{"id":27707,"date":"2018-12-17T06:52:20","date_gmt":"2018-12-17T11:52:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=27707"},"modified":"2018-12-17T06:52:20","modified_gmt":"2018-12-17T11:52:20","slug":"muellers-case-against-flynn-collapsing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/?p=27707","title":{"rendered":"Mueller\u2019s case against Flynn collapsing?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Good day all. Last week a bit of news came out regarding the plea agreement between General Michael Flynn and the Mueller Inquisition. It revolves around Flynn not having a lawyer present during the questioning session that led to the accusation of lying to the FBI.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Flynn\u2019s lawyers filed a lengthy brief to the court where they indicated that Flynn was pressured into not having a lawyer present during the questioning. According to the initial Fox News report<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n

In a lengthy court filing Tuesday, attorneys for former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn alleged that then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe pushed Flynn not to have an attorney present during the questioning that ultimately led to his guilty plea on a single charge of lying to federal authorities.<\/b><\/p>\n

Now this makes me wonder, was Flynn actually read his Miranda Rights?<\/p>\n

The document outlines<\/a>, with striking new details, the rapid sequence of events that led to Flynn’s sudden fall from the Trump administration. The filing also seemingly demonstrates that the FBI took a significantly more aggressive tack in handling the Flynn interview than it did during other similar matters, including the agency’s sit-downs with Hillary Clinton and ex-Trump adviser George Papadopoulos. <\/b><\/p>\n

First, the \u201cQuestioning\u201d of Felonia von Pantsuit was just a pro forma exercise designed to make it look like they actually were going to a real investigation instead of a cover-up. In the case of Papadopoulos, he was never in the inner circles of the Trump campaign. As I recall, they kept the little twerp far away from Donald Trump for the simple reason, they didn\u2019t trust him. He didn\u2019t have any information to trade. There are also some serious question regarding the case against him as well. Now the judge handling the case wants to know just what went on. In another report from Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n

One day after former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s legal team made the bombshell allegation that the FBI had pushed him not to bring a lawyer<\/a> to his fateful Jan. 24, 2017 interview with agents at the White House, the federal judge overseeing Flynn’s criminal case is demanding answers from Special Counsel Robert Mueller. <\/b><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ordered Mueller late Wednesday to turn over all of the government’s documents and “memoranda” related to Flynn’s questioning. The extraordinary demand puts Mueller under the microscope, and sets a 3:00 p.m. EST Friday deadline for the special counsel’s office to produce the sensitive FBI documents.<\/b><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Sullivan — who overturned the 2008 conviction<\/a> of former U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens after government misconduct came to light — is weighing how to sentence Flynn, who pleaded guilty to one count of lying to federal authorities during the 2017 interview in the West Wing. Flynn faced mounting legal bills<\/a> that forced him to sell his home amid the prosecution, and Mueller has already recommended<\/a> he receive no prison time. <\/b><\/p>\n

It wasn\u2019t just running out of money that caused Flynn to plead out. I understand Mueller\u2019s Thugs also threatened Flynn\u2019s family. Considering that Mueller has a long history of prosecutorial abuse, along with his senior staffers, this might just blow up in his face.<\/p>\n

Sullivan also ordered the Flynn team to turn over the documents backing up its assertions. The judge could determine why the FBI apparently took a significantly more aggressive tack in handling the Flynn interview than it did during other similar matters, including the agency’s sit-downs with Hillary Clinton and ex-Trump adviser George Papadopoulos. <\/b><\/p>\n

I just explained why a few paragraphs ago. The investigation into Felonia von Pantsuits many criminal enterprises was never anything more than a white wash job and George Papadopoulos was a phony that Mueller and crew set up. As to the assertions by Flynn\u2019s lawyers, I have a sneaking suspicion that they can put up and wont\u2019 have to shut up.<\/p>\n

Flynn is set to be sentenced next Tuesday — but Sullivan’s move might delay that date, or lead to other dramatic and unexpected changes in the case.<\/b><\/p>\n

Such as?<\/p>\n

Sullivan even has the authority to toss Flynn’s guilty plea and the charge against him if he concludes that the FBI failed to turn over any exculpatory memos indicating that agents thought Flynn was telling the truth, or interfered with Flynn’s constitutional right to counsel.<\/b><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Sullivan could also assess why the two FBI agents who interviewed Flynn — including fired anti-Trump agent Peter Strzok — would have provided an Aug. 22, 2017 date on their so-called “302” report documenting what Flynn told them during their conversation at the White House. <\/b><\/p>\n

The August date on the FBI 302 cited by the Flynn team is nearly seven months after the Flynn interview took place, and about a week after reports surfaced that Strzok had been summarily removed from Mueller’s Russia probe because his persistent anti-Trump communications had surfaced. <\/b><\/p>\n

I\u2019m no expert, far from it in fact, on these 302 reports. As I understand it, they are supposed to be written right after an \u201cInterview\u201d when everything is still \u201cfresh\u201d in the minds of the agents. I also believe that no recording devices are used in these interviews, making these charges even more suspect. Again, I am no expert in this.<\/p>\n

So-called 302 reports are ostensibly contemporaneous accounts by agents of what is said during their interviews with witnesses and subjects, as well as other critical details like interviewees’ demeanor and descriptions of where the interview took place. They are often critical pieces of evidence in false statements cases where, as in the Flynn case, the FBI typically does not audio- or video-record interviews. <\/b><\/p>\n

And right there I call foul. We know that Strzok hates President Trump and who\u2019s sole goal was to get him removed from office. We know he has lied, and that a significant amount of information regarding his texting has \u201cVanished.\u201d If I were Flynn I would have flat out asked for the recordings of the \u201cinterview.\u201d<\/p>\n

Juries like recordings. They like to see and\/or hear the people that are either being tried or are testifying against them. No recordings, and an agent with a known bias and some serious ethical issues? I would trust the jury. But then, Mueller\u2019s thugs did threaten Flynn\u2019s family.<\/p>\n

According to Flynn’s legal team, FBI agents in his case deliberately did not instruct Flynn that any false statements he made could constitute a crime, and decided not to “confront” him directly about anything he said that contradicted their knowledge of his wiretapped communications with former Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. <\/b><\/p>\n

This has the distinct odor of a perjury trap to me. Denial of a lawyer, not recording the meeting, not reading General Flynn his rights and pressuring him not to have a lawyer advising?<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

In his order, Sullivan requested Mueller turn over not only the Flynn 302, but also a memo written by McCabe and any similar documents in the FBI’s possession. Sullivan similarly demanded that Flynn’s lawyers produce the McCabe memorandum and 302 they used to make their assertions.<\/b><\/p>\n

And we have another senior member of the FBI with a serious credibility issue, Andrew McCabe. He was fired for his actions. So we have a federal agent with an axe to grind and Deputy Director of the FBI who were fired for their actions.<\/p>\n

Explaining why Flynn was not warned about the possible consequences of making false statements, one of the agents wrote in the 302 cited by Flynn’s lawyers that FBI brass had “decided the agents would not warn Flynn that it was a crime to lie during an FBI interview because they wanted Flynn to be relaxed, and they were concerned that giving the warnings might adversely affect the rapport.” <\/b><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

No, the real reason was to set him up. Now as to what might happen? It all depends of course. Flynn might withdraw his guilty plea and demand a trial. Judge Sullivan may look at all this and decide that the guilty plea was coerced and reject, ordering a trial. Judge Sullivan may decide \u201cNo harm, no foul and proceed with the sentencing. Finally, Judge Sullivan might decide to vacate the plea and direct a verdict of acquittal, declaring the \u201cevidence\u201d was inadmissible.<\/p>\n

If it is the last possibility, Mueller and his investigation will come to a crashing halt. It will give President Trump all he needs to fire him, and his new Attorney General the cover to prosecute McCabe, Comey and possibly Strzok, and to begin a criminal investigation into the entire Mueller fiasco. We shall soon find out.<\/p>\n

Thatisall<\/p>\n\"1\"2\"3\"4\"5 (2<\/strong> votes, average: 5.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n

~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n