More on the Flynn case

[bellisarius]

What part of "coerced confessions cannot be used against someone because it violates the 6th and 14th Amendments" didn't you understand?

All of it it seems.

 

[akatrex]

The District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan is a Political IDIOT!

In the END, the Judge will Lose!

He will get STEPPED on by the Supreme Court!

 

[Lazaran]

You either watch too much CNN or get your news straight from social media.

Nothing I have found in my research on the case contradicts the fact that Michael Flynn lied to the FBI about his discussions with Russian ambassador Kislyak. It also doesn't change the fact that he was paid $600,000 by Turkey to be an agent for them and failed to disclose that information as well.

The petty charge of coercion because the FBI was looking into Flynns son is laughable, because he was also Mr. Flynns aide at the time he was conducting his criminal activity. Investigating Mr. Flynns son was absolutely warranted.
The contemporaneous notes taken by the FBI investigators is a joke because they ultimately just did an interview, and in that interview Flynn lied. They didn't have to do anything to set him up.

Flynn also worked out a plea deal to get the investigation into his son dropped, to not be charged with being an undisclosed paid agent of the Turkish government, and to get a reduced sentence.
In return Flynn agreed to cooperate with the FBI investigators, but when they started asking questions about his business partner he stopped cooperating, thus violating his plea deal.

He also stood before a judge and testified under oath that he did everything he was charged with and took full responsibility for his actions. His recantation amounts to perjury.

The really disgusting thing, is that he was able to see how corruptly William Barr was behaving and figured he could get some of that "impartial justice" everyone else seemed to be getting.

Unfortunately for Flynn, neither you nor William Barr are in control of his fate, and if Judge Sullivan does decide to press forward with investigating whether or not to sentence Flynn, the original prosecutors will be summoned to testify. Their testimony will likely expose Barrs corruption which will further highlight all his other corrupt actions.

By the way, don't think the judicial branch will just keep rolling over on command whenever Trump whistles. They value their independence and power as much as Trump, and they may just decide it's time to cut bait.

 

[Rightguide]

Heh.

I don't know why you chose to cite a law dictionary and not the Rinaldi opinion, then.

SCOTUS made clear there is no clear precedent. We're in uncharted waters.

Said that as well. He's also untethered from the established case law of the Third Circuit Appeals Court as well, which I explained in my thread.

 

[KeithD]

What part of "coerced confessions cannot be used against someone because it violates the 6th and 14th Amendments" didn't you understand?

What part of confessed/pleaded guilty (twice) and got caught red-handed as well and perjured himself both ways can't you (actually, won't you) Trumpettes accept? You do silly and stupid so well. You're as disgusting as Trump, Barr, and Flynn are. Absolutely no moral grounding whatsoever.

 

[Curmudgeonly]

"Nothing in my research. . ."

No one has seen, much less "researched" what Flynn did or did not say when the FBI ambushed him since the 302 is missing and presumed destroyed.

 

[Lazaran]

"Nothing in my research. . ."

No one has seen, much less "researched" what Flynn did or did not say when the FBI ambushed him since the 302 is missing and presumed destroyed.

There is a 302 genius. It is the final draft of the original 302 that has all grammatical mistakes corrected. The rough copy of the 302 is what is unavailable, and may well have been discarded after the final draft of the 302 was completed.

What is known from official testimony, is that Flynn lied in his FBI interview about telling Kislyak to tell Moscow not to escalate retaliations for US sanctions imposed by Obama, and when he said he didn't tell Kislyak to block a vote in the UN Security Council. Those lies are contradicted by evidence obtained through other methods. It is also not in dispute that Flynn failed to inform the FBI that he was a paid agent of a foreign government(Turkey).

He pled guilty because he was guilty

 

[Conager]

"Nothing in my research. . ."

No one has seen, much less "researched" what Flynn did or did not say when the FBI ambushed him since the 302 is missing and presumed destroyed.

Research is what he calls googling for confirmation buas.

There is a 302 genius. It is the final draft of the original 302 that has all grammatical mistakes corrected. The rough copy of the 302 is what is unavailable, and may well have been discarded after the final draft of the 302 was completed.

What is known from official testimony, is that Flynn lied in his FBI interview about telling Kislyak to tell Moscow not to escalate retaliations for US sanctions imposed by Obama, and when he said he didn't tell Kislyak to block a vote in the UN Security Council. Those lies are contradicted by evidence obtained through other methods. It is also not in dispute that Flynn failed to inform the FBI that he was a paid agent of a foreign government(Turkey).

He pled guilty because he was guilty

Points and laughs.

Always great for your chain of evidence to "edit" a contemporaneous record.

Also, you haven't read the transcript of the call.

-or were you waiting for them to edit the transcript to "correct" it to say what you claim it said?

What part of confessed/pleaded guilty (twice) and got caught red-handed as well and perjured himself both ways can't you (actually, won't you) Trumpettes accept? You do silly and stupid so well. You're as disgusting as Trump, Barr, and Flynn are. Absolutely no moral grounding whatsoever.

They need to prosecute the "perjury" committed by the 30% of those exonerated by the innocence project through DNA that had 'confessed" to crimes the DNA evidence shows that they lied about committing.

 

[HisArpy]

What part of confessed/pleaded guilty (twice) and got caught red-handed as well and perjured himself both ways can't you (actually, won't you) Trumpettes accept? You do silly and stupid so well. You're as disgusting as Trump, Barr, and Flynn are. Absolutely no moral grounding whatsoever.

It's not about us "accepting" anything. It's about THE LAW and THE LAW says that a coerced confession cannot be used to punish the one who gave it.

I even gave excerpts from the cases that SPECIFICALLY say that complete with case citations.

Yet SOMEHOW you missed it and instead continue to parrot the stupid.

 

[HisArpy]

There is a 302 genius. It is the final draft of the original 302 that has all grammatical mistakes corrected. The rough copy of the 302 is what is unavailable, and may well have been discarded after the final draft of the 302 was completed.

What is known from official testimony, is that Flynn lied in his FBI interview about telling Kislyak to tell Moscow not to escalate retaliations for US sanctions imposed by Obama, and when he said he didn't tell Kislyak to block a vote in the UN Security Council. Those lies are contradicted by evidence obtained through other methods. It is also not in dispute that Flynn failed to inform the FBI that he was a paid agent of a foreign government(Turkey).

He pled guilty because he was guilty

The 302 that's available has been deemed to have been altered without the permission of the person(s) who wrote the original 302. It's been altered in a way that changes the text of what was said by Flynn so as to incriminate him instead of accurately reflecting what was actually said by the witness.

That makes it fabricated evidence. Do you know who made those alterations? Peter Strzok. A person whose fingerprints are all over the entire debacle from A to Z and whose name keeps turning up as somehow connected to almost every wrongdoing involving Trump and the 2016 election.

The above is well known. It's not my opinion or a political talking point, it's SUBSTANTIATED FACT. A fact that you, like most who take the viewpoint you espouse, ignore completely because it destroys your narrative.

Further, the Agents who interviewed Flynn are on record that they don't believe he lied. Which means your statement; "What is known from official testimony, is that Flynn lied in his FBI interview...", is a lie. And that's something you've become somewhat known for doing lately.

Finally, there are lots of reasons people make false confessions. The Innocence Project estimates that as many as 30% of all confessions are done under coercion or duress. Most of those people who made the false confessions ALSO confirmed that their confession was truthful. Yet in a lot of those cases, irrefutable evidence eventually showed that they ABSOLUTELY COULD NOT HAVE committed the crimes to which they confessed.

In your mind, are they, like Flynn, still guilty because they confessed or pleaded guilty?

 

[icanhelp1]

It's not about us "accepting" anything. It's about THE LAW and THE LAW says that a coerced confession cannot be used to punish the one who gave it.

I even gave excerpts from the cases that SPECIFICALLY say that complete with case citations.

Yet SOMEHOW you missed it and instead continue to parrot the stupid.

Sky-Pilot can't seem to get through his thick head that the DOJ dropped the case because of all the reasons you mentioned. I don't believe the issue with Turkey is part of the case? I didn't see anything about FARA.

 

[phrodeau]

I have read every page of
this Agreement and have
discussed it with my
attorneys, Robert
K. Kelner and Stephen P. Anthony. I fully understand this Agreement and agree to it without
reservation. I do this voluntarily and of my own free will, intending to be legally bound. No
threats have been made to me
nor am I under the influence of anything that could impede my
ability to understand this Agreement fully. I am pleading guilty because I am in fact guilty of the offense identified in this Agreement.
I reaffirm that absolutely no
promises, agreements,
understandings, or
conditions have
been made or entered into in
connection with my decision
to plead guilty except those
set forth
in this Agreement.

Flynn himself attests that he was not coerced. Whom to believe?

 

[HisArpy]

Sky-Pilot can't seem to get through his thick head that the DOJ dropped the case because of all the reasons you mentioned. I don't believe the issue with Turkey is part of the case? I didn't see anything about FARA.

It's an "uncharged offense" with no evidence behind it, but they have to say something nasty to justify their butthurt.

 

[Conager]

I think a lot of them are really not smart enough to even notice what should cause them to experience cognitive dissonance.

When someone on their "team" successfully obstructs justice, including admitting to actual perjury, they are all about due process.

They have no trouble sending in cops in hob nail boots to throw people out of churches and funerals and off of surfboards, but heaven forfend the cops interfere with a crime in progress or peaceful rioting.

Actual peaceful protests about actual rights being violated is irresponsible. Violent riots to protest an incident where all of the demands for justice regarding that incident were already being met are necessary and "peaceful"

They seem immune to whiplash.

 

[icanhelp1]

The 302 that's available has been deemed to have been altered without the permission of the person(s) who wrote the original 302. It's been altered in a way that changes the text of what was said by Flynn so as to incriminate him instead of accurately reflecting what was actually said by the witness.

That makes it fabricated evidence. Do you know who made those alterations? Peter Strzok. A person whose fingerprints are all over the entire debacle from A to Z and whose name keeps turning up as somehow connected to almost every wrongdoing involving Trump and the 2016 election.

The above is well known. It's not my opinion or a political talking point, it's SUBSTANTIATED FACT. A fact that you, like most who take the viewpoint you espouse, ignore completely because it destroys your narrative.

Further, the Agents who interviewed Flynn are on record that they don't believe he lied. Which means your statement; "What is known from official testimony, is that Flynn lied in his FBI interview...", is a lie. And that's something you've become somewhat known for doing lately.

Finally, there are lots of reasons people make false confessions. The Innocence Project estimates that as many as 30% of all confessions are done under coercion or duress. Most of those people who made the false confessions ALSO confirmed that their confession was truthful. Yet in a lot of those cases, irrefutable evidence eventually showed that they ABSOLUTELY COULD NOT HAVE committed the crimes to which they confessed.

In your mind, are they, like Flynn, still guilty because they confessed or pleaded guilty?

I've read that from time to time people admit guilt to a crime they never committed to protect a loved one, it's the duty of prosecutors to find the truth not accept a plea and close a case because of an admission of guilt.

 

[HisArpy]

I've read that from time to time people admit guilt to a crime they never committed to protect a loved one, it's the duty of prosecutors to find the truth not accept a plea and close a case because of an admission of guilt.

Justice doesn't depend on someone going to jail.

There was a case where a man was beaten by the cops with the buckle ends of their belts. They continued to beat him until his back was ripped to shreds until he agreed to confess to whatever they wanted. He as told that if he EVER deviated from that story, they'd begin beating him again.

With his back still bleeding, he wrote out his confession and signed it. He stuck to the story in his confession even when asked by the court if it was true. He was later exonerated of the crimes to which he confessed. I believe he also won a large monetary judgement for it but I might be transposing a different case as his when it comes to that part.

The doubt about confessions has always raised a red flag in my mind. We all know that many innocent people were executed during the Spanish Inquisition based solely on their confessions. Confessions which were wrung from them under torture and abuse. Yet, somehow, we still continue to believe that a confession alone is sufficient evidence of guilt that nothing else is needed to prove guilt. Our shared pasts should tell us otherwise but for some reason we refuse to acknowledge it.

 

[HisArpy]

All of it it seems.

And, it seems, he's stuck on stupid since he keeps repeating that dead end talking point.

 

[knottagain]

Explain to me again why it was illegal for @GenFlynn to make a standard phone call in his official capacity as NatSec Adviser but perfectly fine for @JohnKerry to meet in Paris with Iranian state sponsor of terror officials to subvert US foreign policy and @realDonaldTrump.

 

[Mal_Huevo]

https://i.redd.it/5cuknnvuis451.jpg

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Flynn himself attests that he was not coerced. Whom to believe?

He was coerced into attesting that he was not coerced, obviously!

https://media0.giphy.com/media/DMtMg3sW1cSdi/giphy.gif

 

[Conager]

He was coerced into attesting that he was not coerced, obviously!

https://media0.giphy.com/media/DMtMg3sW1cSdi/giphy.gif

As were the 30% of the (largely black) convicts who were exonerated by the innocence project that showed through DNA that they gave false elocutions of their guilt. Should we lock 'em up?

 

[Rightguide]

The 302 that's available has been deemed to have been altered without the permission of the person(s) who wrote the original 302. It's been altered in a way that changes the text of what was said by Flynn so as to incriminate him instead of accurately reflecting what was actually said by the witness.

That makes it fabricated evidence. Do you know who made those alterations? Peter Strzok. A person whose fingerprints are all over the entire debacle from A to Z and whose name keeps turning up as somehow connected to almost every wrongdoing involving Trump and the 2016 election.

A 302 is supposed to be flied within five days of the interview according to FBI policy. This one took weeks. I heard an FBI agent say that normally an agent assigned to writing a 302 would fight another agent who attempted to alter change a 302 he had written. I think this system is archaic, and an invitation to corruption. All interviews need to be recorded digitally and transcribed and reviewed by an NCRA certified Scopist.

 

[Rightguide]

Justice doesn't depend on someone going to jail.

Very true, like the expectation that the judge in the case will be a fair arbiter of due process and cognizant of his duty to protect the rights of the defendant from being trampled on by a malicious government prosecution. It becomes problematic when a judge is incompetent, or demonstrates an animus toward the defendant, and acts on that animus by maliciously assuming the role of the prosecutor after the charging agency in the interests of justice, drops the case.

 

[Lazaran]

There is a final 302.

The lies Flynn told contained in that 302 were contradicted by evidence obtained through other sources. (Taped phone calls, other people's testimony, etc.)

His failure to inform that he was a paid Turkish agent is relevant because the government dropped that charge as part of his plea deal.

He couldn't be coerced by a threatened investigation of his son if his son did nothing wrong. His son was also his business partner and his aide at the time Flynn was acting as a foreign agent of Turkey and making side deals with Russia . The government was well within its rights to investigate him.

There has been no known testimony by the interviewing agents, or anyone else, that Peter Strzok or anyone else materially altered the content iof the original draft of the 302 in the final draft of the 302.

There is no known testimony that the agents who conducted the interview disagree with the content of the final draft of the 302.

Every point people cite that they say proves Flynn was set up and coerced is weak. Even the hand written notes showing that the former FBI head of counterintelligence Bill Priestap mulled over how the FBI should approach the Flynn interview is standard procedure.

The only references I could find related to the agents who conducted the interview show that while they thought Flynns body language showed no signs of deception, they found his statements were inconsistent with what they knew to be true from other sources. They even gave him opportunities to reconsider his statements and provided additional information they had to try and get Flynn to tell the truth but he stuck with his lies.

Barrs decision to stop the Flynn prosecution was a corrupt act triggered by an improper request from a corrupt president.

Flynn lied to the FBI about his improper/treasonous actions and testified under oath that he lied. He got caught and was prosecuted just like the rest of Trumps criminal cabal.

He's just another shit stain on Trumps presidency.

 

[Conager]

Points and laughs at the idea of a "final 302"

Which, not incidentally, was not produced to his original counsel, and still does not correctly align with the actual words in the transcript of the call.