
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/495366-something-seems...
This is also more than a month old and a lot more facts have been released since then. Media simply not reporting them because it doesn't fit the narrative doesn't mean the facts aren't important.
I think it's disgusting that police are allowed to threaten and lie to you, but that's how it is for everyone in the US
I really don't think you are actually aware of the facts in this case (probably because you haven't read anything outside what the main stream media reports). I don't have the time to educate you on all the facts of such a long case. If you are really interested and in good faith, watch this playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSwm32hsWAtRdktdmBtZC...
This is just from today:
https://mobile.twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1309646153152...
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSwm32hsWAtRdktdmBtZC...
Here's CBS's Catherine Herridge going over the declassified interview of one of the FBI agents:
https://mobile.twitter.com/CBS_Herridge/status/1309646153152...
Here's WSJ reporting it now:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fbis-bad-intelligence-11601...